Chapter IX: Front Matter (9)

Right here, at the risk of being misunderstood, I want to say a word about Mormon polygamy. It was not established for the gratification of "lust," as has been so often averred, but was, I think, a conscientious effort to improve humanity by stirpiculture. It was the only considerable effort ever so {155} made among civilized people. I think it would have been better to have given it a scientific instead of a theological basis. In the country at large monogamous marriage has long been degenerating. With its degradation society must sink to conditions that must eventually, if not arrested, destroy our civilization. Religion may insure humanity against fabled fire after death, but it cannot breed out defects of will and taints of blood. Nobility of person, life, character is born, not made by creeds. Humanity can never be Godlike or fit for "the kingdom" until it is bred up from its sometimes lower than "beastly" level. Mormon polygamy was the beginning of such an effort. It has been killed by ignorant prejudice. But soon or late the world will see the infinite need of wisdom and science in the production and development of children, and then it will be understood that the marriage system must be reconstructed. Mormon polygamy was not the "beastly" thing a nation of adulterers called it. It grew out of the belief that life is eternal, that there can be no marrying in the future life; that women not married here can never marry, but must be the servants of those who were married on earth for all time here and hereafter. It grew out of the belief that woman gains her "exaltation" in the kingdom with her husband, and he in part through the excellence of his family. It was the Mormon women who wanted polygamy. But no woman would enter that relation through "lust." She could only enter it by conquering her passions, and in doing that she prepared herself to become a divine mother. It is only when women can learn to do this and compel men to respect their rights in gestation, as all other female mammals do their mates, that mankind can be saved from--itself. I am not advocating Mormon polygamy, but the physical improvement of humanity as the natural and also the scientific basis of mental and moral improvement. Sometime this great truth will receive the recognition denied it now.

I come back now and say that, taking polygamy and all into careful consideration, the morals of the Mormon people have always been as good as the best in the nation, and through the thirty-two years when the population of Utah was almost wholly Mormon and "this people" had not come under the influence of those who wanted saloons, brothels and dance halls opened to tempt young Mormons, their morals were infinitely superior to anything to be found in the rag-tag-and-bobtail element that for years existed on the {156} western frontier and found in Utah the only oasis of the mountains.

Had the Mormons been Methodists the praises sung over their success in Utah would have been heard around the world. But if they had been Methodists they would not have been driven out of the United States. Had they been bogus Christians they would have been too busy sending other people to hell to have ever thought of colonizing on a barren desert 1,000 miles from heretics. The sublime industry and heroic achievements of the Mormons among the mountains of the west have been studiously ignored and viciously misrepresented, not because of any real or suspected immorality or menace to "the American home," but simply and solely because they were heretics to other sects. Anti-Mormonism never did and does not now care for polygamy--it hates the Mormon Church. A mean, whiskey-guzzling government official in Utah once said to me: "Damn 'em, all 'e rights 'e Morm's hez is t' pay taxes! 'Fthey don' like that I'm gitout!" That was for years the anti-Mormon spirit in Salt Lake City. The struggle was to get control and tax the Mormons out. That, too, was done largely. That is, many of the poorer Mormons were forced to leave their homes in the city on account of increased taxation levied by anti-Mormon officials. That old spirit is now revived by this new crusade, not because of polygamy but because the Mormons were compelled to take the power to levy taxes out of the hands of their enemies.

A popular impression has been craftily created by the anti-Mormons of Utah that its priesthood and polygamy are the cause of all hostility to Mormonism. The shallowness of the pretense is easily seen when you consider that the most vicious of anti-Mormons accept the Bible as the infallible word and will of God. Yet the Bible teaches priesthood and polygamy. Hence priesthood and polygamy cannot be the secret of anti-Mormonism. The Protestants have been trying for a century to get God into our national constitution and to make Jesus Christ the ruler of the nation. Catholics and Protestants outnumber Mormons a thousand to one. As long as they believe in theocracy they cannot quarrel with the Mormons for holding the same belief. But if they were afraid the Mormons might get into the kingdom ahead of them they would become jealous, and jealousy is the womb of hate. The evangelical churches fought Mormonism from its appearance, not because of polygamy and priesthood, for there was neither {157} priesthood nor polygamy in it then, but because it was a more enticing faith than their own. Mormonism was running smoothly and growing rapidly without original sin, total depravity and eternal torment as its steady theological diet. Therefore, it was infidelity. Therefore, it must be destroyed. Advocates of the undying worm, the lake of fire and the endless roast drove the Mormons out of the United States. When they made the Utah desert a prosperous land, adventurers crowded in to make speculation and riot among them, but found them united against invaders. That was put down against them. Yet a people driven into exile five times would be idiotic not to unite for their own protection, and, as soon as possible, prepare themselves to refuse to be driven again. When their old enemies learned what advancement the Mormons had made in Utah they came to send them to perdition again, but it was too late. Then they raised the outcry against polygamy. That brought in the aid of congress, the destruction of the incorporated church and the confiscation of church property, but did not crush Mormonism. A thousand polygamists went to the penitentiary, and still Mormonism would not collapse. The Mormons did not hanker after salvation from a hot spell in another life. They were too busy. They had hell enough here. There was no brimstone in their conception of the hereafter. A few might falter, but the mass stood by their faith, submitted as best they could to the insolence of their enemies, waiting upon the Lord to rescue them. Then came the scheme to disfranchise them. Disfranchisement was the culmination of forty years of effort to conquer the Mormons. If this calamity should fall the people would be at the mercy of unscrupulous legislators who would practice the sentiment of him who said all the rights the Mormons had were to "pay taxes" or "git out." Before this danger the leader yielded and declared that to save the people from ruin he would take no more plural wives (he was then about 90) himself and would advise his people to do likewise. That was in September, 1800. Two weeks later the church, in conference, accepted the advice of its president that polygamous marriages should cease.

