Thanks, Mary Ann. Your description of events as to undoing the POX matches my research. I hadn’t realized the failure to update those policies had been noted in the Bloggernacle or led to a bait-and-switch analysis. But I don’t believe merely saying “we’re still working on that section” would solve the problem. That statement would itself suggest that either the April 4 announcement was disingenuous or the organization dealing with Handbook 1 is fundamentally incompetent or unwilling to follow directions of the first presidency. All that is needed to implement the April 4 announcement is deletion of a single line of one section of Handbook 1 (and renumbering of the next subsection) and deletion of the section on children with a gay parent that was an added section in November 2015. I’m leaning toward a combination of incompetence and unwillingness since a change was made recently to the section on children. As of March 2019 that section still included no reference to the first presidency’s November 2015 “clarification” letter that made a fundamental change in the policy. As of August 2019 a link to that “clarification” letter has been added. Clearly that section was updated and was presumably intentionally (by someone) not updated to accord with the first presidency’s announcement. The result is, of course, the necessary conclusion that the electronic Handbook 1 (supposedly more easily and economically updated than the former printed versions) is simply not a reliable guide to church policy. Kevin: “If the communication specialists in a corporation the size of the Church in the business world did this they would be fired.” Not only such communication specialists, but also such insubordinate or incompetent handbook drafters or IT folks.
Thanks, Mary Ann. Your description of events as to undoing the POX matches my research. I hadn’t realized the failure to update those policies had been noted in the Bloggernacle or led to a bait-and-switch analysis.
But I don’t believe merely saying “we’re still working on that section” would solve the problem. That statement would itself suggest that either the April 4 announcement was disingenuous or the organization dealing with Handbook 1 is fundamentally incompetent or unwilling to follow directions of the first presidency. All that is needed to implement the April 4 announcement is deletion of a single line of one section of Handbook 1 (and renumbering of the next subsection) and deletion of the section on children with a gay parent that was an added section in November 2015. I’m leaning toward a combination of incompetence and unwillingness since a change was made recently to the section on children. As of March 2019 that section still included no reference to the first presidency’s November 2015 “clarification” letter that made a fundamental change in the policy. As of August 2019 a link to that “clarification” letter has been added. Clearly that section was updated and was presumably intentionally (by someone) not updated to accord with the first presidency’s announcement.
The result is, of course, the necessary conclusion that the electronic Handbook 1 (supposedly more easily and economically updated than the former printed versions) is simply not a reliable guide to church policy.
Kevin: “If the communication specialists in a corporation the size of the Church in the business world did this they would be fired.” Not only such communication specialists, but also such insubordinate or incompetent handbook drafters or IT folks.
