Tag: First Presidency

  • Follow Prophet Covid

    Follow Prophet Covid

    Follow the prophet, follow the prophet,
    Follow the prophet; don’t go astray.
    Follow the prophet, follow the prophet,
    Follow the prophet; he knows the way.

    Follow the Prophet, Children’s Songbook #110
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/music/library/childrens-songbook/follow-the-prophet?lang=eng

    To limit exposure to these viruses, we urge the use of face masks in public meetings whenever social distancing is not possible. To provide personal protection from such severe infections, we urge individuals to be vaccinated. Available vaccines have proven to be both safe and effective.

    The First Presidency Urges Latter-day Saints to Wear Face Masks When Needed and Get Vaccinated Against COVID-19
    https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/first-presidency-message-covid-19-august-2021
  • Sex Education

    Sex Education

    The misguided fostering of sex education in the classroom on the basis that it will lessen sex ignorance and reduce illegitimate pregnancy, venereal disease, and related problems has no basis for sound conclusions. Actual experience has proven the results to be just the opposite.

    President Alvin R. Dyer, First Presidency, April 1969 General Conference
    https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1969a/page/n57/mode/2up

    Comprehensive Sex Education for Teens Is More Effective than Abstinence

    AJN, American Journal of Nursing: March 2012 – Volume 112 – Issue 3 – p15
    https://journals.lww.com/ajnonline/fulltext/2012/03000/comprehensive_sex_education_for_teens_is_more.5.aspx
  • Asked to Wear Face Masks in Temple

    Asked to Wear Face Masks in Temple

    We are grateful that in recent months, some level of ordinance work has resumed in every temple. Our desire is to keep temples open.

    As cases of COVID-19 increase in many areas, we want to do everything possible to allow temples to remain open. Therefore, effective immediately, all temple patrons and workers are asked to wear face masks at all times while in the temple. These safety protocols are temporary, based on COVID-19 conditions, and will be rescinded as soon as circumstances permit.

    Our urging Church members to be vaccinated and to protect themselves and others from the spread of disease has precedent. Prior First Presidencies shared similar messages in 1900 about smallpox and in 1957 regarding polio. Please do all you can to protect yourself and others so the work of the Lord on both sides of the veil can move forward.

    The First Presidency Asks Latter-day Saints Worldwide to Wear Face Masks in Temples
    First Presidency (Russell M. Nelson, Dallin H. Oaks, and Henry B. Eyring)
    https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/first-presidency-temple-masks-letter
  • Racist Doctrine Cannot Be Changed

    Racist Doctrine Cannot Be Changed

    Doctrine Cannot Be Changed

    Boyd K. Packer
    April 2013 General Conference
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1993/10/for-time-and-all-eternity?lang=eng

    August 17, 1949

    The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

    President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.”

    The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.


    Statement of the First Presidency (George Albert Smith, J. Reuben Clark & David O. McKay) of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
    August 17, 1949, Archives, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City.
    https://wasmormon.org/mormons-and-blacklivesmatter-russell-m-nelson-and-the-naacp/

  • Racist Unchanging Doctrine

    Racist Unchanging Doctrine

    The world changes constantly and dramatically, but God, His commandments, and promised blessings do not change. They are immutable and unchanging.

    L. Tom Perry
    April 2013 General Conference
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2013/04/obedience-to-law-is-liberty?lang=eng

    August 17, 1949

    The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

    President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.”

    The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.


    Statement of the First Presidency (George Albert Smith, J. Reuben Clark & David O. McKay) of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
    August 17, 1949, Archives, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City.
    https://wasmormon.org/mormons-and-blacklivesmatter-russell-m-nelson-and-the-naacp/

  • 2021 BYU University Conference

    2021 BYU University Conference

    3 August 2021, BYU University Conference 1

    The Second Half of the Second Century

    BYU Annual University Conference
    August 23, 2021
    By Elder Jeffrey R. Holland

    Someone once told me that the young speak of the future because they have no past, while the elderly speak of the past because they have no future. Although it damages that little aphorism, I come to you as the veritable Ancient of Days to speak of the future of BYU, but a future anchored in our distinctive past. If I have worded that right, it means I can talk about anything I want.

    I am grateful that the full university family is gathered today — faculty, staff, and administration. Regardless of your job description, I am going to speak to all of you as teachers because at BYU that is what all of us are. Thank you for being faithful role models in that regard.

    I can’t be certain, but I think that it was in the summer of 1948 when I had my first BYU experience. I would have been 7 years old. We were driving back to St. George from one of our rare trips to Salt Lake City. As we came down old highway 91, I saw high on the side of one of the hills a huge block “Y” — white and bold and beautiful.

    I don’t know how to explain that moment, but it was a true epiphany for a 7-year-old. If I had seen that “Y” on the drive up or any other time, I couldn’t remember it. But I saw it that day, and I believe it was a revelation from God. I somehow knew that bold letter meant something special and that it would one day play a significant role in my life. When I asked my mother what it meant, she said it was the emblem of a university. I thought about that for a moment then said quietly, “Well, it must be the greatest university in the world.”

    My chance to actually get on campus came in June 1952, four years after that first sighting. That summer I accompanied my parents to one of those early “Leadership Weeks,” a precursor to what is now the immensely popular “Education Week” held on campus. That means I came here for my first BYU experience 69 years ago with a preview of that four years earlier. If anyone in this audience has been coming to this campus longer than that, please come forward and give this talk. Otherwise, sit still and be patient. As Elizabeth Taylor said to her eight husbands, “I won’t be keeping you long.”

    My point, dear friends, is simply this: I have loved BYU for nearly three-fourths of a century. Only my service in and testimony of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, including my marriage and the beautiful children it has given us, have affected me as profoundly as has my decision to attend Brigham Young University. In so testifying, I represent literally hundreds of thousands of other students who say the same thing.

    So, for legions of us over the years, I say: “Thank you for what you do. Thank you for classes taught and meals served and grounds so well kept. Thank you for office hours and lab experiments and testimonies shared — gifts given to little people like me so we could grow up to be big people like you. Thank you for choosing to be at BYU because your choice affected our choice and, like Mr. Frost’s poetic path, “that has made all the difference.”[1]

    I asked President Worthen for a sample of the good things that have been happening of late, and I was delighted at the sheaf of items he gave me — small type, single-spaced lines — everything from academic recognitions and scholarly rankings to athletic success and the reach of BYUtv. Karl G. Maeser would be as proud as I was.

    But Kevin and I both know those aren’t the real success stories of BYU. These are rather, as some say of ordinances in the Church, “outward signs of an inward grace.” The real successes at BYU are the personal experiences that thousands here have had, personal experiences difficult to document or categorize or list. Nevertheless, these are so powerful in their impact on the heart and mind that they have changed us forever.

    I run a risk in citing any examples beyond my own but let me mention just one or two.

    One of our colleagues seated here this morning speaks of his first semester, pre-mission enrollment in my friend Wilford Griggs’s History of Civilization class. But this was going to be civilization seen through a BYU lens. So as preambles to the course, Wilf had the students read President Spencer W. Kimball’s “Second Century Address”[2] and the first chapter of Hugh Nibley’s Approaching Zion.[3]

    Taken together, our very literate friend says these two readings “forged an indestructible union in my mind and heart between two soaring ideals — that of a consecrated university with that of a holy city. Zion, I came to believe, would be a city with a school [and I would add, a temple, creating] something of a celestial college town, or perhaps a college kingdom.”

    After his mission, our faculty friend returned to Provo where he fell under the soul-expanding spell of John Tanner, “the platonic ideal of a BYU professor — superbly qualified in every secular sense, totally committed to the kingdom, and absolutely effervescing with love for the Savior, His students, and His subject. He moved seamlessly from careful teacher analysis to powerful personal testimony. He knew scores of passages from Milton and other poets by heart, [yet] verses of scripture flowed, if anything, even more freely from the abundance of his consecrated heart: I was unfailingly edified by the passion of his teaching and the eloquence of his example.”[4]

    Why would such an one come to teach at BYU after a truly distinguished post-graduate experience that might well have taken him to virtually any university in America? Because, our colleague says, “In a coming day the citizens of Zion ‘shall come forth with songs of everlasting joy’ [Moses 7:53]. I hope,” he writes, “to help my students hear that chorus in the distance and to lend their own voices, in time, to its swelling refrain.”[5]

    Such are the experiences we hope to provide our students at BYU, though probably not always so poetically expressed. Then, imagine the pain that comes with a memo like this one I recently received. These are just a half-dozen lines from a two-page document:

    “You should know,” the writer says, “that some people in the extended community are feeling abandoned and betrayed by BYU. It seems that some professors (at least the vocal ones in the media) are supporting ideas that many of us feel are contradictory to gospel principles, making it appear to be about like any other university our sons and daughters could have attended. Several parents have said they no longer want to send their children here or donate to the school.

    “Please don’t think I’m opposed to people thinking differently about policies and ideas,” the writer continues. “I’m not. But I would hope that BYU professors would be bridging those gaps between faith and intellect and would be sending out students that are ready to do the same in loving, intelligent and articulate ways. Yet, I fear that some faculty are not supportive of the Church’s doctrines and policies and choose to criticize them publicly. There are consequences to this. After having served a full-time mission and marrying her husband in the temple, a friend of mine recently left the church. In her graduation statement on a social media post, she credited [such and such a BYU program and its faculty] with the radicalizing of her attitudes and the destruction of her faith.”[6]

    Fortunately, we don’t get many of those letters, but this one isn’t unique. Several of my colleagues get the same kind, with most of them ultimately being forwarded to poor President Worthen. Now, most of what happens on this campus is wonderful. That is why I began as I did, with my own undying love of this place. But every so often we need a reminder of the challenge we constantly face here.

    Here is what I said on this subject exactly 41 years ago almost to the day. I had been president for all of three weeks.

    I said then and I say now that if we are an extension of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, taking a significant amount of sacred tithes and other precious human resources, all of which might well be expended in other worthy causes, surely our integrity demands that our lives be absolutely consistent with and characteristic of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. At a university there will always be healthy debate regarding a whole syllabus full of issues. But until “we all come [to] the unity of the faith, and . . . [have grown to] the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ,”[7] our next best achievement will be to stay in harmony with the Lord’s anointed, those whom He has designated to declare Church doctrine and to guide Brigham Young University as its trustees.[8]

    In 2014, seven years ago, then-Elder Russell M. Nelson came to campus in this same setting. His remarks were relatively brief, but tellingly he said:

    “With the Church growing more rapidly in the less prosperous countries, we . . . must conserve sacred funds more carefully than ever before.

    “At BYU we must ally ourselves even more closely with the work of our Heavenly Father. . . .

    “A college education for our people is a sacred responsibility, [but] it is not essential for eternal life.”[9]

    A statement like that gets my attention, particularly because just a short time later President Nelson chairs our Board, holds our purse strings, and has the final “yea” or “nay” on every proposal we make from a new research lab, to more undergrad study space, to approving a new pickup for the physical facilities staff! Russell M. Nelson is very, very good at listening to us. We who sit with him every day have learned the value of listening carefully to him.

    Three years later, 2017, Elder Dallin H. Oaks, not then but soon to be in the First Presidency where he would sit, only one chair — one heartbeat — away from the same position President Nelson now has, quoted our colleague Elder Neal A. Maxwell who had said:

    “In a way[,] [Latter-day Saint] scholars at BYU and elsewhere are a little bit like the builders of the temple in Nauvoo, who worked with a trowel in one hand and a musket in the other. Today scholars building the temple of learning must also pause on occasion to defend the kingdom. I personally think,” Elder Maxwell went on to say, “this is one of the reasons the Lord established and maintains this university. The dual role of builder and defender is unique and ongoing. I am grateful we have scholars today who can handle, as it were, both trowels and muskets.”[10]

    Then Elder Oaks said challengingly, “I would like to hear a little more musket fire from this temple of learning.”[11] He said this in a way that could have applied to a host of topics in various departments, but the one he specifically mentioned was the doctrine of the family and defending marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Little did he know that while many would hear his appeal, especially the School of Family Life who moved quickly and visibly to assist, some others fired their muskets all right, but unfortunately didn’t always aim at those hostile to the Church. A couple of stray rounds even went north of the point of the mountain!

    My beloved brothers and sisters, “a house divided against itself . . . cannot stand,”[12] and I will go to my grave pleading that this institution not only stands but stands unquestionably committed to its unique academic mission and to the Church that sponsors it. We hope it isn’t a surprise to you that your Trustees are not deaf or blind to the feelings that swirl around marriage and the whole same-sex topic on campus. I and many of my Brethren have spent more time and shed more tears on this subject than we could ever adequately convey to you this morning, or any morning. We have spent hours discussing what the doctrine of the Church can and cannot provide the individuals and families struggling over this difficult issue. So, it is with scar tissue of our own that we are trying to avoid — and hope all will try to avoid — language, symbols, and situations that are more divisive than unifying at the very time we want to show love for all of God’s children.

    If a student commandeers a graduation podium intended to represent everyone getting diplomas in order to announce his personal sexual orientation, what might another speaker feel free to announce the next year until eventually anything goes? What might commencement come to mean — or not mean — if we push individual license over institutional dignity for very long? Do we simply end up with more divisiveness in our culture than we already have — and we already have too much everywhere.

    In that spirit, let me go no farther before declaring unequivocally my love and that of my Brethren for those who live with this same-sex challenge and so much complexity that goes with it. Too often the world has been unkind, in many instances crushingly cruel, to these our brothers and sisters. Like many of you, we have spent hours with them, and wept and prayed and wept again in an effort to offer love and hope while keeping the gospel strong and the obedience to commandments evident in every individual life.

    But it will assist everyone in providing such help if things can be kept in some proportion and balance in the process. For example, we have to be careful that love and empathy do not get interpreted as condoning and advocacy, or that orthodoxy and loyalty to principle not be interpreted as unkindness or disloyalty to people. As near as I can tell, Christ never once withheld His love from anyone, but He also never once said to anyone, “Because I love you, you are exempt from keeping my commandments.” We are tasked with trying to strike that same sensitive, demanding balance in our lives.

    Musket fire? Yes, we will always need defenders of the faith, but “friendly fire” is a tragedy — and from time to time the Church, its leaders and some of our colleagues within the university community have taken such fire on this campus. And sometimes it isn’t friendly — wounding students and the parents of students who are confused about what so much recent flag-waving and parade-holding on this issue means. Beloved friends, this kind of confusion and conflict ought not to be. There are better ways to move toward crucially important goals in these very difficult matters — ways that show empathy and understanding for everyone while maintaining loyalty to prophetic leadership and devotion to revealed doctrine. My Brethren have made the case for the metaphor of musket fire, which I have endorsed yet again today. There will continue to be those who oppose our teachings and with that will continue the need to define, document, and defend the faith. But we do all look forward to the day when we can “beat our swords into plowshares, and [our] spears into pruning hooks,” and at least on this subject, “learn war [no] more.”[13] And while I have focused on this same-sex topic this morning more than I would have liked, I pray you will see it as emblematic of a lot of issues our students and community face in this complex, contemporary world of ours.

    But I digress! Back to the blessings of a school in Zion! Do you see the beautiful parallel between the unfolding of the Restoration and the prophetic development of BYU, notwithstanding that both will have critics along the way? Like the Church itself, BYU has grown in spiritual strength, in the number of people it reaches and serves, and in its unique place among other institutions of higher education. It has grown in national and international reputation. More and more of its faculty are distinguishing themselves and, even more importantly, so are more and more of its students.

