Why Things Change

I just read a Dialogue article written in 1981 by Thomas Alexander about the development of the Word of Wisdom from being a "principle with promise" to a commandment.  Though not comprehensive it's a worthwhile read.  It's not lengthy and provides context for some of the decisions regarding Church policy that were being made at the time.

Diaries, journals, minutes of meetings, and contemporary news articles are great ways to trace the development of individual and group sentiment about matters pertaining to doctrine and policy in our history.  Much of the best information can be found in these sources, and yet it is unfortunately these sources that are underutilized in publications that most members of the Church would be familiar with.  Publications that have done a good job exhausting these resources are viewed by some as antagonistic to the Church.  These same publications, however, are usually the most accurate and thorough.    

Early leaders of the Church held varied personal opinions about the application of the Word of Wisdom.  It's fun to learn about them.  

Lorenzo Snow, for example, believed and taught that members of the Church ought to avoid eating meat, and that this prohibition was a more serious matter than other requirements of the Word of Wisdom.  

George Albert Smith took brandy for medicinal purposes later in his life, while years earlier he advised Stake Presidencies and Bishoprics to no "longer tolerate men in presiding positions who would not keep the Word of Wisdom."  

Wilford Woodruff and George Teasdale believed and taught that eating pork was a more serious offense than drinking coffee or tea.  Brigham Young often taught the same thing.  

Other prominent Latter-day Saints held other views and opinions about this revelation.  Some members even paid their tithing in homemade wine into the latter part of the 19th century, and these tithes were accepted and stored by the Church.  

Growing support of the prohibition of alcohol among Evangelicals and certain political groups influenced the feelings of LDS Church leaders after the turn of the century.  During this time of growing interest in the Prophet's revelation, leaders of the Church began to prevent members from being ordained to the priesthood, from serving in callings, and attending the temple based upon breaches of conduct pertaining to the Word of Wisdom in an effort to encourage compliance.  

Changes in the Church's policies were influenced by what was going on in the political and social world around them.  This was not the first time in our history that changes in policy were implemented because of shifting social opinions.  The Church's consideration of public opinion has only grown since that time.  

This is not to say that many of the decisions on policy aren't made with good intentions and by good men.  It is only to say that many decisions are made without regard for or reference to revelation. 

One thing in particular that caught my attention in his article was the following:

"Late in the 1920s Church leaders urged alternative anti-tobacco legislation, and  in  1927,  Elders  Richard  R.  Lyman  and  Melvin  J.  Ballard  asked  church attorney Franklin S. Richards for information  on the possibility of legislation preventing the advertising of cigarettes on billboards. Even though  Richards believed  that the Supreme  Court would  declare such a law unconstitutional, the  1929 legislature passed  one anyway. The Relief Society Magazine in May, 1929, said  it hoped  that  the courts would  uphold  the law and  regretted  that the Idaho legislature had not passed a similar law. In November,  1929, however,  Judge  David  W.  Moffatt  of  Utah's  Third  District  Court  ruled  the
billboard  law  unconstitutional."

I don't live in Utah, but have seen pictures spread around online of the many billboards advertising City Creek Center.  Some of those billboards portray the consumption of alcohol.  It's ironic to me that in 21st century Mormonism, at a time when the Word of Wisdom has evolved to be among the most defining practices and attributes of Latter-day Saints, we see billboards with alcohol advertising a mall to attract business - for the sake of popularity and gain.  Yet, a hundred years ago when Word of Wisdom adherence was barely in the stages of becoming a requirement to enter the temple under Heber J. Grant's presidency, there were laws being passed attacking the advertisement of the principles the Church claimed it was striving to uphold.  

Money is a powerful taskmaster.  

Political and Social influence have always been an enticement to men.  They influence more of our decisions than they should (1 Ne. 22:23). 

