|
Answers: Straightforward Answers to Tough Gospel
Questions
by Joseph Fielding McConkie
IT IS NOT UNCOMMON IN gospel discussions for someone
to challenge what is being said with the question, "Is
that official Church doctrine?" This question often means the
one asking it does not like what is being said and is seeking a
reason not to be bound by it. The question is generally successful
in putting the one being challenged on the defensive because of the
difficulties associated with defining "official Church doctrine." In
telling the story of the Creation, for instance, teachers are
commonly challenged with the question, "Does the Church have an
official position on the theory of evolution?" The answer is no, it
does not. On the other hand, and this is certainly very important in
such a discussion, the Church does have an official position on the
doctrine of the origin of man. The way questions are framed is very
important. On the one hand, the Church is not in the business of
evaluating scientific theories; on the other, it is in the business
of teaching that all humankind are the offspring of divine parents
and thus not the product of an evolutionary process. The knowledge
that we obtain in the temple, knowledge required for us to enter
into the presence of the Lord, and the ordinances performed there do
not permit the notion that our blood line traces to animals.
If the body of "official doctrine" is to be limited to formal
declarations by the First Presidency, the Church has precious little
doctrine. From the time of its organization in the spring of 1830 to
the present, there have been very few instances in which the First
Presidency has issued "official" doctrinal declarations. These have
included the statement on the origin of man, a doctrinal exposition
on the Father and the Son, and most recently the proclamation on the
family. Each of these declarations is marvelous in its own right,
but if our definition of "official doctrines" is defined so narrowly
that it is limited to these declarations and the few others we have
received, we could not even declare faith, repentance, and baptism
as doctrines of the Church. Indeed, most of what we understand to be
the doctrine of the Church finds no mention in such documents.
Certainly the standard works, the temple ceremony, and much
instruction that has come to us by those whom we sustain as
prophets, seers, and revelators is also "official doctrine."
The difficulties in defining doctrine too narrowly are matched by
those that are too broad and sweeping. For instance, it is not
uncommon to hear someone say that anything taught in general
conference is "official doctrine." Such a standard makes the place
where something is said rather than what is said the standard of
truth. Nor is something doctrine simply because it was said by
someone who holds a particular office or position. Truth is not an
office or a position to which one is ordained. Let us examine some
points that will help clarify what things are or are not doctrine.
QUESTION
How do we distinguish the
doctrine of the Church from that which is not doctrine?
ANSWER
Perhaps the safest way to answer this question is to identify the
characteristics that are common to good doctrine. They include the
following:
First, good doctrine will always sustain the idea that the living
prophet, not scripture or any other document, is the constitution of
the Church. The Church is not governed by canon law, we have no
creed to which we must pay allegiance, nor do we have a written
constitution. The governing authority of the Church is the voice of
the living prophet. It must ever be so. Our faith embraces "all that
God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that
He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the
Kingdom of God" (Article of Faith 9). The man who stands at the head
of the Church is the instrument through which the Lord conveys the
doctrine that is to bind the Church as a whole. Perhaps the
following illustration will help.
Some time ago I received a long-distance call from a missionary
serving in Texas. He had been given material produced by
anti-Mormons declaring that Latter-day Saints believe that Adam is
God. "What's the deal?" he asked with considerable excitement in his
voice.
"Elder," I asked, "were you born and raised in the Church?"
"Yes," he said.
"Did you attend seminary?"
"Yes."
"Have you ever had an institute class?"
"A few," he said.
"Do you read the Church magazines?"
"Yes."
"Have you read the standard works?"
"Yes."
"Do you listen to general conference?"
"Yes." The tone of his voice now contained a hint of exasperation.
"Well, then," I said, "in all that you have read and been taught,
how many times have you been told that Latter-day Saints believe
that Adam is God?"
"Never," he said a little sharply.
"What do you suppose the reason for that is?" I asked.
"I don't know," the missionary said.
