AN INVESTIGATION 

~OF~ 

TRUTH AND ERROR

~OR~ 

THE PATH OF RIGHT

AND WHERE FOUND

________________

CAREFULLY EXAMINED and COMPILED

________________

 ~BY~

W. C. CATHER, Publisher

ATCHISON, KANSAS

PREFACE

In the following pages we wish to show further evidence in favor of the fact, that what wrong and evil doers have practiced or may continue to practice, has no claim on righteousness, Godly teaching and positions.

The object of the following pages is to show the difference between truth and error. I am perfectly well aware that the name Joseph Smith is repulsive to the minds of thousands of people. And again, thousands of others can say they feel the same toward Jesus Christ, But, never-the-less, the teaching of Christ is pure, and of God-the main evidence used against Joseph Smith is slanderous statements and misrepresentations by the press and from the pulpit, his belief and true position often misstated and misconstrued, his sentiment and doctrine perverted and maliciously changed by those who should have been his truest friends. But this is no surprise to us, for it is true that the same was done in the time of Paul. They had to be on the watch continually in their defense of the gospel, to keep men of different sects and parties and even from among their own ranks, from perverting the truth and veracity of Christ’s teaching.

Calling Joseph Smith fanatic, thief, impostor and pelting him and like believers with unsavory epithets does not solve the problem we present to the world as we defend the restoration of the gospel after the great apostasy. The candid mind wants facts. Joseph, the prophet, has proven to the world that he was honest in his religious understanding and true to his belief and testimony, for he sealed it with his own blood. The writer firmly believes that a careful reading of the following pages will be good for all who honestly and candidly do so. It can plainly be seen that the faults, failings and wickedness of men does not change the facts of God. The main object of this work is to point out the path of right, show the true principle and teaching of Christ. In the defense of Joseph Smith we show his doctrinal teaching from a bible standpoint. We also show him as a moral and law-abiding teacher and citizen. This we are proud to do. His ethics are beautiful and grand, deep and divine and sincerely founded upon Godly truth. We also show you, in the examination, the position of a sect of people called latter day saint, or sometimes called "Mormons" these people are followers of Brigham Young and are degraded with perversion and grounded in untruth. In this can be seen the murderous, fiendish and diabolical position of Brigham Young. And in fact the work will show that a great mistake has been made in the past against the innocent as well as the truth of God. This book will serve to explain the great mystery, "Mormonism, about which a great variety of novels have been written-pandering as they do, to vacillating minds.

Historians and a great number of writers have gone head-long with their misstatements, perversions, ignorance and malicious lies, until the people by thousands suppose Joseph Smith to be the very father of the blackest crimes of the Nineteenth century. In making his defense as we do in the following pages, we aim as an object, to not merely defend an individual, but to roll back if possible the dark curtains of superstition and false statements, and stop the clannish thunder of modern Babylon long enough for a servant of God to be heard. And thereby, let the innocent shine with their deserved glory and with authority from God; teach us in the light of heavenly truth. And while we are in the harbor of understanding and knowledge, safe from the desperate jangle of a confused world with the dark clouds of despair broken and rolled away, and prejudice laid aside; here in this place of safety, let us consider together, and as we do, "prove all things hold fast that which is good." We expect to meet unbelief and those who malign and despise us, but with malice for none and kindness to all we hope with God’s help to hold the kingdom of Christ before the people so that the honest in heart may see it’s light and benefit, and be delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the true church of Jesus Christ.

And with this view in mind we invite you to make the following investigation.

The Author.

LATTER DAY SAINTS.

____

TRUE AND FALSE

_____

"Mormonism" Fully Explained. Brigham Young and the Heresies of the Salt Land

Carefully Explained.

______

"Truth crushed to the earth shall rise again,
The eternal years of God are hers,
But error wounded, writhes in pain,
And dies among his worshipers."

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints," as the same has been reorganized in these last days by the command of God. I expect you to have heard a great deal about this church. Why? Because it is everywhere spoken against. In Act. 28:22 we see that Paul talking with the chief of the Jews, they say: "as with concerning this sect we know that everywhere it is spoken against." certainly it was. Christ was hated. John 15:25, says : He was "hated without a cause." and, judging from the doctrine He taught they surely did not have a cause . The hatred against Christ was so strong, that even the Christian name was despised. Tertullian says : " What are we to think of it, that most people so blindly knock their heads against the hatred of the Christian name, that when they hear favorable testimony to any one, they mingle with it abuse of the name be bears? ‘A good man,’ says one, ‘ is Caius Seius, only that he is a Christian.’ So another, ‘I am astonished that a wise man like Lucuis should have become a Christian’ " Apology, chap. iii., vol. iii., Anti- Nicene gathers. and so it is in our own day. Let a person become a Latter Day Saint, and there is plenty who are willing to howl: "delusion!" " Mormonism!" "Joe smith, " etc. Grinning, slurring and ridicule, is not argument.

I suppose there is not a religious people in the world to-day but what have been slandered, mocked at, and hundreds of the reformers have been killed because of their religion. Take the enemies of religion and with their evidence alone it is no trouble to prove that there is no truth in it. but, what we want is fair dealing. and Now take 1. P. 2:1 for advice: "Wherefore laying aside All malice , and all guile, and hypocrisies, and ENVIES, and ALL EVIL speakings." Of course if you yourself have laid these things aside, will you tolerate the same in some one else as they try to persuade you? Now my dear reader I am going to prove to you that the church I have mentioned, speaks " according to the law and the testimony." but as I do, I shall be brief, and not take the space to bring up all the argument in favor of the restoration of the gospel by an angel. My main aim now is to show you that we speak according to the Bible. Isa. 8:20, says: "To the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Also, John, 3:34 " For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God."

So now, if our church is in harmony with the "Law" and the " testimony" its law, and teachings will be the same as that of 1800 years ago. And, as a church, it bears its testimony to the gospel of Jesus Christ, it will testify to the same fulness of doctrine, together with the gifts , blessings, etc., as received in the days of Christ and his Apostles.

We believe that there has been a dark day of apostasy since the day of Christ, and hence, the need of whatever was lost, being restored. And while some religious thinkers may not believe there has been an apostasy, it still remains for the investigator to try every church by the written word in the scriptures. 2 John 2:9 , says: "If we do not abide in the doctrine of Christ we can not have God." Paul ( 1 Tim., 1:3). " Charges some, that they teach no other doctrine." And Rom., 17:16. " Avoid them that cause a division of the doctrine," etc. And Gal. 1:8. "To preach any other gospel would cause us to be accursed, even through it was an angel from heaven." So you can plainly see it does not matter what college might have furnished us a diploma, or what organization gave us a right to preach, it does not make us right unless we are doing our work with the proper connection with the powers of God. Act, 10:34, says: "God is no respecter of persons." We can all have salvation, but, just as certain as God requires, "without respect of persons ," that all obey, he is likewise no respecter when it comes to preachers and churches and the great reason for so many different doctrines, different church orders, and teachers of different doctrines, is: they are all wrong but the one church, doctrine, organization, teaching and practice, no matter who they may pretend to be nor how good they may in appearance seem to be. Act. 23:1, Paul " had lived in all good conscience before God, " and yet was wrong, Jude 3, we are told, "contend for the faith that was once delivered to the saints." If what we believe is in any way different from what the Apostles believed, we are simply, wrong . Let us see in a brief way: "God set in the ( early) church (1 Cor. 12:28) first, Apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers; after that miracles, then gifts of healing, etc. Eph. 4:11 , "and he gave some apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some pastors and teachers (v. 13, to stay) till we all come to the unity of the faith, "for the reason, notice: "that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and from, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive. " Now if this is all true, we, in order to be the true church of the of the Lord God and Christ must have the same marks of identification. The ancients believed that all these things were "now" right in their own time. So for us to be the same church , we too, and right now must not only believe that the apostles believed so and so, but we must believe, in fact, that our church, or faith, is just the same. For instance, the church of Christ had live apostles; live prophets; and genuine faith wrought miracles; prophesy, healings, etc. Now, after the great apostasy when the Restoration takes place , and also for it to take place we can rightfully expect prophets, in the latter days. Isa 42:9 " Behold the former things are come to pass and new things do I declare( but notice)before they spring forth I tell you of them." So to a benighted world without the church and gospel, a prophet is needed if God is going to restore the gospel. He says, again, Amos 3:7 "the Lord will do nothing except he revealeth his secret unto His servants, the prophets." And Christ in Math 5:17 says: "think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. "But rather, he warned us to look out for "false prophets who come to us in sheeps clothing." But not once does he warn us to beware of true prophets. At the first organization of this Church Joseph Smith was chosen of God as a first Elder, and to be a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator. And as he makes the claim it is perfectly scriptural for him to make it. We will not here take the time, because of limited space, to bring further proof on the Restoration of the church. But, suffice it to say, the church was organized in this dispensation, at Fayette, Seneca Co. N.Y. April 6th 1830. Joseph, the Seer, was martyred June 27th 1844, in Carthage jail, Carthage, Illinois, falsely accused, and basely killed by a howling mob painted black and headed by three preachers. While Joseph Smith was arrested a number of times, he was never found guilty, and no court record to-day in the world can show his guilt. He was hated without a cause, and like God’s Prophets before him, has been vilely slandered, and murdered against the law. But while lies may be told about the church I represent, and Joseph Smith, it is yet an evidence brought against the prophets 1800 years ago.

See Matt 5:11,12. Blessed are yea, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for my sake. Rejoice and be exceeding glad; for great is your reward in heaven, for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you."

After the death of Joseph Smith in 1844, confusion arose. Pride, vain ambition, and, like in the days of Paul, Act. 20:29,30. "Men of their own selves arise trying to draw away disciples after them." And there was several of that kind.

And while the doctrine of the church was not corrupt, the saints, many of them, not being well posted, and worse still, more or less in transgression soon became easy victims for deceivers, among whom, the lowest most vile and wicked, was Brigham Young.

It is through the wicked practices of Brigham Young, J.C. Bennett and other apostates that the doctrine of polygamy was introduced, and it was not the teachings of Joseph Smith. I am truly aware that as a church we are accused of polygamy and many other abominable doctrines, these things we firmly deny, and defy the world to substantially prove them against us .As to what Brigham Young done that was wrong, we are not responsible for, any more than was Paul to blame because Judas betrayed Christ. The prophets unerringly foretold the wickedness of Judas. And so they did the work of Mr. Young. See Jer. 17: 5,6. "Thus saith the Lord; cursed is the man who trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm and whose heart departeth from the Lord. For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness, in a salt land and not inhabited." This was surely done by Brigham Young- his heart departed from the Lord, he trusted in man, and made flesh his arm, and inhabited a salt land, etc.

