John W. Pratt John W. Pratt
Click here for my wife's Testimony
I was born on 30 June 1953 into an LDS family whose history traces back to the earliest pioneer days of the LDS church on both sides of my family. I was the oldest of four children. My parents divorced when I was eleven, but my family and heritage instilled in me a deep love for the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. I was always active in my religious beliefs, and loved to study, teach, and discuss the gospel. It has always been where I would turn to or return to in times of difficulty.
When I was very young, we lived in many parts of the country, but from about my twelfth year on I did most of my growing up in Utah. I attended Junior High School in Salt Lake City, and High School in Orem, Utah. I was a four-year seminary graduate, and served a two-year LDS mission in Tahiti. I attended BYU for one year before my mission, and completed a French degree from BYU in 1979. I taught missionaries for two years in the Missionary Training Center, and I taught two semesters of French 101 at BYU.
I was married on 22 April 1978 in the Manti temple. About a year later, I accepted a commission in the U. S. Air Force. My wife Martine and I lived in many places while I was in the Air Force, including Texas, Florida, Ohio, Arizona, New Mexico, and California. Three children were born to us, David, Alexander, and Valerie.
When I was very young, I remember my father teaching me many things about the fullness of the Gospel. First of all, he and my early church learning gave me a strong yen to look forward and prepare for the return of our Lord Jesus Christ to usher in the Millennium. My father, my mother, and my early religious training also taught me of the great destructions and difficulties that would be encountered in the very last times before Christ's return.
While I was in my seminary years, these topics were still very much in the seminary teaching curriculum. "Last days" discussions were very important to the whole picture. Plural marriage was also taught as an essential doctrine of the kingdom, and a principle of the Heavens. My favorite seminary year was my junior high school year, with Brother Dale Mouritsen as our teacher. I felt he truly had the spirit of the Gospel, and taught us not only out of the scriptures, but out of many of the old writings of this dispensation, including the Journal of Discourses, old journal entries of Church members, and so forth. He taught me many fascinating and interesting things about the Gospel and of the teachings of the Dispensation Head, Joseph Smith. He also taught us extensively about the principles of removal from the world, gathering, and consecration as essential to build a Zion society. He truly believed and taught us that the Church would start from that moment on to withdraw more and more from the world and to be truly separate from it in all ways, in order to truly establish Zion and to welcome the Savior back to the earth. I gained a deep love for these principles, including consecration, from hearing him teaching. I truly enjoyed being taught in his class.
During all these years, I was never a murmurer, nor a faultfinder with the LDS "brethren" or with the LDS Church. I never took it upon myself to consider myself capable of judging whether the "brethren" were "a little off the beam" or not, to quote an oft repeated phrase. I would have things that would bother me from time to time, but I didn't think that I had any options about resolving them, nor the judgment or experience to do so, as a "living prophet" was at the helm of the Church. So whenever I did have an issue that would pierce my heart, I wouldn't struggle too long, and I would come to terms with it, or else just bury it.
I remember as an LDS Aaronic Priesthood youth, we would read the priesthood responsibilities in Section 20 of the D&C, and I would be somewhat troubled because the duties the Lord assigned to the Aaronic Priesthood offices were not what we were doing in our ward. "Oh well," I said, and just went on with my life then. As time went on, I had more of these kinds of issues, but again, I just would bury them or rationalize them.
In a Sunday School Gospel Doctrine class in about 1986, the teacher (from Southern Utah) revealed which was for me the first time the fact that plural marriages in the LDS church continued to be solemnized for some time after the Manifesto, and that it was the highest leadership of the church that continued this practice. The bothered me at the time, since this was directly contrary to what I had always been taught by the church and its leadership with respect to the Manifesto and the discontinuance of plural marriage. However, after a while this ceased to bother me, and I chalked it up to the personal failings of individuals. Much later, however, I was to learn the truth about the historical events of this time and the Manifesto; I learned that what I had learned in 1986 was just the tip of the iceberg. I now know that frankly the LDS leadership has been teaching falsehoods about this subject ever since.
In 1994, I remember also sitting in our Stake Center when Howard W. Hunter was President of the Church. We had gone there for a satellite broadcast from Salt Lake City, with President Hunter to speak. He looked out over the congregation in the tabernacle, and then said the following words that I will never, never forget:
"All is well in Zion. All is well in Zion. All is well in Zion."
Probably never had words passed through my heart with such power as these did to mine, only the power was of despair and panic. For during my seminary years, we were required to memorize key Book of Mormon verses, among which were the following:
And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well--and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well! (2 Nephi 28:21,24-25)
These scriptures declare a curse of "Wo" to him who declares "All is well in Zion!" But I was conditioned to think that a President of the LDS church could never commit any act worthy of the Lord's "Wo." So I was only troubled briefly, and again, after a short time I sort of did a mental shrug and went on. I knew I had a testimony of the restoration, and I dearly loved the teaching I was doing each Sunday, and so I let this cover any concerns I might have had.
