A further, deeper, and more fully rounded discussion of the proper understanding of gospel welfare principles, as taught in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, is clearly necessary, as a wide and deep gorge has, it would appear, opened between some members as to the proper and appropriate conception of the concept "welfare" and just how the Church and its people are to negotiate that concept, especially as compared and contrasted with certain alternative secular belief systems, or variations of them, claiming similar priorities and concerns.
I will not, as I do not have David's expertise in Near Eastern studies and most certainly cannot read biblical Hebrew, concentrate upon scriptural prooftexting or the use of scripture, to any great extent, as the sources of my core propositions here, save to the extent they will be used as supporting material for assertions made as drawn from the writings, teachings, and counsel of the modern, contemporary living oracles of the Lord Jesus Christ in our day. The emphasis will be upon the inspired teachings of the living prophets and special witnesses, with scripture used to reinforce and substantiate their words.
I will use only teachings of the General Authorities of the Church as published in official Church sources (nothing from Deseret Book or such, even if the material is duplicated there), and which is neither obscure or cryptic. What I want to emphasize, if possible, is at least two major points. The first is that we, as Latter Day Saints, are governed by and covenant bound to follow the modern, living oracles in our day first and foremost, according to the principle of continuing, ongoing, ever unfolding modern revelation, both our own for ourselves and for us, as Saints, from the Brethren. Connected to this is that the scriptures, while they are to be "likened unto us" are of varying value depending upon their provenance.
The Old Testament and New Testament are deeply valuable bodies of scripture, but were also written primarily for the people and under the conditions of the times, culture and milieu in which they arose. The Book of Mormon and D&C, on the other hand, are different in that both were written, one in ancient times, and the other in modern, for the Saints and people of the earth in contemporary terms, moving forward to the Second Coming of Christ.
Secondly, as all words, teachings, or counsel that come through the spirit of revelation, or spirit of prophesy, is scripture (D&C 64:, the teachings, doctrinal clarifications, and doctrinal interpretations of the contemporary oracles take precedence over any preceding scriptural interpretation or exegesis, on any given point and to any specific degree. The Church is developing, not static, and its doctrines, thought true, are incomplete.
To initiate the discussion, I'd like us to critique and think about some salient points from the talk by Boyd Packer, given below in 1975 and published in the Ensign of Aug 1975. Are Packer's thoughts, and the thoughts of the other special witnesses of the Lord he quotes, consistent with the concepts and doctrines being taught by some here as the correct, or authentic understanding of gospel welfare/economic principles? The title of the talk, the entire subject of which is temporal welfare principles within a gospel framework, is "Self Reliance." I assume at the outset that Boyd Packer is as aware as any that in the future Zion, there will be "no poor among us." It would appear, however, that for Elder Packer, the means, or form such eradication of poverty will take, as a matter of both principle and application, are not those of some others here proposing an alternate perspective.
The first couple paragraphs of his talk set state fundamental principles:
The Church was two years old when the Lord revealed that, “the idler shall not have place in the church, except he repent and mend his ways.” (D&C 75:29.) President Marion G. Romney in our last conference explained this principle with his characteristic simple directness: “The obligation to sustain one’s self was divinely imposed upon the human race at its beginning. ‘In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground.’ (Gen 3:19)
The welfare handbook instructs, “(We must) earnestly teach and urge members to be self-sustaining to the fullest extent of their power. No Latter-day Saint will … voluntarily shift from himself the burden of his own support. So long as he can, under the inspiration of the Almighty and with his own labors, he will supply himself with the necessities of life.” (1952, p. 2.)
I'll break this all up so single posts don't go long, so let's start here.
1. Idlers have no place in the Church, and if so, then by definition, they have no claim on the Bishop's storehouse. What does this imply with respect to David's longstanding concept of "the poor" as a special class within the gospel with a collective, as well as individual, claim upon the property and labor of others within the community?
2. Self sufficiency and economic independence, the central themes of Providing the Lord's Way, are mentioned here as a divine imposition and core condition of mortality. Not that distribution of wealth for the alleviation of poverty is not an aspect of the entire welfare plan, but it is not, and especially on a society-wide scale, the central organizing principle of it.
Now, notice the following:
We have succeeded fairly well in establishing in the minds of Latter-day Saints that they should take care of their own material needs and then contribute to the welfare of those who cannot provide the necessities of life. If a member is unable to sustain himself, then he is to call upon his own family, and then upon the Church, in that order, and not upon the government at all.
We have counseled bishops and stake presidents to be very careful to avoid abuses in the welfare program. When people are able but are unwilling to take care of themselves, we are responsible to employ the dictum of the Lord, that the idler shall not eat the bread of the laborer. The simple rule has been, to the fullest extent possible, to take care of one’s self.
Do the ideas within the first paragraph harmonize with the position some have taken here that, within the Church, this hierarchy mediating the sources from which help is sought, this hierarchy can be ignored? Why would Boyd K. Packer -- and numerous apostles both before and contemporaneous with him, take this position on the distinction between welfare as received from family and church, and the state?
What doctrines/teachings of the gospel do you think would have led Elder Packer, and so many other General Authorities (including the famous First Presidency statement of 1936 below, which we will come to in due course, made with direct (but unstated) reference to the New Deal) to take such a position?