Testing a Mormon Prophet –2: The Hinckley Timeline

Gordon B Hinckley, the late Mormon Church president, had more opportunities than most to become familiar with Mormonism. It makes you wonder why his most frequent answer to questions from the media was “I don’t know.” He held several distinctions and his life has been, understandably, celebrated by the Mormon Church. He served a mission in London in 1933, unusual in Depression Era Mormonism. On his return he accepted a job offer in 1935 to lead the new Mormon public relations department, bringing with him his college qualifications in journalism. This move effectively made him the first ‘career Mormon’ in the church’s history, all other General Authorities coming from other professions and backgrounds to serve full-time.

Later, as church president, he became the most travelled Mormon president ever, also having the distinction of being responsible for the largest temple building programme in the church’s history. More than two thirds of all currently operating temples were dedicated during his incumbency and he brought the number of temples up from 27 to 122 in just 11 years, with 11 more announced or under construction. He was the second oldest president after David O Mc’Kay and some would argue that he deserves the accolades laid on him and I am not about to deny the man his due. A question arises, however, as we look at his extensive and impressive history. The Hinckley time-line will help you see what I mean.

Early Years

23 June 1910 - born in Salt Lake City, Utah; just twenty years before, Mormonism had “officially” renounced polygamy. The president during Hinckley’s formative years, Heber J Grant (1918-1945), was a practising polygamist, fleeing the country in 1903 to avoid being arrested, finally convicted in 1906 and fined $300. Grant was born in 1856, when Brigham Young was teaching that Adam was God, was 21 in 1877 when Brigham Young, died, and became an Apostle in 1882, when the church was till teaching the Adam/God doctrine.

At this time, and for some time to come, the Journal of Discourses, source of much of the controversy surrounding Mormon doctrine was still regarded as authoritative, a “Standard Work” of the church. In 1913 James Talmage, an Apostle of the church, first published The Articles of Faith, a comprehensive look at church doctrine based on Joseph Smith’s famous creed. 1915 saw the first publication of Talmage’s magnificent work on the Saviour, Jesus the Christ. Both books have proved seminal works for generations of Mormons and are still key text books today; he had been at the centre of Mormonism from birth.

1928 - Hinckley completed High School in Salt Lake City, going on to study at the University of Utah; His education was thoroughly Mormon.

1933 - After attending the University of Utah he was called to go on a mission to London. He would have built his presentation of Mormonism on long-established Mormon works such as Journal of Discourses, as well as more recent works like those produced by Talmage.

1935 - Hinckley returned to the United States and accepted a job offer to lead the Church's new public relations department. Hinckley's responsibilities included developing the Church's recently established radio broadcasts and making use of the era's new communication technologies, putting him, from an early age, at the centre of professionally presenting Mormonism to the world.

1937 - He started serving on the Sunday school General Board, putting him at the centre of the Mormon teaching programme.1938 saw the publication of The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith by Joseph Fielding Smith, Apostle and Grandson of Hyrum Smith, brother of Joseph Smith JR.

In 1954 the teachings of Joseph Fielding Smith himself, a man regarded as “the leading gospel scholar and the greatest doctrinal teacher of [his] generation”, began to be published in three volumes. Doctrines of Salvation is, again, a comprehensive study of key Mormon doctrine and has proved definitive for generations of Mormons. The same year John Widstoe published the Discourses of Brigham Young.

1958 - This year saw the publication of Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R McConkie’s attempt at producing a definitive systematic theology of Mormon teaching based largely on Doctrines of Salvation. It is much quoted by the church to this day. After service in a stake presidency, Hinckley became a General Authority of the Church in the now discontinued position of Assistant to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, giving him experience in application and leadership at the highest level.

