16. Christ’s Promised Gospel Restoration is Here”

In reply to the chapter, “The Secret Kingdom”

Page 230, lines 1-3

“Investigative reporter Jeffrey Kaye concluded, ‘The Mormon Church, this American Zion, wields more economic power more effectively than the state of Israel or the Pope in Rome. ‘ “

This opinion is a real compliment to the LDS Church and must be a surprise to its leaders.

Page 230, lines 8-12

“Nor are the ultimate goals of The Brethren compatible with the normal aims of Christian leaders. They are essentially the same as those of cults in general and especially those of secret revolutionary groups working toward a takeover of the world”

Which Christian leaders? Which cults? With which revolutionary groups does the LDS Church share goals? All these charges have been answered before.

Page 230, lines 14-18

The book quotes: “The Mormons do intend to take over the world . . . .There is no secret about that—it’s in the writings of Joseph Smith right on down. The Constitution of the United States will ‘hang by a thread’ and the Church will save it by establishing a theocracy.”

See comments about page 143, lines 10-15, and page 10, lines 21-24, for discussion of these charges.

Page 230, lines 19-20

“Any who think the Mormon Kingdom [today’s church] is a democracy are under a delusion.”

This statement is true, but where has the LDS Church ever claimed to be a democracy? It has always maintained it is the kingdom of God on earth, or a theodemocracy.

Page 230, lines 22-23

The book quotes from The Wall Street Journal, “Mormon Church leaders oversee a vast and growing worldwide financial empire.”

The holdings of the Church are almost all related to religious, educational and charitable purposes. The LDS Church has stated that the Church could only function a few weeks if it had to rely on its investments. Having some financial holdings allows expenditures to be made without Church contributions having to be used. Many of the Church business ventures are related to building the Church, such as a newspaper and radio/television stations. Almost all the Church’s assets are revenue consuming, such as chapels, temples, schools and welfare facilities. President Gordon B. Hinckley stated in the Church’s conference on October 5, 1985. Few Church assets are revenue producing. He also added, “the Church’s greatest assets are its people.”

Page 230, line 27 to page 231, line I

“Whatever ‘vote’ there seems to be at the Ward, Stake, and individual levels is part of a cleverly contrived illusion that continues to deceive millions of Mormons into imagining that they actually have some say in Church affairs. “

One purpose of the vote is to allow members to show support for the leadership. It is also a way to avoid church power struggles, since no one can hold an LDS leadership position without having been sustained by the membership of the unit concerned. (See D&C 41:9; 42:11). This is an effective safeguard to keep those with self-proclaimed authority from taking over leadership in the Church. Members do not feel they are deceived, and understand this LDS Church leadership procedure better than the authors give the Latter-day Saints credit for—and much better than the authors themselves, who apparently would prefer the jealousies, bickerings and other un-Christian responses that the modern political democratic system encourages.

Page 231, lines 2-11

“Although they do have the ‘freedom’ to disagree with their leaders, to do so means excommunication and damnation [as with Sonia Johnson] for openly disagreeing with The Brethren’s position on ERA.”

Seldom, if ever, is anyone excommunicated for disagreeing with Church leadership. The book persists in perpetuating the myth that Johnson was excommunicated over ERA. The fact is that she disagreed with the Church position on that issue for months and court action was finally taken on other issues. Others in the LDS Church have also disagreed with this and other LDS policies and are still members of the Church. Only after Johnson began publicly urging people to refuse to listen to LDS missionaries, calling LDS leaders “male misogynists,” and flying anti-Mormon banners over LDS conference sessions did she leave church officials in her local area no choice but to excommunicate her.

See comments about page 247, lines 6-7 for other remarks on LDS excommunication practices.

Page 231, lines 21-25

“Church members who have faithfully and sacrificially contributed their tithes, time, and energy are powerless to demand an accounting or to change a single action by the First Presidency, even if all 5.2 million of them stood up in unison and ‘voted’ unanimously for it. “

Since LDS contributions are voluntary, few if any who pay feel powerless. Instead of being a negative point, as the book maintains, the faithful members’ willingness in this matter is evidence of the complete support and trust they have that their leaders are men of integrity and truly represent the Lord.

Page 231, lines 32 and 33

“[The] 5.2 million pawns subject to manipulation from the top [are] part of a secret kingdom that Jeffrey Kaye has called the Invisible Empire.’ “

I never hear Church members claiming they are manipulated. Most members hear the LDS leaders proclaiming good, sound doctrines and ideas and they want to be part of it. Those who do not, drift into inactivity. Serious-minded members seek, and receive, divine confirmation of the correctness of leaders’ requests.

