Criticism of Mormonism/Books/One Nation Under Gods/Chapter 14

< Criticism of Mormonism‎ | Books‎ | One Nation Under Gods

Revision as of 13:58, 6 December 2014 by RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) (→‎323, 589n51-52 (PB))

  1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Response to claims made in "Chapter 14: The Politics of Compromise"


Claims made in "Chapter 13: Unholy Matrimony"
A FAIR Analysis of:
One Nation Under Gods
A work by author: Richard Abanes
 Claims made in "Chapter 15: Making the Transition"
Lying, either to bring about a 'greater good' or to protect the church, has always been an acceptable practice within Mormonism, and continues to be an unspoken tenet of the faith.
—One Nation Under Gods, p. 326.
∗       ∗       ∗

313

Claim
  •  Author's quote: "...prosecuting polygamy would be virtually impossible given Mormon leadership’s willingness to lie under oath."

Author's source(s)
  • Supreme Court Case Miles v. the United States
Response
  • The United States had no difficulty prosecuting polygamy under the Edmunds-Tucker legislation. Many members of the Church admitted their plural marriages, and went to prison as a result.
  • Loaded and prejudicial language

313, 585n10 (PB)

Claim
  • George Q. Cannon said “I have taken plural wives, who now live with me, and have so lived with me for a number of years and borne me children…as a teacher of my religion in Utah territory, I have defended said tenet of said church as being in my belief a revelation of God.”
  •  Author's quote: Such admissions, rather than coming from any sincere desire on Cannon’s part to be forthright, likely resulted from the excessive publicity engendered by the controversy.

Author's source(s)
  • House Misc. Doc. 49 (43-1), 1873, Serial 1617, 5.
Response

315, 585n12 (PB)

Claim
  • Was the First Presidency statement “They who fight against Zion shall be destroyed; and the pit which has been digged shall be filled by those who digged it" contrary to the command in DC 58꞉21 to obey the laws of the land?

Author's source(s)
  • First Presidency (John Taylor, George Q. Cannon, and Joseph F. Smith). Quoted in James R. Clark, Messages of the First Presidency, 5 volumes, cited in Samuel W. Taylor, Rocky Mountain Empire, 13.
Response
  • LDS doctrine endorses the civil law, but does not grant the civil law supremacy over conscience or religious conviction.
  • Illegality and civil disobedience (non-wiki)

315

Claim
  • Why did LDS leaders hide in Europe, Canada and Mexico to avoid prosecution for polygamy?

Author's source(s)
  • No source provided
Response

316, 587n15 (HB) 585n15 (PB)

Claim
  • Did John Taylor receive a revelation on September 27, 1886 that promised that “polygamy would never be abandoned?”

Author's source(s)
  • Fred C. Collier, Unpublished Revelations, vol. 1, 145-146, 180-183.
Response

317, 588n20 (HB) 586n20 (PB)

Claim
  • Did Wilford Woodruff receive a revelation that indicated that polygamy was “absolutely essential to godhood" and promise that anyone who hindered plural marriage would be "damned?"

Author's source(s)
  • Wilford Woodruff, Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, 9 vols., ed., Scott G. Kenny (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1985), 7:546, 615-617, 621 (journal entry dated January 26, 1880). ISBN 0941214133.
Response

317, 587n25 (PB) - Why did Brigham say that “the only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy"?

The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:

Why did Brigham say that “the only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy"?

Author's sources: Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 11:269.

FAIR's Response

Question: Is plural marriage required in order to achieve exaltation?

Critics quote Brigham Young saying that "[t]he only men who become Gods, even the sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy"

Critics of the Church point to a statement made by Brigham Young to make the claim that Latter-day Saints believe that one must practice plural marriage in order to achieve exaltation (i.e. become like God not just be saved).[1]

The relevant text is as follows:

The only men who become Gods, even the sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy" (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 11:269.)