Mid-life

1961 - Around this time America was in the middle of the great Civil Rights Movement and the Mormon Church came under a lot of fire for its policy of barring coloured people from holding the priesthood. Nevertheless, the church put up a robust defence of its anti-Black doctrine until it gave in to pressure and made a policy change in 1978. At 51, Hinckley himself became an Apostle and member of that Quorum, the youngest at that time. Being an Apostle from such a young age has given him more opportunity than most to study Mormon leadership, policy-making and doctrinal decisions at the highest level.

In the early 1980’s the ill health of both Church President Spencer W Kimball and his ageing Counsellors N Eldon Tanner and Marion G Romney led the Church leadership to resort to the occasional practice of adding an additional Counsellor to the First Presidency. Hinckley filled this position on July 23, 1981. At the time of Tanner's death in 1982, Romney succeeded him as First Counsellor and Hinckley succeeded Romney as Second Counsellor. 1980 also saw the publication of Ezra Taft Benson’s famous Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet, in which he makes clear that the prophet “speaks for the Lord in everything, is more vital than the Scriptures, can make Scripture, and that rejecting the counsel of the prophets brings suffering.”

During this time period, there were a number of questionable, new Mormon historical documents that began to surface, and Hinckley oversaw the purchase of some of these documents. Later, most of the newly surfaced documents turned out to be forgeries of Mark Hoffmann including the Salamander Letter. Because of his prominence in the Church and his responsibility to oversee the purchase of historical documents, Hinckley became a key figure in the investigation of Hofmann, giving him vital experience in being at the centre of and dealing with controversies surrounding Mormon Church history.

By this time, however, Hinckley was largely shouldering the burdens of the First Presidency himself. Though he officially remained Second Counsellor, he was informally referred to in the press as "acting President of the Church."

1985 - Kimball and Romney remained largely out of the public eye until President Kimball died in November. Older Mormons will remember that, with the calling of a series of elderly men dogged with ill health, this made him de facto president of the church from this period. His official incumbency is thirteen years, but his de facto incumbency is nearer 28 years. These years have given him unparalleled experience as a top church leader, and his lifetime of service, from missionary to president, a familiarity with church polity, praxis and doctrine unmatched by any other president.

Ezra Taft Benson became Church President, and named Hinckley First Counsellor. Romney succeeded Benson as President of the Twelve, though age and health problems effectively prevented him carrying out his duties. Thomas S Monson became Second Counsellor, and, for a while, all three members of the First Presidency were able to perform their duties. In the early 1990s however, Ezra Taft Benson developed serious health problems and, although the church kept up the pretence of his running things, his own grandson publicly denounced them for exploiting a sick old man. First Counsellor Hinckley again carried out many of the duties of the President of the Church until Benson died in 1994. Meanwhile, 1992 saw the publication of the Encyclopedia of Mormonism in which much Mormon knowledge and doctrine was gathered and explained.

Howard W Hunter, who had succeeded Romney as President of the Twelve, became Church President and Hinckley and Monson became his Counsellors, In addition, Hinckley becoming President of the Twelve by seniority.

Latter-day Prophet

March 12, 1995 - When Hunter died after a presidency of only nine months, Hinckley was chosen to be president of the Church at the age of 84 and led the church until his death in 2008.

Under his leadership, the Church expanded the number of temples world wide from 27 to 122 (as of October 2005, with 11 announced or under construction). His involvement with Mormon temples, their purpose and operation would have given him key insight into temple doctrine.

23 September 1995 he announced and read The Family, A Proclamation to the World, a statement of belief and counsel prepared by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. He has had a key role in formulating and clarifying Mormon doctrine on marriage and the family.

He is the most-travelled Church leader-past or present, travelling millions of miles over the years. In spite of his advanced age, he continued to travel the world over as he dedicated temples and met with the Saints, making it vital that he brought a thorough understanding and clear presentation of Mormonism.

Questions for the Prophet

Adam/God

In an interview in the New Yorker Magazine, January 2002, President Hinckley confessed, “Brigham Young said if you went to Heaven and saw God it would be Adam and Eve. I don't know what he meant by that.” Pointing to a grim-faced portrait of the Lion of the Lord, as Young was called, Hinckley said, “There he is, right there. I'm not going to worry about what he said about those things.”