Page 231, last two lines

As “evidence” of a “secret kingdom,” the authors quote: “Through this church and kingdom a framework has been built through which the full government of God will eventually operate.”

This quote from Elder Bruce R. McConkie simply means Latter-day Saints claim to have the true gospel of Christ, and to be preparing all of God’s children who wish it to be available for whatever Christ would have them do if they live to see the Millennium. If the LDS Church is not what it claims to be, then Christ’s power is certainly strong enough to prevent the “LDS pretenders and usurpers” from making headway, or from taking the world over from Christ during the Millennium. See comments about page 10, lines 21-24.

Page 232, lines 1-3

“That ‘full government of God’ involves what is known as the ‘United Order.’ ‘Revelations’ that came through Joseph Smith described it as a theocratic communistic society.”

The United Order is an LDS term sometimes used to describe cooperative economic programs of the Church during the early days of Mormonism. It perhaps is similar to what some biblical Christians practiced as stated in Acts 2:44. The term does not refer to the “full government of God, ” nor is the plan communistic at all. A more correct term for “United Order” would be “law of consecration.” A few differences between the LDS program and communism follow.

 

If there were enough righteous people, the LDS law of consecration could solve many ills of society. As the former United Nations Secretary U Thant said, ‘The struggle between the rich and the poor is the world’s greatest problem.” The LDS doctrine could eliminate the struggle between the haves and the have-nots.

Page 232, lines 3-7

“All property and income was to be given over to the control of the Church and then distributed to everyone according to his need as The Brethren defined it, so that ‘the poor shall be exalted, in that the rich are made low.'”

The preceding statement is not completely correct. See previous item clarification.

The above quotation about “poor” taken out of context is misleading because it implies that poverty is an LDS goal. In summary, LDS doctrine condemns both the rich and the poor who are not generous and not righteous. LDS doctrine teaches “before ye seek for riches, seek for the kingdom of God” (Jacob 2:1849). Many LDS scriptures give significant insights into the proper attitude toward wealth. (See D&C 6:7, 56:16-18; 2 Nephi 9:30; Alma 1:29-31.)

Page 232, lines 11-18

“When that time comes [worldwide Mormon theocratic communism], woe to all who transgress the laws of the Mormon gospel. Excommunication with loss of earthly property will be supplemented with the death penalty. “

The charge about excommunication has been responded to before (see comments about page 231, lines 2-11). The charge about personal property taken by the church is false. Under the law of consecration individuals would be given the opportunity to donate their property to the Church. The person would then receive a privately owned stewardship that would be secured by a deed. This stewardship could be valued more or less than the original contribution.

The charge about capital punishment is new. During the Millennium, when Christ reigns, whatever laws are in effect will be the right laws. At present the LDS Church does not oppose capital punishment for heinous crimes under the jurisdiction of the legal courts of the state.

Since only decent, honorable people of all religious faiths will survive the events preceding the Second Coming, during the Millennium there probably will not be any need for capital punishment.

Page 232, lines 20-24

“. . . under certain circumstances there are some serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men must then have their own blood shed to atone for their sins.”

The book quotes Elder McConkie on the foregoing point, but fails to put the quotation in its proper context:

From the days of Joseph Smith to the present, wicked and evilly- disposed persons have fabricated false and slanderous stories to the effect that the Church, in the early days of this dispensation, engaged in a practice of blood atonement whereunder the blood of apostates and others was shed by the Church as an atonement for their sins. These claims are false and were known by their originators to be false. There is not one historical instance of so-called blood atonement in this dispensation, nor has there been one event or occurrence whatever, of any nature, from which the slightest inference arises that any such practice either existed or was taught. (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine [1979], p. 92).

The authors quote several statements on “blood atonement” from the Journal of Discourses and from anti-Mormon sources. A few early leaders of the Church sometimes used hyperbole in their speeches in their efforts to stamp out evil and build a righteous society, but if the authors have actual evidence of the practice of “blood atonement” and not just rumors, they should present it. Actually, every nation in the world has practiced capital punishment, which is a form of blood atonement.

