Surprising: Joseph Smith Counseled Against Self-Sufficiency

[Joan7]

This is a counsel from the Prophet Joseph Smith, that totally surprised me:

I then addressed them [the Twelve and other missionaries] and gave much instruction calculated to guard them against self-sufficiency, self-righteousness, and self-importance; touching upon many subjects of importance and value to all who wish to walk humbly before the Lord, and especially teaching them to observe charity, wisdom and fellow-feeling, with love one towards another in all things, and under all circumstances. (Instructions to the Apostles and Seventies departing for missions to England, Nauvoo, IL, 2 July 1839. HC 3:383)

I wondered about such a thing. It is the exact opposite as the Church has taught for more than a century. But, then I remembered Joseph’s teaching the people to not have any poor among them, and to live the law of Consecration. Self-sufficiency is focused on taking care of self, not taking care of others.

There is an important example in 1 Kings 17:7-16. Elijah asked the Widow of Zarephath for a morsel of food. She did think about herself first, but then she offered Elijah all she had. Self-sufficiency, or a years supply is focusing on gathering resources to help yourself, and disregarding the welfare of others. Remember, in the Doctrine and Covenants, God counsels the people to take their surplus to the Bishop’s Storehouse. Then, everyone is saving for everyone. I, for one, believe that we should heed the counsel of God which is:

Doctrine and Covenants 70:6-11, 14
6 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto them, that they shall not give these things unto the church, neither unto the world;
7 Nevertheless, inasmuch as they receive more than is needful for their necessities and their wants, it shall be given into my storehouse;
8 And the benefits shall be consecrated unto the inhabitants of Zion, and unto their generations, inasmuch as they become heirs according to the laws of the kingdom.
9 Behold, this is what the Lord requires of every man in his stewardship, even as I, the Lord, have appointed or shall hereafter appoint unto any man.
10 And behold, none are exempt from this law who belong to the church of the living God;
11 Yea, neither the bishop, neither the agent who keepeth the Lord’s storehouse, neither he who is appointed in a stewardship over temporal things.
14 Nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the Spirit shall be withheld.

[gkearney]

Given at a time when our faith was centered upon the ideals of communitarianism this should not come as much of a surprise.

[h_p]

If you look it up in the 1828 Webster dictionary:

SELF-SUFFI'CIENCY, noun [self and sufficiency.] An overweening opinion of one's own strength or worth; excessive confidence in one's own competence or sufficiency.

So kind of a negative connotation back then. The modern definition:

able to maintain oneself or itself without outside aid : capable of providing for one's own needs

[mudflap]

....and if we look it up in my stake's handbook, it appears to mean

getting a job

not

- planting a garden
- canning the produce
- generating an income independent of "the system"
- getting out of debt

[Joan7]

If you look it up in the 1828 Webster dictionary:

SELF-SUFFI'CIENCY, noun [self and sufficiency.] An overweening opinion of one's own strength or worth; excessive confidence in one's own competence or sufficiency.

So kind of a negative connotation back then. The modern definition:

able to maintain oneself or itself without outside aid : capable of providing for one's own needs

I am more interested in what Joseph Smith felt it meant. If we truly believe the Doctrine he gave us, then we find that:
Nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the Spirit shall be withheld.

Doctrine and Covenants 70:6-11, 14
6 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto them, that they shall not give these things unto the church, neither unto the world;
7 Nevertheless, inasmuch as they receive more than is needful for their necessities and their wants, it shall be given into my storehouse;
8 And the benefits shall be consecrated unto the inhabitants of Zion, and unto their generations, inasmuch as they become heirs according to the laws of the kingdom.
9 Behold, this is what the Lord requires of every man in his stewardship, even as I, the Lord, have appointed or shall hereafter appoint unto any man.
10 And behold, none are exempt from this law who belong to the church of the living God;
11 Yea, neither the bishop, neither the agent who keepeth the Lord’s storehouse, neither he who is appointed in a stewardship over temporal things.
14 Nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the Spirit shall be withheld.

[Joan7]

If you look it up in the 1828 Webster dictionary:

SELF-SUFFI'CIENCY, noun [self and sufficiency.] An overweening opinion of one's own strength or worth; excessive confidence in one's own competence or sufficiency.

So kind of a negative connotation back then. The modern definition:

able to maintain oneself or itself without outside aid : capable of providing for one's own needs

I wanted to confirm the 1828 definition you found, so I looked up the etymology of the word:

self-sufficient (adj.)

