Is Fundamentalism Fundamental?

Is Fundamentalism Fundamental?

By Brian Hales

During the late 1930's and early 1940's, small groups of excommunicated members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints began to coalesce into a movement now described by some as AMormon Fundamentalism.@ The main complaint of these AFundamentalists@ against the Church involves polygamy, but other criticisms are repeatedly leveled at the Church by them. From the 21 volumes of Truth magazine, to the more recent publications by Ogden Kraut, such as 95 Theses, the same dozen or so themes recur over and over. They seem to be republished them every few years attempting to show that Church leaders have deviated from Fundamental doctrines and are presently in a state of apostasy.

It is unfortunate for Fundamentalists, as well as Latter-day Saints, that these publications have been allowed even a limited distribution. This is because their claims that the Church has strayed from the Fundamental doctrines restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith are entirely untrue. Since the death of Joseph Smith, the Lord has been constantly guiding His Church through continuous revelation:

We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. (Articles of Faith, 9; emphasis added.)

The prophets, seers and revelators of the Church have never departed from the Fundamental doctrines restored in this dispensation. The Church's teachings and activities today are completely consistent with the Fundamental doctrines given through the scriptures and prophets such as Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. However, as one compares these teachings and practices to those of the AMormon Fundamentalists@ the title of AFundamentalist@ seems to be misapplied. This conclusion becomes more apparent as we review and briefly compare the two. The tables below contrast the doctrines to be discussed.

Fundamental
Doctrine / Fundamentalist
Doctrine
Plural Marriage / Eternal Marriage
required for Exaltation / Plural Marriage
required for Exaltation
Priesthood
Conferral / Either method: ordain directly to the office or confer pries-thood, then ordain, accepted / Must confer priesthood first,
then ordain or it is not valid
Law of
Consecra-
tion / To be lived when commanded
under Church direction / Must be lived now without
Church participation
Missionary
Work / Will be with or without
purse and scrip as
commanded by the Lord / Must be without purse or scrip
Adam-God Theory / Christ is the Great High Priest, Adam next, then Noah / Adam is superior to Christ
One Mighty
and Strong
(D&C 85:7) / To establish the Church and Law of Consecration
in Independence, Jackson County, Missouri / Will "set in order":
1. Practice of plural marriage
2. Church finances
3. The redemption of Israel
4. Being lead to Independence, Missouri
5. Terms used to confer priesthood
6. Law of consecration
7. Vindication of polygamists with Church memberships restored
8. Polygamists given leadership positions
in the Church
etc.
Gathering of Israel / Gathering is to the Stakes
of Zion to receive
temple ordinances / Gathering must be to a specific physical location (though they
don't say where)

Fundamental
Doctrine / Fundamentalist
Doctrine
Priesthood:
Highest Office
Highest Councils
Ordinations
"One Man" (mentioned
in D&C 132) / Authority to act for God
Apostle
First Presidency and
Quorum of the Twelve
Must be known to the Church
Use of sealing authority
is always subject to him / Also is an organization
existing outside of the Church
High Priest Apostle
Council of Friends
(Priesthood Council)
Secret and unknown
are acceptable
Men may seal marriages independent of the "one man"[i]
Members and
Missionary
Work / All are commanded to preach the gospel / Not required if
attempting to live the
principle of plural marriage
Temple Work for
the Dead / All are commanded
to become "saviors
on mount Zion" / Not required if
attempting to live the
principle of plural marriage

PLURAL MARRIAGE

Modern polygamists claim that we must practice plural marriage today for exaltation in the world to come. It is true that the Lord permitted selected individuals and groups of saints to practice the principle of plural marriage in the past. Some were even commanded to do so. Elder Bruce R. McConkie has observed:

From such fragmentary scriptural records as are now available, we learn that the Lord did command some of his ancient saints to practice plural marriage. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacobamong others (D. & C. 132)conformed to this ennobling and exalting principle; the whole history of ancient Israel was one in which plurality of wives was a divinely accepted and approved order of matrimony. Those who entered this order at the Lord's command, and who kept the laws and conditions appertaining to it, have gained for themselves eternal exaltation in the highest heaven of the celestial world. (Mormon Doctrine, p. 578.)

It is also evident that some of the saints in this dispensation received a similar charge. The question arises: AIs plural marriage mandatory for salvation in the highest portion of the Celestial Kingdom?@ Elder McConkie counseled:

Plural marriage is not essential to salvation or exaltation. Nephi and his people were denied the power to have more than one wife and yet they could gain every blessing in eternity that the Lord ever offered to any people. In our day, the Lord summarized by revelation the whole doctrine of exaltation and predicated it upon the marriage of one man to one woman. (D. & C. 132:128.) Thereafter he added the principles relative to plurality of wives with the express stipulation that any such marriages would be valid only if authorized by the President of the Church. (D. & C. 132:7, 2966.)

All who pretend or assume to engage in plural marriage in this day, when the one holding the keys has withdrawn the power by which they are performed, are guilty of gross wickedness. (Mormon Doctrine, p. 578-579.)