    Reinforcing the fact that so many do understand exactly what that unfolding dream of BYU is, not long ago one of your number wrote to me this marvelous description of what he thought was the “call” to those who serve at BYU:

    “The Lord’s call [to those of us who serve at BYU] is a . . . call to create learning experiences of unprecedented depth, quality and impact. . . . As good as BYU is and has been, this is a call to do [better]. It is . . . a call to educate many more students, to more . . . effectively help them become true disciples of Jesus Christ, to prepare them to . . . lead in their families, in the Church, in their [professions, and] in a world filled with commotion. . . . But [answering this call] . . . cannot be [done successfully] without His . . . help . . . I believe,” the writer concludes,” that help will come according to the faith and obedience of the tremendously good people of BYU.”[14]

    I agree enthusiastically with such a sense of calling here and with that reference to and confidence in “the tremendously good people of BYU.”[15] Let me underscore that idea of such a call by returning to President Kimball’s “Second Century Address.”

    Our bright, budding new Commissioner of Education, Elder Clark Gilbert, is my traveling companion today. You may be certain that he loves this institution, his alma mater, deeply and brings to his assignment a reverence for its mission and message. As part of his introduction to you, I am asking Elder Gilbert to come on campus on any calendar he and President Worthen can work out, and whether those visits are formal or casual or both, I hope they can accomplish two things: First of all, I hope you will come to see quickly the remarkable strengths Elder Gilbert brings to his calling, even as he learns more about the flagship of his fleet and why our effort at a Church Educational System would be a failure without the health, success, and participation of BYU. Second, noting that we are just a few years short of halfway through those second hundred years of which President Kimball spoke, I think it would be fascinating to know if we are, in fact, making any headway on the challenges he laid before us and of which Elder David Bednar reminded the BYU Leadership team just a few weeks ago.

    When you look at President Kimball’s talk again, a copy of which will be distributed following this conference, may I ask you to pay particular attention to that sweet prophet’s effort to ask that we be unique. In his discourse, President Kimball used the word “unique” eight times, and “special” eight times. It seems clear to me in my 73 years of loving it that BYU will become an “educational Mt. Everest” only to the degree it embraces its uniqueness, its singularity.[16] We could mimic every other university in the world until we got a bloody nose in the effort and the world would still say, “BYU who?” No, we must have the will to stand alone, if necessary, being a university second to none in its role primarily as an undergraduate teaching institution that is unequivocally true to the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ in the process. If at a future time that mission means foregoing some professional affiliations and certifications, then so be it. There may come a day when the price we are asked to pay for such association is simply too high, too inconsistent with who we are. No one wants it to come to that, but, if it does, we will pursue our own destiny, a “destiny [that] is not a matter of chance; [but largely] a matter of choice; . . . not a thing to be waited for, [but] a thing to be [envisioned and] achieved.”[17]

    “Mom, what is that big ‘Y’ on that mountain?”

    “It stands for the university here in Provo: Brigham Young University.”

    “Well, it must be the greatest university in the world.”

    And so for Jeff Holland, it is. To help you pursue that destiny in the only real way I know how to help, I leave an apostolic blessing on every one of you as you start another school year. In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and with gratitude for His holy priesthood, I bless you personally, bless the students who will come under your influence, and bless the university as a campus-wide endeavor. I bless you that profound personal faith will be your watchword and the unending blessings of personal rectitude will be your eternal reward. I bless your professional work that it will be admired by your peers, and I bless your devotion to gospel truths that it will be the saving grace in some student’s life. I bless your families that those you hope will be faithful in keeping their covenants will be saved at least in part because you have been faithful in keeping yours. Light conquers darkness. Truth triumphs against error. Goodness is victorious over evil in the end.

    I bless each one of you with every righteous desire of your heart and thank you for giving your love and loyalty to BYU. Please. From one who owes so much to this school and has loved her so deeply for so long, keep her not only standing but standing for what she uniquely and prophetically was meant to be. May the rest of higher education “see your good works, and glorify [our] Father which is in heaven.”[18] I pray, in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

    [1] See Robert Frost, “The Road Not Taken,” Mountain Interval (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1916), 9, Google Books, accessed Aug. 12, 2021.

    [2] Spencer W. Kimball, “Second Century Address,” BYU Studies Quarterly vol. 16, no. 4 (Oct. 1976): 455–457, accessed Aug. 12, 2021, available at https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol16/iss4/2.

    [3] Hugh Nibley, “Our Glory or Our Condemnation,” Approaching Zion, vol. 9 of The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, ed. by Don E. Norton(Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1989), 1–24.

    [4] Personal correspondence, August 1, 2021.

    [5] Personal correspondence, August 1, 2021. Scripture quoted is Moses 7:53.

    [6] Personal correspondence, June 10, 2021

    [7] Ephesians 4:13.

    [8] See Jeffrey R. Holland, “The Bond of Charity,” Annual University Conference, Aug. 26, 1980.

    [9] Russell M. Nelson, “Controlled Growth,” BYU Leadership Meeting, Aug. 25, 2014.

    [10] Neal A. Maxwell, “Blending Research and Revelation,” remarks at the BYU President’s Leadership Council meetings, 19 March 2004; quoted in Dallin H. Oaks, “Challenges to the Mission of Brigham Young University,” Commencement Address, Apr. 21, 2017.

    [11] Dallin H. Oaks, “It Hasn’t Been Easy,” BYU commencement address, Aug. 14, 2014, quoted in Dallin H. Oaks, “Challenges to the Mission of Brigham Young University,” BYU commencement address, April 2017.

    [12] Mark 3:25.

    [13] Isaiah 2:4.

    [14] Personal correspondence, June 21, 2021.

    [15] Ibid.

    [16] See Spencer W. Kimball, “Second Century Address,” BYU Studies Quarterly vol. 16, no. 4 (Oct. 1976): 455, accessed Aug. 12, 2021, available at https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol16/iss4/2.

    [17] William Jennings Bryan, Speeches of William Jennings Bryan vol. 2 (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, Co., 1913), 11, Google Books, accessed Aug. 12, 2021.

    [18] Matthew 5:16; see also 3 Nephi 12:16.

    References

    References
    1 Elder Jeffrey R. Holland Urges BYU to Embrace Its Uniqueness, Stay True to the Savior – https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/elder-jeffrey-r-holland-2021-byu-university-conference#_edn11
  • First Presidency Discontinued and Impressed?

    First Presidency Discontinued and Impressed?

    Beginning with October’s general conference and continuing thereafter, the Saturday evening sessions will be discontinued.

    Salt Lake City News Release, First Presidency Announces Changes to General Conference – 7 June 2021
    https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/general-conference-saturday-evening-session-update

    Therefore, after additional study and prayer, we have felt impressed to continue to hold the Saturday evening session of general conference

    Salt Lake City First Presidency Letter, The First Presidency Continues the Saturday Evening Session of General Conference – 27 July 2021
    https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/general-conference-saturday-evening-session-update

  • Our Own Planets

    Our Own Planets

    Do Latter-day Saints believe that they will “get their own planet”?

    No. This idea is not taught in Latter-day Saint scripture, nor is it a doctrine of the Church. This misunderstanding stems from speculative comments unreflective of scriptural doctrine. Latter-day Saints believe that we are all sons and daughters of God and that all of us have the potential to grow during and after this life to become like our Heavenly Father (see Romans 8:16-17). The Church does not and has never purported to fully understand the specifics of Christ’s statement that “in my Father’s house are many mansions” (John 14:2).

    Frequently Asked Questions, Question 12: https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/frequently-asked-questions & https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2010/10/commonly-asked-questions?lang=eng

    While against the backdrop of infinite creation we may appear to be nothing, we have a spark of eternal fire burning within our breast. We have the incomprehensible promise of exaltation—worlds without end—within our grasp. And it is God’s great desire to help us reach it.

    Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Second Counselor in the First Presidency, October 2011 General Conference talk “You Matter to Him” https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2011/10/you-matter-to-him?lang=eng

    See also:

  • Obedience

    Obedience

    Excerpt from an April 2013 General Conference address by Thomas S. Monson: 1 

    Declared President Joseph F. Smith in October 1873, “Obedience is the first law of heaven.”

    Excerpts from an October 1873 discourse by Joseph F. Smith: 2

    To say I have been very much interested in the instructions that we have had at this Conference is but faintly to express my feelings. We have had much very excellent teaching, which we will do well to give heed to. I cannot believe that the congregations that have attended this Conference will cast lightly aside these teachings. Certain it is that all the preaching that can be done by those who are most competent, and most richly endowed with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, will not benefit the people in the least, unless they will receive it, and will realize that the counsels which are given are designed expressly for themselves. It is not for us to say, “that does not mean me,” and “that applies to my neighbor;” or “that has reference to the doings of so and so.” We should each feel that the instructions given have direct reference to ourselves individually; that counsel or that commandment is for me, and it is for me, as a individual, to put it into practice. This is the only course that will benefit, and fit us for the responsibilities that will devolve upon us in the future. It will not do for us to say—“If brother so and so, or sister so and so, will observe and carry out that counsel, I shall be satisfied to remain as I am.” We cannot obtain blessings from God by taking this course; the only way to secure them is by diligence on our own part. When we are prepared, by our own works and diligence, to receive the blessings that God has in store for the faithful; then, and not till then, shall we receive them. It will not do for us to be satisfied for our brother to prepare himself to receive the blessings God has promised to his children, and to rest content with seeing him receive the light of truth, the blessings of the Gospel, and manifest a willingness to work righteousness in the earth. That will not reach us, only so far as we adopt his course and follow his example.

    This is how I look at the requirements which God has made upon his people collectively and individually, and I do believe that I have no claim upon God or upon my brethren for blessing, favor, confidence or love, unless, by my works, I prove that I am worthy thereof, and I never expect to receive blessings that I do not merit. Who does? I do not know that anybody does, yet if we were to judge by the actions of some, we must come to the conclusion that they are satisfied by seeing others live their religion.

    I love the society of the good, honorable and pure, of those who love virtue and work righteousness. To associate and be numbered with such and to have my portion and my lot with them in this life, and to live so that I can secure that association in the life to come, throughout the countless ages of eternity. I take no pleasure in the society of the wicked, for this reason—the pleasures of the wicked will cease and be forgotten, and the wicked will die and will not be regretted, their names will be cast out from the presence of God and from the things of the righteous forever and ever. I, therefore, want no part with them, but I want to cast my lot with those who are securing to themselves eternal riches and happiness. To obtain these blessings I must be found walking in their footsteps and following their examples, otherwise I shall come short.

    This is how I understand the principles of the Gospel and the work we are engaged in. It is an individual work. You and I must secure the blessings of eternal lives for ourselves, through obedience and the mercy of God. We have the volition of our own wills and we can choose evil or good, the society of the wicked or that of the good; we can enlist under the banner of Christ, or under that of Belial. We have this option, and can do whichever we choose. Therefore we must look well to our ways, and see that we choose the right course, and build upon a foundation that will not wash away. We have got to learn to stand or fall for ourselves, male and female. It is true that we are taught in the principles of the Gospel that man is the head of the woman, and Christ is the head of the man; and according to the order that is established in the kingdom of God, it is the duty of the man to follow Christ, and it is the duty of the woman to follow the man in Christ, not out of him.

    But has not a woman the same volition that the man has? Can she not follow or disobey the man as he can follow or disobey Christ? Certainly she can, she is responsible for her acts, and must answer for them. She is endowed with intelligence and judgment, and will stand upon her own merits as much so as the man. That is why the brethren, during this Conference, have been teaching the sisters that they must refrain from the fashions of Babylon. They must use their own judgment and agency as to whether they will obey this counsel or not. If they will not obey it, they will be responsible as much as the men are responsible for their acts. The man is responsible for the woman only so far as she is influenced by, or is obedient to, his counsels. Christ is responsible for the man so far as the man walks in obedience to the laws and commandments he has given, but no further, and so far will his atoning blood redeem and cleanse from sin; so far as they obey them will the principles of eternal life revealed in the Gospel have effect upon the souls of men, so also with women. So sisters, do not flatter yourselves that you have nothing to answer for so long as you may have a good husband. You must be obedient. Obedience is the first law of heaven. Without it the elements could not be controlled. Without it neither the earth nor those who dwell upon it could be controlled. The angels in heaven would not be controlled without it, and in fact without obedience there could be no union or order, and chaos and confusion would prevail. When we are obedient we may be guided to the accomplishment of all that is required of us by our heavenly Father, for it is on this principle that the designs and purposes of God are accomplished. The elements are obedient to his word. He said, “Let there be light and there was light.” He commanded the land and the waters to be divided, and it was so. When Christ commanded the storm to be still, and the sea to be calm, the elements were obedient to him. The earth, and all the worlds which God has made are obedient to the laws of their creation, for this reason there are peace, harmony, union, increase, power, glory and dominion, which could not exist without obedience. For the lack of obedience the whole world today lies in sin, for except the little existing among this people, obedience cannot be found on the face of the earth. Go to the religions of the day, do you find obedience manifested by the people? No, but you find man everywhere self-willed and untractable, therefore confusion and anarchy reign. It is said in the Scriptures that all things are possible with God; but he only works in accordance with the principles by which he himself is governed; and hence he cannot convince nations of the truth against their will. As the poet says—

    Know this, that every soul is free, To choose his life and what he’ll be; For this eternal truth is given, That God will force no man to heaven.

    He’ll call, persuade, direct aright— Bless him with wisdom, love and light— In nameless ways be good and kind, But never force the human mind.

    That is the way that God deals with man, therefore I say, he cannot work with this generation. They have set him aside and made themselves supreme. They have fulfilled the words of the prophet Paul when he said, “That in the last days perilous times should come, for men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affections, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof,” &c.

    No one could better describe the condition of this generation, and yet light has come into the world, but it is rejected, and for this reason the world lies in sin, and under condemnation. The people of God lie under condemnation too, so far as they are disobedient to the counsels of God’s servants. We talk of obedience, but do we require any man or woman to ignorantly obey the counsels that are given? Do the first Presidency require it? No, never. What do they desire? That we may have our minds opened and our understandings enlarged, that we may comprehend all true principles for ourselves; then we will be easily governed thereby, we shall yield obedience with our eyes open, and it will he a pleasure for us to do so.

    The Lord does not accept obedience from men except that which they render cheerfully and gladly in their hearts, and that is all that is desired by his servants. That is the obedience we ought to render, and if we do not we are under condemnation.

    What matters what the world say in regard to us? Nothing. What do I care? Have I spent thirty years of life, with the opportunities that have been afforded me, and am yet ignorant of the way of eternal life. If I have, then I am to be pitied. “Why then,” says the blasphemer, “do you yield obedience to the servants of God?” Because it is meat and drink to me to do so. Because it is for my safety and for my best good. I ask no odds of the world. I have learned that it is the very best thing that I can do, and I should be a fool indeed not to do that which is for my best good. I intend to do it, and I do not care what the world say about me.

    I am sorry to say that there are some of those who profess to be Latter-day Saints, who meet with the Saints on the Sabbath and partake of the Sacrament, witnessing that they are willing to take upon them the name of Christ, and to follow him through evil as well as good report, and yet in their hearts they oppose the plans and projects of those whom they pretend to upheld and sustain. I know and could call the names of some of these men. Shame on them! I say, in the name of manhood, come out and show your colors! Say you will not be obedient, and cease to be hypocrites, cease lying in the presence of God, and trying to deceive yourselves and your brethren. Tell us what you are, take your stand where you belong, and do not deceive the unwary. You cannot deceive those who have the Spirit of God, for they can discern your hearts.

    I love the cause of the Gospel. I love this people, because, of all others on the face of the earth they have enlisted under the banner of King Emanuel. They have covenanted with God to keep his commandments, and they are the most willing of any on the face of the earth to hearken to God’s inspired servants. I love them for this reason, and I want to be identified with them, not only in time but throughout eternity. Without them I would have no home, no friends. I want none without them.

