The Name Whereby We Shall Call This Church, Part II

Part I

A Sandy Foundation

Jesus continues His answer to His disciples on the subject of being called in His name,

But if it be not built upon my gospel and is built upon the works of men or upon the works of the devil, verily I say unto you, They have joy in their works for a season, and by and by the end cometh and they are hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence there is no return for their works do follow them. For it is because of their works that they are hewn down, therefore remember the things that I have told you.

This hearkens back to what Jesus said directly after preaching His central message of love,

And every one that heareth these sayings of mine and doeth them not shall be likened unto a foolish man who built his house upon the sand, and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.

Everything that is not done in the Lord’s name will eventually fall. Such things may even bring us joy for a time but there will be an end to them. We may come across things that are done in the Lord’s name and are built upon His gospel. But I would suggest that we cannot even build upon those things. Everything that is built must have the Lord as its foundation and nothing else. You might say there are no multi-story apartment buildings in the Lord’s kingdom, for that would require some people to build their residence on top of someone else’s residence and thus not have the Rock as their foundation.

There is nothing wrong with adapting scripture for fellowships so that people with a common goal can be on the same page in how they apply the Lord’s teachings. Such adaptations can be highly informative and extremely helpful. But Jesus lets us know that building upon anything other than Him, even if it is truth wisely adapted for particular circumstances, will be disastrous. We can and should build upon the true principles of the Lord’s gospel. What we should not do is build upon specific applications of the true principles of the Lord’s gospel. Applying the Gospel for a particular fellowship does not necessarily mean building upon a sandy foundation. Canonizing one overall application of the Gospel for all fellowships is something else entirely and would seem to be building upon a sandy foundation.

We can learn much about building upon a sandy foundation from the Nephites after they were visited by the resurrected Lord. They had much joy in their works for a season but their society eventually crumbled and we need to know why if we are to do better than they did and establish a millennium of peace. Perhaps information about the Nephite disciples can assist us. Three of those disciples labored for Zion and nothing else. They only desired to bring people to Christ. They desired to help make all the people one with Him. The three had charity as their foundation, which is the culmination of the Doctrine of Christ. They literally did all things in the name of Christ and they were surely built upon His gospel. The other nine, however, labored for something else. They labored for a speedy reward in the Son's kingdom. That was the one thing they asked for when they had a chance to ask Jesus for anything. That’s certainly not a bad thing to labor for. But is it the surest foundation upon which to build? If only 25% of the disciples responsible for teaching the Lord’s words are built upon the surest foundation, we ought to be concerned about what kind of society gets established. Remember that there was always "one" ordained among the disciples to administer the Lord's flesh and blood. That rule would have continued as disciples died and new ones were ordained in their place. Eventually that one disciple, like the son of perdition, sold the Lord’s flesh and blood for silver and gold (3 Nephi 18:5,28-29; 27:32; 4 Nephi 1:27 [LE]). Just like the way the Nephite society ended, if there is any small deviation from the pure Doctrine of Christ, even if we labor for something “good” like a reward in the Son’s kingdom, our whole society will eventually crumble. We should be reluctant to try to govern all the fellowships with particular applications of gospel principles, even if they are proper applications.

A Second Opinion

I understand that there are many important reasons that have been brought up that would lead one to believe that there ought to be a governing principles document in the scriptural canon. I do not presume to speak the Lord’s will on the matter. It may indeed be the case that He wants such a document in the scriptures. But it may be the case that He doesn’t. It may also be the case that He will approve of whatever we want Him to approve, whether it will lead to Zion or not. The inescapable conclusion is that we have to be careful and consider all possibilities. As I bring up rebuttals to some of the things that have been brought up in various forums and discussions, I hope it is understood that I have no quarrel with anyone and I simply wish to bring things further into the light for closer inspection.

