Posted by:
Wally Prince
(
)
Date: December 06, 2019 02:33AM
...anymore, are they?
That thought struck me as I was reading the Word of Wisdom "clarification" that was published in the New Era this past August.
Excerpts:
"Here are some facts about the Word of Wisdom:
"In Doctrine and Covenants 89:8–9, the Lord forbids our using tobacco and “hot drinks,” which, Church leaders have explained, means tea and coffee.1: [The footnote refers the reader to "Selected Church Policies and Guidelines".]
----
Again from the article:
"Green tea and black tea are both made from the leaves of the exact same tea plant. The only difference is that the leaves in black tea are fermented and in green tea they’re not. They’re both tea and against the Word of Wisdom. Some drinks have tea in them but don’t advertise that fact, so always check the ingredients. Also, iced tea is still tea." {{Note that the unnamed author of the article is relying here on nothing more than his/her own specious reasoning. They aren't citing any actual revelation or divine clarification concerning green tea. Worse, they ignorantly trivialize the differences between highly processed black tea and virtually unprocessed green tea. It's like saying that "the only difference between beer and barley tea is that beer is fermented and barley tea is not." Stupid beyond belief!}}
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/new-era/2019/08/vaping-coffee-tea-and-marijuana?lang=eng-------
So, yeah.....What's missing from the above excerpts, and indeed from the entire article, is any claim that the "clarification" or any interpretation of the scope of the Word of Wisdom is or ever was revelation from God. They accurately state that according to D&C 89 "the Lord" forbids tobacco and hot drinks. But they don't anywhere claim that "the Lord" ever specifically revealed at any time to anyone that "hot drinks" means coffee and tea. Nope. They only state that, after the fact, "Church leaders have explained [that hot drinks] means tea and coffee.1"
Church leaders have explained.....LOL! Past Church leaders have "explained" a lot of crap that is now disavowed by current Church leaders.
As mentioned above, they support the "clarification" in the New Era by referring the reader to Section 21 of the "Selected Church Policies and Guidelines".
As soon as I saw the word "policies" I recalled that the Church has recently taken to dismissing the embarrassing history of banning Africans/people of African descent from the priesthood and temple endowment as something that was just a poorly understood "policy" that they are currently disavowing. So keep that in mind. They are NOT saying that the policy concerning green tea (for example) is doctrinal or that it is based on direct revelation of any kind.
In fact, here is what the "Selected Church Policies and Guidelines" actually say:
" 21.3.11
"Word of Wisdom
"The only official interpretation of “hot drinks” (Doctrine and Covenants 89:9) 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."
That's it folks.
Did you catch that first part? The whole coffee and tea ban (including cold drinks) is entirely based on the flimsy foundation of a "statement made by early Church leaders." They aren't even claiming that it was a clarification revealed to them by God. They're just hoping that the naive reader will assume that if the "early Church leaders" said something then it must be correct.
But doesn't that also apply to the formerly assumed necessity of ALL of those original elements of the temple ordinances that have since been deleted? The "early Church leaders" certainly SAID on numerous occasions that those things were ALL important. Worse, nobody has clearly stated that the deletions were directly commanded by God.
Doesn't it also apply to the teaching that Adam is our god and the only god worshiped by us? That was something preached in General Conference by an "early Church leader".
Doesn't it also apply to the notion that people of African ancestry are spirits who were less valiant in the pre-existence? Not only was that something that was said frequently by "early Church leaders", but it was never overturned by revelation. Kimball's "revelation" (actually his "I thought about it really hard for a long time and this is what I decided" decision/revelation) never repudiated those teachings about less valiant spirits in the pre-existence.
Well, long story short, they're clearly not being straight with the youth, who are the target of the New Era article. The name of the author of the article is not even given. The "clarification" is not even sourced to the current Prophet or the First Presidency. It's just an article in a church magazine that cites a bureaucratic handbook and an unspecified "statement by early Church leaders."
But impressionable young Mormons will read that and think that it must be straight from God because it's in an official church magazine.
It's really pathetic.