The Word of Wisdom is a modern commandment that the Lord revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith designed to bless the physical, emotional, and spiritual lives of the Saints in the modern days. It is a topic which many members know about but the history of which very few seem to understand. As a result many members come to erroneous conclusions about its purpose, place, and enforcement in the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This in turn leads them to false conclusions about how it should be interpreted and enforced today. One of the most common errors is the belief that beer and perhaps other weak alcoholic drinks were acceptable as “mild drinks” and were only forbidden in the early 20th century by LDS leaders who were supportive of American Prohibition. To find out the truth of this I will be evaluating the history of the Word of Wisdom in the 19th century as well as placing it in the larger context of common ideas of medicine and health common in the era. This will give us a great basis then to address and confirm or dispel some of the most common misconceptions surrounding the Word of Wisdom.
The Basics
I don’t want to go into immense detail on the Word of Wisdom as most readers here will already know the basics and if you don’t then you can read the full text in the above link as it isn’t very long. Besides, the portion of the text relevant to our discussion are verses 5-7:
That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.
And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.
And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.
You can see here that strong drinks here are forbidden for drinking and that wine is only acceptable in sacramental usage. With the verses in question understood we can begin to look at the history of how these verses have been interpreted and enforced.
Note: I will not be addressing the religious use of alcohol here, merely the non-religious use. Evidence seems to suggest that the early Church understood the term “sacrament” in its fullest sense. Notice that D&C89:5 says that wine is acceptable is their sacraments, meaning more than just what we today call the Sacrament and what others might call the Lord’s Supper or Communion. Therefore, it shouldn’t surprise us to hear stories of Church leaders drinking wine at weddings as wine usage was seen as acceptable at religious ceremonies such as weddings because weddings were both celebrations and holy sacraments. Here I’m most concerned with the non-religious, everyday usage of alcohol and what that tells us about how the Word of Wisdom was interpreted and lived in the early church.
Ohio and Missouri
One of the first things we need to understand about the Word of Wisdom is that from the very start it was seen as a commandment from God. The first three verses of the text, which contain the phrase, “To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom,” (See D&C 89:2) are not part of the original revelation. The original text of the revelation, which you can see here on page 207 of a scanned copy of the original 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C), begins with what is now verse 4, the very first line of which is, “Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you.” According to Dr. Paul Y. Hoskisson, whose paper The Word of Wisdom In Its First Decade will be a foundational resource for this article, what are now the first three verses of Section 89 were originally an introduction written for it after the revelation was received. (Hoskisson, pgs. 143-152) Dr. Hoskisson also points out that the phrase “thus saith the Lord” appears in the D&C thirty-six times and every time it does it is introducing a commandment from God(ibid. pg. 143), meaning that the phrase is the language God uses when issuing a commandment and that the Word of Wisdom was intended as a commandment from the very start, something reflected in how it was enforced from the very beginning.
Dr. Hoskisson explains that from the time it was given the Word of Wisdom was enforced with a level of strictness very similar to how it is today when you can be subject to church discipline and restrictions based on adherence to the Word of Wisdom but one is not typically excommunicated for not following it. This standard took a little time to take hold in Missouri, but by 1837 the Saints there were being held to the same strict standard that the Saints is Ohio had been since 1833, which was that total “abstinence from tea, coffee, tobacco, and alcohol was made a test of worthiness to hold an office and to be a member in good standing.” (ibid. pg. 132) The first example we have of someone being subject to church discipline for violating the Word of Wisdom comes from February 1834, less than a full year from when the revelation was received and a full year before the revelation would be first officially printed in the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. The brief account can be found in the History of the Church:
Brother Leonard Rich was called in question for transgressing the Word of Wisdom, and for selling the revelations at an extortionate price, while he was journeying east with Father Lyons, Brother Rich confessed, and the council forgave him upon his promising to do better and reform his life.
Vol. 2, pg. 27
Less than a week later the Prophet Joseph Smith would resolve an issue that had begun with a congregation in Pennsylvania where some members refused to partake of the sacrament because the elder performing it did not observe the Word of Wisdom. The question quickly became whether this was an acceptable policy or not and what exactly should be done with members who didn’t obey the Word of Wisdom. The Prophet Joseph Smith’s resolution that became the church’s policy was that:
“No official member in this Church is worthy to hold an office after having the word of wisdom properly taught to him, and he, the official member, neglecting to comply with, or obey them.”