"Well, then," I said, "could the reason you were never taught such a
thing in Sunday School, or sacrament meeting, or priesthood
meetings, or seminary, or your institute classes, or stake
conference, or general conferences, or in Church magazines, or in
the scriptures be because we as Latter-day Saints don't believe it?"
"Well," he said, "it says here that Brigham Young taught it."
"Elder," I asked, "is the issue whether Brigham Young taught it or
whether it is a doctrine of the Church?"
"Both," he said.
"All right, let's take first the issue of whether it's the doctrine
of the Church. We have about ten million members of the Church. Do
you suppose that a single one of them has been taught in any Church
class or meeting that Adam was God?"
"No."
"Why not?"
"Because we don't believe that," the missionary replied.
"There is an important point in all of this, Elder," I said. "Never
let anyone outside the Church tell you what the Church teaches. You
were sent out to teach, not to be taught (see D&C 43:15). The
doctrines of the Church will always come to you through the channels
that the Lord ordained, and the Lord didn't ordain anti-Mormon
literature as one of those channels."
"Okay," he said, "but did Brigham Young teach such a thing?"
"I don't know what the pamphlet you have attributes to Brigham
Young," I said, "but I don't think that is the real issue. Brigham
Young taught a host of eternal truths in which this pamphleteer has
no interest. That has to tell us something about the pamphleteer.
His is not a search for truth; it is a search for something to
quibble about. He is building what we call a straw man."
"What is a straw man?" he asked.
"To build a straw man, your critic takes something he knows he can
pound the stuffing out of, and he attributes it to you as your
belief. He then beats it up as evidence that the doctrines of the
Church aren't true. One way for him to do that is to show where two
of our leaders have said something that appears to be in conflict.
The fallacy in his doing so is that he has the notion that we
believe in the infallibility of prophets. Thus if Brigham Young said
something that is not the doctrine of the Church, then the Church
can't be true because one of its prophets made an error. Now, Elder,
do you see what is happening? Your critic is telling you that we
believe in the infallibility of prophets. The truth is, we simply
don't believe that. Joseph Smith was the great prophet of this
dispensation, yet the Doctrine and Covenants contains a number of
revelations in which the Lord scolds him and invites him to repent.
In this Church everyone is privileged to make mistakes and repent of
them. We take that as an evidence that the Church is true, not that
it is false."
By now my young called had calmed down considerably. "So what you're
telling me," he said, "is that if this Adam-God stuff was really a
doctrine of the Church, we would be teaching it today."
"You got it," I said. "The word doctrine means `teaching.' We teach
our doctrines."
"So can prophets make mistakes on doctrine?" he asked.
"Elder," I said, "I have never known a man whom we sustain as a
prophet, seer, and revelator who thought himself infallible. Nor
have I met one whose counsel and testimony were not worth listening
to."
"Okay," he said and hung up.
The man who presides over the Church holds the keys
of the kingdom. "For him to whom these keys are given," modern
revelation declares, "there is no difficulty in obtaining a
knowledge of facts in relation to the salvation of the children of
men, both as well for the dead as for the living" (D&C 128:11). In a
revelation given on the day the Church was organized, the Lord
defined the relationship that was to exist between its members and
its presiding officer. "Wherefore, meaning the church," the Lord
said, "thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments
which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all
holiness before me; for his word ye shall receive, as if from mine
own mouth, in all patience and faith. For by doing these things the
gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea, and the Lord God
will disperse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the
heavens to shake for your good, and his name's glory" (D&C 21:4-6).
Second, all true doctrine will have revelation as its source. It
will come from the Father in the name of Christ. It must be taught
and learned by the Spirit of revelation. True doctrine will always
declare God and revelation as its source. It will never be based
upon "philosophical speculation," as were the decisions of the
ecumenical councils out of which the creeds of historical
Christianity have come. To those of the Old World Christ declared,
"My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me" (John 7:16). In
another instance he said, "Every plant, which my heavenly Father
hath not planted, shall be rooted up" (Matthew 15:13). Teaching the
same principle in the New World, he said, "This is my doctrine, and
I bear record of it from the Father" (3 Ne. 11:35). Teaching this
principle in our dispensation the Lord said:
"Let us reason even as a man reasoneth one with another face to
face.