Q. But the first prophet you knew, Heber J Grant, had sat at the feet of Brigham in his youth, the same Brigham, who taught this very doctrine until his death in 1877. The Journal of Discourses, considered a Standard Work of the church in your youth, clearly reports this teaching in some depth. Weren’t you paying attention?

The gods of Mormonism

The same article reported, ‘I asked whether Mormon theology was a form of polytheism. “I don't have the remotest idea what you mean,” Hinckley said impatiently.’

Q. But Talmage’s great works, The Articles of Faith and Jesus the Christ, have been standard Mormon text books from the time you were three years old; they clearly teach a plurality of gods, otherwise known as polytheism. One example will suffice. Interpreting the plurality of Genesis 1:26 in the classic Mormon way, Talmage writes:

The Scripture specifies three personages in the Godhead…this fact is instanced by the plurality expressed in Genesis: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness”;…From the words of Moses, as revealed anew in the present dispensation, we learn more about the Gods who were actively engaged in the creation of this earth…In the account of the creation recorded in Abraham, “the Gods”, are repeatedly mentioned (Jesus the Christ, Deseret Books, pp 32/3. The references to “Moses” and “Abraham” are to ‘modern revelation’, which speaks often of gods)

Didn’t you read Talmage? Are you not familiar with the authoritative work he references, The Pearl of Great Price? Didn’t you read Widstoe’s collection of Brigham Young’s discourses, in which is recorded, “Gods exist, and we had better strive to be prepared to be one of them”?

God an Exalted Man

In a 1997 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle the following exchange was reported:

Question: “There are some significant differences in your beliefs [and other Christian churches]. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a man?”
Hinckley: “I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, ‘As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.’ Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about.” Interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997, p 3/Z1

Q. Didn’t you take the time and trouble to study the teachings of your own founding prophet, published in 1938 by Joseph Fielding Smith? A volume in which can be read:

God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!

The Mormon Colour Bar

From another question and answer section from an interview Jan 29th, 2002 conducted by reporter Helmut Nemetschek, ZDF television, Germany, at Salt Lake City, Utah, in the Church Administration Building we read:
Question: “Until 1978 no person of color (sic) attained the priesthood in your church. Why it took so long time to overcome the racism?”
Hinckley: “I don’t know. I don’t know. (long pause) I can only say that. (long pause) But it’s here now. We’re carrying on a very substantial work on Africa for instance and in Brazil. We’re working among their people developing them.”

Q. Weren’t you paying attention in the sixties and seventies when the civil rights movement caused the Mormon Church to make a robust and defiant defence of church doctrine barring Negroes from holding the priesthood? Didn’t you understand the issues when, in 1978, church policy was so radically changed? By this time you were an Apostle of the church and at the centre of leadership and public relations.

We have been here before, of course, but making the timeline makes this Mormon prophet’s public persona and official remarks seem even more disingenuous as we consider what unparalleled resources were available in his 98 years. He didn’t just read the books; he rubbed shoulders with their authors. He did not just learn the doctrine; he sat on the councils that made the doctrines. His apparent ignorance was then more convenient than convincing.

Previous Posts:

Testing a Mormon Prophet

Testing Mormon Prophets

The Mormon Message of prophets

The Changing Face of Mormonism

Who Speaks for Mormonism?

21 Questions about Mormonism

Who Speaks for Mormonism?

A thorny issue for Mormons is that of authority, and the question of who speaks for the church and who is speaking from their own personal convictions and human viewpoint. This is a very important point because Christians are often accused of misrepresenting the church and its teachings. One way of ensuring that we get it right is by knowing and using reliable sources. Attempts on their part to clarify this issue often include statements similar to the following:

“The only works that are authoritative and binding on the church and its Members are the four books of scripture: the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price (collectively known as the standard works), and official pronouncements from the First Presidency, the church's three-Member governing body.”

