Transcript of the podcast Mormon Expression Episode 27: The Word of Wisdom for Dummies. Featuring John, Niel, Jim, George, Tom, and Mike.
John: Welcome back to another edition of Mormon Expression! I'm your host, John Larsen, and tonight we have our full panel, the full Monty, and we are going to have a special discussion. First, let's introduce the panel. We'll move from left to right, starting on the left side, we have Niel...
Niel: Hello everyone.
John: Moving a little bit to the right, but not much—they're kind of competing for the far left—we have Jim...
Jim: Hey, gentlemen!
John: Coming down towards the middle, we have George.
George: Hi everyone.
John: Moving out to the right side, we have Tom.
Tom: Hey, what's up guys?
John: And anchoring in the far extreme right, we have Mike.
Mike: Hello.
John: All right, welcome guys. We know there's some people out there listening to the podcast who might not be as "on the inside" as we all are, who might not know Mormonism backwards and forwards like those of us who have lived it. And we're gonna start the first in a special series of Mormonism for Dummies. Tonight we're going to talk about the Word of Wisdom. It's Word of Wisdom for Dummies, for Mormons, for Mormon dummies, or Word of Wisdom for the rest of us.
John: So what we're gonna do is we're going to give a little brief history of the Word of Wisdom and then we're going to read through the text and we're going to explain to y'all what it means so that you can be the insider. So you don't have to ask your Mormon friends anymore if they can drink Coke or not... you will know! At least as well as we do.
John: So, the Word of Wisdom—let's start and give a little bit of background—is a revelation that was received by Joseph Smith, February 27th, 1833 in response to Ms. Smith, his wife, who came to him and was complaining about the brethren who were in the school; the prophets spittin' their tobacco on the floor. And now, Mike, were you telling me you have the background on that?
Mike: I do. It said, according to Joseph Smith Jr., the founder of the Latter Day Saint movement, "the Word of Wisdom was received in 1933 as a revelation from God. After Smith's death, Brigham Young stated that the revelation was given in response to problems encountered while conducting meetings in the Smith family home. When they assembled together in this room, the first thing they did was to light their pipes, and while smoking, talk about the great things of the kingdom and spit all over the room. And as soon as the pipe was out of their mouths, a large chew of tobacco would then be taken. Often when the Prophet Joseph Smith entered the room to give the school instructions, he would find himself in a cloud of tobacco smoke. This, and the complaints of his wife at having to clean so filthy a floor, made the prophet think upon the matter, and he inquired of the Lord relating to the conduct of the elders and using tobacco. The revelation known as the Word of Wisdom was the result of his inquiry."
John: Okay. So the dirty elders were spitting upon the floor and Joseph took it to the Lord, and he got the revelation. The revelation first appeared in 1835, in the Book of Commandments—no, in the Doctrine and Covenants—and has been there, unaltered, since. So any other matters of history? ...Well, maybe we should talk a little bit about what's happened with it since. In the 1830s, Joseph Smith himself kind of waffled on it. We know that Joseph partook of alcohol, that he talked about getting a beer from time to time, and they were actually drinking wine as one of the last things they did in the Carthage jail. So some are inclined to say that the Word of Wisdom wasn't taken very seriously at the time, but we do also know that in the 1830s, there were members who were excommunicated for violating the Word of Wisdom.
Niel: The early immigrants from Scandinavia... in Scandinavia, coffee is drunk an amazing amount. I mean, they drank it morning, noon night, right before bed, all the time... it's really pretty much a social institution. And when the Swedes and the Danes and the Norwegians joined the Church and came over to Utah, that was the one thing they wouldn't give up. They'd come clear across the world, they would give up drinking, they would come to accept polygamy, but they couldn't give up their coffee. And Brigham Young actually sent out an edict saying that if you're Norwegian or Scandinavian, that it's okay. You can drink coffee.
John: You know, interestingly enough, I'm of Danish descent, primarily— I come from the Sanpete Central Utah Danes—and when I was a child back in the seventies and early eighties, there were still quite a few Danes down in Sanpete—we're talking about Manti, Ephraim area—who would still drink coffee and hold temple recommends. So as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, that was still pretty common.
Jim: You know, I remember listening to the swearing...
John: J. Golden Kimball?
Jim: J. Golden, yeah. I remember listening to a talk by J. Golden Kimball, and he talked about how he drunk coffee all the time until they cracked down on it.
John: Yeah. From my understanding, there were several reformations. We know about the reformation that came about in the 1850s, and there was a renewed interest in getting rid of the alcohol and the tobacco and that sort of thing. And then they would kind of backslide a little bit and then come back and forth. And it wasn't until later that they started taking it much more seriously.
Jim: Yeah, exactly. It's more of a cultural phenomenon than necessarily a religious phenomenon, which are one and the same to me, really... but from a perspective of a Mormon, it is generally looked down upon to drink coffee. But I guess it depends on what timeframe you're talking about.
Niel: Are you saying it's not doctrinal?
John: Well, I think we're starting to beg the question a little bit. Why don't we go through the actual text, and then we can come back and finish it up with a discussion of how serious we are to take this whole thing. We'll do this like elders quorum. We can go around the room and everybody can read a verse. So I'll start with verse one. There's only 21 verses. This is, of course, section 89 of the Doctrine and Covenants. Anybody who has their standard scripture in front of them want to give out the page number?
Mike: I do; page...
George: I was gonna use the new, uh, inspired version. Is that alright with everybody?
John: Inspired by who? [Laughter] I'm reading mine out of History of the Church, so I don't know what the page number in the standard works is. What's the page?
Mike: 175.
