![FairMormon Logo](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021_fair_logo_primary.png)
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
m (→Is "sons" generic?) |
m |
||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
:There was some informal talk regarding the question as to whether there are, or would be, any women in hell. It was conceded that some women by their acts—namely, abortion, child murder after birth, and the poisoning of their husbands, and other criminal acts—merited a place in the lower regions. President Smith expressed the view that women who commit such crimes as those mentioned would receive punishment to the uttermost farthing, but that there would be no daughters of perdition. This, he said, was his view in regard to the matter, which also seemed to meet the minds of the brethren.{{ref|jfs.1903}} | :There was some informal talk regarding the question as to whether there are, or would be, any women in hell. It was conceded that some women by their acts—namely, abortion, child murder after birth, and the poisoning of their husbands, and other criminal acts—merited a place in the lower regions. President Smith expressed the view that women who commit such crimes as those mentioned would receive punishment to the uttermost farthing, but that there would be no daughters of perdition. This, he said, was his view in regard to the matter, which also seemed to meet the minds of the brethren.{{ref|jfs.1903}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | To muddy the waters further, President Smith's remarks in 1916 struck a slightly different tone: | ||
+ | |||
+ | :"The devil knows the Father much better than we. Lucifer, the son of the morning, knows Jesus Christ, the Son of God, much better than we, but in him it is not and will not redound to eternal life; for knowing, he yet rebels; knowing he yet is disobedient; he will not receive the truth; he will not abide in the truth; hence he is Perdition, and there is no salvation for him. The same doctrine applies to me and to you and to all the sons and daughters of God who have judgment and knowledge and are able to reason between cause and effect, and determine the right from the wrong and the good from the evil and who are capable of seeing the light and distinguishing it from the darkness."{{ref|jfs.1916.3}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Here President Smith says that "the same doctrine applies" to "all the sons ''and daughters'' of God,"—perhaps his emphasis was on the need for obedience and to forgo rebellion, rather than the risk of perdition. | ||
===Joseph Fielding Smith=== | ===Joseph Fielding Smith=== | ||
Line 59: | Line 65: | ||
It should be noted, however, that the quote seems to only be referring to men to begin with, and President Richards was speaking to a congregation of men, going on to emphasize the necessity of being worthy of the priesthood—he may have therefore spoken exclusively to the men (i.e., the only ''men'' who can reach perdition are priesthood holders) rather than exclusively ''of'' men (i.e., only ''men with the priesthood'' risk perdition). However, the views expressed by Joseph F. Smith and Brigham Young suggest that Joseph Fielding Smith was probably of the same mind on this point, as was President Richards. | It should be noted, however, that the quote seems to only be referring to men to begin with, and President Richards was speaking to a congregation of men, going on to emphasize the necessity of being worthy of the priesthood—he may have therefore spoken exclusively to the men (i.e., the only ''men'' who can reach perdition are priesthood holders) rather than exclusively ''of'' men (i.e., only ''men with the priesthood'' risk perdition). However, the views expressed by Joseph F. Smith and Brigham Young suggest that Joseph Fielding Smith was probably of the same mind on this point, as was President Richards. | ||
− | + | ==Evidence for the idea== | |
− | |||
− | == | ||
In addition, {{s|2|Nephi|2|11}} states clearly that there is opposition in all things. | In addition, {{s|2|Nephi|2|11}} states clearly that there is opposition in all things. | ||
Line 67: | Line 71: | ||
:For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility. | :For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility. | ||
− | For every evil, there is an equal and opposite good and vice versa. It seems logical that if women are capable of exaltation, they are also capable of perdition. | + | For every evil, there is an equal and opposite good and vice versa. It seems logical that if women are capable of exaltation, they are also capable of perdition. Indeed, Joseph Smith's father—in his capacity as Patriarch of the Church—warned against becoming a "daughter of perdition" through apostasy.{{ref|patriarch.1}} |
− | |||
− | Indeed, Joseph Smith's father—in his capacity as Patriarch of the Church—warned against becoming a "daughter of perdition" through apostasy.{{ref|patriarch.1}} | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | :"That there will also be daughters of perdition there is no doubt in the minds of the brethren."{{ref|ww.1}} | + | While Joseph F. Smith was expressing his view that there would be no daughters of perdition, Wilford Woodruff and George Q. Cannon saw things in a different light: "That there will also be daughters of perdition there is no doubt in the minds of the brethren."{{ref|ww.1}} |
