Celestial Plural Marriage
References
Compiled by Star of Truth Publishing
P.O. Box 271
West Jordan, Utah 84084
Brigham Young:
You often hear people desiring more
of the knowledge of God, more of the wisdom of God, more of the power of God.
They want more revelation, to know more about the Kingdom
of Heaven, in heaven and on the
earth, and they wish to learn and increase.
There is one principle that I wish
the people would understand and lay to heart. Just as fast as you will prove
before your God that you are worthy to receive the mysteries, if you please
to call them so, of the Kingdom of Heaven � that you are full of
confidence in God � that you will never betray a thing that God
tells you � that you will never reveal to your neighbor
that which you ought not to reveal, as quick as you prepare to be entrusted
with the things of God, there is an eternity of them to bestow upon you. Instead
of pleading with the Lord to bestow more upon you, plead with yourselves to
have confidence in yourselves, and know when to speak and what to speak, what
to reveal, and how to carry yourselves and walk before the Lord.
And just as fast as you prove to
Him that you will preserve everything secret that ought to be �
that you will deal out to your neighbors all which you ought, and no more,
and learn how to dispense your knowledge to your families, friends, neighbors,
and brethren, the Lord will bestow upon you, and give you, and bestow upon
you, until finally He will say to you, "You shall never fall; your salvation
is sealed unto you; you are sealed up unto eternal life and salvation, through
your integrity." � Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, pp. 371-372
Alma:
...It is given unto many to know
the mysteries of God; nevertheless, they are laid under a strict command that
they shall not impart, only according to the portion of his word which he
doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which
they give unto him.
And therefore, he that will harden
his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that
will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word,
until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of god until he know them
in full.
And they that will harden their
hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing
concerning his mysteries... � Alma 12:9-11
Brigham Young:
Be not miserly in your feelings,
but get knowledge and understanding by freely imparting it unto others, and
be not like a man who selfishly hoards his gold; for that man will not thus
increase upon the amount, but will become contracted in his views and feelings.
So the man who will not impart freely of the knowledge he has received, will
become so contracted in his mind that he cannot receive truth when it is presented
to him. Wherever you see an opportunity to do good, do it, for that is the
way to increase and grow in the knowledge of the truth. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 267
The revelation on plural marriage
(D&C 132) was received by Joseph Smith as early as 1831, but was not reduced
to writing in its present form until July 12, 1843. The principle was made
public and published to the world through Church channels after August of
1852. Joseph was living the principle long before the church at large knew
about it, possibly as early as 1831 or 1832.
William Clayton:
From [Joseph Smith] I learned that
the doctrine of plural and celestial marriage is the most holy and important
doctrine ever revealed to man on the earth, and that without obedience to
that principle, no man can ever attain to the fulness of exaltation in celestial
glory. � Historical Record, Vol. 6, pp. 225-227
Joseph F. Smith
...And as he (William Clayton) has
here stated, (in a document read by Joseph F. Smith at the funeral of William
Clayton), as having come from the mouth of the prophet, this doctrine of eternal
union of husband and wife, and of plural marriage, is one of the most important
doctrines ever revealed to man in any age of the world. Without it man would
come to a full stop; without it we never could be exalted to associate with
and become gods, neither could we attain to the power of eternal increase,
or the blessing pronounced upon Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the fathers of
the faithful.
...There are, however, enough witnesses
to these principles to establish them upon the earth in such manner that they
never can be forgotten or stamped out. For they will live; they are destined
to live, and also to grow and spread abroad upon the face of the earth, to
be received and accepted and adopted by the virtuous, by all the pure in heart,
by all who love the truth, and seek to serve him and keep His commandments;
they are bound to prevail, because they are true principles. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 21, p.10
Heber C. Kimball:
Do you suppose that Joseph and Hyrum
and all those good men would associate with those ancient worthies, if they
had not been engaged in the same practices? They had to do the works of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, in order to be admitted where they are; they had to be polygamists
in order to be received into their society. �
Ibid, Vol. 4, p. 224
Why Plural Marriage?
John Taylor:
Joseph Smith told others; he told
me, and I can bear witness of it, "that if this principle were not introduced,
the Church and Kingdom could not proceed." When this commandment was
given, it was so far religious, and so far binding upon the Elders of this
Church, that it was told them if they were not prepared to enter into it,
and to stem the torrent of opposition that would come in consequence of it,
the keys of the Kingdom would be taken from them. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 221
John Taylor:
Concerning the Patriarchal order
of marriage, President Taylor said: "If we do not embrace that principle
soon, the keys will be turned against us. If we do not keep the same law that
our Heavenly Father has kept we cannot go with him. A man obeying a lower
law is not qualified to preside over those who keep a higher law. �
Life of Wilford Woodruff, p. 542
Wilford Woodruff:
The reason why the Church and Kingdom
of God cannot advance without the
Patriarchal order of marriage, is that it belongs to this dispensation...without
it the Church cannot progress. �
Ibid, p. 542
George Q. Cannon:
The more people obey the laws of
God as God has revealed them, and as they are embodied in the gospel of Jesus
Christ, the nearer they approach unto God, the more they become like Him,
the more power they get over themselves and over the adversary... I look upon
the man and the woman who have entered into the New and Everlasting Covenant
concerning Patriarchal Marriage as being more advanced than their brethren
and sisters who had not obeyed that law...
I obeyed the doctrine of Patriarchal
Marriage upon the same principle, because I knew that it was a principle of
salvation and of exaltation, and that if I were to be exalted in the presence
of God, I must obey the law. � Deseret News, June 30, 1883
Brigham Young:
Hear it ye Elders if Israel and
mark it down in your logbook, the fulness of the gospel is the United Order
and Plural Marriage, and I fear that when I am gone this people will give
up these two principles which we prize so highly, and if they do this, the
Church cannot advance as God wishes for it to... � Sermon at Dedication
of St. George Temple
Deseret Evening
News
What would be necessary to bring
about the result nearest the hearts of the opponents of Mormonism, or properly
termed the Gospel of the Son of God? Simply to renounce, abrogate and apostatize
from the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage in its fulness. Were the
Church to do that as an entirety, God would reject the Saints as a body, the
authority of the Priesthood would be withdrawn, with its gift and powers and
there would be no more heavenly recognition of the administrations among the
people the heavens would permanently withdraw themselves and the Lord would
raise up another people of greater valor and stability... �
Editorial, April 23, 1885
Millennial Star:
We cannot be married...for eternity
without subscribing to a law that admits a plurality of wives. �
Vol. 5, p. 15
Contributor:
God himself gave unto David a plurality
of wives, thus becoming a party to evil, if polygamy be sinful. �
Vol. 6
Brigham Young:
The only men who become Gods, even
Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. � Journal of Discourses,
Vol. 11, p. 269
Wilford Woodruff:
And God our heavenly Father, knowing
that this is the only law, ordained by the Gods of eternity, that would exalt
immortal beings to kingdoms, thrones...to a fulness of celestial glory...commanded
Joseph Smith the prophet and all Latter-Day Saints, "to obey this law,
or you shall be damned," saith the Lord. �
Millennial Star, Vol. 41, p. 242
Joseph F. Smith:
But he did not falter, although
it was not until an angel of God with a drawn sword, stood before him and
commanded that he should enter into the practice of that principle, or he
should be utterly destroyed, or rejected, that he moved forward to reveal
and establish that doctrine. ...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. 29
Joseph Smith:
All men who become heirs of God
and joint-heirs of Jesus Christ will have to receive the fulness of the ordinances
of His Kingdom; and those who will not receive all the ordinances will come
short of the fulness of that glory, if they do not lose the whole. �
Doctrinal History of the Church, Vol. 5, p. 424; Millennial Star, Vol. 65,
p. 627
Orson Spencer:
When God sets up any portion of
His Kingdom upon the earth, it is patterned after his own order in the heavens.