John: 175. All right, here we go. "A Word of Wisdom for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion." That's verse one. Verse two: "To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days."
John: All right, I think we hit the first issue...
Jim: "In the last days?"
John: Well, nah, it's the last day, we're always in the "last days," that's no problem.
Mike: "Temporal salvation?"
John: Well, the issue I was thinking of is, "not by commandment or constraint." We seem to have got off track. If this is not a commandment or a constraint, why do you have to live the Word of Wisdom to get into the temple?
Niel: Well, can you be a Mormon in good standing and not follow the Word of Wisdom and just not go to the temple?
John: Um, what does it mean to be "in good standing" and not be able to go to the temple?
Niel: Be able to take the sacrament and all that.
John: I assume it'd be up to the bishop. I think as long as you didn't smell like smoke, they probably wouldn't tell you anything.
Mike: Well, when you take the sacrament, you're renewing your baptismal covenants. And if you've covenanted at baptism to not do those things, then it's a curse instead of a blessing.
John: I don't remember that being part of my baptismal covenant, not to take a puff...
Mike: Well...
John: I'm asking, Mike. That's a good question. Is that part of the Baptismal covenant?
Mike: Yes, it is. As a missionary, if you're interviewing someone to be baptized, that's one of the things they ask you. "Do agree to keep the Word of Wisdom?"
Niel: But you're not... you're not God. I mean, when you're doing the baptismal covenant, it's whatever's in your heart that you're covenanting with God to do, right? And you can't, or you shouldn't be, covenanting for God for stuff that isn't doctrinal, right? Like I can't covenant at a baptism to—I don't know, something ridiculous, like—root for the Yankees. That wouldn't even make any sense, right?
Mike: Well, Brigham young made it a commandment. And as the living prophet, he said, "This is a commandment." And so from that time forward it is.
Niel: Well, I mean, was this an actual revelation, or was this just a talk in general conference?
Mike: Uh, have the account in front of me. It was September 9th, 1851; President Young, amongst other things, said he knew the goodness of the people, and Lord would bear their weakness... "We must serve the Lord. And those who go with me will keep the Word of Wisdom. And if the High Priests, the Seventies, the Elders and others will not serve the Lord, we will sever them from the Church. I will draw the line and know who is for the Lord and who is not, and those who will not keep the Word of Wisdom, I will cut off from the Church. I throw out a challenge to all men and women."
Niel: Yeah. I don't hear where that's a revelation.
John: Well, the original one was revelation, but, to Mike's issue, this is what I was referring to during the reformation. They did crack down on it, but we have plenty of instances after this of the brethren, and the 12, and the 70 both drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco. So although they threw that out, they weren't willing to enforce it yet. It was still very common to read talks where they complain about the elders all being drunk and stuff like that. So I don't think it was enforced yet.
Mike: Well, it became a temple issue in 1902. that's when they started enforcing it for entrance into the temple. That was when it became part of the temple review. 1902.
John: That sounds right. But there was a slow adoption, from my understanding, before. It wasn't like today when you have to answer the same 14 questions. They said you should answer that to go to the temple, but it wasn't widely enforced, at least in my understanding.
Niel: Well, it seems like a revelation, or a canonized scripture as part of the core works here—the standard works—has to be overruled by a revelation that's canonized, right? I mean, you had the priesthood ban that was overruled by something that was canonized, and you had the polygamy thing that was overruled by something that was canonized. What I'm hearing from this is a prophet speaking—maybe in an official capacity, but, you know, the prophets said, have said, and will say all kinds of stuff that is opinion, not binding, or... how do you override scripture? By a general conference talk?
George: Well, let me ask you this. I wonder if this was one of those situations where it took the prophets a shorter amount of time to make a decision on changing the direction of this great big ship than the others. I don't know if there's actual dates held to it, when people started taking it as strongly as we do now, but obviously at the start it was one thing. As years went on, it became another. And as years went on you got a third thing. I think what we'd have to do to divide this conversation up is to say, "Are we going to talk about this period of time, or the second period of time, or the third?" Or even the fourth!
Niel: But, in general though, usually when you talk about what's doctrine and what isn't doctrine, there seems to be a very clear—or sort of a clear—sort of story or process.
George: I don't think on this one there is a clear process. I don't think we may ever know, especially when it comes down to when things were talked about versus when they actually became practiced. The history and that ability to go into it in detail may have been lost to us from a historical perspective.
Tom: I think that to me, it doesn't really matter. Maybe the Word of Wisdom started off as kind of a recommendation and then the emphasis on this rule, or law, just slowly got enhanced more and more. But as of now, it's a very strict commandment. It's, what do they call it? "The law of health?" And it's required for baptism, it's required for a temple recommend... so it's a very strong commandment now.
Jim: Yeah, I would agree. I mean that's almost part of your Mormon identification when it comes down to it. You set yourself apart as LDS by following the Word of Wisdom.
George: And I would think that most people in the Church know that it started off—or a lot of people probably think—that it started off with one perspective and it's kind of carried on. And there's lots of problems with it too; it doesn't go into all the details in some things, and we have some interpretation at the personal level. So... it's a complicated one, but it's got an interesting history to it, and I think that's why it makes it interesting for us to talk about.
Jim: That's a good point, George, about interpretation. There's a lot of individuals who have very differing interpretations of the Word of Wisdom within the Church. I don't think it's necessarily set in stone from person to person within the Church.
Mike: There's a key of understanding the Word of Wisdom, and it's the same reasoning that we have against getting tattoos, getting piercings... has little to do with paying your tithing, a little to do with the law of chastity... and that is, our spiritual selves overcoming our temporal bodies, desires and passions. That we can control the things, the passions our body want us to do. All these things that are talked about in the Word of Wisdom are addictive substances, and we're losing control over temporal desires. And we have to overcome those things spiritually and show that we are in fact in charge of this temporal matter, that our houses are spirits, and that's gonna have a lot to do with the things we do in the eternities.
