April 11, 1997
Dear Editor,
After being out of town, I have finally secured and read Peggy Fletcher
Stack's articles about the touchy politics of the LDS Church's international growth (SL
Trib., 4/5/97, p. B-8). Readers who believe all is quite well in Zion probably did not
get too ruffled by the report, for there was sufficient flattery in the reports of growth
to bolster their belief. However, I imagine that those who keep a watchful eye on the
developments in the world with that eye trained in looking specifically for the unfolding
of the signs of the coming of Christ probably were jolted by the report as they should
have been.
Right off the top, anyone who has come to revere the principles of
freedom as taught most eloquently in the scriptures, especially the Book of Mormon, would
have grimaced when they read,
"In 1991, Utah industrialist Jon Huntsman told Armenian leaders
celebrating the opening of his cement plant that he prayed their nation soon would be free
and independent. The two LDS apostles traveling with him, Elders Dallin Oaks and Russel
Nelson, shuddered at those words. They immediately told reporters that while Huntsman is a
Mormon, his prayers were not those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints."
The article then goes on to report that the LDS Church profoundly
downplays any duty for their membership to be bold emissaries of freedom as it pertains to
government. The teachings of former days which implore the Saints to be activists for the
sake of freedom have been replaced by the blanket requirement for "faithful
members" to be obedient to whatever government under which they may find themselves.
This selling of our birthright of freedom for the sake of being able to preach the gospel
in countries with abysmal regard for human rights is not without its ironic side-effects.
The most significant irony is that the Church's brand of
"gospel" has come to reflect their brand of freedom. The same unwavering
devotion expected of members toward their ecclesiastical leadership is required of the
members toward their respective governments. "Just follow the brethren" has
fostered "just follow your political leader," with the "no matter
what" implication in both cases, complete with the horrendous assurance that a person
will be "blessed," even if the edicts are faulty. Images of Nazi Germany come to
mind.
This adulteration of the gospel is not only sickening, it is damning,
as it amounts to political and religious socialism, in which the responsibility for one's
salvation is shifted from themselves to their leaders. Instead of admonishing one to build
on the rock of Christ as their only sure foundation C their bottom line C this
abomination requires a person to trust man more than God, solely because he has the title
of "prophet" or "president." These men are set up as ones which will
not mislead us, no matter what.
Anyone with an honest heart and an anchor established firmly in Christ
will recognize the blatant fallacy of this lie. "Faithful" Mormons defend this
dogma of theirs with surpassing piety. However, the coming days of tribulation will unveil
this folly for what it is: strong delusion.
I find it perfectly paradoxical that ever since the statement was made
and canonized which says, "The prophet will never lead you astray, it is not in the
program..." (Declaration 1), that so far as I know there has not been one revelation
given in which the Lord is speaking first person through "the prophet" to the
Church. The ability to receive such revelation is the hallmark legacy of prophets of God
found in the scriptures. But even more significantly, it is the birthright promise for
each person born of God through the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, thus
establishing themselves on the rock of Christ.
Jesus Christ is the only means by which man might be saved.
Establishing anything more or less than this is to build on a sandy foundation, which will
fall. No man is infallible, no matter how holy. Only God deserves our unwavering loyalty.
Any holiness we attain comes through his grace.
We can and ought to appreciate the role that our leaders play in
pointing us to God; but never, no, never, should we place them before God C which is
what we do when we trust them more than we trust our own relationship with God. By so
doing, as a matter of established policy, this Church which calls itself "the only
true and living church on the face of the earth" builds instead the great and
abominable church of the devil. Hence, those who have been called by God to be the salt of
the earth, and proudly parade themselves as such, are actually marching us down to hell,
religious and political.
The only true church of God is constituted of those who repent and come
unto Christ. Nothing more; nothing less. To the extent that an institution facilitates
this for people, it is built on His gospel (and the LDS Church has truly played this role
in numerous lives); but to the extent that it is built on the works of men, it will
ultimately fall. Let's get it straight before it's too late.
Sincerely,