On the face of it this is not an unreasonable statement. There has to be a plumb line by which all other claims to truth can be judged. For the Christian it is the Bible, for the Muslim it is the Koran, for the Jew the Torah. The above statement seems reasonable as a final standard by which to judge truth, or at least Mormon truth. It is a clear statement with apparently no equivocation. One Mormon correspondent illustrates this point by reference to the book Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R McConkie.

“Thousands of books have been written by Latter-day Saints over the last 166 years. Some of them are well-written and accurate, some contain merely the personal theories of the writer. But just because a Latter-day Saint writes something doesn't mean what he writes is correct or speaks for the church.

A case in point is a work widely accepted by Members of the LDS church: Bruce R. McConkie's Mormon Doctrine. In this encyclopedic work, McConkie attempted to explain in detail what Latter-day Saints believe about more than 1,100 gospel topics. Unfortunately, some of his interpretations and beliefs were not correct, and the second edition of his book had a number of, what were termed in the preface, ‘changes, clarifications, and additions.’ McConkie, as great a man as he was…was imperfect just like the rest of us.”

These two statements seem to clearly define the contrast between "scripture" and those writings, statements, commentaries made by Mormons about scripture and truth. For the Latter-day Saint, however, there is a problem here.

Questioning the Prophets

From the earliest days of Mormonism remarkable claims of revelations, prophecies etc. have been the norm. Even though the LDS church started with a book, nevertheless what was written has always proven insufficient and "the saints" have been encouraged to look to "living prophets" for guidance and direction. In a defining statement Ezra Taft Benson said:

“The most important prophet, so far as we are concerned, is the one living in our day and age. This is the prophet who has today's instructions from God to us today. God's revelation to Adam did not instruct Noah how to build the ark. Every generation has need of the ancient scripture plus the current scripture from the living prophet. Therefore, the most crucial reading and pondering which you should do is of the latest inspired words from the Lord's mouthpiece.”

(Conference Report, Korea Area Conference, 1975, p.52, quoted in 1989 Priesthood Manual, Seek to Obtain My Word)

Essential to Mormon thinking is the belief that the heavens have been opened once more and that God, through his servants the prophets, directs and guides the affairs of his people. Continuous revelation is understood to be the lifeblood of the church. Of course Christians do not believe the heavens are closed and Mormons work from a closed canon as much as Christians.

Nevertheless, Mormons are encouraged to believe that the affairs of the church are guided on a daily basis by revelation through living prophets. This being the case, when the average Latter-day Saint looks to his leaders for guidance and clarity he hardly expects to have to pick carefully through a selection of teachings, comments and pronouncements, weighing each one. He certainly is not encouraged to even consider the possibility that apostles and prophets would be found wanting in clarity and accuracy in bringing the true "interpretation" of church teaching to their congregations. Listen to Mormon apostle Orson Pratt:

“Have we not a right to make up our minds in relation to the things recorded in the word of God, and speak about them, whether the living oracles believe our views or not? We have not the right.”

(Journal of Discourses 7:374-375)

Brigham Young declared:

“I know just as well what to teach this people and just what to say to them and what to do in order to bring them to the celestial kingdom, as I know the road to my office…I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve.”

(Journal of Discourses, vol.13.p.95. Also see vol.13.p.264)

Joseph Fielding Smith said:

“Neither the President of the Church, nor the First Presidency, nor the united voices of the First Presidency and the Twelve will ever lead the Saints astray or send forth counsel to the world that is contrary to the mind and will of the Lord.

An individual may fall by the wayside, or have views, or give counsel which falls short of what the lord intends. But the voice of the First Presidency and the united voices of those others who hold with them the keys of the kingdom shall always guide the Saints and the world in those paths where the Lord wants them to be.”

