Language tends to evolve. Words and their definitions slowly shift over time with the ebb and flow of cultures. Within Mormonism, we have a rather large vocabulary of words which have specific "Mormon" definitions, which in fact differ from the definition outside of a Mormon context. I think this is a problem.
One problem with this is that it allows us to use words that have more weight, when in fact they are not an accurate or daresay honest reflection of what is really going on behind the words. We say "I know" when many times the truth would actually be "I really really believe with stony conviction," or we might say "I testify" when the truth is that we are merely opining.
Another major problem is that we take our modern--and in many LDS cases, specialized--definitions of words and we use those definitions when we read the scriptures. But many of those words do not mean what we have evolved into thinking they mean. We have lost sight of the meaning of some vocabulary words, and suffer as a result. That is what I intend to examine here.
For the following key terms, I use the definitions from Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary, meaning these are the definitions that would have been understood and used by Joseph Smith in his day. When revelation, translation and interpretation came to us through him, these definitions were what he would have intended.
APOSTASY, noun [Gr. a defection, to depart.]
1. An abandonment of what one has professed; a total desertion, or departure from one's faith or religion.
THE EVOLVED, LDS DEFINITION
In the LDS church, apostasy has an evolving publicized definition--representing only a fraction of the basis for disciplinary actions--and a secret interpretation which is the actual basis for waging almost all charges of apostasy.
- Publicized definitions (before June 28, 2014)
- “When individuals or groups of people turn away from the principles of the gospel, they are in a state of apostasy.” -- LDS.org
- This is the most correct statement, and also the least followed. Nearly all charges of apostasy are currently built on infractions against other definitions, hidden from the public eye. In speaking of the principles of the gospel being corrupted or turned away from, such corruption or turning away must be directly related to the gospel, which gospel is defined by Christ Himself:
"Behold I have given unto you my gospel, and this is the gospel which I have given unto you—that I came into the world to do the will of my Father, because my Father sent me. And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross; and after that I had been lifted up upon the cross, that I might draw all men unto me, that as I have been lifted up by men even so should men be lifted up by the Father, to stand before me, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil— And for this cause have I been lifted up; therefore, according to the power of the Father I will draw all men unto me, that they may be judged according to their works. And it shall come to pass, that whoso repenteth and is baptized in my name shall be filled; and if he endureth to the end, behold, him will I hold guiltless before my Father at that day when I shall stand to judge the world." -- 3 Nephi 27:13-16- "We define it as when our members turn away from the principles of the gospel, or corrupt principles of the gospel, or make unauthorized changes in Church organizations or priesthood ordinances. It's one thing to make one's views known; it's quite another to actively draw others away from clear doctrine… Elder Oaks was clear in last April's general conference when he stated categorically that the leaders of the Church don't have the authority to change things.” -- Ally Isom, official church spokesperson (as opposed to the church President), June 16, 2014
- This statement has some issues and should be looked at.
- The "gospel" is defined by Christ (above), and apostasy from it is far more frequently used as a basis for putting membership records on the back burner or inactive lists than it is for excommunication.
- “unauthorized changes in Church organizations or priesthood ordinances” - This creates awkward circumstances, because the highest leadership has in fact made changes to ordinances numerous times, which thing Joseph Smith stated and Elder Oaks here affirmed that leadership has no “authority to change.” Joseph taught that the ordinances were instituted before the foundation of the world, and were not to be altered, period (TPJS, 308). Isaiah notes that alteration of ordinances is coupled with the breaking of covenants, transgressing of laws and defiling of the earth (Isaiah 24:5). Therefore the “unauthorized” clause concerning changes condemns rather than justifies the leadership, and having offended the principle they are themselves necessarily in a state of apostasy by their own definition.
- Publicized First Presidency Statement definition, June 28, 2014
- “Apostasy is repeatedly acting in clear, open, and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its faithful leaders, or persisting, after receiving counsel, in teaching false doctrine.”
