The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) takes no official position on whether or not biological evolution has occurred, or on the validity of the modern evolutionary synthesis as a scientific theory. However, in the 20th century, the LDS Church published doctrinal statements on the origin of man and creation. In addition, individual leaders of the LDS Church have expressed a variety of opinions on evolution, many of which have affected the beliefs and perceptions of Latter-day Saints.
Contents |
The LDS Church has produced a number of official doctrinal statements on the "origin of man." These statements generally adopt the position, as a church-approved encyclopedia entry[1] states, "[t]he scriptures tell why man was created, but they do not tell how, though the Lord has promised that he will tell that when he comes again."[2]
The first official statement on the issue of evolution was in 1909, which marked the centennial of Charles Darwin's birth and the 50th anniversary of his On the Origin of Species. In that year, the First Presidency, led by Joseph F. Smith as President, issued a statement declaring that "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity."[3] This teaching regarding the origin of man differs from traditional Christianity's doctrine of creation, referred to by some as "creationism", which comprises belief in a fiat creation. In addition, the statement declares human evolution as one of the "theories of men," but fall short of explicitly declaring it untrue or evil. They said:
All [men] who have inhabited the earth since Adam have taken bodies and become souls in like manner. It is held by some that Adam was not the first man upon this earth, and that the original human being was a development from lower orders of the animal creation. These, however, are the theories of men. The word of the Lord declares that Adam was 'the first man of all men' (Moses 1:34), and we are therefore in duty bound to regard him as the primal parent of the race...all men were created in the beginning after the image of God; and whether we take this to mean the spirit or the body, or both, it commits us to the same conclusion: Man began life as a human being, in the likeness of our heavenly Father. True it is that the body of man enters upon its career as a tiny germ or embryo, which becomes an infant, quickened at a certain stage by the spirit whose tabernacle it is, and the child, after being born, develops into a man. There is nothing in this, however, to indicate that the original man the first of our race, began life as anything less than a man, or less than the human germ or embryo that becomes a man.[4]
The statement did not define the origins of animals other than humans, nor did it venture into any more specifics regarding the origin of man.
In its 1910 Christmas message, the First Presidency made reference to the church's position on science:
"Diversity of opinion does not necessitate intolerance of spirit, nor should it embitter or set rational beings against each other. ... Our religion is not hostile to real science. That which is demonstrated, we accept with joy; but vain philosophy, human theory and mere speculations of men, we do not accept nor do we adopt anything contrary to divine revelation or to good common sense."[5]
In 1925, in the midst of the Scopes Trial in Tennessee, a new First Presidency issued an official statement which reaffirmed the doctrine that Adam was the first man upon the earth and that he was created in the image of God.[6] There is a short article in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism which is largely composed of quotes from the 1909 and 1925 statements,[2] and the First Presidency has not issued an official statement on evolution since 1925.[7]
The 1909 and 1925 statements of the First Presidency have been subsequently endorsed by church leaders. In 1988, apostle Boyd K. Packer stated:
"Twice the First Presidency has declared the position of the Church on organic evolution. The first, a statement published in 1909 entitled The Origin of Man was signed by Presidents Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund. The other, entitled Mormon View of Evolution, signed by Presidents Heber J. Grant, Anthony W. Ivins, and Charles W. Nibley, was published in 1925. It follows very closely the first statement, indeed quotes directly from it. The doctrines in both of them are consistent and have not changed. ... Statements have been made by other presidents of the Church and members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles which corroborate these official declarations by the First Presidency."[8][9]
In the February 2002 edition of the LDS Church's official magazines Ensign, the 1909 First Presidency message The Origin of Man was reproduced in its entirety with the following heading:
In the early 1900s, questions concerning the Creation of the earth and the theories of evolution became the subject of much public discussion. In the midst of these controversies, the First Presidency issued the following in 1909, which expresses the Church’s doctrinal position on these matters. A reprinting of this important First Presidency statement will be helpful as members of the Church study the Old Testament this year.[8][10]
The Old Testament Student Manual published by the Church Educational System contains "several quotes by General Authorities . . . which appear to rule out any possibility of reconciliation of organic evolution with LDS doctrine."[11] Here is an excerpt:
In the world another theory of how things began is popularly held and widely taught. This theory, that of organic evolution, was generally developed from the writings of Charles Darwin. It puts forth different ideas concerning how life began and where man came from. In relation to this theory, the following statements should help you understand what the Church teaches about the Creation and the origin of man. . . .[quoting Joseph Fielding Smith] “You must choose the one and reject the other, for they are in direct conflict and there is a gulf separating them which is so great that it cannot be bridged, no matter how much one may try to do so. ... Then Adam, and by that I mean the first man, was not capable of sin. He could not transgress, and by doing so bring death into the world; for, according to this theory, death had always been in the world. If, therefore, there was no fall, there was no need of an atonement, hence the coming into the world of the Son of God as the Savior of the world is a contradiction, a thing impossible."[12]
In the official Bible Dictionary of the LDS church, the entry for "Fall of Adam" includes the following statement: "Before the fall, Adam and Eve had physical bodies but no blood. There was no sin, no death, and no children among any of the earthly creations."[13] Under the entry, "Flesh", it is written: "Since flesh often means mortality, Adam is spoken of as the “first flesh” upon the earth, meaning he was the first mortal on the earth, all things being created in a nonmortal condition, and becoming mortal through the fall of Adam.[14]
In 1982, the Ensign, an official periodical of the LDS Church, published an article entitled "Christ and the Creation" by Bruce R. McConkie, which stated that "[m]ortality and procreation and death all had their beginnings with the Fall."[15]
In an earlier edition of the Ensign published in 1980, Bruce R. McConkie stated that "the greatest heresy in the sectarian world ... is that God is a spirit nothingness which fills the immensity of space, and that creation came through evolutionary processes."[16]
Individual leaders of the LDS Church have expressed a variety of opinions on biological evolution.