I remember about 1995 listening and transcribing a talk given by a very enthusiastic LDS researcher named Einer Erickson, who loved to review studies of ancient religious texts, and find traces of doctrines that were peculiar to restoration doctrine taught by Joseph Smith. I found these very interesting, which supported Joseph Smith's work. Brother Erickson even found many indisputable evidences of ancient endowment details, that match closely with the endowment taught by Joseph Smith. However, in one taped talk that Brother Erickson had given around 1977, I had an arrow go through my heart when he read from a non-LDS scholar's book about an ancient ritual (considered by Brother Erickson as referring to ancient true endowments), which referred to the "five points of fellowship." Those were the exact words from the non-LDS scholar's translation and research of this ancient text. That caused my heart to skip a beat, as this had been a part of the LDS endowment since the very beginning until the LDS endowment was changed in 1990. However, as usual, I didn't know what I could do about it, and since I believed in Joseph Smith and the restoration, I just let go, and didn't trouble myself for too long.
At the actual time of the endowment changes, I didn't suffer a great shock, just again
my feeling of not being the one to judge, except for one part. I did have the feeling at
the time that "all the changes relate to things that some people might have found
offensive or 'embarrassing'." In the temple I had this thought, and I felt guilty at
the time for having it, so I again buried it.
In the "Sixty-Minutes" report in April 1996, where Mike Wallace interviewed
Gordon B. Hinckley, I was extremely surprised at Gordon B. Hinckley's remarks regarding
one former LDS doctrine, as being something that "the leaders of the church at that
time interpreted that doctrine that way," and "Look, that's behind us. Don't
worry about those little flecks of history." It was hard for me to consider that such
changes in doctrine could be legitimate. However, this issue also passed.
During this time, I felt a growing heaviness or frustration within the Church for me, as the deeper doctrines were discussed less and less, there was no feeling to move away or to withdraw from the world and be distinct, and there was less and less and finally virtually no discussion on establishing Zion and her laws, especially the higher ones. In fact, I even felt a spirit of resistance regarding these essential teachings and principles. The higher laws and doctrines were either ignored or even claimed to be mistakes often, or at least not dealt with at all--things that were necessary in former days. The shift didn't make sense to me, but I didn't know what to think about it, or what to do about it. There was more and more of an attitude to distance the thinking among the church members from the true church teachings and attitudes of the past. This was an inescapable observation for me, but I had a hard time voicing it, or knowing what to do about it--it didn't occur to me that I could or should do anything about it.
Meanwhile, I had discovered the internet, and began to explore many gospel websites. I found most intriguing the sites that contained doctrinal and historical information from the early LDS days. It intrigued me even more to wonder why some things were just plain different. The principles of salvation don't change do they? Isn't God unchangeable? The church had always taught me that the principles of salvation weren't to be changed, and that God is indeed unchangeable. I reviewed some information on LDS fundamentalism, and while I found that certain doctrines (such as Adam as our Father in Heaven) that they espouse have valid, irrefutable origins in the former LDS teachings, I could not come to terms with other of their concepts. While I was learning many things about the LDS Church and its former doctrines, still nothing jolted me from my belief in the LDS church and its leadership, and I did not murmur, in spite of what I found that seemed anomalous.
About the end of February 1997, I discovered the TLC website, among much other restoration gospel material on the internet. I thought that I was good at discerning truth from error, and didn't think that I would have difficulty perceiving the error in what I was initially sure was "another apostate" group. However, after starting to review the pamphlets, I was immediately struck at the truth that was taught therein. I couldn't deny what was taught, as it was the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ as preached and practiced in the fore-part of the Dispensation. The truths that I was discovering were filling me with joy. In addition, so much was explained that no one in the LDS church could ever explain before. Even aside from the issue of the TLC, I knew that the precepts, doctrines, and principles that I was learning were correct. However, even though I was so exceedingly moved by the truths taught in the pamphlets, I wouldn't take anyone's unchallenged word for it.
Then began a very intense period of study for me. I could think of nothing else. I wanted to find out for myself if those teachings were indeed correct. I would spend hours every day reading and studying, from the scriptures, Journal of Discourses, and every source I could personally find that recorded the original teachings of Joseph Smith and those early leaders who were instructed by him. I verified every single reference in the pamphlets, reading several passages before and after each quote to insure the proper context. I found no lies, half-truths, nor any twisted or "wrested" meanings. I found that these people were being honest with me. I began to write my own "study papers," topic by topic, where I developed Gospel doctrine and ordinance topics from references and scriptures that I identified myself from established "LDS" sources, scriptures, and records. These became very valuable study tools for myself in my investigations.