In St. George, Denver Snuffer said, "When it comes to the history of scripture, corruption happens every time there is an apostasy. Each new dispensation is responsible for fixing the canon in order to reclaim truths, to correct errors and to adopt guiding principles applicable to their day." That may be a call to have guiding principles. But that doesn't mean that the guiding principles need to be in the scriptural canon. If guiding principles must be adapted to apply to the day in which people live, then the adaptation of the principles must be at least as flexible as society, which we know is extremely flexible as it allows and prohibits new things seemingly every day. Prophecy of the last days assures us that society will continue to shift dramatically. Canonized guiding principles are, by definition, not flexible and will cease to be adaptable the day they are put into the scriptures, thus preventing the very adaptation that Denver advocates for. We can pretend that people will continually understand that any governing principles that get canonized are just lowly words of wisdom, able to be modified by any fellowship. But do we truly believe that the governing principles will not naturally take on a more authoritative and fixed quality the moment they are found in a set of scriptures voted on by the entire body of believers? I believe it would be extremely unwise to ignore our own history on this point. Words of wisdom easily get twisted into commandments. It took less than 20 years for Church leaders to try and make the Word of Wisdom into a commandment. The saints got taken in by it even though the text clearly says that it's not a commandment. We might think we can be super careful to make sure people understand that words of wisdom are just words of wisdom and nothing more. But it might be impossible to outmaneuver the subtlety of devising men.

In addition to the quote above about what needs to happen in every dispensation, Denver has also told us that every dispensation head failed to establish Zion with only two exceptions. Only Enoch and Melchizedek were able to establish Zion because they refused to be in any position of power over anyone else. They relegated themselves to being only teachers while they could have legitimately set themselves up as the patriarchal head in a hierarchy. Similarly, even if a committee has a legitimate stewardship to draft a governing principles document (which is debatable), such a committee would probably do well to refuse to act in such a stewardship that might end up inserting extra-scriptural standards into a canon which many people will accept by covenant.

In the April 20, 2017 Scripture Project Update, the scripture committee used D&C 28:4-8 [LE] as a reason to go ahead and put words of wisdom in the scriptures. Those verses tell Oliver to “not write by way of commandment but by wisdom.” It also says that he will “have revelations, but write them not by the way of commandment.” The scripture committee said, "This instruction, given to Oliver, suggests that someone besides Joseph (or in our case Denver) can write in scripture 'by way of' wisdom”. It could be possible that that’s what the Lord meant but it seems like a stretch to me. Reading that revelation shows that nothing was said in relation to the scriptures. Those verses make it clear that there is nothing wrong with receiving revelations and writing them down. But I believe it is too far of a leap to assume that those verses were referring to the canonization of such things.

I have seen people arguing in favor of the canonization of the governing principles by using the example of the US Constitution for support.  Such people say that the US Constitution provided a consistent framework for all the states while the states could govern themselves with their own constitutions. In the same Scripture Project Update quoted above, the scripture committee said, "The process described above also follows the pattern set forth in the Constitution, where imperfect people were able to write an inspired document by which they could govern themselves in equality." I believe that most people in the restoration movement now understand that, while Joseph's revelations concerning the organization of a New Testament church were indeed of divine origin, a New Testament organization is not an example to follow because following such a path will not lead to Zion. The founding of the United States of America must be carefully analyzed to see if there is a similar pattern at work. The Lord has said, "I established the constitution of this land by the hands of wise men whom I raised up" (D&C 101:80). Just because the Constitution was written by "wise men" doesn't mean that it is an example to follow or emulate. In fact, we are specifically told that the wisdom of the wise shall perish (2 Nephi 27:26 [LE]). Denver's Constitutional Apostasy talk shows just a few ways that the Constitution has absolutely corrupted the ability of the states to have their own governing principles. In other words, the wisdom of the wise has already perished. I believe it would be folly to mimic a system that has so quickly led to so much abuse and death. Even if the Constitution represented a proper application of true principles, it is only an application and not a set of foundational principles to follow. A wise man once said, "But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." I believe I would be doing a disservice to my posterity if I were to set up specific applications of truth, and not truth itself, as a foundation to build on.