"able to supply one's own needs, capable of fulfilling one's own desires without aid of others," 1580s, from self- + sufficient. Related: Self-sufficiently. Self-sufficing (1680s) is properly "sufficient for oneself."

It looks like Joseph was using this definition in warning the Saints.

[ParticleMan]

...
It looks like Joseph was using this definition in warning the Saints.

It looks like Joseph was using this definition in [instruct]ing the [Apostles and Seventies departing for missions to England].

There. I fixed it for you.

Correct context facilitates correct reasoning.

One may then consider why, or the wisdom of such counsel. For instance, how this might relate to going without purse or scrip. As a result, one may perceive no issue with this counsel.

[Joan7]

...
It looks like Joseph was using this definition in warning the Saints.

It looks like Joseph was using this definition in [instruct]ing the [Apostles and Seventies departing for missions to England].

There. I fixed it for you.

Correct context facilitates correct reasoning.

One may then consider why, or the wisdom of such counsel. For instance, how this might relate to going without purse or scrip. As a result, one may perceive no issue with this counsel.

His counsel, taken with this verse, shine a light on something that has been hidden for some generations...
14 Nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the Spirit shall be withheld.

[Pazooka]

His preaching against “self-sufficiency, self-righteousness, and self-importance” makes sense since the goal is sufficiency in Christ. And He is our righteousness.

What if everything were taken away from us? Would we still feel rich because we had the Lord as our Providence? I honestly hope so.

[marc]

Great topic!

[MikeMaillet]

Isaiah tells us that if we are righteous and take care of the poor and oppressed that we will "eat the good of the land." If we lived according to the covenant we would have no need to worry about such things as storing food. We would all be farmers and the earth would provide. We currently do not, as a people, live the covenant but rather we have embraced the Babylonian system of working in factories and depend mostly on large corporations to manufacture and distribute our food. These are the same companies that are more interested in making money and polluting the earth than providing nutrition to their customers. These are the same companies that proudly display their rainbow logos. These are the same companies that are mostly on the stock market and therefore answer to the needs of "investors". These are the same companies that are destroying bio-diversity by genetic modification and growing only those variants that yield the most poundage. These are the same companies that are buying up all of the small Mom & Pop farms and these are the same companies that answer to the Luciferian banks and government leaders with their Masonic handshakes.

Isaiah 1:

16) Wash yourselves clean:
remove your wicked deeds
from before my eyes;
cease to do evil.

17) Learn to do good: demand justice,
stand up for the oppressed;
plead the cause of the fatherless,
appeal on behalf of the widow.

18) Come now, let us put it to the test,
says Jehovah:
though your sins are as scarlet,
they can be made white as snow;
though they have reddened as crimson,
they may become white as wool.

19) If you are willing and obey,
you shall eat the good of the land.

20) But if you are unwilling and disobey,
you shall be eaten by the sword.
By his mouth Jehovah has spoken it.

Mike Maillet
Ingleside, Ontario

[Niemand]

I think probably what he meant he was becoming an isolated individual. When it came to LDS communities, they did try to be self-sufficient. Their remote locations are evidence of that.

As Mike Maillet points out above, there are some of us who cannot fend for themselves. We will all get there if we live long enough. This is talked about in the Book of Mormon.

[Joan7]

I think probably what he meant he was becoming an isolated individual. When it came to LDS communities, they did try to be self-sufficient. Their remote locations are evidence of that.

As Mike Maillet points out above, there are some of us who cannot fend for themselves. We will all get there if we live long enough. This is talked about in the Book of Mormon.

Joseph said, "...gave much instruction calculated to guard them against self-sufficiency..."
I agree with you that the communities of Saints tried to be self-sufficient. But, it was a group effort. Any surplus went to the local Bishop's storehouse, to make sure there was no poor among them. The huge change to the policy was when Brigham and crew issued an edict a year after Joseph's death. No longer would Saints be allowed to pay in produce or chickens, etc. And, it would not go to the Bishop's storehouse. Thereafter, it was cash only, and it had to be sent to the Church. That is in direct violation of Doctrine and Covenants 70
6 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto them, that they shall not give these things unto the church, neither unto the world;
7 Nevertheless, inasmuch as they receive more than is needful for their necessities and their wants, it shall be given into my storehouse;

Sometime thereafter they started teaching individual effort to lay up in store against a time of need. But the Lord's standard is it should not be individual, but a community effort. And the surplus, now named tithing, was designated by the Lord to stay in the community, and never be sent to Church headquarters.