Hoskisson, pg. 152
Dr. Hoskisson then goes on to provide two more examples of members who were subjected to church discipline in 1834 for disobeying the Word of Wisdom – a Bro. Orton who was disfellowshipped and nearly excommunicated and Wilkins Jenkins Salisbury, the Prophet’s brother-in-law, who was “expelled from the church for intemperance.” The Salisbury case is actually an important evidence for how strictly the Word of Wisdom was enforced during this period. He was welcomed back into the church in 1835. Then in 1836 he was accused of “tale-bearing,” adultery, neglecting his family, and drinking alcohol. Bro. Salisbury denied all charges but “propensity for talebearing, and drinking strong drink,” and as a result he had his elder’s license revoked and was excommunicated. (ibid. 153)
Dr. Hoskisson then continues on to name more examples of men who were called in to Church courts and subjected to Church discipline for their actions. So from a very early period in Church history we see people being subject to Church councils and discipline for violating the Word of Wisdom and at a level that would be comparable to, if not stricter than, what we have in the present day Church. Then there is this statement from the Quorum of the Seventy and the Presidents of the Seventy:
We certainly have no fellowship for those who live in the daily violation of the plain, written commands of God; and we are sure the Lord will withhold entirely or withdraw his spirit, from all such as disobey or disregard his precepts.
…We speak definitely and pointedly on this subject, because we feel the weight and importance of it. If, as the Lord has said, strong drinks are not to be taken internally, can those who use them thus be held guiltless? We ask, if hot drinks are not to be used, if those who make use of them do not transgress his commands, or at least set at nought his counsel? Most assuredly they do.
Have not the authorities of the church in council assembled in this place, decided deliberately and positively that if any official member of this church shall violate or in any wise disregard the words of wisdom which the Lord has given for the benefit of his saints, he shall lose his office? What official member does not know this? Brethren, either we believe this to be a revelation from God, or we do not. If we do not, we are acting the part of liars and hypocrites in the sight of God to say we are in the faith of the revelations and commandments of God which we have received. If we do, why disobey them and disregard them, and so live in open, avowed and acknowledged transgression, to our own soul’s injury and the grief of our brethren?
You may plead former habits, as an extenuation of your guilt, but we ask if the Almighty did not know your habits and the propensities of your nature? Certainly he did. Has he made any exceptions in your case, or are you wiser than he? judge ye.
These, to many, may appear like small items; but to us, any transgression of the commands of God, or a disregard of what he has said, is evincive of a determination to gratify our own corrupt vitiated taste, the word of the Lord to the contrary notwithstanding.
Messenger and Advocate, May 1837, pgs. 509-510
It is clearly understood here that the Word of Wisdom was not a suggestion from God, but a commandment from God and that those who would not obey it would be met with condemnation for that transgression of God’s commandment. Further, it was made clear that no justification for continuing in drinking alcohol because it was a habit was acceptable. You either kept God’s commandment or you did not. And those who did not must repent and live the Word of Wisdom or face damnation. By the time of the 1838 exodus from Kirtland when the Saints were organizing into groups to travel to Missouri to resettle both the elders quorums of Kirtland as well as the Seventy made adherence a requirement to take part in the Church’s wagon train. If you refused or disobeyed you would be exiled from the caravan entirely. (Hoskisson, pgs. 160-163)
In Missouri strict adherence to the Word of Wisdom took longer to develop, but not because it wasn’t preached as strictly as in Kirtland. The earliest record we have demonstrating this is from an 1834 latter sent by the high council of Clay County, Missouri to the Saints who has just been violently driven from Jackson County, the purpose of which was to recommend and authorize John Corrill to preach to the refugee Saints. It reads:
He, in connection with others also duly appointed, will visit you alternately for the purpose of instructing you in the necessary qualifications of the Latter-day Saints; that they may be perfected, that the officers and members of the body of Christ may become very prayerful and very faithful, strictly keeping all the commandments, and walking in holiness before the Lord continually; that all that mean to have the destroyer pass over them. as the children of Israel, and not slay them, may live according to the “word of wisdom;” that the Saints, by industry, diligence, faithfulness, and the prayer of faith, may become purified, and enter upon their inheritance, to build up Zion, according to the word of the Lord.