There are many people who are concerned about converts being confused because of their non-LDS backgrounds. I think this is a worthy thing to be concerned about and I share the concern. What also concerns me is that people are getting ready to solve the problem of confused converts when there are virtually no converts to be confused. It seems that we may be trying to come up with a solution for a non-existent problem. With virtually no experience actually trying to assist new converts, how qualified are we to decide how to minimize their confusion? And if converts are indeed confused, who can teach them better? A gathering of delegates writing a document for people most of them might never meet? Or a unified fellowship trying to integrate the people they have reached out to in love? I hope we can try to solve problems locally before attempting a centralized solution, especially before the problem even exists.

One argument that has been advanced to favor a canonized governing principles document is that, without the governing principles to bind us all together, we cannot be one. I admit that it is very difficult to be unified without a clear set of common beliefs, practices, and goals. But maybe our common beliefs, practices, and goals are already less clear than we fear. The Lord said that His sheep know His voice. Perhaps His voice, as found in the scriptures (scriptures we hope to receive by covenant) and through the Holy Ghost, is enough for people in this movement to be unified and to be one. Additionally, I suspect that there will be no shortage of projects to keep us unified as one as we find ways to preach the Gospel and bless the world. Our common mission to bring others to Christ might be enough to keep us together in the way the Lord intends.

Other Things to Think About

There are a number of other things that should give us pause about what might happen with a set of governing principles. I hope I can be forgiven for bringing up so many of them. It is not my desire to contend or have any enemies. Knowing the importance of the scripture project, I simply feel a need to be quite thorough in my scrutiny of all the potential implications of the governing principles.

After thinking about what to do about the capitalization of certain scriptural terms that might have helped people's interpretations, the scripture committee announced in the May 15, 2017 update,

Our initial thought was to prepare to dig in and do as much as we could find. But then we realized that doing so would deprive everyone else of the opportunity to become more sensitive to this formatting and we also wanted to avoid any accusation that we were imposing our own interpretations on others. For these reasons, it was decided to only make the changes for this one phrase in the D&C as an example. The rest will be left to the readers to learn and adjust for themselves.

That decision seems wise to me. If putting forth details about scriptural interpretations indeed deprives people of the opportunity to become more sensitive to those interpretations, then it follows that detailing principles that govern fellowships similarly deprives people of the opportunity to become more sensitive to those principles.

We can see throughout scriptural history that Satan always attacks at the very heart of any kind of restoration. If there is any sort of centralized control or something that has the potential of becoming centralized control, that is where Satan will strike in an extremely subtle way. This understanding should not necessarily paralyze us into inaction. But it should make us inspect ourselves very closely to see what our motivations are, what we hope to accomplish, and whether we are using the Lord’s way of solving problems.

We don't know what the future of the restoration will bring. We don’t know what neglected gospel principles will need to be restored and brought to our attention. Therefore, adequate governing principles that continue to be relevant into the future may be impossible at this point. If further adaptations are needed for the governing principles, everything we are doing now - electing fellowship delegates and having meetings to draft documents - could become a regular and tyrannical process of controlling the fellowships. We may indeed believe that we understand that nobody should be a strongman and tell everyone what to do. But if we are hoping to convert a lot of people to Christ, the understanding of those new converts could be quite different from ours. Despite our best efforts to say we don’t need strongmen, converts might simply see that it is possible for a body of representatives to get together and dictate what the fellowships ought to do. Actions are louder than words. Joseph Smith said, “We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion. Hence many are called, but few are chosen.” That potential for power over others is far too tempting for some people to resist. Perhaps we should cement our beliefs about strongmen by eliminating possibilities for having strongmen. That might require refusing to correlate governing principles to any degree.