"Now, when a man reasoneth he is understood of man, because he
reasoneth as a man; even so will I, the Lord, reason with you that
you may understand.
"Wherefore, I the Lord ask you this question—unto what were ye
ordained?
"To preach my gospel by the Spirit, even the Comforter which was
sent forth to teach the truth.
"And then received ye spirits which ye could not understand, and
received them to be of God; and in this are ye justified?
"Behold ye shall answer this question yourselves; nevertheless, I
will be merciful unto you; he that is weak among you hereafter shall
be made strong.
"Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to
preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth,
doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?
"And if it be by some other way it is not of God.
"And again, he that receiveth the word of truth, doth he receive it
by the Spirit of truth or some other way?
"If it be some other way it is not of God.
"Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know, that he
that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is
preached by the Spirit of truth?
"Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one
another, and both are edified and rejoice together" (D&C 50:11-22).
Third, pure doctrine will always come through the channels the Lord
has ordained. "This greater priesthood," the Lord said, "administereth
the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even
the key of the knowledge of God" (D&C 84:19). Explaining this
principle, Joseph Smith said that the "Melchizedek Priesthood . . .
is the channel through which all knowledge, doctrine, the plan of
salvation and every important matter is revealed from heaven"
(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 166-67).
A commonality among cultist groups is the claim to revelation that
makes them independent of the order and channels the Lord has
established. The claim carries within itself the seed of its own
destruction. As the malcontents claim the right to revelation
placing them above the discipline and order of the Church, so their
followers will claim the same right to rebel against their
organization. Thus we find constant division among their ranks.
The revelations of heaven will always call for unity among the
Saints and require that they sustain those called to preside over
them.
Fourth, it is not for us to either add to or take from the system of
salvation as revealed by the Lord. It is not for man to add to or
take from the purity of the revealed word. Having taught the
principles of faith, repentance, and baptism, the Savior said:
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso
buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against them. And whoso shall declare more or less
than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of
evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy
foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when
the floods come and the winds beat upon them" (3 Ne. 11:39-40).
This text is marvelously instructive and challenging. On the one
hand it directs that we are to neither take from or add to that
which has come from the Lord. On the other hand, we are to build
upon the foundation he has laid. We must build revelation upon
revelation. We cannot say, We have this, or, We have done that, and
that is sufficient. "Wo be unto him that saith: We have received,
and we need no more!
"And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because
of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock
receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy
foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
"Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God,
and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
"For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children
of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there
a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and
lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto
him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say,
We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they
have" (2 Ne. 28:27-30).
This passage suggests that we may well be missing the point by
attempting to answer the question of what doctrine is "official" and
what is not. At issue is truth—finding and complying with the
principles that bring salvation. The issue is not whether something
is official, or once was official, or will yet become official. The
issue is whether or not it builds upon the foundation laid by Christ
and his apostles. Is it in harmony with all other laws and
ordinances of the gospel? Does it sanctify the soul? Does it lead us
closer to God? Surely any principle that responds affirmatively to
such questions can be numbered among the doctrines of the Latter-day
Saints.
Fifth, true doctrine will always edify. The Spirit of the Lord is
positive, not negative. It lifts and builds. "That which doth not
edify," we are told, "is not of God" (D&C 50:23). Originally the
verb "to edify" meant to build sacred edifices, for instance, the
temple. With use the word has come to describe the process of
improving character or building spirituality. All that is of God
edifies—that is, it lifts, builds, and improves; to edify is,
conversely, to eschew that which demeans, belittles, or excuses. To
edify is to make the body and soul of man a holy tabernacle, a
temple to God. Any doctrine that does not lead to this end is not of
God. To those who feared that the Book of Mormon might have some
kind of negative effect on the stature of the Bible the Lord said,
"I do not bring it to destroy that which they have received, but to
build it up" (D&C 10:52). Such is the purpose of the restored
gospel. Never does a missionary ask prospective converts to
surrender any positive habit or practice in joining the Church.