Unfortunately the heinous act of murder is committed by members of all units of society, including religious groups. Periodically, it seems, somewhere an unhinged mind hears “voices” telling the per- son to murder a particular individual, perhaps for “religious” reasons. Members or former members of a particular religious group (including Mormons) are not immune from the possibility of such derangement or mental illness, but to blame religion in general or a particular religious group when one of its members (or, especially, former members) sins in spite of that church’s teachings is like blaming lawyers, businessmen, union members, families, and so forth, when one of their members commits a crime. Even to blame a particular law firm, company, union, or family would be completely unjustified.

To the credit of the LDS Church, every effort is made to help errant members correct their behavior when they have violated cardinal church teachings. When that fails, sanctions — including possible excommunication — might be initiated in order to encourage repentence and a return to the Church. Besides murder, other reasons for losing LDS membership would include conviction on a felony charge, adultery, child or wife abuse, and the practice of plural marriage. (See also next item.)

Page 233, lines 23-25

“There are rumors that this doctrine {blood atonement] is still practiced secretly in Utah today, it would be strange if it -were not , . . “

At the beginning of the book (page II, line 35), it was promised, “Everything in the following pages has been thoroughly researched and documented.” This is not the case. Here, for example, only rumors are presented. Previously in connection with page 13, lines 16-18 it was explained that Latter-day Saint doctrine and scripture state that no church has a right to inflict any sanctions on its members except in regard to a person’s church standing or membership. See also comments about page 232, lines 20-24.

It was also previously stated there is no proof of anyone ever becoming a victim of “blood atonement,” yet in early LDS history and up to our day there have been numerous LDS members who have lost their lives as a result of religious persecution. See comments about page 173, lines 4-6. Actually Utah’s homicide rate is one-third of the national average, a fact ignored in the book. (See “statistics” in my “Overview” Section XII.)

Page 233, lines 31-32

“Utah is the only state where the condemned may elect to be executed by a firing squad. . . The execution by a firing squad of condemned murderer Gary Gilmore, who was a Mormon, was a recent example.”

Gary Gilmore’s father was Catholic and his mother LDS. Gilmore’s last rites were administered by Monsignor Meersman at the Utah State Prison. It is not clear why Gilmore chose death by a firing squad, but he himself stated it was not for any LDS reason. Gilmore declared he believed in the idea of reincarnation and apparently looked forward to another immediate life instead of years of imprisonment.

Page 234, lines 21-24

“Dare anyone call [the LDS Church’s effort to take over the world] a conspiracy? Thinking he was denying it, one Mormon recently told us, This isn’t a conspiracy, it’s our destiny!”

Again there is no documentation. In what context was the question asked? How qualified to express LDS doctrine was the person who replied? Who was the person?

Page 234, lines 24-25

“The obsessive [LDS] ambition of world domination is openly denied today but secretly plotted.”

Again, where is the documentation? The only evidence offered is weak and is an 1859 statement in the Journal of Discourses (7:170) by Heber C. Kimball: “The nations will bow to this kingdom, sooner or later, and all hell cannot stop it.”

The purpose of the talk was to plead with the U.S. government forces who were occupying the Utah Territory as the aftermath of the Utah War, to be law-abiding while here, just as Latter-day Saints were expected to abide by local laws when they were away from home. The speaker was simply saying that righteousness will eventually prevail, so that those persecuting the saints ought to abide by the local laws. And immediately before this isolated comment the authors quote. Elder Kimball said, ‘The king of Egypt honoured [Joseph of old], and bowed to his wisdom.” Wisdom, then, not love or lust for power, was the context of the “bowing.”

The book ignores the many speeches by Church leaders at that time that support the LDS loyalty to the United States government, though their territory was unjustly occupied by that same government.

An example of an ignored quote by the authors was from a speech by Elder Orson Hyde also given during the Utah Way when he said, “Mormons stand by their country while any foe dares to set his unhallowed foot upon our shores, or upon our borders” (JD 7:110).

Page 234, lines 33-35

“[The LDS] ‘God’ is an extraterrestrial from Kolob, definitely not the God of the Bible.”

Isn’t the God the authors believe in an “extraterrestrial”? LDS doctrine does not state that God is from Kolob. The LDS Pearl of Great Price actually says that Kolob is a planet that is “nigh unto” the place where God dwells (Abraham 3:9).

God is God, and his nature will remain the same, regardless of what the authors. Latter-day Saints, atheists, agnostics, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Moslems, or anyone say he is.