Then it was seen that the Mormons would not abandon their homes--that their persecutors should not grow rich upon property the fleeing Saints must sacrifice. They had conquered by yielding, and there was no other scheme to be sprung upon them. Those who hoped to crush Mormonism were forced to accept the situation. The old political status {158} disappeared and Mormons and Gentiles came together as democrats or republicans, each party seeking to gain control of available public offices. Men who had for years studied how they might throw increased difficulties upon the Mormons were tumbling over each other in their eagerness to reach the Mormon leaders, to profess their profound esteem and to make known their willingness to aid the Latter Day Saints by accepting office at their hands. The new love was touching, but it was sincere? We shall see. The Mormons were rejoiced to find at last an atmosphere of at least seeming peace about them, and gladly gave their old enemies the offices they desired. The offices secured, the men who were going to "boom Utah" proceeded to a recklessness of "improvement" that increased public debt and taxes to an alarming degree. The Mormons disliked to protest; they could not "grin," so they bore it with long, sober faces. Then statehood was secured and the Mormons began to elect their own more cautious men. The new lovers, chiefly office seekers, scented defeat. The old snarl appeared. Startled politicians appealed to willing ministers who needed funds sadly--and the old outcry against the Mormons and polygamy was revived in 1898.

The New Crusade.

What basis is there for this renewed fight against the Mormons? When Wilford Woodruff declared that he would advise the people to cease plural marriages, and when his advice was accepted by vote of the church, there were men living in Utah who were already in polygamy. Most of them were old men, but there were young and middle-aged men who had more than one wife. All through the government fight against polygamy these men had lived with their wives as far as they could in secrecy. Would they be likely to abandon their wives when peace had been received?

To the Mormons, marriage is one of the most sacred of their ordinances. It is solemnized by a priest in the name of God. It is "sealed" in heaven also and is to continue forever. The true Mormon cannot ignore the claims of his plural wife without being false to his vows and his God. No manifesto of Wilford Woodruff, no vote of conference, could annul a plural marriage or engage that any Mormon should cease to care for his plural wives. This fact was as well known by every non-Mormon in Utah in 1890 as it is today. It was understood by every gentile politician, by every {159} representative of the government, by every minister in Utah, that polygamists had been all along secretly living with their polygamous wives. All knew that this would continue, yet all agreed that no further notice should be taken of the matter and polygamy should be left to die its natural death. That understanding reached, no further effort was made to arrest "cohabs." Polygamists lived openly with their wives and, as was expected, children were here and there born--in one instance, at least, we have heard of "twins." So matters stood from the close of 1890 for seven years. In 1897 we had a semi-centennial celebration of the arrival of the pioneer Mormons. In that "jubilee" Mormons and non-Mormons all joined heartily, including the ministers who have since become rabid anti-Mormons; including also the editor of the anti-Mormon paper who was so harmonious then that he delivered an address when the Brigham Young statue was unveiled, who was so inspired by the holy ghost or some other spirit (he is more familiar with other spirits) as to declare in his paper that the Mormons had founded the "new civilization." Yet at that very moment he and all non-Mormons in Utah knew that those who were in polygamy when "the manifesto" was issued, in 1890, had been living openly with their wives for seven years and that children were being born in some of the families. No objection was made, I repeat, until the Mormons, to stay the increase of public debt, began to fill important public offices with prudent men of their faith. There is no evidence that the church had anything to do with this. It was the work of men who owned property, and were anxious to protect it. That this is true is seen in subsequent political action. A majority of the Mormons are democrats. The democrats were rapidly getting control of the state. In the municipal election of Salt Lake last November the republicans elected their ticket over a known democratic majority of voters. Why? Because the republicans ran their canvass on the line of the anti-Mormon elections of a decade ago--the gentile democrat voted the republican ticket. That is, while the Mormons have kept the compact made when the people divided on national party lines, in 1891, the others have largely broken it and we have now the democratic and republican parties with the republican party working as an anti-Mormon party largely. The excitement in Washington over the fact that the republican Utah postmasters at Provo and Logan have been all along in the same boat with democratic Roberts is amusing because of the frantic efforts of men to show that they did not know that those men were {160} old polygamists and had been living with their wives since the "manifesto" of 1890. Of course they knew it. No man could have lived in Utah since 1890 without knowing it. From 1890 until statehood came United States district attorney and marshal for Utah knew it, and yet so generally was it understood that the old condition was to be left to die of old age that those officers made almost no effort to disturb "cohabs." The postmasters in Provo and Logan were chosen because they were influential republicans, and their wives did not count--then. The anxiety over them now is that this excitement will defeat the hope of the republicans to carry Utah in 1900, and when this whole matter is analyzed it is found that the anti-Mormon agitators of Utah, with one exception, are republicans, and the exception is a democrat who, having most earnestly defended the Mormons ten years, was not recognized by them when they were distributing political offices. The Catholics in Utah are democrats and they have taken no part in this crusade. But the evangelical ministers and sects are republicans. The ministers have worked hard for 25 years to "save" the Mormons and yet have never "saved" one who was in good standing in his own church. When polygamy was given up, eastern interests in Utah missions fell, funds went low and the wolf was howling in the back yard. The politicians who had lived for years on salaries as government officers or later in state or city offices were in the same "fix"--they had to raise hell or starve--they did the first and, if I am not much mistaken, will do the second also or--"git out."

