D&C 89 - A Word of Wisdom: Commandment or Invitation?
A word of wisdom, now called the word of wisdom, was
a revelation the Lord gave on “the order and will of God in the
temporal salvation of all saints in the last days” on February 27, 1833,
to the saints. It originated because of the request of Emma Smith, who was
concerned about—and probably disgusted by—the use of tobacco in the School of
Prophets, especially since it was the same place that Joseph received many of
his revelations and writing the inspired version of the Bible.
This word of wisdom that was received by Joseph Smith through
revelation is not the law of health that we live today. Yes, the revelation
appears the same today in our edition of the Doctrine & Covenants as it
does in the original text, except for some changes in punctuation. However, the
law of health the church uses to judge temple recommend worthiness today does
not reflect the principle that was initially revealed to Joseph Smith. It has
changed from counsel given to weakest of the saints “not by commandment or
constraint” to a commandment compelled upon anyone seeking a temple recommend.
It has evolved from a “principle with promise” to a law with condemnation.
Is the Word of Wisdom a Commandment?
When Joseph Smith received this “word of wisdom” from the Lord
in 1833 to show “the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of
all saints in the last days” it was sent as a revelation, but not as a
commandment. In fact, the Lord was very clear that it was not given by way of
“commandment or constraint but by revelation and the word of wisdom.” Further,
he says it is given as a principle (or a rule of conduct or tenant of truth)
with a promise. In this revelation, the Lord does not imply that this code of
conduct for health was intended to be enforced in the future, but the wording
implies otherwise, that it is not to be constrained. Synonyms of constrain include
to force, compel, obligate, coerce make, or pressure. Taking the appropriate
context of the wording in the timeframe of this revelation, the entry for the
word constraint in the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary is listed as follows:
"CONSTRAINT, noun Irresistible
force, or its effect; any force, or power, physical or moral, which compels to
act or to forbear action, or which urges so strongly as to produce its effect
upon the body or mind; compulsion; restraint; confinement."
Based on the original revelation, it appears the Lord
intended this word of wise counsel regarding truths of health to be an
invitation for his disciples to learn and follow. The principles have a promise
of health, wisdom, knowledge, and temporal salvation. There is no evidence the
Lord intended forced, coerced, or compelled obedience principles of this
revelation. In glaring contrast, it states otherwise. So, why do we as a church
consider the word of wisdom to be a commandment?
Interpretations from Brigham Young to Wilford Woodruff
He continues, “If the Spirit of God whispers this to his
people through their leader, and they will not listen or obey, what will be the
consequences of their disobedience? Darkness and blindness of mind with regard
to the things of God will be their lot.”[ii]
There is a divergence from the Lord’s original counsel compared to Brigham
Young’s understanding, where the revelation is changed from an invitation to
live a principle with a promise to an implication that not living by this
standard will bring darkness and eventually apostasy.
Yet even with the ardent encouragement to live the
principles in the word of wisdom, Brigham Young did not feel he should compel
people to live the principle, though he perhaps did use some energetic coercion
throughout his many sermons on the topic. In one statement early on, Brigham
Young stated, “Some of the brethren are very strenuous upon the ‘Word of
Wisdom’, and would like to have me preach upon it, and urge it upon the
brethren, and make it a test of fellowship. I do not think I shall do so. I
have never done so.”[iii] This
statement suggests a movement from some the “the brethren” to compel strict
compliance to the word of wisdom as a “test of fellowship”, or a test of faith.
One of these may have been Wilford Woodruff. In 1989, Wilford Woodruff, then
president of the church, stated in a presidency meeting with the First
Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve that he considered the word of wisdom to be
a commandment.[iv]
Prior to Wilford Woodruff’s presidency, John Taylor in 1886 felt
there was iniquity inherent in not complying with the tenets of the word of
wisdom. He continued to assert that the word of wisdom should not be obligated,
and though it appears from his writing
that he believed a man’s worthiness is affected by adherence to those
principles, he also felt it did not inhibit a person from entering the temple.
In his letter to John McAllister and David Cannon in November 30, 1886, John
Taylor as the president of the church stated, "The Word of Wisdom as
originally given was sent not by commandment or constraint; but 'by revelation
on the the [sic] Word of Wisdom, for the temporal salvation of all Saints in
these days,' and no rule has been formulated, nor law proclaimed, nor counsel
given since that time which makes its strict observance, necessary to receive
ordinances of life and salvation in the temples. There are many cases where
people may violate the strict letter of the Word of Wisdom, and yet be
following its spirit in doing so.....and yet...we are opposed to the common use
of these articles by Latter-day Saints. A man or a woman who disregards the
Word of Wisdom and still profess to be a Latter-day Saint ought to be ashamed
of their conduct. A judicious bishop will not give a recommend to such a person
without first taking up a labor with him or her against the indulgence in the
habits mentioned in the Word of Wisdom. No person who flagrantly violates that
word should ask for a recommend."[v]
A mental shift evolved regarding obedience to the word of
wisdom, where the word of wisdom changed from a principle—not a commandment or
to be constrained—with a promise—not a condemnation or judgment—to a condition
of obedience, which created belief that anyone not living those principles sin.
