While the Tanners make several charges against the Word of Wisdom and against Mormons for accepting the Word of Wisdom as a revelation, the bulk of their charges can be divided into two primary concerns.
1) The Tanners claim that the Word of Wisdom was not revealed by God, but was “obviously the product of the thinking of Joseph Smith’s times.” (Tanner and Tanner [1987], 413.
2) The Tanners charge that Joseph and other Mormon leaders were hypocritical in their preaching the Word of Wisdom compared to their personal observance of the principal. (Ibid., 406-13.)
Early in their attack, the Tanners attempt to demonstrate that Joseph contrived the Word of Wisdom revelation by borrowing from the philosophies of the temperance movements of his day. That there was a temperance movement in Joseph’s day is not a matter of dispute. In the early 1820's a number of Americans began crusading for temperance, or sobriety. This movement gained momentum until an organized Temperance Society-- originally called, in contempt, the “Cold Water Society” -- formed in 1826. (Arrington, 39.) By 1830 there was a Temperance Society in Kirtland Ohio and three years later (about a month before Joseph received his revelation on the Word of Wisdom) the temperance movement helped shut down the fourteen-year-old Kirtland distillery. (Paul H. Peterson, 13; Arrington, 40. ) By the following year the “American Temperance Society had grown to well over a million members.” (Bush [1981], 51.)
Among the list of early members we find names such as “George Smith, several Morleys, a Wells, a Coe, and a Lyman.” As Arrington notes, these “names [are] all associated with the history of Mormonism, and it is not improbable, though not known as certain, that these temperance workers had relatives among the Saints, even if they themselves were not Mormons.” (Arrington, 39.) Although we can only conjecture as to what influence the temperance movement had on Joseph Smith, it seems improbable that he would have been unaware of it. (Paul H. Peterson, 14.)
Temperance Societies, however, were primarily concerned with the prohibition of alcohol. There were “no influential organizations comparable to temperance societies” combating the use of tobacco, but “there were indications of reform on the local level, some of which could have conceivably had some influence on Joseph Smith.” (Ibid., 16.) Nineteenth century America saw other local reform campaigns such as the religious fervor of the health reform movements which were concerned with the effects of various substances upon the human body. (Ibid., 14-15.) This campaign was spearheaded by Sylvester Graham (of graham cracker fame [Bush {1981}, 52]) who was a former agent of the Pennsylvania Temperance Society. Advocating abstinence from alcohol, tobacco, coffee, tea and other “stimulants” (Peterson, 15-15; Bush [1981], 52) --as will be discussed shortly-- Graham “recommended his program to upstate New Yorkers in the 1830’s.” (Cross, 235.) Graham’s views grew in popularity, reaching its zenith after the Word of Wisdom had been promulgated. (Peterson, 19.)
Lastly we have the possible influence of contemporary medical wisdom of the day. Many early nineteenth century physicians believed that there was only one basic disease state and that what we now know to be different disease, were merely different symptoms of this same basic disease. The underlying condition of this single disease state was believed to be an imbalance in the vital nervous energy which determined an individuals health. When someone showed symptoms of this disease (which could be manifest as nearly any disease) it was believed that the person “needed a reduction in stimulation through dietary adjustment.” It was also reasoned that healthy people could prevent this disease by reducing their consumption of stimulants. (Bush [1981], 48-49.)
There is little doubt that Joseph would have been at least somewhat familiar with the prevailing health attitudes of his day. This might have included some knowledge of the temperance movement, Grahamism, and the notions of the medical community. There is even more reason to believe (as will be demonstrated shortly) that the Mormons interpreted the Word of Wisdom in light of this cultural knowledge on health just as Mormons do today. It was within this cultural context that Joseph received his revelation. Brigham Young, although not present at the event he describes, explained that Joseph and the school of the prophets used to meet in a small room over the prophet’s kitchen. When they met together many of the brethren would light their pipes, and spit their chewing tobacco all over the room. Often the prophet would deliver instructions in a smoke-filled room. This, and the complaints of his wife (who had to clean the filthy floor), made the prophet think about the matter and inquired of the Lord concerning the brethren’s use of tobacco. The Word of Wisdom was the answer to this inquiry. (JD 12:157-8.)
The Tanners suggest that the Word of Wisdom came from less-than-divine means by quoting David Whitmer (who, like Brigham, was not present during the above-noted episode):
Recognizing the fact that to some degree Joseph would have known about-- and/or been influenced by– the prevailing cultural views concerning health, it is appropriate to ask a few questions:
1) Does the Gospel change as new issues arise?
2) Is it unusual to adopt pre-revelatory cultural views as guidance because of a revelation or increased knowledge of a particular topic?
3) To what degree did the Word of Wisdom incorporate the prevailing views of Joseph’s culture?
1) Does the Gospel change as new issues arise?
Just within the framework of Mormonism we can see that many revelations have come as a result of Joseph Smith petitioning the Lord with questions about the Gospel or concerns over pressing issues. Mormonism began when Joseph Smith became concerned because of the confusion and “war of words” among the Christian churches of his day (JS History 1:6-14). Joseph’s prophesy on the Civil War was inaugurated by the events transpiring in South Carolina (D&C 87). (See also Vogel [1988], 189.) Section 76 of the Doctrine and Covenants (which is a revelation concerning the Resurrection of mankind and the Degrees of Glory) was revealed to Joseph because of his concern over John 5:29 as he was involved with his “translation” of the Bible. (See heading to Section 76.) The brother of Jared’s luminous stones were the product of his concern for light in the Jaredite barges (Ether 2:22- 3:6). We need not look past the New Testament, however, for the example of a changing gospel. Circumcision– the “everlasting covenant” (Genesis 17:13)-- was abandoned in the later Christian Church due to concerns of members who were uncircumcised (see Acts 15:24-28). Christ originally taught the gospel only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel (Matt. 15:24) and forbade his apostles from going to the Gentiles (Matt. 10:5-6), but later, after Christ’s death, Peter was commanded by an angel to take the gospel to all people (Acts 10, 11; Matt 28:19). It was often because of pressing issues that the windows of Heaven were opened to the pleas of God’s agents as they petitioned Him with their concerns.