Amnesty.

To make clear the subsequent action of the chief factor in the new crusade it is necessary to call attention to what is known as "the amnesty." By act of congress polygamous Mormons were disfranchised. When peace was declared these men wanted their disability removed. A well-meaning but not sagacious Mormon took it upon himself to secure that result. He went for advice to the man who had tried for years to obtain the disfranchisement of all Mormons. That person seems to have expected such a visit. He advised a petition to the President of the United States for amnesty. The unsuspecting Mormon swallowed the hook and asked his adviser to write such a petition. It was, perhaps, already written. The adviser, swearing he would never consent, consented and the petition was produced. It was carried at once to President Woodruff, lying sick at home. The sick man, unable to even {161} read the petition, signed it. With his name attached it was taken to the Apostles and all signed. The petition went to Washington, and, after much unavoidable delay, was granted. But the course of the writer of the petition, in the new crusade, his continual use of his petition against the Mormons, might possibly be taken as evidence that he was shrewdly forging a weapon that he might use against his quondam friends if his love for them should grow cold, or if his ambition were not satisfied. That is, it was well known here that when statehood should come to Utah The-man-who-wrote-the-petition would be a candidate in the first state legislature for the office of United States senator. It was necessary, therefore, to have a republican legislature. To that end the writer of the petition exerted himself to defeat the democratic party in the election of 1895. The democrats were frothing over a suspicion that prominent Mormon church officials were secretly aiding the republicans. Democrats were crying bad faith on the part of the church. The-man-who-wrote-the-petition defended the church officers and charged the democrats with intent "to give Utah a black eye;" with a desire "to keep immigrants from coming here;" with "the awakening of unworthy suspicions against us all;" with trying "to alarm the country;" with committing "an outrage." A few days before election, in 1895, The-man-who-wrote-the-petition, the man who, for more than a year, has found nothing too scurrilous to publish against the Mormons, the man who expected to be elected to the senate in January, 1896, said:

"There is not a man, woman or child in Utah who for one moment thinks there is any agreement or thought of restoring polygamy, or that it could be possible even if such a thought was in the mind of a few bigots."--Salt Lake Tribune, October 19, 1895.

"There is going to be no revival of polygamy; there is going to be no return to church rule." (The same, Oct. 22, 1895.)

The legislature was republican, but The-man-who-wrote-the-petition was "not in it." In the race for senatorship he was shut out in first heat. That straw of ingratitude broke the candidate's editorial back and he seems to have waited for an opportunity to use his petition. The Deseret News says he was paid for it at the time it was written, or, perhaps, concocted, but the action of the legislature was a deadly frost and the bloom of his young love for the Mormon church was killed.

{162}

The Secret Opened.