I constantly prayed also to God that he would reveal the truth of this to me. Part of the message of the pamphlets was to decry the LDS apostasy from her true moorings and principles established in former days in this dispensation. As I prayed for guidance, I subsequently found myself exposed to teachings, advice, and comments from my local LDS leaders which were clearly far from the revealed word of God in the scriptures themselves, let alone from the other writings and teachings of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and other early leaders.
For example, I was told by my LDS Bishop at the time: "John, obey your wife, listen very carefully to the obedience covenant the next time you go to the temple." I was utterly astounded. I couldn't believe my ears! I immediately opened Ephesians chapter five and asked him how we were then to understand Paul's admonition to husbands and also to wives where husbands were to love their wives and wives were to submit themselves unto their husbands. He looked at the passages, sort of chuckled, and then said, "Oh, Paul, oh yes, well he was really outspoken now, wasn't he?" This same type of scriptural and spiritual nonsense was repeated shortly thereafter in Stake Conference, which made me so angry that I had to approach the Stake President afterward and tell him that certain things being preached from the pulpit by the visiting General Authority were simply not correct nor in accordance with the former teachings of the LDS church or even in accordance with the scriptures themselves. I trembled with emotion as I told him. The true teachings of Joseph and of our Savior from the scriptures were rejected as being "old" or "not suited to this day and age," or rationalized according to some other excuse, such as in a "figurative" sense and so forth.
I saw how many young, single mothers came into the ward who were poor, and most of these would never last. They never received any deep understanding of the gospel, and nothing within the ward efforts could genuinely help them in their meager circumstances, especially considering the great temporal status disparity between them and other very well-to-do families in the ward. I knew that both consecration and plural marriage would have been solutions to the temporal welfare of these ladies, their need to be taught and understand the gospel, as well as how they could have a righteous husband to love and care for them. These were the EXACT teachings in the LDS church in former days. However, my bare mention of these true righteous solutions from the Lord, even in a lighthearted way, was greeted with shocked dismay and contempt from LDS members in the ward.
I saw how D&C scriptures regarding the true nature of Zion were twisted by stake leaders, exhibiting no understanding at all of what Zion truly was to be, to "motivate" the LDS membership whenever they made laborious reorganizations in the stake. On one occasion, I was talking to my old LDS elders quorum president, and he said that the elders were going to have to bless the sacrament one Sunday because the priests were all gone on a camping trip. I told him that in former days, it was the reverse: a priest could only bless the sacrament if there was no elder present, according to D&C 20. He just shrugged it off, stating that things are different now.
My wife was initially very unhappy about my TLC investigations, but after a week or so, she calmed down and actually permitted me to give her some idea concerning many of the TLC doctrines. At the time she would at least listen to me on most topics, but refused to hear anything about plural marriage, an attitude typical for the conditioning presently received by members and women in the present-day LDS church. The only things about plural marriage that she would listen to were the well-documented "antics" of the great majority of the LDS "brethren" regarding their continued practice of this principle in secret for many years after the manifesto. This only served to fuel her fire of contempt for this principle. During this period of my investigation into the TLC, my wife actually became a bit more soft-spoken and kind to me than she was usually, although my investigations made her very frightened.
I arranged to visit Manti briefly, and attend a TLC worship service. I was deeply impressed by the preaching of James D. Harmston, as I had never heard preaching like that before. He preached with power, confidence and authority, that was intrinsic to himself, not in any highly artificially polished way, but it was totally genuine, with an vernacular that was understandable to all. I wouldn't characterize him as a "dynamic speaker" in the traditional sense, because that expression evokes a certain educated and deliberate refinement focusing on delivery rather than content. But his power went way beyond that. One simply has to hear to understand.
About this time, I got a call from my LDS bishop asking me to come in and visit with him. When I got there, I discovered also to my surprise that there was also a member of the Stake Presidency there. I was immediately assailed for having been in communication with an "apostate" group, and sorely chastised. I then tried to bring up specific doctrinal and ordinance issues, to illustrate how the LDS present teachings were not in accordance with the original. If the LDS was truly still the Lord's Church, and still contained the Lord's truth, then these men could have satisfactorily answered my issues. Rather than deal at all with the issues, they simply stated that I was to accept things as they were, and that I should have no more contact with "apostate" groups. The closest thing they did to deal with any of the specifics of the questions was to tell me that Brigham Young was "mistaken," which is an admittance, of course, that Brigham did indeed teach the things that are at variance with the present-day LDS teachings.
