Historian osuus teologiassa
Perhaps the main barrier to understanding the development of Mormon
theology is an underlying assumption by most Church members that
there is a cumulative unity of doctrine. Mormons seem to believe
that particular doctrines develop consistently, that ideas build
on each other in hierarchical fashion. As a result, older revelations
are interpreted by referring to current doctrinal positions. Thus,
most members would suppose that a scripture or statement at any
point in time has resulted from such orderly change. While this
type of exegesis or interpretation may produce systematic theology
and while it may satisfy those trying to understand and internalize
current doctrine, it is bad history since it leaves an unwarranted
impression of continuity and consistency.
Historians have long recognized the importance of the Nauvoo experience
in the formulation of distinctive Latter-day Saint doctrines. What
is not so apparent is that before about 1835 the LDS doctrines on
God and man were quite close to those of contemporary Protestant
denominations.
Of course the problem of understanding doctrine at particular
times consists not only in determining what was disseminated but
also in pinpointing how contemporary members perceived such beliefs.
Diaries of Church leaders would be most helpful. Currently available
evidence indicates that members of the First Presidency, particularly
Joseph Smith, Oliver
Cowdery, Frederick G. Williams, and Sidney
Rigdon were the principal persons involved in doctrinal development
prior to 1835. Unfortunately, the only available diary from among
that group is Joseph Smith's, which has been edited and published
as History of the Church.
Kirkon julkaisut tärkeitä
Church publications from this period are important sources of doctrine
and doctrinal commentary, given the lack of diaries. After the publication
of the Book of Mormon in 1830, the Church supported The Evening
and the Morning Star in Independence (June 1832-July 1833) and
Kirtland (December 1833-September 1834). In October 1834, the Latter
Day Saints Messenger and Advocate (Kirtland, October 1834-September
1837) replaced the Star. Both monthlies published expositions
on doctrine, letters from Church members, revelations, minutes of
conferences, and other items of interest. William W. Phelps published
a collection of Joseph Smith's revelations in the 1833 Book of Commandments,
but destruction of the press and most copies left the Star
and Messenger virtually the only sources of these revelations
until 1835. In that year, the Doctrine and Covenants, which included
the Lectures on Faith and presented both revelation and doctrinal
exposition, was published.
Opit eivät varhaisina aikoina suurestikaan eronneet muista
uskonnoista
The doctrines of God and man revealed in these sources were not
greatly different from those of some of the religious denominations
of the time. Marvin
Hill has argued that the Mormon doctrine of man in New York
contained elements of both Calvinism and Arminianism, though tending
toward the latter. The following evidence shows that it was much
closer to the moderate Arminian position, particularly in rejecting
the Calvinist emphasis on absolute and unconditional predestination,
limited atonement, total depravity, and absolute perseverance of
the elect. It will further demonstrate that the doctrine of God
preached and believed before 1835 was essentially trinitarian, with
God the Father seen as an absolute personage of Spirit, Jesus Christ
as a personage of tabernacle, and the Holy Ghost as an impersonal
spiritual member of the Godhead.
The Book of Mormon tended to define God as an absolute personage
of spirit who, clothed in flesh, revealed himself in Jesus Christ
(Abinidi's sermon to King Noah in Mosiah chapters 13-14 is a good
example). The first issue of the Evening and Morning Star published
a similar description of God, the "Articles and Covenants of the
Church of Christ," which was the Church's first statement of faith
and practice. With some additions, the "Articles" became section
20 of the Doctrine and Covenants. The "Articles," which according
to correspondence in the Star was used with the Book of Mormon in
proselytizing, indicated that "there is a God in heaven who is infinite
and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting, the same unchangeable
God, the framer of heaven and earth and all things which are in
them." The Messenger and Advocate published numbers 5 and 6 of the
Lectures on Faith, which defined the "Father" as "the only
supreme governor, an independent being, in whom all fulness and
perfection dwells; who is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient;
without beginning of days or end of life." In a letter published
in the Messenger and Advocate, Warren A. Cowdery argues that "we
have proven to the satisfaction of every intelligent being, that
there is a great first cause, prime mover, self-existent, independent
and all wise being whom we call God ... immutable in his purposes
and unchangeable in his nature."