When He gives to man a pattern of family organization on the earth, the pattern
will be just like His own family organization in the heavens. The family of
Abraham was a transcript of a celestial pattern. ...It is the only order practiced
in the celestial heavens, and the only peaceful, united, and prosperous order
that will endure, while man-invented orders and devices (monogamy, free love,
etc.) will utterly perish, with the using. �
Spencer Letters, p.193
Heber C. Kimball:
Plurality is a law which God established
for his elect before the world was formed, for a continuation of seeds forever.
� Millennial Star, Vol. 28, p. 190
Brigham Young:
Why do we believe in and practice
polygamy? Because the Lord introduced it to His servants in a revelation to
Joseph Smith, and the Lord's servants have always practiced it. And is that
religion popular in heaven? It is the only popular religion there, for this
is the religion of Abraham, and unless we do the works of Abraham, we are
not Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise. � Journal of Discourses,
Vol. 9, p. 322
George Teasdale:
I bear my testimony that plural
marriage is as true as any principle that has been revealed from the heavens.
I bear my testimony that it is a necessity, and that the Church
of Christ in its fulness never
existed without it. Where you have the eternity of marriage, you are bound
to have plural marriage, BOUND TO; and it is one of the marks of the Church
of Jesus Christ in its sealing
ordinances. � Ibid, Vol 25, p. 21
Then, [according to Bro. Teasdale]
if the Manifesto was a revelation, this is no longer the fulness of times
and we do not have the Church in its fulness.
Erastus Snow:
Joseph Smith said that the parable
that Jesus spoke of that man who had one talent and hid it in the earth was
the man who had but one wife and would not take another, would have her taken
from him and given to one who had more. � Journal of Wilford
Woodruff, Oct 14, 1882 meeting
Zechariah 5:7 says: "And
behold, there was lifted up a talent of lead: and this is a woman that sitteth
in the midst of the ephah."
Common arguments against Plural Marriage:
James E. Talmage:
The Latter-Day Saints were long
regarded as a polygamous people. That plural marriage has been practiced by
a limited portion of the people under sanction of Church ordinance, has never
since the introduction of the system been denied. But that Plural Marriage
is a vital tenet of the Church is not true. What the Latter-Day Saints call
celestial marriage is characteristic of the Church and is in very general
practice. But of celestial marriage, plurality of wives was an incident, never
an essential. � Story and Philosophy of Mormonism, p. 89
Never an essential? Consider
the following.
Doctrine and Covenants, Section 132:
Verse 3 �
Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I
am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them
must obey the same.
Verse 4 �
For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye
abide not that covenant, then are ye damned.
Verse 5 �
And as pertaining unto the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted
for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must
and shall obey the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord.
Millennial Star:
The doctrine of celestial marriage
with the Mormons is not one of that kind that can in the religious world be
classed with non-essentials. It is not an item of doctrine that can be yielded
and faith in the system remain. Mormonism is that kind of religion the entire
divinity of which is invalidated, and its truths utterly rejected, the moment
that any one of its leading principles is acknowledged to be false, or such
as God will not sustain in practice against the entire world. �
Vol. 5, p. 27, Oct. 1865
When was a revelation ever given
that was just "an incident and never an essential?"
Orson Pratt (Statement when Section 132 was presented
to the body of the Church on August 28-29, 1852, Millennial Star suppl., Vol.
15):
It is well known in the congregation
before me, that the Latter-Day Saints have embraced the doctrine of a plurality
of wives as part of their religious faith. But, says the objector, we cannot
see how this doctrine can be embraced as a matter of religion and faith...
In reply, we will show that it is incorporated as part of our religion and
necessary for our exaltation to the fulness of the Lord's glory in the eternal
world.
Joseph F. Smith:
It is a glorious privilege to go
into a Temple of God
to be united as man and wife in the bonds of holy wedlock for time and all
eternity by the authority of the Holy Priesthood... It is an additional privilege
for that same man and wife to re-enter the Temple
of God to receive another wife
in like manner if they are worthy. But if he remains faithful with only the
one wife, observing the conditions of so much of the law as pertains to the
eternity of the marriage covenant, he will receive his reward, but the benefits,
blessings and power appertaining to the second or more faithful and fuller
observance of the law, he will never receive, for he cannot... I understand
the law of celestial marriage to mean that every man in this church, who has
the ability to obey and practice it in righteousness and will not, shall be
damned; I say I understand it to mean this and nothing less, and I testify
in the name of Jesus that it does mean that. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20, pp. 30-31
Wilford Woodruff:
The law of the Patriarchal Order
of Marriage belongs to this dispensation, and after it was revealed to the
Prophet Joseph, he was commanded to receive it. If he and the people had rejected
it, the Church and Kingdom of God
would have advanced no further and God would have taken it from them and given
it to another people. � Life of W. Woodruff, p. 246
"Never an essential"?
George Q. Cannon:
...the Latter-Day Saints have adopted
it and made it part of their practice, but it is because God, our heavenly
Father, has revealed it unto us. If there were no record of its practice to
be found, and if the Bible, Book of Mormon and Book of Doctrine and Covenants
were totally silent in respect to this doctrine, it would nevertheless be
binding upon us as a people, God himself having given a revelation for us
to practice it at the present time. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 197
Never an essential?
Joseph Smith:
The same God that has thus far dictated
me and directed me and strengthened me in this work, gave me this revelation
and commandment on celestial and plural marriage, and the same God commanded
me to obey it. He said to me that unless I accepted it, and introduced it,
and practiced it, I, together with my people would be damned and cut off from
this time henceforth. We have got to observe it. It is an eternal principle
and was given by way of commandment and not by way of instruction. �
Contributor, Vol. 5, p. 259
Historical Record:
...It was as much as a man's life
was worth in those days to say that God required His servants to believe in
and practice plural marriage...yet the Elders who have preached this doctrine
since Joseph's day have found that corrupt, impure and dishonest men have
opposed this doctrine and sought to destroy those who believe and practice
it; but the virtuous and honest have recognized its worth and acknowledge
that, if practiced according to the order revealed by the Lord, it would save
the human family from many of the dreadful evils under which it now groans.