The Latter-day Saint concept is one of many concepts believed by different people on this earth. Latter-day Saints have reasons, additional scriptures, the testimonies of those who have seen God, and the words of living prophets to support their view. They also appeal to the seeker of God to pray to him for guidance. See discussion with page II, line 15; page 26, line 24; page 216, lines 1-5 and lines 11-19 which show the LDS concept of God is biblical.

Page 235, lines 2-5

“Mormons believe that they must establish a worldwide Mormon kingdom dictated from their Missouri base in order to make it possible for Christ to return. “

The LDS believe that Christ will return when he wills to return. And as most Christians believe, Christ will reign as “King of kings and Lord of lords” over the earth, as predicted by many prophets. Latter-day Saints believe they will have a role in the Millennial reign as will other righteous people of all faiths, but that role in no way demands prior world domination.

Page 235, lines 8-11

“The idea of a political kingdom of God, promulgated by a Secret Council of Fifty, is by far the most important key to an understanding of the Mormon past,”

This quotation cannot be found in the reference cited, but is found in the Preface of the same book (Klaus J. Hansen, Quest for Empire, preface). The same author also made it clear that this council was to consist of prominent community leaders including non-Mormons (Ibid., p.62). There also appears to be evidence that the members of this council would be elected by all the people (Hyrum Andrus, Joseph Smith and World Government, p. 32).

It is also known that this Council of Fifty was set up to keep church and state separate as the Latter-day Saints crossed the plains into foreign (Mexican) territory, and thus in the absence of any visible civil government, there now was an organization set into place that could handle civil matters. With perhaps 99 percent of the Mormon migration to the West consisting of Latter-day Saints, the distinction between church and state was understandably often not possible to observe, nor was it always desirable. Under the strain of establishing settlements, one organization is more efficient than two.

In LDS history books on the late Nauvoo, pioneer and early Utah phases of the Church, one reads that councils often met to discuss important issues in order to operate the Church and attend to civil questions.

In recent years, a few authors have exaggerated the Council of Fifty in their writings and they have labeled almost every council meeting as the Council of Fifty. Careful analysis of the original sources in such works indicates such councils were often regular LDS Church councils, such as the Council of the Twelve and high councils. The feeling among a number of LDS and non-LDS historians today is that recent books and articles on the Council of Fifty (although calling attention to the fact that Joseph Smith started this essential organization, which did function for a number of years) have led to an exaggerated view of the actual role of this organization. To link this Council of Fifty to a subversive plot to establish a Mormon-run world government is unwarranted.

Numerous descriptions of this council speak of a separation between the political Council of Fifty and the LDS Church, although some leaders might serve on both. Two recent articles on the Council of Fifty that give additional light on the subject have been published in BYU Studies (Winter 1980, p. 163 and Spring 1980, p. 253).

Page 235, line 37, to page 236, line 3

“Numerous sources report that shortly before his death Joseph Smith was crowned by this secret council as King over the Mormon Kingdom that he believed was destined to control the world. Not only was Joseph Smith crowned ‘King on the earth, ‘ but so were Brigham Young and John Taylor.”

The secondary source cited said, ‘The prophet ‘apparently’ had himself crowned.” However, the source quotes from “an unidentified correspondent in an 1855 letter,” a source I have not been able to locate. One quotation from History of the Church (6:568-569) used by the authors merely says that Dan Jones overheard Wilson Law (a bitter enemy of the Church) say he heard Joseph Smith quote Daniel 2:44, where it speaks of a final kingdom on the earth, and Law said Joseph Smith asserted that the kingdom was already set up and he was the king of it. Another reference given does not say Brigham Young was ordained a king, but as the authors’ text implies, the second LDS prophet referred to the work of the Latter-day Saints as building the kingdom of God. President Young in this talk said, “My desire is to teach the people what they should do now, and let the Millennium take care of itself” (Dialogue, Autumn 1966, pp. 104-105).

Even if Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and John Taylor were ordained as kings in the kingdom of God (the Church), the evidence the authors present is completely inconclusive. Being ordained kings in the kingdom of God, even if it took place, would not show political conspiracy.

In any event, LDS decline supports the biblical contention that during the Millennium Christ will be the King of the earth (Rev 11:15).

Page 235, lines 29-30

“Those [Council of Fifty minutes] that remain in the possession of the Church today are not available even for Church historians to peruse, “

See comments about page 86, line II, and page 235, lines 8-11 for earlier remarks on this issue.

