Talk:O My Father

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the O My Father article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Latter Day Saint movement Mid‑importance

	Latter Day Saint movement portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Latter Day Saint movementWikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementTemplate:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementLatter Day Saint movement articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christian music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Christian musicWikipedia:WikiProject Christian musicTemplate:WikiProject Christian musicChristian music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copyright status of this hymn

Just as a note, the copyright of this hymn is long expired, so there should be no problem including it here in its entirety. COGDEN 19:40, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Yes, but one occasionally sees source-heavy pages thrown up on vfd to be moved to wikibooks. CHL 04:56, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Why do we need the lyrics? Link to an external source. Rick K 04:57, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I believe it's very important to include at least part of these lyrics because this is the only text that plainly asserts the LDS concept of Heavenly Mother. It would be a disservice to simply claim that the song affirms a Mormon Heavenly Mother while pointing to a site relatively few will visit. As such, I think the text--at least the third verse--should be included here to allow readers to appreciate the otherwise this shadowy figure in Mormon theology. If we include the third verse, I think that the other verses should be retained, if only to put the third verse in better context. CHL 08:44, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Rick, this article only exists because of the unique lyrics of this hymn. This is one of a handful of hundreds of Mormon hymns that have unique doctrinal significance. B 15:48, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

Regarding official acknowledgment

If I'm not mistaken, we're using "Mormon" to refer the largest LDS denomination only. If so, then there has been plenty of "official acknowledgment" all the way from Joseph Smith to Gordon B. Hinckley. It would be correct to say there hasn't been much in the way of official detailed teaching or that there has been much in the way of deliberate avoidance of such talk, but any link here will reveal someone from Kimball to Maxwell referring to her quite plainly. I think it's pretty untenable to argue she is not officially acknowledged as doctrine--so long as we are indeed using "Mormon" in the way I described above.

Th. 1:20pm on 2008.01.18 in the Bay Area

Well, that depends on what you think "doctrine" is. Not all members would acknowledge that a statement of Spencer W. Kimball or Neal A. Maxwell is official "doctrine". Many abide by the thought that only things in the Standard Works or joint statements of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles constitute official church doctrine. On this standard, there has been no "official acknowledgement" of the existence of a heavenly mother as doctrine. Some take the reference to "heavenly parents" in the Family Proclamation to mean God and Jesus, so that's not an official acknowledgement either to some. It's best to leave the qualification in, since it is a controversial issue and not cut and dried. Snocrates 06:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But if that's the case, how can we use the word "authoritative" in speaking of this hymn? By that standard, it's not doctrinal either. Th. 11:37pm on 2008.01.18 in the Bay Area —Preceding comment was added at 07:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. I would suggest changing it to something like "one of the few references to Heavenly Mother in materials published by the church" or something similar. Snocrates 08:27, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That seems reasonable. I think the goal here is to keep it simple. Things like "but it's in the gospel essentials book!" are best kept to the article that's actually about her. Th. 10:50pm on 2008.01.21 in the Bay Area —Preceding comment was added at 06:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]