�
Andrew Jenson, Vol. 7, p. 529
Brigham Young:
Why do we believe in and practice
polygamy? Because the Lord introduced it to His servants in a revelation to
Joseph Smith, and the Lord's servants have always practiced it. And is that
religion popular in heaven? It is the only popular religion there, for this
is the religion of Abraham, and unless we do the works of Abraham, we are
not Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise. � Journal of Discourses,
Vol. 9, p. 322
*
* * * *
Argument: Temple
marriages are celestial marriages, and one man with one wife, sealed for eternity
will attain to exaltation and eternal lives.
1.
The LDS Church's
position in its "Official Statement" dated June 17, 1933:
"Celestial marriage �
that is, marriage for time and eternity � and polygamous or plural
marriage are not synonymous terms. Monogamous marriage for time and eternity,
solemnized in our Temples in accordance
with the word of the Lord and the laws of the Church are celestial marriages."
/s/ Heber J. Grant
Anthony W. Ivins
J. Reuben Clark
"I do maintain that the new
and everlasting covenant of marriage is not plural marriage, but is the eternal
union of a man and a woman... To say that those who in the past have or in
the future will enter into plural marriage will be the only ones who shall
attain Celestial Glory is stating that which is not true." �
Ballard - Jenson correspondence, p. 10
However, the following seems
to be in conflict:
Brigham Young:
The only men who become Gods, even
Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. Journal of Discourses, Vol.
11, p. 269
Millennial Star:
We cannot be married...for eternity
without subscribing to the law which admits a plurality of wives. �
Vol. 5, p. 15
Joseph F. Smith:
Some people have supposed that the
doctrine of plural marriage was a sort of superfluity, or non-essential to
the salvation or exaltation of mankind. In other words, some of the Saints
have said, and believe, that a man with one wife, sealed to him by the authority
of the Priesthood for time and eternity, will receive an exaltation as great
and glorious, if he is faithful, as he possibly could with more than one.
I want here to enter my solemn protest against this idea, for I know it is
false...The marriage of one woman to a man for time and eternity by the sealing
power, according to the law of God, is a fulfillment of the celestial law
of marriage in part... But this is only the beginning of the law, not the
whole of it. Therefore, whoever has imagined that he could obtain the fulness
of the blessings pertaining to this celestial law, by complying with only
a portion of its conditions, has deceived himself. He cannot do it. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20, p. 28
Brigham Young:
Now, where a man in this Church
says, "I don't want but one wife, I will have my religion with one,"
he will perhaps be saved in the Celestial
Kingdom; but when he gets there,
he will not find himself in possession of any wife at all. He has had a talent
that he has hid up. He will come forward and say, "Here is that which
thou gavest me. I have not wasted it, and here is the one talent," and
he will not enjoy it, but it will be taken and given to those who improved
the talents they received, and he will find himself without any wife, and
he will remain single forever and ever. � Ibid, Vol. 16, p. 166
Bishop Samuel Wooley:
The spirit told me...that that revelation
was of God and that no man could or would receive a fulness of Celestial Glory
except he obeyed that law and had more than one living wife at the same time.
� Historical Record, Vol. 6, p. 166
Joseph W. Musser:
A tradition has grown among the
Latter-Day Saints that Celestial Marriage may be comprehended in either the
monogamous or the patriarchal form, when the ceremony is preformed under the
authority of the Melchizedek Priesthood, and by one so authorized. True, a
marriage performed for time and eternity, by an authorized servant of the
Lord and sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise, is of a celestial nature as
it is intended to extend into the Celestial sphere; But it is equally true
that the full and complete act of celestial marriage comprehends a plurality
of wives and cannot be complete in the monogamic form. The title first given
to the Revelation on Celestial Plural Marriage was, "A Revelation on
the Patriarchal Order of Matrimony, including Plurality of Wives." Patriarchal
marriage means the kind of marriage entered into anciently by such Patriarchs
as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and others and has reference to a plurality
of wives.
Brigham Young:
It is the word of the Lord, and
I wish to say to you, and all the world, if you desire with all your hearts
to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists �
at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and
the glory which Abraham has obtained. This is as true as that God lives. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 268
Finally, If Celestial Marriage
and Plural Marriage are not synonymous terms, what do we do with:
George Teasdale:
Where you have the eternity of marriage,
you are bound to have plural marriage, bound to; and it is one of the marks
of the Church of Jesus Christ in its sealing ordinances. �
Ibid, Vol 25, p. 21
Joseph Smith:
...[said,] It was a doctrine which
pertained to Celestial Order and Glory. � William Clayton, Historical
Record, 6:225-7
*
* * * *
Argument: Book of Mormon; Jacob 2:23-27: Wherefore...;
for there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines
he shall have none.
Previous verses indicate the
Lord is chastising the people of that time for their much wickedness. They
were not worthy to be living the higher Law of plural marriage. Verse 30 states:
"For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will
command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things."
The Book of Mormon clearly indicates elsewhere
that plural marriage was practiced at proper times:
Alma
10:11 "For behold, he hath
blessed mine house, he hath blessed me, and my women, and my children, and
my kinsfolk..."
Ether 1:14
"Go to and gather together...and thy families; and also Jared thy brother
and his family..."
Ether 6:20
"...now the number of the sons and daughters of the brother of Jared
were twenty and two souls; and the number of sons and daughters of Jared were
twelve..."
The brother of Jared conversed with the Lord
and received revelations because he was living a higher law than was Jared.
Also the Jacob scripture was between 544 and
421 B.C. Over 400 years later, 82 B.C. Amulek proclaimed how the Lord had
blessed his women.
Joseph F. Smith, while testifying in the
Reed Smoot case before the Committee on Privileges and Elections in the U.S.
Senate, March 9, 1904,
said of the Jacob scripture at that time:
"All you need to do, sir, is
to read the whole thing and it explains itself. The revelation to Joseph Smith
does not repeal this. It is simply a commandment of the Lord unto him, and
received by him and accepted by him, to enter into plural marriage by His
law and by His commandment and not by their own volition."
Then it becomes a matter of commandment.
Were we commanded to live the law in this the dispensation of the fulness
of times? Note the following:
Orson Pratt:
Why, then, do Latter-Day Saints
practice polygamy? ...It is because we believe...that the Lord God, who gave
revelations to Moses approbating polygamy, has given revelations to the Latter-Day
Saints, not only approbating it, but commanding it, as he commanded Israel
in ancient times. � JD, Vol. 17, p. 223
Wilford Woodruff:
Again, this testament which Joseph
Smith left contains a revelation from God, out of heaven, concerning the patriarchal
order of marriage...And God, our Heavenly Father, knowing that this was the
only law ordained by the Gods of eternity, that would exalt immortal beings
to kingdoms...to a fulness of Celestial glory, I say, the God of Israel, knowing
these things, commanded Joseph Smith to obey this law, "or you shall
be damned," saith the Lord. � Mill. Star, vol. 41,
pp. 242-243
Joseph Smith:
...We have got to observe it. It
is an eternal principle and was given by way of commandment and not by way
of instruction. � Contrib., vol. 5, p. 259
Again, an incident and never
an essential?