This quotation is often used in anti-Mormon sources. They do not include the surrounding text which explains what Brigham Young had in mind on this occasion:

We wish to obtain all that father Abraham obtained. I wish here to say to the Elders of Israel, and to all the members of this Church and kingdom, that it is in the hearts of many of them to wish that the doctrine of polygamy was not taught and practiced by us...It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. This is as true as that God lives. You who wish that there were no such thing in existence, if you have in your hearts to say: "We will pass along in the Church without obeying or submitting to it in our faith or believing this order, because, for aught that we know, this community may be broken up yet, and we may have lucrative offices offered to us; we will not, therefore, be polygamists lest we should fail in obtaining some earthly honor, character and office, etc,"—the man that has that in his heart, and will continue to persist in pursuing that policy, will come short of dwelling in the presence of the Father and the Son, in celestial glory. The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. Others attain unto a glory and may even be permitted to come into the presence of the Father and the Son; but they cannot reign as kings in glory, because they had blessings offered unto them, and they refused to accept them.[2]

Brigham was stating that the command to practice plural marriage was from God, and it is wrong to seek to abolish a command from God.

It is clear from the quote that Brigham was making several points which the critics ignore:

  • The command to practice plural marriage is from God, and it is wrong to seek to abolish a command from God.
  • To obtain the blessings of Abraham, the Saints were required to be "polygamists at least in your faith": i.e., it was not necessary that each enter into plural marriage in practice, but that they accept that God spoke to His prophets.
  • It was wrong to avoid plural marriage for worldly, selfish reasons, such as believing the Church would fail, and hoping to have political or monetary rewards afterward.
  • Faithful Saints cannot expect to receive "all that the Father has" if they willfully disobey God. When the people have "had blessings offered unto them," and if they refuse to obey, God will withhold blessings later because of that disobedience now.

Finally, it must be remembered that Brigham Young is speaking to a group who had been commanded to live the law of polygamy. There is no basis for speculating about what he would have said to a group who did not have that commandment given to them, as present-day members do not.

See also: Question: Does D&C 132 state that polygamy is required for our exaltation?


319, 588n35-36(PB) - Did Joseph Smith promise in 1835 that most of the Saints then living would see Jesus’ return by 1890?

The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:

Did Joseph Smith promise in 1835 that most of the Saints then living would see Jesus’ return by 1890?

Author's sources:
  • History of the Church, vol. 2, 182.
  • History of the Church, vol. 5, 324, 336.

FAIR's Response

  1. REDIRECTAlleged false prophecies of Joseph Smith#Did Joseph Smith prophesy that Jesus Christ would return in 1890?

320, 588n40 (PB)

Claim
  • Did Wilford Woodruff demolish the Church’s Endowment House in response to agreement with the U.S. to “cease practicing plural marriage?”

Author's source(s)
  • Samuel Taylor, 19.
Response

323, 588n48 (PB)

Claim
  • Did Wilford Woodruff receive a revelation on November 24, 1889 the said that the Church would prevail against the Government effort to seize the Church's assets?
  •  Author's quote: "Despite Christ's assurances that the ruling would favor the Saints, May 19, 1890, saw a five to four decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the government's right to close the LDS church, seize its property, and redistribute it."

Author's source(s)
  • Samuel Taylor, 19.
Response

323, 589n51-52 (PB) - Was the Manifesto a revelation? Wasn't it re-written and edited many times before it was released?

The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:

Was the Manifesto a revelation? Wasn't it re-written and edited many times before it was released?

Author's sources: *Joseph F. Smith, letter to Sarah E. Smith, September 24, 1890, Joseph F. Smith Papers (Letterbook). Quoted in Edward Leo Lyman, Political Deliverance, 138.

FAIR's Response

  • That's why it is labeled "The Manifesto" and not included in the D&C as a revelation. Pres. Woodruff insisted that he had "been struggling all night with the Lord about what should be done under the existing circumstances of the Church. And [a draft of the Manifesto] is the result."
  • Writing the Manifesto (non-wiki)

324-325, 589n53 (PB)

Claim
  • Did the Manifesto included "blatantly false statements" since over 200 plural marriages were performed after the Manifesto was issued?