By reading 2 P. 2: 1-3 we see in the future there was to be: "false prophets" among the people and "false teachings" among the saints, and should follow their pernicious ways; and thereby cause the way of the truth to be evil spoken of. Would that change the "truth" for some false teachers to draw away disciples in pernicious ways? You answer no. As to what Mr. Young done in Utah has nothing to do with the true church, he was an apostate; rebaptized all of his followers, introduced damnable heresies, poligamy, murder and hellish crimes, and caused the way of truth to be evil spoken of. We will now examine some of his teachings while he posed as a prophet-but in reality he was not a true prophet but a "false prophet in sheep's clothing. "There has been , it is true, a great number of books written against the "Mormons" and in most of them no distinction whatever has been made, but any person believing that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God, or in the diving authorship of the Book of Mormon, has been classed as a Mormon. And as such, a believer in poligamy and other abominations.

The true "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" does not call its members "Mormons" this is a name assigned them by their enemies, and if perchance the word Mormon is used in reference to the true Latter Day Saints, by they themselves, it does not imply that they are in sympathy with, or partakers of, the evil deeds, beliefs and practices of Brigham Young and followers. The Church in Utah was not in existence in the days of Joseph Smith, but Brigham Young organized it after his apostasy, and after Joseph Smith’s martyrdom in 1844. And the true church as established by the Prophet Smith, and the members of it are no more responsible for the enebriate-like teachings and practices of Brigham Young and followers than is the good noble, kind, lovable and virtuous woman to blame because of the depraved, debauched condition of many of her fair sister-kind. And now, by taking a glance at the difference between the teachings of Young and the Prophet Smith you can easily see that Mr. Young was indeed an apostate. The evidence we give you is strictly reliable, and it is the only fair and intelligent way to examine a case, that is: hear both sides of the evidence.

Joseph Smith taught that the ministry should be endowed with ‘faith’, ‘virtue’, ‘knowledge’, ‘temperance’, ‘patience’, ‘godliness’, ‘brotherly kindness and charity.’

Also as found in one of the early church papers, Times and Seasons.vol.1.page 132."No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood only by persuasion, by long suffering, by gentlemess, by meekness, and by love unfeigned; *** without hypocrasy, and without guile." And they are required to pay their debts and to this day a minister who refuses to pay his debts is subject to lose his credentials, see, Doc. & Cov.101:13 "And again verily I say unto you, concerning your debts, behold it is my will that you shall pay all your debts." Now listen to Brigham Young in his meekness? "I am controller and master of affairs here, under heavens direction." Journal of Discourses, Vol.1, p. 48. Again; " I will refer again to the brethren and sisters who have lately come over the plains. My counsel to them is, as it has been on former occasions to all who have come into these valeys, go and be baptized for the remission of your sins, repenting of all your wanderings from the path of righteousness, believing firmly in the name of Jesus Christ, that all your sins may be washed away. If any of you inquire what is the necessity for your being baptised, as you have not committed any sins, I answer, it is necessary to fulfill all righteousness."-Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, p. 8. This you see would be instigating a new doctrine and church, and as a matter of course a different priest-hood authority. Now listen to him: "I wish to impress another thing upon your minds: An Elder who is willing to preach the gospel, borrows a hundred or a thousand dollars from you, and you never breathe the first complaint against him, until you come home to this valley; but after you have been here for a few days you follow me around and fill my ears with complaints against this brother, and ask me what he has done with your money: I say, ‘ I do not know,’ thus you are distressed and in misery, all the day long, to get it back again. If an elder has borrowed from you, and you find he is going to apostatize, then you may tighten the screws upon him; but if he is willing to preach the gospel , without purse or scrip, it is none of your business what he does with the money he has borrowed from you. J. of D. Vol. 1, p. 340. Brigham Young’s new church has quite a new way of preaching without purse or scrip. To borrow and not pay back intentionally, is worse and more treacherous than downright stealing.

Joseph Smith taught: "the Holy Ghost shall be thy constant companion to lead into all truth, and compulsory means are not to be used." See Brigham’s teaching. He taught murder: "I say, rather than apostates should flourish here, I will unsheathe my bowie knife, and conquer or die. ( Great commotion in the congregation, and a simultaneous burst of feeling assenting to the declaration.)Now , you nasty apostates, clear out , or judgment will be put to the line, and righteousness to the plummet,’ (voices generally, ‘ Go it! Go it!’ )If you say it is right raise your hands. (all hands up. ) Let us call upon the Lord to assist us in this and every other good work. ** I want you to hear, Bishops, what I am about to tell you, kick these men out of your wards. "J. of D. Vol.1, p. 83,84. Murderers of the blackest deys! as foul and deep dyed in the meshes of sin as hell could make them. And even then, and to this day, brazen like, claim to be the legal successor to Joseph the martyr the true servant of God and Patriot to our nation. And through their false claims and evil teaching and practices have caused millions of people to think Joseph Smith the father of iniquity and the parent of crime. But, fair investigation soon exonerates the innocent and truth.

Let us now see some more of Brigham’s teaching. His new priest-hood had authority to tolerate the smoothest liars in the world, most adroit thieves and gamblers, in fact " every other shade of character you can mention. " We use him or their own works as the witness and as you read you can plainly see the contrast from the teaching of Joseph Smith, Young says:" I have many a time, in this stand, dared the world to produce as mean devils as we can. We can beat them at anything. We have the greatest and smoothest liars in the world, the cunningest and most adroit thieves and any other shade of character you can mention. We can pick out Elders in Israel right here who can beat the world at gambling; who can handle the cards; can cut and shuffle them with the smartest rogue on God’s foot stool. I can produce Elders here who can shave their smartest shavers, and take their money from them . We can beat the world at any game."- Deseret News,Vol.6,p. 291 (their church paper) and also Journal of discourses, Vol. 4.P.77

Next we see why they are so smooth, etc: "We can beat them because we have men here that live in the light of the Lord; that have the holy priest-hood, and hold the keys of the kingdom of God. But you may go through all the sectarian world, and you can not find a man capable of opening the door of the kingdom of God to admit others in. We can do that. We can pray the best.

Preach the best, and sing the best. We are the best looking and finest set of people on the face of the earth; and they can begin any game they please and we are on hand, and can beat them at anything they have a mind to begin. They may make sharp their two-edged swords, and I will turn out the Elders of Isreal with greased feathers, and whip them to death. We are not to be beat. We expect to be a stumbling block to the whole world, and a rock of offense to them. " Deseret News, Vol.6.p.291. Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, p. 77. Again, he taught the murdering of apostates and opposers as we have already shown, and still give further evidence. See Blood Atonement. This means murder by their president’s orders.

President Brigham Young preached, February 8th, 1857, as follows:

"All mankind love themselves; and let these principles be known by an individual and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers and sisters likewise when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus Christ meant. He never told a man or woman to love their enemies in their wickedness. He never intended any such thing.

"I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain in order to atone for their sins. I have seen scores and hundreds of people for whom there would have been a chance in the last resurrection if their lives had been taken and their blood spilled upon the ground as a smiling incense to the Almighty, but who are now angels to the devil, until our elder brother, Jesus Christ, raises them up, conquers death, hell and the grave. I have known a great many men who have left this church, for whom there is no chance whatever for exaltation; but if their blood had been spilt it would have been better for them. The wickedness and ignorance of the nations forbid this principle being in full force, but the time will come when the law of God will be in full force.

"This is loving our neighbor as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood upon the ground in order that he may be saved, spill it. "- Journal of Discourses , Vol. 4, p. 220, or Deseret News, Vol. 6, p. 397.

President J.M. Grant said, September 21st. 1856:

"I say there are men and women here that I would advise to go to the president immediately, and ask him to appoint a committee to attend to their case; and then let a place be selected and let that committee shed their blood." - Deseret News, Vol.6, p. 235

Pres. Heber C. Kimball said, July 19th. 1854:

"It is believed in the world that our females are all common women. Well, in one sense they are common- that is they are like all other women, I suppose, but they are not unclean, for we wipe all unclean ones from our midst; we not only wipe them from our streets, but we wipe them out of existence. and if the world wants to practice uncleanness, and bring their prostitutes here, if they do not repent and forsake such sins, we will wipe the evil out. We will not have them in this valley unless they repent, for so help me God, while I live I will lend my hand to wipe such persons out, and I know this people will. " - Deseret News, August 17th, 1854, and Millennial Star, Vol. 16,pp. 738-9.

Again, Brigham Young said, October 9th, 1852:

"What shall be done with sheep that stink the flock so? We will take them, I was going to say, and cut off their tails two inches behind their ears; however, I will use a milder term, and say, cut off their ears."- Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1.p. 213.

Let us see why Brigham Young could have such power. Because their trust was in "man" and they were making "flesh their arm." And so he gave them to understand that " he was master of affairs there, "and it seems from all appearances that he was more than a master, Listen:

"Who gives me power that at the pointing of my finger, the hosts of Israel move; and at my request, the inhabitants of this great territory are displaced; at my command they are here? Who gives me that power?" - Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1.p. 145.

"The priesthood is a power we should respect, reverence and obey, no matter in whose hands it is."-J.M. Grant, Journal of discourses, Vol. 2,P. 15, February 19th, 1854.

"I will give you the pith of the last orders issued: That man or family who will not do as they are told in the orders, are to be treated as strangers, yea, even as enemies. And if there should be a contest, if we should be called upon to defend our lives, our liberty and our possessions, we would CUT SUCH OFF FIRST, and walk over their bodies to conquer the foe outside."- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, p. 167, July 31st, 1853.

" The time is coming when justice will be laid to the line, and righteousness to the plummet; when we shall take the old broadsword, and ask, ‘ Are you for god?’ and if you are not heartily on the Lord’s side, you will be hewn down."- Brigham Young, Journal of discourses, Vol. 3, p. 266.

"We have been trying long enough with this people, and I go in for letting the sword of the Almighty to be unsheathed, not only in word, but in deed."- J.M. Grant, Deseret News, October 1st, 1856.

Heber C. Kimball, in a sermon in the Tabernacle, October 9th.,1852, says:

"Brother Brigham tells me to do a thing, it is the same as though the Lord told me to do it. This is the course for you and every other saint to take, and by taking this course, I tell you, brethren, you are on the top of the heap."- Journal of Discourses, Vol, 1; p.161.

"If it is the course for me to take, it is the course for every other Elder, *** whether he be an American, an Englishman, Irishman, Frenchman or German, Jew or Gentile; to this you have got to bow, and you have got to bow down like the clay in the hands of the potter that suffers the potter to mold it according to his own pleasure." - H. C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 151, April 2d, 1854.

