a typical dialogue you know like a you know let's find common ground but what we wanted to do is get eight Jewish
scholars together with eight Latter-day Saint scholars and we were going to just
essentially give the mic to these Jewish scholars and say talk about whatever it is you want to talk about instead of
have us tell you you know where our commonalities are or what you should talk about and literally anything you
can talk about that's important to you as a a Jewish person or the Jewish community and then we'll have Latter Day
Saints come respond or engage those topics and try to see if there's
anything that a millennia, you know, two a religion of two millennia or more
can help us. Anything that we're overlooking, any struggles that they've already dealt with that we have.
And so we have all kinds of topics in here on on prophetic authority, which is what I did. And we've got I've got a
whole bunch of others on scripture, on prayer, on women in Judaism,
faith. So there's a lot of good essays in here, even on humor, humor within these two religions. So what I did is I
I approached another mentor, Peter Hos. He is he was the um department chair of
religious studies at Kraton or um at Case Western. So when I approached him, I said, "Hey, do you want to write on,"
he's a rabbitic scholar, so like the early rabbis, "Do you want to write on, you know, what authority is for Jews and
the rabbis?" And he wrote this thing up. And I kind of bounced off that and I said, "What if we applied those positions to a
Latter-day Saint in a Latter Day Saint context?" Obviously with, you know, theirs is let's debate. Let's, you know,
the rabbis are constantly debating and they're tapping into the their their scripture, the Old Testament as
um as authoritative text and then they're debating it and sometimes they call into question different words and say your interpretation needs more
nuance. And so that's what my article came out of and I and I titled it,
what's the church's official position on official positions grappling with truth and authority.
Um yeah and it's it's it's it's wild according to my students.
And so if you want we can just go through what section by section or just kind of well I mean let let's start off with
just what church the church has several times come out with an official position
on different I mean just last week what I don't know if I'd call this an official position maybe but they just came out on a a polygamy statement right
saying Joseph Smith practiced polygamy right they felt they needed to do that so they put that out there. So the official
position I would guess from that statement is that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. Okay. Um they've come out with
the topics in essays and uh talk on race and and and uh polygamy and and I'm not
sure what else now that I'm think of what they've done. Tons of Abraham. Yeah. Yeah. Book of Abraham, different things like that. So they have these
official positions. Are the official positions actually the doctrine necessarily of the church? And is that
doctrine in cement? Yeah. Okay. So here man that so what I
did at the beginning of this paper is I I tried to think of my students asking
these kinds of questions like the exact they would raise their hand in class and they would say just things like this you
know so and so in conference just said this or the church just released this or my mom said this and I don't know what you know to think anymore. So I noticed
that my students were asking this and so I thought of what I've been thinking for two decades about prophets and authority
and I'm like okay my students are are asking these questions or some students would actually challenge me some you know some missionary would come home and
say hey your scholarship on the New Testament on the Pharisees or whatever topic is wrong because
here's James Talmage in literally 120y old publication.
Mhm. So you know in their mind we got professor whoever and then we have James
Townage. So I I I started presenting this in class at the beginning of the semester
to try to help shape expectations or nuance it a little bit not in term not to force them into
my view because as you'll see everything on here is just literally the prophet's
own words about the limitations of their own authority or the boundaries of their own authority. And so that very question
is something that they my students ask is what okay what's the official position on um and you can name a
thousand different things guns communism Mitt Romney running and it's usually current like
issues like that and so but what I I started asking them so when you say the church's official position or our
doctrine what you're really asking and I will say I'm not putting words in your mouth but tell me are you really asking
what is God's position? any any organization can have an position, but what does it matter if the
church some committee correlation has an Emanuel? Is that the official position? And if if that's what you mean, does it
really matter what the church's position is? But if you mean what is God's position and then it's what's filtered through the prophets, okay, that
matters. Is that what you're asking? And they're like, well, in a sense, yeah, like I want to know with a with a
revealed church, what's God saying? Okay. Okay. That stakes are really raised with that kind of uh context.
Right. Right. Well, that sounds a little complicated. Yeah. Yeah, it's complicated. So, what I
did when I sat down to write this, I wanted to pull in a lot of different um
frameworks or models or whatever that some of my colleagues have pulled and say, okay,
this is this is the this is the criteria of how we know what we know and what's
truth and how how can we be confident in whatever question we're asking. And I
found a whole bunch of them. But here's let me just give you uh a context of let me give you four of them right
in and I just I'm kind of going through here. So in 2003 and this was published
this is Robert Millet the former dean of religious education 2003 and then he repeated this in a publication in 2007
and 2013 I mean Robert Millet has been everywhere and he proposed the following criteria
for establishing official positions. So he says that it's the four standard works
or official declarations and proclamation. So that's number one not or but and so number two is general
conference and other official gatherings by general church leaders. Number three is general handbook and
approved curriculum of the church and number four is teachings of the church today.