    Let us keep the commandments and counsels that have been given to us, let us not be hearers of the word only, but let us be doers of it as well as hearers. Let us put away the foolish fashions of the world, live up to the truth, and seek to find out God, whom to know is life eternal. The road to this knowledge is obedience to his laws and to the whisperings of the still small voice in our own hearts. That will lead us into truth if we will hearken, and do not blunt the monitor that is within us. Let us do our duty, and be for God and his kingdom. Let our motto be—“The kingdom of God or nothing.” Because in the kingdom there is everything, and outside of it nothing at all. We heard here, the other day, from the President, that the Gospel embraces everything that is good and true or desirable to the pure in heart. I have said that outside the kingdom of God there is nothing, but there is something. What is it? Disappointment, sorrow, anguish and death, and everything that will make us miserable; while everything that is good, desirable and worth possessing eternally is to be found only in the Gospel of Christ.

    Says one, “Do not people who are not Latter-day Saints have a great many blessings and enjoy a great many good things?” Certainly they do, they enjoy gold, silver and worldly honors—they have a plentitude of greenbacks, houses, lands, carriages, horses, luxury and ease.

    Dives had all these, in this world, while Lazarus crawled at his feet and begged for the crumbs that fell from his table; but afterward Dives lifted up his eyes in hell and saw Lazarus in Abraham’s bosom enjoying the good things that he had formerly possessed in the world, and he begged Abraham to send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water to alleviate his parching tongue. But even this poor boon was denied him, he being informed that there was an impassable gulf between them; and said Abraham to Dives—(in effect), “When you were in the flesh you had Moses and the Prophets, you had the Gospel preached to you, but you rejected and refused to obey it. You had your good portion and your enjoyments in the world, now you are denied them, they are given to Lazarus.” How long do the honors, wealth, and pleasures of the worldling last? Until death claims him for its own, then he ceases to enjoy them, because he has failed to secure his title to them, they have not been sealed upon him by the authority of the Priesthood of the Son of God, which has power to bind on earth and it is bound in heaven. If they have wives and children, when death calls them they are no longer theirs, because they have not been sealed unto them by the power of God. They do not obey the truth, they do not receive the ministrations of the Priesthood, and consequently they are deprived, not only of their wealth, but of their wives and children.

    We are not living only for the few miserable years that we spend on this earth, but for that life which is interminable; and we desire to enjoy every blessing throughout these countless ages of eternity, but unless they are secured to us by that

    sealing power which was given to the Apostle Peter by the Son of God, we cannot possess them. Unless we secure them on that principle, in the life to come we shall have neither father, mother, brother, sister, wife, children, nor friends, nor wealth nor honor, for all earthly “contracts, covenants, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, connections, and associations,” are dissolved in the grave, except those sealed and ratified by the power of God. It is said in the Scriptures that the earth and its fullness are the Lord’s, and that they are to be given to the Saints of the Most High God, and they are to possess them forever and ever.

    You know that those who have not faith in the Gospel call us exclusive and uncharitable; they say—“You cast out all except those of your faith.” Then enroll yourselves under the banner of King Emanuel, to whom the earth and its fullness belong, and when it shall be given to the Saints of the Most High God, you will come in for your share, and only in that way can you do so. Obedience to the Gospel of Christ is the only way to secure blessings for the life that now is, or that which is to come. We are not talking in parables, neither are we ignorantly repeating the words of the ancient Apostles. Our declarations are founded upon modern revelation and inspiration, and we know whereof we speak. We know that angels have come to earth and that God has spoken in our day, that he has raised up Apostles and Prophets, restored the holy Priesthood, and shown himself to man and revealed his truth to those who dwell on earth. We know these things, it is this that makes us bold to declare it to the world. We are not ashamed of it, because we know it is the power of God unto salvation.

    May God help us, and all who love the truth, to keep an eye single to his glory and to the building up of his kingdom on the earth, that we

    may be among those who shall be counted worthy to possess the earth and its fullness forever and ever, is my prayer in the name of Jesus. Amen.

    References

    References
    1 ‘Obedience Brings Blessings’, April 2013 General Conference address by Thomas S. Monson – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2013/04/obedience-brings-blessings?lang=eng
    2 Joseph F. Smith, “Discourse,” Deseret News, Nov. 12, 1873, 644., also pub. in the Journal of Discourses – https://jod.mrm.org/16/246
  • Knee High

    Knee High

    Excerpt from a discourse by Orson Hyde, recorded in the diary of  Luke W. Gallup, February 11, 1857: 1

    “I find a great spirit in men for getting more wives, & I have heard that in this place, there is not a girl knee high to a toad (using a strong figure) that is not engaged. I “do not know, that you have outstript the mark. If you have gone into this, with the sanction of your bishop, or the First Presidency, all is right; but if not, it is not right. It is true I have labored to show up the principle, and tell the people where they were binding; but I did not give anyone the right to act. I could not give that which I did not possess. I only tried to remove the obstacles. I hear that they have gone in couples, triples, quadruples, & even sextuples, to Salt Lake; & the President may think I am raising the very devil here. 

    References

    References
    1 Luke W. Gallup Reminiscences and diary, pages 193-95, MS 8402, Church History Library, Salt Lake City – https://catalog.churchofjesuschrist.org/assets?id=4e4d3060-dc87-464e-9861-cb7f20054bda&crate=0&index=193
  • Questions Raised

    Questions Raised

    Excerpt from a New York Times Opinion article published August 18, 2012, ‘Why Race Is Still a Problem for Mormons’: 1

    The church could begin leaving those problems behind if its leaders explained that their predecessors had confused their own racist views with God’s will and that the priesthood ban resulted from human error and limitations rather than a divine curse. Given the church’s ecclesiology, this step would be difficult.

    Mormons have no reason to feel unusually ashamed of their church’s past racial restrictions, except maybe for their duration. Their church, like most other white American churches, was entangled in a deeply entrenched national sin.

    Still, acknowledging serious errors on the part of past prophets inevitably raises questions about the revelatory authority of contemporary leaders. Such concerns, however, are not insurmountable for religious movements. One can look to the Bible for countless examples of patriarchs and prophets who acknowledged grave errors and moral lapses but still retained the respect of their people.

    Likewise, the abiding love and veneration most Latter-day Saints have for their leaders would readily survive a fuller reckoning with their human frailties and flaws. The Mormon people need not believe they have perfect prophets, either past or present.

    :::

    Excerpt from a September 17, 2019 BYU Devotional address by Russell M. Nelson: 2

    My dear young friends, exaltation is not easy.  Requirements include a focused and persistent effort to keep God’s laws, and rigorously repenting when we don’t.  But the reward for doing so is far greater than anything we can imagine, because it brings us joy here, and “never-ending happiness” hereafter.

    Thus, our commission as Apostles is to teach nothing but truth.  That commission does not give us the authority to modify divine law.

    For example, let’s consider the definition of marriage.  In recent years, many countries, including the United States, have legalized same-sex marriage.  As members of the Church, we respect the laws of the land and abide by them, including civil marriage.  The truth is, however, that in the beginning—in the beginning—marriage was ordained by God!  And to this day it is defined by Him as being between a man and a woman.  God has not changed His definition of marriage.

    :::

    Excerpt from a May 5 1947 Letter from the First Presidency to Virgil H. Sponberg, in Bennion papers: 3.

    No special effort has ever been made to proselyte among the Negro race, and social intercourse between the Whites and the Negroes should certainly not be encouraged because of leading to intermarriage, which the Lord has forbidden. This move which has now received some popular approval of trying to break down social barriers between the Whites and the Blacks is one that should not be encouraged because inevitably it means the mixing of the races if carried to its logical conclusion.

    :::

    Letter from the First Presidency to Dr. Lowry Nelson, July 17 1947: 4

    “Your position seems to lose sight of the revelations of the Lord touching the preexistence of our spirits , the rebellion in heaven, and the doctrines that our birth into this life and the advantages under which we my be born, have a relationship in the life heretofore.

    From the days of the Prophet Joseph even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by any of the Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel.

    Furthermore, your ideas, as we understand them, appear to contemplate the intermarriage of the Negro and White races, a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient patriarchs till now God’s rule for Israel, His Chosen People, has been endogenous. Modern Israel has been similarly directed.

    We are not unmindful of the fact that there is a growing tendency, particularly among some educators, as it manifests itself in this area, toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the Church and is contrary to Church doctrine.

    References

    References
    1 New York Times Opinion article published August 18, 2012, ‘Why Race Is Still a Problem for Mormons’ – https://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/opinion/sunday/racism-and-the-mormon-church.html
    2 September 17, 2019 BYU Devotional address by Russell M. Nelson – https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2019-09-17/president-nelson-byu-devotional-god-love-160666
    3 Ref. May 5 1947 Letter from the First Presidency to Virgil H. Sponberg, in Bennion papers,  quoted in Lester E. Bush, Mormonism’s Negro Doctrine: An Historical Overview, p. 42 – https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V08N01_13.pdf
    4  Lowry Nelson & 1st Presidency Exchange – https://archive.org/stream/LowryNelson1stPresidencyExchange/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange#page/n5/mode/2up/search/doctrine
  • Against Racism

    Against Racism

    Excerpt from the September 2000 Ensign magazine article by Elder Alexander B. Morrison Of the Seventy, ‘No More Strangers’: 1

    How grateful I am that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has from its beginnings stood strongly against racism in any of its malignant manifestations. President Spencer W. Kimball stated the Church’s position well: “We do wish that there would be no racial prejudice. … Racial prejudice is of the devil. … There is no place for it in the gospel of Jesus Christ” (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, ed. Edward L. Kimball [1982], 236–37). The Prophet Joseph Smith, who experienced more than his share of intolerance and prejudice, understood the importance of caring for, respecting, and helping others, even those we don’t agree with. Speaking of the need to provide temporal assistance to others, the Prophet explained that a member of the Church “is to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all, wherever he finds them” (Times and Seasons, 15 Mar. 1842, 732).

    Letter from Joseph Smith to Oliver Cowdery on abolitionism, published in the ‘Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate’, Apr. 1836, pp. 289–291: 2

    “After having expressed myself so freely upon this subject, I do not doubt but those who have been forward in raising their voice against the South, will cry out against me as being uncharitable, unfeeling and unkind—wholly unacquainted with the gospel of Christ. It is my privilege then, to name certain passages from the bible, and examine the teachings of the ancients upon this matter, as the fact is uncontrovertable, that the first mention we have of slavery is found in the holy bible, pronounced by a man who was perfect in his generation and walked with God. And so far from that prediction’s being averse from the mind of God it remains as a lasting monument of the decree of Jehovah, to the shame and confusion of all who have cried out against the South, in consequence of their holding the sons of Ham in servitude!”

    A speech by Governor Brigham Young in Joint Session of the Legislature, January 23, 1852: 3

    “I have this section in my hand, headed “An Act in Relation to African Slavery.” I have read it over and made a few alterations. I will remark with regard to slavery, inasmuch as we believe in the Bible, inasmuch as we believe in the ordinances of God, in the Priesthood and order and decrees of God, we must believe in slavery. This colored race have been subjected to severe curses, which they have in their families and their classes and in their various capacities brought upon themselves. And until the curse is removed by Him who placed it upon them, they must suffer under its consequences; I am not authorized to remove it. I am a firm believer in slavery.”

    David O. McKay, in Llewelyn R. McKay, Home Memories of President David O. McKay (1956), p. 231: 4

    “I emphasize Justice as an attribute of Deity, because it is the Lord who, though He “made of one blood all nations,” also “determined the bounds of their habitation.” In other words, the seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man, but goes back into the Beginning with God.”

    Letter from the First Presidency to Dr. Lowry Nelson, July 17 1947: 5

    “Your position seems to lose sight of the revelations of the Lord touching the preexistence of our spirits , the rebellion in heaven, and the doctrines that our birth into this life and the advantages under which we my be born, have a relationship in the life heretofore.

    From the days of the Prophet Joseph even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by any of the Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel.

    Furthermore, your ideas, as we understand them, appear to contemplate the intermarriage of the Negro and White races, a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient patriarchs till now God’s rule for Israel, His Chosen People, has been endogenous. Modern Israel has been similarly directed.

    We are not unmindful of the fact that there is a growing tendency, particularly among some educators, as it manifests itself in this area, toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the Church and is contrary to Church doctrine.

    Faithfully yours,

    (signed)

    George Albert Smith

    J. Reuben Clark, Jr.

    David 0. McKay”

    References

    References
    1 eptember 2000 Ensign magazine article by Elder Alexander B. Morrison Of the Seventy, ‘No More Strangers’ – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2000/09/no-more-strangers?lang=eng
    2 ‘Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate’, Apr. 1836, pp. 289–291, Joseph Smith Papers – http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-oliver-cowdery-circa-9-april-1836/1
    3 Speech by Governor Brigham Young in Joint Session of the Legislature, January 23, 1852 – https://archive.org/details/CR100317B0001F0014
    4 Letter from David O. McKay reprinted in ‘Mormonism and the Negro’, pp 22 – https://archive.org/details/MormonismAndTheNegro
    5 Letter from the First Presidency to Dr. Lowry Nelson, July 17 1947 – https://archive.org/stream/LowryNelson1stPresidencyExchange/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange#page/n5/mode/2up/search/doctrine
  • We hear him v3

    We hear him v3

    April 2 2020 instagram Post, Church of Jesus Christ:1

    When we hear His servants, we hear Him. 

    Listen to the words of the Savior at general conference. 

    From the April 1942 General Conference, prophet Heber J. Grant: 2

    “MESSAGE TO THE YOUTH

    To the youth of the Church we repeat all the foregoing advice, but above all we plead with you to live clean, for the unclean life leads only to suffering, misery, and woe physically, — and spiritually it is the path to destruction. How glorious and near to the angels is youth that is clean; this youth has joy unspeakable here and eternal happiness hereafter. Sexual purity is youth’s most precious possession; it is the foundation of all righteousness. Better dead, clean, than alive, unclean.

    Times approach when we shall need all the health, strength, and spiritual power we can get to bear the afflictions that will come upon us.”

    References

    References
    1 April 2 2020 instagram Post, Church of Jesus Christ – https://www.instagram.com/p/B-ejqIxnKRj/
    2 Message of the First Presidency, Heber J. Grant. April 1942 General Conference –  http://scriptures.byu.edu/#:t15:g70
  • Covid-19

    Covid-19

    Excerpt from a Mar 23, 2020 Deseret News article, “1st Utahn to die of COVID-19 attended Bountiful temple last week, church confirms”: 1

    Utah Department of Health officials announced the Davis County man’s death on Sunday in a news conference. They said he was over the age of 60 and had tested positive for COVID-19 on Saturday. He was treated for two days at Lakeview Hospital in Bountiful before he died.

    Hours after the news conference, the church announced on Sunday evening that it had closed the temple. The Bountiful temple was the first of the church’s 17 Utah temples to close due to the pandemic.

    Excerpt from an October 1950 General Conference address by Ezra Taft Benson: 2

    “If we are living the gospel, we will feel in our hearts that the First Presidency of the Church not only have the right, but are also duty bound under heaven to give counsel on any subject which affects the temporal or spiritual welfare of the Latter-day Saints.”

    References

  • Voluntary Offerings

    Voluntary Offerings

    Excerpt from ‘Tithing and Charitable Donations’, Church Newsroom: 1

    All funds given to the Church by its members are considered sacred. They are voluntary offerings that represent the faith and dedication of members and are used with careful oversight and discretion. They are audited regularly by independent, certified auditors.

    Excerpt from the June 1980 Ensign, First Presidency Message, Marion G. Romney: 2

    My sincere counsel to all who receive this message is: pay your tithing and be blessed.