*
* * * *
Argument: The New Testament says, "A
Bishop and a deacon shall each be the husband of one wife." �
1 Tim. 3:2
Brigham Young, 1854:
Instead of my believing for a moment
that Paul wished to signify to Timothy that he must select a man to fill the
office of a Bishop that would have but one wife, I believe directly the reverse;...he
did not say "BUT ONE wife:" it does not read so; but he must have
one to begin with... � Jour. of Disc., vol.
2, pp. 88-89
George A. Smith, 1869:
We interpret it to mean, a bishop
must be blameless, the husband of one wife at least... Now this passage does
not prove that a man should have but one wife. It only proves that a bishop
should be a married man... The Savior denounced adultery; he denounced fornication;
he denounced lust; also divorce; but is there a single sentence asserting
that plurality of wives is wrong? If so, where is it? Who can find it? Why
did He not say it was wrong? � Ibid, vol. 13, p. 39
*
* * * *
Argument: "Let no man BREAK THE LAWS
OF THE LAND, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the
laws of the land." � D&C 58:21
1.
Read D&C 98:4-9, which outlines the law of the land to be that which
is Constitutional.
2.
Joseph Smith and all others broke the law wherever they were living, according
to local statutes:
o
Vermont � 1805 � Law of 1797 on record
o
New York � 1815-1830 �
Law of 1788 on record
o
Ohio � 1831 � Law of 1824 on record
o
Missouri � 1831 � Law of 1825 on record
o
Illinois � 1839 � Law of 1833 on record
3.
Instances of breaking the law of the land in favor of God's law, as revealed
in scripture:
The Three Hebrews refused to bow down to the golden image
of King Nebuchadnezzar and were cast into the fiery furnace. All the rest
of Israel
bowed down. And all bow down today to the golden image of monogamy �
except a few.
Daniel refused to cease his prayers according
to the decree of King Darius, and was thrown into the lion's den.
Abraham refused to worship at the shrine of
his apostate father.
4.
The Lord virtually commanded disobedience to the Saints when, for example,
he commanded plural marriage by his servants three years after the Morrill
Law (1879) was enacted, when Seymour B. Young entered polygamy. (In the 1882
revelation to John Taylor)
That 1882 revelation was published by the Church
in early European editions of the D&C, also in the "Life of John
Taylor," p. 349, also in the "Life of Wilford Woodruff," p.
542. Note that this revelation and command from the Lord was given 20 years
after the anti-polygamy law passed by Congress in 1862, and 3 years after
the law was declared constitutional by the U. S. Supreme Court (in 1879),
also 7 months after the Edmunds Law (1882) which was designed to give strength
to the 1862 law. And the 1886 revelation was given 18 months after the Edmunds
Law.
The Manifesto is addressed "To whom it
may concern." Apparently, the Lord didn't feel it concerned Him too much.
Joseph F. Smith (After quoting D&C 58:21):
We are told here that no man need
break the laws of the land who will keep the laws of God. But this is further
defined by the passage which I will read afterwards �
the law of the land, which all have no need to break, is that law which is
the constitutional law of the land, and that is as God himself has defined
it (D&C 107:77-80).
. . . The Lord Almighty requires
this people to observe the laws of the land, to be subject to the powers that
be, so far as they abide by the fundamental principles of good government,
but he will hold them responsible if they will pass unconstitutional measures
and frame unjust and proscriptive laws, as did Nebuchadnezzar and Darius in
relation to the three Hebrews and Daniel. If law-makers have a mind to violate
their oath, break their covenants and their faith with the people and depart
from the provisions of the Constitution, where is the law, human or divine,
which binds me, as an individual, to outwardly and openly proclaim my acceptance
of their acts?
. . . We intend to continue to be
law-abiding so far as the constitutional law of the land is concerned; and
we expect to meet the consequence of our obedience to the laws and commandments
of God, like men. These are my sentiments briefly expressed upon this subject.
�
Gospel Doctrine, Page 406-407
Brigham Young:
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 neighbors, depended upon introducing females into their body politic,
so they stole them from the Sabines, who were near neighbors. The scarcity
of women gave rise 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 monogamous order of marriage, so esteemed
by modern Christians as a holy sacrament, is nothing but a system established
by a set of robbers. � Journal of Discourses,
Vol. 9, pg. 322
The first public law in the Roman
Empire against polygamy was at the latter end of the 4th
century, about the year 393, by the Emperor Theodosius.
Plural marriage was always God's law. Man-made
laws against it are unconstitutional:
"Congress shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof . . ."
Deseret News, 1886:
"Any man who says that he really
and firmly believes a certain law of God binding on him, and who will not
obey it in preference to a conflicting law of man or a decision of a court,
has either an unsound mind or a cowardly soul, or is a most contemptible hypocrite."
Polygamy with the Mormon people
is strictly a religious rite and not subject to legislative interpretation
or judicial curtailment. And this position was maintained leading Senators,
Congressmen, Jurists and Publicists of the United
States during the years when the subject
was receiving legislative attention by the Federal Government.
Witness the following by statesmen and prophets:
Abraham Lincoln:
Think if you can of a single instance
in which a plainly written provision of the Constitution has ever been denied.
If by the mere force of numbers a majority should ever deprive a minority
of any clearly written constitutional right, it might in a moral point of
view justify revolution: certainly would if such a right was a vital one.
�
First Inaugural Address
Thomas Jefferson:
The rights of conscience we never
submitted, we could not submit; we are answerable for them to our God.
Blackstone (the English Jurist):
If ever the laws of God and men
are at variance, the former are to be obeyed in derogation of the latter.
Joseph F. Smith testified in
the Smoot case, Vol. 1:335-6, that he was living in open violation of the
"rules of the Church;" so did Francis M. Lyman; so did B. H. Roberts
and others of the presiding brethren.
George Teasdale:
I believe in plural marriage as
part of the Gospel, just as much as I believe in baptism by immersion for
the remission of sins. The same being who taught me baptism. . . taught me
plural marriage, and its necessity and glory. . . I do not know how you feel;
but I do not fear the face of man as I fear the face of God. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 25, p. 21
Letter from Catholic Bishops:
But when the laws of the state conflict
with the natural laws and God's commands, then God must be obeyed more than
man.