In 1930, B. H. Roberts, the presiding member of the First Council of the Seventy, was assigned by the First Presidency to create a study manual for the Melchizedek priesthood holders of the church.[17] Entitled The Truth, The Way, The Life, the draft of the manual that was submitted to the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for approval stated that death had been occurring on earth for millions of years prior to the fall of Adam and that human-like pre-Adamites had lived on the earth.[7][18]
On 5 April 1930, Joseph Fielding Smith, a junior member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and the son of a late church president, "vigorously promulgated [the] opposite point of view" in a speech that was published in a church magazine.[17][19] In his widely-read speech, Smith taught as doctrine that there had been no death on earth until after the fall of Adam and that there were no "pre-Adamites".[7][17]
In 1931, both Roberts and Smith were permitted to present their views to the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.[17] After hearing both sides, the First Presidency issued a memo to the general authorities of the church which stated:
"Upon the fundamental doctrines of the Church we are all agreed. Our mission is to bear the message of the restored gospel to the people of the world. Leave Geology, Biology, Archaeology, and Anthropology, no one of which has to do with the salvation of the souls of mankind, to scientific research .... We can see no advantage to be gained by a continuation of the discussion ... but on the contrary are certain it would lead to confusion, division and misunderstanding if carried further. Upon one thing we should all be able to agree, namely, that Presidents Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder and Anthon H. Lund were right when they said: 'Adam is the primal parent of our race.'"[20]
Another of the apostles, geologist James E. Talmage, pointed out that Smith's views could be misinterpreted as the church's official position, since Smith's views were widely circulated but Roberts's views were limited to an internal church document.[7][17] As a result, the First Presidency gave permission to Talmage to give a speech promoting views that were contrary to Smith's.[7] In his speech on August 9, 1931 in the Salt Lake Tabernacle, Talmage taught the same principles that Roberts had originally outlined in his draft manual.[21] Over Smith's objections, the First Presidency authorized a church publication of Talmage's speech in pamphlet form.[7] In 1965, Talmage's speech was reprinted again by the LDS Church in an official church magazine.[22] As Talmage points out in the article, "The outstanding point of difference ... is the point of time which man in some state has lived on this planet." With regards to evolution in general, Talmage challenged many of its aspects in the same speech. He said:
"I do not regard Adam as related to–certainly not as descended from–the Neanderthal, the Cro-Magnon, the Peking or the Piltdown man. Adam came as divinely created, created and empowered, and stands as the patriarchal head of his posterity...Were it true that man is a product of evolution from lower forms, it is but reasonable to believe that he will yet develop into something higher. While it is a fact that eternal progression is a characteristic of man's Divine birthright, as yet we have learned nothing to indicate that man shall develop physically into any other form than that in which he now appears...Believe not those who would make man but little above the brutes, when in truth he is but little below the angels, and if faithful shall pass by the angels and take his place among the exalted sons of God... Evolution is true so far as it means development, and progress, and advancement in all the works of God;...At best the conception of the development of man's body from the lower forms through evolutionary processes has been but a theory, an unproved hypothesis. Theories may be regarded as the scaffolding upon which the builder stands while placing the blocks of truth in position. It is a grave error to mistake the scaffolding for the wall, the flimsy and temporary structure for the stable and permanent. The scaffolding serves but a passing purpose, important though it be, and is removed as soon as the walls of that part of the edifice of knowledge have been constructed. Theories have their purpose, and are indispensable, but they must never be mistaken for demonstrated facts. The Holy Scriptures should not be discredited by theories of men; they cannot be discredited by fact and truth."