Author's source(s)
  • Doctrine and Covenants-Manifesto
  • B. Carmon Hardy, Solemn Covenant: The Mormon Polygamous Passage, 394ff.
Response
  •  Internal contradiction: On p. 325, the author tells us that "countless" post-Manifesto marriages were performed. Yet, the best evidence suggests the number is 262. See also p. 328.
  • The Manifesto stated only that it was Pres. Woodruff's "intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise."
  • The Manifesto and its implementation (non-wiki)
  • Lying after the Manifesto? (non-wiki)

325, 591n54 (HB) 589n54 (PB)

Claim
  • Why did Brigham Young say "I live above the law, and so do this people?"

Author's source(s)
Response

325, 589n55 (PB) - Did "countless" plural marriages occur in Utah, Canada, and Mexico after the Manifesto, as the author claims?

The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:

Did "countless" plural marriages occur in Utah, Canada, and Mexico after the Manifesto, as the author claims?

Author's sources:
  • Joseph F. Smith, letter to Reed Smoot, April 1, 1911, Reed Smoot Correspondence. (The first letter mentions Canada and Mexico)
  • George Gibbs, letter to Reed Smoot, April 12, 1911, Reed Smoot Correspondence. (The second letter states that inclusion of Canada was a mistake)

FAIR's Response

  •  Internal contradiction: On p. 324-325, the author tells us that "over two hundred" post-Manifesto marriages were performed. On p. 328 we learn about 262 known marriages. How does this become "countless"?
  • The first of two letters referenced by the author mention Canada and Mexico, with the second letter stating that "Smith's inclusion of Canada in the telegram was a mistake." The author further states regarding the second letter that removes Canada that "the certainty of this claim is questionable since no record exists of Smith correcting himself."
  • How does the author convert this to "countless" plural marriages in "Utah, Canada and Mexico?"

325, 590n56-57 (PB)

Claim
  • Did Wilford Woodruff's testimony before the Federal Master-in-Chancery, Charles Loofbourow constitute perjury?

Author's source(s)
  • J. Reuben Clark, Messages of the First Presidency, vol. 3, 230-231.
  • Wilford Woodruff testimony. Quoted in Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), 149-150.
Response

326, 590n58-59 (PB) - "Lying, either to bring about a 'greater good' or to protect the church, has always been an acceptable practice within Mormonism"

The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "Lying, either to bring about a 'greater good' or to protect the church, has always been an acceptable practice within Mormonism, and continues to be an unspoken tenet of the faith."

Author's sources:
  • Matthias F. Cowley, minutes of Council of the Council of the Twelve, May 10, 1911. Quoted in Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), 151.
  • Abraham H. Cannon. Quoted in Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), 150.
  • D. Michael Quinn, "LDS Church Authority and New Plural Marriages, 1890-1904," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, vol. 18, no. 1, 61.

FAIR's Response

"Lying for the Lord"

Summary: Some have long accused Mormons of organizationally and systematically “lying for the Lord,” equating such with a policy of using any means necessary to achieve some “good” goal. This claim is false, and a biased reading of Church history. One must not use ethically questionable tactics because one believes the “end justifies the means.”


Jump to details:


326, 590n60 (PB) - Did Joseph F. Smith defy the Manifesto?

The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:

Did Joseph F. Smith defy the Manifesto by saying:

"Take care of your polygamous wives; we don't care for Uncle Sam now."

Author's sources: *Joseph F. Smith. Quoted in William Edward Biederwolf, Mormonism Under the Searchlight, 65.

FAIR's Response

  • The author fails to tell us that the leaders of the Church did not intend to have men abandon their wives and children. The government insisted that they had to abandon these families. Most members thus persisted in civil disobedience, refusing to leave wives they had married and children they had fathered in good faith without support.
  • Refusal to abandon plural families (non-wiki)

327, 590n62 (PB)

Claim
  • Did polygamy continue to "thrive" when Lorenzo Snow became Church president in 1898?
  • The endnote states the Snow said during his trial: "Though I go to prison, God will not change his law of celestial marriage. But the man, the people, the nation that oppose and fight against this doctrine and the Church of God, will be overthrown."