2) Is it unusual to adopt pre-revelatory cultural views as guidance because of a revelation or increased knowledge of a particular topic?
Latter-day Saints recognize that they don’t have a monopoly on truth. Joseph Smith once said:
In the Old Testament, Joseph had a silver cup with which he divined (see Gen. 44:2, 5)– a practice known as hydromancy which was employed by surrounding pagans. (Quinn [1987}, 3.) When the Apostles chose a new Apostle by casting lots (see Acts 1:26) they were practicing what the pagans new as sortilege. (Ibid., 3.) Even some of Christ’s miracles had pagan counterparts. Jesus’ healing of the deaf man by putting his fingers in his ears (Mark 7:33-35) and Jesus’ healing of the blind man by touching his eyes with spittle and clay (John 9:6) were commonly practiced by the pagans of Jesus’ day. (Ibid., 4.) Jesus Christ, as the “Light of the World,” represented the universal aspects of Logos exactly as did the Greek names of Apollo, Hermes, Abraxas, and Mithras. (Fideler, 264; thanks to Kerry Shirts for providing this information.) Christ’s association with the Alpha and Omega was also reminiscent of the same association with the Greek god, Apollo. And Christ’s association with the term “the Way” (John 14:6), was similar to the portrayal of the characteristics of Hermes. (Fideler, 227-228.) The point to be noted is that Joseph cannot be faulted for borrowing from his environment to convey revelations, anymore than Biblical, and post-Biblical believers can be faulted for doing the same thing.
3) To what degree did the Word of Wisdom adopt the prevailing views of Joseph’s culture?
Having noted that Joseph most likely would have been aware of the prevailing health issues of his day, I’d like to examine to what degree he was influenced by them.
The Tanner’s argument of a non-revelatory Word of Wisdom relies primarily on the similarities of the Temperance Society’s prohibitions against the use of alcohol, tobacco, coffee and tea. (Tanner and Tanner [1987], 406.) But as already noted, the temperance movement was primarily engaged in the abstinence of alcohol. Although some members within the temperance movement discouraged the use of tobacco (as well as coffee and tea), there were “no influential organizations comparable to temperance societies established to combat its [tobacco] use.” (Peterson, 16.) As Paul Peterson, one of the foremost researchers on this subject, notes: “It would be less safe... to assert that Joseph was influenced by movements that opposed the use of tobacco, tea, and coffee.” (Ibid., 19.) Closely related to the temperance movement were other health reform campaigns which did recommend abstinence from tobacco, coffee and tea, but some of these same health reformers also recommended abstinence from pepper, mustard, (Ibid., 14-15) white bread, salt, ultimately all condiments, and even sex. (Bush [1981], 52. ) Calomel (a colorless, tasteless, white or brown purgative and insecticide) was taken for a variety of ailments. (Pickard and Buley, 92.) In fact Joseph’s older brother, Alvin, was given calomel for an apparent ruptured appendix, from which he died. (Anderson [1987], 69.) It should be noted that some of these supposed “stimulants” were not considered to have negative health effects by the medical community. Many physicians also considered people like Sylvester Graham (reformer and, as noted earlier, Temperance movement leader) a charlatan. (Nissenbaum, 14.) Nevertheless, as I will demonstrate later, early Latter-day Saints seemed to have adopted some of Graham’s positions in their personal health codes. All of these more radical elements, however, are conspicuously absent from the revealed Word of Wisdom.
What about dependance on the orthodox medical views of Joseph’s day? Around 1830, some health reformers aligned with respected orthodox physicians and botanists to discourage the use of tobacco. (Bush [1981], 56.) And, as I noted earlier, the medical community condemned the use of several “stimulants” among which was alcohol. The problem is that this same medical community believed in varying degrees of “stimulation associated with such items as ardent spirits, wine, beer, coffee, tea, meat, mustard, pepper, and other spices” (Bush [1981], 49; Nissenbaum, 86-104.) -- some of the same elements which the reformers suggested were harmful, and all of which were not included in the Word of Wisdom’s list of proscribed stimulants. Orthodox nineteenth century medicine, like the Word of Wisdom, discouraged the excessive consumption of meats, but also advised against eating unripe fruits. In 1832, for example, due to threats of cholera, the Special Medical Council of New York printed warnings against the consumption of “crude vegetables and fruits.” Some medical authorities believed that “a pineapple or watermelon” could be a “death warrant.” (Rosenberg, 30, 42.) The cure for an overload of these stimulants was not only achieved by reduction of stimulants through dietary adjustment, but also by “such relaxing or energy dissipating measures as massive blood-letting, purging with large doses of mercury, and blistering-- all to relieve excessive internal pressures.” (Bush [1981], 49.) All, of which (although perhaps practiced by early Mormons along with their contemporaries), are nowhere to be found in the Word of Wisdom.