Mr. Young says polygamy is constitutional:

"You heard Bro. Pratt state this morning, that a revelation would be read this afternoon, which was given previous to Joseph Smith’s death. It contains a doctrine, a small portion of the world is opposed to; but I can deliver a prophecy upon it. Though that doctrine has not been practiced by the Elders, this people have believed in it for years. The original copy of this revelation was burnt up; W. Clayton was the man who wrote it from the mouth of the prophet. In the meantime it was in Bishop Whitney’s possession. He wished the priviledge to copy it, which Bro. Joseph granted. Sr. Enna burnt the original. The reason I mention this is because that the people who did know of the revelation, suppose it is now in existence. The revelation will be read to you. The principle spoken upon by Brother Pratt this morning, (polygamy), we believe in. And I tell you- for I know it- it will sail over and ride triumphatly above all prejudice and priestcraft of the day; it will be fostered and believed in by the more intelligent portions of the world, as one of the best doctrines ever proclaimed to any people. You hearts need to beat; you need not think that a mob is coming here to tread upon the sacred liberty which the constitution of our country guarantees unto us, for it will not be. * * this revelation has been in my possession many years, and who has known it? None but but those who should know it. I keep a patent lock on my desk, and there does not anything leak out that should not. "Millennial Star Supplement, Vol.15,p.31.

BRIGHAM’S WISDOM.

"The idea of becoming a state in two or three years, when we have only got four or five thousand of an emigration! I do not wonder that the Latter Day Saints believe in the plurality of wives. Launch out your means means to help us bring the poor; if you do not, we will raise up the mountain boys ourselves." -Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 72, October 7, 1854.

GREAT KNOWLEDGE.

"As Brother Benson said this morning, even the mosquitos of Nebraska increase and multiply. If they do, why not high orders of the creation have a better right? These mosquitos and insects are the result of a FALLEN WORLD, but bye and bye there will be nothing to hurt or destroy in all God’s holy mountain. " -Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2.p. 79, October 7, 1854. Orson Hyde.

NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

"I prefer to remark upon subjects as they present themselves to my mind; though I might prepare a course of lectures, and confine myself to given subjects, as I have often done; but when I am in this stand I hoist the gates and let the flood run, not caring which way it goes, or how. ***

Come on with your knives, your swords and fagots of fire, and destroy the whole of us; rather than we will forsake our religion. Whether it is true or false is none of your business; whether the doctrine of wives is true or false is none of your business." - Journal of discourses, Vol. 2, p. 187, February 18, 1855. Brigham Young.

Take my yoke upon you says Brigham Young, September 21st, 1856:

"Men will say, ‘My wife, though an excellent woman, has not seen a happy day since I took my second wife.’ No, not a happy day for a year,’ says one; and another has not seen a happy day for five years.*** I am going to give you from this time to the 6th. of October next for reflection, that you may determine whether you wish to stay with your husband or not, and then I am going to set every woman at liberty, and say to them, now go your way. And my views have got to do one of two things.: either round up their shoulders to endure the afflictions of this world and live their religion, or they may leave, for I will not have them about me. I will go into heaven alone rather than have scratching and fighting around me. *** Prepare yourselves for two weeks from tomorrow, and I will tell you now, that if you tarry with your husbands after I set you free, you must bow down to it, and submit yourselves to the celestrial law. You may go where you please after two weeks from tomorrow; but remember, that I will not hear any more of this whining."- Journal of Discourses, Vol.4,pp.55-57.

And now, added to this heinous way, when the men became tired of any one or more of his women he could be divorced by paying Brigham $10. See:

"The teasers who come all the time after women, and soon get tired of them, and want to divorce them, I make pay ten dollars for each divorce, and that is my individual bank." -Journal of Discourses, Vol. 8, P. 202.

We have now shown you some of the corrupt teachings of Brigham Young. It is a plain fact that according to the teachings of Young and his followers, that he was not a prophet of God.

This can be clearly conceded from his own inadvertent remarks. The quotations that I now give you prove that Mr. Young was no stranger to that fact:

"If I have any knowledge touching the condition of this people at the present time, and the way they are taught, led, counceled and dictated to by those who go before them to open up the way, it is directly opposite of that we saw in the days of Joseph, the prophet. " - Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, P.78. Brigham Young, September 11, 1853.

Brigham Young, being interviewed by United States Senator Trumbull, in 1869, said:

"As to our institution, we know we are right, and polygamy which you object to, was not originally a part of our system, but was adopted by us as a necessity, after we came here." Alta California.

"The Mormon church existed for many years without poligamy. Indeed, correctly speaking, poligamy is not now and never has been even a tenet of the Mormon faith."- Deseret News, Dec. 11, 1881 or Dec. 7, 1882.

The Deseret News is their own church paper. Also the Salt Lake Herald, Feb. 9, 1882, speaking of the time they were driven from Nauvoo, Ills., by H. B. Clawson, says:

"Polygamy at that time was unknown among those of the "Mormon " faith.* * the doctrine of polygamy was not promulgated until they got to Salt Lake ; not, in fact, until some little time after they arrived there."

The doctrine of polygamy was put in the Doctrine and Covenants by the Salt Lake Mormon church in 1876. And first publicly announced to the world before that in 1852, eight years after the death of Joseph, the seer, who publicly and privately proclaimed against it as an evil practice and strongly taught that man should have but "one wife, and cleave unto her and none else." ?According to their own admission polygamy was not originally taught by the church nor introduced by Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith, predicted time and again, what Brigham Young would do if he ever got in a position of the proper influence, which was certainly done in the very face of prophecy, and in direct opposition to the books and teachings of the church.

I now give you the predictions of Joseph Smith, concerning Brigham Young, certified to by sworn testimony:

POMONA, CALIFORNIA,
February 14th, 1884

To Whom this May Concern:_ This is to certify that I, S.L. Crain, was personally acquainted with Joseph Smith from about 1840 to 1841, and that I heard him say to and of Brigham Young, whom I also knew, that if he ( Brigham Young) was left to lead the church, the pride of his heart would lead them to hell. This was said at a conference of the church, in Nauvoo, where there was a large assemblage of the people, and probably in the spring of 1843- possibly 1842.

Winess my hand, S.L. Crain.
Done in the presence of Wm. Pickering.
______

San Bernadino, California,
February 4th, 1884.

Joseph Thorn, a resident of San Bernardino, California, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I was personally acquainted with Brigham Young, late president of the Utah Mormon Church, and knew him when both he and I were living in Nauvoo, Illinois; and I heard Joseph Smith, Jr., at a public meeting in a grove east of the Temple in Nauvoo, when he had been reproving said Brigham Young for taking and using for his own private purposes church moneys without authority, says of him, "If Brigham Young ever leads this church he will lead it to hell." This is said with great emphasis.

JOSEPH THORN.

Sworn and subscribed to before me at San Bernardino county, California, this fourth day of February, 1884.

E.H. Morse, Notary Public.
_______

To Whom it May Concern:- Know ye that I, David Dixon, now resident at Riverside, San Bernardino county, California, was personally present at a public meeting in Nauvoo, Illinois, before the building of the Temple; and there and then saw and heard the Prophet Joseph Smith, while preaching, raise his hand (pointing to Brigham Young who was in the stand with him) saying:"Talk about leading this church; here is Bro. Brigham, if he ever leads this church, he will lead it to hell." There were more than a thousand people present at the time; several of whom, I, David Dickson, know are now living and heard him say it.

DAVID DICKSON

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and affixed my official seal, at my office in the county of San Bernardino, California, on this 29th day of December, 1883.

W.W.Smith, Notary Public.
_______

City of Alton, Ill.,March 6th, 1884.

Bro. Joseph Smith:- In the summer of 1843, one day when your father and William Clayton went into the country to transact some church business, after their return Bro. Clayton came to the office [Brother Whitehead was then the Seer’s private secretary. Ed.] about one o’clock p.m. Father Cutler and I were in the office, and he said, " Well, brethren, I have heard something to-day a little strange. Bro. Cutler asked him if he was going to tell us what it was; he said, "Yes, I am; and I hope that you will make a note of it." He said, " After we had finished our business, we started for home, and had traveled but a very short distance when Joseph stopped talking and was very much absorbed in thought. He never spoke till we were going down the Temple hill. He then uttered this language aloud: ‘If Brigham Young ever leads this people he will lead them to the devil.’ He never spoke another word. When we got to my house I got out of the buggy and Joseph drove on.

JAMES WHITEHEAD.

SAN BERNARDINO, CAL. ,Dec. 31st, 1883

Mrs. Huntington says: "While living in Nauvoo, I lived three years in Joseph Smith’s family; was well acquainted with church affairs there; and several times heard the Prophet Joseph Smith say, "If Brigham Young leads this church he will lead it to hell."

Catherine Huntington

_______

SAN BERNARDINO, CAL., Dec. 31st. 1883

I lived in Nauvoo from the first of its settlement, and was well aquainted with Joseph Smith and family. I well remember the day Joseph prophesied, "If ever Brigham Young leads this church he will lead it to hell." I believe Joseph was a true prophet of God.

Hannah Lytle

Personally appeared before me, Charles W. Oden, a Notary Public in and for Harrison county, Iowa, this 8th day of March, 1884, John Conyers and Pricella Conyers his wife, who on oath says:" On or about the year 1843, in Hancock county, Illinois, at a public meeting, Joseph Smith said in reference to Brigham Young leading the church, "If Brigham Young led the church, he would lead it to hell."

His

John X Conyers

Mark

Her

Pricella X Conyers

Mark

F.M.Terry}Witness

W.C. Atwell } Witness

Chas. W. Oden,

Notary Public in and for Harrison county, Iowa.

You can now see that the workings of Mr. Young was foretold, and he was warned to that effect. His vile doctrines were condemned before and after he had put them to practice. He is indeed a rock of offense and a stumbling block. These Brighamite Latter Day Saints claim to be loyal to the faith, as it was taught in the church books before the death of the Prophet Smith. They so announce themselves, Feb. 21st, 1881, in their own church paper, the Deseret News:

"The Bible, the Book of Mormon and the Doc. and Cov. are our written authority on doctrine, discipline and church government.* The doctrine and covenants is our special authority on government. It is to us the word of the Lord. It contains our eclesiastical code."

But instead of following the teaching of these books they have ignored them very largely; left the original faith; in their delirious confusion took a man of their own choosing and told him he was their prophet, and to "go it! go it !" And as they turned away from the rightful heir, he turned them away from Christ, and introduced Adam, as the only God with whom they had to do. Polygamy, blood atonement and other abominations, they verily believed . Aug. 8th, 1844. Brigham Young, while the president of the Twelve Apostles, and before he had diabolically assumed the position of prophet, said:

"You can not fill the office of a Prophet, Seer and Revelator. God must do this. You are like children without a father, and sheep without a shepherd." (This , you see, was only a month or so after the death of Smith. At that time he knew perfectly well that he was not, and was not to be , the ‘father’ or ‘shepherd’ as he termed it.) In the same article he continues:

"You must not appoint any man at your head; if you should, the Twelve must ordain him. You can not appoint a man at your head: but if you do want any other man or men to lead you, take them and we will go our way to build up the kingdom of God in all the world. You can not take any man and put him at the head; you would scatter the saints to the four winds; you would sever the priesthood. So long as we remain as we are, the heavenly head is in constant co-operation with us; and if you go out of that course God will have nothing to do with you. Again, I repeat, no man can stand at our head except God reveal it from the heavens." - History of

Brigham Young , pp. 113-114.