Reviewing to the original revelation, there does not seem to be any indication
from the Lord that there is sin in not complying to this principle of health
aside from the promise that the destroying angel will pass over those who “keep
and do these sayings [the word of wisdom], walking in obedience to the commandments”
(D&C 89:18). Obviously, there are consequences in health, but at no time
has there been a declaration prior to Brigham Young’s presidency that there was
judgment or sin in disregarding or deviating from the word of wisdom.
In that same meeting mentioned above in which President
Woodruff said that he viewed word of wisdom as a commandment, “one member [of
the meeting] read [to the group] from the twelfth volume of the Journal of
Discourses a statement by Brigham Young that seemed to support the notion that
the Word of Wisdom was a commandment of God.”[vi]
They may have been referencing Brigham Young’s statement, “I know that some say
the revelations upon these points [the word of wisdom] are not given by way of
commandment. Very well, but we are commanded to observe every word that
proceeds from the mouth of God.”[vii]
By the late 1800s there is a major transition in considering
the word of wisdom as commandment, rather than an invitation. This thought process
was justified by Joseph F. Smith in these words, “The reason undoubtedly why
the Word of Wisdom was given—as not by 'commandment or restraint' was that at
that time, at least, if it had been given as a commandment it would have
brought every man, addicted to the use of these noxious things, under condemnation;
so the Lord was merciful and gave them a chance to overcome, before He brought
them under the law.”[viii]
This is a strong statement considering that up to this point there has still
not been a directive given of the Lord to a prophet to change the principle to
a law, unless Brigham Young’s whisperings of the Spirit qualify as that
revelation.
It brings to question whether the statements above sound
like a change in the Lord’s words or will, or change in the minds and beliefs
of men? If the Lord truly wanted to change the word of wisdom from counsel
given “not by commandment or constraint but by revelation and the word of
wisdom” to a commandment or law defining the worthiness of mankind and their
rights to eternal blessings in the temple, would that come as evolution of
thought or as a direct revelation? When Emma Smith complained to Joseph about
her concerns regarding the use of tobacco at the school of prophets, Joseph
received a quick and decisive revelation. Would the Lord not provide a new
revelation to his prophet stating this change, just as he did with Joseph Smith,
especially if it was essential for temple blessings? If that revelation was
received, why was it never shared with the members? This evolution of though
could potentially be inspired by the Lord, though it does not appear that the
Lord did give directive that the church members or its leaders compel people to
live the word of wisdom. The closest thing we get by the turn of the century is
a “statement by Brigham Young that seemed to support the notion that the
Word of Wisdom was a commandment of God” (emphasis added).
Interpretations from Joseph F. Smith to Present Day
When the prohibition movement came to Utah, “the Latter-day
Saints were already working internally before 1906 to oppose the consumption of
alcoholic beverages and to interdict tea, coffee and tobacco among members. The
interpretations given by nineteenth-century leaders to the Word of Wisdom and
the then accepted view that Brigham Young had declared it a commandment
provided part of the basis for this emphasis in the Church” on prohibition.[x]
According to church leaders at that time, Brigham Youngs assertion that
following every word that proceeds from God’s mouth regarding the word of
wisdom became his declaration that the word of wisdom was a commandment and no
longer an invitation without obligation.
“Most vocal among General Authorities in his opposition to
the use of tea, coffee, alcohol and tobacco was Heber J. Grant who would become
one of the leaders of the state prohibition movement. He was particularly
outraged at the church members who served liquor and at some of the Twelve who
opposed the prohibition of liquor at Saltair. He was also concerned with the
indifference some of the General Authorities demonstrated to the feelings of
Protestant ministers who complained about the Saltair saloon.”[xi]
There was a definite change in church policy regarding
temple recommends during the presidency of Heber J. Grant. His passionate push
toward prohibition became the church’s focus of action. In the 1944 version of
the Handbook of Instructions for the church, it stated that temple recommends “are not to be issued to persons who do not
sustain the General Authorities of the Church; who are not honest tithepayers
or who do not undertake to become honest tithepayers, as distinguished from
part tithepayers or token payers; who do not observe the Word of Wisdom or
express a willingness to undertake to observe the Word of Wisdom; and who are
not otherwise fully worthy by believing in and living the gospel....”