While orthodox medical views in Joseph’s day discouraged the use of alcohol, there was disagreement as to which alcoholic beverages qualified as detrimental stimulants. This presented a problem for the early Saints in Word of Wisdom interpretation. According to several medical authorities, “fermented (as distinguished from distilled) drinks such as cider, beer (especially ‘small beer,’ which contained only about 1 percent alcohol), malt liquor, and wine long had been recommended by physicians as a benign alternative to hard liquor. Although most physicians didn’t believe such drinks were “required” they generally believed that they could be consumed without risk. Some physicians even believed that wine contained no alcohol and could be consumed in moderation daily by healthy people to ward of diseases. (Bush [1981], 50-51.) Some medical experts still maintain that moderate wine consumption is beneficial to health. We’ll come back to this issue later.
Most physicians in Joseph’s day believed tobacco to be poisonous in concentrated form, and while it was losing its status as a panacea (often seen in the use of “smoke enemas”), many physicians believed that it did not “pose the same acute risk as ardent spirits or possibly very cold water. ...Moreover, although critics including some physicians had condemned the recreational use of ‘the weed’ for nearly two centuries, tobacco’s medicinal properties had been extolled even longer. One student of this subject has listed over 250 different maladies—from abdominal pain and snake bite, to madness, piles, scurvy, and yaws—allegedly treatable with tobacco, which was applied onto or injected into literally every surface or orifice of the human body.... Tobacco smoke was thought to protect against the black death in the seventeenth century, and some still recommended cigars to ward off cholera in the nineteenth.” (Bush [1981], 56.) In extreme cases (although less frequently) infusions of a preparation of the tobacco leaf were still recommended for hernial strangulation. As Lester Bush notes:
Other physicians believed that for many people coffee had a “‘more or less wholesome effect’” depending on the persons age and other individual peculiarities. It was believed that climate also affected one’s reaction to coffee. It was not as “‘useful in warm, as in cold and temperate climates.’” (Quoted in Bush [1981], 63 n. 34.) As Bush explains, “some authorities might have condemned the Mormon standard, therefore, not because it denounced hot drinks but because it failed to warn against cold ones as well.” (Ibid., 55.) Because the early Saints interpreted the Word of Wisdom in light of their medical understanding as well as cultural background, it’s easy to see how they could have understood observance differently than Mormons do today. The amazing thing, however, is that the Word of Wisdom got the right things right. This lends credibility to the claim that the counsel was received by inspiration rather than environment.
Part II: Charges of Hypocrisy
The Tanners accuse Joseph, Brigham, and other early leaders of being hypocritical in their observance of the Word of Wisdom. In order to support their charge they imply that the Word of Wisdom was interpreted the same in Joseph’s day, as it is in ours. They write:
To further bolster their charge of hypocrisy Tanners point out that in 1834, the High Council, (presided over by Joseph Smith) discussed the issue as to whether disobedience to the Word of Wisdom was a transgression sufficient to deprive an official member from holding office in the Church. Following the discussion, Joseph concluded:
It’s obvious from reading the minutes, however, that at least some Far West council members were overly concerned with relatively minor infractions. Elder James Emmet, for example, objected to making George Hinkle a High Counselor, “because he was to [sic] noisy.” (Ibid., 123.) Early Latter-day Saints frequently charged other members with odd or humourous offenses including things such as “‘murmuring’” and “‘joining with the world in dance.’” We also read about members in the Salt Lake Valley being charged with “excommunicable offenses” such as “refusing to accept ZCMI scrip as wages, subscribing to the Salt Lake Tribune, and buying from Gentile establishments.” Generally, members were rarely excommunicated for such odd offenses, but instead were brought before a High Counsel. In “the majority of cases... it seems that the attitude of the defendant [would] determined whether he was excommunicated (or disfellowshipped) more than the offense per se.” (Bush [1983], 27; italics added.) Nevertheless, sometimes Saints were excommunicated for minor infractions. As historian, Richard D. Poll, has observed, for instance, under the leadership of “Joseph Smith and Brigham Young some Mormons were excommunicated for attending non-Mormon dances, failing to accept mission calls, using tobacco and intoxicants, gossiping, failing to tithe, Sabbath-breaking, patronizing non-Mormon businesses, and failing to follow counsel. (Poll [1983], 83.) Excommunication for minor offenses was not unique to Mormonism. Strict membership requirements and frequent excommunications (for things such as using profane language and Sabbath breaking) was common among many Protestant churches as well. (Backman [1980], 54.)Excommunication, however, did not always entail the same penalization that it carries today. In many early cases, once “an offender [had] manifested proper repentance, there was no longer any reason for ecclesiastical sanctions. Hence, initially recalcitrant members were often cut off and then reinstated in a relatively short time-- as little as a few days or weeks.” Other times the repentant member was simply rebaptized without ever being cut off in the first place. (Bush [1983], 27.) Understanding this different view of excommunication and disfellowship among the early Saints sheds light on the minor importance of the Word of Wisdom related charges against the Missouri presidency.
In the case of the Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer, we find that among the official charges were included, “neglecting to attend meetings...[and] neglecting the duties of his calling.” (Cannon and Cook, 177; 163.) Concerning the charges of failure to observe the Word of Wisdom, Cowdery said “he had drank tea three times this winter on account of his ill health” and the Whitmers said “they did use tea and coffee but they did not consider them to come under the head of hot drinks.” (Ibid., 136.) That these leaders did not agree on the interpretation of the Word of Wisdom, and that Cowdery believed that drinking tea for medicinal purposes was not in violation of the Word of Wisdom, is significant in understanding the early LDS perspective and later evolution of interpreting the Word of Wisdom in LDS thought– which I will discuss shortly.