John: Okay, let's go on to verses three and four. George, you have your scriptures opened, can you read us three and four?
George: Verse three is, "Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints. Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation."
John: Okay, so I think it's clear here that we know why we have the Word of Wisdom, and it's not for health, right? I mean, we just read the verse. It doesn't say anything about...
Niel: And it's not for obedience.
John: It's because, "the evils and designs of conspiring men." [Laughter]
Tom: The personal interpretation aside, I think...
John: Those were the words that it said! There's no interpretation there! I'm reading: "evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men!" I mean...
Tom: Well, as a whole, I think it is a health issue.
John: This isn't a very long verse! And, you know, God doesn't talk to us very often. So I think whenever he does, we should pay attention to the words he chooses! [Laughter] He knows all words, right?
Mike: Well, that was part of what brought the revelation on. He says, "in consequence of these things happening, you asked me the question." So he had issues with sacramental wine being poisoned, and so that was part of the issue, that was part of the reason he went to pray about it,
John: But we have no record of that ever happening.
Niel: And you can't poison the sacramental water?
Jim: I think it speaks more to crazy conspiracy theories and the general paranoid nature of Joseph Smith instead.
Mike: I didn't have time to do any homework for this podcast, but I know that did occur, that somebody was messing with the wine. He'd gone to town to purchase wine and somebody had messed with it.
John: Joseph Smith said that, but there's no proof that it happened.
Tom: I'm sorry we don't have eyewitness accounts or anything... I'm sure he was lying again... [groans from rest of panel]
Niel: Joseph Smith has never lied, according to... there's been no record of Joseph Smith lying?
Mike: The one I want to call attention to is in verse three, he says, "this is a principle given for the weakest of the saints." I've always viewed the Word of Wisdom commandments as entry-level commandments, that you can say, "I've kept these commandments, so I can keep harder ones." That's the way I've always looked at the Word of Wisdom.
John: I mean, but, is that really fair? We know that, for example, quitting smoking—nicotine addiction—is a very, very difficult thing to overcome. So there are people who investigate the Church, who may want to become members, who can't overcome that, but otherwise live as good members. Is that really fair to say, "Well, you're the weakest of the weak because you can't overcome a nicotine addiction, so you can't even begin to talk about things like honesty." That's ridiculous to me.
Mike: I know what you're saying, but I've always thought that it's nice to have a commandment you can look to and say, "I've always been perfect in that thing. I've always been perfect in keeping this commandment so I know I can keep harder ones." But yes, you're correct, overcoming those things, for people who are entering the Church for the first time, are very difficult.
John: The way you're making it sound, it’s like this is a kind of trump card for people who are born into the faith. People who aren't born into the faith, there's no reason for them never to have taken a drink or never to have tried a cigarette. Right? Most people will have done that. So the only people who can really say, "I have tee-totally never done that!" are lifelong members.
Jim: Yeah. That goes back to the whole "setting yourself apart as a Mormon." You always looked to the kids in high school that said they didn't drink or smoke, and, you know, they were usually LDS, at least in my high school, and they self-identify with that.
George: Does anybody know if nicotine was harder to quit—its addiction—back when this was given? It could have been a case where cigarettes did not have as much of the addictive nature as they do today.
John: Well, there were no cigarettes at the time. So you would either have smoked cigars or smoked a pipe.
George: And I've heard—now this isn't from personal experience at all—that those are a lot easier to put down.
Jim: Well, speaking from personal experience, I wouldn't say that. Tobacco consumed through a pipe or a cigar is actually very much more potent than cigarettes.
George: Has it gotten a stronger addictive nature over the years? Or is it lighter now than it used to be?
Jim: It depends on how you consume it, necessarily. Snuff versus chew versus cigars versus pipe tobacco... I don't have that information, so I really couldn't make an assumption based on that.
John: I think it's interesting that in this discussion, we have moved speaking of the Word of Wisdom to tobacco, where in my reading of Church history, that was never really much an issue until the 20th century. Normally when they spoke of the Word of Wisdom, they were generally talking about alcohol. So it's interesting that we went first at tobacco. I don't know why we did that, rather than the booze.
Jim: Good point.
John: All right. Let's go on to verse five and six. Let's see, who's next in the circle...
Tom: I'll take it.
John: Okay, Tom.
Tom: "That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him. And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make."
John: Why don't you go ahead to the next verse, too.
Tom: "And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies."
John: So we should note that at the time, the sacrament used wine, and it was later that Joseph Smith received another revelation—we kind of referred to—that said that they could use water in place of wine. So there's still an exemption here for drinking wine for the sacrament.
Jim: Verse seven, is that an allusion to the washings and anointings performed at the time?
John: This is 1833. This is long before washing and anointing.
Jim: Okay.
Niel: I think the washing and anointing was 1835.
John: '35 and '36 was when they started talking about it, and then they began practicing it in Kirtland. Um, yeah. So, once again, I mentioned in the beginning, this was routinely discarded by the prophet himself. He liked to drink a good stiff drink every once in a while.
Jim: And sell it, too.
John: Yeah, go ahead and explain your comment.
Jim: Oh yeah. He, uh, he opened up several houses of ill repute and—
John: Wait, wait, wait. In my mind, a house of ill repute is a brothel.
Mike: Yeah, I think you're overstating there.
John: There were rumors of a brothel in Nauvoo, but it was said to be run by John C. Bennett. I don't know...