Where the revelation is in which Brigham Young was ever indicated or pointed out as the successor of Joseph Smith, has never been produced. His position was obtained through low devising and mean trickery. And he was not the head of "the church," the church of Christ, but head of "a" church which was his own, as he said "I am master of affairs here." God had nothing to do with it. When a revelation is given to the general church to become an accepted law it comes through the prophet of that church, and not secretly, but publicly, and even that does not make it law but it is to be placed before the Quorum of Twelve, and before the seventy and so on, and accepted by the body before it becomes a law. To become a law it must not discord with any previous law that had been given. Young’s assumption of the presidency was a bold daring scheme. The revelation on polygamy was brought forth eight years after the martyr of the prophet, with no evidence whatever to show that it came through or by the true church. And was not even presented to the legal church for consideration, which was a positive law that it should be. But instead was brought up and presented in an entirely new and distinct organization. Although it’s members had been members of the first organization of 1830 they were then apostates and had been rebaptised. Speaking of that polygamous revelation Aug. 29, 1852, Brigham Young, says: "This revelation has been in my possession for many years, and who has known it? None but those who should know it. I keep a patent lock on my desk, and there does not anything leak out that should not."- Millennial Star supplement Vol. 15, p.31.

This was just the opposite way of doing to that of Joseph, the Seer. Speaking of new revelations, resolutions, laws, etc. in order for the saints to be protected from errors, misrule or deception, he taught as follows:

"These resolutions must needs pass through each quorum separately, beginning at the presidency [ of the quorums], and consequently it must first be thrown into the hands of the President of the Deacons, and his Council , as equal rights and privileges is my motto; and one man is as good as another, if he behaves as well; and that all men should be esteemed alike, without regard to distinctions of an official nature. The resolutions[were] passed through the President of the Deacons and his Council by their unanimous voice. It was then thrown before the Presidents of the several quorums, and their Council, in the following order, and in the same manner as before; viz., the Teachers, Priests, Bishop of Kirtland, Bishop of Zion, Elders, High Priests, Seventy, High Council of Zion, High Council of Kirtland, the Twelve, and lastly, into the hands of the Presidency of the church, and all the quorums ,and received their unanimous sanction."- Millenial Star, Vol. 15, p. 647; also, Messenger and Advocate, p. 267-268.

This safe guide was completely ignored by Mr. Young and followers. And where his claim as prophet, and his bold polygamous revelation, was examined by the true and faithful they were stoutly condemned and refuted, as will be easily seen by the claims of the Reorganization.

It is an easy matter , we think, for all but the willfully blind to see that Young’s assumption, both of the revelation on polygamy, blood atonement and president of the church, was forced upon the people who accepted it. The very argument was forced. Joseph, the Seer of 1830, did not force himself upon the people, but was legally presented in an assembly of the body of those who had been baptized ; chosen by their votes, and ordained according to the diving pattern laid down in the scriptures. Times and Seasons, p. 915.

Before a meeting of Elders and High Priests, Mr. Young speaks as follows:

"A person was mentioned to-day who did not believe that Brigham Young was a Prophet, Seer and revelator. I wish to ask every member of this whole community, if they ever heard him profess to be a Prophet, Seer and Revelator, as Joseph Smith was? He professed to be an apostle of Jesus Christ, called and sent of God to save Israel. If you know what the calling of an apostle is , and if there were ten thousand of them on the earth at the same time, you must know that the words of an apostle who magnifies his calling, are the words of the Almighty all the time. He never need be called in question whether he revealed the mind of the Lord or not. " "Who ordainned me to be First President of this church on earth? I answer, it is the choice of this people, and that is sufficient." - Millennial Star, Vol. 16, p. 442.

"The text is the right of heirship. * * the right of heirship in the priesthood, * * *this heirship, this right, did belong, still belongs, and forever will belong, to the first born son in every family of Adam’s race."- Millennial Star, Vol. 15, p. 493, April 7, 1853.

Mr. Young was not a son of Joseph-hence out of order.

We see by his own careless admission that he is simply the choice of that (Salt Lake ) people without revelation as a warrant from heaven. And again, he taught at one time as his admission shows that the rightful heir was the son of the Seer. This the doctrine and covenants of the church clearly taught. But the church covenants and books were largely laid aside by Brigham Young and his followers, as also their present successors. At Nauvoo, Ills., in the trial of Sydney Rigdon, the books were laid aside. Brigham says:

"I have known that Brother Marks ‘had no evidence but the written word,’ but if this people have no evidence but the written word, it is quite time to go to the river and be baptized

for the remission of their sins. * * Brother Marks says, if there are any ordained to offices equal with Elder Rigdon he don’t know it. He don’t know all the ordinations, nor he won’t till he knows something more than the written word. * * " As to a person knowing more than the written word, let me tell you that there are keys that the written word never spoke of, nor never will." - Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, p. 666.

One of the "Keys" the written word had nothing to do with was the revelation on polygamy. This was one of the secrets kept in stock by Mr. Young. And one of the "Ordinations" independent of the "written word" was his own to that of President of the Church. But the reason they had so many secrets independent of the written word was because they had turned from God, and Christ , and in their stead, worshipped Adam, as the only god with whom they had to do. And of course as they never heard from Adam , they had to do something as a make-shift and so introduced most anything that came handy, or in their apostate minds. The written word and the church recognize Adam simply as a man among men. The Book of Mormon says:

"For behold if Adam had put forth his hand immediately and partook of the tree of life, he would have lived forever, according to the word of god." Alma, 10:19. " and the first man, of all men, have I called Adam which is many."-Doctrine and Covenants, Sec. 22:7.

But right in opposition to this, Brigham taught in the following manner:

"Now hear it, oh inhabitants of the earth, both Jew and gentile, saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the Garden of Eden , he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days ! About whom holy men have written and spoken. He is our Father and our God, and the only God whom we have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later. * * * When the

Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first born of the human family; and when he took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven , after the same manner as the tabernacle of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve; from the fruits of the earth, the first earthly tabernacles were originated by the Father in heaven, and so on in succession. I could tell you much more about this; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstititious and overrighteous of mankind. However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone. "Sermon by Brigham Young, "

Salt Lake City, April 9th, 1852. Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1.pp. 50-51.

The revelation by Mr. Young, on polygamy defends the man (adam) God theory, which includes Brigham and all men who have accepted the everlasting covenant of "many wives and concubines." This polygamous revelation of Brigham Young’s teaches that to reject this "everlasting covenant, "" the doctrine of many wives and concubines, " means in the world to come, "then are ye damned."

Paragraph 2 of this "new covenant’ contradicts paragraph 1, by saying such as refuse to accept the covenant are to "suffer a loss" ( instead of damned) but are to be in their "saved condition" like the angels.

Christ taught that those who were "accounted worthy of that world, " that they were equal unto the angels:" and these were " children of God, being children of the resurrection."

"Brighamites teach, as can be seen in their revelation on polygamy or the "new and everlasting covenant, " that to be obedient to the theory of "many wives and concubines" means an exaltation to that of a god. They teach that unmarried people cannot enter the same glory with polygamous people.

Paragraph 5 says: "Because the angels and the Gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot therefore inherit my glory." Angels are sometimes called God. Here we see the idea of obedience to polygamy and this "new covenant" to make them gods- superior Gods, beyond the jurisdiction of angels, or God. More impudent than the son of the morning, he would "ascend up and be like God."( 2 Thess., 2:3,4). I suppose with their "many wives and concubines, " that their exaltation will allow them to become a law unto themselves, create new worlds, and do as they please.

They really reserve that privilege now when the truth is known. Their own book says, par. 9: "If he or she shall commit any sin or transgression of the new and everlasting covenant, whatever, or all manner of blasphemies: yet they shall come forth in the first resurrection, and enter into their exaltation." " Any sin"or "transgression" "all manner of blasphemies" can be committed by them and it will not interfere with their salvation- " they shall enter into their exaltation."

Paragraph 16 says: "If a man receive a wife in the new and everlasting covenant, [of paragraph 1], and if she be with another man, and I have not appointed unto her[ this privilege] by the holy annointing, she hath committed adultery, and shall be destroyed. " This we see is their definition of adultery. It is all right if Brigham, or their prophet, says so or grants them the privilege, otherwise it is very bad.

Brighamite latter day saints are not only enemies to the true Latter Day Saints, but to all Christendom. Jesus Christ, and God; not excepted.

Peter said these heresies would be "privily" brought in; that is to say, secretly, which was the case, and after wards openly avowed. You remember Brigham said he had keys to secret revelations and ordinations the written word never spoke of nor never would.

Joseph the Seer, condemned all such secrecies. He also warned the church that when any came teaching different from the written word, it would prove they were not servants sent from

God.Joseph, the Seer, taught in 1831: " And again, the elders, priests and teachers of this church shall teach, the principles of my gospel ( that is, Christ’s gospel) which are in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, in which is the fullness of the gospel; and they shall observe the covenants and church articles to do them, and these shall be their teachings. " " thou shalt take the things which thou hast recieved, which have been given unto thee in my scriptures for a law, to be my law, to govern my church; and he that doeth according to these things, shall be saved, and he that doeth them not shall be damned, if he continues." - Doc. & Cov. 42:5,16

The above is so pointed that it leaves no room for "heresies" or changed doctrine to be brought in. And the following clearly shows that there was no earthly room left for Brigham Young to act as President of the church, it reads: " But verily, verily I say unto you, that none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him, for if it be taken from him he shall not have power, except to appoint another in his stead, and this shall be a law unto you, that ye receive not the teachings of any that shall come before you as revelations, or commandments; and this I give unto you, that you may not be deceived, that ye may know they are not of me. For verily I say unto you, that he that is ordained of me, shall come in at the gate and be ordained as I have told you before, to teach those revelations which you have received, and shall receive through him whom I have appointed." - Doc. & Cov., 43:2.

Instead of Brigham Young being appointed by the Lord through Joseph, the Seer, it was foretold as we have shown, the true character of Mr. Young.

The above revelation, we notice, does not give the Seer power to ordain to office, but to simply appoint, or designate as the proper one, etc. But in the same revelation, teaches he must come in at the "gate" and be ordained according to "law." this "gate" and "law" referred to is found in Sec.17:16,17 of Doc. & Cov. and reads: "No person is to be ordained to any office in this church, where there is a regularly organized branch of the same, without the vote of that church. v. 17 says: "Every president of the high priesthood ( or presiding elder), bishop, high counselor and high-priest , is to be ordained by the direction of a high council, or general conference."