Rather they are told to hold tenaciously to such good things and the
restored gospel will add to them. "Yea, and I will also bring to
light my gospel," the Lord said, "which was ministered unto them,
and, behold, they shall not deny that which you have received, but
they shall build it up, and shall bring to light the true points of
my doctrine, yea, and the only doctrine which is in me" (D&C 10:62).
In harmony with this principle the charge given by Christ to the
meridian Twelve was to "seek not the things of this world but seek
ye first to build up the kingdom of God, and to establish his
righteousness" (JST Matt. 6:33).
Sixth, the standard works are the measuring rod for all doctrine.
"It makes no difference," stated President Joseph Fielding Smith,
"what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is
in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My
words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or
low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept
them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four
standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we
measure every man's doctrine.
"You cannot accept the books written by the authorities of the
Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with
the revealed word in the standard works.
"Every man who writes is responsible, not the Church, for what he
writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something which is out of
harmony with the revelations, then every member of the Church is
duty bound to reject it. If he writes that which is in perfect
harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be
accepted" (Doctrines of Salvation, 3:203-4).
Teaching the same principle, President Harold B. Lee said: "It is
not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities
is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in
everything they [speak] and write. Now you keep that in mind. I
don't care what his position is, if he writes something or speaks
something that goes beyond anything that you can find in the
standard church works, unless that one be the prophet, seer, and
revelator—please note that one exception—you may immediately say,
`Well, that is his own idea.' And if he says something that
contradicts what is found in the standard church works (I think that
is why we call them `standard'—it is the standard measure of all
that men teach), you may know by that same token that it is false,
regardless of the position of the man who says it" ("Place of the
Living Prophet, Seer and Revelator," 14).
Seventh, no true doctrine can stand independent of the testimony
that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that salvation is in and
through him and none other. Announcing this truth in our
dispensation the Lord said, "Behold, Jesus Christ is the name which
is given of the Father, and there is none other name given whereby
man can be saved; wherefore, all men must take upon them the name
which is given of the Father, for in that name shall they be called
at the last day; wherefore, if they know not the name by which they
are called, they cannot have place in the kingdom of my Father" (D&C
18:23-25).
All true doctrine testifies of Christ. No doctrine of salvation can
stand independent of him.
It is impossible for a person to have the companionship of the Holy
Ghost and at the same time deny that Jesus is the Christ (see 1 Cor.
12:3; Smith Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 223). Similarly,
it is impossible for anyone to enjoy the companionship of the Holy
Ghost and at the same time deny that Joseph Smith is the great
prophet of the Restoration or that the Book of Mormon is true—or any
other saving truth in the restored gospel.
QUESTION
Does the gospel embrace all truth?
ANSWER
No. Innumerable truths have no bearing on that sacred body of truth
we call the gospel. It is true, for example, that my father wore a
size fifteen shoe, liked to wear bow ties, and had my mother cut his
hair. Though such things are true, they have nothing to do with the
gospel. None of these things affected his knowledge of the gospel or
the testimony he bore. You need neither imitate them nor remember
them to be saved.
There is no equality among truths. They are like pebbles on a dirt
road. Only rarely will you find one that is of any measurable worth.
Gospel truths, the truths that are eternal and have the power of
salvation in them, will have God as their author and revelation as
their source. They will lift and edify the soul and be accompanied
by a spirit of peace. They will also cause the adversary to holler
and complain. Any truth that does not offend the prince of darkness,
causing him to rant and rave, cannot be of any particular moment.