Mike: They tore it down.
John: Yeah. I don't know that you can establish Joseph to that, but we do have Porter's Corner, right?
Jim: Yeah. What did he call it? The "Lodging House?" I can't remember the exact name of what they called it in Nauvoo, but it was basically a hotel with a bar in it. It was one of the places that you could buy alcohol, and Joseph Smith directly profited from it.
John: Well, my understanding is—and you guys correct me if I'm wrong— that Joseph allowed Porter Rockwell to run a bar in Joseph Smith's hotel for a little while. And then Emma didn't like it and shut it down. So Joseph Smith indirectly profited, but I don't think he was running the actual bar himself.
Jim: Yeah. Brigham Young did the same thing as well. I don't remember the exact details, but he had a similar situation in Utah.
Niel: One of his orders to the Saints in various parts was to brew various things to sell to travelers going through the area.
Tom: All right, so all of this is relevant how, again? I mean, okay, so let's say that this Word of Wisdom originally was instituted as a strong recommendation. Let's say that the early prophets and members of the Church could still kind of be involved in alcohol or whatever. But as of now, it's a big no-no. So we can probably say yeah, it probably wasn't as enforced as it is now, but now it's enforced pretty strongly. Shouldn't we talk a little bit more about now instead of trying to dig up all the ghosts in the past and throw Joseph Smith under the bus?
John: Well, I think it's relevant because people were excommunicated for breaking the Word of Wisdom during Joseph's time.
Tom: Well...
Mike: Well, there's partaking of, and there's overindulgence. I think they were being excommunicated for overindulgence, weren't they?
John: Here, I've looked it up. ”April 4th, 1835, at a conference in Freedom, New York. Elder Chester L. Health, a member of the Avon Genesee church, is excommunicated for breach of covenant and not observing the Word of Wisdom. Sidney Rigdon presides.” So, I mean, there's a certain amount of, um... is the word “hypocrisy” too strong?
Tom: Well, it could, it could have been, it could have been that there was other issues involved, just like getting Al Capone for, what, tax evasion, you know... maybe that's what they nailed him on, but there might've been other circumstances that we're not aware of.
Jim: So you're saying weaselly ways of getting rid of people is a-okay in the Lord's Church, Tom?
Tom: Of course that's not what I'm saying! [Laughter] Thanks for putting words in my mouth. I'm just saying that there's other things that we're just not aware of. So...
Jim: Well, my point is, verse seven should have a little asterisk next to it that says, "unless you're profiting from it..." [Laughter]
Tom: You would put an asterisk on the scriptures themselves saying "Not true, read at own risk!"
Jim: That's pretty self explanatory, yeah.
John: Okay. Um, let's see who's next for reading. Let's read verse eight. How about you, Niel?
Niel: "And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill. And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly."
John: Okay. So, um, tobacco, keeping it out of your belly, that's good advice.
Tom: But this one opens up the whole can of worms about the hot drinks, you know: chocolate, is that good or bad?
John: So, hot drinks. Let's be very clear. All it says is "hot drinks are not good for the body or the belly." And the individuals who wrote about this at the time took that very seriously, and they would have included soup in that. We know from some of the journals of the early brethren. So they totally swore off all the hot drinks. Go ahead, Mike.
Mike: So this is from the Church's Handbook of Instructions. "The only official interpretation of "hot drinks" in the Word of Wisdom is the statement made by early Church leaders that the term "hot drinks" means tea and coffee. Members should not use any substance that contains illegal drugs, nor should members use harmful or habit-forming substances except under the care of a competent physician." So that's from the book of instructions.
John: I can tell you, as a young missionary who served among Asian people, that statement you just read just made matters worse. Because "tea" is undefined, right? It's still a weasel word. The Church is still not defining. We struggled quite a bit, because there were all sorts of teas that Asian people drank, and a lot of people didn't drink anything but "hot." And frankly, it's been pointed out before that if the members would have simply disregarded this, they would've saved themselves a lot of issues... if they boiled their water, they would've saved themselves a lot of problems in Nauvoo.
Jim: A lot of cases of dysentery on the Oregon trail.
John: Right. Although I do have to tell you, they gave the list of goods you were supposed to take with you across the plains, and coffee was included in that. So it might be the people were drinking coffee anyway. I don't know.
Tom: I think that's true, the exception there. But the thing is, nowadays, it's a little more specific. I agree with you, John, that "hot drinks" is a little bit too vague and ambiguous, but as far as I know, and correct me if I'm wrong, it's kinda narrowed down as of now. It's "green tea is a no," "coffee's a no," and I think even iced tea is a no, is that right?
John: Well, green tea, white tea, black tea... they're all made from the same plant. It just when it's harvested. Iced tea is too. If everybody's interpreting it that way, why don't they come out and say "This species of plant is against the rules, and this one is not?" I mean, why do they choose to be vague? Why do they let people spin on this?
Tom: Because it should be a relationship between you and God, right?
John: Except it's a relationship between you, God, and your bishop. You could feel that God is okay if you're drinking green tea, but your bishop might not.
Jim: Because of the conspiring hearts of evil men in the last days! Aren't you listening? [Laughter]
John: And I'm only talking because they would ask us! "Can we drink this tea?" And we had no idea.
Tom: You're right. But I mean, even if even if they had, like, a spreadsheet of things you can and cannot eat, I don't know if that would really appease everybody. Besides, then it would seem like they'd be way too controlling.
John: Well, you make a good point. Why do this at all? Would the Church really be that unfortunate if they said, "All right, still alcohol's no good, tobacco's no good, but you can drink whatever hot drinks you want." I mean, what would the Church really suffer from letting the—who are they—the weakest of the weak in, at that point?
