Interpretations of Scriptures
But there are many
places where the scriptures are not too clear, and where different interpretations
may be given to them; there are many doctrines, tenets as the Lord
called them, that have not been officially defined and declared. It is in the
consideration and discussion of these scriptures and doctrines that
opportunities arise for differences of views as to meanings and extent. In view
of the fundamental principle just announced as to the position of the President
of the Church, other bearers of the Priesthood, those with special spiritual
endowment and those without it, should be cautious in their expressions about
and interpretations of scriptures and doctrines. They must act and teach
subject to the over-all power and authority of the President of the Church. It
would be most unfortunate were this not always strictly observed by the bearers
of this special spiritual endowment, other than the President. Sometimes in the
past they have spoken “out of turn,” so to speak. Furthermore, at times even
those not members of the General Authorities are said to have been heard to
declare their own views on various matters concerning which no official view of
declaration has been made by the mouthpiece of the Lord, sometimes with an
assured certainty that might deceive the uninformed and unwary. The experience
of Pelatiah Brown in the days of the Prophet is an illustration of this general
principle (DHC, 5:339-345).
There have been rare
occasions when even the President of the Church in his preaching and teaching
has not been “moved upon by the Holy Ghost.” You will recall the Prophet Joseph
declared that a prophet is not always a prophet.
To this point runs a
simple story my father told me as a boy. I do not know on what authority, but
it illustrates the point. His story was that during the excitement incident to
the coming of Johnston’s Army, Brother Brigham preached to the people in a
morning meeting a sermon vibrant with defiance to the approaching army, and
declaring an intention to oppose and drive them back. In the afternoon meeting
he arose and said that Brigham Young had been talking in the morning, but the
Lord was going to talk now. He then delivered an address, the tempo of which
was the opposite from the morning talk.
I do not know if this
ever happened, but I say it illustrates a principle,—that even the President of
the Church, himself, may not always be “moved upon by the Holy Ghost,” when he
addresses the people. This has happened about matters of doctrine (usually of a
highly speculative character) where subsequent Presidents of the Church and the
people themselves have felt that in declaring the doctrine, the announcer was
not “moved upon by the Holy Ghost.”
How shall the Church
know when these adventurous expeditions of the Brethren into these high
speculative principles and doctrines meet the requirements of the statues that
the announcers thereof have been “moved upon by the Holy Ghost”? The Church
will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members,
whether the Brethren in voicing their views are “moved upon by the Holy Ghost”;
and in due time that the knowledge will be made manifest. (J. Reuben Clark,
“When Are the Writings and Sermons of Church Leaders Entitled to the Claim of
Being Scripture?” lecture given before the summer session of the Seminary and
Institute teachers of the Church at BYU, July 7, 1954, in David H. Yarn, Jr.,
ed., J. Reuben Clark: Selected Papers [Provo: Brigham Young University
Press, 1984], 101-2)