Similarly, any principle that does not require the Spirit of the
Lord to teach can be taught as well by a faithless man as a learned,
as well by students of faith as by those who are making no effort to
accord their lives with the standards the Lord has set. Such a truth
is not a gospel principle and will be of no value in the world to
come.
When missionaries go out into the world to declare the "fulness of
[the] gospel" (D&C 1:23), we send them out to teach faith,
repentance, and baptism. They do not go out to prepare people to
receive a college degree. They go out to prepare people to receive a
degree of glory that centers on that understanding that comes only
from living gospel principles. In so saying, there is no demeaning
the value of secular learning. The knowledge of such things has
placed many in a position to be of meaningful service both to their
community and to the Church. Yet it would miss the mark to suppose
that secular knowledge could somehow substitute for purity, faith,
and obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel.
QUESTION
Does doctrine change?
ANSWER
Doctrine consists of eternal principles, which are the same
yesterday, today, and forever. The principles known to us in our
second estate were known to us in our first, or premortal, estate. A
knowledge of these principles will rise with us in the resurrection
to be used by us in the same manner as they are here. Though the
principles are eternal, they find application according to time and
season.
"To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under
the heaven: a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant,
and a time to pluck up that which is planted; a time to kill, and a
time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; a time
to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a
time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; a time to
get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; a
time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time
to speak; a time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a
time of peace" (Eccl. 3:1-8).
During one time and season missionaries are commanded to go forth
without purse or scrip; in another, to take the same (see Luke
22:35-36). In one instance they are commanded to speak forth boldly;
in another, to remain silent (see D&C 75:4; Matt. 17:9).
Circumstances may change, but the principle of revelation remains
constant. The Prophet taught, "This is the principle on which the
government of heaven is conducted—by revelation adapted to the
circumstances in which the children of the kingdom are placed"
(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 256). At no period in
earth's history could the kingdom of God be adequately governed by
the revelations given to another people in another time for other
reasons. The constitution of the Church must always be the voice of
its living prophet.
QUESTION
Who can declare doctrine?
ANSWER
It has occasionally been argued that only the president of the
Church has the authority to expound scripture. This argument appears
a little ridiculous when it is remembered that it is the duty of the
priests in the Aaronic Priesthood "to preach, teach, expound,
exhort, and baptize" and that both teacher and deacon are also
called "to warn, expound, exhort, and teach, and invite all to come
unto Christ" (D&C 20:46, 59). "To expound" is defined in the
dictionary of Joseph Smith's day as "to interpret; as, to expound a
text of scripture" (Webster, American Dictionary, 78). The argument
that only the president of the Church can teach doctrine usually
comes from someone who doesn't like the interpretation that someone
else has placed on a particular text, so he or she simply argues
that whoever said it is without authority to do so. Thus the focus
of the discussion is shifted from a consideration of the correctness
of a particular statement to a consideration of authority.
It is true, and well understood by Latter-day Saints generally, that
all sound doctrine must trace itself to the prophetic voice and that
the living head of the Church is the binding voice on all doctrinal
matters. That does not mean, however, that every doctrinal insight
must originate with him or that no one else's doctrinal
understanding can exceed his. It was never intended that only
ordained prophets could write inspired books, poetry, plays, hymns,
or music for the edification of the members of the Church. Neither
was it intended that they give all the patriarchal blessings,
deliver all the inspired addresses, teach all the classes, or lead
all the choirs. Indeed, it may never be their lot to paint the great
paintings, sculpt with inspiration, or design chapels and temples.
The kingdom of God is to be built as the tabernacle in the
wilderness or the temple in Jerusalem was—by the revelation of God
as it manifests itself through a prophet and a nation of artists and
craftsmen. All who labor to build the house of the Lord, be it
temporal or spiritual, be it ancient or modern, are to do so with
the Spirit of revelation. And it goes almost without saying, that as
the greatest of temples awaits building, so the best of books,
music, art, and all things that testify of our God still await the
day of their earthly creation.
