Do LDS Prophets Form an Unfailing Safety Net of Truth?
This is a review of a talk give by Sheri Dew which was later published in LDS News
In a recent BYU devotional talk, Sheri Dew discusses her belief that we have the “unique privilege” of having living prophets on this earth, people to help give our lives direction. She states that many people today consider the teachings of the prophets “inconvenient and politically incorrect”, but it is only because prophets are under covenant to teach the truth that they can seem unbending.
This statement makes the assumption that when people dislike or don’t follow the teaching of the prophet it is because they just don’t like being inconvenienced, and she seems to be using the term politically correct as though it is the people who reject the teachings who are wrong rather than the teachings themselves.
The truth is that many of the teachings (both current and historic) are not simply inconvenient or politically incorrect but they are racist, homophobic, and bigoted. The teachings are not simply inconvenient, they are morally wrong and can do actual harm to people.
An example of this would be the teaching regarding race and the priesthood.
In 1852 President Brigham Young announced that the church would no longer allow “men of black African descent” to be ordained to the priesthood. This policy was upheld by subsequent Church presidents who “restricted blacks from receiving the temple endowment or being married in the temple” (LDS Essay - Race and the Priesthood).
In addition to this policy, the LDS Church also taught that black skin was actually a curse from God. There are several excuses for this teaching, but one is that this is actually written in the Book of Mormon where it describes when two opposing groups (the Nephites and the Lamanites) separated from each other that the Lamanites were cursed and “the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them” so that they would not be “enticing” to the Nephites (2 Nephi 5:21-22, 1980).
Although the Church has amended some of the more racist passages of the Book of Mormon and has reversed its policy on not allowing people of colour to hold the priesthood or take part in temple ceremonies, they have not apologised for these teachings. In fact, in their FAQ they even deny knowing when, how, or why the priesthood ban began (despite having articles in other areas of their website discussing race and Brigham Young’s ban).
In addition to this the Church as recently as 2013 was still teaching that LDS members should seek to marry someone with the same “racial background” as themselves (Aaronic Priesthood Manual, V3: pg 128)
I have seen some LDS apologists try and argue that Brigham Young’s declaration was just an unfortunate policy, that was never based on doctrine.
This is clearly not the case since the Book of Mormon quite clearly suggests that having black skin is a curse from God, and even President David O, McKay states “from the days of the Prophet Joseph Smith 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”. He then goes on to say that intermarriage is “repugnant” and it does not have the sanction of the church as it is contrary to Church doctrine.
The full letter can be viewed here.
I have often heard church leaders excuse teaching or doctrine that would now be considered embarrassing or politically incorrect by claiming that the Prophet who spoke was “speaking as a man” and not as a Prophet of God. But this begs the question as to how anyone could then possibly tell when a so-called Prophet is speaking as a man, there is no way for any LDS member to discern this for themselves - they must wait for a revelation from another Prophet to reveal the “truth”. Arguably this means that there is no way of knowing at any given time what teachings are true, and which are false.
Dew mentions in her talk that “some point to changed policies in the church that have modulated over time and ask why procedures would change if prophets were really inspired by God. But the restoration is ongoing, doctrine does not change, policies and procedures do”. This is categorically untrue (as proved with the above example), there are multiple examples of the LDS church leaders making changes to doctrine and even going as far as denying what they have taught about the plan of salvation/the after life. In addition to this, I would argue that it is demonstrably false to claim that the restoration of the gospel is ongoing. The Church even states that “the fulness of the gospel has been restored, and the true Church of Jesus Christ is on the earth again”, so to try and excuse the changes in teachings by saying that we are still receiving updates from God is just false.
At the end of her talk Dew states that we should be asking who the prophets are, and not if they are infallible. But the fact is that truth matters, and it makes no sense to just believe on faith that a Prophet is speaking “truth” which in months or years can later be refuted by another prophet. Truth is important because the teaching of the LDS Church are harmful and cause lasting damage to individuals and families. Dew compares listening to opposing opinions on the truthfulness of the Church as choosing pundits over prophets, and calls those who speak against the church “foolish and blind guides”. The issue is that in my experience there are many “apostates” who have done vast amounts of research and only want to share the facts that the LDS Church would rather not come to light and if the Church is the only true church it should be able to stand up to questioning.
Sister Dew concludes that “there is no greater safety in this life than following the prophet.”. I would argue that there is no evidence to show that the Church is true, there is actually a lot of evidence to show the opposite. I do not believe that LDS Prophets are an “unfailing safety net of truth” because there are so many instances of the words and teaching of the prophets changing and there are teaching in place today that are still harmful. No one has a way of knowing if in a few months or years if a Prophet will come forward and call the current teachings the words of men and not God, and in the meantime, there is lasting damaging being caused by the current teachings of the church.