Ensimmäinen näky
Joseph Smith's 1832 account of the First Vision spoke only of one
personage and did not make the explicit separation of God and Christ
found in the 1838 version. The Book of Mormon declared that Mary
"is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh," which as
James Allen and Richard Howard have pointed out was changed in 1837
to "mother of the Son of God." Abinidi's sermon in the Book of Mormon
explored the relationship between God and Christ: "God himself shall
come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people.
And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God,
and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being
the Father and the Son-The Father, because he was conceived by the
power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the
Father and Son-And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father
of heaven and of earth." (Mosiah 15:1-4.)
Luentoja uskosta
The Lectures on Faith differentiated between the Father
and Son somewhat more explicitly, but even they did not define a
materialistic, tritheistic Godhead. In announcing the publication
of the Doctrine and Covenants which included the Lectures on
Faith, the Messenger and Advocate commented editorially that
it trusted the volume would give "the churches abroad ... a perfect
understanding of the doctrine believed by this society." The Lectures
declared that "there are two personages who constitute the great
matchless, governing and supreme power over all things-by whom all
things were created and made." They are "the Father being a personage
of spirit," and "the Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a
personage of tabernacle, made, or fashioned like unto man, or being
in the form and likeness of man, or, rather, man war, formed after
his likeness, and in his image." The "Articles and Covenants" called
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost "one God" rather than the Godhead,
a term which Mormons generally use today to separate themselves
from trinitarians.
The doctrine of the Holy Ghost presented in these early sources
is even more striking compared to the point of view defended in
our time. The Lectures on Faith defined the Holy Ghost as the mind
of the Father and the Son, a member of the Godhead, but not a personage,
who binds the Father and Son together. This view of the Holy Ghost
reinforced trinitarian doctrine by explaining how personal beings
like the Father and Son become one God through the noncorporeal
presence of a shared mind.
As Marvin Hill and Timothy Smith have argued, much of the doctrine
that early investigators found in Mormonism was similar to contemporary
Protestant churches. The section on the nature of God in the "Articles
and Covenants," now Doctrine and Covenants 20:17-28, was similar
to the creeds of other churches. In fact, what is now verses 23
and 24 is similar to passages in the Apostle's Creed.
Uudenlaisia oppeja
... between 1842 and 1844 Joseph Smith spoke on and published doctrines
such as the plurality of gods, the tangibility of God's body, the
distinct separation of God and Christ, the potential of man to become
and function as a god, the explicit rejection of ex nihilo creation,
and the materiality of everything including spirit. These ideas
were perhaps most clearly stated in the King Follett discourse of
April 1844.
Because doctrine and practice changed as the result of new revelation
and exegesis, some members who had been converted under the doctrines
of the early 1830s left the Church. John Corrill exhibited disappointment
rather than rancor and defended the Church against outside attack,
but left because of the introduction of doctrine which he thought
contradicted those of the Book of Mormon and the Bible.
It seems clear that certain ideas which developed between 1832
and 1844 were internalized after 1835 and accepted by the Latter-day
Saints. This was particularly true of the material anthropomorphism
of God and Jesus Christ, advanced perfectionism as elaborated in
the doctrine of eternal progression, and the potential godhood of
man.
Väliaikaisia oppeja
Between 1845 and 1890, however, certain doctrines were proposed
which were later rejected or modified. In an address to rulers of
the world in 1845, for instance, the Council of the Twelve wrote
of the "great Eloheem Jehovah" as though the two names were synonymous,
indicating that the identification of Jehovah with Christ had little
meaning to contemporaries. In addition, Brigham Young preached that
Adam was not only the first man, but that he was the god of this
world. Acceptance of the King Follett doctrine would have granted
the possibility of Adam being a god, but the idea that he was god
of this world conflicted with the later Jehovah-Christ doctrine.