QUESTION
When we teach, is it ever proper to go beyond the
literal rendering of the scripture
itself?
ANSWER
Even scripture is not scripture unless we bring the Spirit of
inspiration and revelation to it. Illustrating this principle, Elder
Bruce R. McConkie said: "Those who preach by the power of the Holy
Ghost use the scriptures as their basic source of knowledge and
doctrine. They begin with what the Lord has before revealed to other
inspired men. But it is the practice of the Lord to give added
knowledge to those upon whose hearts the true meanings and intents
of the scriptures have been impressed. Many great doctrinal
revelations come to those who preach from the scriptures. When they
are in tune with the Infinite, the Lord lets them know, first, the
full and complete meaning of the scriptures they are expounding, and
then he ofttimes expands their views so that new truths flood in
upon them, and they learn added things that those who do not follow
such a course can never know. Hence, as to `preaching the word,' the
Lord commands his servants to go forth `saying none other things
than that which the prophets and apostles have written, and that
which is taught them by the Comforter through the prayer of faith.'
(D&C 52:9.) In a living, growing, divine church, new truths will
come from time to time and old truths will be applied with new vigor
to new situations, all under the guidance of the Holy Spirit of God"
(Promised Messiah, 515-16).
QUESTION
Are all the answers we need found
in the scriptures?
ANSWER
No. This is the party line of apostate religion, and it is called
the doctrine of sufficiency. The claim is that the Bible contains
all that is or ever can be necessary for the benefit of man. In
making such a claim, they are sealing the heavens, silencing God,
doing away with the need for living prophets, and denying the power
of the Holy Ghost. For a Latter-day Saint to say the same thing of
the standard works is to agree in principle with this basic dogma of
the Apostasy. Nephi said of such a notion, "For unto him that
receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have
enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have" (2
Ne. 28:30).
QUESTION
How should doctrinal issues be
settled?
ANSWER
Perhaps an illustration will help. I received a call from a woman
asking about a doctrine we had studied in a class she had taken a
few years before. She told me that the question had come up in a
Gospel Doctrine class and she had mentioned what she had learned in
class only to be severely rebuked by some of the class members. Then
others got involved, and people divided themselves into two camps.
At that point the bishop intervened and said that he would teach the
lesson the next week and settle the issue and that after he had
taught there were to be no questions. I don't know what happened the
following week and am probably happier not knowing.
The problem here is at least twofold. First, it is unfortunate that
Latter-day Saints would divide themselves in a spirit of sharpness
in a discussion over doctrine. That would have to be offensive to
the Spirit of truth. It is also unfortunate that the bishop chose to
settle the issue with what might be called a priesthood power play.
Not the least of the difficulties here is that such are subject to
reversal every time a new bishop is called. Would it not have been
more appropriate for a charge to be given to each member of the
class to go home and prayerfully search the scriptures and for the
class to come together again the next week in a spirit of searching
rather than in a spirit of defending? The Lord has frequently
enjoined us to search the scriptures; he has never directed that we
debate them.
I am sure no one would question that the final word on all doctrinal
matters rests with the president of the Church. Certainly the united
voice of the First Presidency and/or the Quorum of the Twelve
carries the same authority. Independent of decisions made by such
authority, the standard works constitute the measuring rod. Bishops
and stake presidents and the disciplinary councils over which they
have the authority to preside are responsible to handle matters of
apostasy, which could include the persistent teaching of false
doctrine. There is always a right of appeal that attends their
decisions, so, if necessary, any disagreement could be reviewed by
the highest authorities in the Church.