Page 235, lines 30-33

“In 1884 Mormon spokesman Elder Lunt said, ‘We look forward with perfect confidence to the day when we will hold the reins of the U.S. government . . . after that we expect to control the continent.'”

“Elder Lunt” is not found on lists of LDS leaders. What is his first name, and in what circumstances was he a spokesman for the Church? The reference is to an 1884 encyclopedia which I have not been able to locate, but it is worth noting that 1884 was part of a period of intense anti-LDS feeling and of persecution of the Church, and many books and magazines misrepresented and abused the Church and its members.

Page 235, lines 34-36

“This secret {Council of Fifty] organization was referred to in a ‘writ issued for the arrest of prominent citizens of Nauuoo for “treasonable designs against the state.”‘”

This quotation comes from Klaus Hansen, Quest for Empire, p. 161. That source refers to History of the Church 2:444, but there is no such statement anywhere in that volume.

The authors obviously accepted the Hansen quote without checking its accuracy. Hansen on his page 161 speculated, “Whoever originated the writ must have had some information regarding the Council. ” This is assumption on the part of Hansen, accepted as truth by the authors.

Page 236, lines 8-12

The book quotes Elder Bruce R. McConkie as follows: “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as it is now constituted is the kingdom of God on earth…. “The Church is not a democracy . .. [but] a kingdom. . . and the President of the Church, the mouthpiece of God on earth, is the earthly king.”

Here again the ellipses affect the meaning. In his full quotation Elder McConkie said, “The Lord Jesus Christ is the Eternal King, and the President of the Church, the mouthpiece of God on earth, is the earthly king. All things come to the Church from the King of the kingdom in heaven, through the king of the kingdom on earth.” See Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine (1979), p. 416.

Page 236, lines 20-21

“Temple patrons swear even to sacrifice their lives to this cause [of upholding the secret government]. “

This is not true. The kingdom of God is not a political kingdom.

Page 236, lines 23-27

“[A] Mormon writer . . . has pointed out [the LDS Church today] involves ‘a secret government, responsible not to the governed but to ecclesiastical authority, which will provide benign rule for all people, without election.’ “

See comments about page 235, lines 8-11, for refutation of this point. The writer quoted by the authors of The God Makers was talking about the LDS period of church history in 1844 in Nauvoo, Illinois, both before and after the quotation cited, and was not applying it to today’s circumstances at all as the authors state. Although the writer was talking about the fine line that separates church and state in the USA, the article maintains that the LDS involvement is “but a part of an American pattern” (Dialogue, Summer 1966, pp. 31, 46-47). The authors of The GodMakers are wrong in using this quotation in connection with their charge that LDS people have a current “ambition to rule the world.”

Page 236, last two lines

The authors quote: “indeed, if few Mormons, in 1844, knew what kind of kingdom their prophet had organized that year, fewer know today.”

The book continues: “The fact that so few Mormons themselves, to say nothing of non-Mormons, know the truth about Mormonism today reflects the secrecy involved and the apparent intention of its leaders. Is so much of Mormonism plotted and practiced in secret because The Brethren know it can only be ‘sold’ under false labels?”

There is no “Council of Fifty” in the LDS Church today nor has there been one for nearly a century. The authors do not document this assertion.

It is difficult to determine how many members in 1844 knew about the “Council of Fifty.” Some diaries of non-General Authorities do mention the “Council of Fifty,” such as the published diaries of Hosea Stout. As for today, if members are not aware of past LDS history and teachings on this subject it is because they do not read the material available.

Page 237, lines 6-8

“Can Mormons reasonably expect the world to convert to a religion that is so dishonestly and secretly presented and much of it held back in secret because it is so ‘sacred’?”

Apparently the authors think so, or they wouldn’t go to so much trouble to try to set people against the LDS Church. The question is loaded with false charges about dishonesty and secrets, and I have dealt with them previously. However, a partial answer to this question was given by the authors on their page 58, lines 15-16:

The Mormon Church is one of the fastest-growing religious groups in America as well as one of the wealthiest business corporations. From log cabins to massive skyscrapers, . . . the LDS Church is now exploding across the globe. It took 117 years for the Mormon Church to reach one million members, 19 years to add a second million to worldwide membership, nine years to add the third million, and a mere five years to add its fourth million. Having now climbed quickly to a membership of 5.2 million, the Mormon Church is doubling in size every ten years. Dr. Harold Goodman told us that projections indicate a growth to between 70 and 100 million members within the next 50 years. To accommodate this phenomenal growth, new church buildings (Mormons call them chapels) are being constructed at the rate of nearly two each day around the world.