Journals are Helpful

In 1836, just three years after his baptism, Wilford Woodruff was called as a seventy.  The next year he recorded the following prayer in his journal:

"O Lord I ask thee in the name of Jesus Christ thy Son, to look upon thy servant Willford, who now occupies a place in Kirtland, this first Stake of Zion, which thou has appointed in this last Dispensation, & fulness of times for the gathering of thy Saints.  O God of Israel, inspire the heart & pen of thy Servant at this time, & hear & answer the Petition which he will put up unto thee at this time, & remember the Covenant which they servant Willford will make with thee at this time, O mighty God of Jacob.  O Lord thou hast spared my life, to behold the commencem of 1837.  May my life, health, & strength be precious in thy Sight, through the year.  Wilt thou save me by thy grace from all sin, & the Powers of temptation, which try the souls of men.  Wilt thou give me favor during this year, with God & the Saints.  Wilt thou bless me while in school, & in meeting with the quorum of the Seventies, & while attending all other meetings in Kirtland for Divine worship.  O Lord if it be thy will, give me the privilege of recording in this years Journal great blessing, Pronounced upon my head from mine annointing & from under the hands of the Patriarch JOSEPH.  & an account of Great visions, & the opening of the heavens, & and the Revelation of JESUS CHRIST Unto me that I may be a special witness of Thee.  O Lord.  & may I also have the administering of Holy angels, that I may be taught of the Eternal things of the Priesthood.  If I am called to preach thy word this year, may I be bless with souls for my hire.   If I visit my kinsman, wilt thou make me an instrument, of bringing them into thy Celestial Kingdom.  & I Covenant with Thee, Heavenly FATHER, to go & come at thy bidding.  I ask the above blessing, through the Priesthood in the name of JESUS CHRIST AMEN" (Dean C. Jessee; BYU Studies Vol 12; 4:373, emphasis mine).

Is the gospel different today than it was then?  Why do members of the Church not share the same desire for spiritual things today as Wilford Woodruff did then?  What has changed?  Are members less spiritual?  What about our present culture discourages this kind of seeking?  I'm grateful when I read journals of the early Saints.  

The Danger of Infallibility, Part 2

“Cursed is he that putteth his trust in the arm of flesh.  Yea, cursed is he that putteth his trust in man.”  -Nephi (2 Ne. 4:34).

First consider this.  President Woodruff made his now too-long-promulgated statement while he was the 4^th President of the Church.  It was made at a time when the saints were sore afraid he had taken actions contrary to the will of the Lord by issuing the manifesto.  

By and large, faithful Latter-day Saints believed what they had been taught by Brigham Young and his counselors.  They believed what had been taught by John Taylor and his associates.  They believed what had been taught them by President Woodruff.  The doctrine these men taught the saints was that plural marriage was restored in these last times by the Prophet Joseph Smith and that it was here to stay; that no power on earth or in hell could remove the practice.  They learned that it was required for their exaltation.  They were taught that you were a coward if you abandoned the practice because of ungodly pressures from a wicked world.  They made eternal covenants in the temples to live it.  The saints were terrified that this was now the course that their own leaders were taking, contrary to everything that had been "revealed" concerning the matter.  

Woodruff wrote the following in his journal about the principle of plural marriage:

“God our heavenly Father, knowing that this is the only law, ordained by the Gods of eternity, that would exalt immortal beings to kingdoms, thrones, principalities, powers and dominions…commanded Joseph Smith the prophet, and all Latter-day Saints, to obey this law, ‘or you shall be damned,’ saith the Lord.

 

“Now who shall we obey?  God or man?  My voice is that we obey God. …So say I as an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, I will not desert my wives and my children and disobey the commandments of God, for the sake of accommodating the public clamor of a nation steeped in sin and ripened in the damnation of hell.  I would rather go to prison and to death" (21 April 1879, in Wilford Woodruff’s Journal.  Taken from Briney’s Silencing Mormon Polygamy, p. 7).

Both John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff made claims that a revelation ending plural marriage would "never" come forth.  Heber J. Grant recorded a statement made to him by Wilford Woodruff:

“Had we yielded to that document every man of us would have been under condemnation before God.  The Lord never will give a revelation to abandon plural marriage" (Ibid, p. 31.  An excerpt from the Journals of Heber J. Grant.  The "document" referred to was proposed as a public declaration that the Mormons would no longer practice plural marriage.  Saints, including apostles, had requested that President Taylor issue a "revelation" or declaration that the saints would no longer continue the practice as a ploy to end federal persecution.  This same request was later made of President Woodruff.  Both men refused, stating the Lord would never issue such a revelation, and that they would be condemned by God if they signed such a document.).