Teachings being uh what what does that what does that
include? So, so okay so we got standard works general conference throughout time proclamations handbook and now the
teachings today when prophets stand up in conference and it's you know or other official headings okay
and they give you know they give instruction okay so in the very so he published this and then the very next issue of this journal
Lloyd Ericson who's the the editor for Greg Kofford books Mhm. He he writes an article saying why
are these four the criteria? He didn't state why it's these four in the criteria and why not other things. And
they had a back and forth over the next 5 years in print on this very issue and
it just evolved into um you're a heretic and you know whatever they they solve the issue.
Okay. So in 2016 we have three BYU religious education professors who
published an essay on the same thing and they say these these uh what do they have three four these are how we know
that a position is authoritative and you know we can take it to the bank. Okay, so number one is scripture and better
yet repeated occurrences within scripture, which is interesting because what if you
have one specific place? Well, the witness of two or three out of the witness of two or three, right?
Uh yeah. Right. So there's that. Okay. The united voice of the current brethren.
United voice. Uh number three, current and continuously taught teachings of general authorities and general officers
in their official capacity. See how there's so many nuances all over his voice? Yeah. That one's
malleable to some degree, it seems. Oh, for sure. Yeah. Yeah. And number four, recent church publications or
statements. Okay. Again, when we're talking about recent and you know, common and
repeated, certainly it's the institutional. If somebody says, "What does the institution of the church
teach?" You know, we're they're giving their students and other readers a a way
to say, "Here's what we teach. Here's what we emphasize." If we're talking about another everybody gets a planet or you know these kind of exaggerated
claims we can say and we have that we don't really emphasize that it's not something it's kind of a strange obscure
you know frontier doctrine. Mhm. Um but in some sense it's it's reality.
It's just the way we word it is not that way. Mhm. Right. Okay. We have Michael Goodman. Mike
Goodman is another BYU religion professor a few years later and he wrote the same paper as these others and he
said number one this is trying to establish doctrine not necessarily official positions because there could
be policy positions this is doctrine for him doctrine is like the the most prominent um I don't know what elite or
I don't know what's the truth truth like the very few things you can absolutely say so we're saying God
Christ and the atonement you know there's very few and so He says this is true. True
doctrine is eternal and unchanging. So that's so it's got to be eternal and unchanging.
Well, I don't know how we know that. I'm just Well, it's true and unchanging until it
changes, right? And by the way, so your your audience by past experience is a little
feisty. Some Yeah. Right. Some of the most I just want to tell everybody this is just an intellectual
exercise for me. I don't want you somebody try to cram me into some box and be like, is he for this or that? I'm just
Yeah, I'm just positing both sides. Okay. So, number two, true doctrine is taught by the united voice of the
brethren. There's it again, that united voice. What does that mean? If two prophets have taught something, President Kimell
and President Nelson on major things, but nobody else has really delved into it. Is that the united voice? I don't
know. Number three, true doctrine is salvific. In other words, it's essential for salvation.
Um, you know, that makes sense. Yeah. So, he he posits that and he talks about it often. Um, another one, Scott
Woodward, another another publication, BYU, Idaho, religious education professor, and I'll just run through
these, is um, he says, "Does the teaching accord with the repeated teachings of scripture? Is the teaching
consistent or unitedly proclaimed by the apostles? Is the teaching confirmed by the Holy Spirit?"
Um, okay. Okay. So that I I've had discussions with him that's very difficult. I mean how many how many
people have left the church and and swiped away pulled out you know thousands of people started a new church.
Mhm. By using the Holy Spirit. Mhm. So that's and we have Elder Holland and
others Elder Oaks saying that's very difficult. Revelation the Holy Spirit is very difficult. So that already you know
my students are like yeah it's hard. What do you mean difficult? because it's it's not easily quantifiable.
Yeah. I mean, it will assault Elder Holland when he was asked um about the
2015 policy of LGBT children on BYU campus.
No, right. Right. Right. That was reversed. It was reversed. Yeah. So, he was I I think this was setting
was him being asked about that and he said, "Look, Paul saw through glass darkly. Revelation is difficult. It
comes in its es and flows. you have to think through it. 90% of information or inspiration is information. Like all
those things we've heard and um Elder Iring and Elder Oaks, the same thing. Every time there's a CES fireside and
there's a question, a Q&A, literally every time that I've I've tried to track this, every time they have one of those,
somebody asks, "How do I know if it's a spirit or it's my own mind?" And then somebody gives an answer and the answer is always, "Yeah, it's
difficult." And I try to focus on this. There's so many different answers. Okay.
By that many people asking that and that many answers being given, we know it's very very difficult. So that being one
of the three things that Scott Woodward said, we can be sure it's doctrine that already as hard work. I mean there it's
not a problem to have to work hard at this, but that's that's the reality. Okay. So this is why my students have a
tough time to with this. Okay. So I I laid it all out and then I wanted to give a few examples of
uh of how this plays out with certain doctrines. So we've got three we can talk about. We've got the authority of
prophets. We have the word of wisdom and uh the nature of God.
