Question
Gramps,
Doctrine & Covenants 89:2 says the word of wisdom is, “To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days—“
This says it’s not a commandment, so why is it treated as one? Specifically, if one does not follow it, they cannot attend the temple. I’m genuinely confused by this. Has it been addressed anywhere?
Dawn
Answer
Dawn,
The key is that the Word of Wisdom was not originally given as a commandment, but its status changed over time.
When the revelation was received on February 27, 1833, many practices prohibited by the Word of Wisdom were common in American life. Alcohol consumption was widespread, tobacco use was common, and coffee and tea were everyday beverages for many people.
The Church teaches that the Lord allowed the Saints time to adjust rather than requiring strict observance immediately.
President Joseph F. Smith explained:
“If [the Word of Wisdom] 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.”
The Church’s Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual cites this statement from President Joseph F. Smith’s October 1913 general conference address.
In other words, the phrase “not by commandment or constraint” described how the revelation was initially given in 1833. It does not necessarily mean the Lord intended it never to become a commandment.
That distinction is important because early Latter-day Saints did not always observe the Word of Wisdom the way Church members are expected to today. Some continued drinking coffee or tea, using tobacco, or consuming alcoholic beverages. Even some prominent early Church leaders did so.
The transition happened gradually.
In 1851, President Brigham Young proposed during general conference that the Saints formally covenant to abstain from tea, coffee, tobacco, whiskey, and other things prohibited by the Word of Wisdom. According to Church historical sources, those present accepted the proposal.
Later, the requirement became even clearer. Church educational materials state that on October 13, 1882, the Lord revealed to President John Taylor that the Word of Wisdom was to be considered a commandment.
Still, enforcement and expectations were not immediately identical to what they are today. During the nineteenth century, Church leaders continued to teach the Word of Wisdom while its application became progressively stricter.
By the early twentieth century, observance had become firmly connected with temple worthiness. The Church History Library reports that in 1919, the First Presidency, under President Heber J. Grant, instructed stake presidents not to issue temple recommends to members who did not observe the Word of Wisdom. An official Church history topic describes this development as being firmly established by 1921.
So there really are two different questions involved. Was the Word of Wisdom a commandment when it was originally revealed in 1833? No.
Is obedience to the Word of Wisdom considered a commandment and a requirement for temple worthiness today? Yes.
That helps explain why simply pointing to the words “not by commandment” in verse 2 does not settle the question of present Church practice.
There is another interesting part of the revelation worth noticing. Immediately after saying “not by commandment or constraint,” the Lord calls the Word of Wisdom:
“A principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints.” (Doctrine and Covenants 89:3)
The revelation, therefore, contained a divine standard and promised blessings from the beginning, even though strict observance was not initially imposed upon every member.
This fits a broader Latter-day Saint understanding of continuing revelation. LDS doctrine does not teach that every practice of the Church must remain exactly as it was when a revelation was first received. The Church believes Jesus Christ continues to direct His Church through living prophets. A principle may be introduced and its application clarified as the Church moves forward.
That is essentially what Church leaders teach happened with the Word of Wisdom.
It also helps explain the temple connection. A temple recommend does not simply measure whether someone is a “good person.” It represents whether a member is willing to live by certain standards that the Church currently teaches as part of discipleship and preparation for temple worship.
Today, living the Word of Wisdom is one such standard.
There is, however, an important distinction between the entire text of Doctrine and Covenants 89 and the specific standard used for Church worthiness.
For example, Doctrine and Covenants 89 speaks about eating meat “sparingly.” Yet a member is not denied a temple recommend for eating meat frequently. Likewise, the revelation praises grains, fruits, and wholesome herbs, but bishops do not conduct detailed examinations of members’ diets.
Instead, Church leaders have defined how the Word of Wisdom is applied today. The Church teaches members to abstain from alcoholic drinks, tobacco, tea, coffee, illegal drugs, and other harmful or addictive substances.
So the confusion is understandable. Reading Doctrine and Covenants 89 by itself, someone could reasonably ask, “Didn’t the Lord just say this wasn’t a commandment?”
Historically, the answer is yes—it wasn’t at first.
According to LDS teaching, however, the Lord later directed His Church through living prophets to treat the Word of Wisdom as a commandment. Over time, obedience to that standard also became part of the criteria for determining worthiness to enter the temple.
Rather than saying Doctrine and Covenants 89:2 never meant what it says, the Church’s explanation is that it accurately describes how the Word of Wisdom was introduced in 1833, but it does not mean its status and application could never change through continuing revelation.
Gramps