Peter was commanded by the High
Priests of his day to cease their doctrines. But Peter and John answered and
said unto them, "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto
you more than unto God, judge ye." Also, "We ought to obey God rather
than man." � Acts 4:19; 5:29
Wilford Woodruff:
The Congress of 1862 (Lincoln
was Pres.) and the Supreme Judges of 1879, in their acts and decisions, have
taken a dangerous and fearful step. Their acts will sap the very foundation
of our government and it will be rent asunder, and the God of Heaven will
hold them responsible for these things. . . The Constitution once broken by
the rules of the land, there will be no stopping place until the nation is
broken in pieces, and there is no power beneath the heavens can save this
nation from the consequences thereof. � Mill. Star, Vol. 41,
p. 243, April 21, 1879
George Q. Cannon:
. . .I admit that those raising
children by plural wives are not complying with man-made laws, but in the
sight of God, they are not sinning, as there is no sin in it. �
Sanpete Stake Conf. Sept. 1899
Rudger Clawson:
Your Honor, I have only this to
say why judgment should not be passed upon me: I very much regret that the
laws of my country should come in conflict with the laws of God; but whenever
they do I shall invariably choose to obey the latter. � Nov. 3, 1884; Sentenced to State Penitentiary
Wilford Woodruff:
God. . . commanded Joseph Smith
the Prophet and all Latter-day Saints to obey this law, "or you shall
be damned," saith the Lord. Now, having obeyed the law for many years,
the Congress of the United States
and the supreme judges of the nation, stand forth and say, "You shall
be damned if you DO obey it." Now, Latter-day Saints, what are we going
to do under the circumstances? God says we shall be damned if we do not obey
the law, Congress says we shall be damned if we do. It places us in precisely
the same position that it did the Hebrews in the fiery furnace and Daniel
in the den of lions. The enemies of Daniel counseled together and said, "We
cannot find any occasion against Daniel, except we find it against him concerning
the law of God." Our enemies have pursued the same course. And made it
a law of offense to obey the laws of God. Now who shall we obey, God or man?
My voice is that we obey God. . . � Mill. Star, Vol. 41, p. 242, April 21, 1879
Heber Bennion:
Hundreds of LDS have gone to prison
because they would not do it (obey the law of the land). President John Taylor
died a martyr in exile rather than do it, and men were dropped from their
positions in the Church because they promised they would obey the law of the
land. Joseph F. Smith would not do it, but went on the underground for years,
and had eleven children born after the Manifesto by five mothers.
John Taylor:
When they enact tyrannical laws,
forbidding us the free exercise of our religion, we cannot submit, God is
greater than the United States.
And when the government conflicts with Heaven, we will be ranged under the
banner of Heaven, and against the government. The U.S.
says we cannot marry more than one wife. God says different. . . Polygamy
is a divine institution. It has been handed down direct from God. The U.S.
cannot abolish it. No nation on earth can prevent it, nor all the nations
of the earth combined. I defy the United States.
I will obey God. � S.L. Tribune, Jan. 6, 1880
*
* * * *
Argument: Marriage sealings for time and eternity
must be performed in the Temples.
Brigham Young:
There are many of the ordinances
of the house of God that must be performed in a Temple
that is erected expressly for that purpose. There are other ordinances that
we can administer without a Temple.
. . We also have the privilege of sealing women to men, without a Temple.
. . but when we come to other sealing ordinances, ordinances pertaining to
the holy Priesthood, to connect the chain of the Priesthood from Father Adam
until now, by sealing children to their parents, being sealed for our forefathers,
etc., they cannot be done without a Temple.
But we can seal women to men, but not men to men, without a Temple.
�
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 16, p. 186
John Taylor:
I was asked of certain ordinances
could be performed in different places. I told them, yes, under certain circumstances.
"Where," I was asked � "Anywhere besides
in temples?" Yes. "Anywhere besides the Endowment House?" Yes.
"Where, in some other house?" In another house or out of doors,
as circumstances might be. Why did I say that?. . . It is the authority of
the Priesthood, not the place that validates and sanctifies the ordinance.
I was asked if people could be sealed outside. Yes. I could have told them
I was sealed outside, and lots of others . . . If we are interrupted by men
who do not know about our principles, that is all right, it will not impede
the work of God, or stop the performance of ordinances. Let them do their
work, and we will try and do ours. � Ibid., Vol. 25, p. 355-356
Charles C. Rich
. . . for a Temple
is the proper place to perform these sacred ordinances. We learn from our
past history and experience that there have been deviations from this rule
from time to time . . . There are ordinances which can only be administered
in a Temple, hence the importance
of completing the Temple so that
these ordinances may be administered for the living and for the dead. In relation
to this deviation from this rule pertaining to sealings and endowments, we
understand that the Priesthood is greater than the Temple,
and that which is sealed on earth by those holding the keys, is sealed in
heaven. � Ibid., Vol. 19, p. 164
Samuel Wooley Taylor:
"The plural marriage of the
author's mother and father took place during a carriage ride in Liberty
Park at Salt
Lake City." Samuel's father was John W. Taylor,
son of President John Taylor. � The Kingdom of Nothing
by S. W. Taylor, p. 309-310, footnote
*
* * * *
Argument: "Verily, verily, I say unto
you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work
unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they
have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies
come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth
me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to
accept of their offerings." � D&C 124:49
Charles W. Penrose (refers to the above D&C
quotation and states):
. . . Quotations sometimes referred
to by the weak-backed who need a ramrod fastened parallel to their spinal
column. . .
It is a little singular that some
people will persistently refuse to see the difference between a certain special
work and a principle or law. The consistency of the Lord relieving a people
from any such obligation as the building of a house when prevented by enemies
from accomplishing it is self-evident. When it comes to the abrogation of
a law, a principle, a truth, the matter is entirely different. The revelation
does not apply even remotely. . . � Deseret Evening News,
Editorial, June 5, 1885
Wilford Woodruff:
No man ever did or ever will obtain
salvation only through the ordinances of the Gospel and through the name of
Jesus. There can be no change in the Gospel; all men that are saved from Adam
to infinitum are saved by the one system of salvation. The Lord may give many
laws and many commandments to suit the varied circumstances and conditions
of his children throughout the world, such as giving a law of carnal commandments
to Israel,
but the laws and principles of the Gospel do not change. If any portion of
this generation be saved, it will be because they receive the Gospel which
Jesus Christ and his Apostles preached. When the Lord inspires men and sends
them to any generation, he holds that generation responsible for the manner
in which they receive the testimony of his servants. � Journal of Discourses,
Vol. 10, p. 217
George Q. Cannon:
There are revelations in that book
(D&C) concerning counsel and the management of affairs that are not binding
upon us only so far as they are not applicable to us. When, however, it comes
to the revelations concerning principle, then those revelations are unalterable,
and they will stand as long as heaven and earth will endure, because they
are true. � Deseret Evening News, Sept. 21, 1895
*
* * * *
Argument: Plural Marriage is fine for the
men, but not for the women.
� Someone should have
counseled the Lord about that several billion years ago.
� When will the Lord
ever reveal a principle that will harm women? Or make them second- class citizens?
� Jesus said, "If
any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of
God, or whether I speak of myself." --John 7:17
� Thousands of women
know the doctrine to be of God. And rejoice in it.
Marian Ross Pratt:
I have been in polygamy 25 years
and have never seen the hour when I have regretted that I was in it. I would
not change my position for anything earthly, no matter how grand or gorgeous
it might be; even were it for the throne of a queen.
Lucy W. Kimball:
I poured out my hearts contents
before God. I at once became calm and composed; a feeling of happiness took
possession of me and at the same time I received a powerful and irresistible
testimony of the truth of plural marriage, which testimony has abided with
me ever since.
