ScriptureCentral Goofs Up

By Dennis B. Horne

 

I have long thought of ScriptureCentral as a fine organization doing much good and I still do. But they occasionally get things wrong, with no way to straighten them out or at least have posted corrected views. The Church has a Correlation Department to help keep its doctrine pure, but ScriptureCentral does not—so you can get some bad opinion on occasion. In this case Scott Woodward and Casey Griffiths (and Paul Reeve) have stumbled with some of their interpretations and conclusions on the issue of blacks and the priesthood/temple ban.

            For episode 3 of their “Church History Matters” podcast, the summary says this:

 

“Once people come to terms with the uncomfortable idea that Brigham Young committed an error in endorsing a priesthood ban on church members with black African ancestry, a puzzling question naturally follows: if the ban was an error, then why didn’t it get corrected earlier than 1978? There were nine church presidents between Brigham Young and Spencer W. Kimball, and 101 years between President Young’s death in 1877 and President Kimball’s revelation in 1978. So why did it take so long to correct this mistake and again offer full privileges to black Africans in the church, as they had enjoyed in Joseph Smith’s day? In today’s episode of Church History Matters we attempt to offer at least the beginning of an answer to this question by tracing the key moments and decisions in the leadership councils of the church when, instead of correcting this error, they came to conclusions that led to an unfortunate hardening in place of the priesthood ban. In this episode, the years 1879, 1904, 1907, and 1908 will, sadly, be added alongside the year 1852 as we piece together both the timeline and the reasoning behind this ban.”

 

So for all intents and purposes, here and elsewhere, they are saying a racist Brigham Young began the restriction and it was continued because he and subsequent prophets messed up and continued the restriction in error; by mistake. This is simply false. For a detailed analysis of why they get it wrong, see here.

 

But let’s take a closer look at this question of whether prophets can make mistakes and errors. Of course they can—but such mistakes can also be promptly fixed by the Lord (especially the larger ones). Examination of a couple of incidents in the life and experience of President Heber J. Grant give us some understanding on this issue of mistakes. One of them occurred in relation to his Apostolic call and another with his becoming President of the Church.

 

I provide this excerpt from one of the several accounts shared by Elder Heber J. Grant of his call to the Apostleship. It is not the whole narration, two of which can be read in detail here, but it is enough to make the point about how the Lord can remedy mistakes made by prophets (bold added):

 

“As I was riding along . . . I seemed to see, and I seemed to hear, what to me is one of the most real things [vision or manifestation] in all my life. I seemed to hear the words that were spoken. I listened to the discussion with a great deal of interest. The [earthly] First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles had not been able to agree on two men to fill the vacancies in the Quorum of the Twelve. There had been a vacancy of one for two years, and a vacancy of two for one year, and the conferences had adjourned without the vacancies being filled. In this [heavenly] council the Savior was present, my father was there, and the Prophet Joseph Smith was there. They discussed the question that a mistake had been made [by Pres. John Taylor] in not filling those two vacancies and that in all probability it would be another six months before the Quorum would be completed. And they discussed as to whom they wanted to occupy those positions, and decided that the way to remedy the mistake that had been made in not filling these vacancies was to send a revelation.”

 

And so a revelation was sent to President Taylor, who had it written and read to the two apostles called, in October of 1882. Elder Grant explained: “So I went to the President's office, and there sat Brother Teasdale, and all of the ten Apostles, and the Presidency of the Church, and also Seymour B. Young and the members of the Seven Presidents of the Seventies. And the revelation was read calling Brother Teasdale and myself to the apostleship, and Brother Seymour B. Young to be one of the Seven Presidents of the Seventies. Brother Teasdale was blessed [ordained and set apart] by President John Taylor, and George Q. Cannon blessed me.” (The Church’s little video rendition with a voice actor reading Heber’s record is found here.)

 

A mistake or error occurred—but it was soon fixed by a revelation to a Prophet of God. Years later, when President Joseph F. Smith was on his death bed, he received his last visitor, President Heber J. Grant, President of the Quorum of the Twelve and next in line of succession to the presidency. President Grant related the incident by reading to a general conference assemblage a statement prepared by one of President Smith’s sons, then a counselor in the Presiding Bishopric:

 

“I will read the following statement—and have no recollection of having done so before—written at my request, by Bishop David A. Smith, Nov. 19, 1918: President Grant came into the Beehive House yesterday afternoon to inquire as to father's condition, and I suggested that he go in and speak to him, but he said he did not want to disturb him. I said, ‘You had better wait and see him, as it may be your last chance to speak to him.’ Father being awake, I told him Brother Grant was there, and he directed me to tell Brother Grant that he wanted to see him, and when Brother Grant entered the room he took him by the hand and said: “The Lord bless you, my boy, the Lord bless you, you have got a great responsibility. Always remember this is the Lord's work, and not man's. The Lord is greater than any man. He knows whom he wants to lead his Church, and never makes any mistakes. The Lord bless you.”’ This was the last message that President Smith delivered to anyone.’ (Signed) David A. Smith.”

 

I take these at face value; that the Lord doesn’t make mistakes although His prophets can—but when they do He can and does fix them.