History of the Church, Vol. 2, pg. 138
It is worth noting here that this clearly states that the Word of Wisdom, the revelation which is actually quoted in part in the high council’s statement above, was listed and known as being among the commandments of God. Yet, it took longer for the Word of Wisdom to catch on in Missouri, as can been seen in this observation in an 1835 letter written by W.W. Phelps to his wife who was then in Missouri while he was in Kirtland, “They keep the Word of Wisdom in Kirtland; they drink cold water and don’t even mention tea and coffee.” (Hoskisson, pg. 166) The strictness which the teaching was meant to be accepted with would be made clear in February 1838 when a Church disciplinary council consisting of two Apostles, seven high councilors, and other local men removed David Whitmer, W.W. Phelps, John Whitmer, and Oliver Cowdrey from their position as the Presidency of Far West for two charges: selling their lands in Jackson County and violating the Word of Wisdom. It is certainly true that of the two charges the selling of land was the major charge, but the fact that violating the Word of Wisdom is mentioned right there along with it shows just how important it was in the early Church. In April 1838, David Whitmer would be excommunicated from the Church based on five charges. The first? “For not observing the Word of Wisdom.” (History of the Church Vol. 3, pg. 3 and pgs. 18-19) From this time forward the Word of Wisdom received as much emphasis as it had in Kirtland.
Then came the genocidal Mormon War.
Nauvoo
From the outside I’m sure it looked like “Mormonism” was finished in 1838. Joseph Smith and most of the main Church leaders were in prison in a frozen hellhole beneath the ironically named Liberty Jail and the body of the Saints were refugees fleeing Missouri for Missouri. But our destruction was not to be. By 140 though it was obviously not the cause. The Prophet and his brother Hyrum had escaped, rejoined the Saints, and settled what would be known as Nauvoo, the City Beautiful.
It is during this time period in Church history that we see the first slackening in enforcement of the Word of Wisdom, but even then this slackening is often overemphasized, presented as less strict than was actually the case. In February 1841, the Nauvoo City Council passed a city ordinance that made the sale of alcohol in sizes quarts or larger illegal unless specifically proscribed by a doctor. Joseph Smith publicly endorsed it saying that, “liquors …were unnecessary, and operate as a poison in the stomach, and that roots and herbs can be found to effect all necessary purposes.” Dr. Hoskisson then goes on to point out that during this time period “liquors” could mean either fermented alcohols such as beers and ales along with the stronger distilled alcohols such as whiskey. (Hoskisson, pgs. 140-141)
In historian George W. Givens’ stellar social history of life in Nauvoo from its founding until the Saints were forced to flee it totally titled In Old Nauvoo: Every Life In The City of Joseph, we learn about the immediate effects of this ban. Heber C. Kimball, writing for the LDS newspaper The Millennial Star, recorded that when he was in Nauvoo for its 1841 Independence Day celebration he saw no drunken people, no bars, no place to buy alcohol, indeed no public place where one could get them at all except for on a doctor’s orders. Josiah Quincy was disappointed with the hospitality of the Nauvoo Mansion House, which was Joseph Smith’s home, because it had “a small and comfort-less bar-room; all the more comfortless, perchance, from it being a dry bar-room.” Even the Church’s Mississippi River steamboat, the Maid of Iowa, was a dry boat which didn’t allow alcohol upon it. As Givens notes, this does not mean that alcohol didn’t exist in Nauvoo or that it wasn’t drank, but we do see the Church and most of its members seek to limit it as much as possible. In 1841 the people of Nauvoo petition the city to shutdown a business that had been selling alcohol. In 1843 the Prophet Joseph Smith wrote that been busy “ferreting out grog shops, groceries [which commonly sold alcohol], and beer barrels. I have warned the rum and beer dealers to be scare after this time.” (Givens, pg. 203-204)
Does this sound to you like the Word of Wisdom wasn’t something that the Church tried to enforce or that beer wasn’t considered to be restricted by the Word of Wisdom?
Yet, I can hear the response already. “Fine, the Word of Wisdom was considered much more important than we thought and efforts were made by Church leaders to enforce it, but there were still taverns still existed in Nauvoo and we know Church members, sometimes including even Church leaders, bought and drank alcohol, both harder liquors and beer.” As far as it goes, these statements are true, but they do not lead to the conclusion that the critics want them to once you understand the context of these facts.