Here Elder McConkie points out that the great prophets and their followers in the Book of Mormon were monogamists and yet they lived and died with a complete hope of exaltation based on their obedience during their earthly probations.

The Lord taught that the Book of Mormon contains the "fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ" (D&C 20:8-9) which was obeyed by the righteous monogamist men and women mentioned within its pages. Yet, we note that teachings in the Book of Mormon only condemn polygamy and give no hint that it could possibly be required for exaltation.

Elder McConkie referred to the most impressive evidence that plural marriage is not required for exaltation. It is found in D&C 132:19-20 where the Lord states:

And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them --- Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths -- then shall it be written in the Lamb's Book of Life... and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in al things, as hath been sealed upon their heads which glory shall be a fullness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever. Then shall they be gods, because they have no end. (D&C 132:19-20.)

Exaltation is having a "continuation of seeds forever and ever." This is promised if "a man marry a wife" (that is one man marries one wife) through proper authority. There is no demand for plural marriage. (These verses are seldom discussed in Fundamentalist literature.)

Fundamentalists usually claim that the Manifesto given by Wilford Woodruff was not inspired of the Lord. This too is in error. President Woodruff himself stated that the Manifesto was a revelation.[ii] He also taught concerning the Manifesto:

He [God] has told me exactly what to do...

[T]he God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do...

I wrote what the Lord told me to write.

Almighty God commanded me to do what I did.

[T]he Son of God felt disposed to have [the Manifesto] presented to the Church...[iii]

The Manifesto instructed the Saints that the Lord accepted their sacrifices associated with plural marriage and that such sacrifice was no longer required.

In their attempts to show that plural marriage is commanded today, Fundamentalists often quote the following:

Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.

For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.

And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God. (D&C 132:3-6.)

By interpreting "this law" and the "new and everlasting covenant" mentioned as meaning strictly plural marriage, Fundamentalists feel justified. Notwithstanding, a review of all 29 references to the "law" as found in D&C 132, as well as references to a "new and everlasting covenant" shows that neither can refer strictly to plural marriage. The Lord was in fact referring to the entire law of eternal marriage which includes the plurality of wives. That law is also called "the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage," which includes plural marriage, but is not limited to it.

It is very apparent from the language used in the verses quoted above, that once the Lord restores the knowledge of and authority for eternal marriages, those who are so privileged to understand must participate or "be damned." It is inaccurate, however, to teach that participation with plural marriage is required to avoid being "damned." Brigham Young taught this principle. Wilford Woodruff recorded in his journal dated September 24, 1871:

Pres. Young spoke 58 minutes. He said a man may embrace the Law of Celestial Marriage in his heart and not take the second wife and be justified before the Lord. (Wilford Woodruff Journals.)

Currently (1993) polygamy is neither commanded nor authorized. As we have shown, exaltation in the eternal worlds does not require participation with plural marriage during our mortal existence. This is the true and Fundamental doctrine.

PRIESTHOOD CONFERRAL

During the 1920's, Lorin Woolley remembered that President Taylor stated the following to him and others in 1886:

Among other things stated by President Taylor on this occasion was this, "I would be surprised if ten percent of those who claim to hold the Melchizedek priesthood will remain true and faithful to the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, at the time of the seventh president, and that there would be thousands that think they hold the priesthood at that time, but would not have it properly conferred upon them. (Pamphlet, 1886 Revelation, p.8.)

This statement is based on a long standing controversy in the Church over the proper method of transmitting Priesthood authority. During the administration of Joseph F. Smith (1901-1918), the general policy was to first confer the Priesthood and then ordain to the individual offices or callings within that Priesthood. During the presidency of Heber J. Grant (1918-1945), the official policy specified that ordination to office in the Priesthood was all that was really required and that conferring of the Priesthood was a redundant, if not presumptuous, part of the ordinance. George Albert Smith (1945-1951) cautiously removed specificity in the ordinances as a general policy, thereby permitting either form to be used. (See Deseret News, Dec. 27, 1947, also Truth 14:12.) When David 0. McKay assumed the Presidency in 1951 he reverted to the form followed during Joseph F. Smith's administration, which method is still being followed as the official Church policy.

Fundamentalist theology asserts that the Church has little or no priesthood authority, thus leaving the Fundamentalists believing they probably do. However, the inverse is actually the true Fundamental doctrine. The priesthood has been correctly transmitted from man to man since it was restored in 1829. Acceptable terminology has been used. Also, Fundamentalists today have no authority since they are nonmembers or have been excommunicated and can't derive any valid priesthood through their completely spurious lines of authority.

Regarding the two methods which have been implemented to transfer priesthood authority from one man to another, George Q. Cannon, a member of the First Presidency, wrote the following in 1894:

Ordaining to the Priesthood. We have been asked by several persons whether in ordaining a brother, it is right to confer the Priesthood first and then ordain him to the particular office to which he is called, or to directly ordain him to that office in the Priesthood. That is in ordaining a man an Elder, should the one officiating say: "I confer upon you the Melchizedek Priesthood and ordain you an Elder," or "I ordain you an Elder in the Melchizedek [Priesthood]" or whatever the office conferred may be?