LDS Church buys printer's manuscript of Book of Mormon for record $35 million from Community of Christ

[tribrac]

Robin, would you care to elaborate on your position. Because I too have heard the LDS church has helped the CoC financially and otherwise many times and I have heard it from many different sources.

[Michelle]

Paid for by donors, not the Church.

Thank goodness. I can see a lot of people on this board making a big deal if tithing had been used.

Haha! Look at all the posters still making a big deal about tithing being used without proof. Talk about reading between the lines what isn't even there.

They are like LDS Church conspiracy theorists.

[captainfearnot]

Paid for by donors, not the Church.

Thank goodness. I can see a lot of people on this board making a big deal if tithing had been used.

Haha! Look at all the posters still making a big deal about tithing being used without proof. Talk about reading between the lines what isn't even there.

They are like LDS Church conspiracy theorists.

Instead of being derisive, maybe cite an example of anybody in this thread who is making an assertion without proof besides yourself.

[Serragon]

I suppose, there is more to running the Mormon church then just writing checks for humanitarian aid. I suppose the Church sends more than most for these efforts, meanwhile everyone has a Chapel to attend and a Temple nearby.

I'm not minimizing the Church's humanitarian efforts, I'm disputing your claim that $35,000,000 is an inconsequential amount. If $40,000,000 is an impressive sum to contribute to humanitarian aid, then $35,000,000 is a significant amount to spend on holy relics.

On the other hand, if $35,000,000 is chump change to the Church—as you put it, like a normal person "buying a Big Mac"—then they should be embarrassed at the paltry sum that they are contributing to humanitarian aid each year. If you earn $50k and pay a full tithe, then your annual charitable contributions would buy a thousand Big Macs.

I think spending money on items of historical and cultural significance is one of the things the church should be doing. The argument that being made that others are not being helped because money was spent in this fashion is rather juvenile.

As Christ said, the poor will be with us always. The purpose of the church is not to alleviate poverty and suffering by giving money. The purpose of the church is to help bring you and I to exaltation. It is our individual duty to be charitable, as this changes us and makes us more like God. When the Church gives money, it may benefit those in need temporarily, but it does nothing to benefit our salvation as all aspects of the charitable act have been abstracted away.

[captainfearnot]

The argument that being made that others are not being helped because money was spent in this fashion is rather juvenile.

To clarify, I'm not arguing that the church should have spent the $35M on humanitarian aid or anything else. I'm using that as an example of the scope of the expenditure. The church is understandably proud of its humanitarian giving, as it should be.

As Christ said, the poor will be with us always. The purpose of the church is not to alleviate poverty and suffering by giving money. The purpose of the church is to help bring you and I to exaltation. It is our individual duty to be charitable, as this changes us and makes us more like God. When the Church gives money, it may benefit those in need temporarily, but it does nothing to benefit our salvation as all aspects of the charitable act have been abstracted away.

You've cited one of the church's purposes, to perfect the Saints. The church's mission is actually four-fold. You probably know what the other three are.

I think spending money on items of historical and cultural significance is one of the things the church should be doing.

I am interested in exploring this further. You may well be right, but it's not something the church has spoken a lot about in the past and I'm not sure exactly how acquiring rare artifacts furthers its mission.

At present, it invites a few unseemly comparisons. One is with the Catholic church and its penchant for acquiring holy relics. Typically we don't imbue physical objects with that kind of value. But maybe there is a gospel principle there that I haven't clued in on yet.

Another is a habit the wealthy have of buying up rare treasures. The article even cites Bill Gates' purchase of the Davinci codex by comparison.
When you have all of the fun toys to make life easy and pleasurable that money can buy, you move on to priceless artifacts and works of art. Some of these are intrinsically valuable, but others derive their value solely from their scarcity.

The church already has access to this manuscript in digital form, so I don't know what archival value is served by owning the actual physical paper. It seems like it's just a trophy or a luxury, bought to be able to say that we own the only one of these that exists. I'm not saying that's a bad thing by any stretch, but I also don't see anything wrong with questioning the propriety of spending obscene amounts of money on something like that. Hopefully there are good answers to those questions that will come in time.

[tribrac]

I am interested in exploring this further. You may well be right, but it's not something the church has spoken a lot about in the past and I'm not sure exactly how acquiring rare artifacts furthers its mission.