(Ensign, July 1972, p.88)

It has always been understood amongst the Latter-day Saints that "when the prophet speaks all debate is ended". Indeed, if you had to define the seminal message of the Mormon Church it is that men may once again look confidently to prophets and apostles to guide them unerringly in their lives and devotion to God.

“When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan - it is God's plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy.”

(Improvement Era June 1945,p.354)

Oracles or Just Men with Opinions?

Contrast this with another quote from Joseph Fielding Smith:

“You cannot accept the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works.”

(Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft), 1956, 3:203-4.)

But surely what makes the "authorities of the Church" authorities at all is their dependability and their insight into the business of God. It is almost a given that their comments, in whatever form, will be "in accord with the revealed word in the standard works". Their humanity will surely show through in tone and presentation, but surely not in content. This is the view Christians take of biblical writers. If this is not the case then they are no "authorities". Of course an individual may hold an opinion that has no bearing on eternal verities, e.g. 'should a Mormon drink Coke?' and this opinion we may choose to ignore. However, when a "prophet" speaks, even as a man, touching gospel principles then, even as a man, his opinion should be in accord with revealed truth. We should be able to trust him.

If we are to sift and check, harbour doubts, speculate and essentially question him then how does he differ from the Dalai Lama, Rajneesh or the Archbishop of Canterbury? How could you square such thinking with statements like this from Spencer W Kimball:

“Apostasy usually begins with question and doubt and criticism…They who garnish the sepulchres of the dead prophets begin now by stoning the living ones…They allege love for the gospel and the Church but charge that leaders are a little 'off beam'...Next they say that while the gospel and the Church are divine, the leaders are fallen.”

(The teachings of Spencer W Kimball, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1982)

How can we trust a leader whose personal opinions differ from his official pronouncements for God? Surely we have been promised that such a thing would never happen?

Of course the problem here, typically, is that the Mormon Church is trying to hold two mutually exclusive positions simultaneously. The traditional position of the church is that God once again speaks through prophets and that, in contrast to a dead tradition, the "true church" is in a state of growth and development, a state of flux. The Mormon canon of scripture is not a complete canon but a founding canon, clearly identified as the "standard works" of the church, but the whole canon is not fixed since it is purported to include further revelations and announcements up to the present day. Hence the statement, " The most important prophet, so far as we are concerned, is the one living in our day and age." This makes Thomas Monson and the rest of the "general authorities" of the church more important to current church members than Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Peter James and John, or even Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. 'Watch the prophet' is the phrase sometimes used. Spencer W Kimball criticised the practice of some that, "return to the pronouncements of the dead leaders and interpret them to be incompatible with the present programs." The message, clearly, is that one should test the past by the present.

On the other hand, as the church grows more sophisticated, in an increasingly sophisticated world, it is apparent that these prophets are more closely scrutinised by a people who are ever more critical and discerning. Leaders can no longer make pronouncements that are xenophobic, confrontational or overtly triumphalistic in nature, and expect to get away with it. Nor can they any longer make ridiculous claims about archaeology and the Book of Mormon, the imminent fate of the United States Government, or the inhabitants of the moon. The answer is to have a fixed canon of scripture, controlled from the centre, against which everyone, even the prophet, is to be tested. This is the current thinking. The message here is that one should test the present by the past. The position of the church has shifted. Surely, though, in a church that claims continuing revelation, and promises unerring guidance there should be perfect accord between prophets past and present?

Next: The Changing Face of Mormonism

We Thank Thee, O God, For a Prophet?

Thomas S Monson is the new president of the Mormon Church. After the death of Gordon B Hinckley on January 27th 2008, Monson’s appointment was announced on 4 February to a world overwhelmingly indifferent to all things Mormon; although the church prefers to think of us as all waiting with baited breathe. He was announced as “the new world leader of the church” on that date and more recently sustained as “prophet, seer and revelator” at the 178th Annual General Conference in April and now heads the, nominally 13 million strong church. He has issued the traditional invitation to “the less active, the offended, the critical, the transgressor” to come back and “feast at the table of the Lord and taste again the sweet and satisfying fruits of fellowship with the Saints.”