Author's source(s)
  • Andrew Jenson, "Lorenzo Snow," HR, February 1887, vol. 6, no. 2, 144.
Response
  • How does Lorenzo Snow serving jail time and making a statement 13 years before he became President of the Church prove that "polygamy continued to thrive?"
  • Lorenzo Snow's administration (non-wiki)

328, 591n66 (PB)

Claim
  • Did Joseph F. Smith take additional polygamous wives himself after the Manifesto, and enourage at least 63 others to do so as well?

Author's source(s)
  • Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), 159.
Response

328, 591n67 (PB) - "These were but a small portion of the documented 262 post-Manifesto marriages between October 1890 and December 1910 involving 22 different Mormon men"

The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "These were but a small portion of the documented 262 post-Manifesto marriages between October 1890 and December 1910 involving 22 different Mormon men."

Author's sources:
  • Hardy, 389-425.
  • D. Michael Quinn, "Plural Marriages After The 1890 Manifesto," lecture delivered August 1991 at Bluffdale, Utah. (The author includes a lengthy excerpt from this speech in the endnote.)

FAIR's Response

  •  Internal contradiction: On p. 325, the author tells us that "countless" post-Manifesto marriages were performed. Yet, the best evidence suggests the number is 262. See also p. 324-325.

Contents
Articles about Plural marriage
Doctrinal foundation of plural marriage
Introduction of plural marriage
Plural marriage in Utah
End of plural marriage

Gospel Topics: "The Second Manifesto. At first, the performance of new plural marriages after the Manifesto was largely unknown to people outside the Church"

"The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage," Gospel Topics on LDS.org:

At first, the performance of new plural marriages after the Manifesto was largely unknown to people outside the Church. When discovered, these marriages troubled many Americans, especially after President George Q. Cannon stated in an 1899 interview with the New York Herald that new plural marriages might be performed in Canada and Mexico.40 After the election of B. H. Roberts, a member of the First Council of the Seventy, to the U.S. Congress, it became known that Roberts had three wives, one of whom he married after the Manifesto. A petition of 7 million signatures demanded that Roberts not be seated. Congress complied, and Roberts was barred from his office.41

The exclusion of B. H. Roberts opened Mormon marital practices to renewed scrutiny. Church President Lorenzo Snow issued a statement clarifying that new plural marriages had ceased in the Church and that the Manifesto extended to all parts of the world, counsel he repeated in private. Even so, a small number of new plural marriages continued to be performed, probably without President Snow’s knowledge or approval. After Joseph F. Smith became Church President in 1901, a small number of new plural marriages were also performed during the early years of his administration.[3]—(Click here to continue)

Gospel Topics: "The Church’s role in these marriages became a subject of intense debate after Reed Smoot, an Apostle, was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1903"

"The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage," Gospel Topics on LDS.org:

The Church’s role in these marriages became a subject of intense debate after Reed Smoot, an Apostle, was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1903. Although Smoot was a monogamist, his apostleship put his loyalty to the country under scrutiny. How could Smoot both uphold the laws of the Church, some of whose officers had performed, consented to, or participated in new plural marriages, and uphold the laws of the land, which made plural marriage illegal? For four years legislators debated this question in lengthy public hearings.[4]—(Click here to continue)

Gospel Topics: "Church President Joseph F. Smith took the stand in the Senate chamber in March 1904. When asked, he defended his family relationships"

"The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage," Gospel Topics on LDS.org:

The Senate called on many witnesses to testify. Church President Joseph F. Smith took the stand in the Senate chamber in March 1904. When asked, he defended his family relationships, telling the committee that he had cohabited with his wives and fathered children with them since 1890. He said it would be dishonorable of him to break the sacred covenants he had made with his wives and with God. When questioned about new plural marriages performed since 1890, President Smith carefully distinguished between actions sanctioned by the Church and ratified in Church councils and conferences, and the actions undertaken by individual members of the Church. "There never has been a plural marriage by the consent or sanction or knowledge or approval of the church since the manifesto," he testified.43

In this legal setting, President Smith sought to protect the Church while stating the truth. His testimony conveyed a distinction Church leaders had long understood: the Manifesto removed the divine command for the Church collectively to sustain and defend plural marriage; it had not, up to this time, prohibited individuals from continuing to practice or perform plural marriage as a matter of religious conscience.[5]—(Click here to continue)

Why were some plural marriages performed after the First Manifesto (Official Declaration 1)?