For now, however, it is important to understand that although these leaders were charged with not observing the Word of Wisdom, such charges were secondary to the other, more serious charges, leveled against the Missouri presidency (Cowdery, Phelps, and David Whitmer). In fact, Elder Lyman Wight, of the High Counsel, “stated that he considered that all other accusations were of minor importance compared to their [the Missouri presidency] selling their lands in Jackson County.” (Ibid., 138.) Likewise, Paul H. Peterson notes:
Was Joseph hypocritical in his observance of the Word of Wisdom, or did he simply interpret Word of Wisdom observance differently than we do today?
Early LDS records suggest that “adherence to at least some portions of the revelation was mandatory and necessary for Church fellowship” but there “was no consistent pattern or interpretation or application of the Word of Wisdom between the time it was given and the middle 1840’s.” (Ibid., 22.) How did the early Saints interpret the Word of Wisdom? And why would their interpretation differ from ours today?
A few years earlier, on August 7, 1831, Joseph received what is now section fifty-nine of the Doctrine and Covenants. In this section the Lord revealed that “all things which come of the earth, in the season thereof, are made for the benefit and the use of man, both to please the eye and to gladden the heart; Yea, for food and for raiment, for taste and for smell, to strengthen the body and to enliven the soul. And it pleaseth God that he hath given all these things unto man; for unto this end were they made to be used, with judgment, not to excess, neither by extortion.” (D&C 59:18-20.) When these verses are applied to the Word of Wisdom, they suggest moderation rather than abstinence.
The Word of Wisdom, which was initially printed as a separate tract, (Matthews [1982], 411) was included in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants. With this printing, Joseph added an inspired introduction and description of the revelation (which he did to a number of other revelations) wherein he informed the members that this instruction was “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.... Given for a principle with promise....” This introduction was included as the first three verses “of the revelation itself when the 1876 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants was published and thus was part of the revelatory text canonized in 1880.” (McCue, 66-67; Matthews, 411.) The inclusion of this provision, and the fact that the principal was still in its infancy practically guaranteed a fluid interpretation of “observance.” As Peterson notes:
Joseph’s approach to the Word of Wisdom, when viewed in historical perspective, seems sensible and rational. In the late 1830's, the Kirtland Stake had dissolved due to apostasy, the Missouri Saints were being driven from the State with accompanying hardships, and Joseph himself was imprisoned. At a time when the Church was struggling for mere existence, it would seem small and petty to quibble about a drink of tea or coffee. Similarly, after a comparatively comfortable initial existence in Nauvoo, Mormon society was torn apart by internal dissension and by the controversy and persecution which resulted from the promulgation and practice of peculiar religious doctrines. Emphasis on a rigid interpretation of a health code during such a period of turmoil would seem ill-timed and inappropriate. Moreover, there is some evidence that Joseph sought to avoid needless dissension among the Saints by urging moderation and charity. It would appear that some Mormons had been influenced by the fanaticism that characterized sermons of some of the radical temperance reformers, and tended to be intolerant of those with professed Word of Wisdom weaknesses. The Prophet, recognizing that the revelation must be seen in perspective with other matters and doctrines pertaining to the growth of the “Kingdom,” urged them to be slow to judge or condemn others. Joseph’s rather curt reaction to a talk advocating “temperance in the extreme” was illustrative of his desire to teach the Saints to be charitable and merciful, rather than vindictive and unforgiving. (Ibid.; HC 4:445.)
Early LDS Medical Views and the Word of Wisdom
It general it appears that, to the early Saints, Word of Wisdom observance was recommended with the perception that observance meant moderation (Peterson, 27) guided by prevailing medical beliefs. (Bush [1981], 57.) The Latter-day Saints of the 1830’s, like the Latter-day Saints in every decade since, have attempted to interpret the Word of Wisdom according to insights of conventional medical knowledge. In Joseph’s day there were a variety of differing medical “systems” each with its own popularity and none with the allegiance of the majority. Herbal medicine was very popular among the Saints, whereas homeopathic medicine (which amounted to little more than dispensing sugar pills and colored water) was just gaining a foothold. (Ibid., 48.) The Saints, like their contemporaries, practiced many of these systems to various degrees. The Word of Wisdom was not received in a cultural vacuum. (Alexander, 87.)
Earlier I noted that according to the opinions of the reform movement and the nineteenth century medical community, many items or spices which are not mentioned in the Word of Wisdom were also considered to be harmful. Reading through the statements of early Latter-day Saints we see that some members interpreted the revelation to include these more radical items, although they were never made an official part of the Word of Wisdom. Some of the more radical interpretations continued well into the twentieth century. David O. McKay, for instance, in 1926 advised the youth to “refrain from the use of tobacco” as well as “too much meat and from the use of strong spices, cocoa, tea and coffee.” (David O. McKay, Conference Report, October 1926, p.114.)
Among the items which Grahamism recommended avoiding were white bread and flour, and refined sugar. Many early Saints (and no doubt some now) saw this as good advice in context of the Word of Wisdom’s recommended use of grain. It is therefore interesting to read that Rulon S. Howell, the Brazilian Mission president between 1949 and 1953, encouraged the members in Brazil to use unrefined sugar and avoid white flour. Missionaries who were sent to teach the Brazilian women in Relief Society, also discouraged the use of white flour and refined sugar. (Grover, 35.) David A. Smith, speaking in April 1930 Conference encouraged members to substitute white flour for wheat. (Elder David A. Smith, Conference Report, April 1930, p.86) He also believed-- and as previously noted this was one of the beliefs of early physicians– that pepper, spices, and mustard should be avoided. (Ibid., 85.)
