The restoration was essentially based on a rejection of the creeds of Christendom which were declared “an abomination” and “those professors were all corrupt; that: ‘they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.” So, are all creeds bad or just those specific creeds? Are there creeds in Mormonism or is it a creedless religion?
Over Christmas, I was fortunate enough to be able to attend an Evensong service at Westminster Abbey. It was very cool to be in a worship service surrounded by 3000 of England’s most famous dead people. The choir was far superior to anything I’ve heard in any of the wards I’ve been in, although the songs had that quality of being made up as they went along (but in Latin). Part of the service was the recitation of the Anglican Creed. I could have in honesty recited 80% of it without batting an eye, but there were some statements in it that I could not in good conscience recite (but then I’m not an Anglican, am I?).
First of all, what is objectionable about creeds? Here are some thoughts:
- Content. These specific creeds are usually rejected by Mormonism because they conflict with our view of God as being an exalted man with a body. But these are just current drafts of millenia old discussions, the efforts of people to describe the holy. Whenever people are doing that, their efforts will be tainted by:
- Consensus. Too many cooks spoil the broth, as they say. Groups of people haggling over the nature of God is likely to lead to debates full of compromises and competition, not actually nailing down the nature of God.
- Limits of Language. Regardless of how precisely we try to communicate, words have mutliple meanings and are subject to individual interpretation.
- Context of Culture & Time. Over time and in different cultural contexts, the meaning of words changes.
- Lack of Authority. They are deemed to have been created by well-intentioned men but without authority and therefore, they allowed error to be included. This seems to be a problem frequently discussed in the b’nacle within Mormonism:
- Conflicting Opinions. Q: When two authorities disagree, which is right? A: The one who agrees with you.
- Prophetic Fallibility. Q: When is a prophet not speaking for God? A: When he’s proven wrong over time (or see the first answer).
- In Writing. One could say that creeds are bad in that they are written down at a point in time based on one’s understanding, but they could be incorrect or need revision at a later date. Being written down causes people to stop seeking revelation and to continue to reinterpret the same dead words on a page. Creeds in general are rejected because they hem the church in rather than allowing it the freedom to reinterpret itself through greater light and knowledge.
I suggest that there are two main creeds that have crept into Mormonism: the Articles of Faith and the Proclamation on the Family. I considered and reject that the Official Declarations are creeds (they are more like one-time memos). I also reject the scripts in the temple as “creeds” of a sort because they change considerably and frequently.
The Articles of Faith were written by JS in 1841 (in a letter written to John Wentworth published in 1842 in Times & Seasons) to explain what Mormons believe. The Proclamation on the Family was published (to the world at large) to explain what Mormons believe about families and responsibilities. Are they creeds? And if they are creeds, do they have any of the 3 problems listed above? So, if we dismiss the idea that authority is a problem (for those who are Mormons at least), is there a problem with either content or with the fact that they are in writing?
First of all, let’s consider the ubiquitous Articles of Faith. What Primary child hasn’t memorized these basic, irrefutable tenets of Mormonism? Surely, their content must be above reproach. Or is it? Here’s a counter-point on the Articles of Faith, excerpted from here.
Apostle Bruce R. McConkie boasted as follows concerning the Articles of Faith:
“For brevity, clearness, and forthrightness of doctrinal presentation, they are unexcelled. When compared with the muddled creeds formulated by the supposedly greatest religious thinkers of Christendom—creeds born amid the strife, bitterness, and debates of councils that struggled at length over every word and comma—the Articles of Faith, coming forth as the spontaneous and inspired writing of one man, are a marked evidence of the spirit of revelation that rested upon the Prophet.” (Mormon Doctrine, page 53)
Actually, the truth of the matter is that the Articles of Faith are remarkable for what they fail to say concerning the teachings of the Mormon Church. Although Joseph Smith was practicing polygamy at the time he authored them, he made no reference to the doctrine of plural marriage. He made no mention of his teaching that there are many Gods, that God was once a man or that men can become Gods. The Articles of Faith are completely silent concerning the Doctrine and Covenants which contains many of Smith’s revelations and distinctive doctrines. Even Apostle McConkie had to admit that these “articles, of course, do not attempt to summarize all of the basic doctrines of the gospel…. the Articles of Faith are silent on such things as celestial marriage, salvation for the dead, temple work in all its phases, the resurrection, and degrees of glory in the eternal worlds.” (Ibid.) The Articles of Faith seem to be an attempt to hide almost all of the LDS teachings which separate the Mormon Church from historic Christianity.
So, it would seem that the Articles of Faith might be said to suffer the same basic problems of all creeds: content, authority, and being written at a fixed point in time. Perhaps these are issues that all scripture face as well. But are they an abomination? More or less of an abomination than the Creeds of Chrstendom?
Do you agree that these are creeds of Mormonism? Do they lead to the same sorts of problems that other creeds do or are our creeds OK, but others’ are not? Discuss.