So you see if any person tries any other plan we can know they are not of God, but can be counted a thief and a robber. And further: "Doc. & Cov., sec. 42:4, " Again I say unto you that it shall not be given to any one to go forth to preach my gospel, or to build up my church, except he be ordained by some one who hath authority, and it is known to the church that he has authority, and he has been regularly ordained by the heads of the church."

Again,sec. 87:2 revelation to Joseph, the Seer, reads: "Nevertheless, through you shall the oracles be given to another, yea, even unto the church. And all they who receive the oracles of God, let them beware how they hold them, lest they are accounted as a light thing, and are brought under condemnation thereby; and stumble and fall."

Now by reference to church covenants it can be seen that the one to be appointed by the Seer was to be of his own seed, or lineage, see Sec. 84:3; 104:18; 107:18, .In the lineage right as well as the other requirements. Mr. Young is not the legal successor. He was wrong in appointment, both as to lineage and designation. He did not, because he could not, come in at the gate according to law, be ordained by those who were in the "true" Faith, and held the legal right. He was an impostor for assuming rights that he did not have nor legally obtain. He was a bold usurper because he brazenly admitted that he was not chosen of god, but simply, was the choice of the (Salt Lake) people. His successors are the same because they defend him and stand by his fraudulent position. More reasons are: He taught a different doctrine, such as: Adam being the only God with whom we have to do, while the books teach that he was simply a man.

He taught blood atonement and murder. He taught polygamy and robbery, and for ten dollars allowed fornication. He was the father of licentiousness and a vicious tyrant, all of which we have clearly shown from their own evidence. When the matter is fairly investigated it is an

easy thing to see that all these stories about Joseph, the Prophet, being such a bad character are not true. Joseph Smith, the true Prophet and Seer of the Lord, and for the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, has been falsely accused, and the way of truth evily spoken of , just as Peter said would be the case. The truth is just as pure as though it had never been spoken against. And the work of Joseph Smith, as a prophet of God, will bear a scrutinous investigation, and the more he is persecuted, vilely slandered and mocked at, unless there is positive evidence, the more apparent becomes the fact, that he was a prophet of God. There were several who claimed to be the true and legal succesors to Joseph, the Seer. J.J. Strang was also among the number. He claimed great revelatons for his call to act as a prophet and translator. But to no avail. At the present time Strang’s organization is nearly, if not entirely, extinct.

The re-organization is not a new and distinct church from the church organized in 1830 by Joseph the Prophet. But it is distinct from all sects and parties, who sprung up anew after 1844 and erroneously claimed to be the church. The reorganizaton is the original church with new growth. It is the works of men that get frustrated not the works of God. And while the world was supposing the claims of the early church to be a failure, and gone to corruption, and many of the saints supposing that all was lost, the Lord’s hand was over the faithful, to speak peace and freedom. And as the angel delivered Peter from his prison chains, so the saints were unloosed from the shackels that bound them after 1844. And those who did not step out of their shackles and chains of bondage are still in the darkness and their iniquity.

The Salt Lake contingent of believers in the divinity of the restored gospel, and who call themselves "Latter Day Saints, " as we have said, is a distinct and separate church and organization from the one known as the "Reorganization." The Brighamites have their three Presidents, twelve Apostles and other officers with headquarters at Salt Lake City, Utah.

The Reorganized church has it’s offices and organization entirely separate from the Brighamites, with President and two counsellors, Quorum of twelve Apostles, Seventy, Elders, etc. with headquarters at Lamoni, Iowa. The official paper published by the True Latter Day Saints is called " The ‘ Saints’ Herald." And as further proof that, as a church, we are not one and the same, the church through "The Herald," has always taken an active part in showing the difference, and also showing to the world the adulterous and ungodly practices of the Brighamite believers. While in some places they claim to have dispensed with Polygamy, yet it is a positive fact they have not, and have no such intentions. The following is in point as proof.- S.H. Oct. 21,1896

IS POLYGAMY SUPPRESSED IN UTAH?

We have been sharply criticised by the Utah contingent of Mormons for permitting suggestions and statements to appear in the HERALD from time to time to effect that plural or polygamous marriages were still maintained in Utah; thus by inference casting suspicion upon that people that they were not acting in good faith with the government of the United States and the world outside of Utah. We give place to the following taken from the Republic, newspaper, of St. Louis, for September 14, 1896.

Of course we do not vouch for the accuracy of the report of what Mr. Roberts said on the occasion referred to; but, if it is a correct statement it is strongly corroborative of the sentiment that plural marriage is still held to by the church in Utah, and taught by their elders when abroad, notwithstanding this has been denied so frequently by them.

Elder B.H. Roberts, of the Mormon church, preached last night at Chatsworth Hall, Seventeenth and Olive Streets, in justification of plural marriage, as formerly practiced and now maintained in ‘theory’ by the Latter Day Saints. A large audience accorded him close attention. Mr. Roberts is an eloquent, forcible speaker, and makes his remarks entertaining even to those who do not agree with his conclusions. The meeting followed the orthodox religious form

generally adopted by Protestant Christian churches, and there was nothing but the sermon to indicate that the service was that of the Mormon Church.

The preacher took some little time in creating a philosophical foundation for his tenet, but he did it in a way that showed his eloquence and descriptive powers to great advantage. The fact that this earth is but an atom in the universe, and that human beings play an infinitesimally small part in the design of creation, having been vividly brought before the minds of the audience, he began his argument proper. He stated that in 1831, Joseph Smith, then engaged in a revision of the Bible, entered into communication with God for the purpose of promulgating a new and everlasting covenant of marriage. Smith was permitted to prophesy, and the Mormon bible was the result. It regards marriages made upon this earth in that postmortem time. The speaker paid a high tribute to women, and her influence on men for the betterment of the world. Entering into a scriptural defense of polygamy, he said:

" The faith of the saints in the revelation commanding them to practice celestial marriage was strengthened by reading in the Scripture how the Lord blessed and approved the action of those who practiced plural marriage in past ages. They read of the faithful Abraham taking Hagar, to wife; and when trouble arose in the family and Hagar departed from her husband’s household, an angel of the lord met her and commanded her to return( Genesis 19:9), which, if plural marriage were sinful, the angel would not have done, but would rather have encouraged her in her flight from that which was evil. Nowhere do we find the Lord reproving Abraham for taking Hagar to wife; on the contrary, when the Lord appeared unto him some time after the birth of Ishmael, he promised him a son by his wife, Sarah, through whom all the seed of Abrahm was to be blessed. In all this there appears no displeasure toward Abraham for marrying more wives than one.

" The history of Jacob affords still more striking proofs of God’s approval of polygamy. The story of his marrying the two daughters of Laban is too well known to need repeating here. but when Rachel realized her barrenness she gave her handmaid Bilhah, to be her husband’s wife, and she bore Jacob a son, and Rachel said: ‘God hath judged me, and heard my voice, and hath given me a son.’- Genesis 30:6. Then, when Leah saw that she had left off bearing children, she took Zilpah, her maid, and gave her to Jacob to wife; and the sacred writer adds:’ And God hearkened unto Leah, and she conceived and bore unto Jacob a fifth son.’

"If plurality of wives were wrong in the sight of God, would he bless in so remarkable a manner those polygamous wives, and answer them with blessings.- take away the reproach of the barren Rachel and make her fruitful, and give more children to Leah as her ‘hire’ for giving her husband another wife, when he already had three? I think not. If a plurality of wives, I mean as practiced by the prophets, is a sin at all it must be adultery. Yet we find adultery condemned and Abraham, Jacob, and the prophets exalted.

"David, the king of Israel, a man whose heart we are informed, was perfect before the Lord, had a plurality of wives. Yet notwithstanding David practiced a principle which the Christians of to-day denounce as evil, we are taught by the Scripture that David did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from anything he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah’s wife, he must have done what was right when he took Abigail and Ahinoam to be his wives; hence a plurality of wives as David practiced it must be right in the sight of God.

"David’s sin with Uriah’s wife also throws some light on the subject in hand. The circumstance is well known- David committed adultery with Bathsheba and then had her husband placed in the front of the battle where he was murdered. For this crime the lord reproved David, but gave him Saul’s widows. If polygamy were sinful, was it not wrong for the Lord to give unto David the widows of Saul, when he already had several wives? If for a man to have a plurality of wives be sinful, then in this instance at least the Lord was a party to the wrong. And the Christians of to-day, who in the face of the truth just pointed out still insist on the sinfulness of polygamy, virtually accuse God of Being a party to the evil.

"We learn from the description given of the New Jerusalem that there will be twelve gates in the wall surrounding the city, and on these gates will be written the names of twelve sons of Jacob, born of his four wives. We have already quoted the words of Jesus, showing that polygamous Abraham, Jacob, and the prophets will be in the kingdom of God, and will doubtless have their abode in this New Jeresalem, so that it appears that if our modern friends, who so bitterly oppose the practice of saints in having a plurality of wives, ever go to heaven, gain an admittance to the heavenly city, it will be by passing through a gate upon which is written the name of a polygamous child, only to be ushered into the presence of such notorious polygamous as Abraham and Jacob. It appears that modern Christians must either learn to tolerate polygamy or give up the glorious hope of resting in Abraham’s bosom- a hope which has ever given a silvery lining to the clouds which hang about the deathbed of the dying Christian.

"The following is a summary of reasons we have for believing that God approves polygamy:

"First. When a polygamous wife deserted the family of which she was a member, the Lord sent an angel to bid her return to that family and promised to make her seed a great nation.

"Second. The Lord heard and answered the prayers of polygamous wives by granting them children.

"Third. The men who practiced plural marriage by no means forfeited the peculiar blessings promised to them before they were polygamists; on the contrary promises were renewed and greater blessings added.

"Fourth. God himself gave unto David a plurality of wives.

"Fifth. God owned and blessed the issue of polygamous marriages, making a marked contrast between them and illegitimate children.

"Sixth. So far as the earthly parentage of Jesus is concerned, he came of polygamous lineage.

"Seventh. The Lord gave unto Israel a number of laws, under which polygamy was not permitted, but in some instances made obligatory."

Elder Roberts reviewed the suppression of polygamy in Utah by law, and said that the Mormons would have suffered any martyrdom for their principles had they not been released by revelation to their President. Polygamy, however, he said, is only incidental to the Mormon theory of marriage. He defended the practice from the assertion that it was but a foil for the gratification of lust. He declared that it was not necessary for a family to gratify lust, and cited social conditions in St. Louis. His eloquent peroration terminated with the declaration that the "Mormon marriage covenant is a system that rises to meet the grandeur of God’s universe."

