By Jerald and Sandra Tanner
Every year the LDS faithful give a sustaining vote to their president, acknowledging his divine appointment as God’s prophet, seer and revelator. The concept of direct communication from God goes back to the very beginning of Mormonism when Joseph Smith claimed to literally converse with God and Jesus. As one looks through their Doctrine and Covenants he will encounter various revelations given to Joseph Smith which start with the phrase, “Verily, thus saith the Lord” (i.e., Sec. 38; Sec. 52; Sec. 95; Sec. 100). However, since Smith’s death in 1844, there have only been four additions to the LDS Doctrine and Covenants, none of which opens with the phrase “thus saith the Lord.” The last section added to the compilation was in 1978.
Interestingly, the 1890 section, ending plural marriage, and the 1978 section, ending priesthood restriction on Blacks, give instruction on ending embarrassing practices, not to establish new doctrine. These sections claim to be the result of revelation but the specific wording of the divine communications are not published. Since both of these changes came after the church had received years of severe criticism from the outside, one is left to wonder if the changes were made due to pressure more than hearing the voice of God. Oddly, Doctrine and Covenants section 132, which instructed Smith on the practice of polygamy, is still retained in their scriptures. While there never was a revelation in the Doctrine and Covenants stating Blacks could not be ordained to the priesthood, there were statements by President Brigham Young declaring that descendants of Cain, interpreted as Blacks, would not get the priesthood until after the resurrection:
The Lord put a mark on him [Cain] . . . When all the other children of Adam have had the privilege of receiving the Priesthood, and of coming into the kingdom of God . . . and have received their resurrection . . . then it will be time enough to remove the curse from Cain and his posterity. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, page 143)
If the ban on priesthood was not due to revelation, but simply one of practice, then why did it take a revelation to end the practice?
All of this raises the additional question as to how revelation is currently received in the LDS Church? In a 1996 interview LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley explained the current process of divine direction:
“Revelation no longer comes by vision,” Mr. Hinckley said, “but in the ‘still, small voice,’ like that heard by Elijah.”
“We wrestle with a problem, we discuss it, we think about it, we pray about it,” he said. . . . “And the answer comes in a remarkable and wonderful way.” (Washington Times, Dec. 3, 1996, page A8)
This revelatory process seems to also include surveys of the membership. In 1988 a church survey was mailed to 3,400 members in the United States and Canada. Many of the questions dealt with the person’s feelings and reactions to temple work. One of the questions wanted to know if the person “was confused by what happened” in the temple. Also, did he/she find the experience “unpleasant” or did she feel the rites were “too hurried.” The survey also wanted to know if the person found “it hard to go to the temple” or if the person felt “guilty about not doing enough.” One question tried to determine if the person felt “the church makes unreasonable demands” of its members. The results were not released, but in 1990 the LDS Church made major revisions to the temple ceremony, making it more palatable to the members.
In 1990 the church did another survey, evidently by telephone. Among other things, it wanted to know what type of marriage the person had (temple or civil), how active the person was in the ward and his level of tithing.
In 2001 the church sent out another survey to the female members. The Salt Lake Tribune, October 5, 2002, put the entire 30-page survey on its website, http://www.sltrib. com. It dealt with “everything from church attendance to belief in divine intervention.” The article further stated:
It asks if respondents felt depressed, lonely or sad in the past week and if they feel comfortable at Relief Society. How has their spiritual and prayer life progressed in the past five years, and why do they want to go to the celestial kingdom (Mormon heaven)—to be “with their family eternally, be in the presence of Heavenly Father, to experience eternal joy, achieve godhood, be free from sickness and pain, bear spirit children or create worlds?”
The article also reported:
One question that the survey skirts, however, is whether Mormon women want to be ordained to the all-male priesthood. It asks them if church leaders “understand the challenges of Latter-day Saint women today” or if women should be included more in “making decisions about church programs and policies at all levels.”
The survey was done “to provide church leaders with information about the needs and concerns of Latter-day Saint women,” says a letter . . . signed by Elder Ben Banks, . . .
“Along with frequent personal interaction with Latter-day Saints worldwide, senior church leaders occasionally use surveys as a means of listening to and learning from an increasingly diverse membership,” said LDS spokesman Dale Bills. “As with most large organizations, the results of such internal studies remain confidential.”. . . (Salt Lake Tribune, October 5, 2002, page Cl)
Those taking the survey were assured “that individual responses would be kept confidential.” However, one female physician, Dr. Janet Howard, expressed her concerns:
“My questionnaire had a number and bar code on it.” Howard said. It may have been useful as a tracking system, but leaves her nervous about “where information is going.” . . . She is also troubled by the church’s unwillingness to publish the results. . . .
“Why do they need such a detailed questionnaire about how women are feeling when they are supposed to be receiving divine revelation?” she asked. (Salt Lake Tribune, October 5, 2002, page C3)