In subsequent years, however, LDS leaders began to teach that while it was possible there were health benefits to avoiding such items, consuming them was not in violation of the Word of Wisdom. Mark E. Peterson, for example, said in April 1953 Conference:
Thus we see that the Saints, in all ages, have been influenced in the interpretation of the Word of Wisdom by the findings of the medical community. Medical sentiments of the 1830's suggested that each of the four proscribed Word of Wisdom stimulants (alcohol, tobacco, coffee, and tea) offered some redeeming therapeutic value. That is not to say that the belief in medicinal value was the only reason the Saints consumed these stimulants. Sometimes they were consumed for the relief of stress, mental anguish, or simply to liven the spirits. For many of the early Saints these circumstances presented justifiable grounds for nonobservance or fell within the tolerances of moderation. (Peterson, 24.)
Alcohol
Despite the Word of Wisdom’s discouragement against the drinking of wine (except for sacramental purposes) evidence suggests that many Church Authorities did not consider moderate wine drinking in the same category as the use of strong drinks– which mirrored contemporary medical views. (Peterson, 26; 104-5.) And like some of the orthodox physicians of the day, many LDS believed that there were medical benefits for the consumption of alcohol, including tonic or restorative properties (Bush [1981], 51), as well as relief from fatigue and sore throats. (Pickard and Buely, 92.) At other times alcohol was consumed to lift their spirits in times of turmoil. (John Taylor, HC 7:101.) The Saints didn’t believe that ingestion under these conditions was in violation of the Word of Wisdom. (“Memoirs of George Albert Smith,” entry under 1834, in Watson, 50-52.) In the final days of Brigham Young’s illness in 1877, he received regular doses of brandy– the single most widely used drug of that time. (Bush [1978], 97-98; Bush [1981], 58.)
The perspective of moderated observance gave rise not only to ambiguous compliance but sometimes to vacillating attitudes toward liquor laws. Mormon Nauvoo, for instance, initially prohibited liquor. Due to the urging of Saints who believed in tolerance and moderation rather than abstinence, as well as the growing Gentile element, and – in all likelihood– the fact that Nauvoo could see an economic benefit to their collapsing economy, the Nauvoo City Council repealed their prohibition on liquor in 1841. Both Saints and Gentiles were free to sell alcohol and Joseph even attempted to open a bar, until he abandoned the idea due to the protests of his wife. (“The Memoirs of President Joseph Smith: (1832-1914),” Edited by his daughter Mary Audentia Smith Anderson, The Saints Herald, Jan. 22, 1935, 110.) It should be noted, however, that even with the relaxed liquor laws, alcohol was not overly easy to procure, that drunks were virtually unseen and, as a whole, the Mormon town was more temperate than other contemporary frontier cities. (Smucker, 155.)
The Tanners charge Joseph and Brigham with hypocrisy because they drank alcohol. (Tanner and Tanner [1987], 406-13.) But what the Tanners fail to recognize, or explain, is that these leaders did not view the Word of Wisdom in the same perspective and light as Mormons do today. Observance meant moderation. It doesn’t matter that Joseph drank on occasion. He lived the Word of Wisdom according to his understanding of the revelation based on the newness of the concept and his cultural understanding of health and medicine.
Tobacco
The early LDS approach to tobacco was similar to that of their attitude to alcohol. It was avoided, but it was also believed– based on contemporary medical advice– to offer medicinal aid for things such as toothaches (as used by Brigham Young [Bush {1981}, 56-67]), and relief of fatigue, stress, and headaches. James Talmage was counseled by the First Presidency “‘to try the effect of moderate smoking’” for his nervous disorder. Talmage wrote in his journal that “‘a good cigar produced a marvelous quieting of my over-wrought nerves.’” (Wagoner and Walker, 344-345.) While Joseph Smith apparently had no objection to the use of tobacco for medicinal purposes (Peterson, 38-39), he apparently almost never used it himself. The one most notable exception, was when he tried the faith of the Saints by riding through Nauvoo, smoking a cigar just after having preached a discourse on the Word of Wisdom. (Diary Excerpts of Abraham Cannon, Vol. 19, October 1, 1895, reproduced in New Mormon Studies.) Brigham Young counseled moderation in the use of tobacco and in a sermon in 1860 chastised the brethren for their tobacco chewing because it was uncouth, filthy and offensive, not because it violated the Word of Wisdom. (Brigham Young, JD, March 10, 1860, 8:361.)
Coffee and Tea
Previously I pointed out that Cowdery, Phelps, and the Whitmers were charged with violating the Word of Wisdom because they consumed coffee and tea. They argued that they did not consider coffee and tea “to come under the head of hot drinks” and in the case of Cowdery, tea was taken on account of his ill health. (Cannon and Cook, 136.) Those who charged these three with Word of Wisdom violations obviously believed that coffee and tea were the “hot drinks” of the Word of Wisdom. Some Saints apparently heard Joseph make this definition as early as 1833. (J. Johnson, 12.) It is unknown if these three men were unfamiliar with the statements made by Joseph and Hyrum, or if they simply disagreed with that interpretation, or if, as stated by Oliver, they believed that there were circumstances when drinking coffee and tea was permissible. Whatever the case we do know that, as with the other elements of the Word of Wisdom, there was apparently some confusion among the Saints as to what was encompassed or excluded by “hot drinks” as well as differing opinions as to wether “hot drinks” could be taken in moderation or if they should be abstained from. The Tanners, claim:
The Tanner’s are not completely forthright, however, in claiming that current Word of Wisdom interpretation emphasizes “how much caffeine” a drink has. Just as in the days of Joseph Smith, Mormons today often interpret the Word of Wisdom according to orthodox medical knowledge. To consume chemicals which are harmful to the body violates the intent of the Word of Wisdom. For instance, it is a violation of the Word of Wisdom to use marijuana, heroin, or LSD. We also know now about the harmful effects of caffeine and Church leaders have recommended its avoidance. While decaffeinated coffee (“Decaffeinated Coffee Does Not Violate Word Of Wisdom” Revelations in Addition to Those Found in the LDS Edition of the D&C in New Mormon Studies) and herbal tea (Joseph Lynn Lyon, “Tea,” Encyclopedia of Mormonism 4:1441) do not violate the Word of Wisdom, drinking caffeinated colas– while discouraged– does not constitute nonobservance. The Church “has never included Cola drinks within the actual prohibitions of the Word of Wisdom” (quoted in Peterson, 101) and drinking colas does not prevent a member from entering the Temple.