− | + | Charles Penrose described those who go to perdition in similar terms as Joseph F. Smith and others, but did not make ''holding'' the priesthood a requirement, but merely having and rejecting all the blessings of the gospel: | |
− | :" | + | :The "sons of perdition" are ''those who have received the Gospel, those to whom the Father has revealed the Son; those who know something concerning the plan of salvation; those who have had keys placed in their hands by which they could unlock the mysteries of eternity; those who received power to ascend to the highest pinnacle of the celestial glory; those who received power sufficient to overcome all things, and who, instead of using it for their own salvation, and in the interest of the salvation of others, prostituted that power and turned away from that which they knew to be true, denying the Son of God and putting Him to an open shame''. All such live in the spirit of error, and they love it and roll it under the tongue as a sweet morsel; they are governed by Satan, becoming servants to him whom they list to obey, they become the sons of perdition, doomed to suffer the wrath of God reserved for the devil and his angels. And for them, having sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no forgiveness either in this world or the world to come. But all the rest Christ will save, through the plan of human redemption prepared in the beginning before the world was {{ea}}.{{ref|penrose.1}} |
− | ;Melvin J. Ballard: | + | ;Melvin J. Ballard was explicit in labeling both "sons and daughters" as "sons of perdition": |
:"[God] has other sons and daughters who do not even attain unto the telestial kingdom. They are sons of perdition out with the devil and his angels, and though the Father has grieved over them, he still has not the power to rescue and save them because He gave them free agency, and they used that in such a manner that they have shut themselves out from His presence. But He is justified. He has performed His full duty by them."{{ref|ballard.1}} | :"[God] has other sons and daughters who do not even attain unto the telestial kingdom. They are sons of perdition out with the devil and his angels, and though the Father has grieved over them, he still has not the power to rescue and save them because He gave them free agency, and they used that in such a manner that they have shut themselves out from His presence. But He is justified. He has performed His full duty by them."{{ref|ballard.1}} | ||
− | ;Rodney Turner: | + | ;Rodney Turner, and LDS scholar, made perdition open to both genders: |
:"Satan is called perdition. (D&C 76:26.) Therefore, all who yield to his enticings and die in their sins are sons (or daughters) of perdition and will have to suffer in hell for a given length of time. (Moses 7:37-39.) The risen Christ compared Nephite apostates to Judas: 'For they are led away captive by him [Satan] even as was the son of perdition; for they will sell me for silver.' (3 Ne. 27:32.) Those Gentiles who deny Christ 'shall become like unto the son of perdition, for whom there was no mercy.' (3 Ne. 29:7.) 'No mercy' means they must bear the full weight of divine justice (the wrath of God or hell) before being saved. They are temporary sons or daughters of perdition as opposed to those who, failing to ever repent, are termed the "filthy still" (D&C 88:35, 102) and are consigned to the fullness of the second death (D&C 29:27-30, 41)."{{ref|turner.1}} | :"Satan is called perdition. (D&C 76:26.) Therefore, all who yield to his enticings and die in their sins are sons (or daughters) of perdition and will have to suffer in hell for a given length of time. (Moses 7:37-39.) The risen Christ compared Nephite apostates to Judas: 'For they are led away captive by him [Satan] even as was the son of perdition; for they will sell me for silver.' (3 Ne. 27:32.) Those Gentiles who deny Christ 'shall become like unto the son of perdition, for whom there was no mercy.' (3 Ne. 29:7.) 'No mercy' means they must bear the full weight of divine justice (the wrath of God or hell) before being saved. They are temporary sons or daughters of perdition as opposed to those who, failing to ever repent, are termed the "filthy still" (D&C 88:35, 102) and are consigned to the fullness of the second death (D&C 29:27-30, 41)."{{ref|turner.1}} | ||
− | |||
:"Between now and the last judgment, billions of men and women will be transferring their memberships from one church to the other! Those who repent, bow the knee, and confess that Jesus is the Christ will be numbered with the church of the Lamb of God (Mosiah 27:31; D&C 76:110-11). | :"Between now and the last judgment, billions of men and women will be transferring their memberships from one church to the other! Those who repent, bow the knee, and confess that Jesus is the Christ will be numbered with the church of the Lamb of God (Mosiah 27:31; D&C 76:110-11). | ||
:Those who absolutely refuse to repent will remain 'filthy still'; they will retain their memberships in the church of the devil. They are sons and daughters of Perdition, suffering the damnation of the second death. (Alma 12:12-18; D&C 88:35.)"{{ref|turner.2}} | :Those who absolutely refuse to repent will remain 'filthy still'; they will retain their memberships in the church of the devil. They are sons and daughters of Perdition, suffering the damnation of the second death. (Alma 12:12-18; D&C 88:35.)"{{ref|turner.2}} | ||
Line 131: | Line 128: | ||