In 1897, the Mormons, aided and abetted by many of the most influential non-Mormons, made a non-partisan effort to secure much needed municipal reforms. The movement was largely successful, but was hotly denounced by the office seekers of the republican and democratic parties as a "trick" of the church to restore political control over its people. In Salt Lake City the feeling was bitter and an attempt was made to resurrect the anti-Mormon "liberal" party. Failing in that, the excited politicians appealed to the clergy. A Presbyterian paper in Salt Lake began the publication of sundry articles running back into early Mormon literature, culling the crudities, slips and discrepancies to be found therein and using them to condemn the Mormons and Mormonism of today--a course that would be paralleled by attacking the Presbyterians of the present with the fanaticism, folly and worse of "no papacy" days. This publication was scattered over the country and started up the smouldering non-Mormon fire. The smoke encouraged the clergy in Utah to believe that there actually might be something in their sensational talk about polygamy. Then they got together in the summer of 1898 and adopted a series of resolutions declaring that plural marriages are still being contracted, that the Mormons control the state, injure the public schools, and that old Mormon Utah is on deck again. A few weeks later came the state democratic convention to nominate candidates and B. H. Roberts was nominated for congress. He was one of the men who were in polygamy when plural marriage was stopped. From the day of Roberts' nomination the writer of that petition found his opportunity and from then until now has not ceased to vilify the Mormons. He insisted that the election of Roberts would create a storm and then created it himself--a very common trick of false prophets. He revelled in his petition. That is, he sprung the trap he himself had set. I think he was trying to force the Mormon church to declare for the election of the republican ticket, for there was to be another election of a senator in 1899.

In addition to his use of the petition he reprinted the testimony of President Woodruff before a Master of Chancery and tried to prove that the manifesto of 1890 prohibited cohabitation among those then in polygamy. He knew that the president of the church could not annul a marriage. He knew that the hearing was held preliminary to a decree restoring what {163} remained of the escheated church property. He knew that property was worth millions of dollars and the church needed it. There was not an attorney engaged in that hearing who did not want the church to get back its property. There was not a non-Mormon in Utah then mean enough to wish that the church might not get it. But there must be a record to the effect that polygamy had been given up. So President Woodruff consented to say that he included "cohabs" in his manifesto. At that time the editor of the Salt Lake Tribune was friendly, as I have shown, and although it now seeks to brand President Woodruff as a liar it said then that the manifesto "went only to the point of plural marriages," and added "we believe that the rule laid down has been as sacredly kept by this people as it would have been done by any other people; that the Mormons and Gentiles have a right to say that the change amounts to a transfiguration." The measureless infamy of the disappointed office seeker now seeking to pile odium upon the honored dead will be a fitting monument to his malodorous memory in Utah for years to come; and if our good old friend did stretch the truth to save that property it was a lie like that of Hugo's nun, the recording angel dropped a tear upon the slate and rubbed it out.

All this insanity of excitement through the country over alleged polygamous marriages has been created by a few men who are now laughing over their success in fooling the people. They have hunted these mountain states over--have imported special aid from New York--have declared that plural marriages are being contracted, and yet have not been able to find one case. Defeated in that they have arrested several men for "unlawful cohabitation" and advertised that as proof of polygamous marriages.

Avowing, with maledictions upon it, that polygamy is the "twin-relic of barbarism" and must die, they yet will not let it die, but drag it from its senile sleep, enhorse and caparison it like a waxen image of some old Catholic saint and lead it in triumphal procession through the land to excite the clamor of women gone hysterical through brooding in nightly loneliness over the clandestine amours of their monogamous husbands with other women more charming than themselves!

If polygamy were permitted to die a natural death the evangelical churches would lose their last foothold against the rising tide of Mormonism. It is not polygamy that disturbs them, but the steady growth of the Mormon church. Right or wrong, there is a current running to the Mormon church with {164} increasing volume and velocity. The Mormon church and faith have been a boon to hundreds of thousands as poor as were those who heard Jesus gladly. It is today nearer to being a successful effort to inaugurate the Brotherhood of Man than anything ever tried.

In Conclusion,

I want to say that what is here presented does not err from truth and was not written with either knowledge or consent of any member of the Mormon church. It stands upon my personal knowledge. I am not a member of any church, and view all sects philosophically. I cannot perceive that any religion has been of divine origin, in the theological sense of the terms. To my mind they are all human, very human, in their origin. But, conceding to all the rights of intellectual liberty I claim for myself, I question not the right of the people to any religion that satisfies them. In so far as creeds and dogmas impose upon credulity, I claim the right to protest. Thus I have long protested against Calvanism in all its varieties as a wholly unjustifiable cruelty forced upon humanity through its ignorance and fear. I gladly admit that theology, like everything else, is subject to the progressive influence of the ages, and realize that the God of Calvin is not as mean as he was 400 years ago--has been much improved in the last 100 years under our free government and public education. I cheerfully concede that all theologians mean to be honest in the dogmas they create, and I believe that all churches sincerely endeavor to hold their people to defined standards of moral life. But I lay this against them--that they would have men and women practice moral living, not for itself, but to secure a definite reward after we have ceased to live here, a reward called "salvation" from threatened ills and horrors that exist only in the excited imagination of ignorance and superstition. It is childish--it is the mother bribing her boy with bread and jam, or frightening him with threats of "the bad man."