Early Mormons did not always avoid coffee and tea. As with alcohol and tobacco, coffee and tea were believed to offer medicinal benefits. As Peterson notes:
The Church’s increased emphasis on Word of Wisdom observance.
For most of LDS history the Word of Wisdom was viewed with some laxity and most certainly more with moderation than abstinence. Wilford Woodruff, for instance, “concluded that it was wisdom to deal with all such matters according to the wisdom which God gave; that a forced abstinence was not making us free, but should [put us] under bondage with a yoke upon our necks.” (Wilford Woodruff Journal, 7 November 1841 quoted in Bergera [1985], 32.) Orson Pratt, and probably other members, felt that Word of Wisdom infractions were not as serious as disobedience to more fundamental Gospel principles. (Orson Pratt, JD [May 20, 1855] 3:18.) Despite the fact that the Word of Wisdom was not lived to the degree that it is today, non-Mormon visitors to both Nauvoo, and later Salt Lake City, observed that the Mormons were more moderate in their consumption of those elements proscribed by the Word of Wisdom than their contemporaries. (Peterson, 47-48; Arrington, 42.)
Initially Brigham Young, like Joseph Smith, took a tolerant rather than a vigilant attitude to Word of Wisdom observance. Nels Anderson wrote, “‘For him the test of a man's faith was his integrity to an assignment given by the church. Could a man take a company of Saints to a desert and hold them to the task of building a community; then it didn’t matter much to Brother Brigham if he was a user of whiskey and tobacco. Those “Word of Wisdom” virtues were precious to him but secondary.’” (Quoted in Arrington, 41.)
As gospel knowledge grew LDS leaders began to recognize the wisdom of D&C 89 and efforts appeared periodically to commit to greater adherence. “Additional evidence of serious concern,” notes Peterson, “is seen in the fact that in December, 1850, Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Parley P. Pratt, and other Church [leaders] met in Young’s ‘upper room’ to pray. Here they concluded to ‘renew the Word of Wisdom.’” (Quoted in Peterson, 44.) By 1862 Brigham Young had curbed his own habits and encouraged the members to curb their bad Word of Wisdom habits as well. Then by 1867 Brigham Young began campaigning for a stronger emphasis on the Word of Wisdom. The Womens’ Relief Society and the men’s School of the Prophets were both organized in each Mormon community and adopted rules requiring Word of Wisdom observance. At that time the primary reason for the increased stress on the Word of Wisdom was economic. (Arrington, 43.) It had become necessary for the Mormons to develop and maintain a self-sufficient economy. This required not only developing their own resources (which included providing jobs for the hundreds of new converts arriving regularly), but also controlling their cash outflow which was needed for the home economy as well as the gathering of Saints into the Valley– which required large sums of cash. The Mormons could not afford to waste their liquid assets on imports such as alcohol, tobacco, coffee and tea. There would have been no problem producing these products locally for their own consumption, but “something more permanent and productive than tea, coffee, and tobacco was wanted for the building of the Kingdom, in view of the limited funds at the disposal of the Saints.” (Ibid., 44.)
In the 1860's Brigham Young suggested that the Saints in St. George manufacture their own wine to provide for the sacrament wine as well as to help their economic situation (which was destitute at that time). (Ibid., 46; Peterson, 64.) The need for economic independence fueled the LDS desire to break their bad Word of Wisdom habits, and little by little the Church saw an increase in observance. Peterson, however, explains, that “while the economic motive was the major factor in bringing about an increased stress on Word of Wisdom observance, Brigham Young also stressed the spiritual side. ...Moreover, one can sense after reading various conference addresses in 1867 that the Authorities were becoming preoccupied with the idea of more strict observance of the Word of Wisdom, rather than the notion of producing these products locally.” (Peterson, 58.)
“The spirit whispers to me,” said Young in 1867, “to call upon the Latter-day Saints to observe the Word of Wisdom, to let tea, coffee, and tobacco alone, and to abstain from drinking spirituous drinks.” (JD [August 17, 1867] 12:118.) In this same year, Brigham Young referred to the Word of Wisdom as “the word of the Lord,” and explained to the members that although they had a great many privileges, indulgence in liquor and other injurious substances was not one of them. (JD [April 7, 1867] 12:29.)
Although LDS leaders urged greater observance and more dedicated commitment, members were slow in following the counsel. Many members had become addicted to these stimulants. Showing compassion for those who were addicted– especially the older members who had been addicted for years– efforts were concentrated on the younger generation. (See George A. Smith, JD [April 8, 1855] 2:362-364 and JD [August 2, 1857] 5:111.)
By the late 1800's, despite the high production of wine in Southern Utah, the Church became convinced that the promotion of this industry was a mistake due (in part) to the degradation of individual Saints. More of the home-grown wine was consumed in the Mormon settlements than church officials had hoped, and in1900 Church members were counseled to dig up their vineyards. (Arrington, 46.)