At present, it invites a few unseemly comparisons. One is with the Catholic church and its penchant for acquiring holy relics. Typically we don't imbue physical objects with that kind of value. But maybe there is a gospel principle there that I haven't clued in on yet.

Another is a habit the wealthy have of buying up rare treasures. The article even cites Bill Gates' purchase of the Davinci codex by comparison.
When you have all of the fun toys to make life easy and pleasurable that money can buy, you move on to priceless artifacts and works of art. Some of these are intrinsically valuable, but others derive their value solely from their scarcity.

The church already has access to this manuscript in digital form, so I don't know what archival value is served by owning the actual physical paper. It seems like it's just a trophy or a luxury, bought to be able to say that we own the only one of these that exists. I'm not saying that's a bad thing by any stretch, but I also don't see anything wrong with questioning the propriety of spending obscene amounts of money on something like that. Hopefully there are good answers to those questions that will come in time.

Might I venture a guess that you are a what they call a Millennial?

[captainfearnot]

but it's not something the church has spoken a lot about in the past

Might I venture a guess that you are a what they call a Millennial?

The suggestion being that if I were older I would remember a bunch of times the Church talked about the importance of buying up rare artifacts?

I am not a Millennial, but I am guilty of sleeping through Conference on occasion. If there's a bunch of stuff out there on the topic that I missed I would welcome a reminder. I know they acquire lots of artifacts and documents but since the whole Book of Abraham debacle in the 60s, they have tended to be a bit more discreet about it. In fact it was exactly that tendency that allowed Mark Hoffman to run his scam in the 80s.

Of course, the BoM manuscript is no McClellin journal or Salamander Letter.

(By the way, are you a Baby Boomer? As a GenXer, one of my favorite pastimes is supposed to be munching popcorn while watching the Boomers and Millennials fight over America.)

[Original_Intent]

To my understanding,no church funds were used for this purchase. All $35 million came from wealthy donors who gave the funds for this specific purpose.

As long as that's the case, I'm fine with it. When I incorrectly believed that the church just bought it, I felt differently.

[Gage]

To my understanding,no church funds were used for this purchase. All $35 million came from wealthy donors who gave the funds for this specific purpose.

As long as that's the case, I'm fine with it. When I incorrectly believed that the church just bought it, I felt differently.

Who bought the fake stuff from Mark Hoffman? Tithe payers or donors?

[Robin Hood]

To my understanding,no church funds were used for this purchase. All $35 million came from wealthy donors who gave the funds for this specific purpose.

As long as that's the case, I'm fine with it. When I incorrectly believed that the church just bought it, I felt differently.

To be honest, I think it's a play on words.
As I understand it, the way it works is that the church approach some wealthy members to donate to a special project, such as this purchase.
The wealthy donors agree and pay the money. They can then write it off against their tax assessment. So far, so good.
The real interesting stuff starts when it comes to these donors paying their tithing.
Let's say an individual donor donated $10 million for the Manuscript. Come the end of the financial year he calculates his tithing due as $12 million. However, he has already made a donation of $10 million.
Tithing due is $2 million.

The waters are muddied a little further if BYU are one of the donors.

[Michelle]

Paid for by donors, not the Church.

Thank goodness. I can see a lot of people on this board making a big deal if tithing had been used.

Haha! Look at all the posters still making a big deal about tithing being used without proof. Talk about reading between the lines what isn't even there.

They are like LDS Church conspiracy theorists.

Instead of being derisive, maybe cite an example of anybody in this thread who is making an assertion without proof besides yourself.

Multiple people on the thread have implied that the word "donors" in the article is a euphemism for tithing.

[captainfearnot]

Multiple people on the thread have implied that the word "donors" in the article is a euphemism for tithing.

Which it very well could be, for all we know. Do you deny that to be the case?

I see one side claiming to know where the funds came from, and the other side questioning that claim.

Unless I'm mistaken, the only indication we have comes from one line in the DesNews article: "Donors provided all of the money for the purchase made by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." Which tells us very little.

It could mean that Frank Vandersloot and Truman Hunt got together and decided to buy the church an expensive gift, over and above what they normally pay in tithes.

But if nothing like that happened, and all the money came from the general tithing fund, the statement in the article would be no less true. Because of course all tithe payers are donors. Donors provide the money for everything the church does (outside of its for-profit ventures, of course). That's what tithing is. It's not even a euphemism, the church refers to tithing as donations (and tithe payers as donors) all the time.