Right? So with authority of prophets, the central question that is asked is
where is the is the primacy of prophets come in versus scripture? Okay. Is it is
the authoritative voice scripture or prophets? Here's a question a reflective question
on that. Do you think most people create that value system? Right. It's I
do. I I I put scriptures first. Yeah. Okay. I I put scriptures first and I think
other people would put the prophet first. Because sometimes they're not always the
same because I'll look at something, I'll say, "Wait a minute here. I'm reading the scriptures because I I read the scriptures a lot. So I see those
two, three witnesses. I see, you know, four, five, six, seven different places that something written and I'm like,
well, wait a minute. I don't know if I understand that. I'm not sure that's something I might have to put on the shelf,
right? Yeah. So, so let's let's take both of those schools of thought and and show
what they're saying because they might be there might be people just saying, okay, uh there might be a superficial
category and they're trying to, you know, pit profits. Maybe there's not a problem, but
um but let's let's see what they say. So in uh I got a couple examples here in 1897 you have Wilfrid Woodruff relaying
a story about Brigham Y. Young who said and everybody knows this when compared so Brigham Y. Young stands up and he
said when compared with living oracles those books for any of the scriptures are nothing to me. I would rather have
the living oracles and all the writings in the books remember that President Benson 1980 he says beware of
those who pit the dead prophets against the living prophets for the living prophets always take precedent. I hear people referencing that one a
lot. Yeah. And then 1916 we have Orson F. Whitney said and this is actually repeated by
Lawrence C. Dunn in 1976. He says the latter saints do not do things because they happen to be printed in a book i.e.
scripture right? They do not do things because God told the Jews to do them i.e. the Bible. They do not do things and there's a whole
sentence essentially because he gave he told the Nephites to do them. So the Bible and Book of Mormon. We don't do those things because he told nations to
do this. Whatever is done in the church is because God speaking from heaven in our day has commanded his church to do
it. No book presides over this church and no book lies at its foundation. I mean that's that sounds
well and that's the exact opposite of what you get say with uh solos scrutura right that's that's
that is the authority period is going for for you know Protestants for example it's it's the Bible is the
authority that's that's one way we're very different from them. Yeah. Very different. Yeah. And but there's another
school of thought. Yes. For Latter Day Saints. Um but before you even get there along
those lines of which comes first and you have to pay attention to either prophets or scripture first if there's a contradiction. There's also this line of
thinking that one must always follow the prophet at all times. So we have again
President Benson if there's ever a conflict between earthly knowledge and the words of the prophets you stand with
the prophet. And everybody's heard this. and and you'll be blessed in time vindicate you. Right. Um we've got Elder
Bednar 2005. He sees this is a BYU devotional. So again, is this official?
This is not conference like people would debate. But you have a a prophet standing up giving at at the church
institution. And he says he he stressed that the Latter-day Saints must promptly quote promptly and quietly obey the
council of the prophet in all things and at all times. So I mean what what's it's never really
qualified though like what do you mean all things and all times in in every statement on civic matters and politics
and related to the family and finances. Mary G. Romney used to talk all about right Mary G. Romney was married. Um or
and NL Tan or one of those one for the money that pamphlet talking about finances um and all kinds of different
things, you know. So they never state really, you know, it's just sort of a it's a
it's a talking point that's powerful and that people nod their head and they generally understand, yeah, we we have prophets and we follow them, but you
fall to it to a conclusion or the rubber hits the road. What are we talking about? Um so the counternarrative
and everybody's heard some of these quotes too although some of them are are quite radical. So you have President Harold B. Lee and Joseph Fielding Smith
big names in the church and both of them said that if a prophet teaches anything that's out of harmony with the the
revelations referring to scripture then every member is duty bound to reject it. And that's actually quote he said if a
prophet writes something which is out of harmony of the revelations then every member of the church is duty bound to rejected. I mean that's radical compared
to like what we learn as growing up in seminary. Yeah. What we're taught but that's
that already just right there adds a problem and we'll see when we get to like the word of wisdom and other things
because if I'll I'll wait till we get there but I'll I'll remind us of that quote. Mhm.
Uh let's see. Elder Makoni, we could go on forever. These are just a few examples, but Elder Manki, prophets, this is in Mormon doctrine, prophets do
not rank with the standard works. It's the exact opposite. Elder Oaks in
October 2019 said, "Not every statement made by a church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes
doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often
often represents a personal though well-considered opinion, but is not meant to be binding." That word binding
is used a lot by earlier brethren, 20th century brethren. Binding
um meaning that it is um a presupposition to to to obedience.
Exactly. You know, Larry saying what's binding upon me? Well, um even Joseph FSmith
um there's a there's a part in here and if we don't get to it, I can just mention now where he Brigham Young has
certain things that he teaches about God. Orson Pratt doesn't agree with it. Everybody sides with Brigham Y. Young
except Orson Pratt. And by within 15 years of Brigham Young's death, Joseph F. Smith is saying he he was he was
speaking as a man and we reject all of it. All of that, you know, doctrine of him,
you know, of the nature of God. Um and he and then what he said was the
how we know that he was speaking as a man is that his position was not brought to the councils presented to the council
of the church and voted on by the the body of the church you know and and accepted
added into the canon so to speak. Okay. Well, we don't see that hardly ever. I mean the last do you know when
the last time if I if I remember the last time that happened or in conference like we raise our hand to accept
something something new well let's see it would be uh the last I can think of are two major
things that would have been you've got the uh well you've got the removal of the lectures of faith I don't know if that
was from the DNC if that was something that was brought in and voted on and that would have been 19
or something 197 something like that early 1919 wasn't it that early. Was it later or was it 194?