Jim: This discussion reminds me so much of Old Testament dietary restrictions. The Word of Wisdom in general reminds me of that. There's a lot of gray area, there's a lot of, "Well, this is okay, this is not okay, and this is why..." Does anyone else get that same kind of feeling, that it feels like, you know, the rules of kosher food?
Tom: Well, yeah. I mean, growing up in the Church, one of the biggest topics that surrounds the Word of Wisdom is this caffeinated soda. And the debate and the controversy it stirs up... it drives me crazy. I've been in multiple elders quorums where somebody starts talking and says, "You can't drink Pepsi or Coke, that's bad!"
Jim: We got that a lot on my mission too. I think what it really comes down to is, you have some little power-hungry little dweeb, who wants to lord over someone else, and it's a gray area, and the gray area is where all weasely little dweebs hide. The Church is full of them. "Oh, Elder so-and-so... he, I saw him, you know, with a whole case of Coke! It's time for you to take away his District leadership, and give it to me..."
John: Now, Jim, let's be fair. There are people who struggle with it because they really, honestly, do struggle with it. They really honestly don't know whether they should drink it or not. So it's not just... I've heard that way, "Why do people keep asking this question!?" People ask the question because they really want to know! There are factions in the Church who say, "No, you should not drink caffeine drinks at all!" And there's others that say it's okay.
George: I remember this coming up really strong in my youth. This may be outing me a little bit, but this was back in the seventies. I lived in Utah County. My bishop was the owner of the local Pepsi Distribution Company that was down in South Provo. The back of his car port—it wasn't even a garage, it was a car port—had just cases and cases... I mean 300, 400 cans of Pepsi back there! This was back in the seventies, when it wasn't "up to your own mind," it was, "you don't drink it." And here was my bishop... not only owned the distributing company, but was going through this like... he drank it like water! I mean, it just went down, down, and his whole family... and he'd give cases out to people around the neighborhood... It was neat for me to experience, because I went out already with this attitude, saying, "You know, some people don't do everything the way you hear from, that's supposed to be that way."
Tom: Well, this is the way that I know it, and you guys can correct me if you think I'm wrong: decaffeinated coffee is an "okay." You can still have a temple recommend or whatever. You can be baptized if you drink decaffeinated coffee.
John: Depends on your bishop. I know some bishops who allow it and some bishops who don't.
Tom: Maybe it's ambiguous, but that's what we were told on my mission. That if they're drinking decaffeinated coffee, that's an okay.
Jim: I think they lied to you.
Tom: You think my mission president lied?
Jim: [Chuckling] He misunderstood.
George: I heard the exact opposite on my mission. I heard coffee of any sort was bad. Decaf coffee was bad. Caffeinated soda is okay. That's the way I was taught.
Tom: Okay, well...
Mike: I thought for years that the whole caffeine thing came up in the early eighties when everyone was freaking out over caffeine... you started having all the decaf Coke and everything coming out... but I guess the real story behind it was, a Latter Day Saint professor at the University of Utah, Frederick J Pack in 1918, wrote some kind of dissertation, and I guess he wrote it for the Ensign or whatever Church magazine was out at the time, that Coca Cola contains caffeine, which is also present in coffee, and so he said it should be part of the Word of Wisdom, and then it stirred up a fuss.
Jim: Why didn't he mention cocaine?
Mike: I don't know why he didn't mention cocaine... I don't know what the reasoning was.
Jim: If he was inspired, he should've mentioned cocaine, right?
Mike: Heber. J. Grant put a stop to it, and said as far as he knows, there's nothing wrong with it. So, according to Heber J. Grant, soda's okay.
John: And I've never heard anybody mention Mormon tea, which... What's Mormon tea made out of?
Niel: It's ephedra.
John: Yeah, it's some desert plant and it has ephedra in it. Speed.
Mike: Oh really? Is that what's in that?
John: Yeah. Yeah, it's a stimulant.
Mike: I picked it out of the desert and brewed a pot way back in my youth...
John: Oh, ho, ho, Mike...! You need to repent!
Jim: It certainly clears you out.
Mike: I don't know who gave it to me, but they brewed it delicious. It was really good.
John: Alright, enough hearing about your sin, Mike. Why don't you go in and read verse 10 and 11?
Mike: Okay. "And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome herbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man. Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with prudence and thanksgiving."
John: So now we're getting onto the ignored second half of the Word of Wisdom. It clearly says there you should eat fruit in season, right?
Mike: Uh, yes. I think we're taught that in the temple as well, aren't we? There's a whole section on "God gave you these things for the use of man."
John: But my point is in season. So you're not supposed to eat, like, cherries out of season, right? I mean, that's what the verse says.
Mike: I think God ordains us with some common sense we're supposed to follow.
George: I always asked that at my folks' when we had to do canning in the fall. "We aren't supposed to be doing this!"
John: Mike, I don't mean to bust your rear end, but we just got up off this long discussion about hot drinks, and you just tried to raise the specter of common sense. [Laughter] I don't see how common sense gets suspended for verse eight & nine and comes back in full force in verse ten.
Jim: It's almost like the Mormon culture can only pay attention to one specific section at a time, you know what I mean?
John: I think it's interesting that in the enforcement of the Word of Wisdom today, the first half of the revelation is very negative: "Don't drink this, don't take this." The second half is more positive. "Do this, do this, do this..." And everybody pays attention to the first half, and the second half is completely forgotten. People give lip service to it, don't get me wrong, but you won't not get a temple recommend because you eat fruit out of season. But you will not get a temple recommend for smoking, or for drinking alcohol.