    Tithing is not a free-will offering; it is a debt, payment of which brings great blessings.

    References

    References
    1 ‘Tithing and Charitable Donations’, Church Newsroom – https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/tithing
    2 June 1980 Ensign, First Presidency Message, Marion G. Romney – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1980/06/concerning-tithing?lang=eng
  • Honesty

    Honesty

    Excerpt from the 2011 Gospel Principles manual, Chapter 31: Honesty: 1

    There are many other forms of lying. When we speak untruths, we are guilty of lying. We can also intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.

    The Mantle Is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect, Boyd K. Packer, Address to religious educators at a symposium on the Doctrine and Covenants and Church history, Brigham Young University, 22 August 1981: 2

    The fact that I speak quite directly on a most important subject will, I hope, be regarded as something of a tribute to you who are our loyal, devoted, and inspired associates.

    I have come to believe that it is the tendency for many members of the Church who spend a great deal of time in academic research to begin to judge the Church, its doctrine, organization, and leadership, present and past, by the principles of their own profession. Ofttimes this is done unwittingly, and some of it, perhaps, is not harmful.

    It is an easy thing for a man with extensive academic training to measure the Church using the principles he has been taught in his professional training as his standard. In my mind it ought to be the other way around. A member of the Church ought always, particularly if he is pursuing extensive academic studies, to judge the professions of man against the revealed word of the Lord.

    Many disciplines are subject to this danger. Over the years I have seen many members of the Church lose their testimonies and yield their faith as the price for academic achievement. Many others have been sorely tested. Let me illustrate.

    During my last year as one of the supervisors of seminaries and institutes of religion, a seminary teacher went to a large university in the East to complete a doctorate in counseling and guidance. The ranking authority in that field was there and quickly took an interest in this personable, clean-cut, very intelligent, young Latter-day Saint.

    Our teacher attracted attention as he moved through the course work with comparative ease, and his future looked bright indeed—that is, until he came to the dissertation. He chose to study the ward bishop as a counselor.

    At that time I was called as one of the General Authorities and helped him obtain authorization to interview and send questionnaires to a cross-section of bishops.

    In the dissertation he described the calling and ordination of a bishop, described the power of discernment, the right of a bishop to receive revelation, and his right to spiritual guidance. His doctoral committee did not understand this. They felt it had no place in a scholarly paper and insisted that he take it out.

    He came to see me. I read his dissertation and suggested that he satisfy their concern by introducing the discussion on spiritual matters with a statement such as “the Latter-day Saints believe the bishop has spiritual power,” or “they claim that there is inspiration from God attending the bishop in his calling.”

    But the committee denied him even this. It was obvious that they would be quite embarrassed to have this ingredient included in a scholarly dissertation.

    It is as Paul said: “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14).

    He was reminded of his very great potential and was told that with some little accommodation—specifically, leaving out all the spiritual references—his dissertation would be published and his reputation established. They predicted that he would become an authority in the field.

    He was tempted. Perhaps, once established, he could then insert this spiritual ingredient back into his work. Then, as an established authority, he could really help the Church.

    But something stood in the way: his faith, his integrity. So, he did the best he could with his dissertation. It did not contain enough of the Spirit to satisfy him, and too much to have been fully accepted by his worldly professors. But he received his degree.

    His dissertation is not truly the scholarly document it might have been, because the most essential ingredient is missing. Revelation is so central a part of a bishop’s experience in counseling that any study which ignores it cannot be regarded as a scholarly work.

    He returned to the modest income and to the relative obscurity of the Church Educational System.

    I talked to this teacher a day or two ago. We talked about his dissertation and the fact that it was never published. He has been a great influence among the youth of the Church. He did the right thing. He summed up his experience this way: “The mantle is far, far greater than the intellect; the priesthood is the guiding power.” His statement becomes the title for this talk and embodies what I hope to convey to you.

    I must not be too critical of those professors. They do not know of the things of the Spirit. One can understand their position. It is another thing, however, when we consider members of the Church, particularly those who hold the priesthood and have made covenants in the temple. Many do not do as my associate did; rather, they capitulate, cross over the line, and forsake the things of the Spirit. Thereafter, they judge the Church, the doctrine, and the leadership by the standards of their academic profession.

    This problem has affected some of those who have taught and have written about the history of the Church. These professors say of themselves that religious faith has little influence on Mormon scholars. They say this because, obviously, they are not simply Latter-day Saints but are also intellectuals trained, for the most part, in secular institutions. They would that some historians who are Latter-day Saints write history as they were taught in graduate school, rather than as Mormons.

    If we are not careful, very careful, and if we are not wise, very wise, we first leave out of our professional study the things of the Spirit. The next step soon follows: we leave the spiritual things out of our lives.

    I want to read to you a most significant statement by President Joseph F. Smith, a statement that you would do well to keep in mind in your teaching and research, and one which will serve as somewhat of a text for my remarks to you:

    “It has not been by the wisdom of man that this people have been directed in their course until the present; it has been by the wisdom of Him who is above man and whose knowledge is greater than that of man, and whose power is above the power of man. … The hand of the Lord may not be visible to all. There may be many who can not discern the workings of God’s will in the progress and development of this great latter-day work, but there are those who see in every hour and in every moment of the existence of the Church, from its beginning until now, the overruling, almighty hand of Him who sent His Only Begotten Son to the world to become a sacrifice for the sin of the world.” (In Conference Report, Apr. 1904, p. 2; emphasis added.)

    If we do not keep this constantly in mind—that the Lord directs this Church—we may lose our way in the world of intellectual and scholarly research.

    You seminary teachers and some of you institute and BYU men will be teaching the history of the Church this school year. This is an unparalleled opportunity in the lives of your students to increase their faith and testimony of the divinity of this work. Your objective should be that they will see the hand of the Lord in every hour and every moment of the Church from its beginning till now.

    As one who has taken the journey a number of times, I offer four cautions before you begin.

    First Caution

    There is no such thing as an accurate, objective history of the Church without consideration of the spiritual powers that attend this work.

    There is no such thing as a scholarly, objective study of the office of bishop without consideration of spiritual guidance, of discernment, and of revelation. That is not scholarship. Accordingly, I repeat, there is no such thing as an accurate or objective history of the Church which ignores the Spirit.

    You might as well try to write the biography of Mendelssohn without hearing or mentioning his music, or write the life of Rembrandt without mentioning light or canvas or color.

    If someone who knew very little about music should write a biography of Mendelssohn, one who had been trained to have a feeling for music would recognize that very quickly. That reader would not be many pages into the manuscript before he would know that a most essential ingredient had been left out.

    Mendelssohn, no doubt, would emerge as an ordinary man, perhaps not an impressive man at all. That which makes him most worth remembering would be gone. Without it he would appear, at best, eccentric. Certainly, controversy would develop over why a biography at all. Whoever should read the biography would not know, really know, Mendelssohn at all—this, even though the biographer might have invested exhaustive research in his project and might have been accurate in every other detail.

    And, if you viewed Rembrandt only in black and white, you would miss most of his inspiration.

    Those of us who are extensively engaged in researching the wisdom of man, including those who write and those who teach Church history, are not immune from these dangers. I have walked that road of scholarly research and study and know something of the dangers. If anything, we are more vulnerable than those in some of the other disciplines. Church history can be so very interesting and so inspiring as to be a very powerful tool indeed for building faith. If not properly written or properly taught, it may be a faith destroyer.

    President Brigham Young admonished Karl G. Maeser not to teach even the times table without the Spirit of the Lord. How much more essential is that Spirit in the research, the writing, and the teaching of Church history.

    If we who research, write, and teach the history of the Church ignore the spiritual on the pretext that the world may not understand it, our work will not be objective. And if, for the same reason, we keep it quite secular, we will produce a history that is not accurate and not scholarly—this, in spite of the extent of research or the nature of the individual statements or the incidents which are included as part of it, and notwithstanding the training or scholarly reputation of the one who writes or teaches it. We would end up with a history with the one most essential ingredient left out.

    Those who have the Spirit can recognize very quickly whether something is missing in a written Church history—this in spite of the fact that the author may be a highly trained historian and the reader is not. And, I might add, we have been getting a great deal of experience in this regard in the past few years.

    President Wilford Woodruff warned: “I will here say that God has inspired me to keep a Journal History of this Church, and I warn the future Historians to give Credence to my History of this Church and Kingdom; for my Testimony is true, and the truth of its record will be manifest in the world to Come.” (Journal of Wilford Woodruff, 6 July 1877, Historical Department, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; emphasis added. Spelling and punctuation have been standardized.)

    Second Caution

    There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not.

    Some things that are true are not very useful.

    Historians seem to take great pride in publishing something new, particularly if it illustrates a weakness or mistake of a prominent historical figure. For some reason, historians and novelists seem to savor such things. If it related to a living person, it would come under the heading of gossip. History can be as misleading as gossip and much more difficult—often impossible—to verify.

    The writer or the teacher who has an exaggerated loyalty to the theory that everything must be told is laying a foundation for his own judgment. He should not complain if one day he himself receives as he has given. Perhaps that is what is contemplated in having one’s sins preached from the housetops.

    Some time ago a historian gave a lecture to an audience of college students on one of the past Presidents of the Church. It seemed to be his purpose to show that that President was a man subject to the foibles of men. He introduced many so-called facts that put that President in a very unfavorable light, particularly when they were taken out of the context of the historical period in which he lived.

    Someone who was not theretofore acquainted with this historical figure (particularly someone not mature) must have come away very negatively affected. Those who were unsteady in their convictions surely must have had their faith weakened or destroyed.

    I began teaching seminary under Abel S. Rich, principal. He was the second seminary teacher employed by the Church and a man of maturity, wisdom, and experience. Among the lessons I learned from him was this: when I want to know about a man, I seek out those who know him best. I do not go to his enemies but to his friends. He would not confide in his enemy. You could not know the innermost thoughts of his heart by consulting those who would injure him.

    We are teachers and should know the importance of the principle of prerequisites. It is easily illustrated with the subject of chemistry. No responsible chemist would advise, and no reputable school would permit, a beginning student to register for advanced chemistry without a knowledge of the fundamental principles of chemistry. The advanced course would be a destructive mistake, even for a very brilliant beginning student. Even that brilliant student would need some knowledge of the elements, of atoms and molecules, of electrons, of valence, of compounds and properties. To let a student proceed without the knowledge of fundamentals would surely destroy his interest in, and his future with, the field of chemistry.

    The same point may be made with reference to so-called sex education. There are many things that are factual, even elevating, about this subject. There are aspects of this subject that are so perverted and ugly it does little good to talk of them at all. They cannot be safely taught to little children or to those who are not eligible by virtue of age or maturity or authorizing ordinance to understand them.

    Teaching some things that are true, prematurely or at the wrong time, can invite sorrow and heartbreak instead of the joy intended to accompany learning.

    What is true with these two subjects is, if anything, doubly true in the field of religion. The scriptures teach emphatically that we must give milk before meat. The Lord made it very clear that some things are to be taught selectively, and some things are to be given only to those who are worthy.

    It matters very much not only what we are told but when we are told it. Be careful that you build faith rather than destroy it.

    President William E. Berrett has told us how grateful he is that a testimony that the past leaders of the Church were prophets of God was firmly fixed in his mind before he was exposed to some of the so-called facts that historians have put in their published writings.

    This principle of prerequisites is so fundamental to all education that I have never been quite able to understand why historians are so willing to ignore it. And, if those outside the Church have little to guide them but the tenets of their profession, those inside the Church should know better.

    Some historians write and speak as though the only ones to read or listen are mature, experienced historians. They write and speak to a very narrow audience. Unfortunately, many of the things they tell one another are not uplifting, go far beyond the audience they may have intended, and destroy faith.

    What that historian did with the reputation of the President of the Church was not worth doing. He seemed determined to convince everyone that the prophet was a man. We knew that already. All of the prophets and all of the Apostles have been men. It would have been much more worthwhile for him to have convinced us that the man was a prophet, a fact quite as true as the fact that he was a man.

    He has taken something away from the memory of a prophet. He has destroyed faith. I remind you of the truth Shakespeare taught, ironically spoken by Iago: “Who steals my purse steals trash; ’tis something, nothing; / ’Twas mine, ’tis his, and has been slave to thousands— / But he that filches from me my good name / Robs me of that which not enriches him / And makes me poor indeed” (Othello, act 3, sc. 3, lines 157–61).

    The sad thing is that he may have, in years past, taken great interest in those who led the Church and desired to draw close to them. But instead of following that long, steep, discouraging, and occasionally dangerous path to spiritual achievement, instead of going up to where they were, he devised a way of collecting mistakes and weaknesses and limitations to compare with his own. In that sense he has attempted to bring a historical figure down to his level and in that way feel close to him and perhaps justify his own weaknesses.

    I agree with President Stephen L Richards, who stated:

    “If a man of history has secured over the years a high place in the esteem of his countrymen and fellow men and has become imbedded in their affections, it has seemingly become a pleasing pastime for researchers and scholars to delve into the past of such a man, discover, if may be, some of his weaknesses, and then write a book exposing hitherto unpublished alleged factual findings, all of which tends to rob the historic character of the idealistic esteem and veneration in which he may have been held through the years.

    “This ‘debunking,’ we are told, is in the interest of realism, that the facts should be known. If an historic character has made a great contribution to country and society, and if his name and his deeds have been used over the generations to foster high ideals of character and service, what good is to be accomplished by digging out of the past and exploiting weaknesses, which perhaps a generous contemporary public forgave and subdued?” (Where Is Wisdom? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1955], p. 155.)

    That historian or scholar who delights in pointing out the weakness and frailties of present or past leaders destroys faith. A destroyer of faith—particularly one within the Church, and more particularly one who is employed specifically to build faith—places himself in great spiritual jeopardy. He is serving the wrong master, and unless he repents, he will not be among the faithful in the eternities.

    One who chooses to follow the tenets of his profession, regardless of how they may injure the Church or destroy the faith of those not ready for “advanced history,” is himself in spiritual jeopardy. If that one is a member of the Church, he has broken his covenants and will be accountable. After all of the tomorrows of mortality have been finished, he will not stand where he might have stood.

    I recall a conversation with President Henry D. Moyle. We were driving back from Arizona and were talking about a man who destroyed the faith of young people from the vantage point of a teaching position. Someone asked President Moyle why this man was still a member of the Church when he did things like that. “He is not a member of the Church,” President Moyle answered firmly. Another replied that he had not heard of his excommunication. “He has excommunicated himself,” President Moyle responded. “He has cut himself off from the Spirit of God. Whether or not we get around to holding a court doesn’t matter that much; he has cut himself off from the Spirit of the Lord.”

    Third Caution

    In an effort to be objective, impartial, and scholarly, a writer or a teacher may unwittingly be giving equal time to the adversary.

    Someone told of the man who entitled his book an Unbiased History of the Civil War from the Southern Point of View. While we chuckle at that, there is something to be said about presenting Church history from the viewpoint of those who have righteously lived it. The idea that we must be neutral and argue quite as much in favor of the adversary as we do in favor of righteousness is neither reasonable nor safe.

    In the Church we are not neutral. We are one-sided. There is a war going on, and we are engaged in it. It is the war between good and evil, and we are belligerents defending the good. We are therefore obliged to give preference to and protect all that is represented in the gospel of Jesus Christ, and we have made covenants to do it.

    Some of our scholars establish for themselves a posture of neutrality. They call it “sympathetic detachment.” Historians are particularly wont to do that. If they make a complimentary statement about the Church, they seem to have to counter it with something that is uncomplimentary.

    Some of them, since they are members of the Church, are quite embarrassed with the thought that they might be accused of being partial. They care very much what the world thinks and are very careful to include in their writings criticism of the Church leaders of the past.

