This
is perhaps a first: last week in Utah a stake high council of The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints excommunicated Brother
Denver C. Snuffer, Jr., a member of the church who purportedly held a
temple recommend and faithfully answered all of the recommend
interview questions appropriately. His “crime”? Two years ago he
published a book (one of eight he has written) arguing that the
Saints, as a body, rejected the “fullness of the priesthood”
offered to them in the early 1840s. Consequently the Saints now
possess less priesthood power and authority than current LDS Church
leaders presume or portray themselves as having. While seemingly
deleterious to the message and mission of the Church, Snuffer's
thesis is supported by historical documents, statements made by LDS
leaders, and LDS scriptures. Bro. Snuffer's explanation also happens
to be the only one (I've encountered) that makes sense!
The
original
indictment
against him reads, in part, as follows:
“...[Passing
the Heavenly Gift] is not constructive to [the] work of salvation or
the promotion of faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ. The book's
thesis is in direct conflict with church doctrine. In your effort to
defend the restoration, you have mischaracterized doctrine,
denigrated virtually every prophet since Joseph Smith, and placed the
church in a negative light. The book is a misguided effort to attempt
to bridge the gap between the church and its dissidents. PTHG will
never be the solution to hard questions that you believe it is. Like
every other such effort, it will attract only the attention of those
whose spiritual eyes, ears and hearts are obscured from the truth.
Your work pits you against the institution of the church and will
lead to the spiritual demise of you and your family.”
The
above statement is problematic for several reasons. Firstly, the high council
apparently never considered the truthfulness of PTHG's thesis,
only the effects. If the book's claims are true, then every other
consideration is irrelevant (unless suppressing truth and upholding
falsehood has become the LDS Church's mission). Ironically,
Snuffer's book explains how truth has been suppressed. Apparently
the book's truthfulness was never examined or considered, much less
refuted.
Secondly,
what is “church doctrine”? (Apostle Bruce R. McConkie once
published a book titled “Mormon Doctrine”, but that book was
deemed "flawed" and has since been withdrawn from
publication.) PTHG does critically examine several
teachings of past and present LDS leaders and does challenge
the Church's “traditional narrative”. But so what? Mormons aren't
required to have a “testimony” of Church history. Neither do they
covenant to uphold “church doctrine”. Latter-day Saints covenant
to uphold Christ's doctrine and to exercise faith in Him.
Unlike
Christ's doctrine (which never changes), LDS doctrine has changed
(and continues to change at an accelerating pace, according to Snuffer's book). What LDS leaders teach today is very different from the
faith restored by Joseph Smith. Excommunicating Snuffer because of
his interpretation of Church history – which he wrote
relying upon LDS Church documents, statements made by LDS Church
leaders, and LDS scriptures – smacks of “killing the messenger”.
I
found PTHG to be very constructive to the work of salvation,
largely because I found it to be true. Reading the book very
strongly promoted my faith in the restored gospel of Jesus
Christ (even if it did weaken – no, destroy! – any
confidence I had in the unblemished virtue or abject truthfulness of
the leadership now controlling the corporation known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). I was driven to my knees in fervent prayer,
acknowledging my sins and “awful state” before God, recognizing
that I had been led to embrace a false and foolish hope that any mere man (or group of men) could "save" me. Denver
Snuffer awakened me to my dire need to repent and to rely, once
again, upon Jesus Christ and His power to save, not on some (great and spacious) institution, symbolic physical ordinance, or the “arm of flesh”.
I
now know (what I, before, only suspected) that many Latter-day
Saints embrace a “gospel” tainted by myth, corrupted by damning
false doctrines, and adulterated with folklore and the teachings and commandments of men passed off as “truth”
and "revelation". Our “gospel” and “official”
Church history have been compromised and changed, again and again.
PTHG is an exposé on those compromises and changes, how they came to
pass, and what we can (and must) do in response to them. Thus, I continue
to have hope (even as I have lost faith in the church I once thought
to be "true"). My faith is now properly grounded in
Jesus Christ and His gospel (again), not in the “sand” of institutional
salvation or the commandments and teachings of men.
Ironically,
Denver Snuffer never encouraged anyone to leave the LDS
Church. (He argued against doing that! And still does!) He continues
to promote faithful activity in the Church, attendance at meetings,
paying tithes to the Church, and doing all that is asked of
Latter-day Saints by their current Church leaders. He doesn't
advocate establishing another church or replacing the current
Magisterium. In fact, he supports and sustains the current LDS
hierarchy, prays for them, and encourages others to do likewise.
A
very strange “apostate” indeed!
I
have read PTHG and am currently reading another Snuffer book, The
Second Comforter: Conversing with the Lord Through the Veil. Both
have been very enriching: more inspiring, faith promoting,
repentance-inducing and informative than anything
I have read from
the current crop of LDS leaders (no disrespect intended). True
“prophets, seers and revelators” prophesy,
see,
and reveal!