Niel: You're hiding cherry pockets in your car... [Laughter]
Tom: Geez. Isn't it just modern revelation, where they've just kind of taken more emphasis on certain portions of it? I mean, like, the Church Handbook of Instructions say, "Okay, this is what we should avoid, these are the things that are recommended, you know, eat meat sparingly..."
John: I don't think the Church Handbook is that explicit on the issue. Sorry, go ahead, Niel.
Niel: See, this is what drives me crazy. Because if there's a revelation that says, "The Word of Wisdom is now a commandment. God has spoken and opened up the damn heavens!" Okay... why like this? Right? Why!? Where did God come down and say, "Hot drinks are tea and coffee?" Where does God come down and say, "Well, you know, go ahead and go to Golden frick'n Corral." You know what I'm saying?
Mike: I think Hyrum Smith is the one that said the coffee and tea thing. No, I think you all have a point. I think there's a big problem with overweight Mormons, and if they would follow the second half of the Word of Wisdom, they wouldn't be. Because all of this is about overcoming—
Niel: No, no, no. Mike, Mike, Mike! Why is that excused in your head? Have you, personally, ever eaten the flesh of the beasts when you're not in the wintertime and not in a starvation situation?
Mike: I keep my house at 72 degrees, so I have meat with every meal. [Laughter, applause] I think you're right. I do agree with you.
Niel: Well, are you going to start living it? Are you going to go start throwing out the meat?
Mike: Uh, can I switch over to, like, a chicken burger?
Niel: Stop it! Did God say this or not!? Did God say this or not?
Mike: The current—
Niel: No. No. None of the "current" this, that, and the other. Because you know, a revelation could come down and clarify this crap. But it doesn't. It's just old geriatric men who want to boss people around and tell them what to do with their lives. Hot drinks... hot drinks is hot drinks. Where's the tea... you know what? I got in trouble once for taking green tea extract. That's not a drink, and it ain't hot! But holy crap, it's against the gosh dang Word of Wisdom!
John: Hey, cut out all that swearing, gosh dang it!
Mike: Yeah, holy freak! I think, think you just have to realize that the current leadership, they're emphasizing some portions of it, and obviously they're ignoring some of the other... whether you believe that that's.... I mean, if you're going to take 100 percent of the Word of Wisdom literally, which is I guess what you're trying to say, then that's fine. But the current Church leadership, they emphasize with alcohol, tobacco, tea, coffee. That's what they emphasize. You know, what's written in the scriptures... some of it's just isn't emphasized as much. I don't know. ...I guess that was your hot button issue. Niel. Sorry, bro.
Mike: To take Joseph Smith at his word, he said, "I teach the people correct principles and let them govern themselves." I think we all know that that overconsumption of anything, whether it be alcohol or meat, is a bad thing. And we're supposed to take these commandments and learn how to overcome our physical cravings. It's the same as the law of chastity.
Niel: In your mind, would it be acceptable for me as a Mormon to drink coffee?
Mike: No.
Niel: Okay. In your mind as a Mormon, is it okay for me to eat meat out of season?
Mike: Yes. It's sparingly. Don't think you should have an 18 ounce t-bone down at the steakhouse, but...
Jim: I think what Niel, the point he's getting to, is that certain points of D&C 89, are emphasized whereas certain points of D&C 89 or de-emphasized... why is there a de-emphasis on certain things that culturally stand out? I think he's right. It does represent hypocrisy.
Mike: I think it just represents a human principle that when we're told we can't have something, we focus on that. We're getting told we can have all of these things, so "Okay, who cares? I want to focus on what you told me 'no' to." We have that childish mentality. "Why did you tell me no?" and so everybody focuses on that and that's all you ever hear about.
Niel: So are, are you saying that that half of the interpretation is the men then?
Mike: Say that again?
Niel: I mean, if it's just humans obsessing over what they can't do rather than what they should do, are you saying that the prescriptions against drinking wine and coffee and all these other ridiculous things are just the interpretations of men?
Mike: No, they're the commandment! The living prophet has told us—
Niel: So God is saying, "in the first half, yeah!" in this sort of weird way, but the second half, "Do what you want with that?"
Mike: Um, I don't know, did Brigham Young give a commandment to...
Niel: Who's speaking in the Word of Wisdom? Back then and now?
Mike: Actually, Christ. It would be Christ.
Niel: This is a glaring piece of proof that this is all just ridiculous. You can't even tell me why one half goes this way, one half goes this way.
John: Now, Niel, I have an answer for you. If this is God's words, um, then God says in verse two, "to be sent greeting, not by commandment or constraint." So God is—if this is God's words—more pleased with the Church for the second half than he would be for the first half, because the second half they're taking God's counsel, which is, "This is just for your own health and benefit, and not by way of commandment." It's the first one that's come in, later, and they've said, "These are a, um, a requirement." I do agree with your general sentiment: why does the Church emphasize the one and not the other? They're equally laid out, you know?
Niel: See, here's the weird thing. When you talk to Mormons and Mormon apologists, they always play this game of doctrine, right? And they always make it very clear that a good Mormon can sometimes disagree with things said over the pulpit and general conference, right? But you cannot disagree with the things in the standard works. Correct? That seems to be the largest sort of thesis on this study of doctrine.
John: Yes, but that thesis is not in the standard works.
Niel: Well. Okay. But here is something where it very clearly says some very particular things, the most important which is that it's not by commandment or constraint. And there has never been a revelation canonized, or even saying, "thus sayeth the revelation" kind of thing... you ignore completely the Word of Wisdom according to the scriptures and Mormon teachings of doctrine, and remain a good Mormon. Or the alternative is you have to accept everything said in general conference.