Dr. Ellis R. Shipp:
We are accused of being down-trodden
and oppressed. We deny the charge! For we know there cannot be found a class
of women upon the earth who occupy a more elevated position in the hearts
of their husbands, or whose most delicate and refined feelings are so respected
as here in Utah. True we practice plural marriage, not however because we
are compelled to, but because we are convinced that it is a divine revelation,
and we find in this principle satisfaction, contentment and more happiness
than we can obtain in any other relationship.
Eliza R. Snow:
This, one of the most important
events of my life, I have never had cause to regret. The more I comprehend
the pure and ennobling principle of plural marriage, the more I appreciate
it. It is a necessity in the salvation of the human family �
a necessity in redeeming woman from the curse, and the world from its corruptions.
Bathsheba W. Smith:
Joseph Smith counseled the sisters
not to trouble themselves in consequence of it, that all would be right, and
the result would be for their glory and exaltation.
Ella Wheeler Wilcox:
In Salt Lake City the men and women
born of polygamous mothers in the upper classes of Salt Lake City, are superior
in physique and in mental endowments to the same members selected at random
in other cities I have seen. A little investigation will prove the truth of
my statement.
Before we cast any more stones at
their ancestors, let us weed from the ranks of our own churches and our own
fashionable society all the unwelcome and fatherless children, all the deserted,
betrayed girls, and stand them in a row, and practice upon them as targets,
in order that we may have a surer aim when we stone the polygamists again.
� New York Journal
John Taylor (Letter to a sister, January 19,
1883):
. . .You seem desirous to take part
of the law and reject the other part . . . This law (Section 132) pertains
more particularly to the living . . . You seem to be desirous of having dead
women sealed to your husband instead of living ones, whereas the law pertaining
to these matters does not our things in that shape. We read that the Lord
commanded and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife, and it is for wives as
well as husbands to perform their part in relation to these matters. . . no
man or woman has authority to point out any other way than that which the
Lord has appointed. � Joseph W. Musser, Celestial or Plural Marriage,
p. 52-53
*
* * * *
Argument: We can live plural marriage during
the Millennium. It is not for now.
1.
People have said since the beginning of time, "Not now, let's wait."
The command was not given for the Millennial period. Are we to wait for the
Millennium to fulfill a mortal covenant to raise up a choice seed unto God?
2.
The fulness of the Gospel was restored. Can we receive baptism in the Millennium
instead of now? The laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost? Can
we have someone live plural marriage for us by proxy?
3.
Zion, prior to the Millennium, must be built up on principles of celestial
law (United Order and Patriarchal Marriage) according to D&C 105:5. Was
Joseph Smith commanded to wait? The Millennium is too late.
4.
The righteous will be resurrected at the beginning of the Millennium. We
are resurrected according to degree of glory for which we have lived and according
to the laws we have obeyed. How can one become exalted if he hasn't lived
those laws designed to exalt? Have we been given opportunity to live ALL the
restored laws now?
5.
". . .and when we obtain any blessing, it is by obedience to that
law upon which the blessing is predicated."
6.
"For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law
which was appointed for that blessing. . ." (D&C 132:5)
"During the Millennium"
was not included in the verse.
Wilford Woodruff:
. . .The reason why the Church and
Kingdom cannot advance without the Patriarchal order of marriage, is that
it belongs to this dispensation. . . � Life of Wilford Woodruff,
p. 542
Wilford Woodruff:
The Gospel which we preach is the
power of God unto salvation to every one who believes, both high and low,
rich and poor, Jew and Gentile. There is no man who will receive salvation
without it; no man can receive exaltation and be crowned with a fulness of
salvation in the presence of God without receiving the fulness of the everlasting
gospel of the Son of God.
All men who have received a glorious
salvation and resurrection and have gone to receive their reward in the presence
of God, have had to go there by keeping the laws that He gave them. They have
had to obey the Gospel of Christ on the earth: They have had to receive the
law and abide that law while in the flesh, that they might receive a fulness
in the resurrection. It will take just as much to save the Latter-day Saints
and the inhabitants of the earth in this generation as it did to save Adam,
Enoch, Seth, Moses, Elijah, Elias or Jesus and the apostles. There is no change
nor variableness with the gospel of Christ; its ordinances are the same yesterday,
today and forever. As the Apostle Paul said, "If we or an angel from
heaven preach any other gospel than that we have preached, let him be accursed."
� Journal of Discourses, Vol. 12, p. 277
If all of the restored laws cannot
be lived now, then we have to admit that the wishes of the faithful are bound
by the wishes of the unfaithful � that Lucifer has succeeded
in binding Jesus Christ.
*
* * * *
Argument: Only one man on earth can hold keys
of authority, and he is President of the Church.
The student is here advised to
study Priesthood, Apostleship, Church, Kingdom
of God, and church
history.
It will help to read of Joseph Smith's desire
to have Hyrum preside over the Church while he continued presiding over the
keys of Priesthood. See Doc. Hist. of the Church, Vol. 5, pp. 510, 517-518;
also Vol. 7, pp. 213, 382.
Brigham Young:
Perhaps it may make some of you
stumble, were I to ask you a question � Does a man's being
a Prophet in this Church prove that he shall be the President of it? I answer,
no! A man may be a Prophet, Seer and Revelator, and it may have nothing to
do with his being President of the Church. Suffice it to say, that Joseph
was the President of the Church, as long as he lived: the people chose to
have it so. He always filled that responsible station, by the voice of the
people. Can you find any revelation appointing him the President of the Church?
The keys of the Priesthood were committed to Joseph, to build up the Kingdom
of God on the earth, and were not to be taken from him in time or in eternity;
but when he was called to preside over the Church, it was by the voice of
the people; though he held the keys of the Priesthood, independent of their
voice. Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, p. 133
Only one man does preside over
the keys of Priesthood. But it may not be the President of the Church.
J. Reuben Clark:
The Priesthood is essential to the
Church, but the Church is not essential to the Priesthood. �
Improvement Era, p. 134, March 1936
George Q. Cannon:
We are asked, Is the Church of God
and the Kingdom of God
the same organization? And we are informed that some of the brethren hold
that they are separate. This is the correct view to take. The Kingdom
of God is a separate organization
from the Church of God.
There may be men acting as officers in the Kingdom
of God who will not be members
of the Church. . . � Doctrinal History of the Church, Vol. 7, p.
382
B. H. Roberts:
Joseph Smith when speaking strictly
recognized a distinction between the Church
of Jesus Christ and the Kingdom
of God, and not only a distinction
but a separation of one from the other. � Rise and Fall of Nauvoo,
p. 180
Brigham Young:
(Spoke of the Church structure and
said:) This is what we are in the habit of calling the kingdom
of God. But there are further organizations.
The Prophet gave a full and complete organization to this kingdom the Spring
before he was killed. . . The kingdom
of God will protect every person,
every sect and all people upon the face of the whole earth, in their legal
rights. I shall not tell you the names of the members of this kingdom, neither
shall I read to you its constitution, but the constitution was given by revelation.