    They particularly strive to be acclaimed as historians as measured by the world’s standard. They would do well to read Nephi’s vision of the iron rod and ponder verses 24–28.

    “And it came to pass that I beheld others pressing forward, and they came forth and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron; and they did press forward through the mist of darkness, clinging to the rod of iron, even until they did come forth and partake of the fruit of the tree.

    “And after they had partaken of the fruit of the tree they did cast their eyes about as if they were ashamed. [Notice the word after. He is talking of those who are partakers of the goodness of God—of Church members.]

    “And I also cast my eyes round about, and beheld, on the other side of the river of water, a great and spacious building; and it stood as it were in the air, high above the earth.

    “And it was filled with people, both old and young, both male and female; and their manner of dress was exceeding fine; and they were in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit.

    “And after they had tasted of the fruit they were ashamed, because of those that were scoffing at them; and they fell away into forbidden paths and were lost.” (1 Nephi 8:24–28; emphasis added.)

    And I want to say in all seriousness that there is a limit to the patience of the Lord with respect to those who are under covenant to bless and protect His Church and kingdom upon the earth but do not do it.

    Particularly are we in danger if we are out to make a name for ourselves, if our “hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that [we] do not learn this one lesson—

    “That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.

    “That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

    “Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.” (D&C 121:35–38.)

    There is much in the scriptures and in our Church literature to convince us that we are at war with the adversary. We are not obliged as a church, nor are we as members obliged, to accommodate the enemy in this battle.

    President Joseph Fielding Smith pointed out that it would be a foolish general who would give access to all of his intelligence to his enemy. It is neither expected nor necessary for us to accommodate those who seek to retrieve references from our sources, distort them, and use them against us.

    Suppose that a well-managed business corporation is threatened by takeover from another corporation. Suppose that the corporation bent on the takeover is determined to drain off all its assets and then dissolve this company. You can rest assured that the threatened company would hire legal counsel to protect itself.

    Can you imagine that attorney, under contract to protect the company, having fixed in his mind that he must not really take sides, that he must be impartial?

    Suppose that when the records of the company he has been employed to protect are opened for him to prepare his brief he collects evidence and passes some of it to the attorneys of the enemy company. His own firm may then be in great jeopardy because of his disloyal conduct.

    Do you not recognize a breach of ethics, or integrity, or morality?

    I think you can see the point I am making. Those of you who are employed by the Church have a special responsibility to build faith, not destroy it. If you do not do that, but in fact accommodate the enemy, who is the destroyer of faith, you become in that sense a traitor to the cause you have made covenants to protect.

    Those who have carefully purged their work of any religious faith in the name of academic freedom or so-called honesty ought not expect to be accommodated in their researches or to be paid by the Church to do it.

    Rest assured, also, that you will get little truth, and less benefit, from those who steal documents or those who deal in stolen goods. There have always been, and we have among us today, those who seek entrance to restricted libraries and files to secretly copy material and steal it away in hopes of finding some detail that has not as yet been published—this in order that they may sell it for money or profit in some way from its publication or inflate an ego by being first to publish it.

    In some cases the motive is to destroy faith, if they can, and the Church, if they are able. The Church will move forward, and their efforts will be of little moment. But such conduct does not go unnoticed in the eternal scheme of things.

    We should not be ashamed to be committed, to be converted, to be biased in favor of the Lord.

    Elder Joseph Fielding Smith pointed out the fallacy of trying to work both sides of the street: “You may as well say that the Book of Mormon is not true because it does not give credence to the story the Lamanites told of the Nephites” (Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine, Apr. 1925, p. 55).

    A number of years ago, professors from Harvard University who were members of the Church invited me to lunch over at the Harvard Business School faculty dining room. They wanted to know if I would join them in participating in a new publication; they wanted me to contribute to it.

    They were generous in their compliments, saying that because I had a doctorate a number of people in the Church would listen to me, and being a General Authority (at that time I was an Assistant to the Twelve), I could have some very useful influence.

    I listened to them very attentively but indicated at the close of the conversation that I would not join them. I asked to be excused from responding to their request. When they asked why, I told them this: “When your associates announced the project, they described how useful it would be to the Church—a niche that needed to be filled.” And then the spokesman said, “We are all active and faithful members of the Church; however, …”

    I told my two hosts that if the announcement had read, “We are active and faithful members of the Church; therefore, …” I would have joined their organization. I had serious questions about a “however” organization. I have little worry over a “therefore” organization.

    That however meant that they put a condition upon their Church membership and their faith. It meant that they put something else first. It meant that they were to judge the Church and gospel and the leaders of it against their own backgrounds and training. It meant that their commitment was partial, and that partial commitment is not enough to qualify one for full spiritual light.

    I would not contribute to publications, nor would I belong to organizations, that by spirit or inclination are faith destroying. There are plenty of scholars in the world determined to find all secular truth. There are so few of us, relatively speaking, striving to convey the spiritual truths, who are protecting the Church. We cannot safely be neutral.

    Many years ago Elder Widtsoe made reference to a foolish teacher in the Mutual Improvement Association who sponsored some debate with the intent of improving the abilities of the young members of the Church. He chose as a subject “Resolved: Joseph Smith was a prophet of God.” Unfortunately, the con side won.

    The youngsters speaking in favor of the proposition were not as clever and their arguments were not as carefully prepared as those of the opposing side. The fact that Joseph Smith remained a prophet after the debate was over did not protect some of the participants from suffering the destruction of their faith and thereafter conducting their lives as though Joseph Smith were not a prophet and as though the church he founded and the gospel he restored were not true.

    Fourth Caution

    The final caution concerns the idea that so long as something is already in print, so long as it is available from another source, there is nothing out of order in using it in writing or speaking or teaching.

    Surely you can see the fallacy in that.

    I have on occasion been disappointed when I have read statements that tend to belittle or degrade the Church or past leaders of the Church in writings of those who are supposed to be worthy members of the Church. When I have commented on my disappointment to see that in print, the answer has been, “It was printed before, and it’s available, and therefore I saw no reason not to publish it again.”

    You do not do well to see that it is disseminated. It may be read by those not mature enough for “advanced history,” and a testimony in seedling stage may be crushed.

    Several years ago President Ezra Taft Benson spoke to you and said: “It has come to our attention that some of our teachers, particularly in our university programs, are purchasing writings from known apostates … in an effort to become informed about certain points of view or to glean from their research. You must realize that when you purchase their writings or subscribe to their periodicals, you help sustain their cause. We would hope that their writings not be on your seminary or institute or personal bookshelves. We are entrusting you to represent the Lord and the First Presidency to your students, not the views of the detractors of the Church” (The Gospel Teacher and His Message [address delivered to Church Educational System personnel, 17 Sept. 1976], p. 12.)

    I endorse that sound counsel to you.

    Remember: when you see the bitter apostate, you do not see only an absence of light, you see also the presence of darkness.

    Do not spread disease germs!

    I learned a great lesson years ago when I interviewed a young man then in the mission home. He was disqualified from serving a mission. He confessed to a transgression that you would think would never enter the mind of a normal human being.

    “Where on earth did you ever get an idea to do something like that?” I asked.

    To my great surprise he said, “From my bishop.”

    He said the bishop in the interview said, “Have you ever done this? Have you ever done that? Have you ever done this other?” and described in detail things that the young man had never thought of. They preyed upon his mind until, under perverse inspiration, the opportunity presented itself, and he fell.

    Don’t perpetuate the unworthy, the unsavory, or the sensational.

    Some things that are in print go out of print, and the old statement “good riddance to bad rubbish” might apply.

    Elder G. Homer Durham of the First Quorum of the Seventy told of counsel he had received from one of his professors who was an eminent historian: “You don’t write [and, I might add, you don’t teach] history out of the garbage pails.”

    Moroni gave an excellent rule for historians to follow:

    “For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

    “But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.” (Moroni 7:16–17.)

    It makes a great deal of difference whether we regard mortality as the conclusion and fulfillment of our existence or as a preparation for an eternal existence as well.

    Those are the cautions I give to you who teach and write Church history.

    There are qualifications to teach or to write the history of this church. If one is lacking in any one of these qualifications, he cannot properly teach the history of the Church. He can recite facts and give a point of view, but he cannot properly teach the history of the Church.

    I will state these qualifications in the form of questions so that you can assess your own qualifications.

    Do you believe that God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ personally appeared to the boy prophet, Joseph Smith, Jr., in the year 1820?

    Do you have personal witness that the Father and the Son appeared in all their glory and stood above that young man and instructed him according to the testimony that he gave to the world in his published history?

    Do you know that the Prophet Joseph Smith’s testimony is true because you have received a spiritual witness of its truth?

    Do you believe that the church that was restored through him is, in the Lord’s words, “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased” (D&C 1:30)? Do you know by the Holy Ghost that this is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints restored by heavenly messengers in this modern era; that the Church constitutes the kingdom of God on earth, not just an institution fabricated by human agency?

    Do you believe that the successors to the prophet Joseph Smith were and are prophets, seers, and revelators; that revelation from heaven directs the decisions, policies, and pronouncements that come from the headquarters of the Church? Have you come to the settled conviction, by the Spirit, that these prophets truly represent the Lord?

    Now, you obviously noted that I did not talk about academic qualifications. Facts, understanding, and scholarship can be attained by personal study and essential course work. The three qualifications I have named come by the Spirit, to the individual. You can’t receive them by secular training or study, by academic inquiry or scientific investigation.

    I repeat: if there is a deficiency in any of these, then, regardless of what other training an individual possesses, he cannot comprehend and write or teach the true history of this Church. The things of God are understood only by one who possesses the Spirit of God.

    Now, what about that historian who defamed the early President of the Church and may well have weakened or destroyed faith in the process? What about other members of the Church who have in their writings or in their teaching been guilty of something similar?

    I want to say something that may surprise you. I know of a man who did something quite as destructive as that who later became the prophet of the Church. I refer to Alma the Younger. I learned about him from reading the Book of Mormon, which in reality is a very reliable history of the Church in ancient times.

    You are acquainted with the record of Alma as a young man. He followed his father, the prophet Alma, about, and ridiculed what his father preached. He was, in that period of his life, a destroyer of faith. Then came a turning point. Because his father had prayed for it, he came to himself. He changed. He became one of the great men in religious history.

    I want to say something to that historian and to others who may have placed higher value on intellect than upon the mantle.

    The Brethren then and now are men, very ordinary men, who have come for the most part from very humble beginnings. We need your help! We desperately need it. We cannot research and organize the history of the Church. We do not have the time to do it. And we do not have the training that you possess. But we do know the Spirit and how essential a part of our history it is. Ours is the duty to organize the Church, to set it in order, to confer the keys of authority, to perform the ordinances, to watch the borders of the kingdom and carry burdens, heavy burdens, for others and for ourselves that you can know little about.

    Do you know how inadequate we really are compared to the callings we have received? Can you feel in a measure the weight, the overwhelming weight, of responsibility that is ours? If you look for inadequacy and imperfections, you can find them quite easily. But you may not feel as we feel the enormous weight of responsibility associated with the callings that have come to us. We are not free to do some of the things that scholars think would be so reasonable, for the Lord will not permit us to do them, and it is his church. He presides over it.

    There is another part of the on-going history of the Church that you may not be acquainted with. Perhaps I can illustrate it for you.

    A few years ago it was my sad privilege to accompany President Kimball, then President of the Twelve, to a distant stake to replace a stake leader who had been excommunicated for a transgression. Our hearts went out to this good man who had done such an unworthy thing. His sorrow and anguish and suffering brought to my mind the phrase “gall of bitterness.”

    Thereafter, on intermittent occasions, I would receive a call from President Kimball: “Have you heard from this brother? How is he doing? Have you been in touch with him?” After Brother Kimball became President of the Church, the calls did not cease. They increased in frequency.

    One day I received a call from the President. “I have been thinking of this brother. Do you think it is too soon to have him baptized?” (Always a question, never a command.) I responded with my feelings, and he said, “Why don’t you see if he could come here to see you? If you feel good about it after an interview, we could proceed.”

    A short time later, I arrived very early at the office. As I left my car I saw President Kimball enter his. He was going to the airport on his way to Europe. He rolled down the window to greet me, and I told him I had good news about our brother. “He was baptized last night,” I said.

    He motioned for me to get into the car and sit beside him and asked me to tell him all about it. I told him of the interview and that I had concluded by telling our brother very plainly that his baptism must not be a signal that his priesthood blessings would be restored in the foreseeable future. I told him that it would be a long, long time before that would happen.

    President Kimball patted me on the knee in a gentle gesture of correction and said, “Well, maybe not so long. …” Soon thereafter the intermittent phone calls began again.

    I want to tell you of another lesson I received. Many years ago, when I was a new General Authority and not very experienced, I was called to the office of the First Counselor in the First Presidency. “We find you are going to the West Coast for conference this weekend. We wonder if you would leave a day or so early to help with a problem at a mission headquarters in another city.”

    A missionary had confessed to transgression, and the mission president was reluctant to take action. I was instructed to see that a court was convened and that the missionary was excommunicated.

    I went, and I interviewed the elder at great length. I then went to a park to think and pray about it. It was an unusual case, most unusual. After two hours, I telephoned the member of the First Presidency from a pay telephone and told him a little of what I had learned and of how I felt about the matter. He asked what I wanted to do. Hesitantly I told him I wanted to delay, to take no action now. Then I said, “But, President, tell me to do it, again, and I will do it.”

    His voice came over the telephone and seemed like thunder to me: “Don’t you go against the voice of the Spirit!”

    I had learned a great lesson. I have never forgotten it, and the inspiration greatly affected the outcome when final action was taken.

    Do not yield your faith in payment for an advanced degree or for the recognition and acclaim of the world. Do not turn away from the Lord nor from his Church nor from his servants. You are needed—oh, how you are needed!

    It may be that you will lay your scholarly reputation and the acclaim of your colleagues in the world as a sacrifice upon the altar of service. They may never understand the things of the Spirit as you have a right to do. They may not regard you as an authority or as a scholar. Just remember, when the test came to Abraham, he didn’t really have to sacrifice Isaac. He just had to be willing to.

    Now a final lesson from Church history, one that illustrates the kind of thing from the past that builds faith and increases testimony.

    William W. Phelps had been a trusted associate of the Prophet Joseph Smith. Then, in an hour of crisis when the Prophet needed him most, he turned against him and joined the apostates and oppressors who sought the Prophet’s life.

    Later, Brother Phelps came to himself. He repented of what he had done and wrote to the Prophet Joseph Smith, asking for his forgiveness. I want to read you the letter the Prophet Joseph wrote to Brother Phelps in reply.

    I confess also that many times I have moaned in agony when I have thought of the many incidents of this kind that researchers have discovered when they have pored over the record of our history but have left them out of their writings for fear they would be regarded as not worthy of a scholarly review of Church history.

    Now the letter.

    “Dear Brother Phelps: …

    “You may in some measure realize what my feelings, as well as Elder Rigdon’s and Brother Hyrum’s were, when we read your letter—truly our hearts were melted into tenderness and compassion when we ascertained your resolves, &c. I can assure you I feel a disposition to act on your case in a manner that will meet the approbation of Jehovah, (whose servant I am), and agreeable to the principles of truth and righteousness which have been revealed; and inasmuch as long-suffering, patience, and mercy have ever characterized the dealings of our heavenly Father towards the humble and penitent, I feel disposed to copy the example, cherish the same principles, and by so doing be a savior of my fellow men.

