From: owner-gdm-digest@lists.xmission.com (gdm-digest) To: gdm-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: gdm-digest V2 #21 Reply-To: gdm-digest Sender: owner-gdm-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-gdm-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk gdm-digest Thursday, March 9 2000 Volume 02 : Number 021 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 01:52:45 -0700 From: "Perry L. Porter" Subject: ---> Persecuted...don't see much today. LDSWorld-Gems News Extra President Gordon B. Hinckley Notes from the "Question and Answer" session The National Press Club, Washington D.C., March 8, 2000 (NOTE that these are notes only - a summary of what was said. The questions were written by the attendees at the luncheon and asked to Pres. Hinckley by the oderator.) What is the Church's stand on Politics? Pres. Hinckley explained that the Church becomes involved only in matters that are harmful to the Church or its beliefs. ... Opinion about George W. Bush's appearance at Bob Jones University We've been persecuted throughout our history, but don't see much today. We just move forward with a smile on our face. ============ Let any people enjoy peace and quiet, unmolested, undisturbed, never be persecuted for their religion, and they are very likely to neglect their duty, to become cold and indifferent, and lose their faith. Discourses of Brigham Young, p.346 7:42. I expected when I came into this church, that I should be persecuted and proscribed. I expected that the people would be persecuted. John Taylor, The Gospel Kingdom, p.369-370 Prophets of All Ages Persecuted by Self-Righteous. Parley P. Pratt, A Voice of Warning, p.149 Every time they persecute and try to overcome this people, they elevate us, weaken their own hands, and strengthen the hands and arms of this people. Discourses of Brigham Young, p.351 VERILY I say unto you, concerning your brethren who have been afflicted, and persecuted, and cast out from the land of their inheritance-- D&C 101:1 Why Prophets Are Persecuted 1. Prophets are persecuted because they testified of Christ. 2. Prophets are persecuted because there are false churches. 3. Prophets are persecuted as a form of false worship. 4. Prophets are persecuted because they reveal the wickedness and abominations of the people. 5. Prophets are persecuted and slain as a witness against the wicked and ungodly. 6. Prophets are persecuted to test their integrity to make sure of their allegiance to that Lord whose they are. Bruce R. McConkie, The Promised Messiah, p.33, 34, 36, 38 and 39 ... And if they persecute you, so persecuted they the prophets and righteous men that were before you. For all this there is a reward in heaven. D&C 127:4 The Followers of Christ to Be Persecuted. LeGrand Richards, A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, Ch.28, p.393 Blessed [are] they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:10 Our Church knows full well what it means to be misjudged, scoffed at, and persecuted. It can appreciate, too, in full value, tolerance, and a sense of justice and fair play. David O. McKay, Gospel Ideals, p.580 And again, there was another church which denied the Christ; and they did persecute the true church of Christ, because of their humility and their belief in Christ; and they did despise them because of the many miracles which were wrought among them. 4 Nephi 1:29 So it was with me. I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me, and speaking all manner of evil against me for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute me for telling the truth? Joseph Smith History 1:25 Blessed are ye, when [men] shall revile you, and persecute [you], and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Matthew 5:11 I say the same now. Let us alone, and we will send Elders to the uttermost parts of the earth, and gather out Israel, wherever they are; and if you persecute us, we will do it the quicker, because we are naturally dull when let alone, and are disposed to take a little sleep, a little slumber, and a little rest. If you let us alone, we will do it a little more leisurely; but if you persecute us, we will sit up nights to preach the Gospel. Discourses of Brigham Young, p.351 - p.3522:320. But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute [you], delivering [you] up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake. Luke 21:12 To be persecuted for righteousness' sake in a great cause where truth and virtue and honor are at stake is God-like. Always there have been martyrs to every great cause. The great harm that may come from persecution is not from the persecution itself but from the possible effect it may have upon the persecuted who may thereby be deterred in their zeal for the righteousness of their cause. Much of that persecution comes from lack of understanding, for men are prone to oppose that which they do not comprehend. Some of it comes from men intent upon evil. But from whatever cause, persecution seems to be so universal against those engaged in a righteous cause that the Master warns us, "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets." (Luke 6:26.) May youth everywhere remember that warning when you are hissed and scoffed at because you refuse to compromise your standards of abstinence, honesty, and morality in order to win the applause of the crowd. If you stand firmly for the right, despite the jeers of the crowd or even physical violence, you shall be crowned with the blessedness of eternal joy. Harold B. Lee, Stand Ye In Holy Places, p.347-348 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great [is] your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. Matthew 5:12 To the young men who may be disheartened by false attacks upon the Saints, and to the missionaries in the world, who are driven and persecuted, I wish to say: have no fear; slacken not your labors for the truth; live as becometh Saints. You are in the right way, and the Lord will not let your efforts fail. This Church stands in no danger from opposition and persecution from without. There is more to fear in carelessness, sin and indifference, from within; more danger that the individual will fail in doing right and in conforming his life to the revealed doctrines of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. If we do the right, all will be well, the God of our fathers will sustain us, and every opposition will tend only to the further spread of the knowledge of truth. Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p.413 Improvement Era, Vol. 6, June, 1903, p. 625. And labour, working with our own hands: being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it: 1 Corinthians 4:12 In another great event in Mormon history, several hundred men marched from Ohio to give military relief to the persecuted Saints in Zion--western Missouri. But when the men of Zion's Camp approached their intended destination, the Prophet Joseph Smith disbanded them. According to its ostensible purpose, the expedition was a failure. But most of the men who were to lead the Church for the next half-century, including those who would take the Saints across the plains and colonize the Intermountain West, came to know the Prophet Joseph and received their formative leadership training in the march of Zion's Camp. Dallin H. Oaks, Pure in Heart, p.119 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. Matthew 10:23 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. John 15:20 It takes faith to withstand the secular society. We who seek to serve in this day and time are, for instance, asked to be more loving at a time when the love of many waxes cold. We are asked to be more merciful, even as the Saints are persecuted. We are asked to be more holy as the world ripens in iniquity. Neal A. Maxwell, Men and Women of Christ, p.106 - p.107 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and [some] of them ye shall kill and crucify; and [some] of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute [them] from city to city: Matthew 23:34 The false religion that is in the world, is what raises this "hue and cry," misguides the people, and opposes itself against the Kingdom of God on the earth. Now if we would only fall in with the wicked all would be right, and then no person would wish to persecute us. Discourses of Brigham Young, p.349 2:181. For ye shall have great joy and be exceedingly glad, for great shall be your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets who were before you. 3 Nephi 12:12 December 16, 1838 To the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Caldwell county, and all the Saints who are scattered abroad, who are persecuted, and made desolate, and who are afflicted in divers manners for Christ's sake and the Gospel's, by the hands of a cruel mob and the tyrannical disposition of the authorities of this state; and whose perils are greatly augmented by the wickedness and corruption of false brethren, greeting: Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Three 1838 39, p.122 Who can justly say aught against Joseph Smith? I was as well acquainted with him, as any man. I do not believe that his father and mother knew him any better than I did. I do not think that a man lives on the earth that knew him any better than I did; and I am bold to say that, Jesus Christ excepted, no better man ever lived or does live upon this earth. I am his witness. He was persecuted for the same reason that any other righteous person has been or is persecuted at the present day. Discourses of Brigham Young, p.459 - p.460 9:332. The Constitution should contain a provision that every officer of the Government who should neglect or refuse to extend the protection guaranteed in the Constitution should be subject to capital punishment; and then the president of the United States would not say, "Your cause is just, but I can do nothing for you," a governor issue exterminating orders, or judges say, "The men ought to have the protection of law, but it won't please the mob; the men must die, anyhow, to satisfy the clamor of the rabble; they must be hung, or Missouri be damned to all eternity." Executive writs could be issued when they ought to be, and not be made instruments of cruelty to oppress the innocent, and persecute men whose religion is unpopular. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Six 1843 44, p.327 President Joseph Smith read the 11th Chapter II Corinthians. My object is to let you know that I am right here on the spot where I intend to stay. I, like Paul have been in perils, 2 and oftener than anyone in this generation. As Paul boasted, I have suffered more than Paul did. I should be like a fish out of water, if I were out of persecutions. Perhaps my brethren think it requires all this to keep me humble. The Lord has constituted me so curiously that I glory in persecution. I am not nearly so humble as if I were not persecuted. Ehat & Cook, Words, History of the Church, 6:408-12: 26 May 1844 (Sunday Morning), p.373 No sooner was this made known, and published abroad, and people began to listen and obey the heavenly summons, than opposition began to rage, and the people, even in this favored land, began to persecute their neighbors and friends for entertaining religious opinions differing from their own Discourses of Brigham Young, p.109 2:171. THE FOLLY OF PERSECUTION. I say to the world, to every sect under heaven, if you ever obtain any blessings in the eternal worlds from anybody at all, it will be from the God the Latter-day Saints worship, for God made us all; whether we are Methodists, Baptists, Mormons or anything else we are all the children of one parent. Then why should we persecute one another because of our religion? It is folly in the highest degree. We live in a land and under a constitution which guarantees the right to worship God according to the dictates of conscience to every sect, party, name and denomination under heaven, then why should we be so narrow-minded as to hate or seek to persecute or kill our neighbor because he differs from us in religion? The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, p.192 JD 17:193-194, October 7, 1874. Joseph, our Prophet, was hunted and driven, arrested and persecuted, and although no law was ever made in these United States that would bear against him, for he never broke a law, yet to my certain knowledge he was defendant in forty-six lawsuits, and every time Mr. Priest was at the head of and led the band or mob who hunted and persecuted him. And when Joseph and Hyrum were slain in Carthage jail, the mob, painted like Indians, was led by a preacher. Discourses of Brigham Young, p.466 14:199. [Commentary, polygamy was never legal in any state where Joseph Smith lived. Joseph Smith was tried and convicted of money digging] Persecution Follows Revelation I do not believe there ever was a people who were guided by revelation, or acknowledged of the Lord as his people, who were not hated and persecuted by the wicked and the corrupt, and perhaps no people were ever more persecuted than this people would be if it were in the power of the enemy today to persecute us as it was in the power of Nero and the Romans to persecute the Saints in their day. There never was a time when it was more fixed and determined in the heart of the wicked to fight against and destroy the kingdom from the earth than now, and their failure will be due only to the impossibility of the task they have undertaken. And this is an evidence to everyone that God's Priesthood is here, that many of the Saints are magnifying their calling and honoring the Priesthood and also the Lord, both with their lives and with their substance, which are his. Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p.46 Deseret Weekly News, Vol. 24, p. 708, 1875. [Commentary, when President Hinkley was asked by a reporter, shortly after assuming office, if he received revelations, he replied that he got warm feelings in answer to prays, he did not claim to receive Revelations like other prophets had in the past. He recently published a book that did not quote any LDS scriptures or unique LDS teachings. This could be why he is not feeling any persecution.] We are far removed from the days of our forefathers who were persecuted for their peculiar beliefs. Some of us seem to want to share their reward but are ofttimes afraid to stand up for principles that are controversial in our generation. We need not solicit persecution, but neither should we remain silent in the presence of overwhelming evils, for this makes cowards of men. We should not go out of the path of duty to pick up a cross there is no need to bear, but neither should we sidestep a cross that clearly lies within the path of duty. Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p.292-293 (CR October 1964, Improvement Era 67 [December 1964]: 1067.) The gates of hell shall not prevail against us. Now, Latter-day Saints, how is it with us? We have received the gospel. We have received the kingdom of God, established on the earth. We have had trouble; we have been persecuted. We were driven from Ohio; we were driven from Missouri; we were driven from Nauvoo; and once we were driven for a time from this beautiful city [Salt Lake City]. Many have lost thousands of dollars; lost their homes and all they had, and some of the brethren have seen their wives and children lay down their lives because of the hardships they had to experience during these changes, these persecutions, these revolutions, and these drivings. The people have looked with astonishment at the willingness of the Latter-day Saints to suffer these things. Why do we do this? Why do we adhere to these principles that have caused us at times so much grief and sacrifice? What is it that enables us to endure these persecutions and still rejoice? It is because we have had revelations from the Almighty; because He has spoken to us in our souls and has given to us the Holy Ghost, which is a principle of revelation wherever it exists and is promised to every man, as in the days of the former Apostles, who will believe, repent of his sins and be immersed in water for the remission of them by those who have the authority from the Lord to administer this ordinance. Jesus, when He was among the children of men, said that He would build His church upon this principle of revelation and the gates of hell should not prevail against it. Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, p.124-125 (6 April 1900, CR, pp. 2-3.) ============ Perry http://pobox.com/~plporter - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 03:11:33 -0700 From: owner-gdm@lists.xmission.com Subject: [none] Notes from the "Question and Answer" session Sender: owner-gdm@lists.xmission.com Reply-To: gdm The National Press Club, Washington D.C., March 8, 2000 (NOTE that these are notes only - a summary of what was said. The questions were written by the attendees at the luncheon and asked to Pres. Hinckley by the oderator.) The spiritual leader of the Mormon church, the Yes-on-22 campaign's major source of money and volunteers, showed no inclination Wednesday to seek a rollback of gay rights in California. "I don't think it signals a more active political posture" for the church, Gordon B. Hinckley said at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. "We are not anti-gay. We are pro-family." - ------------------ For Some, Mormon Stance on Gay Issue Creates a Crisis of Conscience THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE Sunday, March 5, 2000 BY DAN EGAN ... "The ecclesiastical pressure has been enormous," says one former bishop, who continues to hold a high church leadership position in the Bay Area. "We've never seen anything like this." Even LDS Church President Gordon B. Hinckley has weighed in. "We regard it as not only our right, but our duty to oppose those forces which we feel undermine the moral fiber of society," Hinckley said last fall. "Such is currently the case in California, where Latter-day Saints are working as part of a coalition to safeguard traditional marriage from forces in our society which are attempting to redefine that sacred institution." At the same time, Hinckley says the church will continue "to love and honor them [homosexuals] as sons and daughters of God." The LDS Church rarely wades into stormy political waters. But, Hinckley and other leaders say, this is a moral issue, and it calls for political activism. - ------------------------ SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, February 6, 2000 Mormon Church: The Powerful Force Behind Proposition 22 DON LATTIN Politics does make strange bedfellows, especially when you add sex, religion and a little historical perspective. One of the delicious ironies of the current political campaign concerns the role of the Mormon church in the California Defense of Marriage crusade, also known as the "Knight Initiative.'' Proposition 22 states, in its entirely, that "only marriage between a man and woman is valid or recognized in California.'' It is on the March 7 ballot as a rear-guard action against persistent attempts to legitimize same-sex marriage in church and state. If one takes a somewhat longer view, the most notorious sexual outlaws in American history are not today's gay rights' crusaders, but the founding fathers of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, or the Mormon church. Joseph Smith Jr., the original Mormon prophet, was fomenting a radical revolution in American religion and sexuality when he was imprisoned in an Illinois jail and assassinated by a mob in the summer of 1844. He was also running for president and controlled an armed militia of approximately 3,500 men. During his lifetime, Smith publicly denied allegations of widespread polygamy in his sect. Today, it's widely acknowledged that Smith took at least 28 wives, including the spouses and teenage daughters of his Mormon brethren. His successor, Brigham Young, brought the persecuted polygamous sect to the Utah wilderness and for decades continued the practice of "plural marriage'' in open defiance of Congress. Officially, the church ended the practice of polygamy in 1890, as a condition to get Utah admitted to the union as a state. - ------------------- [Commentary, it is interesting that this article takes what Mormons would consider a negative slat, but ironically accepts the churches whitewashed and false version of history that sanctioned polygamy ended in 1890! See a new web page added by permission: http://www.xmission.com/~plporter/lds/postman.htm That deals extensively with post 1890 polygamy] - ------------------- [Commentary, The old excuse of why we do not live section 132 today is that it is against the law of the land. Yet the church, instead of struggling to try to get the laws changed so that we can live our religions to it's fullest like our ancestors did, the church works to see that the law does NOT allow marriage of anything but ONE man and ONE women!!! How can this match with our history?] - --- LDS Representative Tells Vermont Legislature to Amend Constitution (Opponents testify before Legislature) Boston Globe (AP) 13Jan00 N1 By Ross Sneyd: Associated Press MONTPELIER, VERMONT -- In the wake of last month's Vermont Supreme Court decision that gay and lesbian couples are entitled to the same benefits enjoyed by married couples, the Vermont legislature held hearings what legislation should be enacted to implement the decision. Opponents of same-sex marriage, including the LDS Church, testified before the Vermont House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, arguing that the legislature should either ignore the decision or try to enact a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage. The LDS Church was represented by Burlington lawyer Thomas McCormick, who helped write a brief to the Vermont Supreme Court for its recent decision, now called the Baker decision. McCormick told the Judiciary committee that he thinks the best way to respond was to seek an amendment to the state constitution that defines marriage as between one man and one woman. McCormick told the committee that he thinks permitting same-sex marriages will lead to other forms of marriage. "What is going to mean if you redefine marriage today that says, yes, the very attractive couples in the Baker case can be married? What are you going to say