#{{note|jfs.1903}} Joseph F. Smith quoted in Stan Larson (editor), ''A Ministry of Meetings: The Apostolic Diaries of Rudgar Clawson'' (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books in association with Smith Research Associates, 1993), 560 (entry for 26 March 1903). | #{{note|jfs.1903}} Joseph F. Smith quoted in Stan Larson (editor), ''A Ministry of Meetings: The Apostolic Diaries of Rudgar Clawson'' (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books in association with Smith Research Associates, 1993), 560 (entry for 26 March 1903). | ||
#{{note|jfs.1}} {{CD1|author=Joseph F. Smith|vol=4|start=230|date=20 January 1895|article=The Second Death}} | #{{note|jfs.1}} {{CD1|author=Joseph F. Smith|vol=4|start=230|date=20 January 1895|article=The Second Death}} | ||
+ | #{{note|jfs.1916.3}} {{CR1|author=Joseph F. Smith|date=April 1916|start=3}} | ||
#{{note|smith1}}{{CR1|author=Joseph Fielding Smith|date=October 1958|start=21}} | #{{note|smith1}}{{CR1|author=Joseph Fielding Smith|date=October 1958|start=21}} | ||
#{{note|richards.86}} {{CR1|author=Stephen L Richards|date=October 1958|start=86}} | #{{note|richards.86}} {{CR1|author=Stephen L Richards|date=October 1958|start=86}} | ||
− | |||
− | |||
<!--For the idea--> | <!--For the idea--> | ||
#{{note|ww.1}} {{CriticalWork:Quinn:Mormon Hierarchy2|pages=795}} | #{{note|ww.1}} {{CriticalWork:Quinn:Mormon Hierarchy2|pages=795}} | ||
#{{note|patriarch.1}} H. Michael Marquardt, comp., ''Early Patriarchal Blessings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints'' [Salt Lake City: The Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2007), 106. | #{{note|patriarch.1}} H. Michael Marquardt, comp., ''Early Patriarchal Blessings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints'' [Salt Lake City: The Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2007), 106. | ||
− | #{{note| | + | #{{note|penrose.1}} {{JoD24_1|author=Charles W. Penrose|vol=24|start=93|date=4 March 1883|title=The Church of Christ,....}} |
#{{note|ballard.1}} Melvin J. Ballard, ''Sermons and Missionary Services of Melvin J. Ballard'' (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book Co., 1949), 255–257. Also in Melvin J. Ballard, ''Three Degrees of Glory'' (Independence, Mo: Missions of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1922), 32. | #{{note|ballard.1}} Melvin J. Ballard, ''Sermons and Missionary Services of Melvin J. Ballard'' (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book Co., 1949), 255–257. Also in Melvin J. Ballard, ''Three Degrees of Glory'' (Independence, Mo: Missions of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1922), 32. | ||
#{{note|turner.1}} Rodney Turner, "The Farewell of Jesus," in ''Studies in Scripture: Vol. 5, The Gospels'', edited by Kent P. Jackson, (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Co., 1986), endnote #20. ISBN 087579064X | #{{note|turner.1}} Rodney Turner, "The Farewell of Jesus," in ''Studies in Scripture: Vol. 5, The Gospels'', edited by Kent P. Jackson, (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Co., 1986), endnote #20. ISBN 087579064X |
This article is a draft. FairMormon editors are currently editing it. We welcome your suggestions on improving the content.
This page is based on an answer to a question submitted to the FAIR web site, or a frequently asked question.
Are there women who would be among those cast into outer darkness? Are there female 'Sons of Perdition'?
FAIR is not aware of any official Church position on this issue.
The idea that women cannot become "sons of perdition" likely comes from DC 84꞉40-41:
Some interpret this to mean that to become a "son of perdition," one must first hold the priesthood. It does, in fact, state that if one knows the priesthood and denies it, it is unforgivable. However, it does not explicitly say that that is the only way to become a son of perdition.
This uncertainty did not keep Brigham Young for teaching that women were not at risk of perdition:
Brigham saw man as more culpable than woman for the Fall, and thus expressed his view that the revelations no where mentioned a woman in "all the regions of hell," which likely refers to perdition in this context.
The next year, Brigham again relied on his view of women's relative innocence when he said, "Woman must atone for sins committed by the volition of her own choice, but she will never become an angel to the devil, and sin so far as to place herself beyond the reach of mercy." His reasoning drew on the same view of woman's lesser culpability: "She is not accountable for the sins that are in the world. God requires obedience from man, he is lord of creation, and at his hands the sins of the world will be required."[2]
Brigham is a good example of the necessity of taking nothing for granted in reading such quotes. He often discussed the matter of sons of perdition when mentioning both men and women, but his earlier explicit quotes make it clear that we ought not to read anything into this ambiguity:
Brigham would later say that "All the sons and daughters of men will be saved, except the sons of perdition,"[4] and "Jesus will bring forth, by his own redemption, every son and daughter of Adam, except the sons of perdition, who will be cast into hell."[5] Again, we have the mention of men and women being saved, but his reference to "sons of perdition" should apparently not be read in a generic, non-gendered sense.