There are many more details about all of this.  These are just snippets.  It is easier to get at a clear understanding of what President Woodruff believed about what he was saying, when you consider all of those details.  There are over fifty years of context that need to be understood before really understanding the situation he found himself in, and what he meant when he said neither he nor any other President of the Church would lead the saints astray.  Among other possible meanings, he was at very least trying to calm the hearts of the general membership of the Church during a time of tumult and severe change.  By revoking the practice of plural marriage he was contradicting the previous Church Presidents, and the saints were afraid he'd succumbed to political pressure.  


There is, however, important additional context for President Woodruff’s 1890 statement that is worth consideration.  This additional context is important not because it helps you understand the immediate circumstances that led to President Woodruff’s making the statement, or even what the statement itself may mean, but because this context helps you begin to consider some of the implications of what he said.

Wilford Woodruff had served faithfully beside Brigham Young during the 40 years previous to issuing the manifesto, and making this statement.  He loved President Young, and he loved what he taught.

“Every man in this room who has a particle of the Spirit of God knows that President Young is a Prophet of God and that God sustains him and he has the Holy Spirit and his doctrines are true" (27 Jan 1860, Minutes of Meeting with the Quorum of the Twelve and First Presidency, The Office Journal of President Brigham Young, 1858-1863 Book D, Appendix A.  Taken from Collier’s President Brigham Young’s Doctrine on Deity, p. xxx)

At President Young’s funeral Wilford Woodruff said:

“I have often felt in listening to the glorious principles of President Young, that the people here heard him so much that they hardly prized the beauty and the extent of the results and virtues of His teachings…Let us not forget the precious words of truth and wisdom he has taught us” (Ibid.).

To that point in history, President Woodruff had not found fault with the doctrines of Brigham Young.  Some of these doctrines are incredibly contrary to the feelings of contemporary Latter-day Saints. These doctrines at least include a denial of priesthood to the blacks, blood atonement, Adam-God, the law of adoption, and plural marriage.  Did President Woodruff have these doctrines in mind when he said the President of the Church would never lead the saints astray?  

At the time President Woodruff made this statement there had not been statements from either President Taylor or President Woodruff contradicting or correcting Brigham Young’s teachings, with the very recent exception of plural marriage, which the saints were outwardly (but not privately) abandoning.  In fact, when President Woodruff made his statement after issuing the manifesto he still had no intention of altogether abandoning the practice of plural marriage.  We must ask why President Young’s ideas went uncorrected, if what he was teaching was incorrect in their view?  Consider the following statement Wilford Woodruff made while he was President of the Church regarding the various teachings of President Young: 

“President Young led us a great many years.  He was a man of God, filled with revelation.  His teachings were attended by the inspirations of Almighty God…and in all his counsels the word of the Lord was with him.  He had but few revelations that were written and published to the world.  But we had the word of the Lord through him day by day" (Deseret Evening News, 21 April 1890.  Ibid. xxxiii.).

These are just a few of many examples that could be cited indicating Wilford Woodruff’s support of the teachings of his predecessors.  If he disagreed with their doctrines he did not express so either in public or in his private journals (After a meeting with the school of the prophets, for example, President Woodruff wrote in his journal: “President Young spoke of the first organization of this school by Joseph Smith the Prophet.  The word of wisdom was given in this school.  President Young said Adam was Michael the Ark angel & he was the Father of Jesus Christ & and was our God & that Joseph taught this principle.” (WWJ, 16 Dec. 1867).  Nothing in the full journal entry indicates Woodruff’s acceptance or rejection of the teaching.).

Are those doctrines true or false?  What did Wilford Woodruff think of them?  What are the implications of his statement that it isn't in the programme for the church President to lead us astray?  How do today's leaders feel about the doctrines that were taught in 19th century Mormonism?

The Danger of Infallibility, Part 1

“In the Catholic church everyone says the pope is infallible but nobody believes it; and in the Mormon church everybody says the prophet is fallible but nobody believes it.”              - Wendy Ulrich

Heber J. Grant once said to Marion G. Romney, “My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it" (Conference Report, October 1960, p. 78).

However, Joseph Smith said, “We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them even if they knew it was wrong; but such obedience is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme; and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself, should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise the idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves" (Millennial Star, Volume 14, No. 38, Pages 593-595).