Doctrines such as those preached by Orson Pratt, harking back to
the Lectures on Faith and emphasizing the absolute nature
of God, and Amasa Lyman, stressing radical perfectionism which denied
the necessity of Christ's atonement, were variously questioned by
the First Presidency and Twelve. In Lyman's case, his beliefs, contributed
to his excommunication.
The newer and older doctrines thus coexisted, and all competed
with novel positions spelled out by various Church leaders. The
Lectures on Faith continued to appear as part of the Doctrine
and Covenants in a section entitled "Doctrine and Covenants," as
distinguished from the "Covenants and Commandments" which constitute
the current Doctrine and Covenants. The Pearl of Great Price containing
the Book of Abraham was published in England in 1851 as a missionary
tract and was accepted as authoritative in 1880. The earliest versions
of Parley P. Pratt's Key to the Science of Theology and Brigham
H. Roberts's The Gospel both emphasized an omnipresent, nonpersonal
Holy Ghost, though Pratt's emphasis was radically materialistic
and Roberts's more allegorical. Both were elaborating ideas addressed
in the King Follett sermon. Such fluidity of doctrine, unusual from
a twentieth-century perspective, characterized the nineteenth-century
Church.
1890-1925 tapahtunut oppien rekonstruointi
By 1890 the doctrines preached in the Church combined what would
seem today both familiar and strange. Yet, between 1890 and 1925
these doctrines were reconstructed principally on the basis of works
by three European immigrants, James E. Talmage, Brigham H. Roberts,
and John A. Widtsoe. Widtsoe and Talmage did much of their writing
before they became Apostles, but Roberts served as a member of the
First Council of the Seventy during the entire period.
Perhaps the most important doctrine addressed was the doctrine
of the Godhead, which was reconstructed beginning in 1893 and 1894.
During that year James E. Talmage, president of Latter-day Saints
University and later president and professor of geology at the University
of Utah, gave a series of lectures on the Articles of Faith to the
theological class of LDSU. In the fall of 1898 the First Presidency
asked him to rewrite the lectures and present them for approval
as an exposition of Church doctrines. In the process, Talmage reconsidered
and reconstructed the doctrine of the Holy Ghost. In response to
questions raised by Talmage's lectures, George Q. Cannon, "commenting
on the ambiguity existing in our printed works concerning the nature
or character of the Holy Ghost, expressed his opinion that the Holy
Ghost was in reality a person, in the image of the other members
of the Godhead-a man in form and figure; and that what we often
speak of as the Holy Ghost is in reality but the power or influence
of the spirit." The First Presidency on that occasion, however,
"deemed it wise to say as little as possible on this as on other
disputed subjects."
The impact of the Articles of Faith on doctrinal exposition
within the Church seems to have been enormous. Some doctrinal works
like B. H. Roberts's 1888 volume The Gospel were quite allegorical
on the nature of God, Christ, and the Holy Ghost. In the 1901 edition,
after the publication of the Articles of Faith, Roberts explicitly
revised his view of the Godhead, modifying his discussion and incorporating
Talmage's more literal interpretation of the Holy Ghost.
Mormonioppi ja evoluutio
By 1900 it was impossible to consider the doctrines of God and
man without dealing with evolution. Darwin's Origin of Species
had been in print for four decades, and scientific advances together
with changing attitudes had introduced many secular-rational ideas.
James E. Talmage and John A. Widtsoe had confronted these ideas
as they studied at universities in the United States and abroad.
As early as 1881 Talmage had resolved to "do good among the young,"
possibly by lecturing on the "harmony between geology and the Bible."