The fact is, none of us knows, because the Church's financial books are closed. Some of us like to pretend we do know, and others of us see fit to remind ourselves that we don't. When you don't know, the appropriate thing is to ask questions, not make assertions.

[Original_Intent]

The news stated yesterday that Church funds weren't used.

I realize this could be a game of semantics. I was pretty upset about the whole thing until I heard that. I'd prefer to remain calm and hopeful that it's true unless evidence to the contrary emerges.

If the donors want to "deduct" this donation from their tithing, that's on them.
If the church told them or advised them that doing so would be fine, then again, it is on their stewardship, they essentially did use tithing funds if that's what happened, but I'm not going to play that game. I mean the QoT could be sacrificing children and bathing in their blood in a secret room under the SLC temple...it's stupid to go down that path. Personally, I feel bad that I was so quick to assume the worst before I heard about the donors.

[Silver]

Is it impossible for some of you to consider that the First Presidency/Quorum of the Twelve fasted and/or prayed over the purchase decision and received an affirmation through the Spirit that they should acquire the documents? What if it were truly the will of the Lord for those manuscripts to be in the hands of the Church?

Some of the posts in this thread lead the casual reader to think that the Lord has lost control of the action of His servants. I assure that that has not happened.

[captainfearnot]

The news stated yesterday that Church funds weren't used.

Please cite where you read that. The line from the DesNews article says no such thing. It says " "Donors provided all of the money for the purchase made by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." Which only tells us that the money didn't come from the church's for-profit ventures, and that the purchase was made by the church itself, not by a third party who then gifted it to the church.

I've been looking, because the Church did specifically say that tithing funds were not used for City Creek, and I would expect them to say something similar if that was the case here. But I haven't found it.

The church's news release says that Elder Snow "offered appreciation to the generous donors who provided the means to acquire this treasure for the Church." That statement seems crafted to suggest that the Huntsmans and the Marriotts of the world put up the funds, but read it carefully and you'll see he could be thanking you and me. All tithe payers are generous donors.

Here's something weird. In the more detailed Church News article on the purchase, again Elder Snow is cited as thanking the generous donors (notice they never say wealthy donors) who provided the means. Then a couple of paragraphs later, this statement appears:

According to the Community of Christ's website, the sale price of $35 million was provided by generous donors.

Why would the Church News cite the CoC's website on the matter? As if the CoC knew better than the LDS church where the funds came from? That doesn't make any sense.

Is it impossible for some of you to consider that the First Presidency/Quorum of the Twelve fasted and/or prayed over the purchase decision and received an affirmation through the Spirit that they should acquire the documents? What if it were truly the will of the Lord for those manuscripts to be in the hands of the Church?

That's absolutely a possibility. A very likely one in fact. But one of many. None of us knows for sure.

(Although if this purchase is the result of revelation I wonder why the church's leaders weren't inspired to buy the manuscript back in 1903 when they could have picked it up for $2500.)

[Michelle]

Still people worried about money.

All the world is the Lord's and the all the treasures of the earth.

Perhaps the Church recognizes the need to hold onto original copies of works so that in the days ahead, conspiring men don't try to lie about the Church's history.

Or perhaps, it is just a test of faith for those who worry too much about the Church and money.

[Elizabeth]

Elder Steven E. Snow, Church Historian and Recorder, said: “We hold the Book of Mormon to be a sacred text like the Bible. The printer’s manuscript is the earliest surviving copy of about 72 percent of the Book of Mormon text, as only about 28 percent of the earlier dictation copy survived decades of storage in a cornerstone in Nauvoo, Illinois.”. . .

https://www.lds.org/church/news/church- ... t?lang=eng

[captainfearnot]

Here's what Joseph Fielding Smith had to say about the Book of Mormon manuscripts in 1959:

The Original Manuscript of the Book of Mormon

by Joseph Fielding Smith

It is quite true that the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon is not in its entirety in the possession of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is equally as true that it is not in the custody of the "Reorganized" Church, nor in a vault in Independence, Missouri. This is said merely to correct misrepresentation, and not with the spirit of controversy.

The manuscript which the "Reorganized" Church for some time has been designating as the original is but the printer's copy which Oliver Cowdery, shortly before his death, gave into the hands of David Whitmer, his fellow witness.

