The Word of Wisdom: A Case Study in Fabricated Doctrine

The evolution of the word of wisdom is a wonderful case study in how doctrines can be created through historical ignorance. Abstinence from coffee, tea, tobacco, and alcohol is considered a hallmark of modern Mormons. The Bible dictionary defines peculiar as carrying “the meaning of the saints’ being the Lord’s own special people or treasure.”

Leaders have indicated that these restrictions are what makes modern Mormons peculiar. Abstinence from these materials has come to be understood as “the maintenance of an identity for the church separate from the world” (Edwin B. Firmage, “The Word of Wisdom: Mark of a Peculiar People,” Oct 1972), the thing that makes Mormons more like God than the rest of the world. In other words, church leaders teach that abstinence from coffee, tea, tobacco, and alcohol makes the subject more special to God, or more holy. For example, President Joseph Fielding Smith explained:

When we join the Church and receive the priesthood, we are expected to forsake many of the ways of the world and live as becometh saints....Many in the world use tea, coffee, tobacco, and liquor, and are involved in the use of drugs. Many profane and are vulgar and indecent, immoral and unclean in their lives, but all these things should be foreign to us. We are the saints of the Most High. We hold the holy priesthood. To ancient Israel, by the mouth of Moses, the Lord said: “... if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.” (Ex. 19:5–6.) This promise is ours also. If we will walk in paths of virtue and holiness, the Lord will pour out his blessings upon us to a degree we have never supposed possible. We shall be in very deed, as Peter expressed it, “a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people.” (1 Pet. 2:9.) And we will be peculiar because we will not be like other people who do not live up to these standards. (Joseph Fielding Smith, “Our responsibilities as priesthood holders,” April 1971 General Conference.)

President Smith implies that use of these materials is just as effectual in preventing one from becoming part of a holy nation as immoral and unclean behavior. This belief is a part of the traditions of modern Mormonism.

From where do these perceptions stem? In the context of history, the current understanding of the word of wisdom did not come into place until 1930, when the word of wisdom as a temple requirement was added to the General Handbook of Instructions.¹ Though pressures to make the word of wisdom a commandment existed even during Joseph Smith's life, these pressures were resisted over several successors to the presidency. For example, Joseph Smith continued to drink coffee, tea, beer, and wine at times (including wine for the sacrament) throughout his life. He had a stocked bar in the Nauvoo house, and drank wine on the day he died.²

After Joseph's death, Brigham Young refused to endorse the idea of making the word of wisdom into a commandment. In 1861 he said,

Some of the brethren are very strenuous upon the “Word of Wisdom”, and would like to have me preach upon it, and urge it upon the brethren, and make it a test of fellowship. I do not think I shall do so. I have never done so. (Brigham Young, JD 9:35.)

In 1870 he said,

The observance of the Word of Wisdom, or interpretation of God's requirements on this subject, must be left, partially, with the people. We cannot make laws like the Medes and Persians. We cannot say you shall never drink a cup of tea, or you shall never taste of this, or you shall never taste of that... (Brigham Young, JD 14:20.)

Brigham's successor John Taylor reiterated that the word of wisdom was not necessary for a temple recommend, but differed from his predecessors in suggesting that those who do not observe it ought to be ashamed of themselves.³ President Woodruff said

...he regarded the Word of Wisdom in its entirety as given of the Lord for the Latter-day Saints to observe, but he did not think that Bishops should withhold recommends from persons who did not adhere strictly to it.4

In 1901, Apostles Brigham Young, Jr. and John Henry Smith argued that beer was not prohibited.⁵

The transition from advice to commandment essentially began during the administration of Joseph F. Smith. In 1902, Joseph F. Smith suggested that drunkards be denied recommends, but that older or more subtle users should not be penalized.⁵ In making this change, President Smith did not cite any revelation. In fact, under oath to the U.S. Congress in 1904, President Smith indicated that he had never received a revelation as president of the church (see Reed Smoot hearings transcripts). In other words, President Smith elevated the word of wisdom from an unenforced, vague principle to a commandment required for entrance into the temple. The next year, the commandment was expanded to prevent any man from holding a leadership position if he did not obey the word of wisdom.⁵ Again, this change did not come via revelation, if we are to take President Smith at his word under oath to Congress. On 5 July 1906, the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve began using water instead of wine for their sacrament meetings.⁶ President Smith speculated that