[h_p]

If you look it up in the 1828 Webster dictionary:

SELF-SUFFI'CIENCY, noun [self and sufficiency.] An overweening opinion of one's own strength or worth; excessive confidence in one's own competence or sufficiency.

So kind of a negative connotation back then. The modern definition:

able to maintain oneself or itself without outside aid : capable of providing for one's own needs

I wanted to confirm the 1828 definition you found, so I looked up the etymology of the word:

self-sufficient (adj.)

"able to supply one's own needs, capable of fulfilling one's own desires without aid of others," 1580s, from self- + sufficient. Related: Self-sufficiently. Self-sufficing (1680s) is properly "sufficient for oneself."

It looks like Joseph was using this definition in warning the Saints.

I'm not sure I'm following. Are you saying that he didn't want people to be able to supply their own needs?

Doesn't it stand to reason, that if you have a community of people, and none of them are producing enough to even support themselves, they are all in poverty, and will eventually starve to death, regardless of whether their lack of resources is equal or not?

And if you want that community to be able to provide enough for everyone to have *sufficient*, that some people are going to have to produce more than what they themselves need? Assuming not everybody is producing equally? Doesn't that mean that there are going to be people who absolutely must be even more than self-sufficient?

[Joan7]

If you look it up in the 1828 Webster dictionary:

SELF-SUFFI'CIENCY, noun [self and sufficiency.] An overweening opinion of one's own strength or worth; excessive confidence in one's own competence or sufficiency.

So kind of a negative connotation back then. The modern definition:

able to maintain oneself or itself without outside aid : capable of providing for one's own needs

I wanted to confirm the 1828 definition you found, so I looked up the etymology of the word:

self-sufficient (adj.)

"able to supply one's own needs, capable of fulfilling one's own desires without aid of others," 1580s, from self- + sufficient. Related: Self-sufficiently. Self-sufficing (1680s) is properly "sufficient for oneself."

It looks like Joseph was using this definition in warning the Saints.

I'm not sure I'm following. Are you saying that he didn't want people to be able to supply their own needs?

Doesn't it stand to reason, that if you have a community of people, and none of them are producing enough to even support themselves, they are all in poverty, and will eventually starve to death, regardless of whether their lack of resources is equal or not?

And if you want that community to be able to provide enough for everyone to have *sufficient*, that some people are going to have to produce more than what they themselves need? Assuming not everybody is producing equally? Doesn't that mean that there are going to be people who absolutely must be even more than self-sufficient?

What Joseph and the Doctrine and Covenants is teaching is to not have selfish-sufficiency, such as I need to build up a years supply. So, while you are packing away yet another bucket of apple slices, you are not caring that the family of 8 across the street are sometimes without food. If we conduct our lives in the way the Lord commands, He promises that we will have abundance for everyone. I believe that.

Now, we may not know of the distress of the family next door. Say, he is an electrician. He can offer his service through the Bishops storehouse, because that is his surplus. Because others are gardeners or raise beef, he is able to receive from other's surplus to feed his family. It is to be in every place that has a Bishop, or at a specific community level. Joseph was guided by the Lord in setting up the storehouses in his day. And they let Saints give chickens or eggs or wheat, etc. That is an inspired program. I think it would be wonderful to live that way.

[OPMissionary]

Not surprising at all. The fetishising of "independence" at the expense of the collective good is why our society has so many problems to begin with. People hear the word "collective" and immediately think about communism, but doing good for the whole of the community is anything but exclusive with the ideology of Marxism. The law of consecration is a collective law. We are not separate from what is around us, we are a part of it. What is good for the whole, is good for the part.

Declaring yourself independent from those around you is foolhardy. You are not independent from those around you. You co-exist with them - what you do affects them and what they do affects you. Helping your neighbor is the same as helping yourself and vice versa. When everyone thinks about what is good for everyone, this will invariably produce better results that "every man for himself."

Fierce independence is also prideful. It implies that you are "above" the help of others, and that anyone who accepts help is "less than" the rest who do not. It turns everything into a competition of who can rise above the rest and claim the most autonomy and power. With this mentally, tearing someone else down is the equivalent of bringing yourself up in relative terms, which is why we see so much backbiting and sabotage today. A healthy society does not think in these terms of "me vs. the rest." Instead, they come together to achieve what is best for all, including future generations. It's the difference between selflessness and selfishness itself.