John Taylor, Brigham Young’s successor, took leadership of the Church in 1880, and two years later, according to one researcher, received a revelation designating the Word of Wisdom as a commandment. (Cited in Peterson, 69-70.) By the following year (1883) the Church saw the commencement of a “Second Reformation” which stressed, among other things, greater observance of the Word of Wisdom. (Ibid., 71.) In fact, the Quorum of the Twelve pledged themselves to observe the principals of the Word of Wisdom. Peterson notes that this stress on the Word of Wisdom “was strictly moralistic as Church members were urged to heed the revelation because God desired it and not because of economic pressure or health considerations.” (Ibid., 107.)
The renewed emphasis on Word of Wisdom compliance began to see fruition. Observance by way of abstinence was being preached vigorously throughout the Church until the Polygamy persecutions caused a shift of focus and a minor slump in observance. By 1894 Wilford Woodruff became President of the Church and spoke forcefully to the members about Word of Wisdom compliance. (Ibid., 76-77.) With the increasing concern over observance, some leaders began to question wether those who did not fully follow the Word of Wisdom should be allowed to attend the Temple. In the early 1900's bishops were asked to consider each situation on its own merits since there was no rigid rule for each case. (Bergera, 32.) Recognizing that it would be a hardship for the older men– who had become addicted– to abstain from tobacco in order to enter the Temple, the First Presidency decided in 1902 that such members “should at least be willing to curtail themselves as much as they possibly can, and promise to cleanse themselves from the tobacco odor and not to use it at all the days they do work in the temple.” (Quoted in Bergera, 32.)
Just as the Israelites wandered for forty years raising a new generation before their arrival to the promised land, so likewise, the Lord, in his wisdom allowed the Word of Wisdom to develop slowly so that the revelation might be “adapted to the weakest of the Saints” (D&C 89:3.) Joseph F. Smith, fifth President of the Church, felt “the reason ...why the Word of Wisdom was given not by commandment or constraint was that at that time . . . it would have brought every man, addicted to the use of these noxious things, under condemnation.” He reasoned that a merciful God would give individuals a chance to overcome undesirable habits before bringing them under law. (Conference Reports, October, 1913, p. 14) Nevertheless, Joseph F. Smith felt that it was time for stricter observance. In 1902 he “urged stake presidents and others to refuse recommends to flagrant violators but to be somewhat liberal with old men who used tobacco and old ladies who drank tea. Habitual drunkards, however, were to be denied temple recommends.” (Alexander [1981], 79.) As demands for observance increased bishops were advised to no “‘longer tolerate men in presiding positions who would not keep the Word of Wisdom.’” By 1906, in keeping with the increased emphasis on abstinence, the First Presidency and Twelve substituted water for wine in the sacrament in their temple meetings. (Cited in Bergera, 32; see also Alexander [1981], 79 and Alexander [1986], 261.) Seven years later, the First Presidency instructed the President of the Salt Lake Stake, not to call or recommend missionaries who did not observe the Word of Wisdom. (Clark, 4:283.) Five years later Heber J. Grant became Church President and in 1921, adherence to the Word of Wisdom was made a requirement for admission to the temple. (Alexander [1981], 82; Peterson, 90.)
Final Question: Why Would God Change Moderation to Abstinence?
The question might be answered that God did not change Word of Wisdom observance from moderation to abstinence, but rather than the Latter-day Saints eventually came to recognize what God knew all along-- that abstinence was preferred to ineffectual self-policed moderation. In verse four of the D&C 89 – which originally was the first verse– the Lord explains that this revelation was given “in consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days.” (See also Ford, 134-4.) The revelation begins not by condemning the stimulants it later suggests avoiding, but rather warning that it is due to the evil of conspiring men that the revelation was given. In our day we see the enticing alcohol and tobacco ads designed to lure young men and women into partaking of these vices. We read of the on-going lawsuits with the Tobacco Industry and the claims that they were aware of the links with cancer years ago. Addiction to these harmful stimulants drives billion dollar businesses.
While it is possible that in a perfect world moderation might be sufficient, even a cursory investigation of the ills caused by tobacco and alcohol alone should demonstrate that mankind is generally incapable of such moderation. Alcoholism, drunk drivers, date rape, and a variety of other maladies can be traced to the over-indulgence of alcohol. Sometimes critics cite studies which indicate that the consumption of small quantities of alcoholic can be healthy. While there may be some truth to this, the problem, as one researcher has noted, is that “moderate drinking can easily turn heavier, increasing the drinker’s risk of other diseases. Besides... any protection from alcohol is far less than a person gets from more traditional practices like exercise, proper diet and avoiding tobacco.” (Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph, May 14, 1984.) Other researchers are not so sure about the conclusiveness of these such studies. “‘A protective effect’” of the moderate consumption of alcohol, notes Dr. Arthur Klatsky, “‘is not really proven’” (Ibid.) and some research indicates that the same preventive benefits can be obtained from drinking grape or apple juice. (Ogden Standard Examiner, May 17, 1992.)
As for tobacco, Dr. James Mason, director of the Center of Disease Control in Atlanta wrote:
There appears to be at least three reasons why Word of Wisdom emphasis went from moderation to abstinence.
1) Line upon Line.