tomorrow when three or more people want to get married? If you say yes to same-sex couples, what do you say to two sisters or two brothers who want to be married?" http://www.burstnet.com/ads/ad6305a-map.cgi From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events http://www.boston.com/dailynews/013/region/Opponents_testify_before_Legis:. shtml ============================= Talk about polygamy! There is no true philosopher on the face of the earth but what will admit that such a system, properly carried out according to the order of heaven, is far superior to monogamy for the raising of healthy, robust children! A person possessing a moderate knowledge of physiology, or who has paid attention to his own nature and the nature of the gentler sex, can readily understand this. Journal of Discourses, Vol.13, p.317, Brigham Young, April 17, 1870 ============================= Of all men upon the face of the earth, we are the most favoured; we have the fulness of the everlasting Gospel, the keys of revelation and exaltation, the privilege of making our own rules and regulations, and are not opposed by anybody. No king, prince, potentate, or dominion, has rightful authority to crush and oppress us. We breathe the free air, we have the best looking men and handsomest women, and if they envy us our position, well they may, for they are a poor, narrow-minded, pinch-backed race of men, who chain themselves down to the law of monogamy, and live all their days under the dominion of one wife. They ought to be ashamed of such conduct, and the still fouler channel which flows from their practices; and it is not to be wondered at that they should envy those who so much better understand the social relations. Journal of Discourses, Vol.3, p.290 - p.291, George Albert Smith, April 6, 1856 ====================== We have another example in the three Hebrew children, who refused to bow down to a golden image that had been set up. Shall we call it monogamy? [Laughter.] Journal of Discourses, Vol.23, p.33 - p.34 - p.35 - p.36, John Taylor, March 5th, 1882 =========================== The Bible is the foundation of most of the criminal laws of Christendom. Point out in the Bible where polygamy is a crime, and then you may say we have no right to embrace it as part of our religious creed, and pretend it as part of our constitutional rights. If we embrace murder, stealing, robbing, cheating our neighbour, as a part of our religious rights, then the Constitution will condemn us. Not so with polygamy. If we should embrace adultery in our religious creed, then we may be condemned as criminals by the laws of God and man; but when it comes to polygamy, which is not condemned by the Bible any more than monogamy, and embrace that as a part and portion of our creed, the Constitution gives us an undeniable right of worshipping God in this respect as in all others. Congress have no more constitutional right to pass a law against polygamy that they ave to pass a law against monogamy, or against a man living in celibacy. Journal of Discourses, Vol.6, p.361, Orson Pratt, July 24, 1859 ======================= Monogamy, or restrictions by law to one wife, is no part of the economy of Heaven among men. Such a system was commenced by the founders of the Roman empire. That empire was founded on the banks of the Tiber by wandering brigands. When these robbers founded the city of Rome, it was evident to them that their success in attaining a balance of power with their neighbours, depended upon introducing females into their body politic, so they stole them from the Sabines, who were near neighbours. The scarcity of women gave existence to laws restricting one wife to one man. Rome became the mistress of the world, and introduced this order of monogamy wherever her sway was acknowledged. Thus this monogamic order of marriage, so esteemed by modern Christians as a holy sacrament and divine institution, is nothing but a system established by a set of robbers. Journal of Discourses, Vol.9, p.322, Brigham Young, July 6, 1862 ============================ Patriarchal marriage involves conditions, responsibilities and obligations which do not exist in monogamy, and there are blessings attached to the faithful observance of that law, if viewed only upon natural principles, which must so far exceed those of monogamy, as the conditions responsibilities and power of increase are greater. This is my view and testimony in relation to this matter. I believe it is a doctrine that should be taught and understood. Journal of Discourses, Vol.20, p.30, Joseph F. Smith, July 7, 1878 =================== The benefits derived from the righteous observance of this order of marriage do not accrue solely to the husband, but are shared equally by the wives; not only is this true upon the grounds of obedience to a divine law, but upon physiological and scientific principles. In the latter view, the wives are even more benefitted, if possible, than the husband physically. But, indeed, the benefits naturally accruing to both sexes, and particularly to their offspring, in time, say nothing of eternity, are immensely greater in the righteous practice of patriarchal marriage than in monogamy, even admitting the eternity of the monogamic marriage covenant. Journal of Discourses, Vol.20, p.30, Joseph F. Smith, July 7, 1878 ===================== I don't often say anything in regard to plural marriage; but there has been a great deal said about the misery of women in that order. Well, if in monogamy women do not have any trouble, if it were all serene in that order of marriage--no cause of difference of feeling or of jealousy--then there might be some cause for this hue and cry. People imagine, you know, that in a man's family where there are several wives, they must be very jealous of one another--that they must tear each other's hair and all that kind of thing. Well, as I have said, if there was never any jealousy, or any feelings of unhappiness in monogamic families, then they might say something. I have had a little experience both ways, and though not a woman, yet I am bold to bear my testimony that there is more happiness in the number of families living in plural marriage, than there is in an equal number of families in the other condition. And I speak from my own experience in regard to these matters. I think I lived as happily in monogamy as anybody, and I think, too, that I live as happily in plural marriage as anybody else. Journal of Discourses, Vol.24, p.320, Daniel H. Wells, October 28th, 1883 =========================== ... and no better time have I had in thirty years of married life than when I had three wives given me of God, and occupying but one habitation. The power of God was in that home; the spirit of peace was there, the spirit of intelligence was there; and we had our ever present testimony that God recognised the patriarchal order, that which had been practiced by His servants ages and ages ago and revealed to us in the dispensation of the fullness of times; and although two of these have gone behind the veil, they went there with a consciousness of having done their duty in this life, and that they would meet in the life beyond those who agreed with them in practice and in faith; from this condition came the discipline of life, the power of self-restraint, a tender regard for each others' feelings, and a sort of jealousy for each others' rights, all tempered by the consideration that relations meant to be enduring