I submit that this "F you, I got mine" mentally of Americans will be entirely foreign to Zion or the kingdom of heaven. It's no wonder that Joseph Smith, what with his attempts to instate the law of consecration and life of service, warned against the pitfalls of individualism.

[TheDuke]

Context: Joseph is teaching of spiritual, not temporal. We can only be saved as a society, not as an individual (thou each individual must also be saved). We need each other, that is what Joseph was teaching, he never even talked about jobs, money, etc here. And this clap-trap of always teaching united order is also incorrect, as it was never the intent of the entire gathering (14 people in Kirtland, and then in Mo), never in Nauvoo, NY, Iowa, etc...

[Joan7]

Context: Joseph is teaching of spiritual, not temporal. We can only be saved as a society, not as an individual (thou each individual must also be saved). We need each other, that is what Joseph was teaching, he never even talked about jobs, money, etc here. And this clap-trap of always teaching united order is also incorrect, as it was never the intent of the entire gathering (14 people in Kirtland, and then in Mo), never in Nauvoo, NY, Iowa, etc...

This is not a "spiritual" commandment, and is the same teachings from Joseph's quote:
Doctrine and Covenants 70:6-11, 14
6 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto them, that they shall not give these things unto the church, neither unto the world;
7 Nevertheless, inasmuch as they receive more than is needful for their necessities and their wants, it shall be given into my storehouse;
8 And the benefits shall be consecrated unto the inhabitants of Zion, and unto their generations, inasmuch as they become heirs according to the laws of the kingdom.
9 Behold, this is what the Lord requires of every man in his stewardship, even as I, the Lord, have appointed or shall hereafter appoint unto any man.
10 And behold, none are exempt from this law who belong to the church of the living God;
11 Yea, neither the bishop, neither the agent who keepeth the Lord’s storehouse, neither he who is appointed in a stewardship over temporal things.
14 Nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the Spirit shall be withheld.

[Original_Intent]

If you look it up in the 1828 Webster dictionary:



So kind of a negative connotation back then. The modern definition:

I wanted to confirm the 1828 definition you found, so I looked up the etymology of the word:

self-sufficient (adj.)

"able to supply one's own needs, capable of fulfilling one's own desires without aid of others," 1580s, from self- + sufficient. Related: Self-sufficiently. Self-sufficing (1680s) is properly "sufficient for oneself."

It looks like Joseph was using this definition in warning the Saints.

I'm not sure I'm following. Are you saying that he didn't want people to be able to supply their own needs?

Doesn't it stand to reason, that if you have a community of people, and none of them are producing enough to even support themselves, they are all in poverty, and will eventually starve to death, regardless of whether their lack of resources is equal or not?

And if you want that community to be able to provide enough for everyone to have *sufficient*, that some people are going to have to produce more than what they themselves need? Assuming not everybody is producing equally? Doesn't that mean that there are going to be people who absolutely must be even more than self-sufficient?

What Joseph and the Doctrine and Covenants is teaching is to not have selfish-sufficiency, such as I need to build up a years supply. So, while you are packing away yet another bucket of apple slices, you are not caring that the family of 8 across the street are sometimes without food. If we conduct our lives in the way the Lord commands, He promises that we will have abundance for everyone. I believe that.

Now, we may not know of the distress of the family next door. Say, he is an electrician. He can offer his service through the Bishops storehouse, because that is his surplus. Because others are gardeners or raise beef, he is able to receive from other's surplus to feed his family. It is to be in every place that has a Bishop, or at a specific community level. Joseph was guided by the Lord in setting up the storehouses in his day. And they let Saints give chickens or eggs or wheat, etc. That is an inspired program. I think it would be wonderful to live that way.

I think what h_p provided is dead-on.
Word meaning changes over time. In the 1828 dictionary which was kindly provided, it doesn't even give the definition that, apologies, it seems you are trying to force.
If anything, when I read the original quote you provided, my impression was to caution them against salvation by works. That certainly aligns better with the dictionary meaning at the time.

Also, looking up the etymology of a word is nice and all, but the dictionary definition of the time absolutely trumps etymology.

[TheDuke]

These scriptures are not related to the quote you made above. There is no reference in D&C 70 about not being self sufficient. And this is just talking about paying your excess (tithes) to the storehouse etc. It actually assumes all that this apply to are "more than self sufficient" in temporal things and have excess. Again, we cannot take spiritual teachings and temporal needs (at the time) out of context and mix them like we would a breakfast sandwhich.