They speak with God personally, stand in His holy presence from
time to time,
and deliver messages directly from Him (as did Joseph Smith). They
are often persecuted by the very people they are called to serve
(especially by members of the Church).
Do
our current leaders fill the bill? By their fruits ye shall know
them.
Today
Bro. Snuffer posted (without comment) a
second letter he received from his (former)
stake
president, Truman Hunt. The
letter outlines restrictions Bro. Snuffer must endure as a current
excommunicant.
In
addition to being forbidden to pray, talk or testify in Church, pay
tithing or wear the garment, Bro. Snuffer was told to “not engage
in activities which require an exercise of priesthood power.”
In
modern LDS parlance, attributions of priesthood “power” and
“authority” are inextricably conjoined, resulting in almost
universal misunderstanding.
One
may have "authority" (as one supposes) without exercising
(or receiving) any real "power". For example, one may serve
as stake president upon being duly sustained by common consent of the
membership of the Church of that stake, thereby receiving authority
to
act in said capacity. But receiving power
from
On High to righteously discharge the duties of that office is an
entirely different matter altogether. Anyone who exercises divine
power clearly also possesses divine authority. (Jesus healed the sick
and thereby demonstrated His authority to forgive sins. If He only
pretended
to
have authority to forgive, He would not have possessed the divine
power to heal.) Manifestations of divine power are signs
of
actual
divine
authority.
Likewise,
lacking divine power is tantamount to lacking divine
authority. The works of God
cannot be accomplished without divine power, for
God is a God of miracles and works by power. (Anything else
is simply the work of men.) "Powerless" authorities
"play-act", pretending to act on the Lord's behalf.
(The Lord suffers them to do so, inasmuch as we all are
learning to "magnify" our offices and callings in
the priesthood.) However, the priesthood is not to be trifled
with. Those who vainly claim divine power or authority without doing
everything in their power to receive such risk committing blasphemy.
Having
excommunicated Bro. Snuffer, Pres. Hunt surrendered any claim to
"authority" he might have had over Bro. Snuffer. (Pres. Hunt
insured that Bro. Snuffer was no longer a member of his stake!) While
Pres. Hunt has no more authority
over
Bro. Snuffer, he still has the responsibility
and
accountability
to
seek Bro. Snuffer's welfare. (We all bear such responsibility and
accountability for the welfare of those within our sphere of
influence.) Pres. Hunt may fulfill this responsibility by exercising
priesthood power, but only by the same means –
the
only
means! –
by
which priesthood power (or "authority") can or ought to be
exercised: by persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness and
love unfeigned, kindness and pure knowledge. (See Doctrine and Covenants 121:41-42.)
By
forbidding Bro. Snuffer from engaging in activities “which require
an exercise of priesthood power”, does Pres. Hunt think to prevent
Bro. Snuffer from being kind, long-suffering, loving, gently
persuasive or meek? For those are the only
attributes
by which priesthood authority (or power) may be handled
or maintained. Other forms of behavior – exerting control, dominion
or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of
unrighteousness – are anathema
to
the Holy Spirit and to the exercise of true
priesthood
power (or authority).
Likewise
driving away (or restraining) a righteous man (who can honestly
obtain a temple recommend) assaults the sensibilities of heaven and
is not the work of the Lord.
I
have read literally thousands of pages of Bro. Snuffer's
writings. In so doing, I have found nothing for which Bro.
Snuffer should be condemned, much less found guilty of apostasy. Does
Pres. Hunt really think he can command Bro. Snuffer to
keep silent or to refrain from doing the Lord's bidding and expect to
be obeyed? Can Pres. Hunt not see the repetition of history in the
making? (Acts 5:28-29.)
Only
a fool would hearken unto man rather than to God.
“[T]hrough
your actions and claims,” Pres. Hunt wrote, “you have chosen to
leave us.” In his first letter to Bro. Snuffer, Pres. Hunt wrote
“only the attention of those whose spiritual eyes, ears and hearts
are obscured from the truth” will be attracted to his message.
Furthermore, Snuffer's efforts, Hunt wrote, would “lead to the
spiritual demise of [him] and [his] family.” With
regard to each of these statements, I surmise
the exact opposite to be true.
Apparently
Pres. Hunt has swallowed – hook, line and sinker – the corporate
mantra “there is safety in the mainstream of the Church” and
“the Brethren will never lead you astray”.
There
isn't and they have.
There
is safety only in exercising real faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
True faith in Christ produces spiritual power, manifest by the
possession and exercise of spiritual gifts (the “gifts of the
Spirit”). Thus one may judge the “rightness” of one's course.
The possession of spiritual gifts is a living witness, a testimony
and a “sign” that one's course is correct. One may “see” the
Way, the Truth and the Life only if one's “lamp” (soul) is filled
with “oil” (the Holy Ghost). “And by the power of the Holy
Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.” (Moroni 10:5.)
We
must pray for Pres. Hunt.