claimed more love and interest and soul than did monogamy under its best conditions. Journal of Discourses, Vol.26, p.124, Henry W. Naisbitt, March 8, 1885 ====================== But it is a most difficult thing to get these Latter-day Saints to understand the principles that are as plain as the noonday sun--that they should receive readily, and why? Because, as I have said, they are heirs of the traditions of centuries that have come down through the dark ages. It is a wonderful thing to do what we have done respecting woman. Look at what monogamy has done. Look at its effects; trace its influence from the death of the Apostles, or soon afterwards, down to this the nineteenth century, and what do we behold? Why, in every generation a large percentage of our sisters has been consigned either to that nameless condition of which it is a shame to speak, or have died without ever knowing the joys of maternity. When I think of it, when I read the history of the boasted civilization of the Greeks and the Romans, and think of the boasted civilization of our day, inherited from these nations, and witness its effects, I wonder how man, standing up in the face of heaven, dare look at woman and talk about being her protector. Read the history of the sex and of the frightful evils which have been brought upon our sitters through man's accursed traditions and evils. If it were to be told to another people differently situated to us, with different traditions to us, they could not believe that intelligent man would entertain for one moment, or that women themselves, in view of what their sex has suffered, would cherish and cling to the wretched traditions that have prevailed in christendom and to a certain extent yet prevail in our midst. Journal of Discourses, Vol.20, p.197 - p.198 - p.199, George Q. Cannon, April 6, 1879 ====================== Ladies and gentlemen, I exhort you to think for yourselves, and read your Bibles for yourselves, get the Holy Spirit for yourselves, and pray for yourselves, that your minds may be divested of false traditions and early impressions that are untrue. Those who are acquainted with the history of the world are not ignorant that polygamy has always been the general rule and monogamy the exception. Since the founding of the Roman empire monogamy has prevailed more extensively than in times previous to that. The founders of that ancient empire were robbers and women stealers, and made laws favoring monogamy in consequence of the scarcity of women among them, and hence this monogamic system which now prevails throughout all Christendom, and which has been so fruitful a source of prostitution and whoredom throughout all the Christian monogamic cities of the Old and New World, until rottenness and decay are at the root of their institutions both national and religious. Polygamy did not have its origin with Joseph Smith, but it existed from the beginning. So far as I am concerned as an individual, I did not ask for it; I never desired it; and if I ever had a trial of my faith in the world, it was when Joseph Smith revealed that doctrine to me; and I had to pray incessantly and exercise faith before the Lord until He revealed to me the truth, and I was satisfied. I say this at the present time for the satisfaction of both saint and sinner. Now, here are the commandments of the Lord, and here are the wishes of wicked men, which shall we obey? It is the Lord and them for it. Journal of Discourses, Vol.11, p.127 - p.128, Brigham Young, June 18, 1865 ========================== Do you see anything very bad in this? Just ask yourselves, historians, when was monogamy introduced on to the face of the earth? When those buccaneers, who settled on the peninsula where Rome now stands, could not steal women enough to have two or three apiece, they passed a law that a man should have but one woman. And this started monogamy and the downfall of the plurality system. In the days of Jesus, Rome, having dominion over Jerusalem, they carried out the doctrine more or less. This was the rise, start and foundation of the doctrine of monogamy; and never till then was there a law passed, that we have any knowledge of, that a man should have but one wife. Journal of Discourses, Vol.12, p.261, Brigham Young, August 9th, 1868 =========================== Some want to destroy "the twin relics--slavery and polygamy"--and establish monogamy, with a brothel on every corner of each block in this city. This reminds me of what I was told the President of the United States said to a gentleman who is a preacher and a member of Congress. He took our President to task for not destroying both "the twins" together, that is, polygamy as well as slavery. After he had laid the whole matter before the President in an elaborate manner, showing him the necessity of destroying this people who believed in polygamy, the President said "It makes me think of a little circumstance that happened with me in my younger days. I was ploughing a piece of newly cleared land, by and bye I came to a big log; I could not plow over it, for it was too high, and it was so heavy I could not move it out of the way, and so wet I could not burn it; I stood and looked at it and studied it, and finally concluded to plow around it." It looks as if they were trying to plow around Mormonism. They and the Lord for it. Journal of Discourses, Vol.10, p.306, Brigham Young, June 4, 1864 ====================== There is an opinion in the breasts of many persons, who suppose that they believe the Bible, that Christ, when he came, did away with plural marriage, and that he inaugurated what is termed monogamy; and there are certain arguments and quotations used to maintain this view of the subject, one of which is found in Paul's first epistle to Timothy (3 chap. 2 v.), where Paul says: "A bishop should be blameless, the husband of one wife." The friends of monogamy render it in this way: "A bishop should be blameless, the husband of but one wife." That would imply that any one but a bishop might have more. But they will say, "We mean a bishop should be blameless, the husband of one wife only." Well, that would also admit of the construction that other people might have more than one. I understand it to mean that a bishop must be a married man. Journal of Discourses, Vol.13, p.38, George Albert Smith, October 8, 1869 ======================== I will say a few words on a subject which has been mentioned here--that is, celestial marriage. God has given a revelation to seal for time and for eternity, just as he did in days of old. In our own days he has commanded his people to receive the New and Everlasting Covenant, and he has said, "If ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned." We have received it. What is the result of it? I look at the world, or that small portion of it which believes in monogamy. It is only a small portion of the human family who do believe in it, for from nine to ten of the twelve hundred millions that live on the earth believe in and practice polygamy. Well, what is the result? Right in our land the doctrine and practice of plurality of wives tend to the preservation of life. Do you know it? Do you see it? What is our duty? To preserve life or destroy it? Can any of you answer? Why yes, it is to perpetuate and preserve life. But what principle do we see prevailing in our own land? What is that of which, in the East, West, North and South, ministers in their pulpits complain, and against which both