Summary: The leaders were agreed that President Woodruff had been right to issue it, and acknowledged his action of the Lord; the full implications of the Manifesto, however, were still the subject of discussion and debate.

Lisa Olsen Tait: The Manifesto and the end of Polygamy


Gregory L. Smith, M.D., "Polygamy, Prophets, and Prevarication: Frequently and Rarely Asked Questions about the Initiation, Practice, and Cessation of Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"

Gregory L. Smith, M.D.,  FairMormon Papers
We note again that the Church and its members were in an impossible position–the government showed no concern for the women and children who would be left without support if government policies were obeyed. Members and leaders again had agonizing choices to make, in which all their moral duties simply could not be honored. Joseph F. Smith wrote to a member who faced just this dilemma, “The whole thing in a nut shell is this, you should keep your covenants with your family and you should also not violate the law. Now if you can comprehend it–you will grasp the situation.”


The situation–which critics and many modern members have not grasped–is that it was impossible to do both. A choice had to be made, the Saints chose whatever was most important, and most seem to have chosen support for families over being straightforward with the government.

President Woodruff continued similar tactics throughout the remainder of his administration. By July 1892 he had granted a few recommends for plural marriages in Mexico, and in June 1897 marriages sanctioned by the First Presidency were performed at sea, on the Great Lakes, and in Mexico. There is circumstantial evidence that President Woodruff himself married a plural wife at sea in September 1897. At times, President Woodruff seems to have maintained some “plausible deniability” by declining to personally approve a polygamous marriage, while referring the potential polygamists to his counselor, George Q. Cannon, for a recommend.

Click here to view the complete article

Gospel Topics, "Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah"

Gospel Topics,  Gospel Topics, (2013)
After the Manifesto, monogamy was advocated in the Church both over the pulpit and through the press. On an exceptional basis, some new plural marriages were performed between 1890 and 1904, especially in Mexico and Canada, outside the jurisdiction of U.S. law; a small number of plural marriages were performed within the United States during those years. In 1904, the Church strictly prohibited new plural marriages. Today, any person who practices plural marriage cannot become or remain a member of the Church.

Click here to view the complete article


Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources

Notes

  1. ↑ The following critical works use this quote from Brigham to claim that Latter-day Saints must accept polygamy as a requirement to enter heaven. Contender Ministries, Questions All Mormons Should Ask Themselves. Answers; Richard Abanes, Becoming Gods: A Closer Look at 21st-Century Mormonism (Harvest House Publishers: 2005). 233, 422 n. 48-49. ( Index of claims ); George D. Smith, Nauvoo Polygamy: "...but we called it celestial marriage" (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2008), xiv, 6, 55, , 356. ( Index of claims , (Detailed book review)); Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), 29, 258.( Index of claims )
  2. ↑ Brigham Young, "Remarks by President Brigham Young, in the Bowery, in G.S.L. City," (19 August 1866) Journal of Discourses 11:268-269. (emphasis added) See Quote mining—Journal of Discourses 11:269 to see how this quote was mined.
  3. ↑ "The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage," Gospel Topics on LDS.org
  4. ↑ "The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage," Gospel Topics on LDS.org
  5. ↑ "The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage," Gospel Topics on LDS.org

328

Claim
  •  Author's quote: "[Joseph F.] Smith, of course, like every other LDS president before him, would continue utilizing cunning prevarications to conceal his personal activities and anything else that might embarrass the church."

Author's source(s)
  • No source provided.
Response
Notes
Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Mormonism/Books/One_Nation_Under_Gods/Chapter_14&oldid=131901"