Elder Oaks: Science Quotes
Edited transcripts for the interviews with President Boyd K. Packer and Elder Dallin H. Oaks for the PBS documentary The Mormons have been posted by the Church.
Elder Oaks made several comments that touched on science. Although most of them appear to have been made in the context of the Book of Mormon, they have broader applicability and are reproduced below. I may discuss some of these points further in later posts, but I thought I would post them all together first. Except for the footnote and separating dashes, all indications of editing (brackets, etc.) are in the original.HW: What would you say to faithful, liberal (in the absence of a better word) Mormons who are searching for “the middle way” to look at the Book of Mormon as an inspired text with profound spiritual meaning?
DHO: To people who have a hard time with the literal claims of scripture, I would say: “Keep your life in balance between reliance on history, so-called, or geology or science, so-called, and reliance on spiritual witnesses and the testimony of the Holy Ghost. There are two ways to truth: science and revelation. If you find things that trouble you, don’t dismiss the spiritual explanation and hold with the scientific one. Keep your life in balance by continuing to do the things necessary to keep open the channels of communication to heaven as well as to scholarly journals.”
HW: Describe what that middle way or middle ground is.
DHO: It’s hard for me to define a middle ground because I don’t believe in a middle ground when it comes to morality. I don’t believe in situational ethics. I believe that truth is a knowledge of things as they are. I think we’re dealing with religious truth, and I don’t think that religious truth can be understood by scientific methods.
Whenever science dilutes a religious truth or the revelation of God, it demeans it. While I understand the sincerity of those who are looking for a middle way, I think that God has the final answer on the purpose of life. He has the final answer on what is right and wrong. I don’t think there’s a middle way. I think that science and scholarship can lead us toward truth, but I think that people in the end must be willing to surrender their best judgment to revelation from God.
----------------------------HW: Possibly the “problem” the Book of Mormon has to a modern person is that there are no precedents [to the plates].
DHO: A book that has no origin, of course that’s a problem! Of course a book, translated from plates that you can’t examine to authenticate it is a terrible problem to anyone who approaches this in a scientific way. There have been other visionaries, but I don’t know of any who have written a book. So Joseph is unique in saying, “I had a vision, and it led to this book, and here’s the book! Read it, put it to the spiritual test.” Well, it can be put to the spiritual test. Millions have done that and have joined the Church. But it can’t be put to scientific test — that really bothers a scientific age! If I wanted science to draw on, it would bother me too.
I suppose that we’re in a scientific age, but surely in human history there have been times when people would have said, “Visions in the age in iron? Visions in the age of sailboats?” [Slight laughter.] Any age could take its own marvels and use them to reject the simpler revelatory experiences of an earlier time.
----------------------------Now intellectualism is also perceived as a danger. I suppose it has been for at least a century. I read some history of some of the early confrontations with science — creation of the earth and so forth. In fact at Brigham Young University in some of its earliest years, [there] was [such a] manifestation [1]. There’ll be other manifestations at different times. The life of the mind, which is a great, defining object of universities in our day, of which I’ve been the beneficiary in my own life, can be seen or practiced to be in flat-out opposition to the spiritual characteristics of one’s faith. Revelation stands in opposition to science in some aspects according to some understandings. So I think in any day the watchmen on the tower are going to say intellectualism is a danger to the Church. And it is at extreme points, and if people leave their faith behind and follow strictly where science leads them, that can be a pretty crooked path. ([The] science of today is different than the science of yesterday.) We encourage the life of the mind. We establish and support universities that encourage education. But we say to our young people: “Keep your faith. Do the things necessary to hear the promptings of the Spirit. If you’re getting too far off the line in the latest scientific theory or whatever, you will get a spiritual warning.” And I believe that.
1. This is almost certainly a reference to the 1911 evolution controversy. To read more about it, as well as Elder Oaks's interaction with the sciences while president of BYU, see here.

5 comments:
Thanks for the quotes, Jared*. I'd forgotten about the two interviews posted at LDS.org. Elder Oaks certainly went to bat for science when he was BYU President. I have to think his view hasn't changed, although as an apostle (and speaking publicly and for the record) he obviously has to choose his words very carefully.
.
"There are two ways to truth: science and revelation. If you find things that trouble you, don't dismiss the spiritual explanation and hold with the scientific one."
I think Elder Oaks is paraphrasing President Monson's motto for youth: "My faith did not come to me through science, and I will not permit so-called science to destroy it."
Do you agree that these two statements are essentially the same? Do you agree with their message?
Why is it, I wonder, that history, geology and science are always "so called" but revelation, doctrine and religion never are. What could this phrase possibly mean such that the latter group does not merit its application while the former does?
Dave, thanks for stopping by.
Anon, I noticed that too. It seems like a rhetorical method of putting science--or some aspect of it's current state--into an inferior position.
Gary, the basic message of the two statements seems about the same to me. I agree with it in proportion to the fundamental importance of the issue under consideration. Here the issue is the Book of Mormon.
Allow me to quote the next sentence and do some bolding of my own:
"Keep your life in balance by continuing to do the things necessary to keep open the channels of communication to heaven as well as to scholarly journals."
To me, the distilled meaning behind these statements is basically: don't make any rash decisions.
anonymous,
I guess that sort of depends on what you mean by "revelation" doesn't it?
Obviously, you could "bear testimony" about whatever fool thing you felt like on any given Sunday. That wouldn't necessarily make it any more reliable than scientific study (although in some "scientific" fields, the blatant ideological manipulation of the facts and methods makes me wonder sometimes...).
For me, the Mormon interplay of "faith and reason" (if they are two separate things) is simple a reminder that human instinct, intuition, and force of habit are often far more compelling than the various logic games we play in our modern world.
I find that the spirit enriches and enlivens what would otherwise be a rather drab world.
Post a Comment