Page 237, lines 9-11

“If Mormons are indeed ‘the only true Christians/ then let them emulate the founder of Christianity, who said, I spake openly to the -world. . . and in secret have I said nothing· “

See comments about page 142, lines 12-13 for remarks about this passage in John 18:20. This verse means something different.

Page 237, lines 17-19

“The Bible declares that the heart of every human is ‘deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked . ..’ This applies to The [LDS] Brethren as well as to everyone else.”

The scripture in Jeremiah 17:9 does not say “every human,” but refers to the wicked people of that day who had turned from the Lord. Was the heart of Abraham deceitful? of Job? of Nathanael, “in whom is no guile”? (John 1:47). As to “LDS Brethren,” they would be the first to admit they are imperfect, as President Spencer W. Kimball said (Conference Report, April 1970, p. 120), but they are neither deceitful nor in other ways wicked.

Page 237, lines 19-20

“The worst despots in history have been those who claimed to be divine.”

This may be true, but there is absolutely no claim to divinity in humans by any LDS person or doctrine. The LDS do not believe that man is divine now, but that he is potentially divine, being the offspring of a divine being (Acts 17:29).

Page 237, lines 25-31

“The most outrageous lies that Mormons themselves admit is endemic among them can be traced to their belief that they are in the process of becoming ‘Gods. ‘ How can a ‘God’ ever be wrong? Surely the temptation to live by the adage ‘The end justifies the means’ would be overpowering for anyone who really believes that his ‘end’ will be ‘exaltation’ to ‘Godhood.’ “

If this concept of potential godhood were the sole idea in LDS doctrine, the tendency suggested might come about. However, LDS doctrine states that the end does not justify the means. Liars will be assigned to the lowest sphere in the afterlife. Knowing one can become a god when perfected is more likely to motivate a person to strive to overcome his faults.

Where is the documentation of the statement that Mormons admit that “outrageous lies” are “endemic among them”? I had never heard such a comment until I read Tfie God Makers, and it is untrue.

Page 237, lines 32-36

“Under the grandiose dream that they are the God Makers, Mormonism’s leaders have developed an utter contempt for truth when it conflicts with their goal of extending the Mormon kingdom, in the name of Jesus Christ, to encompass the entire world. “

I have found just the opposite in dealing with Church leaders and members. For example, when the Howard Hughes “will” was discovered in the LDS Church Office Building, which named the LDS Church as one of the beneficiaries, a public relations official of the Church asked President Kimball, “What should we say about this?” The LDS leader’s answer: “Just tell the truth.”

Of course there are exceptions among the membership. If any Latter-day Saint, like any religious person, is dishonest, it is in spite of his religion, not because of it.

There are dishonest people in sports, businesses, unions, government, and literature. Does this mean we should declare all sports, businesses, unions, governments, and books illicit?

Page 238, lines 5-6

“[LDS] followers dare not think for themselves or examine facts, but must blindly obey whatever The Brethren decree. “

When Harold B. Lee became the eleventh President of the LDS Church in 1972, he was interviewed by a reporter and asked what it was like to be the head of the LDS Church. “I’m not the head of this Church; Jesus Christ is the head,” was his reply. Such men do not issue decrees; they lead by love (D&C 121:41-42), and faithful Latter-day Saints are pleased to follow their counsel.

Page 238, lines 2-15

“Mormonism seems as American as apple pie . . . perfect citizens with close families, high morals, patriotism. Boy Scout programs, Tabernacle Choir and conservative politics. A Los Angeles Times article implied that Mormons have recently gained the image of super-Americans . . . [who] appear to many to be ‘more American than the average American, ‘ “

Interesting! Throughout the book the charge has been that the Church that produced such people is satanic, radical, pagan, dishonest, deceitful, revolutionary, subversive, etc.

Page 239, line 3 to page 240, line 19

The authors charge LDS leaders with vowing revenge against the United States,

No documentation is given for this charge. Nor is it consistent with LDS doctrine (e.g. D&C 98:5-7; 101:77, 80). Such charges have been made by anti-Mormons over the years, especially during the 1889 naturalization hearing in Salt Lake City and the Reed Smoot hearings in Washington, D.C. The charges have been refuted previously in the press by the Church, but the authors ignored this contrary evidence. Some former Mormons testified there was no such oath. Much of the anti-LDS testimony was conflicting. (See Salt Lake Tribune, November 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 1889; Deseret Weekly, December 7, 1889.)