    “It is true, that we have suffered much in consequence of your behavior—the cup of gall, already full enough for mortals to drink, was indeed filled to overflowing when you turned against us. One with whom we had oft taken sweet counsel together, and enjoyed many refreshing seasons from the Lord—’had it been an enemy, we could have borne it.’ …

    “However, the cup has been drunk, the will of our Father has been done, and we are yet alive, for which we thank the Lord. And having been delivered from the hands of wicked men by the mercy of our God, we say it is your privilege to be delivered from the powers of the adversary, be brought into the liberty of God’s dear children, and again take your stand among the Saints of the Most High, and by diligence, humility, and love unfeigned, commend yourself to our God, and your God, and to the Church of Jesus Christ.

    “Believing your confession to be real, and your repentance genuine, I shall be happy once again to give you the right hand of fellowship, and rejoice over the returning prodigal …

    “‘Come on, dear brother, since the war is past,

    For friends at first, are friends again at last.’

    “Yours as ever,

    “Joseph Smith, Jun.”

    (History of the Church, 4:162–64.)

    Brother Phelps did return to full fellowship. He was a writer of hymns. The one we sang to open this meeting, “Praise to the Man,” was written by Brother Phelps, as were “O God, the Eternal Father,” “Now Let Us Rejoice,” “Gently Raise the Sacred Strain,” “The Spirit of God Like a Fire”—to mention but a few.

    Oh, how great the loss to the Church if Brother Phelps had not returned. And how great would have been the tragedy for him.

    When I read about our Brethren of the past, I am overwhelmed with humility. Consider the Prophet Joseph Smith and the little opportunity he had for formal schooling. Read the letters written in his own hand, and you will know that he could not spell correctly. Oh, how grateful he must have been for a scribe. I have wept when I have contemplated what they accomplished with what little they had. I sense how grateful they were to those who stood by them.

    To you who may have lost your way, come back! We know how that can happen; we have walked that path of research and study. Come help us!—you with your scholarship and your training, you with your bright, intelligent minds, you with your experience and with your academic degrees.

    How grateful we are today for the many members who have special gifts and special training that they devote to the building up of the Church and kingdom of God and to the protecting of it.

    May God bless you who so faithfully compile and teach the history of the Church and build the faith of those you teach. I bear witness that the gospel is true. The Church is His church. I pray that you may be inspired as you write and as you teach. May His Spirit be with you in rich abundance.

    As you take your students over the trails of Church history in this dispensation, yours is the privilege to help them to see the miracle of the Restoration, the mantle that belongs to His servants, and to “see in every hour and in every moment of the existence of the Church … the overruling, almighty hand of [God]” (Joseph F. Smith, in Conference Report, Apr. 1904, p. 2).

    As you write and as you teach Church history under the influence of His Spirit, one day you will come to know that you were not only spectators but a central part of it, for you are His Saints.

    This testimony I leave, with my blessings, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

  • It is the Same

    It is the Same

    Doctrine and Covenants 1:37-39: 1

    37 Search these commandments, for they are true and faithful, and the prophecies and promises which are in them shall all be fulfilled.

    38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.

    39 For behold, and lo, the Lord is God, and the Spirit beareth record, and the record is true, and the truth abideth forever and ever. Amen.

    :::

    Letter from Joseph Smith to Oliver Cowdery on abolitionism, published in the ‘Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate’, Apr. 1836, pp. 289–291: 2

    “After having expressed myself so freely upon this subject, I do not doubt but those who have been forward in raising their voice against the South, will cry out against me as being uncharitable, unfeeling and unkind—wholly unacquainted with the gospel of Christ. It is my privilege then, to name certain passages from the bible, and examine the teachings of the ancients upon this matter, as the fact is uncontrovertable, that the first mention we have of slavery is found in the holy bible, pronounced by a man who was perfect in his generation and walked with God. And so far from that prediction’s being averse from the mind of God it remains as a lasting monument of the decree of Jehovah, to the shame and confusion of all who have cried out against the South, in consequence of their holding the sons of Ham in servitude!”

    :::

    A speech by Governor Brigham Young in Joint Session of the Legislature, January 23, 1852: 3

    “I have this section in my hand, headed “An Act in Relation to African Slavery.” I have read it over and made a few alterations. I will remark with regard to slavery, inasmuch as we believe in the Bible, inasmuch as we believe in the ordinances of God, in the Priesthood and order and decrees of God, we must believe in slavery. This colored race have been subjected to severe curses, which they have in their families and their classes and in their various capacities brought upon themselves. And until the curse is removed by Him who placed it upon them, they must suffer under its consequences; I am not authorized to remove it. I am a firm believer in slavery.”

    :::

    David O. McKay, in Llewelyn R. McKay, Home Memories of President David O. McKay (1956), p. 231: 4

    “I emphasize Justice as an attribute of Deity, because it is the Lord who, though He “made of one blood all nations,” also “determined the bounds of their habitation.” In other words, the seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man, but goes back into the Beginning with God.”

    :::

    Letter from the First Presidency to Dr. Lowry Nelson, July 17 1947: 5

    “Your position seems to lose sight of the revelations of the Lord touching the preexistence of our spirits , the rebellion in heaven, and the doctrines that our birth into this life and the advantages under which we my be born, have a relationship in the life heretofore.

    From the days of the Prophet Joseph even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by any of the Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel.

    Furthermore, your ideas, as we understand them, appear to contemplate the intermarriage of the Negro and White races, a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient patriarchs till now God’s rule for Israel, His Chosen People, has been endogenous. Modern Israel has been similarly directed.

    We are not unmindful of the fact that there is a growing tendency, particularly among some educators, as it manifests itself in this area, toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the Church and is contrary to Church doctrine.

    Faithfully yours,

    (signed)

    George Albert Smith

    J. Reuben Clark, Jr.

    David 0. McKay”

    References

    References
    1 Doctrine and Covenants 1:37-39 – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/1?lang=eng
    2 ‘Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate’, Apr. 1836, pp. 289–291, Joseph Smith Papers – http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-oliver-cowdery-circa-9-april-1836/1
    3 Speech by Governor Brigham Young in Joint Session of the Legislature, January 23, 1852 – https://archive.org/details/CR100317B0001F0014
    4 Letter from David O. McKay reprinted in ‘Mormonism and the Negro’, pp 22 – https://archive.org/details/MormonismAndTheNegro
    5 Letter from the First Presidency to Dr. Lowry Nelson, July 17 1947 – https://archive.org/stream/LowryNelson1stPresidencyExchange/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange#page/n5/mode/2up/search/doctrine
  • Not a free will offering

    Not a free will offering

    Excerpt from the June 1980 Ensign, First Presidency Message, Marion G. Romney: 1

    Tithing is not a free-will offering; it is a debt, payment of which brings great blessings.

    I consider the payment of tithing a sound financial investment. To those who pay their tithing, the Lord has said that he will “open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

    The payment of tithing is also worthwhile as fire insurance. Through his prophets the Lord has told us that incident to his second coming, there will be a great conflagration. Malachi thus refers to it in connection with his pronouncement about tithes and offerings.

    I know from my own experience, and I bear you my witness, that there is a peace and a comfort and an assurance which comes to one who pays an honest tithing. If you ever come to a time when you don’t know how much you owe, pay a little more. It is better to over-pay than to under-pay.

    References

    References
    1 June 1980 Ensign, First Presidency Message, Marion G. Romney – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1980/06/concerning-tithing?lang=eng
  • Bankruptcy

    Bankruptcy

    Utah Ranks in the Top 10 Bankruptcy Filing States Per Capita 1

    Excerpt from the June 1980 Ensign, First Presidency Message, Marion G. Romney: 2

    Tithing is not a free-will offering; it is a debt, payment of which brings great blessings.

    I consider the payment of tithing a sound financial investment. To those who pay their tithing, the Lord has said that he will “open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

    The payment of tithing is also worthwhile as fire insurance. Through his prophets the Lord has told us that incident to his second coming, there will be a great conflagration. Malachi thus refers to it in connection with his pronouncement about tithes and offerings.

    I know from my own experience, and I bear you my witness, that there is a peace and a comfort and an assurance which comes to one who pays an honest tithing. If you ever come to a time when you don’t know how much you owe, pay a little more. It is better to over-pay than to under-pay.

    References

    References
    1 Personal bankruptcy rate in the United States as of September 2019, by state (per 100,000 population) – statista – https://www.statista.com/statistics/303570/us-personal-bankruptcy-rate/
    2 June 1980 Ensign, First Presidency Message, Marion G. Romney – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1980/06/concerning-tithing?lang=eng
  • The Debate is Over

    The Debate is Over

    Excerpt from a First Presidency Message, August 1979, Ensign, N. Eldon Tanner (First Counselor in the Presidency): 1

    “We must turn all this about. We cannot serve God and mammon. Whose side are we on? When the prophet speaks the debate is over.”

    Additional study: 

    14 Fundamentals in Falsifying the Prophet – https://rationalfaiths.com/fourteen-fundamentals-falsifying-prophet/

    References

    References
    1 First Presidency Message, August 1979, Ensign – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1979/08/the-debate-is-over?lang=eng
  • Equal Rights Amendment 3

    Equal Rights Amendment 3

    Church Spokesman Doug Anderson, December 3 2019: 1

    “The church’s position on this issue [Equal Rights Amendment] has been consistent for more than 40 years”

    Excerpt from a March 1980 Ensign article, ‘Frequently Asked Questions about the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment’:2

    What would be the impact of the ERA on homosexual marriages?

    In hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Paul A. Freund of Harvard Law School testified: “Indeed if the law must be as undiscriminating concerning sex as it is toward race, it would follow that laws outlawing wedlock between members of the same sex would be as invalid as laws forbidding miscegenation [interracial marriages]” (Senate Report 92–689, p. 47).

    Passage of the ERA would carry with it the risk of extending constitutional protection to immoral same-sex—lesbian and homosexual—marriages. The argument of a homosexual male, for example, would be: “If a woman can legally marry a man, then equal treatment demands that I be allowed to do the same.” Under the ERA, states could be forced to legally recognize and protect such marriages. A result would be that any children brought to such a marriage by either partner or adopted by the couple could legally be raised in a homosexual home. While it cannot be stated with certainty whether this or any other consequence will result from the vague language of the amendment, the possibility cannot be avoided.

    :::

    Excerpt from a Statement from the First Presidency, ‘First Presidency Reaffirms Opposition to ERA’, October 1978: 3

    “From its beginning, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has championed the rights of women in our society. We recognize that there have been injustices to women before the law and in society in general. There are additional rights to which women are entitled. We would prefer to see specific injustices resolved individually under appropriate specific laws. We firmly believe that the Equal Rights Amendment is not the proper means for achieving those rights because:

    “a. Its deceptively simple language deals with practically every aspect of American life, without considering the possible train of unnatural consequences which could result because of its very vagueness—encouragement of those who seek a unisex society, an increase in the practice of homosexual and lesbian activities, and other concepts which could alter the natural, God-given relationship of men and women.

    :::

    Excerpt from an address By Boyd K. Packer, January 8, 1977:4

    We cannot eliminate, through any pattern of legislation or regulation, the differences between men and women.

    There are basic things that a man needs that a woman does not need. There are things that a man feels that a woman never does feel.

    There are basic things that a woman needs that a man never needs, and there are things that a woman feels that a man never feels nor should he.

    These differences make women, in basic needs, literally opposite from men.

    A man, for instance, needs to feel protective, and yes, dominant, if you will, in leading his family. A woman needs to feel protected, in the bearing of children and in the nurturing of them.

    Have you ever thought what life would be like if the needs of men and women were naturally precisely the same?

    What would it be like if they both naturally needed to feel dominant all of the time, or both naturally needed to feel protected all of the time?

    How disturbed and intolerable things would be.

  • Equal Rights Amendment 2

    Equal Rights Amendment 2

    Church Spokesman Doug Anderson, December 3 2019: 1

    “The church’s position on this issue [Equal Rights Amendment] has been consistent for more than 40 years”

    Excerpt from a March 1980 Ensign article, ‘Frequently Asked Questions about the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment’:2

    What would be the impact of the ERA on homosexual marriages?

    In hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Paul A. Freund of Harvard Law School testified: “Indeed if the law must be as undiscriminating concerning sex as it is toward race, it would follow that laws outlawing wedlock between members of the same sex would be as invalid as laws forbidding miscegenation [interracial marriages]” (Senate Report 92–689, p. 47).

    Passage of the ERA would carry with it the risk of extending constitutional protection to immoral same-sex—lesbian and homosexual—marriages. The argument of a homosexual male, for example, would be: “If a woman can legally marry a man, then equal treatment demands that I be allowed to do the same.” Under the ERA, states could be forced to legally recognize and protect such marriages. A result would be that any children brought to such a marriage by either partner or adopted by the couple could legally be raised in a homosexual home. While it cannot be stated with certainty whether this or any other consequence will result from the vague language of the amendment, the possibility cannot be avoided.

    :::

    Excerpt from a Statement from the First Presidency, ‘First Presidency Reaffirms Opposition to ERA’, October 1978: 3

    “From its beginning, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has championed the rights of women in our society. We recognize that there have been injustices to women before the law and in society in general. There are additional rights to which women are entitled. We would prefer to see specific injustices resolved individually under appropriate specific laws. We firmly believe that the Equal Rights Amendment is not the proper means for achieving those rights because:

    “a. Its deceptively simple language deals with practically every aspect of American life, without considering the possible train of unnatural consequences which could result because of its very vagueness—encouragement of those who seek a unisex society, an increase in the practice of homosexual and lesbian activities, and other concepts which could alter the natural, God-given relationship of men and women.

    :::

    Excerpt from an address By Boyd K. Packer, January 8, 1977:4

    We cannot eliminate, through any pattern of legislation or regulation, the differences between men and women.

    There are basic things that a man needs that a woman does not need. There are things that a man feels that a woman never does feel.

    There are basic things that a woman needs that a man never needs, and there are things that a woman feels that a man never feels nor should he.

    These differences make women, in basic needs, literally opposite from men.

    A man, for instance, needs to feel protective, and yes, dominant, if you will, in leading his family. A woman needs to feel protected, in the bearing of children and in the nurturing of them.

    Have you ever thought what life would be like if the needs of men and women were naturally precisely the same?

    What would it be like if they both naturally needed to feel dominant all of the time, or both naturally needed to feel protected all of the time?

    How disturbed and intolerable things would be.

    References

    References
    1 Rally in Utah State Capitol puts focus on Equal Rights Amendment – https://www.deseret.com/utah/2019/12/3/20992717/equal-rights-amendment-rally-utah
    2 Frequently Asked Questions about the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1980/03/the-church-and-the-proposed-equal-rights-amendment-a-moral-issue/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-proposed-equal-rights-amendment-a-closer-look?lang=eng
    3 First Presidency Reaffirms Opposition to ERA – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1978/10/news-of-the-church/first-presidency-reaffirms-opposition-to-era?lang=eng
    4 The Equal Rights Amendment, January 8, 1977 – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1977/03/the-equal-rights-amendment
  • Equal Rights Amendment

    Equal Rights Amendment

    Church Spokesman Doug Anderson, December 3 2019: 1

    “The church’s position on this issue [Equal Rights Amendment] has been consistent for more than 40 years”

    Excerpt from a March 1980 Ensign article, ‘Frequently Asked Questions about the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment’:2

    What would be the impact of the ERA on homosexual marriages?

    In hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Paul A. Freund of Harvard Law School testified: “Indeed if the law must be as undiscriminating concerning sex as it is toward race, it would follow that laws outlawing wedlock between members of the same sex would be as invalid as laws forbidding miscegenation [interracial marriages]” (Senate Report 92–689, p. 47).