After the plates were translated, the Prophet received a commandment from the Lord that the entire manuscript should be copied, that the copy should go to the printer, and that the original manuscript should not be permitted to go out of his hands.

The original manuscript was in this manner carefully guarded, and the copy struck off by Oliver Cowdery was used in the printing of the Book of Mormon. The original was never in the hands of the printer. David Whitmer was not aware of this commandment, or had forgotten it, and without doubt believed that the printer's copy was the original. It was in this light that he prized it. In September, 1878, he was visited by Elders Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith at his home in Richmond, and on that occasion showed them this printer's copy, marked and scarred with the printer's notes, and was greatly surprised when his attention was called to the fact for the first time, that in his copy all the signatures of the witnesses were in one handwriting, (evidently that of Oliver Cowdery,) when he was most emphatic that each witness had, in the original, signed his own name.

Quite a number of the elders of the Church have examined the manuscript now in the keeping of the "Reorganized" Church, and all declare that it is most likely, in the main, in the handwriting of Oliver Cowdery, and that the signatures of the witnesses are all in the same handwriting. The question would naturally arise: What became of the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon? The answer is simple. The original manuscript remained in the possession of the Prophet Joseph Smith and was by his own hand placed in the corner-stone of the Nauvoo House, October 2, 1841, in the presence of numerous witnesses. One of these was Elder Warren Foote, of Glendale, Utah, who recorded in his journal under date of October 2, 1841, the following:

October 2, 1841. The semi-annual conference commenced today. After meeting was dismissed a deposit was made in the southeast corner of the Nauvoo, House. A square hole had been chiseled in the large corner stone like a box. An invitation was given for any who wished to put in any little memento, they desired to. I was standing very near the corner stone, when Joseph Smith came up with the manuscript of the Book of Mormon, and said he wanted to put that in there, as he had had trouble enough with it. It appeared to be written on fool's cap paper was about three inches in thickness. There was also deposited a Book of Doctrine and Covenants, five cents, ten cents, twenty-five cents, fifty cents, and one dollar pieces of American coin, besides other articles. A close fitting, stone cover was laid in cement, and the wall built over it. I was standing within three feet of the Prophet when he handed in the manuscript and saw it very plainly.

The late Bishop Frederick Kesler of the Sixteenth Ward, Salt Lake City, was also present and recorded in his journal that the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon was placed in this corner-stone. We have also, in one of the manuscript histories of the Church under date of December 29, 1841, kept by the Prophet's clerk at that time, a list of the articles that were placed in this corner-stone.

The Nauvoo House, which was begun in the days of Joseph Smith, was never finished, and in the course of time the walls were torn down by Mr. Lewis C. Bidamon, second husband of Emma Smith, and the contents of this cornerstone, which had so long been exposed to the elements, were found to be nearly ruined. Some of the articles, however, were preserved, and have been widely distributed. President Joseph F. Smith had in his possession Lyman Wight's memorial, and also pages 3 to 22 of the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon, which are, considering all things, fairly well preserved. Elders Andrew Jenson, Edward Stevenson, Joseph W. Summerhays, and others obtained portions of the original manuscript. Some of it, we understand, was also in the possession of the "Reorganized" Church, but only a small fragment. Thus the original manuscript, that portion that was not destroyed by the elements, has been scattered. This is what became of the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon. This original manuscript is valueless, save as a relic. The statement has gone forth that the Church offered a large sum for the printer's copy. No such offer was ever made. The Book of Mormon has been translated into more than a dozen languages, and hundreds of thousands of copies have been published at a price so reasonable that it is within the reach of all-the same as that of the original manuscript. If the Prophet had considered the original manuscript of any value as a work of reference, he would not have placed it in the foundation of the Nauvoo House.

© 1959 Deseret Book Company

In other words, JFS considered the original manuscript to be worthless "save as a relic," the printer's manuscript worth even less, and reports that the church had ever offered exorbitant sums for either as baseless rumors to be dispelled henceforth and forthwith.

Of course a lot has changed since the 1950s.

[Michelle]

Here's what Joseph Fielding Smith had to say about the Book of Mormon manuscripts in 1959:

The Original Manuscript of the Book of Mormon

by Joseph Fielding Smith

It is quite true that the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon is not in its entirety in the possession of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is equally as true that it is not in the custody of the "Reorganized" Church, nor in a vault in Independence, Missouri. This is said merely to correct misrepresentation, and not with the spirit of controversy.