Page 240, lines 19-27

In reference to a Wall Street Journal article the authors say: “When the Church opposed the MX for Utah, those plans were immediately dropped by the federal government. ”

The anti-MX missile movement has been spearheaded by numerous liberal organizations, and I am sure they would insist on having some of the credit.

Page 240, lines 31-33

The authors quote: “There is a disquieting statement in Mormonism: ‘When the leaders have spoken, the thinking has been done. ‘ To me, democracy can’t thrive in that climate.”

This statement is not LDS doctrine. The LDS leadership does not address the decisions which must be made in daily life, as they generally speak mostly on moral and religious issues. The LDS Church often sends out directives staling that the Church does not take sides in politics; and historically this has usually been the case. Instead, the Church always urges members to be law-abiding and to get involved in politics to help safeguard democracy.

Joseph Smith said, “\ will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning” (History of the Church 5:499).

Page 241, lines 6-7

“[There is a] growing cooperation between Mormons and the Moral Majority. “

Heretofore Latter-day Saints were charged with being too exclusive and being completely different from other Christians (see comments about page 257, lines 4-7), but now comes this charge.

The National Center for Constitutional Studies (formerly the Freemen Institute) consisting of both Latter-day Saints and non-LDS people has occasionally joined with Moral Majority leaders in speaking out to preserve the U.S. Constitution. This group has no connection with the LDS Church and involves only a handful of the LDS Church membership.

Page 241, lines 19-21

“Millions of Mormons with their year’s supply of food, guns, and ammunition play a key role [in a future LDS takeover of the U. S. government].”

Latter-day Saints are not asked to carry weapons or ammunition. A year’s supply of food is encouraged and has been a blessing to thousands of Latter-day Saints in times of economic stress, unemployment or sickness. If enough Latter-day Saints or other citizens have this year’s supply, the run on our supermarkets in times of crisis might be reduced. Latter-day Saints have been encouraged to share their commodities in times of disaster. The storage of guns and weapons was previously denied—see comments about page 229, last 8 lines.

Page 241, lines 24-27

The authors quote Brigham Young as quoting Joseph Smith: “The time will come when the destiny of the nation will hang upon a single thread. At that critical juncture, this people will step forth and save it from the threatened destruction.”

Although no statement in the handwriting of Joseph Smith or one of his official scribes exists that I know of, several individuals claimed they heard Joseph Smith state words to that effect. The best summary is by D. Michael Stewart (Ensign, June 1976, pp. 64-65). Another original manuscript, this one in the handwriting of Martha Jane Knowiton, has since surfaced. She also recorded similar words in a speech she heard Joseph Smith give on July 19, 1840 (Dean C. Jessee, BYU Studies, Spring 1979, pp. 390-391). (See commentary with page 10, lines 21-24, which shows that this is not a legitimate conspiracy charge.)

Page 241, lines 31-34

“In 1834 Joseph Smith organized an army and marched toward Independence, Missouri, to ‘redeem Zion/ [There was] a humiliating surrender to the Missouri Militia that proved his bold ‘Prophecies’ false. . . . “

This is not true. The episode concerned is Zion’s Camp. Latter-day Saints were being expelled from their homes and property in Jackson County, Missouri, and as a result the governor, Daniel Dunklin, felt he could not enforce the legal rights of Latter-day Saints; so he suggested that the Saints might want to raise a group of LDS men to join with the state militia to help him get the Latter-day Saints their prop- erty (HC 1:445). The governor realized he could not maintain his meager state troops indefinitely to guard the homes of private citizens. The governor felt with a strong LDS military presence, the abuse against LDS people might subside.

However, by the time the LDS Zion’s Camp arrived in Missouri as a result of a revelation received by Joseph Smith (D&C sec. 103), rumors and fears of the advancing LDS army had caused the non-LDS citizens so much concern that they formed their own citizen armies to repel the arrival of Zion’s Camp. This included burning the abandoned homes of Latter-day Saints in Jackson County, and harassing Latter-day Saints in the new homes in northern Missouri.

Although Zion’s Camp was prepared to fight if necessary, the intent of the group was to keep the peace to allow Church members the right to occupy their property from which they had been evicted by mob violence.