I went away from this interview very unsatisfied, as it impressed me much more as an attempt at intimidation rather than an attempt to establish the truth: they spoke specifically of loyalty to the "prophet" at the expense of throwing away all written material by former prophets including Joseph Smith himself, specifically including the scriptures themselves. However, they didn't make any attempt to explain or rationalize to me why so many things could be so radically different. I was merely to accept this. They refused to deal with the issues. This to me was and still is a clear sign of being in error. Their statements that day also violate the following passages from latter-day scripture:
But behold, there are many that harden their hearts against the Holy Spirit, that it hath no place in them; wherefore, they cast many things away which are written and esteem them as things of naught. (2 Nephi 33:2)
- Behold, I have manifested unto you, by my Spirit in many instances, that the things which you have written are true; wherefore you know that they are true.
- And if you know that they are true, behold, I give unto you a commandment, that you rely upon the things which are written;
- For in them are all things written concerning the foundation of my church, my gospel, and my rock. (D&C 18:2-4)
It was impossible for me to consider that the present-day "prophet" could be justified in declaring things in violation of those former written things established by the Dispensation Head, Joseph Smith, as vital and necessary for the establishment of Zion, and for the Kingdom of God on the earth.
I was very impressed with the truthfulness of the teachings from the True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days, but I had a difficult time committing to action because of my fears of change and of new things. The following months were very difficult as I wrestled with the issues of decision, and the difficult events in my life that served to show me that this was indeed the path the Lord desired for me. Nonetheless, I continued to study more things from the historical and former doctrinal record, which further reinforced to me the absolute reality of the LDS having departed from the essential truths and principles necessary to establish Zion.
In January 1998, I received an e-mail from Jeff Hanks inviting me to attend the models a couple of weeks later. I then knew that I was going to attend, and I made arrangements to do so. Hearing the fullness of the Gospel preached in such a fashion made a deep impression on me, even though I had been familiar with the majority of the individual doctrinal points that are part of the models. The power in the models comes from the manner and organization of the teaching, coupled with the power of the Testimony of James Harmston. I found it inescapable to deny the truth of the fullness of the gospel after hearing it presented in the models. I was extremely pensive as I drove back to California, still battling my fear over the decision that was mine.
Upon returning home, my wife asked in a low voice how it went, to which I muttered, "fine." She and I really had nothing to discuss about it, but I wound up unexpectedly speaking to my mother on the phone that evening. She asked about the models, and I surprised myself at what I found coming out of my mouth bearing testimony to what Jim had taught and who he was. I then knew how I truly felt inside, and what I had to do about it. The next morning, I just told my wife, "It's true," as I left for work.
I was baptized on 7 February 1998 into the True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days. I was also ordained to the priesthood that same day. My wife refused to hear more of these teachings, and refused to stay with me as I was soon to gather to Manti. I was excommunicated from the LDS church in February 1998 for my sincere decisions and testimony of the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I submitted to this without resistance and with a peaceful heart. I wrote a lengthy letter to my former Stake Presidency, High Council, Bishopric, and to several of my ward friends and acquaintances. I cited my reasons, my testimony, as well as many essential parts of the fullness of the Gospel that had been absolutely ignored and adulterated by the LDS church over the years. The stake did not respond back to me on a single issue that I had raised to them, and in fact chastised and lectured me in my excommunication letter regarding the very scriptural teachings that I do whole heartedly believe in. I had described these true principles accompanied with scriptures in my letter to the stake, but the LDS church had never shown to me at all by example and precept that it still believes in these, as I had for so long in the LDS church sought for council, guidance, and support for these very critical issues in my home, but to no avail, as in the example or two cited here.
I had submitted my papers to leave military service upon making my decision after the models, and had then to wait until I could be released from active duty before I could complete actions to gather to the Manti area. While I was waiting to complete my military service, I continued to study and read, but to also engage in preaching and writing to TLC investigators asking gospel questions. I completed my actions to gather to Manti on 2 July 1998. This has been a very exciting experience for me, and I have never felt closer nor more accepted of the Lord. This has been a very demanding experience. For we take true repentance seriously, and one cannot embark on this path without being pure in heart, or with having any double mind, or without a complete resolution.
We are greatly saddened at the path of rebellion against the Lord taken by the LDS church, and of the blindness of its members who refuse to even consider what the teachings were that the Lord established for this, the dispensation of the fullness of times. Not a single member here coming from the LDS church escapes a period of great sadness and heartache over this fact. However, as in all ages when the Lord's people need to be called to repentance, the Lord raised up those to whom he gave the commission to perform this job, which was always to not mince words in decrying the iniquity of the day. It is our hope that any who hear these words may learn to drop the scales of blindness from their eyes, and study what indeed the Lord through his Servant Joseph Smith established as the teachings, doctrines, principles, and ordinances for this the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times, and to establish Zion, to provide a protection for the righteous elect of the Lord from the terrible desolations of the very last times, and to welcome back our Lord Jesus Christ, the City of Enoch, and to usher in the Millennium.
John W. Pratt
Back to General Membership