...the reason undoubtedly why the Word of Wisdom was given as not by 'commandment or restraint' was that at that time, at least, if it had been given as a commandment it would have brought every man, addicted to the use of these noxious things, under condemnation; so the Lord was merciful and gave them a chance to overcome, before He brought them under the law.7

Two years later, he made compliance with the word of wisdom a requirement for ordination to the priesthood,⁵ notwithstanding the fact that the brethren had used wine for the sacrament every Sunday in the temple until just 7 years prior.

It is clear from history that the word of wisdom was not a commandment until President Joseph F. Smith made it so without revelation. However, has the meaning of the word of wisdom always been the same? As previously cited, Joseph Smith's understanding did not seem to preclude the consumption of tea, wine, beer, or tobacco. He used all of these products from time to time from when the revelation was received until his death. In fact, the list of leaders just who consumed alcohol post-word of wisdom include (at a minimum) Joseph Smith (President of Church), Brigham Young (President of Church), John Taylor (President of Church), Brigham Young, Jr. (Apostle), John Henry Smith (Apostle), BH Roberts (President of 70), Anthon H. Lund (1st Presidency), Matthias F. Cowley (Apostle), Charles W. Penrose (1st Presidency), and George Albert Smith (President of Church). As already noted, wine was used for the sacrament until 1906, meaning that all leaders who participated in the temple sacrament (at a minimum the 15) would be included in this list. The names listed are all documented as using alcohol outside of the sacrament.

It is clear that leaders prior to President Joseph F. Smith's change did not believe abstinence from alcohol was a commandment from God. What about tobacco, coffee, tea, or otherwise? It turns out that the interpretation of several elements of the word of wisdom was highly disputed from the start. From the start, many were willing to put forth their diverse opinions on the matter. Early on, Hyrum Smith indicated that “‘hot drinks are not for the body, or belly;’ there are many who wonder what this can mean; whether it refers to tea, or coffee, or not. I say it does refer to tea, and coffee.”⁸ Here, he both admits to the confusion about the meaning of the imprecise parts of the word of wisdom, and gives his opinion of the same. Although our modern day traditions blind us to the ambiguity of the original revelation, Hyrum Smith’s documentation of the confusion surrounding the meaning of the revelation is understandable in a historical context. For example, when the revelation was given, the meaning of “hot drinks” was not necessarily a question of their temperature. The 1828 Webster’s dictionary indicates that this phrase was regularly used as a synonym for liquor, as liquor burns the drinker’s throat. In other words, it is completely possible that God did not refer to tea or coffee at all in the word of wisdom. As another example, the most likely definition of the “mild drinks” made from barley⁹ in the word of wisdom was beer, meaning that far from banning alcohol, the word of wisdom might actually endorse it!

The meaning of the word of wisdom was never canonized by vote of the church, or even cemented by proclamation of the 15. In fact, disputes about what it prohibited were common until the era of correlation. For example, President Lorenzo Snow emphasized that not eating meat was central to the Word of Wisdom in 1900. In 1930, Apostle John A. Widtsoe claimed that refined flour was contrary to the word of wisdom.⁵ Caffeine became another item that some said was against the word of wisdom, while others said it was not. Joseph Smith never received (and doesn’t appear to have asked for) a clarifying revelation on the word of wisdom. None of his successors recorded a revelation on the subject.

With knowledge of history, these changes could have been avoided. Instead, we have a worthiness test that has nothing to do with morality that excludes countless numbers of people from baptism and the temple simply for drinking tea and coffee, when early leaders did both without any loss of spiritual blessings. Jesus clearly taught that “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth the man.” (Matthew 15:10, Inspired Version.) The modern version of the word of wisdom is not only not God’s word, but teaches the opposite of God’s word: that somehow tea, coffee, tobacco, and alcohol spiritually defile you.