The day will come when it will be organized in strength and power. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 17, pp. 156-157
Times and Seasons:
There are men here, brethren, who
have got authority, but we don't want to mention their names, for the enemy
will try to kill them. � Vol. 5, p. 663
Times and Seasons:
As to a person not knowing more
than the written word, let me tell you that there are keys that the written
word never spoke of, nor never will. � Vol. 5, p. 667
George Q. Cannon:
Joseph Smith set the pattern; he
taught the brethren who were with him better ideas; you well-informed Latter-day
Saints know that there are two powers which God has restored in these the
last days. One is the Church of
God, the other is the Kingdom
of God. �
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20, p. 204
Another item of interest:
Brigham Young:
Because a man is ordained an Apostle,
it does not prove that he belongs to the Quorum of the Apostles. I just mention
this that you may understand it. � Deseret News, Sept. 18, 1875 (Stated Aug. 31, 1875)
*
* * * *
Argument: My grandfather was a righteous man,
holding many positions in the Church. Surely he won't receive a lesser reward
because he didn't know about plural marriage. He was nearly perfect.
Joseph F. Smith:
...but if he remain faithful with
only the one wife, observing the conditions of so much of the law as pertains
to the eternity of the marriage covenant, he will receive his reward, but
the benefits, blessings and power appertaining to the second or MORE FAITHFUL
AND FULLER OBSERVANCE of the law, he never will receive for he cannot. ...But
what will become of him that cannot abide it...he that is without understanding
is not under the law, and it remains for God to deal with him according to
his own wisdom. If a man acknowledges that he is incapable, or disqualified
BY A LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, wisdom or understanding to obey this law, then it
remains with God to deal with him according to those principles of justice
which are written, or are yet to be revealed. IT IS NOT LIKELY, HOWEVER, THAT
HE WILL TAKE HIS SEAT WITH ABRAHAM, ISAAC AND JACOB, OR SHARE IN THEIR PROMISED
BLESSINGS. � Jour. of Disc., Vol. 20, p. 31
Would this also apply to those
who claim immunity because of the 1890 Manifesto? (The Manifesto pleased the
Utah Commission
and 97% of the Saints; provision for continuing patriarchal marriage pleased
God.)
*
* * * *
Argument: No one can live any principle not
accepted by the Church through the vote of its members. Common consent governs
all Priesthood action.
1.
Someone should have informed Joseph Smith. He and others lived plural marriage
for many years before the Church at large knew anything about it.
2.
Plural marriage from the beginning was, and now is, A LAW OF THE PRIESTHOOD
and was never voted into acceptance by the Church. The Church, rather, was
invited to participate. In 1890 the general Church membership voted against
the principle, but the 1886 revelation to John Taylor had already made it
a matter of individual agency. The principle of celestial plural marriage
continued as a matter of Priesthood law, INDEPENDENT OF THE CHURCH. The 1890
Manifesto was not a revelation to the Priesthood, and it seems that none was
needed to the Church. The negative vote from 97% of the Saints was all the
revelation necessary.
The revelation on celestial plural marriage
states (D.&C. 132):
(Verse 28): "I am the Lord thy God, and will give unto
thee THE LAW OF MY HOLY PRIESTHOOD."
(Verse 58): "Now as touching THE LAW OF THE
PRIESTHOOD..."
(Verse 61): "And again, as pertaining to THE
LAW OF THE PRIESTHOOD..."
The President of the Church accommodated the
Saints of the Church in their demands. But as President of Priesthood, he
made other arrangements.
Wilford Woodruff:
In SOME things, it was the law of
the Church that all things should be done by the common consent of the people;
in the matter of presenting temporal business and in the quorums, it was.
But I have no recollection of any revelation given to the effect that ALL
Church affairs pertaining to what
should be or what would be the law of the Church, that that course was to
be pursued, that the matter should be submitted to the body for its sanction.
�
Temple Lot Case, 1892, p. 291-313
Lorenzo Snow:
The higher law was given to the
children of Israel
when they were first delivered from Egyptian bondage, but in consequence of
their disobedience, the Gospel IN ITS FULNESS, was withdrawn, and the law
of carnal commandments was added. Now, do you imagine that there would be
any wrong IF THE PEOPLE WANTED TO FIND THE PRINCIPLES OF THE HIGHER LAW AND
OBEY THEM as near as circumstances would admit? DO YOU SUPPOSE IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN WRONG TO SEARCH OUT THE FULNESS OF THE GOSPEL, while living under the
Mosaic law? ...Alma, by his energy
and perseverance, had discovered the fulness of the Gospel and obtained revelations
from the Lord, and the privilege of observing the Gospel in all its fulness
and blessings. Do you think the Lord was angry with them? They were under
the Mosaic law, and yet considered it a blessing to observe the higher law....
�
Jour. of Disc., Vol. 19, p. 345
From B.Y.U. Studies, 1976:
"Joseph Smith had often suspended
the prior approval of common consent. At Nauvoo, the Prophet secretly introduced
special endowment ceremonies, the practice of plural marriage, and the organization
and conduct of a parapolitical Council of Fifty without the ratifying vote
of the Church in common consent. Moreover, the following important ordinations
of General Authorities had not only occurred without a prior vote of the Church,
but had also continued in force for weeks, months, or years before being officially
presented for a public vote of common consent:..." �
Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 193-194
*
* * * *
Argument: The Church leaders would never make
misleading statements.
1.
This has always been necessary because of the wickedness and unbelief of
the people. Dr. Hugh Nibley in a series of articles published in the Improvement
Era concerning secrecy in the New
Testament Church
stated:
Quoting from Tertullian: "We believe that the Apostles
were ignorant of nothing, but that they did not transmit everything they knew
and were not willing to reveal everything to everybody. They did not preach
everywhere nor promiscuously...but taught ONE THING ABOUT THE NATURE OF CHRIST
IN PUBLIC AND ANOTHER IN SECRET..." � Imp. Era, May 1965
2.
In 1850, John Taylor made a misleading statement when he took the Gospel
to France.
He quoted a statement of the Church on monogamy (See Times and Seasons 3:940),
and said in part: "We are accused here of polygamy and actions the most
indelicate, obscene and disgusting, such that none but a corrupt and depraved
heart could have contrived. These things are too outrageous to admit of belief...I
shall content myself by reading views of chastity and marriage... "You
both mutually agree to be each other's companion, husband and wife, observing
the legal rights belonging to this condition; that is keeping yourselves wholly
for each other, and from all others, during your lives." � July 1850, Public Discourse, p. 8
John Taylor was quoting from the 1835 edition
of the Doctrine and Covenants, knowing full well the extent of plural marriage
in the Church.
3.
Joseph Smith also made misleading statements on several occasions because
of the unbelief and wickedness of men. The President of the Nauvoo Stake,
William Marks, said: "I met with Bro. Joseph. He said he wanted to converse
with me on the affairs of the Church, and we retired by ourselves. I will
give his words verbatim, for they are indelibly stamped upon my mind. he said
he had desired for a long time to have a talk with on the subject of polygamy.