It should sit as a curiosity to you that we continually return to the sentiment expressed so long ago by President Woodruff that the President of the Church would never “lead you astray" (See Official Declaration-1).

We think it is unreasonable that the Catholic church considers its pope to be infallible.  We scoff the idea of infallibility, but then fervently believe that the President of the Church will never lead us astray. 

Why do we take such solace in President Woodruff’s statement?  Why has that taken such a pre-eminent stance in Mormon teachings through time?  It appears everywhere.  It was just in a recent Ensign magazine yet again: 


“Some might call our actions blind obedience. But we have the Lord’s personal promise that the prophets will never lead us astray" (by Elder Randall Bennett titled “Follow the Prophet.”).  


What does this statement mean?  Is it true?  Is it "the Lord's personal promise?"  What did President Woodruff mean in saying what he did?  Does it mean the Church President would never believe in or teach anything that is false, as some folks might interpret it today?  Or that he would never teach us anything that would cause us to err in doctrine?

Other Church Presidents preceding Wilford Woodruff directly expressed the exact opposite view:  

“President Joseph Smith read the 14th chapter of Ezekiel - said the Lord had declared by the Prophet, that the people should each one stand for himself, and depend on no man or men in that state of corruption of the Jewish church - that righteous persons could only deliver their own souls - applied it to the present state of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – said if the people departed from the Lord, they must fall – that they were depending on the prophet, hence were darkened in their minds, in consequence of neglecting the duties devolving upon themselves, envious towards the innocent, while they afflict the virtuous with their shafts of envy" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Five 1842-43,  p. 237-38).

Brigham Young expressed the following in 1874,

“I have often said to the Latter-day Saints – 'Live so that you will know whether I teach you the truth or not.'  Suppose you are careless and unconcerned, and give way to the spirit of the world, and I am led, likewise, to preach the things of this world and to accept things that are NOT of God, how easy it would be for me to lead you astray!  But I say to you, live so that you will know for yourselves whether I tell the truth or not.  That is the way we want all Saints to live" (Brigham Young, JD 18:248).

In the Deseret News the saints read this:

“I told the people that if they would not believe the revelations that God had given, He would suffer the devil to give revelations that they – priest and people – would follow after.  Have I seen this fulfilled?  I have.

 

“I told the people that as true as God lived, if they would not have truth, they would have error sent unto them and they would believe it" (Brigham Young, Deseret News, June 8, 1873).

Mormon historian, D. Michael Quinn points out that this idea of infallibility “denies the principle of free agency and goes against Joseph Smith's assertion that a prophet is only a prophet when he is acting as such. To ignore the limitations and errors of significant statements of the prophets, Quinn feels, would be as false as to ignore their visions, revelations and testimonies" (The Seventh East Press, November 18, 1981).

We delight in the reassurance that a man will not lead us to hell; the very man, in fact, in whom many of us have been placing our trust for salvation.  It’s as though, in effect, we breathe a sigh of relief when reiterating President Woodruff’s words from so long ago while thinking, “I’m glad to know that that man in whom I’ve placed all of my trust for salvation will not lead me astray.”  


Is this the teaching of the Lord?  Has He invited us to “follow the prophets?”  Verily, we can place all of our trust in another man, even a very good man (a Prophet), and ultimately find that we are not saved.  We must foremost learn to trust in Christ and “follow [Him],” and then receive his servants; otherwise we remain telestial (D&C 76:99-101).

What does it mean that the President of the Church will never lead you astray?  Does it mean that he is perfect?  Does it mean that he knows all truth?  Does it mean that every president and apostle has the same gospel understanding?  Have they all had the same amount of light and truth revealed from heaven?  Have all of them received the “testimony of Jesus" (D&C 76:51; Rev 19:10)?  Does it mean that the President of the Church will have no opinion about the gospel that is incorrect?  What about politics, science, ethics, business, or philosophy?  Do their opinions or statements always reflect the absolute truth in these matters?  


The answer to each of these questions is NO.  


If we’ve assumed his statement allows us to answer in the affirmative to any of the above questions then we’ve misunderstood the relation in which we stand to other men.  How then are we to understand President Woodruff’s statement that these men will never lead us astray?