Benjamin Franklin said,

...Reminds me of what I think a more prudent conduct in another sect among us, that of the Dunkers. I was acquainted with one of its founders, Michael Welfare, soon after it appeared. He complained to me that they were grievously calumniated by the zealots of other persuasions, and charged with abominable principles and practices, to which they were utter strangers. I told him this had always been the case with new sects, and that, to put a stop to such abuse, I imagined it might be well to publish the articles of their belief and the rules of their discipline. He said that it had been proposed among them, but not agreed to, for this reason: 'When we were first drawn together as a society,' says he, 'it had pleased God to enlighten our minds so far as to see that some doctrines, which we once esteemed truths, were errors; and that others, which we had esteemed errors, were real truth. From time to time He has been pleased to afford us farther light, and our principles have been improving, and our errors diminishing. Now, we are not sure that we are arrived at the end of this progression, and at the perfection of spiritual or theological knowledge; and we fear that, if we should once print our confession of faith, we should feel ourselves as if bound and confined by it, and perhaps be unwilling to receive farther improvement, and our successors still more so, as conceiving what we their elders and founders had done to be something sacred, never to be departed from.' This modesty in a sect is perhaps a singular instance in the history of mankind, every other sect supposing itself in possession of all truth, and that those who differ are so far in the wrong; like a man traveling in foggy weather, those at some distance before him on the road he sees wrapped up in the fog, as well as those behind him, and also the people in the fields on each side, but near him all appears clear, tho' in truth he is as much in the fog as any of them.

We would do well to be at least as modest and humble as those of whom Franklin spoke. Like the people in that sect spoken of, I believe that we are still progressing and should expect to see further light and knowledge. Such further light and knowledge may clarify things to such a degree that, if we were to write down the principles we think we may understand right now, those written principles may later seem to be in error due to their incompleteness. And if that happens, people may be blinded by the written principles so much so that they will reject the further light and knowledge that aims to refine the understanding of the very principles they claim to follow. To use an example, right now we may have a glimpse at the proper order of things and it looks like a square. And we may be tempted to proclaim to the world, "It is a square!" to make it easier for people to integrate and understand what they are looking at. But what if God expands our perceptions and we start seeing that the square was only one face of a cube? Well, once the idea that it's a square is canonized, that cannot easily be altered. When the idea of a cube starts coming out, people might reject it because the square was canonized and the cube was not. Yes, it looks like a square, but we don't necessarily need to write it down and canonize it. The scriptures don't need clarification except in other revelations and as the Lord sees fit by having His servants speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost.

It's possible that the Lord may have raised this issue about governing principles at this stage so that we may learn to resist the temptation to set up stakes and correlate things that ought not be correlated. If it's possible that the Lord may reject our scriptures if there are no governing principles contained in it, it is just as possible that He will reject our scriptures if we decide to include governing principles. To not admit that possibility would be an oversight.

Joseph Smith said, “It is the constitutional disposition of mankind to set up stakes and set bounds to the works and ways of the Almighty...I say to all those who are disposed to set up stakes for the Almighty, You will come short of the glory of God.” How sure are we that governing principles will not set up stakes? We may have the best intentions in the world. Does that necessarily qualify us to be free of the blinders we have on us due to the traditions we have inherited? We should assume that every people who were cursed with lesser things because they hardened their hearts didn’t actually think they were hardening their hearts. We should probably assume that they all talked a great game about seeking the word of the Lord to them. Our apparent humility is no guarantee that we won’t ask the Lord for something amiss. The Lord gives us the things we desire, whether those things lead to Zion or not. Therefore, we could potentially put together a governing principles document that would be according to His word but would have the ability to sabotage Zion, as has happened in many previous dispensations.

3 Nephi 9 [RE] says,

And when these things come to pass that thy seed shall begin to know these things, it shall be a sign unto them that they may know that the work of the Father hath already commenced unto the fulfilling of the covenant which he hath made unto the people who are of the house of Israel. And when that day shall come, it shall come to pass that kings shall shut their mouths, for that which had not been told them shall they see and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

This seems to be describing something that has not happened yet. When it does happen, the people of Israel that are taught will come to know and understand things that were not even shown to them or said to them. A type for this was given in the Book of Mormon. When the sons of Mosiah taught the Lamanites, the Lamanites adopted the doctrine of Christ to a degree the Nephites had been unwilling to do. They were willing to sacrifice their lives rather than risk killing their brethren. In doing so, they saw something that had not been told to them and they considered something that they had not heard. If we are to take this prophecy and its type seriously, we should probably expect the remnant of Jacob to understand and practice things that we do not yet understand or practice. Therefore, it might be unwise to try to cement in scripture things that we think we understand but do not yet truly understand.