 

Perhaps the most common occasions when the Lord fixes mistakes is when the senior Brethren are meeting together as the First Presidency and the Twelve in Council and counsel. Here the spirit of revelation is often (always?) present in one degree or another. These are the very occasions when such revelation is meant to direct and guide the Church, not to “harden” a policy or practice to lead it astray.

 

One of the most pertinent occasions when the Lord could have remedied an alleged mistake was one of those very meetings, held October 9, 1947. These are observations as recorded by Elder Spencer W. Kimball: “In the 10 o’clock meeting with the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve the matter of the negro was brought up for discussion again. I think I felt in this meeting the spirit of revelation more pronounced than in any meeting I have attended. The spirit of unity was manifest. All the Brethren seemed to see alike through the sweet spirit throughout the meeting, and I was almost overcome with the delightful experience. The Brethren seemed unified in feeling that we could not withhold the regular gospel blessings from the colored people, and that though we were unable yet to give them the Priesthood, perhaps we should not withhold from them the other blessings of the gospel which are available to them.” (Spencer W. Kimball diary, October 9, 1947)

 

To me, this seems like a forerunner to the (30-year-later) 1 June 1978 revelation on the priesthood in its intense spiritual power and apostolic unity, but the restriction was still not removed by the Lord. President Kimball’s diary, in fact, records many instances wherein he and other members of the First Presidency and Twelve felt the power of the Holy Spirit to a sublime degree in their weekly and quarterly meetings—all without the Lord directing a lifting of the restriction. Yet we have seen that the Lord can fix or remedy mistakes made by His leaders anytime He wants.

(See for example: October 3, 1949; October 10, 1960; January 20, 1966; March 3, 1966; December 1, 1966; December 7, 1972. Talk about edifying reading!)

 

In my research into President Kimball’s various statements regarding the priesthood restriction, I find that he called it a “possible error” once, but every other time he referred to it as the Lord’s doctrine or program or policy. And he didn’t seem to distinguish between the meanings of those labels; the Lord had implemented it and He would have to remove it.

 

To try to maintain the argument that the restriction was an error or mistake made by all the prophets until President Kimball (1978) is simply untenable and unsustainable. Too many prophets and apostles have formally stated that they and their predecessors have not erred in their ministries on matters of such importance; that they had no fear of future embarrassment from being or doing wrong in leading the Church.

 

Years before President Russell M. Nelson was called as an apostle, he wrote his views about the issue: “In 1971, when the search was under way for a new president for Brigham Young University, President Romney interviewed me extensively, particularly on the question of the Negro and the Priesthood. I gave him a simple answer: I had no problem with that doctrine, because I knew that in the Lord’s own due time a revelation would come which would enable the Blacks to receive the Priesthood, and until that time came, they were not to receive it. It was just that simple.” (Nelson, From Heart to Heart, 192)

 

The only situation that I can think of where a possible long-term mistake was made and then fixed, is with the office of the Seventy. When the church was initially being restored in the 1830s, there were just Seventies. But as the decades passed, there became General Authority Seventies and local Seventies, with the General Authorities (First Seven Presidents then First Council of Seventy) presiding over the locals. Then in 1987 the local stake/ward level Seventies Quorums were disbanded and only the General Authority Seventies remain and they have multiplied in quorums. (There is far more to this history than what I have just summarized, but this is not the place for such a recounting.) But no one’s eternal blessings were at stake; the change was more administrative than anything else, putting the priesthood quorums in their proper places and order. And more of that happened under President Nelson, with most high priests being moved to elder’s quorums.

 

No, the prophets did not continue and sustain the priesthood and temple blessings restriction on their own volition, without the direction and revelations of the Lord. He inspires His prophets to do what needs to be done and “never makes any mistakes.”

 

I would add that we do not worship at the altar of historical sources or scholarship, especially when the records are incomplete or scanty and are contradicted by other sources. Our prophets today are not making a mistake or error in regards to withholding the priesthood from worthy women; that is the Lord’s doing. I also believe that those who interpret the church essay on “Race and the Priesthood” as blaming Brigham Young for the priesthood restriction to be in error themselves; such a conclusion is not warranted. The minute we prioritize scholarship (historical or otherwise) over prophetic direction, that is when we become simply another Protestant or Catholic sect of the world.

 

Many years ago, when these podcasters were probably still in grade school, I read the reasoning of an anti-“Mormon” who made the same arguments: If the prophets were wrong and in error on the priesthood restriction, what else have they been wrong about and how can you trust anything they say? How many other major mistakes have they made? Is it all a mistake? Such erroneous thinking is how critics hope to start Latter-day Saints down the path of doubt to eventual disbelief and personal apostasy. Don’t buy the critics snake oil. Instead, hold to the iron rod like a vise. And don’t accept everything academics say without doing your homework first.

 

I also suggest that interested parties compare this piece on the law of consecration and tithing:

https://scripturecentral.org/archive/media/podcast/did-tithing-replace-consecration?searchId=96637476b477122b1df0e0a698f08a4404c968bf4dad8d86eff6d92897d95211-en-v=3ea0322

 

to this, by President Marion G. Romney:

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/marion-g-romney/socialism-united-order/?M=A