    Passage of the ERA would carry with it the risk of extending constitutional protection to immoral same-sex—lesbian and homosexual—marriages. The argument of a homosexual male, for example, would be: “If a woman can legally marry a man, then equal treatment demands that I be allowed to do the same.” Under the ERA, states could be forced to legally recognize and protect such marriages. A result would be that any children brought to such a marriage by either partner or adopted by the couple could legally be raised in a homosexual home. While it cannot be stated with certainty whether this or any other consequence will result from the vague language of the amendment, the possibility cannot be avoided.

    :::

    Excerpt from a Statement from the First Presidency, ‘First Presidency Reaffirms Opposition to ERA’, October 1978: 3

    “From its beginning, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has championed the rights of women in our society. We recognize that there have been injustices to women before the law and in society in general. There are additional rights to which women are entitled. We would prefer to see specific injustices resolved individually under appropriate specific laws. We firmly believe that the Equal Rights Amendment is not the proper means for achieving those rights because:

    “a. Its deceptively simple language deals with practically every aspect of American life, without considering the possible train of unnatural consequences which could result because of its very vagueness—encouragement of those who seek a unisex society, an increase in the practice of homosexual and lesbian activities, and other concepts which could alter the natural, God-given relationship of men and women.

    :::

    Excerpt from an address By Boyd K. Packer, January 8, 1977:4

    We cannot eliminate, through any pattern of legislation or regulation, the differences between men and women.

    There are basic things that a man needs that a woman does not need. There are things that a man feels that a woman never does feel.

    There are basic things that a woman needs that a man never needs, and there are things that a woman feels that a man never feels nor should he.

    These differences make women, in basic needs, literally opposite from men.

    A man, for instance, needs to feel protective, and yes, dominant, if you will, in leading his family. A woman needs to feel protected, in the bearing of children and in the nurturing of them.

    Have you ever thought what life would be like if the needs of men and women were naturally precisely the same?

    What would it be like if they both naturally needed to feel dominant all of the time, or both naturally needed to feel protected all of the time?

    How disturbed and intolerable things would be.

  • Policy

    Policy

    Excerpts from the LDS Gospel Topic Essay, ‘Race and the Priesthood’:1

    “Church leaders believed that a revelation from God was needed to alter the policy, and they made ongoing efforts to understand what should be done.”

    Excerpt from ‘Statement of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’, August 17, 1949: 2

    “The attitude of the Church with reference to the Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the Priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle.

    President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

    President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.”

    The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.”

    References

    References
    1 Race and the Priesthood – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng
    2 Ref. Letter from the First Presidency to Stewart Udall, Archive.org – https://archive.org/stream/StewartUdallConscienceOfAJackMormon/StuartUdall-OpenLetterOnRaceAndConsequencesOfConscience#page/n12/mode/1up
  • We will always teach truth #1

    We will always teach truth #1

    Excerpt from an address by Russell M. Nelson, September 17 2019: 1

    It is precisely because we do care deeply about all of God’s children that we proclaim His truth. We may not always tell people what they want to hear. Prophets are rarely popular. But we will always teach the truth!

    Excerpt from ‘Statement of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’, August 17, 1949: 2

    “The attitude of the Church with reference to the Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the Priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle.

    President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

    President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.”

    The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.”

    References

    References
    1 Russell M.Nelson, BYU Devotional, September 17 2019 – https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/russell-m-nelson/love-laws-god/
    2 Letter from the First Presidency to Stewart Udall (referencing the letter) – https://archive.org/stream/StewartUdallConscienceOfAJackMormon/StuartUdall-OpenLetterOnRaceAndConsequencesOfConscience#page/n12/mode/1up
  • Editing 2

    Editing 2

    General Conference talk given by Boyd K. Packer, ‘Cleansing the Inner Vessel’, October 2010:1

    Note: Bolded are the parts of the talk given in the original address, not appearing in written format on the official LDS church website.

    This general conference was convened at a time when there is such confusion and such danger that our young people hardly know which way they can walk. Having been warned through the revelations that it would be this way, the prophets and apostles have always been shown what to do.

    The Lord revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith “that every man might speak in the name of God the Lord, even the Savior of the world.” When the keys were restored, they provided priesthood authority to be present in every home through the grandfathers, the fathers, and the sons.

    Fifteen years ago, with the world in turmoil, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles issued “The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” the fifth proclamation in the history of the Church. It qualifies according to the definition as a revelation, and it is a guide that members of the Church would do well to read and to follow.

    It states in part: “We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.”

    “The Gods went down to organize man in their own image, in the image of the Gods to form they him, male and female to form they them.

    “And the Gods said: We will bless them. And … we will cause them to be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.”

    This commandment has never been rescinded.

    “And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them.”

    It is intended that we be happy, for “men are, that they might have joy.”

    Lehi taught that men are free and must be “free … to act for themselves and not to be acted upon, save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day.”

    The old saying “The Lord is voting for me, and Lucifer is voting against me, but it is my vote that counts” describes a doctrinal certainty that our agency is more powerful than the adversary’s will. Agency is precious. We can foolishly, blindly give it away, but it cannot be forcibly taken from us.

    There is also an age-old excuse: “The devil made me do it.” Not so! He can deceive you and mislead you, but he does not have the power to force you or anyone else to transgress or to keep you in transgression.

    To be entrusted with the power to create life carries with it the greatest of joys and dangerous temptations. The gift of mortal life and the capacity to kindle other lives is a supernal blessing. Through the righteous exercise of this power, as in nothing else, we may come close to our Father in Heaven and experience a fulness of joy. This power is not an incidental part of the plan of happiness. It is the key—the very key.

    Whether we use this power as the eternal laws require or reject its divine purpose will forever determine what we will become. “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?”

    There is something very liberating when an individual determines of his or her own free will to be obedient to our Father and our God and expresses that willingness to Him in prayer.

    When we obey, we can enjoy these powers in the covenant of marriage. From our fountains of life will spring our children, our family. Love between husband and wife can be constant and bring fulfillment and contentment all the days of our lives.

    If one is denied these blessings in mortality, the promise is that they will be provided for in the world to come.

    Pure love presupposes that only after a pledge of eternal fidelity, a legal and a lawful ceremony, and ideally after the sealing ordinance in the temple, are those life-giving powers released for the full expression of love. It is to be shared only and solely between man and woman, husband and wife, with that one who is our companion forever. On this the gospel is very plain.

    We are free to ignore the commandments, but when the revelations speak in such blunt terms, such as “thou shalt not,” we had better pay attention.

    The adversary is jealous toward all who have power to beget life. Satan cannot beget life; he is impotent. “He seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.” He seeks to degrade the righteous use of the life-giving powers by tempting you into immoral relationships.

    The Lord used the expression “is like unto” to create an image His followers could understand, such as:

    “The kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man.”

    “The kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field.”

    In our day the dreadful influence of pornography is like unto a plague sweeping across the world, infecting one here and one there, relentlessly trying to invade every home, most frequently through the husband and father. The effect of this plague can be, unfortunately often is, spiritually fatal. Lucifer seeks to disrupt “the great plan of redemption,” “the great plan of happiness.”

    Pornography will always repel the Spirit of Christ and will interrupt the communications between our Heavenly Father and His children and disrupt the tender relationship between husband and wife.

    The priesthood holds consummate power. It can protect you from the plague of pornography—and it is a plague—if you are succumbing to its influence. If one is obedient, the priesthood can show how to break a habit and even erase an addiction. Holders of the priesthood have that authority and should employ it to combat cast out these evil influences.

    We raise an alarm and warn members of the Church to wake up and understand what is going on. Parents, be alert, ever watchful that this wickedness might threaten your family circle.

    We teach a standard of moral conduct that will protect us from Satan’s many substitutes or counterfeits for marriage. We must understand that any persuasion to enter into any relationship that is not in harmony with the principles of the gospel must be wrong. From the Book of Mormon we learn that “wickedness never was happiness.”

    Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations tendencies toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone. Remember, God He is our Heavenly Father.

    Paul promised that “God … will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” You can, if you will, break the habits and conquer an addiction and come away from that which is not worthy of any member of the Church. As Alma cautioned, we must “watch and pray continually.”

    Isaiah warned, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

    Years ago I visited a school in Albuquerque. The teacher told me about a youngster who brought a kitten to class. As you can imagine, that disrupted everything. She had him hold the kitten up in front of the children.

    It went well until one of the children asked, “Is it a boy kitty or a girl kitty?”

    Not wanting to get into that lesson, the teacher said, “It doesn’t matter. It’s just a kitty.”

    But they persisted. Finally, one boy raised his hand and said, “I know how you can tell.”

    Resigned to face it, the teacher said, “How can you tell?”

    And the student answered, “You can vote on it!”

    You may laugh at this story, but if we are not alert, there are those today who not only tolerate but advocate voting to change laws that would legalize immorality, as if a vote would somehow alter the designs of God’s laws and nature. A law against nature would be impossible to enforce. For instance, what good would a vote against the law of gravity do?

    There are both moral and physical laws “irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world” that cannot be changed. History demonstrates over and over again that moral standards cannot be changed by battle and cannot be changed by ballot. To legalize that which is basically wrong or evil will not prevent the pain and penalties that will follow as surely as night follows day.

    Regardless of the opposition, we are determined to stay on course. We will hold to the principles and laws and ordinances of the gospel. If they are misunderstood either innocently or willfully, so be it. We cannot change; we will not change the moral standard. We quickly lose our way when we disobey the laws of God. If we do not protect and foster the family, civilization and our liberties must needs perish.

    “I, the Lord, am bound when ye do what I say; but when ye do not what I say, ye have no promise.”

    Every soul confined in a prison of sin, guilt, or perversion has a key to the gate. The key is labeled “repentance.” If you know how to use this key, the adversary cannot hold you. The twin principles of repentance and forgiveness exceed in strength the awesome power of the tempter. If you are bound by a habit or an addiction that is unworthy, you must stop conduct that is harmful. Angels will coach you, and priesthood leaders will guide you through those difficult times.

    Nowhere are the generosity and the kindness and mercy of God more manifest than in repentance. Do you understand the consummate cleansing power of the Atonement made by the Son of God, our Savior, our Redeemer? He said, “I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent.” In that supernal act of love, the Savior paid the penalties for our sins so that we might not have to pay.

    For those who truly desire it, there is a way back. Repentance is like unto a detergent. Even ground-in stains of sin will come out.

    Priesthood holders carry with them the antidote to remove the terrible images of pornography and to wash away guilt. The priesthood has the power to unlock the influence of our habits, even to unchain from addiction, however tight the grip. It can heal over the scars of past mistakes.

    I know of no more beautiful and consoling words in all of revelation than these: “Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more.”

    Sometimes, even after confession and paying penalties, the most difficult part of repentance is to forgive one’s self. You must come to know that forgiveness means forgiveness.

    “As often as my people repent will I forgive them their trespasses against me.”

    President Joseph Fielding Smith told me of a repentant woman struggling to find her way out of a very immoral life. She asked him what she should do now.

    In turn, he asked her to read to him from the Old Testament the account of Lot’s wife, who was turned to a pillar of salt. Then he asked her, “What lesson do you gain from those verses?”

    She answered, “The Lord will destroy the wicked.”

    “Not so!” President Smith said that the lesson for this repentant woman and for you is “Don’t look back!”

    Strangely enough, it may be that the simplest and most powerful prevention and cure for pornography, or any unclean act, is to ignore and avoid it. Delete from the mind any unworthy thought that tries to take root. Once you have decided to remain clean, you are asserting your God-given agency. And then, as President Smith counseled, “Don’t look back.”

    I promise that ahead of you is peace and happiness for you and your family. The ultimate end of all activity in the Church is that a man and his wife and their children can be happy at home. And I invoke the blessings of the Lord upon you who are struggling against this terrible plague, to find the healing that is available to us in the priesthood of the Lord. I bear witness of that power in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

    References

    References
    1 ‘Cleansing the Inner Vessel’, October 2010 General Conference, Boyd K. Packer – https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1981/04/turning-the-hearts?lang=eng
  • Editing

    Editing

    General Conference talk given by Hartman Rector Jr., ‘Turning the Hearts’, April 1981:1

    Note: Bolded are the parts of the talk given in the original address, not appearing in written format on the official LDS church website.

    I consider it a great honor and a privilege to greet you this afternoon in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am sure the Lord is much concerned about the families of the earth today.

    The family is the basic unit of society, and more importantly it is the basic unit of exaltation. It seems that nothing is more important to the Lord than a family. He has designed the greatest blessings for His children to be received through families, and the temple, of course, is the means of creating these eternal, exalted families.

    I believe that families are under a more serious attack today than at any time since the beginning of the world, with the possible exception of the days of Noah. It must have been bad then too. Maybe we today are not quite as bad as they were. Moses recorded in the Book of Genesis: “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (Gen. 6:5.) I don’t believe I have ever known anyone quite that bad, whose “every thought was evil continually.”

    The Lord further indicated that all flesh was corrupt in those days, and so he brought forth the flood and destroyed all flesh except Noah and his family. Therefore, we are all descendants of righteous Noah. But the family concept is under very serious attack today all over the world.

    In many countries of the world today birth control is practiced. In some countries only one child per family is permitted. This is controlled through birth control, abortion and sterilization. If a second child is born the government takes it to rear. Since the real strength of a nation is in her families, I fear that such restrictions will literally destroy these nations. A documentary for TV was produced recently where it was shown that old people are dying for lack of love and attention. It seem s that children no longer care enough for their aged parents to visit them. Well, why should they anyway. The government takes care of them so why should the children bother with that chore. Today some governments pay full time employees to do nothing but visit their old people. It appears that this is one of the hidden evils which destroy families. Children no longer have to worry about their parents in their old age, so they completely neglect them.

    The Lord said from Mt. Sinai, “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.” (Ex. 20:12.) There’s precious little honor shown as children not even visit their parents. Of course we’re not lily white in this area here in the United States either. In 1980 was the year of the family here in the US of A. There were White House conferences held on the family in Maryland, Minnesota, and California, with delegates chosen from each state. In most states there was an attempt to get a resolution passed by the state convention, defining the family as any group of people living together. Not the traditional father, mother, children relationship but any group of people living together. And whom do you supposed would sponsor such a resolution. Is those who represent the so-called alternate lifestyle. Birth control is rampant. Sterilization, vasectomies increase annually. The statistics on abortion in the United States are mind boggling. For example, abortions will kill over 2 million babies in the next 12 months. Which amounts to three abortions every 60 seconds. Abortions kill more Americans in one year than all the wars did from Valley Forge to Vietnam. 8 Million American babies have been slaughtered since January the 22nd 1973 when the Supreme Court legalized abortion. Over 3 million dollars of American tax payers money will be used to pay for government funded abortions this year. How frightening.

    As I mentioned earlier we seem to have conditions today similar to those Noah faced; and the Lord speaks of smiting the earth with a curse, as happened at the time of the flood, and this will happen if there is not a turning of “the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers.” (Mal. 4:6.)

    There are those who feel that this turning of the hearts is strictly Elijah’s job, but in Doctrine and Covenants 98:16 [D&C 98:16] the Lord seems to give us that assignment. He said, “Seek diligently to turn the hearts of the children to their fathers, and the hearts of the fathers to the children.”
    Elijah came and delivered the keys, but the Lord looks to us to do the work. In a little plainer translation of the Malachi scripture, the Lord said:
    “Behold, I will reveal unto you the Priesthood, by the hand of Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.
    “And he shall plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children shall turn to their fathers.
    “If it were not so, the whole earth would be utterly wasted at his coming.” (D&C 2:1–3; see also JS—H 1:38–39.)