After the sermon was concluded a man in the audience rose and attempted to engage the elder in a colloquial controversy, but the saint declined to answer any questions except in private. His questioner stated that he wanted to straighten out an apparent contradiction, but the elder remained obdurate and the man’s curiosity was not satisfied.

Whether Elder B.H.. Roberts has more ability and is more eloquent than other defenders of the Utah philosophy, or if he has been started on a new crusade by the leaders of the church, in behalf of plural marriage, because of the fact of statehood for Utah, we can only conjecture; but it is very peculiarly striking that in the effort at Chatsworth Hall, St. Louis, he persues the very course which the Lord commanded Jacob to tell the people of his time was not pleasing to him:

"For behold, thus saith the Lord, this people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures; for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son. Behold, David and Solmon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord."- book of Jacob,2:6.

We have not space to review this effort at any length, but it is surely just to conclude that what the people whom the Lord revuked through the Prophet Jacob were doing by citing the example of David and Solomon, Mr. Roberts did at St. Louis; and if he fairly represents the people for whom he is preaching, then, if the course taken by that people rebuked by Jacob was condemnable, so is the one adopted by Mr. Roberts and his people.

The following from "Zions Ensign" published at Independence, Mo, Nov. 18, 1897 shows who Mr. Roberts is, and that he not only believes, but practices polygamy:

NOT A DEAD ISSUE YET.

That the Utah Eldership are insincere in their profession of the abandonment of polygamy, and in the statement, that it is not now practiced in that church, is beyond dispute. Visitors to the territory in which the Utah Church flourishes, who get into close contact with resident members there, say that they simply laugh when asked in regard to the matter and admit that there is really no change from the old order of things.

At the little town of Centreville, between Ogden and Salt Lake City, Utah, lives Elder B.H. Roberts, one of the quorum of Twelve in the Utah organization, and in the early part of August of the present year there were born to him from what is known as his second wife, twins, evidencing that Elder Roberts not only believes the doctrine of Polygamy to be right as advocated in a public sermon in the city of St. Louis, Missouri, at Chatsworth Hall, October 13, 1896, as noted in the ENSIGN of October 17th, but he actually puts it into practice, notwithstanding the assertions of the elders of that organization that they observe the law forbidding the practice of that condition. Elder Roberts thus proves that polygamy is not only not a dead issue, but as a speaker said recently, it is with the elder very much a live issue, and there are two of them.

We have the information of this occurrence through a resident of Centreville. There is no evidence that any new contracts for polygamous unions are now entered into, but the old relations of those who formerly contracted them, are still continued, which shows their estimate of President Woodruff’s manifesto on the subject, abrogating that relation; and what kind of obedience is given to the law of the land by that people.

You have now read the views of Brighamite Latter Day Saints on the polygamous question and concubinage. By reading Ester 2:14, it can be seen that these concubines are simply prostitute women- bad characters. And the doctrine of polygamy is the companion to concubinage. And the practice of one is just as legal as the other with Brighamites. In Gal. 4:22, 23, 24 we see the seed of the bond woman was not righteous in the sight of God, but was after "the flesh" and its conception the command of Abraham’s wife - not God. And such unfaithfulness "gendreth to bondage." In a tract published by elder, David H. Smith, entitled, "the Bible versus Polygamy" is an argument that I now call your attention to. This tract is published by the Reorganized church, and as they have accepted and published this you get their exact position on the polygamous and concubinage question.

ABRAHAM’S CASE

Before advancing any further in our examination of the scripture, we will see some of the requirements necessary for the entering into and living up to this doctrine; requirements, by the way, pointed out and claimed as requisite by those who advocate this principle in the Valley.1st, This state of holy plural wedlock must be entered into by the direct "revelation and commandment, through the mediation of mine anointed" prophet, seer, and revelator, holding this power: 2nd, "And there is never but one on earth at a time holding this power. "These conditions we call from the revelation claimed by this people to be their authority for entering into the practice of these doctrines in the latter days, found in the Seer, a periodical published by the church of the Valley, January 1853.

Now understanding the conditions of this power and covenant, or doctrine let us examine the example of Abraham or Abram.

Abram having a wife called Sarai obtained promise of God that he should have a son in whom his seed should be called and blessed of God. Sarai was barren and unbelieving, and even laughed at the promise, and was guilty of untruth in regard to laughing when reproved for so doing. Sarai took it into her head to bring about the plan of God; so she took her handmaid and gave her to Abram. Afterward, when despised by this handmaid, she proposed dealing hardly with her, and did finally succeed in driving her away. When the lord says anything about the matter He commands Abram to put the bondswoman away with her son, and this is the only command the Lord gave in regard to it.

Sarai meanwhile had borne the promised son on whom the blessing rested. This is our statement. That of the polygamist is as follows. Abram had two wives, one Sarai, and the other Hager, and God blessed him in his plural marriage and approbated it. According to the polygamic revelation he must have gone into this plural marriage by revelation and commandment and been sealed to all eternity. And if we wish to go to Abram’s bosom, and sit down with him in the kingdom, we must do the works of Abram.

Let us examine the scripture in regard to the matter. We quote:

"Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, bare him no children. And she had a handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hager.And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold, now, the Lord hath restrained me from bearing; I pray thee go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened unto the VOICE OF SARAI.- Gen.xvi. 1,2.

Where was the revelation through a prophet of God, the only one having this power? Where is the approbation of God in this thing? We find in the chapter xxi., an account of Isaac’s birth, and of events that followed.

"And the child grew and was weaned. And the day that Isaac was weaned, Abraham made a great feast, and Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which Hagar had borne unto Abraham, mocking; and she was troubled. Wherefore she said unto Abraham. Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, Isaac."- Gen.xxi. 7,8.

Now let us hear how God looked upon this transaction.

"And God said unto Abraham, let it not be grievous in thy sight, because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman, in all that Sarah has said unto thee hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called." - Genesis xxi.10.

What was Sarah’s voice? "Cast out this bondwoman, " and God commands him to do so. Comment is needless.

In Galatians we read that Ishmael was born after the flesh, but Isaac by the will of the spirit. Also some statements in regard to the evil works of the flesh.

"Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman."_Galatians , iv.30.

RECAPITULATION.

In the first place, Hagar was given unto Abram by Sarai; not by the Lord.

2ndly, There is no account of any revelation or command from God, by which Abram was actuated, neither any prophet holding power to seal to all eternity.

3rdly, The fact that an angel spoke to Hagar after she was cast out, argues nothing in favor of God’s approbating her relationship to Abram, or it would argue too much, for God himself spoke to Cain, after he had become a murderer.

4thly, God himself commanded Abraham to hearken to the voice of Sarah, which said, "Cast out this bondwoman." Also, Isaac received the blessing, although Ishmael was the first-born.

From these statements we conclude, that God did not sanction Abram’s relationship with Hagar. This case is therefore no argument in favor of polygamy; but rather against it.

ISAAC

The promised seed in whom the blessing came. The Bible reader will wonder why we mention him, seeing that he had but one wife; but for all that, polygamists are fond of quoting him, ringing him in as graciously and boldly as if he had had a dozen. He had but one, however, the fair and favored Rebekah, who came to him from the homes of his kindred people, to comfort his heart for the loss of a mother. It will be remembered that Abraham was instructed to teach his household the commandments of God, so that if this were one of them, no doubt Isaac would have entered into it; but like many of the rising generation of Utah, he had seen enough of the evil in his father’s time. He had one son, however, who went into this practice; Esau, the hairy man, who sold his birthright, and who, the New Testament informs us, was a profane person.

"And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite; which were a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah." - Gen. xxvi, 34,35.

JACOB’S CASE

The argument used by polygamists in this case is as follows: Jacob had four wives, and the approval of God rested upon this fact. He was blessed in so having them. God approved of it as is shown by the blessing of Joseph the son of the second wife, Rachel by name. Leah was the first wife, Rachel the second, and her son Joseph being sold into Egypt, was the savior of his family, and became a blessing to them. Through him the Lord raised up a righteous branch for the redemption of all Israel. Jacob also had two wives beside, making four in all. Now behold the son of a polygamist by his second wife, preserved of God, blessed and called of Him. Does not this show that God approved and sanctioned this holy principle?

It might have a bearing that way, if this were the fair and true statement of the case. We will examine the history on this matter. Jacob came to the house of Laban and saw there the fair, clear-eyed Rachel, and so great was the love he bore her that he covenanted to serve seven years for her; and they seemed but a short time. Laban covenanted to give her to him at the end of his term of service. At its close, whose right was valid to the fair Rachel? Evidently that of Jacob, for we hear him speaking of her in the following language:

"And Jacob said unto Laban, Give unto me My WIFE, that I may go and take her , for my days of serving are fulfilled."- Genesis, xxix, 21.

Reader, was she not his, and the first wife also, for there is no account preceding this of his having a wife. Sanctioned by love, made holy by covenant, it was a right and proper union, and no wonder that God blessed Rachel and called her son Joseph to receive His blessing and approval. This verse is not all, the next one closes the covenant, and put the fact that Rachel was the first wife beyond all doubt, and LABAN GAVE HER TO JACOB, and gathered together all the men and made a feast. Nothing but the most designing and shallow sophistry could have the face to endeavor to evade this.

It was not until after this giving, receiving, and feasting, at the marriage of Jacob to Rachel, that Leah is mentioned as an actor in the scene. Then in the hour of darkness, with an unpardonable lack of modesty and feminine pride or rectitude, she suffered herself to be imposed upon the upright, confiding Jacob, by being smuggled into his bed in the stead of his lawful wife, - a contraband article in every sense of the word, - by a treacherous and idolatrous father. And this is the revelation from God commanding Jacob to enter into this holy order (!) This the holy prophet clothed with authority from God to sanctify this plural marriage;- an idolator and an observer of laws extant in a heathen nation!! Shame upon such doings !Shame upon the principle that needs such examples to bolster it upon it’s tottering foundation. Alas! alas! that the saints of God should so lose their inherent sense of right, as to suffer themselves to be so led and blinded that they cannot discern the baseness of this designing sophistry.

" And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to jacob, and she went in and slept with him."

Afterward, Jacob obtained possession of his lawful wife; and the only excuse Laban could find to cover his treachery with was, that "It must not be so done in our country, to give the younger before the first-born."

However, as he had already given her first, this last act but convicts him of haste to get rid of both.

As for the other two women, they were given him by Rachel and Leah in jealous controversy, each striving to out- do the other in bringing children to Jacob, hoping thereby to gain his favor.