You see, then, that I am one of that class of persons called by all the professors of all the thousand and one varieties of so-called Christianity "an infidel." It is the easiest thing in the world to call people by opprobrious names, as the history of these unpopular Mormons makes manifest. In fact, no new thought appears that is not infidelity to some older one--no new issue that is not maligned by the satisfied believer in some old one. The term "infidel," as applied to persons who think for themselves, do their own business with the Infinite, and {165} decline proffered rewards based on fear of God, is one of merit rather than reproach. Jesus was the great infidel of his time--crucified for truth derided by the prevailing orthodoxy of his day.

There are two kinds of infidelity in the world. One comes by growing up out of existing beliefs, the other by falling below them. The only harmful infidelity exists in the churches, and consists of professing one code of morals and living another. For instance, all Christians call Sunday the Lord's day and pretend to keep it holy, a sacred day devoted to the worship of God. Yet half of them, in this country, keep it as a day of frolic and dissipation. That does not harm the day, does not injure God, but it makes hypocrites of professing Christians. They are infidels who have fallen below their religion. For instance, again, take the seven million names of American people who petitioned congress to expel the Utah congressman. It is safe to say a large percentage of the signers were children who did not know what they were doing, but whose names were taken by Christian adults with intent to deceive.

A long study of religions convinces me that all mean to do good, yet fail, in great part, because they work for a wrong purpose. That is, they work, not for this life, but for one to be sometime somewhere "above the stars," in a locality that has never been more than a myth; and the object of working for that unreality is to escape another mythical locality below the earth, in the earth, or somewhere else equally uncertain. This would do in a world peopled with ignorant savages, but will not do for intelligent men and women. This fact is recognized by the churches. They spend their money chiefly to carry their religion to the "heathen," realizing that it is useless at home. The religions of the world need reconstructing. They have much to learn and unlearn. I know of no church working so zealously for what it believes to be the good of humanity as Mormonism. I know its leaders, its system, its work. Its directors, as a whole, are sincere, conscientious, clean, honest men. If they err, it is not from evil intent. To them the presence of God is a living faith. It may be an error, but the faith is there, and the work is the result.

Mormonism is peculiar in this: it does not regard this life as a preparation for an eternity of idle psalm-singing in a future existence Lord-knows-where, but a school of moral training for an eternal life right here after "the resurrection." To this end it aims to make its people intelligent, capable, honest, moral, successful now, as the proper means of reaching the greatest {166} happiness then. This may be a practical basis for a possible end. Its enemies say it is based on fraud. Well, it is said they cannot demonstrate that Christianity was not based on fraud--cannot demonstrate that Jesus ever existed. But Christianity is here, and, whether He lived or not, it will remain. If it should transpire that Joseph Smith was not the founder of Mormonism, that the engraved "plates" had no existence, Mormonism is here, the faith is here, and it too will remain. We can only dismiss all questions of "fraud" and choose--the best. The best is that which is most beneficent in practical helpfulness. Tried thus, Mormonism possesses merit that cannot be ignored by any who would concede equal rights--fair field and no favors--to all. I see in it what to me are weaknesses, but in what system do they not exist? They are the weaknesses of its youth and are being outgrown--would be outgrown faster but for the malevolent opposition that drives it back upon itself. But let no enemy of Mormonism flatter himself that it can be killed by vituperation. It is the most remarkable movement in the religious world since the days of Mahomet--the most wonderful religious movement in forty generations. The thunder and lightning of its enemies cannot strike it down. It must fall, if fall it must, as other religions have fallen--by its own decay after it has lived its natural life. Keeping Roberts out of congress will not arrest its course, and it is highly probable that the time will come when the American people who want no church interference with our national government may be glad to have the aid of the now maligned Mormons.

Consider that there are today 1,700 young Mormons tramping over this continent in city, town and hamlet--young men who are so circumspect in all their deportment that not even the most bitter enemies of their faith have the hardihood to raise their voices against them--young men who are steadily making the fundamental principles of their faith known to the people. There has been nothing like it in the world for hundreds of years, nothing in so-called Christian countries since the steady persistence of the Protestants on the continent and in Great Britain, and it is going to produce great results. The Mormons might be called the non-Conformists of this country and in spite of all efforts to the contrary they are going to wield an influence upon its future. One of the Utah men in Washington fighting the Mormons was honest enough to tell the truth when he said in a public meeting: "It is not polygamy but Mormonism we want to check." But it won't check or {167} warp and is growing, and I write with a growing interest in its success. In 1718 there came 900 non-Conformists from Ulster county, Ireland, to Boston. They were Scotch-Irish Protestants seeking religious freedom. They introduced the Irish potato in New England. Some of them gave to older Yankees a few potatoes with instructions for planting them. They grew, blossomed, and bore fruit, but the Yankees cooked the seed balls and said they found them anything but good. Next spring when spading up their gardens they found the potato crop. Mormonism presented to Christian sects a new theological potato, so to speak. They tried it, ate the wrong end of the growth and denounced it. But there will come a new spring in which old sectarian gardens will be plowed up and then the real fruits of Mormonism will be discovered--and will be found to be both palatable and healthful.