I was thinking so what I was thinking about is 1979 when they they it was the
quad that they changed the scriptures to the new church edition and I for some reason I thought they took that out
then. No, the lectures it was way early. It was way early. Yeah. Yeah. Because that was the doctrine of doctrine of covenants.
All right. Was lectures on faith. That's right. And then the other one was uh where they would have accepted uh
I don't know. How about the proclamations? Are those ever accepted? I don't think so. No. No. Yeah. So I mean it's been 45 years
since we did that last. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So let's take um let's say take
the word of wisdom as another example and then maybe we can move on to like how you and I or how I you know
solve this issue when we just have these stark contrasts among prophets even though we're being
led by revelation. Mhm. Okay. And then this one is always I tried to so when I first wrote this
article I had a friend he he read it and he says I will pay you money not to publish this. I'll pay you money and
because I was just using the most um the best examples most provocative examples
and it probably would have got me in trouble just by the fact that I was he's like you can't let's just not use these
and let's use so I used the word of wisdom which the stakes are lower you know I'm still important but
but here's here's what I found. So over 80 times between 1908 and 2002,
Latterday Saints were counseledled not to drink caffeine, not on coffee. Caffeine, not to consume
Mhm. caffeine. And when I saw that, what's the what's the what's the year range again? That 1908 to 2002.
2002 there was something mentioned on caffeine. Right. Right. Yeah. Wow. So what I did is I went to Gospel Link
and I uh I think it was Gospel Link. Anybody a lot of people I've got gospel. you can go and you can search across all
kinds of different publications and I, you know, selected which ones I wanted and then I just I plowed through and I
counted them all up. But 80 times shows that this is repeated across time. You know, I I measured up
against what my my colleague friends have used and I'm like, okay, so 80 times.
Now, the the problem is is that caffeinated drinks are now offered in church own facilities again at BYU.
Again, I don't I don't really care. I'm not I don't want your audience to say, "Oh, he's a proponent of this or that."
I'm just this just is the case. But what was fascinating is when this was in the press,
there were certain PR people of the church that were trying to respond to it. And so I'm listening like this is
going to be very fascinating on why they, you know, what rationale they use.
And one of them said that this is,
let's see, where is it? They said the doctrine caffeine is not mentioned in Doctrine Covenants 89.
Mhm. Okay. So, that's fascinating because they're taking they're citing they're taking the revelation that's literal and
they're saying this is off the table or or it's subject to discussion and debate
just like our Jewish friends because it's not mentioned in the word of wisdom.
Okay. The reason why that's fascinating is because they're siding with scripture over prophets. Right now, the words the
word of wisdom itself in the 1830s was as you know a piece of wisdom for the
temporal salvation of the saints as it says and in verse two not by commandment or by constraint.
Mhm. Now if if you were a bishop and I came
in and you you and you know you said you asked me the question you know do you
understand and obey the word of wisdom? And I said, 'Yeah, I do. And and we got in discussion about it. And I said, and
I I drink beer, just one every night for dinner. Um
and I eat a ton of meat. Mhm. Like ridiculous amount, like every meal. What would you say? You I mean, you
probably wouldn't a typical bishop would say, "Well, I don't know about the meat. That doesn't seem like a problem." But your beer, that's a problem.
Yeah, that's a problem. Yeah. Okay. Well, the revelation allows for beer but not very much meat. How do we
know that? Because in the history and we have our scholars um Steven Harper and others have written about this
and mild barley drink, mild meaning versus strong drink, low alcohol content. Mild barley drink,
that's beer. So, it wasn't a problem for Joseph Smith when he went to Frederick Moser's store
and drank a beer. Bought a beer from his store and drank it. It also wasn't a problem that he drank wine and took wine
into Carthage and they said it's it wasn't just for sacrament purposes in there. They needed to calm their nerves.
And I think in my memory he told George A. Smith, one of my historian scholar
friends can look it up or we can look it up. George George A. Smith, he says, "You're too uptight and highrung. You
need to get drunk." So, there's a few of these, you know, uh, things in our
history that Well, in that case, then you've got a double whammy because you've got both a
prophet and you've got the revelation and and neither one of them
point those out specifically. Right. Right. Yeah. They're not a commandment. So, that for, you know, the saints at that day, which
was what is worthiness and what, you know, how do we live as saint? However, it because of Brigham Young and Hebrew
J. aunt who made it a commandment. Now church members wouldn't sip any kind of
alcohol and it's a problem, you know, but and so there lies the problem. So we
have this appeal to canonized revelation
at some point and then at other times we're appealing to prophets. Okay. So whi which is it? Do we follow prophets
or do we follow scripture? Mhm. Um and so that was very telling when
when the PR people said, you know, they they don't caffeine isn't mentioned in the revelation. Therefore, it's up for debate. Okay. Well, marijuana is not
mentioned. A whole host of other things aren't mentioned as harm and and people say, yeah, but the word of wisdom is
extended by voices of the prophets as a health code and we avoid all harmful
substances. Well, we can debate about that because there's sugar and other things that are
wreaking havoc on our population and leading all kinds of heart disease and death and everything else. Definitely. Yes.
