Comments on: Without Purse or Scrip in Texas: 4 May – 14 May, 1901

By: Bruce Crow

Bruce Crow — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 12:01:23 +0000

I noticed the Elder equated studying with memorization. I suspect that was the method commonly used at the time, but I don’t think I’ve seen it so expressly stated in a missionary journal before.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 13:01:00 +0000

Most of those whom this elder mentions by name are those who have let the missionaries stay overnight, or given them dinner. I think, but am not sure, that he calls them “Brother” because they have been kind to the Lord’s servants and are therefore brothers even if they haven’t been baptized — once or twice he has said something about people who turn them away as not being worthy of the blessing of hosting the Lord’s servants.

In other words, I think this is a special case of using those titles, and that in the ordinary course of things Latter-day Saints of 1900 didn’t usually call nonmembers “Brother.”

By: Julia

Julia — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 08:10:02 +0000

I read this a couple of times, trying to figure out why these mission accounts seemed so different to other missionary accounts that were written 50-60 years ago.

Tonight I finally figured out what it was. Every person they meet they describe as Brother or Sister So and So. More modern accounts (and practice) only refer to people as Brother or Sister if they are baptized members of the church. These missionaries refer to everyone they meet with those titles.

Was this usage because they saw all as brothers and sisters of our heavenly parents? If that is the reason was there a doctrinal or social change in the custom?