Yes, there were taverns in Nauvoo. But they were specifically forbidden by law from selling alcohol. Their major function was to provide room and board to travelers, not to operate as bars. The later concept of a tavern that thinks of it as much as being a bar as a place where you can rent rooms has more to do with how the idea of taverns has evolved in the modern conception thanks to movies, fantasy books, and video games than with how they actually functioned in America in the 1800s. (Givens, pg. 204)
Medicinal Purposes
What then about the use of alcohol, whether harder liquors or beer in Nauvoo? Certainly that must be a violation of the Word of Wisdom or signal that it wasn’t taken seriously as a commandment during this era, right? Incorrect. Since the very beginning the Church has made exceptions to the Word of Wisdom based on medicinal needs. Even today you can take seriously addictive painkillers like opioids or use a normally controlled substance like marijuana if you have a doctor’s prescription without it being a violation of the Word of Wisdom. (General Handbook, pg. 397) Just as this is true today it was true then as well, with two big differences. The first is that there were very few doctors in America who operated in the way that we think of them today and as a result “medicinal usage” was often determined as much by the individual acting upon commonly held medicinal belief of there era. The second is that alcohol, especially beer, was often promoted as a medicine in and of itself and was often sold as a tonic to promote health. In an era where we understand that no percent of alcohol is good, healthy, or safe this may seem shocking. To understand how prevalent this was, let me provide a few examples.
Givens quotes an etiquette book of the period as advising against drinking water because:
An unnecessary quantity has a tendency to weaken the system generally, and in a particular manner the digestive organs.
Givens, pg. 202
This popular opposition to drinking water probably explains why W.W. Phelps was so shocked at the amount of cold water the Kirtland Saints drank. So, if you aren’t supposed to drink water, what are you supposed to drink? As Givens notes after the above quotation, beliefs like this gave people the perfect justification for drinking alcohol. Honestly, they may not have been entirely wrong. On page 295 of his biography on Andrew Jackson, titled Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times, Dr. H.W. Brands explains what he thinks is the most likely cause that Jackson was so rail thin and dyspeptic for most of his life. Brands explains that food borne pathogens plagued the intestines of almost everyone in America, especially those on the frontier. Especially virulent and deadly water borne pathogens like typhoid and cholera – the latter of which we know plagued Nauvoo when the Saints were first settling the area – were extremely common and extremely deadly. Intestinal problems, “fractious bowels,” and violent dysentery were all everyday experiences for Americans during this time. “Alcohol,” Dr. Brands notes, “was the universal medicine,” for all these ailments. (Brands, pg. 295) The Latter-day Saints, like many of their day, believed the same, as explained by Dr. Paul H. Peterson:
A similar point could be made regarding the consumption of strong drinks while the general use of whiskey and liquor was contrary to the principle many saints felt these beverages had redeeming medicinal qualities. It was drunk by some to help remedy the effects of cholera and evidently was used as an alleviating cure for the effects of other sicknesses.
Hoskisson, pg. 196 and Peterson, pg. 24
It was this medicinal usage for which alcohol was only ever legally allowed in Nauvoo. As Givens explained, city law only allowed the mayor and one person from each city ward to sell alcohol for medicinal purposes and all other alcohols, whether distilled like whiskey or fermented like beer, were not approved for sale. That said, beer was treated as a health tonic in that era. To understand what I mean by this, think about the way that sodas like Coca-Cola and gin and tonics in the early 20th century promised to do everything for you from increasing your focus and mental capacity to invigorating your body. Beer was promoted as a similar item in its day. Givens provides one later example of a beer called Hoff’s Malt Extract which promised to promote your general well-being as “a remedy recommended by European physicians.” In an era before modern medicines these beliefs were not just clever ways for most Americans to drink alcohol or for the Saints to get around the Word of Wisdom. As Givens explains, the medicinal benefits of beer were firmly and honestly held by both the Saints and the larger general population. (Givens, pg. 205) Which is why the Church in Nauvoo tried to regulate beer sales but did not absolutely forbid them and why you find both general members and Church leaders using them, because beer especially, but alcohol generally, was medicinal. (As a side note, this belief might also explain why so many toasts when drinking alcohol seem to revolve around wishing “Health!” and “Long life!” to your companions.)