gentlemen and ladies lecture? It is against taking life. They say, "Cease the destruction of pre-natal life!" Our doctrine and practice make and preserve life; theirs destroy it. Which is the best, saying nothing about revelation, which is the best in a moral point of view, to preserve or to destroy the life which God designs to bring upon the earth. Just look at it and decide for yourselves. Journal of Discourses, Vol.14, p.43, Brigham Young, May 8, 1870 ====================== Now, if in this respect a Bishop had proved himself a wise and discreet father and husband, a man who knew how to rule well his own family, this was a qualification recommending him as a suitable person to be trusted with the office of a Bishop. And how much more suitable would he be for that position if he were perfectly able to govern two or more wives, and to rear their children in the fear of God? The very fact that a Bishop must be the husband of one wife, it we admit the correctness of the views of our Christian friends in this regard (which, however, we do not by any means) the logical inference is, that any other officer or member in the Church but a Bishop was at liberty to have more than one wife. For if he intended it to be a general prohibition, why should he confine it to the Bishop, why did he not make it general? It is sheer sophistry on the part of our sectarian friends and groundless assertion that monogamy, to the exclusion of polygamy was introduced into Europe by the primitive Christians; for that system of marriage was introduced prior to the establishment of Christianity in Europe, by the Roman empire, and became the form of marriage in early times when, as history alleges, men were more numerous in Rome than women. And the earlier settlers of Rome were political refugees, renegades and scape-graces from surrounding nations, and were under the necessity of making raids upon their neighbors to procure wives; and it became a matter of necessity and for mutual protection, to limit the number to one. It was the Roman state that limited the number of a man's wives to one, and not the Christian church; and this being done, it was perpetuated. And history teaches us that under that monogamic system, Rome became the most licentious of all nations. Journal of Discourses, Vol.23, p.297 - p.298 - p.299 - p.300, Erastus Snow, October 7, 1882 ==================== We were not sent here to manifest the fruits of the flesh but those of the spirit; and if the hearts of any wives of the elders of Israel are breaking, by reason of their husbands' conduct, may God have mercy on such husbands, for knowing better, they sin against light in transgressing their covenants. The allegiance of a wife in this Church is not due to an unfaithful, deceiving or cruel husband. And he who regards his wife as the creature of his sinful pleasure, made and given to gratify his fallen nature is unworthy of a wife or to be the father of children. Were I to seek to find happiness in the marriage relation, I should expect to find it most abundant, perfect and pure in Utah, notwithstanding all that is said to the contrary. And this conclusion is reached after years of observation here and abroad. Nowhere exists so great confidence between husbands and wives as in Utah. Nowhere is sexual impurity regarded with greater disgust, or chastity esteemed more highly. Philosophers, preachers and moralists may insist on the enforcement of Roman instituted monogamy, but its practice throughout the Christian world is fraught with all manner of deceivableness, of iniquity and sexual abominations. Better practice what we preach and preach what we practice, leaving no room for distrust; for, as between man and wife, where confidence dies, there you may dig the grave of love. Destroy one and the other cannot exist. Journal of Discourses, Vol.26, p.315, Moses Thatcher, August 28, 1885 ====================== Now, the Supreme Court of the United States, in its great zeal to establish and maintain monogamy upon this American continent, and to strike a blow at the patriarchal order of marriage, believed in by the Latter-day Saints, in its decision in the Reynolds' case announced the doctrine that religion consists in thought and matters of faith and concerning matters of faith, and not actions, and the government is restrained by the terms of the Constitution from any efforts to curtail this freedom and liberty. Wonderful doctrine! A wonderful strain of judicial thought to announce to the world, this wonderful doctrine that the government should not attempt to restrain the exercise of thought, or the exercise of faith! I would like somebody, that knows how to defend this doctrine, to tell me how any one man, or any set of men on the earth could go to work and catch a thought and chain it up and imprison it, or stop its flight, or root it out of the heart, or restrain it, or do away with it. Let them go to and try to chain the lightning, stop the sun from shining, stop the rains from descending and the mist from arising from the ocean, and when they have done this, they may talk about restraining men's faith, and exercising control over the thoughts and faith of the people. The fathers who framed our Constitution were not such dunces, I am happy to say, as Attorney-General Devens, who put that nonsensical language and doctrine into the mouths of the chief justices of the Supreme Court of the United States--the fathers who framed our Constitution, I say, were not such dunces, they did not attempt to place constitutional restrictions upon the law-making power from any effort at making law for the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. And the exercise of religion implies something more than mere faith and thought. Journal of Discourses, Vol.24, p.74 - p.75, Erastus Snow, April 6, 1883 ==================== Let us speak for a few moments upon another point connected with this subject--that is, the reason why God has established polygamy under the present circumstances among this people. If all the inhabitants of the earth, at the present time, were righteous before God, and both males and females were faithful in keeping His commandments, and the numbers of the sexes of a marriageable age were exactly equal, there would be no necessity for any such institution. Every righteous man could have his wife and there would be no overplus of females. But what are the facts in relation to this matter? Since old Pagan Rome and Greece--worshippers of idols--passed a law confining man to one wife, there has been a great surplus of females who have had no possible chance of getting married. You may think this a strange statement, but it is a fact that those nations were the founders of what is termed monogamy. All other nations, with few exceptions, had followed the Scriptural plan of having more wives than one. These nations, however, were very powerful and when Christianity came to them, especially the Roman nation, it had to bow to their mandates and customs, hence the Christians gradually adopted the monogamic system. The consequence was that a great many marriageable ladies of those days, and of all generations from that time to the present, have not had the privilege of husbands, as the one-wife system has been established by law among the nations descended from the great Roman empire--namely, the nations of modern Europe and the American States. This law of monogamy, or the monogamic system, laid the foundation for prostitution and the