The manuscript which the "Reorganized" Church for some time has been designating as the original is but the printer's copy which Oliver Cowdery, shortly before his death, gave into the hands of David Whitmer, his fellow witness.

After the plates were translated, the Prophet received a commandment from the Lord that the entire manuscript should be copied, that the copy should go to the printer, and that the original manuscript should not be permitted to go out of his hands.

The original manuscript was in this manner carefully guarded, and the copy struck off by Oliver Cowdery was used in the printing of the Book of Mormon. The original was never in the hands of the printer. David Whitmer was not aware of this commandment, or had forgotten it, and without doubt believed that the printer's copy was the original. It was in this light that he prized it. In September, 1878, he was visited by Elders Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith at his home in Richmond, and on that occasion showed them this printer's copy, marked and scarred with the printer's notes, and was greatly surprised when his attention was called to the fact for the first time, that in his copy all the signatures of the witnesses were in one handwriting, (evidently that of Oliver Cowdery,) when he was most emphatic that each witness had, in the original, signed his own name.

Quite a number of the elders of the Church have examined the manuscript now in the keeping of the "Reorganized" Church, and all declare that it is most likely, in the main, in the handwriting of Oliver Cowdery, and that the signatures of the witnesses are all in the same handwriting. The question would naturally arise: What became of the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon? The answer is simple. The original manuscript remained in the possession of the Prophet Joseph Smith and was by his own hand placed in the corner-stone of the Nauvoo House, October 2, 1841, in the presence of numerous witnesses. One of these was Elder Warren Foote, of Glendale, Utah, who recorded in his journal under date of October 2, 1841, the following:

October 2, 1841. The semi-annual conference commenced today. After meeting was dismissed a deposit was made in the southeast corner of the Nauvoo, House. A square hole had been chiseled in the large corner stone like a box. An invitation was given for any who wished to put in any little memento, they desired to. I was standing very near the corner stone, when Joseph Smith came up with the manuscript of the Book of Mormon, and said he wanted to put that in there, as he had had trouble enough with it. It appeared to be written on fool's cap paper was about three inches in thickness. There was also deposited a Book of Doctrine and Covenants, five cents, ten cents, twenty-five cents, fifty cents, and one dollar pieces of American coin, besides other articles. A close fitting, stone cover was laid in cement, and the wall built over it. I was standing within three feet of the Prophet when he handed in the manuscript and saw it very plainly.

The late Bishop Frederick Kesler of the Sixteenth Ward, Salt Lake City, was also present and recorded in his journal that the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon was placed in this corner-stone. We have also, in one of the manuscript histories of the Church under date of December 29, 1841, kept by the Prophet's clerk at that time, a list of the articles that were placed in this corner-stone.

The Nauvoo House, which was begun in the days of Joseph Smith, was never finished, and in the course of time the walls were torn down by Mr. Lewis C. Bidamon, second husband of Emma Smith, and the contents of this cornerstone, which had so long been exposed to the elements, were found to be nearly ruined. Some of the articles, however, were preserved, and have been widely distributed. President Joseph F. Smith had in his possession Lyman Wight's memorial, and also pages 3 to 22 of the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon, which are, considering all things, fairly well preserved. Elders Andrew Jenson, Edward Stevenson, Joseph W. Summerhays, and others obtained portions of the original manuscript. Some of it, we understand, was also in the possession of the "Reorganized" Church, but only a small fragment. Thus the original manuscript, that portion that was not destroyed by the elements, has been scattered. This is what became of the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon. This original manuscript is valueless, save as a relic. The statement has gone forth that the Church offered a large sum for the printer's copy. No such offer was ever made. The Book of Mormon has been translated into more than a dozen languages, and hundreds of thousands of copies have been published at a price so reasonable that it is within the reach of all-the same as that of the original manuscript. If the Prophet had considered the original manuscript of any value as a work of reference, he would not have placed it in the foundation of the Nauvoo House.

© 1959 Deseret Book Company

In other words, JFS considered the original manuscript to be worthless "save as a relic," the printer's manuscript worth even less, and reports that the church had ever offered exorbitant sums for either as baseless rumors to be dispelled henceforth and forthwith.

Of course a lot has changed since the 1950s.

I agree that a lot has changed since the 1950s. Owning the manuscript must not have meant as much in JFS time as ours. Thank goodness we have a living prophet. It will be interesting to see why the Lord places priority on this now.