Somewhat related to the above point, we must be open to the idea that the Lord may alter the scriptures dramatically after we have made our best efforts. I think it’s not too much to assume that anything in a governing principles document should point to the scriptures as their source. It is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that a scripture referred to by something in the governing principles gets removed by the Lord when the scriptures are presented to Him. It might be better to wait until Christ has approved the scriptures before trying to use our own limited wisdom to know what to point to with any governing principles.

Denver Snuffer said,

Theologian, James R. White, from the Christian Research Institute makes damning admissions as he labors to defend the Nicene Creed. (See What Really Happened at Nicea? CRI Statement DN-206.) He explains that 'every time they came up with a statement that was limited solely to biblical terms' it was unclear. They invented and used new terminology because 'they needed to use a term that could not be misunderstood.' Meaning that they had to go outside the scriptures because the scriptures failed to say what they wanted said. He elaborates that 'they sought to clarify biblical truth.' He does not want to admit their extra-biblical creed was a departure, and struggles to claim the council was only accomplishing a limited and clarifying task. What if instead of debating and focusing on 'substance' (or the material of which God is composed), the debate did confine itself solely to biblical terms? (http://denversnuffer.com/2017/05/trinitarian-impediment/)

What do we want to be said that is not in the scriptures? Are we trying to clarify the scriptures by inventing non-scriptural ways of explaining them? What was said about the Nicene Creed should set off alarm bells about our current efforts.

Joseph Smith said,

The things of God are of deep import; and time, and experience, and careful and ponderous and solemn thoughts can only find them out. Thy mind, O man! if thou wilt lead a soul unto salvation, must stretch as high as the utmost heavens, and search into and contemplate the darkest abyss, and the broad expanse of eternity—thou must commune with God. How much more dignified and noble are the thoughts of God, than the vain imaginations of the human heart! None but fools will trifle with the souls of men.

We want to lead souls to salvation by writing something that will go in the scriptures. But how qualified are we to do that? Are we in danger of playing the part of the fool, trifling with men's souls? Do we meet the qualifications Joseph outlined to avoid doing that? As for me, I currently feel that I do not meet the standard that Joseph described. But it turns out that I have been asked to attend a meeting to draft a document that could end up in the scriptures. I’m guessing that at least some others who will attend the meeting feel similarly unqualified. Now, that does not necessarily preclude the possibility of becoming qualified by the time a draft is decided upon. Miracles can happen. But will a draft be decided upon even if a miracle does not happen?

Denver Snuffer said,

The church has been damaged by correlation. President McKay predicted it would lead to apostasy. If I were to 'lead' and standardize things it would be a return to correlation. Why return to what has damaged Mormonism? It is the system that has done the damage. You cannot improve that flaw by choosing to make me your new correlator. I will not do it. It will darken your minds and would corrupt me. I am no better than you, and I believe some of you to be better than I. We need hundreds of independently functioning believers adapting the Gospel to their needs. Doctrine does not change, and the scriptures are constant. Your needs will vary. Therefore you apply what is changeless to your peculiar circumstances. You can do it better than any distant authority could possibly do it for you.

This quote from the tenth talk applies to us whether it is Denver who correlates, a scripture committee who correlates, or a group of fellowship delegates who correlate. And, as he said, fellowships acting independently can adapt eternal truths to their circumstances better than anyone else. We all know that even words of wisdom can be warped by correlation and turned into commandments. The desire toThe scripture committee said that the governing principles can "assist new converts to get the basics right" (see the Scripture Project Updates, April 30, 2017). But I believe that indicates a paternalistic stance and assumes that we are currently in a position of great knowledge that would enable us to actually assist them. I believe that assumes too much and is prideful. In fact, our "basis in the LDS tradition" (ibid.) - a corrupt tradition, I might add - may specifically disqualify us from being in a position to assist new converts. We should consider running far away from anything that has a proven track record of sabotaging the restoration. The scriptures themselves, since they contain the fulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, might be the only “standardized” governing principles anyone needs.