U so I don't you know we don't we can just use those two as an example. There's the nature of God which I talked about a little bit. Um especially that
Joseph F. Smith you know here's how we know Brigham Y. Young even though Brigham Young said this was revealed to
me Joseph F. Smith is saying it wasn't a revelation. He didn't bring it forward
to You're talking about the Adam God theory. The Adam God. Yeah.
So now, Greg, what do we do with this? What do we how how do you how would you deal
with this kind of thing? And how do I deal with it? Um, so here's a little anecdote. I can't remember if I put it
in this paper or not. So, I was at a a family gathering like in 2001 or
whatever. My wife's side of the family and I was sitting there rocking one of my kids in this big swing and there was
all kinds of people milling around and my wife's aunt couple of her aunts were to my right and they were talking about
COVID and all that all that stuff and whether we should get the vaccine which now since then has become a huge it you
know issue for both sides. Mhm. Um, somebody made the comment, one of our ants made the comment and said,
well, the prophet said, "Get the vaccine. Case closed. It's done. We get
the vaccine." Mhm. And then I having just written this paper, this book was published in 2001,
actually, same time. Um, and I said, "So, wait, wait, wait. 2021." 21 2021.
So, I said, "Wait, did Prophet Nelson say that or did President Nelson say
that?" And they both turn around. I have a good relationship with them, but they both rolled their eyes like, "Oh,
liberal professors or whatever, you know." So, I'm just I'm like I'm just saying like there's a difference and
it's okay. You do whatever you want, but to you know, you just you sound as
dogmatic, you know, and people can use this to bludgeon or to browbeat people
into doing what you want them to do by appealing to a prophet in a certain context,
you know. And she wasn't having it. She's like, "I don't care. I'm I'm doing it. The prophet said it. Well, there's a
problem with that. Well, that's the that brings up another point because you have a prophet that
gives advice to to be a good citizen, I think it was, and and to get the get the
the vaccine, right? Um mostly what someone let's say for
example, someone says, "Well, I have prayed for about it. I don't feel that I should take it." um the most they should
it shouldn't even be this but the most they would likely deal with is maybe like some shaming from others right
but once there are times where that got into policy in wards and stakes
where uh you may you may get released from your calling you may all these different things start
happening because the prophet said this and so now you've got an actual execution of of the prophet's words put
down through a priesthood chain where there actually is
there are ramifications for for your decision of whether you're going to follow the prophet in that
example or or not. Yeah, for sure. And even even um I somebody posted on on uh social media a
like a meme thing with with the text in President Nelson's face and they quoted his words some people
have guns who shouldn't have who shouldn't have guns or something like that. Some people have gotten on their
hands on guns who shouldn't have them. I don't something like that posted on there. The prophet speaks or
the prophet has spoken. The thinking has been done. Right. And we'll get to that that saying
because yes, people use this uh for their positions or for their identity politics.
Mhm. So now we got to get to how I tried to figure this out for me and then when I'm
presenting to my students like I tell them how do you wrestle with this? You could just take the view of you know
like well this is all complicated and so I'm just going to follow what the prophets say and there's nothing wrong with that. others. I said, "But what
about the person sitting next to you?" If theirs is, "Well, prophets see
through glass darkly. Prophets have made mistakes. I'm not just going to criticize them and reject
everything, but I want to go through this exercise, intellectual exercise based on the prophet's own words
and come up with my own my own position. What do you guys feel about that?" You
know, I ask my class and we have that debate. And then I show these kinds of quotes to this is it doesn't it kind of
humanizes the prophets but again I'm trying to give them experiences from the
prophet's own lives. So here's Elder Maki and these is just stuff I've gathered over the years and he said
though general authorities are authorities in the sense of having power to administer church affairs. They may
or may not be authorities in the sense of doctrinal knowledge or the receipt of the prompings of the spirit. Wow. I mean
that's In other in other words, us as as a social scientist, I'm a train, you know,
I have degrees in both social sciences and also uh early Judaism and Bible. So the social science person in me, you
know, thinks um in those terms of okay,
um that's very interesting. If you take a random sample of the people in the church and you take the brethren, would
the same spectrum exist in terms of people who are smarter or who know more
or have certain areas of expertise? Probably. But members wouldn't say that.
They'd say, "No, that's that doesn't sound right to me." But that's but that's his that's his
experience. And then he say he he further explained that being called into the apostilhip adds little knowledge or power of discernment to an individual.