[Joan7]

These scriptures are not related to the quote you made above. There is no reference in D&C 70 about not being self sufficient. And this is just talking about paying your excess (tithes) to the storehouse etc. It actually assumes all that this apply to are "more than self sufficient" in temporal things and have excess. Again, we cannot take spiritual teachings and temporal needs (at the time) out of context and mix them like we would a breakfast sandwhich.

I disagree.

[Joan7]

These scriptures are not related to the quote you made above. There is no reference in D&C 70 about not being self sufficient. And this is just talking about paying your excess (tithes) to the storehouse etc. It actually assumes all that this apply to are "more than self sufficient" in temporal things and have excess. Again, we cannot take spiritual teachings and temporal needs (at the time) out of context and mix them like we would a breakfast sandwhich.

TheDuke, God said that He never gives a temporal commandment.
Doctrine and Covenants 29
34 Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; neither any man, nor the children of men; neither Adam, your father, whom I created.
35 Behold, I gave unto him that he should be an agent unto himself; and I gave unto him commandment, but no temporal commandment gave I unto him, for my commandments are spiritual; they are not natural nor temporal, neither carnal nor sensual.

[TheDuke]

Wresting

[mudflap]

If you look it up in the 1828 Webster dictionary:



So kind of a negative connotation back then. The modern definition:

I wanted to confirm the 1828 definition you found, so I looked up the etymology of the word:

self-sufficient (adj.)

"able to supply one's own needs, capable of fulfilling one's own desires without aid of others," 1580s, from self- + sufficient. Related: Self-sufficiently. Self-sufficing (1680s) is properly "sufficient for oneself."

It looks like Joseph was using this definition in warning the Saints.

I'm not sure I'm following. Are you saying that he didn't want people to be able to supply their own needs?

Doesn't it stand to reason, that if you have a community of people, and none of them are producing enough to even support themselves, they are all in poverty, and will eventually starve to death, regardless of whether their lack of resources is equal or not?

And if you want that community to be able to provide enough for everyone to have *sufficient*, that some people are going to have to produce more than what they themselves need? Assuming not everybody is producing equally? Doesn't that mean that there are going to be people who absolutely must be even more than self-sufficient?

What Joseph and the Doctrine and Covenants is teaching is to not have selfish-sufficiency, such as I need to build up a years supply. So, while you are packing away yet another bucket of apple slices, you are not caring that the family of 8 across the street are sometimes without food. If we conduct our lives in the way the Lord commands, He promises that we will have abundance for everyone. I believe that.

Now, we may not know of the distress of the family next door. Say, he is an electrician. He can offer his service through the Bishops storehouse, because that is his surplus. Because others are gardeners or raise beef, he is able to receive from other's surplus to feed his family. It is to be in every place that has a Bishop, or at a specific community level. Joseph was guided by the Lord in setting up the storehouses in his day. And they let Saints give chickens or eggs or wheat, etc. That is an inspired program. I think it would be wonderful to live that way.

This is nice, but you can't live in Zion if you have any debt. How would you "sign over your house to the church" if it is still owned by a bank? or your cars? No. The church doesn't want your debt. That is the first thing to eliminate if you want this "Zion society". Which implies a degree of self-sufficiency and good stewardship over "a few things", in other words, the ability to act independently of "the system", which system is desperately trying to make us "dependent" through debt and reliance on the system.

D&C 78 says that a bishop's storehouse should be established to eliminate poverty (vs 3), so that (vs 14):

the church may stand independent above all other creatures beneath the celestial world;

.

How can the church be independent if its members are not, due to all the debt we've personally accumulated chasing degrees, the ever-increasing-square-footage of our homes, and larger and more expensive cars and trucks, cell phones, entertainment, etc?

Also, the idler shall not have place in Zion. I don't know any electricians who are suffering. My friend got a quote from an electrician to wire his cabin - $30k - $35k. I think that works out to about $200- $300 / hour. that's a lot of chickens.

If my ancestors who blazed trails across the plains and then settled some of the most inhospitable deserts in Utah weren't "self-sufficient", then I don't know what that means.

[Gadianton Slayer]

What's wrong with not being dependent on another to live? That's literally all "self-sufficiency" is. Not sure how you're tying that to people having excess and not caring about others. It is impossible for you to provide for someone else if you can't even take care of yourself.