I would suggest that it is this practice which causes us to see Nauvoo as a period of slackening when it comes to enforcing the Word of Wisdom. I am not convinced that is the case. Instead I see the Saints trying to live the Word of Wisdom while also balancing that with what was commonly accepted medical wisdom of the day. When Joseph, acting as mayor, allowed for the building of a brewery in Nauvoo that isn’t him suggesting that the Word of Wisdom isn’t in force as strong as before, it is the equivalent of building a medical facility that produces painkillers. That may seem like a silly comparison given what we have learned about biology, microbiology, and medical science since then, but this is a good example of the old adage about how the past is a different country and they do things differently there being true. The whole conception of medicine, health, and the job of a doctor was generally radically different then compared to how we see things now. Surely this allowed for some to abuse their rights, as happens even today. But that doesn’t mean the Church leadership wasn’t trying to strictly enforce the Word of Wisdom and limit or eliminate the proscribed substances, including beer, for anything other than medicinal purposes in the same way that we today are not supposed to use marijuana except for medicinal purposes and pure recreational usage is not accepted. (There is another good comparison to Joseph Smith supporting the brewery. If I support the building of a marijuana dispensary in my town so that people can use it wisely and appropriately for proscribed medicinal purposes doesn’t mean I am likewise supporting people recreationally smoking marijuana all day.)
The Word of Wisdom Today
As Dr. Hoskisson notes that this idea of medical exceptions proceeded well into the Pioneer/Utah Period and he provides examples of Church leadership counseling and using alcohol along the same guidelines as discussed above. (Hoskisson, pgs. 141-143) For sake of space and not being too repetitious I will not go into it in detail here. You can read his work at the above link. The only thing I suggest in addition is this article by Linda P. Wilcox that outlines the general negative attitude that Brigham Young and the majority of 19th century people, Saints and not, had about doctors and medicine and why they felt that way. It helps place in further context why Church members and leaders, and people more generally, continued to have more faith in home remedies such as the supposed medicinal benefits of alcohol and herbs than professional medicine through much of the century.
It isn’t until after the turn of the century, during the Presidencies of Joseph F. Smith and Heber J. Grant, that we see the way the Word of Wisdom is understood and enforced begin to eliminate “medicinal alcohol” except in exceedingly rare cases. This, I do not believe, is mere coincidence. Nor am I convinced Presidents Smith and Grant were merely more influenced by the Temperance Movement than previous Church leaders. As I’ve hopefully shown, Latter-day Saints had always been temperance minded and even the American Temperance Movement had recognized the medicinal usage of alcohol as being acceptable among its members and society from its very start in 1808. (Givens, pg. 204) So there was nothing new or different about President Grant’s positions either in terms of the Word of Wisdom or the Latter-day Saint relationship to temperance. What had changed was how people understood the world, including themselves. Medical science had made incredible advancements in the latter half of the 19th century and at the birth of the 20th; industrialization had made better medicine and safer living conditions more common for more people than ever before. In 1917, before either President Grant made living the Word of Wisdom a condition for obtaining a temple recommend or the enactment of Prohibition in America, the American Medical Association had declared:
“Whereas, we believe that the use of alcohol as a beverage is detrimental to human economy; and
Whereas, its use in therapeutics, as a tonic or a stimulant or as a food has no scientific basis, therefore be it resolved that the American Medical Association opposes the use of alcohol as a beverage, and be it further
Resolved, that the use of alcohol as a therapeutic agent should be discouraged.”
Of course it was not perfect. Many of the older doctors certainly still carried out their old ideas of medicinal alcohol usages, but the knowledge was growing and the times were changing. For all that had been discovered, there was still much we did not know. For example, it wasn’t until the 1970’s that we really understood the dangers of alcohol to unborn children, for example. But our knowledge and safe access to alternatives were both dramatically increasing in the early 20th century, beginning to replace the old ideas.
Therefore, it is no accident that it was this era that our understanding of the Word of Wisdom began to change along with our understanding of biological science. As medical knowledge increased, becoming better and more general, we began to realize that alcohol, beer or otherwise, did not have the medical benefits that previous generations had believed it had. As industrialization made drinking water safer and more easily obtainable than ever before that justification for drinking alcohol diminished. Even if, for the sake of argument, we assume that between the constant streaming in of new converts, the Exodus, the settlement of in Intermountain West, and trying to survive the decades of persecution heaped upon us by the US government there was a slackening in the way the Word of Wisdom was interpreted and/or enforced, then what we see starting with Presidents Smith and Grant and continuing to today is not a new interpretation of the Word of Wisdom foisted upon the Saints, but rather a return to how it was always originally meant to be understood and enforced, the original spirit of this commandment from God restored. This being that the Word of Wisdom is a commandment from God, that all alcohol, including beer, was not to be drank recreationally but was allowable medicinally, and that members of the Church could be disciplined by the Church for failing to strictly adhere to the Word of Wisdom, though not excommunicated.