Brigham elsewhere lumped all traitors to Christ with the sons of perdition:
Brigham's argument seems to implicitly require that no woman can be an apostate in the same sense as a man—this may reflect his experience of most violent apostates being men, and was also doubtless influenced by his view of women as less inherently corrupt and culpable for the world's sin.
In 1895, Joseph F. Smith addressed both men and women in a manner which might suggest that "sons of perdition" was a generic term for males or females:
The plausibility of this reading, however, is undercut by an informal discussion in 1903, Joseph F. Smith's views were expressed:
To muddy the waters further, President Smith's remarks in 1916 struck a slightly different tone:
Here President Smith says that "the same doctrine applies" to "all the sons and daughters of God,"—perhaps his emphasis was on the need for obedience and to forgo rebellion, rather than the risk of perdition.
In 1958, Joseph Fielding Smith suggested to many readers that he shared his father's view that only priesthood holders risked becoming be sons of perdition:
The next day, during Priesthood Session, President Stephen L Richards said:
It should be noted, however, that the quote seems to only be referring to men to begin with, and President Richards was speaking to a congregation of men, going on to emphasize the necessity of being worthy of the priesthood—he may have therefore spoken exclusively to the men (i.e., the only men who can reach perdition are priesthood holders) rather than exclusively of men (i.e., only men with the priesthood risk perdition). However, the views expressed by Joseph F. Smith and Brigham Young suggest that Joseph Fielding Smith was probably of the same mind on this point, as was President Richards.
In addition, 2 Nephi 2꞉11 states clearly that there is opposition in all things.
For every evil, there is an equal and opposite good and vice versa. It seems logical that if women are capable of exaltation, they are also capable of perdition. Indeed, Joseph Smith's father—in his capacity as Patriarch of the Church—warned against becoming a "daughter of perdition" through apostasy.[12]
While Joseph F. Smith was expressing his view that there would be no daughters of perdition, Wilford Woodruff and George Q. Cannon saw things in a different light: "That there will also be daughters of perdition there is no doubt in the minds of the brethren."[13]
Charles Penrose described those who go to perdition in similar terms as Joseph F. Smith and others, but did not make holding the priesthood a requirement, but merely having and rejecting all the blessings of the gospel:
DC 76꞉31-32 lays out the criteria for being a son of perdition:
Therefore, the criteria for becoming a "son of perdition" are:
If we argue that women are not capable of this, which of these two things are we saying that women are not capable of? Obviously they are capable of the first and if they aren't capable of the second, then that completely flies in the face of agency.
It is possible that the idea that women are not capable of perdition is part of a phenomenon of so-called "woman worship" that sometimes goes on at church. The men put themselves down, praising the sisters, saying their wives are more righteous than they are, that there are "more women in heaven," mothers are all angels, and so on. It's a nice sentiment, but it's incorrect and it does not do justice to the female mortal experience. Men who think that women are, as a whole, better simply don't know enough women or perhaps don't know the women they do know well enough. Women are social networkers and are naturally more concerned with the social consequences to their actions (i.e., hurting someone's feelings, betraying someone, being embarrassed, etc). The reality is that women are just as human and flawed as men, and capable of good and evil to the same capacity as men. They are simply different and therefore prone to different behaviors.
It seems, on balance, that one could draw the conclusion that women can become sons of perdition. Perhaps "daughters" is more accurate, but this is purely semantics, and at least one Church leader (Joseph F. Smith) used the expression "sons of perdition" to refer to both women and men.
There is a chance that daughters of perdition are fundamentally different from sons of perdition, but one could suggest that the difference is not in degree of transgression, but rather simply different as it pertains to their genders.
Most Latter-day Saints would regard this as a point of theoretical or hair-splitting interest only—surely no one aspires to be a son/daughter of perdition! This is likely the reason for which we are told so little about the matter. As the Lord told Joseph Smith about those who go to perdition,
J. Reuben Clark |
This is one of many issues about which the Church has no official position. As President J. Reuben Clark taught under assignment from the First Presidency:
|
Harold B. Lee |
Harold B. Lee was emphatic that only one person can speak for the Church:
|
First Presidency |
This was recently reiterated by the First Presidency (who now approves all statements published on the Church's official website):
In response to a letter "received at the office of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" in 1912, Charles W. Penrose of the First Presidency wrote:
|
References |
Notes
|
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now