Roberts died in 1933 and The Truth, The Way, The Life remained unpublished until 1994, when it was published by an independent publisher.[11]
Although it is apparent that Roberts and Smith may have had differing views on whether there was death before the fall of Adam, it is evident that they may have had similar views against organic evolution as the explanation for the origin of man. For example, Roberts wrote that "the theory of evolution as advocated by many modern scientists lies stranded upon the shore of idle speculation. There is one other objection to be urged against the theory of evolution before leaving it; it is contrary to the revelations of God."[23] Roberts further criticized the theories of evolution as follows:
As before stated, the claims of evolution, as explained by philosophers of the Darwin school, are contrary to all experience so far as man's knowledge extends. The great law of nature is that every plant, herb, fish, beast and man produces its kind; and though there may be slight variation from that law, those variations soon run out either by reverting to the original stock, or else by becoming incapable of producing offspring, and thus become extinct. [24]
In 1954, when he was President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Smith wrote at length about his views on evolution in his book Man, His Origin and Destiny.[25] In response to an inquiry about the book from the head of the Geology Department at the University of Utah, church president David O. McKay affirmed that "the Church has officially taken no position" on evolution and that Smith's book "is not approved by the Church" and that the book is composed entirely of Smith's "views for which he alone is responsible".[26]
In his popular and controversial reference book Mormon Doctrine, general authority Bruce R. McConkie devoted ten pages to his entry on "Evolution".[27] After canvassing statements of past church leaders, the Standard Works, and the 1909 First Presidency statement, McConkie concluded that "There is no harmony between the truths of revealed religion and the theories of organic evolution."[28] The evolution entry in Mormon Doctrine quotes extensively from Joseph Fielding Smith's Man, His Origin and Destiny.[29] McConkie characterized the intellect of those Latter-day Saints who believe in evolution while simultaneously having knowledge of LDS Church doctrines on life and creation as "weak and puerile".[28]
McConkie included a disclaimer in Mormon Doctrine stating that he alone was responsible for the doctrinal and scriptural interpretations.[30]
Joseph Smith, Jr., the founder of the Latter Day Saint movement, died in 1844, prior to the promulgation of Darwin's theory of evolution. Regarding plant life, Smith taught:
"God has made certain decrees which are fixed and immovable ... for instance, the oak of the forest, the fruit of the tree, the herb of the field—all bear a sign that seed hath been planted there; for it is a decree of the Lord that every tree, plant, and herb bearing seed should bring forth of its kind, and cannot come forth after any other law or principle."[31][32]
Brigham Young, the second president of the LDS Church, stated:
"We have enough and to spare, at present in these mountains, of schools where young infidels are made because the teachers are so tender-footed that they dare not mention the principles of the gospel to their pupils, but have no hesitancy in introducing into the classroom the theories of Huxley, of Darwin, or of Mill and the false political economy which contends against co-operation and the United Order. This course I am resolutely and uncompromisingly opposed to, and I hope to see the day when the doctrines of the gospel will be taught in all our schools, when the revelations of the Lord will be our texts, and our books will be written and manufactured by ourselves and in our own midst. As a beginning in this direction I have endowed the Brigham Young Academy at Provo."[33][34][35]
John Taylor was the first president of the LDS Church to comment directly on Darwinian theory. In his 1882 book Mediation and Atonement, Taylor stated:
"The animal and vegetable creations are governed by certain laws, and are composed of certain elements peculiar to themselves. This applies to man, to the beasts, fowls, fish and creeping things, to the insects and to all animated nature .... These principles do not change, as represented by evolutionists of the Darwinian school, but the primitive organisms of all living beings exist in the same form as when they first received their impress from the Maker. ... [Man] did not originate from a chaotic mass of matter, moving or inert, but came forth possessing, in an embryonic state, all the faculties and powers of a God."[36]
Soon after the First Presidency's 1909 statement, Joseph F. Smith professed in an editorial that "the church itself has no philosophy about the modus operandi employed by the Lord in His creation of the world."[37]
However, in the very same month (and in the wake of the evolution controversy that had recently ensued at Brigham Young University), Joseph F. Smith published and signed a statement wherein he explained some of the conflicts between revealed religion and the theories of evolution. He wrote:
Recently there was some trouble...in one of the leading Church schools—the training college of the Brigham Young University—where three of the professors advanced certain theories on evolution as applied to the origin of man, and certain opinions on "higher criticism," as conclusive and demonstrated truths. This was done although it is well known that evolution and the "higher criticism"...are in conflict on some matters with the scriptures, including some modern revelation...The Church, on the contrary, holds to the definite authority of divine revelation which must be the standard; and that, as so-called "science" has changed from age to age in its deductions, and as divine revelation is truth, and must abide forever, views as to the lesser should conform to the positive statements of the greater...Philosophic theories of life have their place and use, but it is not in the classes of the Church schools, and particularly are they out of place here or anywhere else when they seek to supplant the revelations of God.[38]