In 1898 Talmage urged George Q. Cannon to have the General Authorities
give, careful, and perhaps official consideration to the scientific
questions on which there is at least a strong appearance of antagonism
with religious creeds." Cannon agreed, and Talmage recorded a number
of interviews with the First Presidency on the subject. In a February
1900 article Talmage argued that science and religion had to be
reconciled since "faith is not blind submission, passive obedience,
with no effort at thought or reason. Faith, if worthy of its name,
rests upon truth; and truth is the foundation of science."
Hämmennystä
Even though the publications of Talmage, Roberts, and Widtsoe had
established the Church's basic doctrines of the Godhead, members
and nonmembers were still confused. In 1911, George F. Richards
spoke in the Tabernacle on the nature of God. Afterward, a member
challenged him, arguing that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were one
God rather than three distinct beings. Richards disagreed and cited
scriptural references including Joseph Smith's first vision.
In February 1912, detractors confronted elders in the Central
States Mission with the Adam-God theory. In a letter to President
Samuel O. Bennion, the First Presidency argued that Brigham Young
did not mean to say that Adam was God, and at a special priesthood
meeting during the April 1912 general conference, they presented
and secured approval for a declaration that Mormons worship God
the Father, not Adam.
Reconsideration of the doctrine of God and the ambiguity in discourse
and printed works over the relationship between God the Father and
Jesus Christ pointed to the need for an authoritative statement
on the nature and mission of Christ.
Official statements were required to canonize doctrines on the
Father and the Son, ideas which were elaborated by the progressive
theologians. A clarification was particularly necessary because
of the ambiguity in the scriptures and in authoritative statements
about the unity of the Father and the Son, the role of Jesus Christ
as Father, and the roles of the Father and Son in creation. A statement
for the Church membership prepared by the First Presidency and the
Twelve, apparently first drafted by Talmage, was published in 1916.
The statement made clear the separate corporeal nature of the two
beings and delineated their roles in the creation of the earth and
their continued relationships with this creation. The statement
was congruent with the King Follett discourse and the work of Talmage,
Widtsoe, and Roberts.
This elaboration, together with the revised doctrine of the Holy
Ghost, made necessary the revision and redefinition of work previously
used.
Korjattuja laitoksia pyhistä kirjoista
The clarification of the doctrine of the Holy Ghost and the relationship
between the three members of the Godhead also made necessary the
revision of the Lectures on Faith. A meeting of the Twelve
and First Presidency in November 1917 considered the question of
the lectures, particularly lecture five. At that time, they agreed
to append a footnote in the next edition. This proved unnecessary
when the First Presidency appointed a committee consisting of George
F. Richards, Anthony W. Ivins, James E. Talmage, and Melvin J. Ballard
to review and revise the entire Doctrine and Covenants. The initial
reason for the committee was the worn condition of the printer's
plates and the discrepancies which existed between the current edition
and Roberts's edition of the History of the Church.
Revision continued through July and August 1921, and the Church
printed the new edition in late 1921. The committee proposed to
delete the Lectures on Faith on the grounds that they were
"lessons prepared for use in the School of the Elders, conducted
in Kirtland, Ohio, during the winter of 1834-35; but they were never
presented to nor accepted by the Church as being otherwise than
theological lectures or lessons." How the committee came to this
conclusion is uncertain. The general conference of the Church in
April 1835 had accepted the entire volume, including the Lectures,
not simply the portion entitled "Covenants and Commandments," as
authoritative and binding upon Church members. What seems certain,
however, is that the interpretive exegesis of 1916 based upon the
reconstructed doctrine of the Godhead had superseded the Lectures.
If the 1916 statement essentially resolved the Latter-day Saint
doctrine of God along the lines suggested by Talmage, Widtsoe, and
Roberts, the work of these three men, while suggesting a doctrine
of man, did not lead to a similar authoritative statement, except
on the question of the relation of the creation to natural selection.
Still, the work of these progressive theologians provided a framework
for understanding man which went relatively unchallenged until the
recent development of Mormon neo-orthodoxy.
Onko Jehova Jeesus vai Elohim?
|