He said it would eventually prove the overthrow of the Church, and we should
soon be obliged to leave the United
States, unless it could be speedily
put down. He was satisfied that it was a cursed doctrine, and that there must
be every exertion made to put it down," etc. (June 1844) �
Smith, Was Joseph Smith a Polygamist?, p. 15
Joseph Smith also had a good number of wives
at the time.
Also:
"We the undersigned members of the Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints and residents of the city of Nauvoo, persons of families
do hereby certify and declare that WE KNOW OF NO OTHER RULE OR SYSTEM OF MARRIAGE
than the one published from the Book of Doctrine and Covenants," which
again was the 1835 edition teaching monogamy. And among those who signed the
declaration were W. Woodruff, N. K. Whitney, and John Taylor.
Accompanying this declaration:
"We the undersigned members of the Ladies' Relief Society,
and married females do certify and declare that we know of no system of marriage
being practiced in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints save the
one contained in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants..." Among those signing
the document were Emma Smith and Eliza R. Snow, as well as Lenora Taylor.
Among others, both Emma and Eliza were the wives of Joseph Smith at the time.
The date was October 1, 1842.
�
Times and Seasons, Vol. 3, pp. 939-940
The statements were plainly designed to mislead.
Also: Joseph Smith published several questions
and answers in the Elders' Journal, vol. 1, No. II, pp. 28 and 29:
Seventh � "Do the Mormons
believe in having more wives than one?" No, not at the same time. But
they believe if their companion dies they have the right to marry again...
�
Doc. Hist. of the Church, vol. 3, pp. 28-30, May 8, 1838
Joseph Smith also published the following:
"As we have lately been credibly informed, that an Elder
of the Church, by the name of Hiram Brown, has been preaching POLYGAMY and
OTHER FALSE and corrupt doctrines, the county of Lapeer, state of Michigan,
this is to notify him and the Church in general that he has been cut off from
the Church for his iniquity; and he is further notified to appear at the Special
Conference on the 6th of April next, to make answer to these charges.
/s/ Joseph Smith
Hyrum Smith
Feb. 1, 1844 (Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 423)
4.
Thus prompting Joseph F. Smith to state:
Joseph
F. Smith
Let all the Latter-day Saints know
that Joseph Smith...and his brother Hyrum did practice the doctrine (of plural
marriage) in their lifetime, and until their death, NOTWITHSTANDING THEIR
SEEMING DENIALS as published in the Times and Seasons, and which are so fervently
relied upon as evidence against the fact by a certain class of anti-polygamists.
Those DENIALS can be explained, and have been, and while they are true IN
THE SENSE FOR WHICH THEY WERE DESIGNED, they are not denials of plural or
celestial marriage as taught by Joseph and Hyrum Smith, and practiced at the
time by both of them and many others in prominent standing in the Church.
� Hist. Rec., vol. 6, pp. 219-220, Des. News
of May 20, 1886
"In
the sense for which they were designed" covers the reason for many misleading
statements made by Church leaders, including the 1890 Manifesto period.
5.
Paul in II Thess. 2:10-11 reminded the Saints that because men "received
not the love of the truth...God shall send them strong delusion, that they
should believe a lie."
Misleading statements were also elicited from Joseph F. Smith, Lorenzo
Snow, B. H. Roberts, and others during the Reed Smoot investigations in Washington,
D.C., in 1904. In the matter
of the questioning of Joseph F. Smith:
| Chairman: |
|
"Is
the sealing for eternity ever performed between two LIVING mortals?" |
| |
|
|
| Smith: |
|
"I
have heard of one or two instances of that kind." |
| |
|
|
| Chairman: |
|
"According
to the doctrines of your church, did that carry with it the right of
earthly cohabitation?" |
| |
|
|
| Smith: |
|
"It
was not so understood. It does not carry that right." |
| |
|
|
| Chairman: |
|
"Was
it practiced, do you know?" |
| |
|
|
| Smith: |
|
"Not
that I know of." |
| |
|
|
| Chairman: |
|
"This
Manifesto suspending polygamy, I understand, was a revelation and a
direction to the church?" |
| |
|
|
| Smith: |
|
"I
understand it, Mr. Chairman, just as it is stated there by Pres. Woodruff
himself. Pres. Woodruff makes his own statement. I cannot add to nor
take anything from that statement." |
| |
|
|
| Chairman: |
|
"Do
you understand that it was a revelation the same as other revelations?" |
| |
|
|
| Smith: |
|
"I
understand personally that Pres. Woodruff was inspired to put forth
that Manifesto." |
| |
|
|
| Chairman: |
|
"And
in that sense it was a revelation?" |
| |
|
|
| Smith: |
|
"Well,
it was a revelation to me." |
And
so on...
6.
Church President Heber J. Grant stated in a letter dated November 15, 1935:
"I have been accused of having other wives and of having children by
them, all of which is an absolute falsehood."
However, accompanied by his attorney, F. S. Richards, President Grant
pleaded guilty yo unlawful cohabitation in court, and was fined $100.00 by
Judge Norrell. Two wives were named in the newspaper article, Salt
Lake Tribune, Saturday, September 9, 1899,
accompanied by a picture of President Grant. The two wives were Augusta W.
Grant and Emily Wells Grant. And there were other wives besides those two.
* * * * *
Argument: The "One Mighty and Strong" spoken of in the 85th
section of the D. & C. is not Joseph Smith but Edward Partridge.
Joseph F. Smith is credited with relating Section 85 to
Edward Partridge at one time. However, the latter part of this reference states:
"If, however, there are those who will still insist
that the prophecy concerning the coming of "one mighty and strong"
is still to be regarded AS RELATING TO THE FUTURE, let the Latter-day Saints
KNOW that HE WILL BE a future Bishop of the Church who will be WITH THE SAINTS
IN ZION, JACKSON COUNTY, Missouri, when the Lord SHALL ESTABLISH them in that
land; and he WILL BE so blessed with the spirit and power of his calling that
he WILL BE able to set in order the house of God, pertaining to the department
of the work under his jurisdiction; ...This future Bishop will also be called
and appointed of God as Aaron of old, and as Edward Partridge was." �
Imp. Era, Oct. 1907
- Verse 7 of Section 85,
"...holding the scepter of power in his hand, clothed with
light for a covering, whose mouth shall utter words, eternal words; while
his bowels shall be a fountain of truth, to set in order the house of God,"
seems a rather exalted description for Bishop Partridge.
- D.&C. 90:16 refers to
Joseph Smith:
"And this shall be your business and mission in all your
LIVES, to preside in council, and SET IN ORDER all the affairs of this church
and kingdom."
- Brigham Young said:
"Brethren, this church will be led onto the very brink
of hell by the leaders of this people. Then God will raise up the one mighty
and strong spoken of in the 85th Section of the Doctrine and Covenants, to
save and redeem this Church." � Provo Bowery Conf.,
1867