The LDS corners of the Internet have been abuzz the last couple of days since Idaho gubernatorial candidate Rex Rammell announced a political meeting to which he only invited men who were elders in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For you non-LDS readers, the term elders refers generically to men who hold the Melchizedek Priesthood. The Church does not have a paid, professional clergy.
The purpose of the meeting was purportedly to discuss the "White Horse Prophecy." This "prophecy" is a collection of statements that were supposedly told to Theodore Turley and Edward Rushton in 1843 by the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both men were faithful members of the Church and recorded their recollections their diaries. We have no reason to suspect the integrity of these men or their motives in recording and attempting to preserve the statements, but there are some discrepancies in their memories of the events. Regardless, there is a pattern in the way revelation is given to the Church.
The Lord said in the Doctrine and Covenants that he would give us a pattern in all things so we would not be deceived. (See D&C 52:14) This "revelation" does not come to us by the established pattern. In 1918, President Joseph Fielding Smith said without equivocation that the revelation is false. Revelation to the Church will never come from some obscure corner of the Church, someone's diary, etc. When revelation comes, it comes in the front door. It doesn't sneak in through the back door.
Nevertheless, there are some members of the Church who seek to "look beyond the mark" (Jacob 4:14) and prepare the Church and kingdom of God in a manner that is not in harmony with their calling or authority. The efforts of those people can be embarrassing for them and sometimes lead them into apostasy.
In this case, we have a politician who is trying to gain political advantage by appealing to the latter-day saints using a discredited, alleged "prophecy." What good can come of it?
When the time comes for Joseph's statements regarding the Constitution to be fulfilled, the actions of the elders of the Church will be directed by the President of the Church, not some political candidate trying to start a movement. A couple of scriptural examples came to mind when I read this.
In 1 Samuel 13 we read about King Saul getting impatient before going into battle while he waited on the prophet Samuel to arrive. Instead of waiting on the Lord's servant, Saul took it upon himself to offer sacrifice. In the face of impending danger, he was unwilling to wait for the Lord's prophet to give him guidance and he took matters into his own hands. That action cost him the kingdom.
The second example is found in 2 Samuel chapter 6. Uzzah takes it upon himself to steady the ark of the covenant when it looked like it was about to fall. He violated the rule that no one was to touch the ark. God "smote him there for his error" and he died. What was Uzzah's error? He didn't trust that the Lord was capable of protecting his own ark without his intervention.
The Church public affairs spokesperson, Kim Farah, issued this statement:
"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is politically neutral and does not endorse or promote any candidate, party or platform. Accordingly, we hope that the campaign practices of political candidates would not suggest that their candidacy is supported by or connected to the church.
"The so-called 'White Horse Prophecy' is based on accounts that have not been substantiated by historical research and is not embraced as Church doctrine."
Politically and spiritually, this has to be one of the most ill-advised tactics a politician has used in recent years. It's a cynical attempt to politicize the Church and its teachings. It completely ignores the importance of voting latter-day saint women, who should be rightfully offended by their exclusion. (After all, weren't Mormon women were the first in the nation to have the vote?) LDS women are every bit as capable as their male counterparts to discuss doctrine, prophecy, history, and the impact of those things on the modern political landscape. If and when the "elders of Israel" do indeed step up to preserve constitutional liberties, I suspect that it won't be done without their wives at their sides playing an equally critical role. To exclude the Church's women for the purpose of holding an unauthorized priesthood "conference" to generate political support is asinine at best and treads awfully close to apostasy.
Yes, we live in "perilous times." Our general authorities have said so. They see and know what is going on. We must wait for them to lift the "ensign" before we go off half-cocked in some direction that does not accomplish what the Lord wants. I'm sure we will see more LDS folks, particularly those in politics, try to force the Lord's hand. Some will urge their brothers and sisters to join them in militia groups. Others will attach themselves to telestial political parties which ultimately must fail. Some will feel the compulsion to focus on the warnings of the church leaders of the past and ignore the counsel of the present-day leaders. Some may even break away and form communal/survivalist groups that unwisely rely on the force of arms or who claim new revelation outside the channels ordained by the Lord. (See Revelation 13:10)
The best thing to do is be still, be watchful, and know that God is fully in control of the situation. We have a living prophet and living apostles. We need to study their sermons from the last general conference and, if we apply those teachings in our lives now, we won't be caught unprepared if some dire national calamity or spiritual emergency of some kind occurred.
If we have the Spirit of God and we follow its counsels, we'll find ourselves exactly where we need to be when the time comes, ready to act, and completely in harmony with the will of the Lord when it is revealed through his servants.
For more info:
Church statement on Rex Rammell's actions
Analysis of the "White Horse Prophecy" by FAIR
Partisans and the saints: the difference between choosing a side and choosing the right
Liberal or conservative? Joseph Smith's 1844 presidential platform
Standing against secret combinations
Comments