But I was almost a teenager when I had that thought. We didn’t learn them until right before we aged up.

I was such a charlatan in primary. I remember being told that, before I could graduate from primary and move on to YM, I would have to memorize the AoF. I hedged on their lack of time for testing and memorized only the last AoF. When the big moment came, my guess proved brilliant and I only had to recite the last one.

Looking back, though, I wouldn’t have memorized any of them. Honestly, what were they going to do? Keep me in primary? Oooh…scary.

#8 – Great point, Scott. JSH doesn’t condemn the concept of creeds explicitly; it only condemns “THEIR” creeds. If you are interested, Scott:

http://mormonmatters.org/2008/08/27/common-scriptures-in-review-jsh-119/

One of the AoF that I remember being perturbed by as a Primary child was the first one because it doesn’t specifically state that we believe God has a physical human-looking body or that we are His literal children. It sounded like all other Christian churches’ beliefs without including any of the cool ideas that are more unique to Mormonism.

Wow. I don’t remember being perturbed about much of anything in primary beyond the length of the meeting and that I had to wear church clothes. Late bloomer, I guess.

Like SteveS, I think the PoF won’t stand the test of time possibly due to the constraints of language. The language around gender is evolving right now. It will be very difficult to express ideas about it in a way that will sound right in 20 or 50 years. Best to wait for PoF 2.0 IMO.

In this context, AoF 1-4 essentially accomplish what the Nicene and other creeds do by stating belief in God, proclaiming the need for Christ, and outlining the components of Christ’s gospel whereby humankind is reconciled with God. All the other Articles of Faith add extra context for a Mormon understanding of other Christian principles such as church organization, priesthood authority, canonized scripture, operations of the Holy Spirit, millenarianism, agency and freedom of religion, and espousing ideal character traits. IMO they are extra-creedal.

If we are going to interpret the AoF as a de facto creed for Mormonism, it accomplishes more than other creeds set out to do by including more elements. While certainly the Catholic, Anglican, Protestant, or other creedal churches have doctrines that establish orthodox beliefs for each of the topics covered by AoF 5-13, the fact that they don’t make it into an official creed is telling of what a creed might mean, and how it operates for these organizations. Perhaps the detail of the AoF contributes to the perception by outsiders that the LDS church overreaches in its conception of Christianity to include elements not considered core or essential.

Similarly, the Family Proclamation could be seen as overreaching as a creedal document as well. After it helps delineate humankind’s relationship to God and showing how the concept of the family is integral to the reconcilation of humankind with God, it continues on to include proscriptions and counsel about how families ought to be formed and managed, and about how families ought to operate in society. Here, the Proclamation leave creedal territory. Nevertheless, the document is received as a whole, and has taken upon itself a rather creedal-like function in practical usage (I know of a fair number of people who have memorized it, and have encouraged their children to memorize it as well). It could be yet another example of how Mormon’s seek to go above and beyond the basic elements of core orthodox belief in their statements of belief.

So what would a Mormon creed look like? I’m not completely certain, but it would include the following:

Statement of belief in God the Father, Jesus Christ, and Holy Ghost as perfect, eternal, beings.
Statement of the relationship of Jesus Christ to God the Father. Statement humankind’s relationship to God the Father and Jesus Christ.
Statement of Christ’s mission to redeem mankind from the Fall, and basic historical events that accomplished that reconciliation (divine birth, perfect life, atonement, crucifixion, death, resurrection, ascension).
Statement of Gospel plan (faith, repentance, baptism, gift of holy ghost, other ordinances(are there truly any?) necessary for salvation in preparation for future resurrection, judgment, and inheritance of glory.
Perhaps a statement of the relationship of families in God’s plan of salvation.
Statement of faith in the Church as God’s organization or kingdom on earth.

It doesn’t sound much different than the Nicene creed to me. Why? because the essentials of the Gospel and our conception of God are the same, barring minor squabbles about Original Sin, Trinitarianism, and post-mortal living arrangements. Why wouldn’t stuff like priesthood ordination and temple ordinances make it in? I suspect because those are not universal requirement for salvation: women do not currently get ordained to the priesthood, and whereas we believe that temple work must be performed for everyone who has ever lived, we are not absolutely required to obtain those ordinances during our lifetimes. Indeed, many never have that opportunity. Why wouldn’t “enduring to the end” make it into a Mormon creed? I suspect because it is still unclear in our theology how works and grace operate in our salvation in the ultimate sense. Why wouldn’t statements like AoF 13 fit? Perhaps because people of other faiths, or people of no faith believe in attaining those character traits as well, so they really don’t set one apart from others very effectively, or act as requirements for reconciling onesself with God.

Sorry for the long comment. Cheers!

The main difference I see between the later creeds and the AoF is that nobody in the Church is usually excommunicated for private disbelief in any or all of the AoF but rather for their actions. However, in defining orthodoxy, the AoF are definitely a creed in my book.

That being said, though, my main point is that when we substitute one set of creeds (even if they aren’t really creeds) for another (the “abominable” ones), we do ourselves a disservice. The greatness of Mormondom is, IMO, what is pointed out by Doc – “to be continued . . .”. The BY quote is great, too. Hadn’t heard that one before. There will always be those within the church who want to close the canon, who will try to nail things down that should be left open. Those are my concerns with treating the AoF or the PoF as Mormon creeds.

1. Marriage
2. The afterlife in gritty detail
3. The Bible as the only source of divine knowledge
4. Baptism
5. Sacraments
6. and on and on and on and on through the doctrines that set Christians apart from all other religions…

In short, may I suggest that Ms. Tanner yank the plank out of the creeds she compares the AoF to before attempting to tweeze Joseph Smith’s work.

Also, Brigham famously declared the Mormon Creed to be “Mind your own business.”

dictionary has the following as one definition of a creed

“an authoritative, formulated statement of the chief articles of Christian belief, as the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, or the Athanasian Creed.”

so yes I guess the articles of faith could be seen as a creed

I dont see those articles of faith changing at any point in the next thousand years
They are the MAIN beliefs we have

Polygamy was never in a “creed” so when that changed…big deal so what?
The temple scripts change but are not in the articles of faith again – and?

As for the family proclamation – I see that as common sense
On some of the UK Newspapers today there are headlines about a 13 year old boy who is now a Daddy (i kid you not!)

I dont see a problem with NOT having the works for the dead, the temple ordinances, or other things in there. If I had have seen that on my first meeting with the missionarries I would have thought “Baptise dead people WHAT”
I do think that some things have to be learned slowly
Much like asking someone to work out the area of a triangle without being able to work out 3 multiplied by 4. ANYTHING of such magnitude as deep doctrine can only be learned after learning some other things like Heavenly Father has a body and HF Jesus and the Holy Spirit are three totally seperate entities!

This article has really opened my eyes to a LOT
thanks for putting it up