Twelve patriarchs or fathers of tribes were borne to Jacob by these women, Rachel, Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah. Because they were the mothers of these twelve sons, from whom sprang the twelve tribes of Israel, and because their names, Joseph, Benjamin, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulon, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, are said by John the Revelator to be upon the twelve gates of the New Jerusalem, the advocates of polygamy say that plural marriage must be a true and faithful doctrine, and that if we are opposed to it, we shall never inherit a portion in that celestial city. We confess our inability to perceive the correctness of this reasoning. The fact that they were the fathers of these twelve tribes, does not prove that Reuben did right when he transgressed with his father’s conconcubine. The truth of the matter is that God promised; nay, swore even by Himself that he would make Abraham’s seed as numerous as the sands of the seashore. So, whether he or his posterity did right or not, they would have been the fathers of an innumerable posterity. God promised this unconditionally, and it would have transpired whether by one wife or a dozen; whether they were sinful or perfect. God would fulfill his word.

On going to the records we discover that the fact of their names being placed upon the twelve gates of the new Jerusalem, happens in this wise. These names were those of the twelve tribes of Israel, and not merely of these twelve men as individuals.

As for entering into this holy city, and going to Abraham’s bosom, etc., we are informed by our Savior, that many shall come from the east, and from the west, and shall sit down with him in the kingdom. We are not to suppose that the "many" have all passed a life without sin; nor that any one, however sinful, may not by repentance and faithful works enter into this exaltation. Nor would their having been forgiven and redeemed from sin, nor their having been received into happiness, be any argument that those sins were justified, nor that they were ever after to become examples worthy of our imitation.

According to Bible history, God has ever conferred His most choice blessing upon the son of the legal, first wife, the only wife we may say, for the Bible itself styles Bilhah a concubine. Are we to say tht an illegal child can never receive a blessing from God? By no means. A child is not responsible for its parentage. If such a person turn to God and does His works, obeying the gospel of Christ, who shall say that God will not bestow upon him all the blessings poor humanity is heir to at best; so that forty sons of ancient polygamists might have received blessings from God, without compromising God as justifying the sin of their parents. Does not God send the rain upon the unjust? Yet who shall say that this justifies them in their injustice. Are not the homes of the wicked oft filled with children? Are not their houses grand, their equipage splendid, their feet in high places, their coffers filled with the earnings of the poor? Yet for all this God shall bring them to judgment , and these things are the arguments with which Satan seeks to allure the shallow-minded to their destruction. Behold, they say, the wicked prosper, let us do likewise;- it is policy , and we shall flourish; - but they know not the end.

Joseph, the son of Jacob, recognized of God, who was sold into Egypt, was an example of chastity and uprightness. We have an account of only one wife for him. He was the promised, blessed son. This ends our examination of biblical examples of marriage as found in Genesis.

KINGS.

The law for kings was,

"Neither shall he multiply wives unto himself, that his heart turn not away; neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold."- Deut. xvii.17.

Gold and silver he may multiply unto himself, but not greatly multiply; but wives he is not to multiply at all. Reader, twice one are two, and this is multiplication. Here is a positively expressed law and commandment, signifying God’s pleasure in regard to the marriage of the Priest and the King, and it denies to them the practice of polygamy.

If polygamy be salvation and exaltation, as is claimed by Utonians, would God withhold it from the Priest and King of Israel, and permit it to the common people? Not at all. It is evident that the law from the beginning was:

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother and cleave unto his WIFE, and they shall be one flesh."- Gen.ii,30

Royal Bible! men, priests and kings disobey thy commands and misrepresent thee, but thou are holy still; and verily thou shalt judge them in the last day!

KING DAVID.

We have seen the law governing the Kings of Israel. Nevertheless David, the famous King of Israel, as well as others of the Kings of Israel, disobeyed this law. And to show the lightness with which they regarded the law of God, we read that Saul took one of David’s wives and gave her to another . Sec.1 Samuel, xxv. 44. Now because they did these things, have we any reason to say that God loved such doings? Certainly not. On the contrary, we learn that in the case of David that he incurred the displeasure of god, for he was not allowed to build the temple of God; and in the New Testament we are told, that " David is not ascended into the heavens." Acts,ii.34, Wheras the promise is that they who please God shall rest in Paradise, which Paul says is "up." David, no doubt, while humble and just, was a man after God’s own heart; but his subsequent acts, like those of Gideon, were anything but right.

We now quote a text that is a strong fort with the advocates of polygamy.

"And Nathan said to David, thou art the man. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee King over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; and I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom." -2 Sam.xii. 7,8.

There, exclaims the polygamist, does not God say that He gave them to David? Then certainly it was right. Not so fast. God gives the lives of the innocent into the hands of the wicked, that is, He permits the wicked to slay the innocent,( for He could prevent it if he would), and when men desire evil he frequently allows them to accomplish it; but does He justify it?

To illustrate this style of giving, and to show that it was for evil and not for good, for cursing and not for blessing, we quote the 11th.verse of the same chapter.

"Thus saith the Lord, behold I will raise up EVIL against THEE out of thine own house, and I will take THY WIVES before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbor, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun."

Now, if it were for evil that God gave David’s many wives to another, was it not for evil that another’s wives had been given to him? Yes, of a surety.

Why did God permit this? Because these men were voluptuous and sensual, willingly evil, and would have it so. God will as surely judge them for it as He will the thief and murderer. I grant that to slay Uriah and to take his wife, was more cruelly wicked than it would have been to take her among many, had she been a virgin; but this latter would still have been abominable, being against the law declaring that kings shall not multiply wives. As it was it was murder and polygamy combined.

Hear the voice of penitence, 13th verse:

"And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the Lord."

Hear that of judgment:

" And Nathan said unto David, the Lord also hath not put away thy sins that thou shalt not die."-( Re-translation).

Were these women sealed to David by prophets for eternity? We have no account of it. They were only the fair ministers of voluptuousness that ever attend upon kings, and ever will, until the King of righteousness shall reign. What became of them? Like Hagar of old they were put away.

"And David came to his house at Jerusalem; and the king took the ten women his concubines; whom he left to keep the house, and put them in ward, and feed them, but went not in unto them. So they were shut up unto the day of their death, living in widowhood." -2 Sam.xx.3.

Now ye sticklers for Abraham’s and King David’s examples, do the works of these men that were worthy of imitation. Put away the bond-woman, the many wives and concubines. David’s experience with his "righteous" seed was anything but pleasant . One died stricken by the hand of God. Another, of great beauty, was very wicked and brought about the confusion prophesied of in the above quotation. Another, though gifted with wisdom, failed to apply it to his own life, for he exceeded his father in polygamy, and allowed the admission of its boon companion, idolatry.

His name was Solomon.

"And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concumbines, and his wives turned away his heart. * * * And Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord, as David his father, and went not fully after the Lord. * * * Wherefore the Lord said unto Solomon, forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenants, and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee." 1 Kings xi. 3-10.

There was another of the Israelitish kings who "desired many wives, " and the following verse states that he did evil in the sight of God. On reading the tenth chapter of Ezra, we learn that Israel had a great time of repentance and putting away of their strange wives at the voice of God. It could not have been alone because of belonging to other nations, for in the law we find they were allowed to marry captives taken in war .

We have referred already to Malachi, who upbraided Israel for sinning against the wife of their youth, and we find a similar passage in Proverbs, v. 18.

"Let thy fountain be blessed; and rejoice with the wife of thy youth."

What sweet and delicate language! How does it bring to the mind thoughts of life-long faithfulness; of a sacred and love sanctified home; of the assimilation and drawing together, through grief and joy, of two hearts, each willing to sacrifice for the other all the world beside, and each requiring no sacrifice from the other save that which they are willing to abide by themselves; of honored children whose birth is crowned with joy and virtue, who are kindred and not strangers; of love, enduring, concentrate, faithful, pure, and blessed of God.

There are other instances of transgessions mentioned, with many examples of faithfulness worthy of record, but this much will suffice, so conclude we our examination of the Old Testament scriptures.

THE NEW TESTIMENT.

It is with surer feelings of mind in regard to our subject that we enter upon this new ground, for the ushering in of the gospel in purity, the fulfillment of the law of carnal commandment brings in more decided lines of right, with deeper, clearer insight into the eternal nature of truth.

The order of marriage as taught by our Divine Savior is plain, unequivocal and clearly expressed.

" Have ye not read that he who made man in the beginning made him male and female. * * * For this cause shall a man leave father, and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh. * * * Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh." Mat. xix. 4-6.

If Salvation, glory and exaltation, depend upon the possession of more than one wife, would not our Savior have made plain the commandment, "Seek ye wives, for therein is found salvation." Nay! but his holy words specify one wife.

We realize that marriage is the natural condition of the fully developed man and woman, and God enjoins it upon all who are suitable for it; but He does not say that we must marry and be saved, or that we shall be damned if we do not. Marriage is not said by our Savior to affect our future condition. Of course we are responsible to God for the use as well as the abuse of this talent; but it is not, like the ordinances and requirements of the gospel, essential to our salvation and exaltation. It is a sacred privilege attending this life, for the perfect development of our own souls, and the continuance of our noble race upon the face of the earth. That these statements are valid and proper we feel assured from our Savior’s language.

" The children of this world marry and are given in marriage, but they who are accounted worthy to obtain the world through the resurrection of the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage. Neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God. " - Luke xx, 34-36.

This explodes that wickedly blasphemous idea, that an angel is something degraded in God’s kingdom, merely barren slaves and servants to wait upon those who by having many wives have got above them. If they are the children of God, and we are only worthy to obtain that world and become equal with them, - those great, strong, pure, splendid beings, clothed in power and light, we shall be unspeakably happy. As for getting above them by marrying, the idea is imbecile and ridiculous.

The doctrine of inequality in the celestial kingdom, one sitting in the great glory with many wives, another with less glory because of few wives, and another with none because of no wife, is pernicious in the extreme. We are repeatedly informed that all are equal in that home of peace. " There is one glory of the sun." - 1 Cor. xv. 41.

Our quotation above says, " equal unto the angels" and " children of god."

"And if children, then heirs : heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. " - Rom.viii. 17.

With those who say Abba Father , the children of God, there is no room for inequality.

"And to know the love of Christ which passeth knoweldge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God." -Eph. iii.19.

If these children of God receive of all the fulness of God, there is no possibility of getting ahead of them. The thing is simply nonsensical. Paul in speaking of the disciples, says, "All things are yours. " " And ye are Christ’s and Christ is God’s."

They that seek a place wherein difference of caste or of glory is to be had, must remain here, or put up with the "glory of the stars," wherein "one star differs from another in glory." - Cor. xv.41. And we doubt, if they seek to allure "through the lusts of the flesh, "their getting even there. Christ prayed that God would make his disciples one in him, as he was one with God, and in the clestial glory they will be so. There are numerous quotations which might be made to overturn this absurd theory of polygamic exaltation; but to use them for this doctrine would be like firing off a cannon to kill a mouse.