Mike: All right. I think you're, you're thinking too black and white, Niel—it's either yes or no, you accept it all or you don't—it's a little more complicated than that. I mean, there's lots of shades here that I think you're ignoring. That would mean that we would have to take everything literally in the scriptures, all the law of Moses things we'd still have to keep... I mean, that's, that's kind of a ridiculous statement.
Niel: Or, or! The crazy thing is just to see it for what it is.
Mike: Well, I think this goes back to when the children of Israel, when the Melchizedek priesthood was taken... what was put back in its place was this law of strict commandments. "Here's what you do every day. This is how many steps you can take for this." So you're asking for a weekly menu to be passed down from the general authorities. That's not the way Christ's church is supposed to work.
Niel: Mike, I want to go on the record as saying, I absolutely agree with you that God is in no way logically consistent or even rationally possible. Okay? I get that.
Mike: That's not what I said! God sends out the Holy Ghost and you're supposed to use your common sense. This commandment is saying, don't overindulge in things and live your life in a balanced way. He doesn't need to spell out for us, "On Mondays for breakfast, I want you to have oats. In wintertime you can throw in a steak at night." That's just silly!
Niel: Bishop Mike, can I drink green tea?
Mike: Green tea?
Niel: Green tea, coffee, and go to the temple. It's your call, bishop Mike.
Mike: You can't have a coffee. No, no, you can't. Switch to an herbal tea and I'll let you slide.
Jim: I think we're running in circles.
John: I was going to say, let's move on, fellas. Let's see. Who hasn't read yet?
Jim: I haven't. I'll go. "Yea..." ...We're doing 12, right?
John: Yeah. 12.
Jim: Okay. Let me start again. "Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly; And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine."
John: Now, I think we've established that this is pretty well ignored. Interestingly enough, because of the health issues in the United States, if the LDS people—and I include myself in this, I mean, I'm overweight—but if the LDS people were to obey this, they would probably really enjoy good health.
Jim: Yeah.
John: All right. Any other comments or have you all spent it all?
Jim: I think there's a good chance on Judgment Day this will be used against a lot of the members of the Church.
Tom: I think the surprising thing for me was that Niel just announced that this was the smoking gun for Mormonism. I had no idea that this was the one troublesome topic that was going to be the downfall of the Church overall.
John: I just want to go on the record saying I think it's a lot more than green tea keeping Niel out of the temple... [Laughter] All right. Um, I'll move on to verse 14. "All grain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life, not only for man but for the beasts of the field, and the fowls of heaven, and all wild animals that run or creep on the earth; And these hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger."
John: Fifteen's an interesting verse. It says that animals were made for man to eat, right? Did I read that correctly?
Jim: What about beer?
John: Oh, we're getting there. It's coming up. Okay, Tom, why don't you read Verse 16 and 17?
Tom: "All grain is good for the food of man; as also the fruit of the vine; that which yieldeth fruit, whether in the ground or above the ground—Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain."
John: Now, Jim, can you define for us what "mild drinks" meant in 1833?
Jim: I would say it would be cider, and beer, brewed beer.
John: And cider at the time was fermented.
Jim: Yeah.
John: So, it seems—and I think most historians would agree—there's a real exception that Joseph is making here between hard liquor and beer.
George: So take me through it quick... "Grain is good for the food of man," when it comes to beer, would be included, but hard liquor would not. What is the base ingredient in hard liquor that would make it different than "grain is good for the food of man?"
John: Well, um, since liquor is distilled, it packs a much bigger wallop. It has more alcohol per ounce. So...
George: But it still comes from a grain product, right?
Jim: Some do.
George: So, why? Why does this show the distinction between something light and something hard? I'm not following what you mentioned there a minute ago.
Jim: I think the distinction is mild drinks. Um, you know, "mild" definitely, I think, would connotate less alcohol content.
Mike: I’ve got an interesting footnote: "As recently as 1901, apostles Brigham Young Junior and John Henry Smith argued that the revelation did not prohibit beer. However, LDS church leaders now teach that consumption of any form of alcohol, including beer, violates the Word of Wisdom."
George: Did that come with prohibition? That or was that before then?
Mike: They were making their argument in 1901; it wasn't until 1921 that Heber J. Grant said these things are to be followed and obeyed. So there's a big turn of the century hullabaloo over these things, that might've coincided with prohibition, like you're saying.
Jim: Temperance was a pretty long movement even before prohibition.
John: Yeah, the late 19th century.
Mike: That was Emma Smith's argument against having the bar in the Nauvoo House: you have all these Saints coming over, they're a part of the temperance movement, and if Joseph was serving alcohol, he was going to drive away new converts.
John: I think there's another point to be made, that all the stuff in here, about the grains, and not eating meat except in time of winter or famine, and the prohibition of alcohol and tobacco, were very common ideas floating around at the time. It wasn't real foreign. A lot of people have given Joe Smith credit for, like, predicting health codes, and saying, "He essentially banned smoking long before science proved that it was negative!" But even then, it was seen as a social... it was smelly and produced smoke. Joseph Smith might have had a certain amount of foresight in putting this out, and he was ahead of his time in some ways, but he wasn't standing out on his own in giving these revelations.
Jim: No, this was not anything new necessarily.
John: Okay. I'm just going to read the end to make sure that for those following along, they can finish it out... verse 18: "And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones; And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures; And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint. And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the destroying angel shall pass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them. Amen."
Tom: I think it's interesting that all of you apostates actually read some of the scriptures and didn't wither up. Congratulations.
John: Hey, we can read the scriptures. So, any last thoughts on the Word of Wisdom?
