Comments on: New Directions in Church History

By: GP

GP — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 22:10:50 +0000

We should say Mr. Quinn.

“Dr. Quinn” has kind of a medicine woman feeling to it.

By: NoCoolName Tom

NoCoolName Tom — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 21:08:17 +0000

D’oh!

By: David

David — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:58:17 +0000

Mr. Quinn does have a doctorate from Yale University.

By: NoCoolName Tom

NoCoolName Tom — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 00:22:30 +0000

Hmm… Interesting. In any case, I’m all for openness, but it would reflect much better on the Church to have it come voluntarily rather than sneakily by historians.

Oh, I meant to write “Mr. Quinn.” Don’t think he has a doctorate… Could be wrong.

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:58:51 +0000

There were not a few purloined copies of microfilm. I think Buerger was the source of much consternation, among others.

By: NoCoolName Tom

NoCoolName Tom — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:44:21 +0000

During the Arington years, there was a remarkable openess in the archivesâ€¦and some abuses.

I don’t know much about the Arington years (it was before I was born, actually), but I find it interesting that I’ve not been told about any actual abuses of the department’s openness during this time. I’ve always heard that certain general authorities didn’t like the “warts and all” history coming out of the department (the “New” Mormon History stuff). Of course, most of the accounts I’ve read were by Dr. Quinn and others who enjoyed that time, so I guess they might not focus so heavily on any problems they might have caused. What sort of abuses occurred, if it’s not improprietous to know?

(Is impromprietous a word?)

By: Random Guy

Random Guy — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:49:02 +0000

Thank you kindly for taking the time, J. Stapley.

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:36:55 +0000

Q1 – Many Diaries are available (see the Selected Collections DVD); however, many Church leaders wrote about restricted things in their diaries. Non-GA materials are, I think, universally un-restricted.

Q2 – I don’t think they ever did, but you can imagine how sensitive that might be. I have read many, many diary entries of GA’s that have discussed transgressions and confessions.

By: Random Guy

Random Guy — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:30:13 +0000

Stapley,

That’s a good answer to my question. Thank you.

Question 1:
From your answer, may I infer that access to materials such as diaries is unrestricted? (since they aren’t church minutes, temple records, or records of transgressions.)

Question 2:
I wasn’t aware that bishops kept a record of people’s transgressions. Do you know if that is still the case?

By: David

David — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:11:18 +0000

As for records of disciplinary councils, I remember Elder Oaks saying something about how the dead have rights, and one of them is that their sins (as recorded in church records) will not be brought to light by later generations.
I also understand that records of tithing and other donations are not made available.
I think it should be obvious why temple records are not made available.