evils and diseases of the most revolting nature and character under which modern Christendom groans, for as God has implanted, for a wise purpose, certain feelings in the breasts of females as well as the males, the gratification of which is necessary to health and happiness, and which can only be accomplished legitimately in the married state, myriads of those who have been deprived of the privilege of entering that state, rather than be deprived of the gratification of those feelings altogether, have, in despair, given way to wickedness and licentiousness; hence the whoredoms and prostitution among the nations of the earth, where the "Mother of Harlots" has her seat. Journal of Discourses, Vol.13, p.194 - p.195, Orson Pratt, October 7, 1869 ========================= It is necessary that this principle should be practiced under the auspices and control of the Priesthood. God has placed that Priesthood in the Church to govern and control all the affairs thereof, and this is a principle which, if not practiced in the greatest holiness and purity, might lead men into great sin, therefore the Priesthood is the more necessary to guide and control men in the practice of this principle. There might be circumstances and situations in which it would not be wisdom in the mind of God for His people to practice this principle, but so long as a people are guided by the Priesthood and revelations of God, there is no danger of evil arising therefrom. If we, as a people, had attempted to practice this principle without revelation, it is likely that we should have been led into grievous sins, and the condemnation of God would have rested upon us; but the Church waited until the proper time came, and then the people practiced it according to the mind and will of God, making a sacrifice of their own feelings in so doing. But the history of the world goes to prove that the practice of this principle, even by nations ignorant of the Gospel, has resulted in greater good to them than the practice of monogamy or the one-wife system in the so-called Christian nations. To-day, Christendom holds itself and its institutions aloft as a pattern for all men to follow. If you travel throughout the United States and through the nations of Europe in which Christianity prevails, and talk with the people about their institutions, they will boast of them as being the most permanent, indestructive and progressive of any institutions existing upon the earth; yet it is a fact well known to historians, that the Christian nations of Europe are the youngest nations on the globe. Where are the nations that have existed from time immemorial? They are not to be found in Christian monogamic Europe, but in Asia, among the polygamic races--China, Japan, Hindostan and the various races of that vast continent. Those nations, from the most remote times, practiced plural marriage handed down to them by their forefathers. Although they are looked upon by the nations of Europe as semi-civilized, you will not find among them woman prostituted, debased and degraded as she is through Christendom. She may be treated coldly and degraded, but among them, except where the Christian element prevails to a large extent, she is not debased and polluted, as she is among the so-called Christian nations. It is a fact worthy of note that the shortest-lived nations of which we have record have been monogamic. Rome, with her arts, sciences and warlike instincts, was once the mistress of the world; but her glory faded. She was a monogamic nation, and the numerous evils attending that system early laid the foundation for that ruin which eventually overtook her. The strongest sayings of Jesus recorded in the New Testament were levelled against the dreadful corruptions practiced in Rome and wherever the Romans held sway. The leaven of their institutions had worked its way into the Jewish nation, Jewry or Palestine being then a Roman province, and governed by Roman officers, who brought with them their wicked institutions, and Jesus denounced the practices which prevailed there. Journal of Discourses, Vol.13, p.201 - p.202, George Q. Cannon, October 9, 1869 ========================= A great amount of this "fuss and feathers" that we have to-day is simply a political ruse in the interest of party politics. What for? Why, the brethren have told you. Mormonism is very unpopular, and if they can only do something that will be in opposition to Mormonism it will satisfy the howling priests throughout the land, and a great many of their flocks. As was remarked by one of the brethren, when Jesus was crucified, Pilate and Herod could be made friends. When Mormonism is to be opposed, all men, or at least a great many men, can unite in opposing it. And they want to go before the people and tell them that they have rooted out slavery, and now they are after Mormonism, and wont you religious fanatics join in? No, excuse me, I mean, you pure and holy religious people, who are so humble and posses so much of the spirit that dwelt in the lowly Jesus, wont you help us to do this thing--wont you vote for us because we are doing this thing? Why, bless your souls, they would not hesitate to sweep us off the face of the earth to get elected. That is their feeling. They care nothing about human rights, liberty, or life, if they can bring about the results desired. They would despoil, destroy and overthrow this people to accomplish their own end. Well, the other party, it is true, would not be very well suited about it, but they would not care to see it politically. However, it is for us to do the best we can. We have got to put our trust in the living God. We might ask--Will they derive any benefit from any course taken against the Latter-day Saints? No! a thousand times no!! I tell you that the hand of God will be upon them for it, and every people, be it this nation, or any other nation, that shall lift up their hands against Zion shall be wasted away; and those that want to try it let them try it, and it is them and their God for it. But it is for us to fear God, to keep his commandments; we can afford to do right whether other people can or not. Respect all men in their rights, in their position, and in their privileges, politically and socially, and protect them in the same; but be not partakers of their evil deeds, of their crimes, nor their iniquities, that you have heard spoken about here to-day. We do not want them to force upon us their drinking saloons, their drunkenness, their gambling, their debauchery and lasciviousness. We do not want these adjuncts of civilization. We do not want them to force upon us that institution of monogamy called the social evil. We will be after them; we will form ourselves into police and hunt them out and drag them from their dens of infamy and expose them to the world. We wont have their meanness, with their feoticides and infanticides, forced upon us. And you, sisters, don't allow yourselves to become contaminated by rusting against their polluted skirts. Keep from them! Let them wallow in their infamy, and let us protect the right, and be for God and his Christ, for honor, for truth, for virtue, purity and chastity, and for the building up of the kingdom of God. Amen. Journal of Discourses, Vol.20, p.320 - p.321, John Taylor, October 6th, 1879 ============================ Of course, this is the general view taken of it by Christian nations, as shown in their acts and in their laws regulating it. Although the Roman