AT ISSUE
The whole system of salvation centers in our obtaining the "mind of
Christ," as Paul said (1 Cor. 2:16). It is the process by which we
come to think as God thinks, to believe as he believes, and
therefore to act as he would act. It embraces, Paul explained, our
"rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). The original
sense of this text was to "cut a straight path," or to "hold to a
straight course." It was a charge to teach the truths of salvation
without adding to or taking from them (see 3 Ne. 11:39-40). It also
embraced the idea of dividing to every man according to his need
(see D&C 84:85). A proper understanding of the text gives us a
clearer view of the ministry of John the Baptist, who was charged to
"make straight in the desert a highway for our God" (Isa. 40:3).
That is, his office was to teach the doctrine that would prepare the
hearts and minds of men to accept Christ and his teachings. All good
doctrine has this as its end. No good doctrine "rightly divided"
would ever do otherwise. Good doctrine "cuts a straight path" and
demands that we "hold to a straight course." Believing in good
doctrine always lifts us to a higher level of commitment while at
the same time placing us in a position to see and understand all
other doctrines more clearly.
Most doctrinal errors are rooted in a desire to accommodate either
the standards of the world or its philosophies and theories. In a
sobering, prophetic description of our day, Nephi said, "They have
all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of
Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do
err because they are taught by the precepts of men" (2 Ne. 28:14).
The Lord warned Joseph Smith that the prince of darkness would come
to["[take] away light and truth, through disobedience," doing so
under the cloak of the "tradition of their fathers" (D&C 93:39). In
the process of discerning what constitutes sound doctrine, among the
basic questions that ought to be asked is, Where does this lead?
Does it lead us to favor with God or man? Robert J. Matthews
properly observes that "in the process of apostasy, the most
spiritual doctrines are cast aside first. Ethical teachings remain
even in apostasy, but the most profound doctrinal precepts are
discarded as narrow, theoretical, opinionated, discriminatory,
uninspired, and socially unacceptable" (unpublished lecture).
The only true danger facing Mormonism is that which comes from
within. It comes from those who would seek to popularize Mormonism
so that we might be like, and thus acceptable to, the world. Such
people should remember, observed President Joseph F. Smith, "that
the theories of the worldly-wise cannot with safety be engrafted
into the principles of the gospel. We have received a distinct
dispensation of the gospel." Ours is a revealed faith, a new
dispensation, which by its very definition demands that we stand
independent of the world. "We cannot," President Smith observed,
"consent to be guided by inspiration from the outside, but are in
duty bound to follow in the way revealed by God. To be directed by
the postulates of the world, and by leaders of men, will be just as
fatal to the Latter-day Saints, as it was for the Former-day Saints"
("Principle, Not Popularity," 731).
Of necessity there will always be things about our faith that will
be offensive to the world. "Do you suppose that this people will
ever see the day that they will rest in perfect security, in hopes
of becoming like another people, nation, state, kingdom, or
society?" Brigham Young asked. "They never will," he declared.
"Christ and Satan never can be friends. Light and darkness will
always remain opposites" (in Journal of Discourses, 1:188).
[Answers: Straightforward Answers to Tough Gospel Questions,
211-230, by Joseph Fielding McConkie]
© 2004 Deseret Book. Printed from
GospeLink.com.
We do not believe in the infallibility of prophets
or any other set of men. All men err, sin, and are invited to repent
(Romans 3:23). Lorenzo Snow observed: "I can fellowship the
President of the Church if he does not know everything I know. . . .
I saw the . . . imperfections in [Joseph Smith]. . . . I thanked God
that He would put upon a man who had those imperfections the power
and authority He placed upon him . . . for I knew that I myself had
weakness, and I thought there was a chance for me. . . . I thanked
God that I saw these imperfections" (quoted by Maxwell, in
Conference Report, October 1984, 10). In so saying, Elder Snow
reflected both the spirit and counsel of Moroni, who wrote: "Condemn
me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of
his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but
rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our
imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been"
(Mormon 9:31). [Joseph Fielding McConkie, Craig J. Ostler,
Revelations of the Restoration, 1:25-27].
© Deseret Book. Printed
from GospeLink.com.
|