George: So are we going to talk about about... fatty, a little bit? Overweight... portions? Because I mean, that, I think, should be there... Mike put out this thing early in the conversation, that said, "We're going to keep this thing going and we want there to be direction today of what we're going to do..." But then, you know, there's a huge elephant in the room here, that some of the most unhealthy people in the entire world are members of the Church. We are grossly overweight. It just seems like that's part of the Word of Wisdom that I think seems to be there, the health part.
Tom: "Let's talk about fatty?" I like it. [Laughter]
John: Let's turn that on its head. Let's suppose, George, that they did that. What would be the social ramifications? I mean, a lot of people who are overweight struggle emotionally with it. Think about poor sister, I dunno, Smith. She's overweight, she's single, she's already feeling down, and now suddenly God won't let her in the temple. I think that'd be emotionally devastating to start singling out the people who are overweight. And that's why, frankly, I think they don't do it.
George: Well, I totally agree. But I do think that if they took the whole thing back and said, "We're going to make some things just, they're going to keep you out of the temple. If you're smoking or drinking hard liquor or things like that, that may be it. But if we also have some guidelines for healthy living..." Because every time you turn around, the Church prances out statistics about how much healthier we are than anybody else, and how our life expectancy is longer. But in reality, we should be giving lessons on good health, not just, "Don't drink green tea."
John: I think in the wards I was in, they did. They tried to do it in a non-offensive way. And I think Mike was making this point before, I think the second part is still in the scriptures and people talk about it. And frankly, in Utah, there's a huge movement of people who are into whole foods and grains and herbs and that sort of thing. I think that probably stems from the Word of Wisdom.
Jim: Unfortunately, along with that comes a lot of very reactionary things such as anti-vaccination and a belief in chiropractic.
Tom: There's a whole group of Mormons, too, that believe in the Fritos, the Doritos and the Oreos too. [Laughter] Sacrament meeting, when they're busting open all the ziplock bags for the kids...
Jim: So, uh, are going to talk about pot now?
John: Pot's out.
Jim: Awww.
John: So let's review for those following along at home. If you want to be a Mormon, you cannot drink coffee. Some bishops might let you drink decaf, but most probably won't. You cannot drink—
Niel: Can you start that over with "LDS Mormon?"
John: What other kinds of Mormons are there?
Niel: Every other kind.
John: Okay. So if you are a Salt Lake, if you are a Brighamite Mormon, you cannot drink coffee. Some will let you drink decaf but for the most part, no coffee. You cannot drink tea of any of the major tea varieties, meaning green tea, black tree tea, and any of those... there's no Earl Gray for you. You can most likely drink your diet caffeine soda. Some will probably give you guff about it, but it won't keep you out of the temple. You can eat as much meat as you want.
John: You can eat fruit out of season and you can eat whatever kind of grain you want. You can eat the corn that was for the hawks or whatever. [Laughter] No alcohol in any form or any shape and no recreational drugs. Did I miss anything?
George: No drugs as in pain drugs?
John: Oh, that's why I said recreational drugs. You can take all the prescription painkillers you want.
Mike: No, you can't abuse that too. That's in there. You can't abuse prescription drugs.
John: So drug abuse is out. Now I remember when I was at BYU, this is the early nineties, there was a big controversy around kava, which apparently is a mild stimulant that comes out of the islands. And the general consensus was that wasn't allowed either. So any sort of recreational stimulant is not allowed. Did I miss anything, Mike?
Mike: I was going to say, I think you said you can eat all the meat you want. I'm going to disagree with that. I think that's something I need to repent of.
John: Well, my point is, maybe you shouldn't, but that's not going to keep you out of the temple. That's not going to keep you out of positions of leadership or whatever.
Mike: Okay. I'll agree with you there.
Niel: You'll still get your wives.
John: To be clear, there's no "wives," unless you're a serial divorcer.
Niel: In this life!
John: Yeah. All right. One last thought. I think we've pretty well hashed out the Word of Wisdom. And we're all feeling a little worse for the wear, a little little bloodied going through the fight, but hopefully it was worth it. Any, any last thoughts? You guys? No one wants the last word? No one wants to call...
Tom: It's a good thing.
Jim: This podcast makes me want to drink.
John: There was some allusion to the old Judaic laws... I think, more than anything, for me, the Word of Wisdom doesn't have to make sense. It's a marker that marks "ingroup" and "outgroup" and it helps keep the borders, so when people come into the Church and have to live that law, it helps them self-identify and see themselves as Mormons and make sort-of-hard choices that aren't too hard. I mean, it's not really that hard to give up alcohol on the bigger scheme of things—there's people who struggle with it, don't get me wrong—but I think it's very much akin to the religions like Islam or Judaism that give up pork. It's kind of hard to do, but not that hard. You can easily get around it.
Tom: The only thing that I've always had a problem with in the Word of Wisdom is the ambiguousness and the vagueness. How some things are kind of in the shadows. I've always hated the fact that the Church has never really made a stance on caffeinated soda. I don't know if they do that just to spark debate. I've always hated that. Go one way or the other! But I guess they don't want to put their foot down because they're afraid that all those kids will stop attending church because they have to have their Pepsi... I don't know.
Jim: I think it's a culturally driven phenomenon. It's defined by the culture and then that culture is reinforced by the religion.
John: Okay guys, I think this discussion has been informative and we invite all out there, if they want to continue the discussion and argue with any of us about the Word of Wisdom, to please head over to the mormonexpression.com website. You can also call and leave your opinion on our line at 801-906-6722 or send us an email at mail@mormonexpression.com.
John: I have not been drinking, by the way. [Laughter]