"_Where there is no change of priesthood, there is no change of
ordinances, says Paul. If God has not changed the ordinances and
the priesthood, howl ye sectarians! If He has, when and where
has He revealed it? Have ye turned revelators? Then why deny
revelation_?"

--_Joseph Smith, The Prophet_.

"_All who live according to the best principles in their
possession, or that they can understand, will receive peace, glory,
comfort, joy, and a crown that will be far beyond what they are
anticipating. They will not be lost_."

--_Brigham Young_.

{168}

Prophets and Apostles Necessary.

By the Late President, George Q. Cannon, in Millennial Star, 1866.

The assertions made by the Latter-day Saints that God has raised up a Prophet and Apostles in these days, who have the authority to teach and instruct men in the principles of His kingdom, and that their teachings and counsels are entitled to consideration and obedience, are statements that are looked upon by many to be little less than blasphemous. Many cannot conceive how individuals, who are apparently so sane and possessed of good judgment on other subjects, should be so visionary, and so wholly absorbed in the strange belief of there being men who hold this power on the earth in these days. They, nevertheless, believe that men clothed with this power have existed upon the earth at various times, who were inspired to speak and write; and they are quite willing to receive the writings, said to be theirs, upon very slight testimony, and rest all their hopes of future and eternal blessedness upon their veracity. They have an idea that it is perfectly reasonable to believe in the words of the Apostles and Prophets who lived thousands of years ago, and they think that, were they alive now, they could place all reliance and confidence in their words as the word of God. Peter, James and John, with their brethren, are looked up to as having been something superior to mortal, and many, forgetting that they were but human, think that it would only be necessary, did they live now, for them to declare this message and state that they were empowered to teach it, and men without the slightest demur would instantly embrace its doctrines. This professed admiration of dead Prophets and Seers, however, is not confined to this generation alone; it was a characteristic of other generations. The Jews, when Jesus was in their midst, would build and adorn the tombs of the Prophets {169} whom their fathers had slain, and say that if they had lived in the days of their fathers they would not have persecuted or killed them, while at the same time they were thirsting for the blood of the Son of God, and they did not rest until He had shared the same fate with the Prophets whom they so ostentatiously honored. But what is there visible at the present time from which we can infer that were any of the ancient Prophets or Apostles in the midst of this generation, they would be any better treated, or their teachings given more heed to, than they were in the generation in which they lived? The present ideas of professing Christians--that the canon of Scripture is full--and that there is no further need of direct revelation--would not admit of their recognizing a Prophet or an Apostle, should they be so fortunate as to have one sent into their midst. They are, in this respect, in a similar situation to the Jews at the time of the advent of the Messiah. They were in possession of the writings of the Prophets, and held them as the present sects of Christendom hold the Bible. Their writings were their oracles, and they indulged in the idea, as the modern sects do about the Bible, that they contained all that was necessary to lead them to salvation, until Shiloh should come, without the aid of any Prophets or Apostles to act as living oracles in their midst. They doubtless imagined that they were warranted in this belief by their sacred Scriptures, in the same manner that many at the present day imagine that the present Scriptures, composed of the writings of the ancient Prophets and Apostles, warrant them in rejecting all further revelation. This misapprehension of the Jews was followed by terrible results; they ceased to have a national existence, and they were scattered and dispersed abroad.

If the Scriptures the Jews had and the Scriptures we at present have are examined, it will be found that there is a greater amount of evidence in our possession in favor of the idea of living oracles, or Prophets and Apostles, being raised up and inspired in these days, than there was among the Jews in the days of the Apostles to support them in believing that they would make their appearance at that time. In fact the Scriptures cannot be fulfilled until these things take place. Prophecy upon prophecy has been uttered and recorded, pointing clearly and definitely to the _last days_--to the time when God should again set His hand the second time to recover the remnants of His people; when He would send for many fishers and they would fish them, and for {170} many hunters and they would hunt them; when His Kingdom would again be built up, and their judges be restored as at the first, and their counsellors as at the beginning; when many nations would be seized with the desire to go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob, that they might be taught in His ways and be able to walk in His paths. To fulfill these prophecies--which were, no doubt, given with the expectation of their being as literally accomplished as the prophecies in relation to the Messiah which the Jews misapprehended--men holding power and authority equal with the men of old who were called to perform similar works, have to be raised up; and if they are raised up and inspired, they must have equal power to teach, counsel and direct the children of men, and their teachings, counselings, and directions will be as obligatory upon mankind as the teachings, counselings and directions of the ancients. Since the creation of man and the first revelation of God's will unto him, we have no account of the Lord ever having a people upon the earth, or a system which He recognized as being His, without also having men of this description--men with whom He could communicate, and through whom His mind and will could be made known to the people. They were the living oracles, possessing living Priesthood, through which they could obtain light and intelligence from the Almighty, to expound with authority to the children of men; and their words, whether delivered orally or written, were equally binding upon the people with the words of any preceding servant of God. That this was the case all sacred history bears abundant evidence.