    We, then, are in the very serious business of attempting to save the earth or to keep it from being “wasted” when the Lord comes. I have often wondered how or why the earth would be wasted if Children’s hearts did not turn to their fathers. Today is very clear for all to see. When the Lord comes if he finds nothing but birth control, abortion, sterilization, homosexuals the earth is wasted. What was the purpose of his creation anyway. The Lord said “we would go down for there is space there, and we will take of these materials and make an earth, whereon theses” meaning all of us “may dwell.” This earth was created so God the Father would have a place to send His children to receive bodies of flesh and bones and prove themselves. If we will no longer permit the Lord to send his children to this earth, then the earth is wasted, and as in the days of the flood He will surely destroy it.
    So what must we do? We must follow the living prophet, for herein is our only safety. He says, among other things:

    1. Complete four-generation family records and as far beyond as you can go.

    2. Write a personal and family history.

    3. Perform a reasonable number of temple ordinances by attending the temple as often as is practical.

    I personally believe that the writing of personal and family histories will do more to turn the hearts of the children to the fathers and the fathers to children than almost anything we can do. I am sure you will never turn your own children’s hearts more to you than you will by keeping a journal and writing your personal history. They will ultimately love to find out about your successes and your failures and your peculiarities. It will tell them a lot about themselves, too. They will get a great desire to raise a family of their own when they see what a great blessing they were to you.

    If children have a happy family experience they will not want to be homosexuals, which I am sure is an acquired addiction just as drugs, alcohol and pornography are. The promoters of homosexuality say they were born that way. But I do not believe this is true. There are no female spirits trapped in male bodies and vice versa. He who made them, made them male and female. Every form of homosexuality is sin said the living prophet Spencer W. Kimball.

    Also, I seriously doubt that you will ever turn your own heart more to your own fathers than by writing your family history. You must know a lot about them before you can write it. This will lead you to much in-depth research. I promise you will love them when you become acquainted with them. They were noble people, and they sacrificed much to give you the heritage you have today. They deserve the best you can give them, which of course is membership in the Church and the kingdom of God and the sealing of their loved ones to them.

    I am convinced that these records we are commanded to write are absolutely vital, not only to the salvation of our ancestors but also to ours, for are we not to be judged out of the books which John saw were to be opened, as recorded in Revelation 20:12 [Rev. 20:12]?

    “And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.”

    After quoting this verse from Revelation, the Prophet Joseph Smith said, as recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 128:7–8 [D&C 128:7–8]:
    “You will discover in this quotation that the books were opened; and another book was opened, which was the book of life; but the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works; consequently, the books spoken of must be the books which contained the record of their works, and refer to the records which are kept on the earth. …

    “Now, the nature of this ordinance consists in the power of the priesthood, by the revelation of Jesus Christ, wherein it is granted that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Or, in other words, taking a different view of the translation, whatsoever you record on earth shall be recorded in heaven, and whatsoever you do not record on earth shall not be recorded in heaven; for out of the books shall your dead be judged.” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, comp. Joseph Fielding Smith, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book.)
    Sometimes we feel we just don’t have time to write in our journals. I wonder. President Kimball stood before the World Conference on Records last August and said: “By now, in my own personal history, I have managed to fill seventy-eight large volumes, which are my personal journal. There have been times when I have been so tired at the end of a day that the effort could hardly be managed, but I am so grateful that I have not let slip away from me and my posterity those things which needed to be recorded.” (Ensign, Oct. 1980, p. 72.)

    I am convinced that it is not what we have done here upon the earth that will condemn us at the last day; it is what we have not done that will ultimately stand to judge us. Why? Well the bad things we have done we can repent of and because the Lord Jesus Christ paid for these sins they will be blotted out. So they obviously won’t hurt us. The good things we have done we should record in our journals and personal history and the good things surely won’t hurt us. But the things we have not done, how do we repent of them. It’s what we should have done, and didn’t do, that will constitute our judgment.

    Is there any wonder the prophet Joseph said, “The greatest responsibility in this world that God has laid upon us is to seek after our dead. Those saints who neglect it in behalf of their deceased relatives, do it at the peril of their own salvation.” (Teachings of the Prophet, p. 193.)

    To become a savior on Mount Zion, then, goes far beyond the performance of the temple ordinance. It encompasses the personal and family history as well as the four-generation-and-beyond research—plus participation in the extraction program.

    Of course, none of this would mean very much if we did not have a holy house in which to perform this work. In this sense, temple building then becomes the most important work of this dispensation. How glorious to live upon the earth at this time and have part in the grand work of rearing the Lord’s house in nations around the world so the saving ordinances of the gospel and the ties that bind eternal families may be made available to all the children of the earth! Surely we are the most blessed people who have ever lived, to which I bear witness in the name of the Lord, Jesus Christ, amen.

    Gary Bergera wrote to Elder Rector inquiring about the difference between the published version of his talk and the version reported in the Deseret News, Church News, and Salt Lake Tribune. Elder Rector replied in a hand-written note: 2

    “Sometimes it is not expedient to make people angry by telling them in too plain terms what their problems are. … Also the church [is] hoping to gain entrance into communist China so didn’t want to make waves,” according to an article in Dialogue A Journal of Mormon Thought. “I presume a combination of things made the First Presidency decide to eliminate certain portions of my remarks even tho’ they had received and cleared the talk before it was given. It is OK. They know best. However, what was said is still true.”

    (Gary J. Bergera, Letter to Hartman Rector, 11 May 1981; undated response handwritten on the bottom of the letter by Hartman Rector.)

    References

    References
    1 Turning the Hearts, Hartman Rector Jr, April 1981 General Conference – https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1981/04/turning-the-hearts?lang=eng
    2 The LDS conference sermon you read online may not match the words spoken from the pulpit — a look at why speeches are sometimes ‘corrected’, The Salt Lake Tribune – https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018/12/17/lds-conference-sermon/
  • Revelation

    Revelation

    Excerpt from a Young Adult Devotional talk by Russell M. Nelson, January 10, 2016: 1

    This prophetic process was followed in 2012 with the change in minimum age for missionaries and again with the recent additions to the Church’s handbook, consequent to the legalization of same-sex marriage in some countries. Filled with compassion for all, and especially for the children, we wrestled at length to understand the Lord’s will in this matter. Ever mindful of God’s plan of salvation and of His hope for eternal life for each of His children, we considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise. We met repeatedly in the temple in fasting and prayer and sought further direction and inspiration. And then, when the Lord inspired His prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, to declare the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord, each of us during that sacred moment felt a spiritual confirmation. It was our privilege as Apostles to sustain what had been revealed to President Monson. Revelation from the Lord to His servants is a sacred process, and so is your privilege of receiving personal revelation.

    Excerpt from a ‘A Message from the First Presidency’, First Presidency Shares Messages from General Conference Leadership Session, 4 April 2019: 2

    At the direction of the First Presidency, President Oaks shared that effective immediately, children of parents who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender may be baptized without First Presidency approval if the custodial parents give permission for the baptism and understand both the doctrine that a baptized child will be taught and the covenants he or she will be expected to make.

    A nonmember parent or parents (including LGBT parents) can request that their baby be blessed by a worthy Melchizedek Priesthood holder. These parents need to understand that congregation members will contact them periodically, and that when the child who has been blessed reaches 8 years of age, a Church member will contact them and propose that the child be baptized.

    Previously, our handbook characterized same-gender marriage by a member as apostasy. While we still consider such a marriage to be a serious transgression, it will not be treated as apostasy for purposes of Church discipline. Instead, the immoral conduct in heterosexual or homosexual relationships will be treated in the same way.

    The very positive policies announced this morning should help affected families. In addition, our members’ efforts to show more understanding, compassion and love should increase respect and understanding among all people of goodwill. We want to reduce the hate and contention so common today. We are optimistic that a majority of people — whatever their beliefs and orientations — long for better understanding and less contentious communications. That is surely our desire, and we seek the help of our members and others to attain it.

    These new policies are being sent to priesthood leaders worldwide and will be included in online updates to our Church handbook for leaders. These changes do not represent a shift in Church doctrine related to marriage or the commandments of God in regard to chastity and morality. The doctrine of the plan of salvation and the importance of chastity will not change. These policy changes come after an extended period of counseling with our brethren in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and after fervent, united prayer to understand the will of the Lord on these matters.

    References

    References
    1 Becoming True Millennials, Russell M. Nelson, January 10, 2016 – https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/worldwide-devotionals/2016/01/becoming-true-millennials?lang=eng
    2 First Presidency Shares Messages from General Conference Leadership Session, 4 April 2019 – https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/first-presidency-messages-general-conference-leadership-session-april-2019
  • Changed

    Changed

    ‘First Presidency Statement on Temples’, 2 January 2019: 1

    “Whenever the Lord has had a people on the earth who will obey His word, they have been commanded to build temples. Scriptures document patterns of temple worship from the times of Adam and Eve, Moses, Solomon, Nephi, and others.

    With the restoration of the gospel in these latter days, temple worship has also been restored to bless the lives of people across the world and on the other side of the veil as well.

    Over these many centuries, details associated with temple work have been adjusted periodically, including language, methods of construction, communication, and record-keeping. Prophets have taught that there will be no end to such adjustments as directed by the Lord to His servants.

    A dedicated temple is the most holy of any place of worship on the earth. Its ordinances are sacred and are not discussed outside a holy temple.”

     

    Excerpt from the October 1979 General Conference address by David B. Haight: 2

    “The crowd was large and pressing toward us, the traffic rather noisy. We were on a close time schedule. It was not an ideal setting, not one I would have chosen to explain the difference between the Lord’s church and others. However, taking advantage of this opportunity, we explained briefly the Apostasy and the Restoration: that there is vast evidence and history of an apostasy from the doctrine taught by Jesus and his Apostles, that the organization of the original Church became corrupted, and sacred ordinances were changed to suit the convenience of men, and that today good people all over the world are confused with contending religions with differing doctrine and methods of worship.”

    References

    References
    1 ‘First Presidency Statement on Temples’, 2 January 2019, Mormon Newsroom – https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/temple-worship?fbclid=IwAR3L82cFeLcxpWCagtfrwv7oAOikRGA38UvzaVvCV40OGbVbYoswPV1hJFk
    2 Joseph Smith the Prophet, October 1979 General Conference, David B. Haight – https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1979/10/joseph-smith-the-prophet?lang=eng
  • Casket

    Casket

    Excerpt from a First Presidency Address, published in the September 1981 Ensign, Marion G. Romney: 1

    I remember how my father impressed the seriousness of unchastity upon my mind. He and I were standing in the railroad station at Rexburg, Idaho, in the early morning of 12 November 1920. We heard the train whistle. In three minutes I would be on my way to Australia to fill a mission. In that short interval my father said to me, among other things, “My son, you are going a long way from home. Your mother and I, and your brothers and sisters, will be with you constantly in our thoughts and prayers; we shall rejoice with you in your successes, and we shall sorrow with you in your disappointments. When you are released and return, we shall be glad to greet you and welcome you back into the family circle. But remember this, my son: we would rather come to this station and take your body off the train in a casket than to have you come home unclean, having lost your virtue.”

    References

    References
    1 Marion G. Romney, September 1981 Ensign, First Presidency Message – https://www.lds.org/ensign/1981/09/we-believe-in-being-chaste?lang=eng
  • Prayer

    Prayer

    Excerpt from an August 1975 Ensign article, ‘New Information on Church Policies’: 1

    “Prayers in Sacrament and Priesthood Meetings. Attention is called to the following instruction which appeared in the July-August 1967 Priesthood Bulletin.

    The First Presidency recommends that only those who bear the Melchizedek Priesthood or Aaronic Priesthood be invited to offer the opening and closing prayers in sacrament meetings, including fast meetings. This also applies to priesthood meetings.”

  • Curtail Birth of Children

    Curtail Birth of Children

    Letter from the First Presidency, April 14, 1969: ((Realities of the Population Explosion, May 1971 Ensign – https://www.lds.org/ensign/1971/05/realities-of-the-population-explosion?lang=eng)

    “Presidents of Stakes, Bishops of Wards, and Presidents of Missions
    Dear Brethren:

    The First Presidency is being asked from time to time as to what the attitude of the Church is regarding birth control. In order that you may be informed on this subject and that you may be prepared to convey the proper information to the members of the Church under your jurisdiction, we have decided to give you the following statement:

    We seriously should regret that there should exist a sentiment or feeling among any members of the Church to curtail the birth of their children. We have been commanded to multiply and replenish the earth that we may have joy and rejoicing in our posterity.

    Where husband and wife enjoy health and vigor and are free from impurities that would be entailed upon their posterity, it is contrary to the teachings of the Church artificially to curtail or prevent the birth of children. We believe that those who practice birth control will reap disappointment by and by.

    However, we feel that men must be considerate of their wives who bear the greater responsibility not only of bearing children, but of caring for them through childhood. To this end the mother’s health and strength should be conserved and the husband’s consideration for his wife is his first duty, and self control a dominant factor in all their relationships.
    It is our further feeling that married couples should seek inspiration and wisdom from the Lord that they may exercise discretion in solving their marital problems, and that they may be permitted to rear their children in accordance with the teachings of the gospel.”

    David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner

  • Forbid Them Not

    Forbid Them Not

    Excerpt from a March 30, 1899 article by George Q. Cannon, ‘The Blessing of Children’: 1

    THE BLESSING OF CHILDREN.

    The question has been raised several times as to the proper manner of blessing children. This subject has been written upon before in this paper, but it seems proper that the matter be again referred to. A correspondent addresses the editor in these words;

    “Is it right in blessing children to confer on them all the powers and blessings of the new and everlasting covenant? I observe Elders doing this sometimes in our fast meetings, and in one instance the Elder conferred all the keys and powers and blessings of the new and everlasting covenant upon the babe he was blessing.”

    The blessing of children is a very simple matter and it should not be surrounded at all by forms. The bestowing upon a babe of the blessings and powers that pertain to adults and that are only pronounced upon people of more advanced years and experience, is entirely unsuitable and improper. It is a departure from the simplicity of the beautiful ordinance of taking the infant, bestowing upon it a name, and giving it a blessing. Certainly the use of such terms as our correspondent refers to is improper, for this reason if for no other, that there is, or should be, no necessary distinction between the blessing conferred upon children whose parents do not belong to the Church and those whose parents do. In some minds there seems to be an idea that there should be a different form of blessing for children born of non-members and for those who are identified with the Church; and it is from such sources that in the case of children belonging to members of the Church “the blessings of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” and all the attendant favors are frequently conferred upon the child. This is all wrong. If we take the example of our Lord and Redeemer, who is our pattern and whose example we cannot too closely follow, we find that He blessed all who were brought to Him. We have no hint that He asked whose children they were, or the standing or faith of their parents. His remark was, “Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven;” and He laid His hands upon them and blessed them. All little children, no matter what their parentage may be, are innocent in the sight of heaven, and they should be received as such and blessed as such. We repeat, the ordinance is one of beautiful simplicity. Those who officiate ought to guard against extravagance, either in language or promise.

     

    Handbook 1: Stake Presidents and Bishops, 16:13:2

    Children of a Parent Living in a Same-Gender Relationship

    A natural or adopted child of a parent living in a same-gender relationship, whether the couple is married or cohabiting, may not receive a name and a blessing.

    A natural or adopted child of a parent living in a same-gender relationship, whether the couple is married or cohabiting, may be baptized and confirmed, ordained, or recommended for missionary service only as follows:

    A mission president or a stake president may request approval from the Office of the First Presidency to baptize and confirm, ordain, or recommend missionary service for a child of a parent who has lived or is living in a same-gender relationship when he is satisfied by personal interviews that both of the following requirements are met:

    The child accepts and is committed to live the teachings and doctrine of the Church, and specifically disavows the practice of same-gender cohabitation and marriage.

    The child is of legal age and does not live with a parent who has lived or currently lives in a same-gender cohabitation relationship or marriage.