- This is a major shift, as “the gospel” is not to be understood as being the same thing as “the church” or its leaders. (Indeed, the gospel has apparently gone completely out the window with this revised definition.)
- Public disciplinary actions taking place at the time of this declaration, and higher accessibility to information, forced the First Presidency to be slightly more transparent and honest with their definition of apostasy, or face being further humiliated by the press. This definition is pulled from the hidden definitions of Church Handbook of Instructions, vol. 1 (CHI-1).
- The First Presidency added the qualifier “faithful” in this statement. Why? Is the CHI-1 statement upon which they execute discipline insufficient and in need of alteration? Is it a PR stunt to make the phrase appear more palatable to the public? Is it a blanket compliment applied to all the leadership, as though there are none who are not faithful? Is it a tacit admission that there are priesthood leaders who are not faithful and therefore opposition to them does not constitute apostasy? Why present an altered version to the public, rather than an accurate one?
- Secret definitions from CHI-1, 2010 edition (6.7.3, “Apostasy”)
1. “Repeatedly act in clear, open and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders.”
- The definition says nothing of opposition to the gospel, nor the Lord, nor the scriptures. One can fully believe and follow Christ, the scriptures and the gospel, yet be punished for disagreement with the current stewards. This is definitively tyranny.
- This definition has four qualifiers for the “opposition” that theoretically must all be met, according to the conjunction “and” sandwiched in its adjectives. Clear. Open. Deliberate. Public. If your opposition meets less than all four descriptors, then according to the language of lawyers used to write and interpret the Handbook, you should not be able to be punished for infraction against this point. However, we see in practice that this is not the case.
- Should a person exercise their scriptural mandate and manifest an opposing vote to leadership (D&C 124:144) twice in their lifetime, they technically qualify as "apostates" under this definition. For their vote was "clear," "open," "deliberate," "public" and in "opposition," and upon the second vote it becomes "repeated."
- It is worth noting that there is a major difference between “deliberate” opposition to one paradigm, and deliberate support of a paradigm that happens to disagree.
- This definition has become a breeding ground for institutional hypocrisy.
- In word, President Uchdorf’s General Conference address in October 2013 publicly acknowledges that church leadership has been and continues to be subject to human error. He then invited even those with “doubts” and “questions” pertaining to these human errors into the fold.
- In practice, there have been many now who have expressed these “human error” based questions and doubts while fully believing in Christ, the Book of Mormon and the divine calling of Joseph Smith, and desiring to be numbered among the church. The decision of the church has overwhelmingly been to interpret their questions and doubts as opposition, and to excommunicate rather than embrace.
2. “Persist in teaching as church doctrine information that is not church doctrine after they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.”
- This mandate is clearly misunderstood by many authorities, as it is generally armed against opinions that are stated as opinions, and are rarely (if ever) claimed as representing church doctrine. While this mandate could perhaps be rightly applied to those lying about the teachings of the church and spreading intentionally false doctrine, it is instead used to silence any voice of disagreement with the correlated and censored teachings of the Church.
- Note, again it is about church doctrine. Not Christ's doctrine, not scriptural doctrine, not gospel doctrine. It fosters the idolatrous worship of the institutional church and its leaders.
3. “Continue to follow teachings of apostate sects (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.”
- Originally designed—right or wrong—to weed out polygamists (as still evidenced within the statement). “Follow[ing] teachings of apostate sects” has become so loosely interpreted as to include simply hearing a person speak ideas that certain members of church leadership don’t like, or having a conversation with someone else who questions the alignment of an official church doctrine or statement with scripture. There is too much latitude of interpretation. If teachings do not go against scripture there may be room for disagreement, but there is no scriptural basis for punishment.
4. “Formally join another church and advocate its teachings.”
- In writing, the “formal” aspect is heavily emphasized, including the phrases “If a member formally joins another church…” and “ if formal membership in the other church is not ended…” Therefore if you were to informally engage in religious practices outside the LDS church, or informally attend group meetings outside the control of the LDS church, you should be able to avoid concern on this.