The response has been the traditional stampede of indifference as people who have once walked in the light of the Son prove reluctant to return to the shadows of Mormonism, while those with grievances, from liberal-minded progressives to frustrated fundamentalists, along with a large number of the cold and indifferent see nothing to attract them back to a religion that epitomises conservatism, and micro-management.

Thomas S Monson has the distinction of being the first Mormon president to have been born after the war – the First World War that is. The Mormon Church has the distinction of being probably the best established gerontocracy in the world, making even the leadership of China look increasingly youthful by comparison. The previous five presidents were all born within 20 years of each other, before or around the turn of the twentieth century, from Harold B Lee (b.1899) through Spencer W Kimball (b.1895); Ezra Taft Benson (b.1899); Howard W Hunter (b.1907) and Gordon B Hinckley (b.1910).

This last president, Gordon B Hinckley, was the man who, in his dotage, guided the Mormon Church into the 21st century, but he is only following in the footsteps of the man who effectively guided the Mormons into the 20th century, Joseph F Smith (b.1838). If you have ever wondered why those nice young missionaries seem so steady, carrying themselves as though they enjoyed wisdom beyond their years (which of course they really don’t have) you need only look to the leaders they strive to emulate. That is not gravitas they are copying, its arthritis and the cautious gait of old age.

So what sort of leader will the new man be? One word that has been used a lot to describe him is ‘folksy’. He is said to have a speaking style that favours anecdotes and down-home story-telling that has a lesson for life. A look at his inaugural “First Presidency Message” as president in the April Ensign magazine gives a good flavour of the man. Under the heading “Treasures of Eternal Value” he offers us an insight into what he calls a “three part treasure map to guide you to your eternal happiness”. In a rambling and “folksy” message he takes us from the radio programme he used to listen to as a boy – Jack Armstrong, the All-American Boy (those were the days), through a “romantic and fanciful ballad from years ago”, his naval training towards the end of the Second World War and the Christmas cards he and his wife exchanged for fifty five years with their good friends Bob and Grace.

The proverbs are there in abundance: “Fear is the enemy of progress”; “Success is the progressive realization of a worthy ideal”; “you pile up enough tomorrows, and you will find you’ve collected a lot of empty yesterdays” (this from The Music Man); “never put off ‘till tomorrow what you can do today”; “the bitterest tears shed over graves are the words left unsaid and the deeds left undone”. Yes, the proverbs are there and he cites sources as varied as the 1957 Broadway musical The Music Man, R L Stevenson’s Treasure Island, a 1930’s radio drama, a popular ballad by Buddy DeSylva (who wrote for Al Johnson), and the (19th c.) author Harriet Beecher Stowe, as well as personal anecdotes.

He mentions Jesus twice, cites the Bible once and says nothing, absolutely nothing about the Christian gospel. Nothing about the purposes of God in Christ; nothing about the inherent sinfulness of man; nothing about the effectual nature of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross; nothing about the need for us to turn to God for mercy; nothing about grace; nothing about the sure hope of the gospel and nothing about the sure promises of God to those who love him. His three pieces of the map to guide you to your eternal happiness are:

1. Learn from the past
2. Prepare for the future
3. Live in the present

It is a self-help message of which Samuel Smiles, Dale Carnegie and Norman Vincent Peale would have been proud. I have a similar message on my study wall on a “precious” poster my wife gave me years ago. It reminds me:

1. Learn from yesterday
2. Live for today
3. Look to tomorrow
4. Rest this afternoon

I prefer the Snoopy version. I don’t think we can look to this man for any substantial doctrine, prophetic outlook or insightful teaching, indeed I think The Gospel According to Snoopy will probably prove more challenging.