Elder Boyd K. Hacker at one point gave a talk and he said that unless a church leader and he says in the case of the
bishops, state uh state council members, state presidents, regional representatives
and I don't know if he said prophets, probably even possible he said church leaders and he went all the way through all of them. He says unless they knew
the fundamental principles of the gospel before their call, they will scarcely have time to learn them along the way.
So we be very busy. So then my students start thinking, okay, um they're humans,
you know. I show I throw up um Elder Ballard's comment that I'll show in a minute. He's like, people expect too
much of us. We're authorities, general authorities, but we're not authorities in general, right? Um you have George
Cuchanan. The people who have embraced this gospel have had to think for themselves. It is no light matter to
become a Mormon. Do not, he's speaking to a group of um
the priesthood, right? Do not, brethren, put your trust in man through though he be a bishop, an apostle, or a president.
If you do, they will fail you at some point some time or place or seem to fail you. But if we lean on God, he will
never fail us. When men and women depend on God alone and trust in him alone, their faith will not be shaken if the
highest in the church should step aside. Perhaps it is his own design that faults
and weaknesses should appear in high places in order that his saints may learn to trust in him and not in any man or woman. So again, that's when I when I
share this with my students. I've been thinking about this stuff for two decades. Mhm. But some of my students have sent me emails like that, I'm just totally like
worried about dissonance with this. Yeah. It's it's because see I love that
quote. Yeah. Because I've been through that fire several several times, right? And so
it's the problem is is if people have not gone through that themselves and they hear something like that their
first reaction and it's natural is well that's a sign of apostasy right you know
you no you you that's a sign of apostasy but actually I mean I I have a hard time believing
that we aren't supposed to think for ourselves that we're not supposed to grow for ourselves. I mean, that's that
the whole idea of uh I I think what we do sometimes in in the church, and I
will say I believe because I've lived for a few years in in Utah and and I
think that there's especially in the inner mountain west, I think that there is a culture of, you know, when Jesus
says that uh the Sabbath was made for man and not man
for the Sabbath. I feel that that is kind of a a direct reference in a sense to the church also
the same idea. Interesting. Yeah. Right. It's like the church, you're not made for the church,
right? The church was made for you and your families, right? And and so I think that
if you think that you're made for the church, then I think that you take a position of it. It's almost like you're
on autopilot, right? and and if it's the other way around
then you say then you've got to deal with okay I have to think for myself
uh I have to re respect and reverence you know if the authorities
and I have to if I disagree I have to learn to still sustain
and that's a that could be difficult for some people it can be very difficult yeah but and that sounds very rational and logical to
me and it sounds healthy And I think a lot of people would say that, but then when push comes to shove,
sometimes they'll use exaggerated exaggerated language just like, you know, with the meme when the prophet
prophet has spoken, thinking has been done. Well, what's interesting is that comes from the 1940s.
Some somebody had said that in the improvement era. The editor put that in there. When our leaders speak, the
thinking has been done. Well, George Albert Smith, who was the the president of the church at the time, didn't like
that and wrote a letter to the editor, and he said that even to imply that
members of the church should not do their own thinking is grossly to misrepresent position of the church, the
ideal of the church. And so that and I I'm always sharing that with people. I
have a handy and I just share it. And again, it just throws in a little cognitive distance. But one time when I
shared this in um a gospel doctrine class just talking about you know authority and how we go about thinking
and doing somebody almost and my students do this sometimes they raise their hand. Yeah but what about doctrine
covenants one se uh section 138 my word shall not pass away but shall be
fulfilled. Remember that and then it says whether by my known voice or the voice of my servants it is the same. So people say okay it's as if
God said it but that's not what the section says. It doesn't say anything these prophets say. And by the way, it
doesn't say prophets. It says my servants. And that word servants is appears over
uh like 350 times in the doctrine of covenants. Numerous times is not referring to somebody who is a prophet.
All kinds of missionaries and other people. What's it saying is that God's prophecies will be fulfilled whether he
utters them sometimes through a prophet or whether somebody else utters them, receives his spirit and utters them. If
it's something that's prophetic, it will be, you know, it'll be fulfilled. It's vastly different than what
interesting. Yeah. Latter day saints Yeah. You know, we we pluck these scriptures out. We put them in this context. Yeah.
Right. And I think the the last and this is very fascinating. The last example that
I use to try to just help myself or my students think through this is President
Ezra Tapbenson in the 1980 BYU devotional. I asked my father about this. I think he graduated in ' 84
and he was there before and after his mission right during this time with the 14 fundamentals of the prophet and
there's all kinds of other uh crazy like amazing talks by Hugh nibbley rar makoni
during this time period well if you remember most of the letter most latter
saints know that talk because it been used over and over again well what he said in that talk is that the living prophet is more vital to us than the
standard works he said the prophet will never lead the church astray the prophet is not required to have These are quotes. The prophet is not required to
have any particular training, earthly training or diplomas to speak on any subject on any matter at any time. And
the prophet may well advise on civic matters. You know, that's and that's been used
all the time because it just it just lays it down. We are a church of prophets.