Catholic Church prohibits intercourse with the sexes to sacred orders, they being, according to the rites of the church forbidden to marry. And however much some may doubt the iniquity of their holy vows, it is a matter too well known to call in question. The more general sentiment of Christians recognizes the purity and uprightness of marriage of a man to one woman; and they quote the following words of the Apostle Paul to testify to it, "Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled; but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." But the majority of modern Christians consider that for a man to marry more than one wife while she lives and is his wife is sin. Now I will undertake to say respecting the two conditions of marriage, single and plural, that where the duties and obligations are the same, and the husband is equally honorable, just and virtuous, faithful and true to his wives and children, that there is not necessarily any greater impurity existing between such a man and his plural family, than between a man and his single family; that there is not necessarily a defilement of the marriage bed, that there is not necessarily defilement of the body or spirit. When the institution of marriage is founded in religious sentiment and is confirmed by the enduring love of husband, wives and children, and the responsibilities attending that relationship, as we find it in many of the ancient worthies, there is not necessarily any defilement in plural marriage. There was not necessarily defilement in father Abraham and other ancient patriarchs and prophets who took to themselves a second or a third or a fourth wife, any more than there was in those who confined themselves to one wife. Nor have I ever heard from any creature--and I have read and heard much and reflected much, because our institution of marriage has invited discussion and reflection upon this subject. I have never yet heard an argument that, to my mind, appeared sound against the marriage of an honorable man to two women any more than to one. And the only argument that has ever been presented that has had a semblance of soundness is the generally admitted fact of the near equality of the sexes which would seem to foreshadow the general purpose and design of providence that one man should have only one wife. I have never heard an argument relating to the physical effects of the institution, nor as relating to the state of society that could not be applied just as appropriately to monogamy. The opposers of plural marriage make many declarations against us which are untrue, which they do not understand because they accept the reports of certain persons who give way to a lying spirit, and misrepresent and belie people far better than themselves. The selfishness and weakness of human nature, the evils which manifest themselves from time to time between families and between husband and wife, and between wives and children are quoted as evils greatly to be deplored as growing out of this system. I will only say in regard to this, that those best acquainted with the inner workings of the system among the Latter-day Saints throughout all of their settlements, if they testify honestly and truthfully as to the result of their careful observations extending over a period of over thirty years--the time that this system of plural marriage has been practised by us in these mountains, they would, in effect, say, that there is less discontent, less strife and fewer family broils and less divorce, and less casting off wives and casting upon the community of children without care, than would be found in the same number of monogamic families. And I may here say, that statistics will bear me out in making this assertion. To those who are not posted in the matter this may appear incredible; and the majority of the christian world would think it impossible judging from their standpoint; and what they see and hear among themselves, and judging by the spirit by which they are animated, they would, I admit, pronounce this a thing impossible. But it is simply because they are not imbued with the faith of the Latter-day Saints, and this being the case they cannot understand the motives that prompt us to enter into this relationship. They cannot comprehend the spirit that governs us, the devout God-fearing spirit of self-sacrifice which leads us onward to all that is noble, forbearing and long-suffering, that teaches us to love one another and to be charitable to all men, and which teaches us that the relationships which we make through the marriage covenant are but the foundation of eternal glory and exaltation in the worlds to come; and it also teaches us that the glories of the future that open up before us are greatly dependent upon the faithfulness of our relationships and associations in this life; and that a man must be found capable to properly govern and guide his family and preserve in time the wives and children that are given to him, leading them in the way of life and salvation, and rearing his children in all that is pure and praiseworthy, so that he can receive them in the morning of the first resurrection, there to have the Father confirm upon him his wives and children, the foundation of his individual kingdom which will exist for ever and ever. The outside world cannot comprehend this, and simply because they cannot believe it. It is this same religious sentiment that prompts women and the best of women, the most devout women, women of the purest motive and character to enter into this sacred relationship, and to cause them to determine in their own minds that they would sooner be associated with a man who has proven himself a man of integrity, a man of strict virtue and honor, who can be relied upon by God and man--they would rather trust themselves with such a man than to be the only wife of a man devoid of these qualifications, a man who, perhaps, for the want of such high motives would be the victim of many vices, of whoredom, of concubinage or illicit intercourse with the sexes, and defile himself and destroy the confidence of his family in him, or he would perhaps indulge in drunkenness and other kindred vices which would be the means of producing the same result. And such has been the experience of many women in monogamy. And I do not say that the weaknesses of mankind do not manifest themselves in plural families; I do not say that there are not some who may be urged on by fleshy lust, but if there are it results in their making shipwreck of their faith and becoming, in time, a lasting disgrace to themselves. But where there is one example of this kind, under our polygamic system, there are at least two under the monogamic order that might be cited, who make shipwreck of their faith, who sacrifice their honor, and whose family send forth a wail of grief for the loss of confidence in husband and father. Adultery, fornication, whoredom, God will judge; every form of licentiousness He has condemned in His word from the beginning of the world to the present. And if follies are manifested by some who profess to be Latter-day Saints in this direction, so we may cite similar weakness manifested by ancient men of God; not, however, to justify such cases but merely as examples of human weaknesses. Journal of Discourses, Vol.23, p.226 - p.227 - p.228, Erastus Snow, February 26th, 1882 Perry http://pobox.com/~plporter - - ------------------------------ End of gdm-digest V2 #21 ************************