The necessity of inspired men, in order that the prophecies may be fulfilled, must be apparent. Man has always been the instrument which the Lord has used to accomplish His purposes. But apart from the prophecies which set forth in unmistakable language, that the days of revelation and intercourse between the Deity and man will again be restored, there is an abundance of evidence to prove that there cannot be a Church of Christ on the earth without having Prophets and Apostles as its officers. They were not to be confined to the early days of Christianity alone, but were to be continued "until all should come to the unity of the faith, unto the knowledge of the Son of God;" they were to be as necessary "for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the ministry, and for the edifying of the body of Christ," as evangelists, pastors and teachers are. To assert that {171} Prophets and Apostles are no longer needed would be to assert that evangelists, pastors and teachers are likewise unnecessary. The great head of the Church, in its organization, had a definite object in placing these officers in His Church and that object could not be accomplished except by their perpetuity. When these officers ceased to be recognized then the Church ceased to be the Church of Christ. It would be considered a very great departure from the spirit of the Gospel to assert that pastors and other ministers--such for instance as teachers and evangelists--were no longer needed; and yet the evidence necessary to support their recognition as officers of the Church proves that not only they are necessary, but that Prophets and Apostles also are required. The proofs brought forward to substantiate the idea that Prophets and Apostles are no longer needed will apply with much force to the other officers in the Church; and if the necessity for one or two of the callings in the Church has ceased to be, it can easily be proved that there is no further necessity for the remainder. The belief that these callings are no longer needed has been inculcated in Christendom by both precept and example. A false Christianity has flourished for centuries, and men have been taught to rely upon it as the religion of Jesus, and not seeing these callings filled in it, it has required but little persuasion to cause them to fall into the erroneous belief that they were only designed for the days when Christianity was first preached. If one, more inquiring and penetrating than his fellows, should ascertain by a perusal of the Scriptures, that there was nothing to discountenance the idea of the perpetuity of such callings, and should make inquiries to know why they did not at present exist, his doubts would be removed by pointing him to Christianity as it exists around him, flourishing and yet destitute of these offices; and its existence without them must be received as evidence that the Lord had altered the organization of His Church and deemed these offices unnecessary. Men instead of making their belief conform to the Bible have endeavored to distort it and make it correspond with their ideas and systems; when the plainly written word would not admit of that they have endeavored to hide their errors and the incorrectness of their position, by stating that the Scriptures have a spiritual meaning--and they do not literally mean what their language denotes, but they require to be spiritualized to be understood. Miserable subterfuge! What a cunning device of the adversary of souls and his agents, to {172} entrap and deceive mankind! Impress upon the people that these are no longer necessary, and they will cease to look for them; persuade them to believe that the word of God has a different meaning from the one apparent on its face, and they will see nothing condemnatory of sin and the commission of gross wrong; Satan's victory and triumph will then be easy.

The correctness of the position we have assumed in stating that Prophets and Apostles are as necessary in the Church of Christ now as they ever were, is not at all affected by the truth or falsity of the doctrines we believe in and teach. Because the Latter-day Saints believe in these things does not detract one iota from their truth. These officers would be indispensably necessary, wherever a Church of Christ existed, if we as a people, were extinct. If men believe the Bible they must believe as Latter-day Saints, and if there is a Church of Christ upon the earth there must of necessity be Prophets and Apostles, and if there are Prophets and Apostles, they have the right to teach and instruct mankind in the principles of the Lord's Kingdom, and their teachings and counsels are entitled to consideration and obedience. A great many find considerable fault with the Latter-day Saints because they rely so much upon the words of their Prophets and Apostles. They think it decidedly anti-republican; and some, to give vent to superabundance of their spleen, occasionally call Brigham Young and his brethren hard names, because they, being men, make themselves equal with the Apostles. These individuals, with their present feelings, had they lived in any other generation when Prophets and Apostles were upon the earth, would have taken a precisely similar course to oppose them. It is not the individuals they are warring against--though many of them, no doubt, think that it is--but it is the principle. How much more republican would we be, if we paid no attention to their teachings, than we are at present? Can not we exercise our rights and privileges as republicans, to as full an extent by doing right as by doing wrong--by being obedient to the will of the Almighty as by being disobedient? The Latter-day Saints cannot fail to hearken to and have confidence in the words of their leaders, so long as they believe as they do about the necessity of Prophets and Apostles, and the authority they hold; and while they retain this belief, the only thing that will destroy this confidence is to prove that they do not hold this authority, and are not Apostles and Prophets. So long {173} as we know that men have this authority it makes but little difference to us what their names may be. And the moment the Latter-day Saints became convinced that Joseph and Brigham Young were Apostles of Jesus Christ, they were as willing to believe their testimony and to hearken to their counsel and teachings, as they would have been to have believed and hearkened to those of the ancient Apostles.