But , says the polygamist, they all receive a fullness, but one holds more than another, consequently like a "quart," a "gallon" measure , and a "bucket," each full and therefore equal. Shade of reason ! Do they really think there will be any undervelopment or incapacity in the celestial kingdom! Why, we "shall see as we are seen, "and know as we are known." God will develop every capacity to its fulness, and every power unmeasurably. There will be no more difference in capacity than there will be in glory, for a difference in one ensures a like variation in the other;- all will be raised to a like standard of eternal perfection, or put down, if unworthy to become so, to a kingdom where they belong. The argument is lacking in truth, even as the types are in delicacy and refinement.

Can an unmarried person be saved? Reader, please do not laugh; for although this question would be preposterous in and of itself elsewhere, in Utah it is made of vital import. A woman must be sealed or married, for sealing is by polygamists called plural marriage, or she can not come up in the resurrection of celestial glory.

A man is a servant in the future, if unmarried, without glory or salvation, in fact is "damned.’ A few wholesome quotations are all that is necessary to rebut such a doctrine.

"For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; even unto them will I give in mine house, and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters, I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off."- Isaiah lvi. 4,6.

He that giveth himself in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth himself not in marriage doeth better. "1 Cor. vii.38.

Why this language, if marriage constitutes salvation?

"And I looked, and , lo , a lamb stood on the mount Sion and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads. * * * and they sung as it were a new song. * * * These are they which were not defiled with women: for they are virgins. These are they which follow the lamb whithersoever He goeth. "- Rev. xiv. 1-4.

Surely they would be in some exalted place then.

Oh ! Polygamist ! Our Savior Himself, unmarried, was more charitable than you are toward the virgins, the old maids and bachelors, who so freely receive your condemnatory disparagement, together with the miserable men of one wife.

We do not forbid to marry, but we most decidedly say that the salvation and exaltation of every man or woman, depends upon himself or herself, and with God; that we all stand upon our agency, not depending one upon another for salvation. Moreover , salvation is more likely to be endangered by a disregard and light treatment of the rights of marriage, than by chaste virginity. To such as believed gave he power to become the sons and daughters of God, not alone to such as married; for this they perhaps possessed the power to do before. Paul, also says, that the unmarried are apt to care for God; while the responsibilities of the married with their cares are increased, so being hindered they are less likely, if marriage make any difference, to gain the crown. Eunuchs, children, virgins, being saved marriage is not absolutely necessary, either to salvation or exaltation. What remaineth then to ask is,

Is polygamy admissable judging from the New Testiment scriptures?

Both Matthew and Mark have recorded our Savior’s command, as limiting it to one wife. "A man shall cleave unto his wife." And Paul in 1 Cor. vii. 2, makes it still more imperative.

"Nevertheless, I say, to avoid fornication let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband."

If that is not plain it were vain to endeavor to make it so. Comment is needless. Ephesians 5th chapter is full of exhortation to the husband and wife, as such a thing as polygamy was unknown to them. If a man marry, the woman is his wife, and he is her husband, and another can not have him without having another’s husband, and that is fornication or adultery, according to above command. In reproving the churches through John the Revelator, Christ says,

"So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of Nicolaitans, which thing I hate."- Rev. ii. 15.

The scriptures do not tell us what that doctrine was , but on consulting Buck’s Theological Dictionory, we discover it to be they allowed "a community of wives." His references are taken from Eusebius.

A few words as to its general working , and we shall bid this disagreeable subject adieu. The universal comment given in Utah is, that the first wife is unhappy, and the others are almost invaribly so. While they are the favorite, they may triumph for a season, but when another who bids fair to become the favorite is taken, adieu to happiness.

How fair the contrast makes the one wife’s home, where order reigns, where each is an help meet, and where the husband is not a petty tyrant, putting one aside and taking another in the stead thereof, as his mind inclines.

Many are the first wives that say that it was not until their husbands became totally indifferent to them that they could endure the order at all. Many are the second wives that testify that they were unhappy in it. Many entering it from conscientious motives , most bitterly repent it. It tends to anything but a righteous seed, as exemplified in the families of those practicing it, as many can testify.

It does not tend to prostitution for it is wholesale liberty itself, tending to a lightness in regard to the married state that is fearful, as exemplified by the frequent divorces and marriages in Utah, many marrying and divorcing and remarrying until they scarcely know themselves by name.

While in Salt Lake City, and conversing with an eminent doctor there, who had gathered many facts in regard to this system, he stated that nature strives to correct it, for the male children born in it are in the majority, and degenerate also, extremely liable to precocity in the direction of the social evil. We have been considering this doctrine from the Bible, which favors this statement, as the numerous sons and few daughters of Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, and other ancient polygamists most clearly show.

It is the habit of the Utah elders to cast severe reflections upon the habits of the outside world around them , as if prostitution and infidelity to the marriage covenant were the universal order of the day, hoping thereby to make their rotten order look a trifle clean by blackening everything around them. to be sure the world is impure, and there is a floating populace, in our great cities and upon our thoroughfares, that is fearfully corrupt; but in the minor cities and villages, and especially in the country places, sexual depravity of the kind so much written of here, is as cordially despised and as little known as in Utah. But even if it were not so, would this evil be any excuse for their evil?

Polygamists are addicted to the habit of quoting the half-barbarous nations of Asia and the far east, where women are bought and sold in open market, exposed naked, their teeth examined, and the price paid down for them, as if this was any criterion for christians to go by.

They are fond also of misrepresenting the census, stating that an overplus of women made this order necessary, although frequently shown that it is just the contrary in the United States, and in Utah too.

If any one says a word in regard to the evil tendencies of the practice, they cry out that we are perfectly ignorant of their city and habits, as if it were impossible, being among them however long a time, to discover anything in regard to them. It is universally conceded that their children are much more liable to die than others , and if they live they are remarkable examples of natural depravity.

The marriage state is like a spring once given to a people who were told that so long as they considered sacred, and kept it pure, it would be the source of life and health to them , giving ceaseless and unalloyed joy; but if they should pollute it, and disesteem it, it would be a pestilent source of most loathsome corruption and unhappiness.

In view of our researches in the Old and the New Testaments, we, without hesitation pronounce the Bible clear and free from the charge of teaching polygamy, concluding with a repetition of Paul’s exhortation, "LET EVERY MAN HAVE HIS OWN WIFE, AND LET EVERY WOMAN HAVE HER OWN HUSBAND."

We have given you this lengthy argument, showing how decidedly the Bible, the holy prophets, God and the Christ stand against the practice of polygamy, and also the other heresies of the salt land of Utah. It will be noticed, that this argument against polygamy is the position of belief held by true Latter Day Saints. Nevertheless they are despised by thousands. What are they hated for? We defy the world to show where, as a church, we teach a single heresy. Those who hate the doctrine of this "church" do so "without a cause." Cicero has well said:

"It is the peculiar quality of the fool, to perceive the faults of others, and to forget his own."

The writer has no desire to defend any wickedness of members in this organization. We are not fighting the individuality or personal weakness of Brighamites or any other people. It is a doctrinal principle of belief practiced by a body of organized believers. It is , on the other hand, the principles of the doctrine of Christ that this argument is intended to defend. We invite investigators to look into the perfect law, and not merely into the faults of individuals. We have enemies, so had Christ. With wicked hands they killed him.

With wicked hands they killed Joseph Smith.

"Do not be afraid of making enemies, woe be to him who has none."

The very best men in the world have enemies. Always when men have bravely tried to better the way for good, enemies have been thick on every hand.

There are men, scores of them, who travel now from town to town lecturing against Joseph Smith and any shade of Latter Day Saints. These parties are full of lies, slander and misrepresentations.

We have a right to represent our own "faith" and are the only responsible parties for its true presentment.

We have given you some of the teachings of Joseph Smith, as we have shown you the false claims of Brighamites.

We aim in a fair way to show the difference between truth and error, and prove to you that Latter Day Saints of the true faith and Joseph Smith, as a servant of God, are worthy of consideration.

And as further proof, I cite you to more of the direct teaching of the prophet, and Latter Day Saints.

We hope this will fairly explain "Mormonism" and allay prejudice against the innocent and truth.

We will now turn to the Prophet Smith’s own teaching. Tract 42, p. 6., reads as follows:

"There are many called, but few chosen; and why are they not chosen? Because their hearts are set upon the things of the world, and are aspiring to the honors of men; they do not learn the lesson that the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven; and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled, only upon the principles of righteousness; that they may be conferred upon us it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins to gratify our pride, vain ambition, or to exorcise dominion or compulsion over the souls of the children of men in any degree of unrighteousness; behold the heavens withdraw themselves, the spirit of the lord is grieved, then amen to the priesthood, or the authority of that man. Behold , ere he is aware, he is left to kick against the pricks; to persecute the saints, and to fight against God."

You see, he teaches that the principle of righteousness must be adhered to, no using dominion or compulsion over the saints. He gives here to understand, we can not use a priestly cloak to cover our sins, nor to gratify our pride.

Joseph Smith condemned secret oaths and special covenants in the church. Hear him:

"We further caution our brethren against the impropriety of the organization of bands or companies by covenants, oaths, penalties or secrecies * * * and let our covenant be that of ‘the everlasting covenant,’ as it is contained in holy writ, and the things which God has revealed to us. Pure friendship always becomes weakened the very moment you undertake to make it stronger by penal oaths and secrecy."

So you see, gentle reader, we make a clean start; no " secrecies," "special oaths, " etc. And no chance to cover your sins and vain ambition. This is the reason Brigham Young, and others , had to start up a church of their own, and get some new doctrine. And if you will notice closely there are a great many people who do not like the doctrine we preach because their deeds are evil, and they prefer not a have so much light on them. Whatever doctrines Joseph Smith, laid out in the early church, he claimed were revelations from God, and could not be changed. He taught: (Doc. & Cov., sec. 2:1:

"God doth not walk in crooked paths; neigher doth He turn to the right hand nor to the left; neither doth he vary from that which he hath said; therefore his paths are straight and his course is one eternal round. "

Book of Mormon, Alma, 5:3, we have similar language:

" He cannot walk in crooked paths; neither doth he vary from that which he hath said; neither hath he a shadow of turning from the right or the left, or from that which is right to that which is wrong."

It is positive that whatever was wrong at the beginning is wrong now. Let us notice the marriage question. First, see book of Mormon, Jacob, 2:6

"’Behold David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before my, saith the Lord.’ * * * Wherefore , my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord; for there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife, and concubines he shall have none.’"

This was given at first, and, as a revelation from God, it can not be changed.

Now notice the Doc. & Cov., sec 42:7: "Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shall cleave unto her and none else."

Do you comprehend this language? You are not only to have none else, but you are to LOVE the one you DO have! Why so particular? Because, as Mal., 2:14, says:

"God witnesses the covenant made between man and wife, and does not allow treacherous dealing, and for a man to marry a woman to gratify his baser passion, or , to get a house keeper, and not have the proper love f