It is important to understand that not every Gospel Principal was, or is, revealed in its complete form all at once. Joseph Smith once said: “It is not wisdom that we should have all knowledge at once presented before us; but that we should have a little at a time; then we can comprehend it.” (TPJS 297.) As new truths are revealed, previous revelations are modified to accommodate additional light. “But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little....” (Isaiah 28:13; D&C 98:12.) “That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.” (D&C 50:23-24.) It is not strange that many truths are revealed in stages or degrees. Brigham Young once said:
The Church has seen a variety of changes and improvements as gospel knowledge has increased. The garment, for example, has undergone a series of changes, including changes of length. Early LDS garments extended to the wrists and ankles (See Melvin J. Ballard to Mr. Lloyd J. Ririe, December 1, 1933 in “Research Notes on LDS Temples-- Temple Clothes Letter,”New Mormons Studies; Buerger [1987], 55; Alexander [1986], 201) and were (until 1979) always one-piece. (Buerger [1987], 56.) Rebaptisms were not uncommon in early LDS history– especially during the Salt Valley “Reformation” of 1856-1857. (See Campbell, 181-84; King and King, 63; Quinn [1978], 226-32.) Even the Temple admission standards and questions have undergone changes. (Edward Kimball [1998], 135-76.]
Early Mormons understood things differently than we do today. Just as Biblical figures had strange view about the shape of the earth (Isaiah 11:12), the motion of the planets (Joshua 10:6), and animal husbandry (Genesis 30:33-39), so likewise some early LDS leaders had odd views about the habitation of the Sun, treasure-digging and a variety of other topics. Not only did they have their own cultural views, but the views of the Saints, and LDS leaders, did not always harmonize with the views of Joseph Smith. The early members of the Church, for example, voted to retain Sidney Rigdon as a counselor in the first presidency despite the protests of Joseph. (CHC 2:242-3.)
Considering the fact that there are other examples of partial understanding developing into advanced understanding as prophets and Saints became more spiritually mature, it is entirely possible that the early Saints simply did not fully comprehend the significance and scope of the Word of Wisdom. It’s entirely possible that we still don’t fully understand the depth of the principals which the Lord revealed.
2) Economic concerns and the Gathering of Israel.
As I’ve pointed out earlier, economic factors played a major if not sole role in the increased Word of Wisdom observance in the 1860's and 1870's. There are some who suggest that the early Saints never took the Word of Wisdom seriously until Brigham Young used the revelation as the perfect tool to enlist the assistance of Saints in supporting the emigration efforts. The Word of Wisdom would thus have been revealed for this later purpose of addressing the cash leak problem which would have hindered the gathering of Saints in the Salt Lake Valley. Since the Word of Wisdom tells us that it was revealed for the “temporal” salvation of the Saints, it is significant to recall that the gathering of Saints formed the foundation of their temporal salvation. (Thanks to Andrew Piereder for pointing out this perspective on LDS-Hist email list, July 28, 2000.) Even later prophets have noted the financial stress put upon those who refuse to observance the Word of Wisdom. In 1944, for example, Heber J. Grant said:
When the Word of Wisdom was first revealed, the health benefits which could have been attained from strict observance were minimal. Life expectancy was thirty-five years and by 1900 was still less than fifty years– less than that of underdeveloped countries today. (Bush [1981], 59.) Whereas the Word of Wisdom would have extended the lives of adult Mormons, most Mormons (and non-Mormons) died in either infancy or before they would have reached an age where the Word of Wisdom’s preventive effects (cancer, heart disease, etc.) would have any real impact. (Ibid.) The Lord, of course, knew that the time would come when adherence to the Word of Wisdom would impact the life expectancy and health of the Saints. Considering the length of time it took for the Saints to comprehend the significance of the Word of Wisdom and wean themselves from the addictive elements which it proscribed, it interesting that by the time this realization was made the health value of the revelation was real. As Lester Bush has written:
There may be other reasons for the change in Word of Wisdom observance and perspective, but the forgoing reasons fit comfortably into a framework of logic and the historical record. If we think in terms of the distinction between “rules” and “laws,” as J. Reuben Clark outlines below, we need not worry about why the status of the Word of Wisdom changed.
The Tanners make two primary charges against Joseph Smith and the Word of Wisdom.
1) The Tanners claim that the Word of Wisdom was not revealed by God, but was “obviously the product of the thinking of Joseph Smith’s times.” (Tanner and Tanner [1987], 413; italics added.)
As demonstrated in this paper, however, while Joseph was most likely aware of the prevailing health movements of his day, the Word of Wisdom– though similar to some health reform suggestions– included only those things which we now know negatively impacts our health. While the medical community and health reform movements added some proscribed substances which they (and admittedly some early Saints) believed were harmful, the Word of Wisdom ignores these elements. Joseph Smith, under the direction of the Lord, got the right things right.
2) The Tanners charge that Joseph and other Mormon leaders were hypocritical in their preaching the Word of Wisdom compared to their personal observance of the principal. (Tanner and Tanner [1987], 406-13.)
While the Tanner’s are correct that Joseph and other early LDS leaders partook of things which are proscribed by the Word of Wisdom, the Tanner’s fail to grasp that the early LDS view of the Word of Wisdom is not the same as it is today. Although taught by angels and heavenly messengers, Joseph had to learn line up line as all other prophets before him. His spiritual education was received within the limitations of his understanding, expectations, familiarity and cultural atmosphere.
The evidence suggests that the Word of Wisdom was not merely the product of Joseph Smith’s environment, and neither he, nor Brigham Young were hypocritical about their observance. Instead we find that God works through living prophets and directs the affairs of the Church in His own manner and according to His own timetable. And the evidence suggests that the Tanner’s charges have gone up in smoke.
(Special thanks to Russell Anderson for his helpful comments and suggestions.)
Michael R. Ash