"_If we could see our heavenly Father, we should see a being
similar to our earthly parent, with this difference: our Father
in heaven is exalted and glorified. He has received His thrones,
His principalities and powers, and He sits as a governor, as a
monarch, and overrules kingdoms, thrones and dominions that have
been bequeathed to Him, and such as we anticipate receiving. While
He was in the flesh, as we are, He was as we are_."

--_Brigham Young_.

"_Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although
we may not see the reason thereof until long after the events
transpire_."

--_Joseph Smith, August 25, 1842_.

{174}

COMPREHENSIVE SALVATION, OR THE GOSPEL TO THE LIVING AND THE DEAD.

By John Nicholson.

An Elder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

First Principles--Authority--Miraculous Gifts--Organization--Apostasy--Restoration--The Gospel Preached to the Spirits of the Departed--Different Degrees of Glory--Turning the Hearts of the Fathers to the Children, and the Children to their Fathers.

Honest professing Christians, of every creed, must freely admit that the position of the Latter-day Saints in regard to what are called the first principles of the doctrine of Christ is invulnerable. They must acknowledge that faith in God, the Eternal Father, in His Son Jesus Christ and the divinity of His mission, and in the Holy Ghost, is unquestionably Scriptural. They must accede also that repentance of sins, as preparatory to their remission, occupies the same Biblical position. Neither can they consistently question the object of baptism, being for the remission of sins--"Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins." Nor can the mode (immersion) be questioned by them. Paul, in his epistle to the Romans, likens baptism, administered in the proper form, to the burial and resurrection of Christ; a very beautiful figure--immersion in the liquid element. No other method bears the remotest resemblance to being buried and resurrected. Nor do {175} unprejudiced investigators for religious truth deny that the baptism of true Christianity, as taught and administered by John the Baptist, Christ and His disciples, was intended, not for infants, but only for those persons who had reached the years of accountability. This must be obvious, because before people were baptized for the remission of sins it was necessary, as a preparation, that they should believe and repent, a process impossible to little children. The latter being, according to the Savior, of the Kingdom of Heaven, have no sins to remit, for no unclean thing can enter the heavenly kingdom. Sinfulness is uncleanness.

It is easy for the Saints to show that the ordinance administered in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, of the "Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost," is strictly a Bible practice. Read, for instance, the 8th chapter of the Acts, and numerous other passages, "Then laid they their hands upon them and they received the Holy Ghost." [1]

The necessity of authority to enable man to represent Jesus on the earth in the ministry of the Gospel, is also admitted freely by the unprejudiced. The absence of such authority among the lifeless sects is conspicuous. Paul lays down an unqualified rule upon this point: "No man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron." Aaron was called of God by revelation from Him, through the Prophet Moses. The sects of to-day repudiate revelation and its necessity, and how therefore can they be in possession of an authority that can only be given by that means? It is impossible. [2]

Honest-hearted people who profess a belief in the Bible cannot and do not deny that a true Church of Christ must necessarily enjoy the fruits of the Spirit. These are the gifts enumerated by Paul in the 12th chapter of Corinthians. How can a belief in such things be repudiated when they existed in the primitive Church, which was the genuine Church of Christ, established by Himself? If the true Church is extant now, its peculiarities and blessings must be the same. [3]

It surely will be admitted that the Church will not only be the same in doctrine, ordinances, spirit, gifts and authority, {176} but also in organization and officers. Hence, as in primitive times, it will incorporate apostles, prophets, and other inspired men, who were given to the Church to edify its members until they "all come to a unity of the faith." It may be well to ask how a Church could be the Church of Christ denuded of some of its most conspicuous doctrines, ordinances, spirit, gifts, officers and organization. [4]

In fact so wide is the gulf that separates the true Church--that described in the Scriptures--from the repudiative, revelationless, spiritless, disjointed churches of the day that it is difficult to discover even a remote resemblance. But these things are very plain and clear. They must be obvious to fair, candid truth-lovers. And as that is the only class whom the glorious light of revealed Gospel truth will be likely to impress with its beauty, it is to such that we, in the present writing, appeal.

How clear is the wide discrepancy between the primitive Church, the true Church, and the sects of "Christendom" in every feature. How often we have listened to exclamations of astonishment from the lips of persons when this remarkable difference was first explained to them by the elders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They have wondered that so potent a fact did not strike them before. This amazement has been increased when their attention has been called to the predictions of the inspired apostles and prophets regarding the apostasy from the ancient faith of the Saints. In fact Paul positively declares, in the 2nd chapter of 2nd Thessalonians that "That day (meaning the second coming of Christ) shall not come except there come a _falling away_ first." But it is not our purpose to elaborate upon this subject, preferring that our readers should peruse the Scriptures relating to it, guided by the passages to which their attention is directed by note. [5]