President David O. McKay,
successor of President Grant, likewise held the same viewpoint. “I explained
that people who go to the temple should be full tithe payers and should observe
the Word of Wisdom; that as a matter of fact, it is a question of their
faith. Men who have a testimony of the Gospel and believe it should
contribute to it and if they fail to keep their promise to observe these
commandments the Bishop has a right to withhold the recommend, not wholly on
the failure to pay tithing but because of their lack of faith in the Gospel."[xii] Note that in less than
100 years (and really much earlier), there is a significant change in
philosophy from Brigham Young, who said that the word of wisdom should not be
considered a test of someone’s faithfulness, to Heber Grant and David McKay who
assert that a man’s faith is determined on how strictly they adhere to the
principles of the word of wisdom.
By 1960, not only could a Bishop withhold a temple recommend from a
person for their failure to live by the principles of the word of wisdom, but
his or her adherence to the word of wisdom was an official indication of
worthiness in church policy. Regarding temple recommends, the General Handbook
of Instruction in 1960 stated, "No person should receive a recommend for
any purpose unless he is believed to be worthy in every respect. Unworthiness
disqualifies him. Before issuing recommends bishops will assure themselves by
searching inquiry that the recipients are free from all kinds of immoral
practices; that they have no affiliation, in sympathy or otherwise, with any of
the apostate groups that are running counter to the established order of the
Church; that they sustain local and General Authorities of the Church; are full
tithepayers, or will covenant to become such; that they observe the Word of
Wisdom, abstaining from tea, coffee, tobacco, and liquor; and that they are
fully worthy as evidenced by their observance of the whole gospel law including
abiding by all conditions of their temple obligations." Clear guidelines appear
that implicate sin to drink tea, coffee, or “liquor”, or to use tobacco, which
by logical deduction means that by 1960 the church had officially taken the
position that the word of wisdom was no longer a principle, but was an absolute
law.
Today, the most recent copy of the Handbook of Instructions,
Handbook 2, states, “The Lord has commanded members to take care of their minds
and bodies. They should obey the Word of Wisdom, eat nutritious food, exercise
regularly, control their weight, and get adequate sleep. They should shun substances
or practices that abuse their bodies or minds and that could lead to
addiction.”
So, does this answer the question? Is the word
of wisdom a commandment or is it not a commandment? According to church policy,
it is a commandment that each person wanting a temple recommend is compelled to
live. Yet, historically there is no evidence that the Lord gave a new
revelation stating it should be mandatory or constrained, but instead the word
of the Lord, meaning his own words from his own voice, as dictated by Joseph
Smith, stands as it did when it was first received: a word of wisdom given “not
by commandment or constraint but by revelation and the word of wisdom
shewing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of
all saints in the last days given for a principle with promise.” So, if
the word of wisdom is a commandment, it is because of the evolution of thought over
a century of time beginning with “statement by Brigham Young that seemed to support
the notion that the Word of Wisdom was a commandment of God” has eclipsed the
dictation of the Lord to Joseph Smith.
Is the word of wisdom a commandment or an invitation? You decide....
[i]
Widtsoe, John A., comp. Discourses of Brigham Young. Salt Lake City: Deseret
Book, 1954.
[ii]
Ibid.
[iii] Watt, George D. et al., eds. Journal of
Discourses. London: Latter-Day Saints’ Book Depot, 1854-1886. Vol
9.
[iv] “Minutes
of First Presidency and Council of Twelve Meeting.” Journal History of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 5 May 1898. LDS Church
Archives. Cited in Alexander, Thomas G. "The Word of Wisdom: From
Principle to Requirement." Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought. Vol
14. No 3 (Autumn 1981): 78–88.
[v] Anderson,
Devery, ed. The Development of LDS Temple Worship, 1846-2000: A Documentary
History. Signature Books, 2011.
[vi] Alexander,
Thomas G. "The Word of Wisdom: From Principle to Requirement." Dialogue:
A Journal of Mormon Thought. Vol 14. No 3 (Autumn 1981): 78–88.
[vii] Watt, George D. et al., eds. Journal of Discourses. London: Latter-Day Saints’ Book
Depot, 1854-1886. Vol 13.
[viii]
Smith, Joseph F. Conference Report. October 1913.
[ix]
Grant, Heber J. Conference Report. April 1925.
[x] Alexander,
Thomas G. "The Word of Wisdom: From Principle to Requirement." Dialogue:
A Journal of Mormon Thought. Vol 14. No 3 (Autumn 1981): 78–88.
[xi]
Heber J. Grant Diary, June 30, 1898, August 17, 1900, and July 11, 1901. Cited
in Alexander, Thomas G. "The Word of Wisdom: From Principle to
Requirement." Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought. Vol 14.
No 3 (Autumn 1981): 78–88.