Now with Missouri on the verge of civil war. Governor Dunklin decided to not take sides and aid the Latter-day Saints. Joseph Smith decided at this point to seek a negotiated settlement rather than shoot first and talk later. The Mormon prophet could see that a military solution was not the answer and thus a truce was arranged between Latter-day Saints and non-Mormons. The book’s charge of “a humiliating surrender to the Missouri Militia” is false. No Missouri Militia was involved at this point.

Some ask why the Lord would call “Zion’s Camp” when it “failed in its military objective.” As previously stated, the objective was a nonviolent peace-keeping force, not military aggression, which the Book of Mormon condemns (3 Nephi 3:20-21). LDS doctrine is against preemptive strikes. When the state, out of expediency, felt it could not keep its part of the original offer, it is not realistic to claim that the Latter-day Saints should have forged ahead violently into a situation of needless bloodshedding, which in any case would have given their enemies excuse to call the Latter-day Saints aggressors. The Lord apparently also felt the Saints were not yet worthy to redeem Zion (D&C 105:10-13), and the commandment was revoked. With hindsight one can see why the Lord commanded the march.

Loyalty in defeat is the greatest loyalty. It is easy to love a winner. A few in Zion’s Camp became disillusioned and left the Church or became its enemies. Most of the camp, who had deep convictions of Joseph Smith’s prophetic calling, came out stronger members of the Church as a result of this day-after-day close encounter with their prophet which covered nearly one thousand miles.

Many of the future LDS leaders came from this camp. Little did any of the Saints realize that this march was a “dry run” for a much greater trek a dozen years hence when many of these same Zion’s Camp members would be the leaders of one of the largest mass exoduses in the history of the world. Jedediah M. Grant, Orson Hyde, Heber C. Kimball, Orson and Parley P. Pratt, George A. Smith, Wilford Woodruff, Charles C. Rich, and Brigham Young were some of the first participants in various companies of the pioneer trek to Utah.

Page 242, lines 5-8

“Joseph Smith was not only ordained King on earth, but he ran for President of the United States just before his death, at which time Mormon missionaries across the country became ‘a vast force of political [power].’ “

There were fewer than one hundred missionaries at this time, hardly a “vast” force. Joseph Smith became a third party candidate to allow Latter-day Saints the opportunity to vote for someone not opposed to the Church. The two major political parties in Illinois had turned against Latter-day Saints. Joseph Smith as a candidate also had the opportunity to proclaim the LDS view to a national audience. He was aware that he had no chance of winning.

A study of the political platform of Joseph Smith shows that it was actually very farsighted and profound. The idea of having the government sell western lands and with the revenue purchase slaves and set them free could have averted the Civil War. Other ideas such as rehabilitating and training prisoners and a federal banking system were advanced ideas for the time.

Page 242, lines 21-27

“The Mormon President of the United States acts boldly and decisively to assume dictatorial powers . . . At this time he is made Prophet and President of the [LDS] Church. “

Since the senior apostle always becomes the President of the LDS Church upon the death of a President, this is pure fantasy. See also next item.

Page 242, lines 29-31

“With the government largely in the hands of increasing numbers of Mormon appointees at all levels throughout the United States, the Constitutional prohibition against the establishment of a state church would no longer be enforceable.”

The book does not explain how this imaginative scenario is possible. What would the other branches of government, the Congress and the judiciary, be doing under these circumstances?

Page 243, lines 16-18

“Thus far in history, these numerous occult/revolutionary organizations have remained largely separate and in competition with one another. If something should happen to unite them, and at the same time their beliefs should gain worldwide acceptance, a new and unimaginably powerful force for world revolution would have come into existence.”

This is another flight of fancy. Occult groups are as diversified as Christians, Moslems, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists. So far, any unification movement has ended up in a separate new church. The unwarranted conclusion is based on an unimaginable “if.”

Page 243, lines 22-25

“There is increasing evidence of a new and growing secular/religious ecumenism persuasive enough to accomplish this unprecedented and incalculably powerful coalition.”

The ecumenical movement in Christianity involves many Protestant groups, and Catholicism seems to be leaning in that direction to some extent. Whatever “threat” of a growing secular/religious ecumenism exists, it certainly does not involve Latter-day Saints, who do not belong to such groups as the World Council of Churches, nor would Mormons likely be admitted even if they made efforts to join. Being a church based on revelation from God through a living prophet does not leave the Latter-day Saints with many religious issues on which to compromise.