Okay. Well, the problem was is that President Kimell, according to his son, who had all access to his papers and
journals and wrote his biography. According to President Kimell, he hated that and made him made him nervous. And
he actually called President Benson into a meeting with the 12 and the other
leaders to explain himself and even apologize according to President Kimell's son on two different occasions. And the
reports that some were not satisfied with his with his rationale and his his doctrine. And so some people say, "Yeah,
but that those are closed papers. We don't know what President Kimell's son is saying because clearly they haven't I
mean, it's still circulating. It's still all over the place." Mhm. But we do have on record is that when
that happened, the PR uh person, his name is
uh his name is Don Leafarve, you know, I don't he's he's the first presidency
spokesperson at the time and he commented the press that this is simply not true that the president's word is law on all issues.
It it caused a lot of angst in national media and everybody, you know, commenting on this.
So then um we get quotes and
I imagine people who watch this online or others that I have uh discussions with have said this to me before like
yeah but you're just kind of bouncing through picking quotes. Yeah. I mean, we don't really have time to go through this whole thing. And so,
I'm just kind of giving highlights and bouncing quote like quote mining, but there's a lot of nuance to all this
and setting it up, but what we see is a trajectory of prophets
saying certain things and trying to rein back in overstatements. You know, you have 2017 Elder Ballard
um he said, this is where I referenced it before. He says, "I'm a general authority, but that doesn't make me an
authority in general. My calling and life's experiences allow me to respond to certain types of questions. There are
other types of questions that require an expert in a specific subject matter. This is exactly what I do when I need an
answer to such questions. I seek others, including those with degrees and expertise in such fields. I've gotten
emails from the first presidency and the 12 secretaries that they need help pulling together something like prompts
for their discussions in the temple on Thursday or pulling research together on what other religions say you know just
different talking points or they'll they've called some of my colleagues to get you know some of some discussion or
some clarification on a Greek word or something they're they're putting in there many many times okay they should so they have they've reached out
and and asked a certain questions. But he says, "This is exactly what I do when I need an answer to questions. I seek
others um with degrees expertise. I worry sometimes that members expect too much from church leaders and teachers,
expecting them to be experts in subjects well beyond their duties and responsibilities.
Our duty as as apostles, our primary duty is to build up the church, teach the doctrines of Christ, and help those
in need of our help." And then he echoed the same thing in um both 2015 talk and
2017. So like four or five different talks. Um and at so at that point I just I talk to
my students about okay so next time and I actually run a poll. This is fascinating. I run a poll after this whole discussion. I run a poll and I say
I I have them close their eyes, you know, raise your hand if if you had one meeting. Um, pick any
non-doctrinal issue and just some scriptural interpretation or some historical question that you need an
answer to. Would you meet with a scholar who you knew study that thing or would you meet with an apostle? Raise your
hand scholar. Raise your hand apostle. Overwhelmingly, raise your hand. Meet with an apostle. Even the apostle himself said they
expect I just had showed them you know this is sort of an experiment like he just he just told them uh we're not
authorities on everything we seek advice and scholarship from others.
So it's fascinating fascinating what happens and then I then I go on and talk about
um you know different issues uh the prophets say. So, I'm I'm curious what you like how we
solve this issue, you know, because we have we have different contradictions or schools of thought and we have
overstatements and we have some prophets pulling it back. But regardless of how messy I've made it in this article, we
still have to grapple with the subtitle of the paper is grapple with truth and authority. And you know, my kids are
still young. My oldest is going into her senior year and eventually they're not going to they're eventually going to care about this stuff. Like we we talk
about some of these things, but they're into football and baseball and volleyball and stuff like that. Eventually they're going to start to go
on missions or come into these classes or marry somebody who's got issues with the church or different doctrines
and we're going to have to have these discussions. Um so I mean I'm just curious how we
work through this. Like what would what do you do? Well, now that's where I would need to probably go get an expert on this, but I
I I here's what I I would say that we I
think that the church I mean everyone but I think that understanding in the church as members of the church is one
of the beauties about it is that we are participants in pretty much everything and we need to look at it that way.