A 1910 editorial in an LDS Church magazine that enumerates various possibilities for creation is usually attributed to Smith or to the First Presidency.[7] Included in the listed possibilities were the ideas that Adam and Eve: (1) "evolved in natural processes to present perfection"; (2) were "transplanted [to earth] from another sphere"; or (3) were "born here ... as other mortals have been."[39]
In 1946 at a the funeral of May Anderson, five years before he became president of the church, David O. McKay spoke approvingly of the theory of evolution, and quoted Charles Darwin to support a point he was making about the resurrection of the dead:
"Among the generalizations of science, evolution holds foremost place. It claims: 'Man is a creature of development; that he has come up through uncounted ages from an origin that is lowly.' Why this vast expenditure of time and pain and blood? Why should he come so far if he is destined to go no farther? A creature which has traveled such distances, and fought such battles and won such victories deserves, one is compelled to say, to conquer death and rob the grave of its victory. Darwin said...'Believing as I do that man in the distant future will be a far more perfect creature than he now is, it is an intolerable thought that he and all other sentient beings are doomed to complete annihilation after such long-continued, slow progress. To those who fully admit the immortality of the human soul, the destruction of our world will not appear so dreadful.'[40]
McKay continued to make comments about evolution after becoming president of the church. In a 1952 speech to students at Brigham Young University, McKay used the theory of evolution as an example while suggesting that science can "leave [a student] with his soul unanchored". He stated:
"There is a perpetual design permeating all purposes of creation. On this thought, science again leads a student up to a certain point and sometimes leaves him with his soul unanchored...For example, evolution's beautiful theory of the creation of the world offers many perplexing problems to the inquiring mind. Inevitably, a teacher who denies divine agency in creation, who insists there is no intelligent purpose in it, will impress the student with the thought that all may be chance. I say, that no youth should be so led without a counterbalancing thought ... God is at the helm. God is the Creator of the earth. He is the Father of our souls and spirits. No question about it. You have your testimony—if you haven't you shouldn't be on the faculty—that God lives and Jesus is the Christ, and the purpose of creation is theirs."[41]
In the April 1968 church general conference, McKay's son David Lawrence McKay read a message on his father's behalf that was an edited version of the 1952 speech, including the omission of the word "beautiful" when describing the theory of evolution.[42]
In 1954, McKay quoted the Old Testament while affirming to members of the BYU faculty that living things only reproduce "after their kind". He said:
The stern fact of life is that animals, as other living things, can grow and produce their kind only in accordance with fixed laws of nature and the divine command, "Let the earth bring forth the living creatures after his kind, cattle and creeping things, and the beast of the earth after his kind." (Genesis 1:24)[43]
At a 1975 church women's conference, church president Spencer W. Kimball stated that "we don't know exactly how [Adam and Eve's] coming into this world happened, and when we're able to understand it the Lord will tell us."[44]
As president of the Church, Ezra Taft Benson, published teachings about the theories of evolution. In 1988, he counseled members of the Church to use the Book of Mormon to counter the theories of evolution. He wrote that "we have not been using the Book of Mormon as we should. Our homes are not as strong unless we are using it to bring our children to Christ. Our families may be corrupted by worldly trends and teachings unless we know how to use the book to expose and combat the falsehoods in ... organic evolution.[45]
Also in 1988, Benson published another book that included his earlier warnings[46] about the "deceptions" of Charles Darwin. He wrote:
As a watchman on the tower, I feel to warn you that one of the chief means of misleading our youth and destroying the family unit is our educational institutions. There is more than one reason why the Church is advising our youth to attend colleges close to their homes where institutes of religion are available. It gives the parents the opportunity to stay close to their children, and if they become alerted and informed, these parents can help expose some of the deceptions of men like ... Charles Darwin.[47]
In a 1997 speech at an Institute of Religion in Ogden, Utah, church president Gordon B. Hinckley said:
People ask me every now and again if I believe in evolution. I tell them I am not concerned with organic evolution. I do not worry about it. I passed through that argument long ago.[48]
Also in 1997, Hinckley published his earlier teachings[49][50] wherein he contrasts "organic evolution" with the evolution and improvement of individuals:
None of us ... knows enough. The learning process is an endless process. We must read, we must observe, we must assimilate, and we must ponder that to which we expose our minds. I believe in evolution, not organic evolution, as it is called, but in the evolution of the mind, the heart, and the soul of man. I believe in improvement. I believe in growth.[51]
In the late 1990s, Hinckley recalled his university studies of evolution to reporter Larry A. Witham: "'Studied all about it. Didn't worry me then. Doesn't worry me now.'"[52] In 2004, an official church magazine printed a quote from Hinckley from a 1983 speech where he expressed a similar sentiment.[53]