An Allegory that Rings True

In the Lord of the Rings, when a great source of power was found, a power that could potentially unite the good guys in their war against evil and give them the upper hand, the various peoples of the land all sent representatives to a secret meeting to decide what to do about it. Good men desired to use it but such power would eventually corrupt even the most pure souls. When it became obvious that the power could not be wielded safely by anyone, they decided that it must be destroyed so that no one could use it ever again.

We are currently considering how to use the power of systematic and correlated religion. However lightly we may think we are applying it, we are indeed contemplating the application of the great power of correlation. A meeting will take place to make decisions about how we are all to be governed. We may consider the wonderful ways such power can be safely and sparingly employed to bless others. It has the potential to make things less confusing for converts and thus unite the entire movement and make us more powerful in the face of evil. But it also has the great potential to corrupt, as our own history has shown us. We might use the governing principles from a desire to do good, but through us it might wield a power too great and terrible to imagine. What will we choose?

Believe All Things

Though I have made all these points in favor of a certain point of view, I do try to keep an open mind. I believe that the scripture project is a necessary ingredient for the covenant and I am extremely grateful for the efforts of the scripture committee. While the efforts have been valiant, it wouldn't make sense to assume that all the efforts are necessarily the correct efforts. I am willing to consider the possibility that some of the efforts of the scripture project are not things that will help us establish Zion and may actually lead us away from Zion.

I am also willing to consider the possibility that the Lord really does want us to have a canonized governing principles document because it will help us establish Zion. And in such a scenario, it is possible that someone such as myself may still be led by the Lord to oppose the canonization of the governing principles so that what eventually does get canonized is limited to the degree that the Lord always intended. In other words, it is possible that I may have a function to perform even while being seemingly opposed to what the Lord means to accomplish.

I am also willing to consider that, even if we mess up by canonizing a document we shouldn't or leaving out a document we should have canonized, the Lord can still work with us because He is merciful. Once the final product is offered to the Lord for His approval, He may not even correct every single mistake. He may not bother to remove a governing principles document that shouldn’t be there or He may not bother to add a governing principles document that should be there. He may add only the most critical things and/or remove only the very worst stumbling blocks.

Another way of saying that I consider all these different possibilities is that I try to believe all things, as the scriptures instruct us to do if we are to have charity.

A Firm Foundation

Jesus said that we must be built upon His gospel. We must have Him as our foundation. We must be called in His name, meaning that we must be driven forward to do the things we do by remembering the way He lived and loved and served. Our “governing principles” must be the same exact principles that govern the way that the Lord lives and acts. Anything else is a sandy foundation. So what exactly are those principles the Lord so perfectly lives by?

I honestly don’t know if those principles can actually be stated in a single document. I suspect that our language is limited and our hearts are hardened to such a degree that it takes hundreds of pages of scripture in order to communicate to our minds the “governing principles” the Lord lives by. And that communication to our minds only happens if we are illuminated by the Spirit and we are willing to cast aside our traditions. I think we will inevitably fail if we think we can summarize or restate the Lord’s own governing principles better than what He has already stated.

That doesn’t mean we can’t allow the Lord’s light to guide our fellowships with particular applications of the Lord’s own “governing principles”. We can certainly unite with each other through common understandings of scriptures and practices. And we can do so without establishing anything less than the Lord’s gospel as our “governing principles” while remaining free from any human correlation. If we can limit ourselves to the tools allowed by the Lord (persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness, love unfeigned, kindness, and pure knowledge), we may not be able to prevent people and fellowships from making poor choices, but we will be qualified to help them in the Lord’s way, which is the only way that matters.

In part 3 we will look at what the Lord said about being called in His name and the amazing blessings that will be poured out when that happens.

Part III