Yeah. Right. It's we are not just here to believe in Christ and and that's it. I
think that we're part of the work. We we are part of we even as sustaining is
part of truth and authority. Right. Right. You can't you you actually have to give authority
in that regard. you're giving authority to those individuals and sustaining them and and I mean, yeah, it's God-given,
but it's the same way we give glory to God. I mean, you're God's getting the glory
for from us in a sense by our participation in our worship of him. That's right. And so, I think it's the same way with
truth. And we've got to be able to figure that out for self. And maybe that's why it's kind of nebulous. That's
kind of why it's kind of messy. And you've got to be able to think and learn and and maybe be driven to some degree
beyond the prophet's words into a place where you have a relationship with God and you know how to work with the
spirit. Right? And I I I don't know. I grapple
with this all the time. I I I do not always agree with what is said from the
highest levels in the church. That's okay. I don't, you know, I maybe I'm
wrong and uh but I'm going to go to the
scriptures. If I've got a question on things, I'm going to read that. I'm going to go maybe even look at dead dead
prophets and see what they've said. And then I've got to come up with an understanding myself. So I think all of
these things are, you know, maybe the solution is you pull from all of these things. You've got to
be able to pull from all of these sources. Yeah, exactly. And that's really the conclusion that I came to and I'm still
kind of working through it, but um I make the case towards the end. This just
this is my own based on all this everything I've been thinking about for two decades and pulling it in is and
tell me if you think this is too um too extreme. I have a friend who says that's
that's you're you're minimizing you're putting the prophets in too small of a box but that's just the implication of all
of this and mine is okay the prophets are stewards of the church the
institution and so anything they say in regards to how the church is run like no
questions asked 100%. In other words, how should what kind of callings should
bishops, you know, what's the structure of sacrament meeting? What what kind of callings? How are baptisms run? All the
ordinances like all all that stuff like it has to pertains to the the church structure and the church meetings and
like that's and that's they're stewards of it. Y
um and the other role is that they are stewards of the ordinances, right? But
they have the keys to make sure they're guardians of the ordinances. This is how the ordinances should be run. This has
to have proper authority. And so again, with the ordinances, any way it says in the handbook, this is how
you do it. Fine. Great. Okay. But what about anything outside of nonrevelatory
things that have, you know, non-revelatory matters or matters of the church? So I say here and toward the end
I said consulting profits on nonrevolatory matters or on issues that fall outside of institutional policies
and functions is like asking a lawyer for medical advice or medical profession for legal advice.
You know that means tongue and cheek but I mean I say yes someone might argue that my criterion for using scholarship
science and reason to discover truth or establish personal personal official positions is also flawed. After all, how
many scholars and scientists have gotten it wrong? I mean, yes, I say that's true. We've gotten it wrong, but so have
prophets on occasion. Everybody gets it wrong sometimes and everybody including
therapists and scholars and prophets and others have gotten it right. you know, when they're talking about social issues with the family and how to raise your
kids, there's all So, my position is if really in my head is if if there's ever
a case where two prophets contradict us, there's a school of thought and there's a contradiction, it's it it opens it up
for me to then step in and grapple with it and come to my own conclusion.
Yeah. And where I thought you were going to go with that, I think that's right. But I I think if you've also divided up
in a way where you said okay the prophet the brethren and the right they're all stewards of the church
um and sure of the members too but I once if something applies to what I am
supposed to believe in or not or applies to my family
that's where I will will probably really have to internalize something.
Yeah. Yeah. Of course. Right. It's like, yeah, like you said, you know, the way the ordinances are, the the the running of the church and
what what countries they're going into, what whatever else, right? I I have nothing to do with that, but once it applies to me,
Mhm. Well, I have stewardship, too, right? I have a stewardship over my own soul. I
have a stewardship over my family, right? I have stewardship over my callings.
So, that means I need to take responsibility. And if I I have to I
have to take responsibility for that. So I have to go through everything here, understand it, believe it.
All right. In order to execute it. Otherwise, I I'm not fulfilling my stewardship. That's right. I mean, so I mean, if you
if you lived in California during the Prop 8 because we've heard all kinds of stories about middle management type
callings, bishops, state presence. So, you know, this is not a shot at the brethren, but it's there's all kinds of
stories coming out where the brethren did want those saints to work on that
and try to get the the, you know, the citizens of California to vote one way, right? But
there's been stories where people said, "I don't want to participate. I don't agree or whatever if they're on one side of the political
and so I'm not going to go door to door. I'm I'm not going to put in my time. I'm not going to donate money or go to the call centers." Some of those people were
reprimanded. I'm going to take your temperament in a way. Yeah. Same thing as co it's the same. Yeah. Yeah. Co. So, um there is there has been
leadership abuse a little bit. Like I'm not saying it's widespread. There has been abuse and I I
think with with how my brain works and my sort of rugged, you know, just like
let me figure it out personality. This really came came about by me trying to
to put on paper something that I could almost could be my my my mission
statement for how I um am a Latter-day Saint and to guard against potential
abuse from leaders if that ever happened like it's happening less and less. It's you it's usually the more old school
like Makoni Latter Day Saint bishops who are just like they had a certain way about them
but it happens enough and there's circulating stories enough and I wanted to know what what is
expected of me as a Latter Day Saint and what is binding upon me and maybe those questions are too scientific you know
what what can we take to the bank you know what's you know one way or the other I want to know what's fact and
what's up for debate and maybe that's too scientific but that's how my brain works like just tell me what
what is and I and I'll I'll I'll go with it. Yeah. You know. Well, Trevan, really appreciate that. I
think it's a great topic. It is uh spiritual chewing gum that I think
everybody should take a bite of and and go through to figure this out because I think you've got to have introspection
on what do you believe? Why do you believe it? Where what authority are you following? Why do you follow it? Those
are questions that you do have a stewardship over and and I think that we all need to be involved as participants
not as observers. So anyway, really appreciate your time. Well, thanks for having me.