- In practice, this instruction is loosely (and INFORMALLY) interpreted to now include rebaptisms by LDS priesthood holders, with no ties to any other church, simply operating outside standard church regulation. It is levied against LDS members holding private fellowship and study groups, unaffiliated with any other church. It is also levied against those who believe God can work with people outside the hierarchal framework of the church, including those “holy men” of whom the church doesn’t know (D&C 49:8), even though God gave us the heads up that they exist and are recognized of Him.
Considering how loosely each definition is interpreted, and the trend of such interpretations, it could be said that the one current definition of an apostate is “anyone who doesn’t follow the current Prophet (meaning President of the LDS Church).” This is idolatry.
BEHALF, noun behaf.
1. Favor; advantage; convenience, profit; support, defense, vindication. The advocate pleads in behalf of the prisoner. The patriot suffers in behalf of his country.
2. Part; side; noting substitution, or the act of taking the part of another; as, the agent appeared in behalf of his constituents, and entered a claim.
EXCOMMUNICATION
- Read HERE.
IMPARTIAL, adjective [in and partial, from part, Latin pars.]
1. Not partial; not biased in favor of one party more than another; indifferent; unprejudiced; disinterested; as an impartial judge or arbitrator.
2. Not favoring one party more than another; equitable; just; as an impartial judgment or decision; an impartial opinion.
INJUSTICE, noun [Latin injustitia; in and justitia, justice.]
1. Iniquity; wrong; any violation of another's rights, as fraud in contracts, or the withholding of what is due. It has a particular reference to an unequal distribution of rights, property or privileges among persons who have equal claims.2. The withholding from another merited praise, or ascribing to him unmerited blame.
JUST, adjective [Latin justus. The primary sense is probably straight or close, from the sense of setting, erecting, or extending.]
5. In a moral sense, upright; honest; having principles of rectitude; or conforming exactly to the laws, and to principles of rectitude in social conduct; equitable in the distribution of justice;
In an evangelical sense, righteous; religious; influenced by a regard to the laws of God; or living in exact conformity to the divine will.
OFFICE, noun [Latin officium; ob and facio, to make or do.]
1. A particular duty, charge or trust conferred by public authority and for a public purpose; an employment undertaken by commission or authority from government or those who administer it. Thus we speak of the office of secretary of state, of treasurer, of a judge, of a sheriff, of a justice of the peace, &c. Offices are civil, judicial, ministerial, executive, legislative, political, municipal, diplomatic, military, ecclesiastical, &c.
REPENT, verb intransitive [Latin re and paeniteo, from paena, pain. Gr. See Pain.]
3. To change the mind in consequence of the inconvenience or injury done by past conduct.
- Repentance is not a checklist which must be ticked off before one may receive Divine forgiveness. The word “repent” simply means to turn or change direction, to change your mind, and that word is used deliberately. To repent is simply to evaluate the direction you are going, and adjust course back to facing and moving toward God. It is a matter of adjusting the mind and heart. All the rest, the confessions, the making amends, etc. are fruits of repentance. They are evidence that the repentance has already taken place in the heart and mind, which is the only place repentance can take place. So as soon as someone is making an effort to conform outward actions to a more godly course than what they were before, that is evidence they have repented and they already warrant forgiveness. Indeed, God has likely already extended it.
SANCTION, verb transitive
To ratify; to confirm; to give validity or authority to.
TESTIMONY, noun [Latin testimonium.]
A solemn declaration or affirmation made for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact… testimony differs from evidence; testimony is the declaration of a witness, and evidence is the effect of that declaration on the mind, or the degree of light which it affords.
WITNESS, noun
3. A person who knows or sees any thing; one personally present; One who sees the execution of an instrument, and subscribes it for the purpose of confirming its authenticity by his testimony.
