Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Diary of LDS apostle includes tales of bribing a Supreme Court justice
Ogden Standard-Examiner ^ | Dec. 9, 2010 | Doug Gibson

Posted on 12/11/2010 7:37:48 AM PST by Colofornian

To see Cal Grondahl’s Currents cartoon that goes with this post, click here

The diaries of the late LDS Church Apostle, Abraham H. Cannon, stretching from 1889 to the end of 1895, is interesting church history reading. Signature Book’s “Candid Insights of a Mormon Apostle,” edited by scholar Edward Leo Lyman, provides readers glimpses into the wary, sometimes turbulent LDS history between the Manifesto against polygamy, the church’s desperate efforts to avoid financial destruction due to polygamy, the dedication of the Salt Lake temple, the financial panic of 1893, and efforts toward statehood for Utah.

Cannon, who had several wives, died in 1896 at age 37 from complications of an ear infection. The scion of a prominent Mormon family — his father, George Q. Cannon, was a fellow apostle — his diaries show how his high standing in the LDS Church encompassed not only religious duties, but high-stakes business, chicanery and politics. A thorough diarist, regular meetings of the church’s First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 Apostles are meticulously recorded. Governing the young church’s business empire and dealing with the real threat of imprisonment and government harassment due to polygamy occupied as much time — if not more — than religious duties. Example: Cannon’s diary entry of Dec. 17, 1892, records that at the apostles’ meeting “… the brethren were told that our success in the Church suits was in a great measure due to the fact that we have a partner of Justice {Stephen J.} Field of the Supreme Court of the United States in our employ, who is to receive a percentage of the money if the suits go in our favor, and the property is returned to us. …” Given the times, this is not as shocking as it sounds today. Justice Field was not the only person of influence tempted by the church. President Benjamin Harrison’s secretary was helping the church. The diaries reveal how federal attorneys were routinely bribed through third parties. Church leaders spent considerable energies covering up the crime of an embezzler because that man — sympathetic to the church — was in a position to be a receiver of assets the church needed. In fact, Cannon records entries where the apostles were counseled to “keep secrets” from their enemies.

But even with the help of a high court justice, Cannon’s entries detail how the church was boxed in politically and in danger of financial ruin due to overall public disgust of polygamy. The Manifesto from President Woodruff against polygamy was originally intended to grandfather in current polygamous relationships, but Cannon’s diaries detail how political powers forced the LDS prophet to make later, tougher statements that forbid already-married polygamists from co-habitating. Apostles, including Cannon, were constantly threatened with imprisonment if they even visited their plural wives.

Cannon details how busy the life of an LDS apostle was. Although most details of his family life were omitted by Signature’s editors, Cannon was constantly taking trains up and down the state, speaking at stake conferences, settling church feuds, selecting new bishops and stake presidents. Cannon must have given hundreds of church-related talks a year. As is today, the LDS priesthood hierarchy was stressed. Leaders, from apostles downward, were urged to change their opinions if a superior took an opposing stance. Cannon also describes, in detail, prayer circles and the rarely-mentioned second anointing, where church leaders and spouses are guaranteed exaltation, or the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom. Cannon himself received a second anointing.

Politics was often discussed and apostles were assigned to research and lobby for or against legislation. Cannon’s disgust for the anti-Mormon Liberal Party is not shy. The First Presidency and Apostles engaged in serious efforts to control local press coverage and counter the Tribune. Pages of the diaries recount local campaigns. Eventually, Cannon became part owner of the LDS-friendly Deseret News. Politics at times would tear the apostles’ unity, particularly when the Democrats and Republicans set up parties in Utah. Apostle Moses Thatcher, a Democrat, would often quarrel with apostle, John Henry Smith, a Republican.

Cannon details special meetings of the quorum where the apostles would speak frankly about their feelings for each other and address cases of gratitude and their struggles against resentment. The reader catches the religious spirit and commitment that bonded these men. These are fascinating, partially because even today, the LDS Church leadership is silent on the spirit and topics of the meetings of its hierarchy. A key difference from today’s LDS leadership is that the church’s highest officials — 120 years ago — were more likely to go out politicking. Today, church politics is more subtle. Preaching was far more conservative: Apostle John Henry Smith is recounted warning members that sexual intercourse for any purpose other than bearing children is the same as adultery, according to the Lord.

Glimpses of a high-level meeting are very interesting for history buffs. In one apostles’ session, Cannon recounts a debate over the Adam-God doctrine. The apostles disagree, but Cannon believes Adam must be more than just a spiritual brother. In another, the apostles discuss the status of the Holy Ghost — is he a son of God, only without a body? There was a discussion of whether there were “daughters of perdition.” The apostles also stressed the LDS doctrine that faithful parents would be assured of the salvation of their wayward children. The bohemian atmosphere of the early LDS church still remained. President Woodruff and the apostles freely discussed visions, conversations with the slain Mormon leader Joseph Smith and even a glimpse of the modern-day Cain was described.

Cannon was often without enough money to keep his many businesses healthy. He was a good businessman but had his hands in too many endeavors, although near the end of his life, his efforts in a railroad were paying off. Much of the 1893 entries involve his desperate attempts to meet payrolls and keep a bank he co-owned afloat during that year’s financial panic. In one instance, Cannon, after becoming a partner in a mine, promised the Lord a fifth of his profits if the mine was successful.

Ogden is mentioned often — Cannon frequently spoke there — as is the Standard-Examiner a few times. Much of the diaries cover mundane, administrative tasks that will interest history buffs. One tidbit of interest: church leaders, including President Woodruff, were fans of horse racing in Salt Lake City.

Cannon lived in Salt Lake City, on the northwest corner of 900 South on 800 West. His diaries may be uncomfortably candid, but they can also inspire LDS readers today who want more than Pablum. We are in Cannon’s debt for leaving records that bring to life an era in the Top of Utah usually recollected in dry history texts.


TOPICS: History; Moral Issues; Other Christian; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: apostle; bribery; inman; lds; mormon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
BTW, before the anti-Mormon labels are falsely trotted out...let me point out:

#1 This article was written by a Mormon journalist in Utah, Doug Gibson.

#2 The column is based upon a Utah publisher of a book based upon the diaries of an Lds Mormon "apostle." So the account is from one of the top 15 Mormon leaders from the 1890s (whose father was the #2 man in the church).

His diaries showed that Abraham Cannon bribed a Supreme Court justice, Stephen J. Field...and it sounds like more than once since Cannon says Field was "in our employ" and referenced that in regard to "suits" plural.

In fact, the briberies, embezzlements, and cover-ups by the highest members of the Lds church didn't stop with bribing the Supreme Court justice:

From the column: The diaries reveal how federal attorneys were routinely bribed through third parties. Church leaders spent considerable energies covering up the crime of an embezzler because that man — sympathetic to the church — was in a position to be a receiver of assets the church needed. In fact, Cannon records entries where the apostles were counseled to “keep secrets” from their enemies.

From the article: Cannon’s diary entry of Dec. 17, 1892, records that at the apostles’ meeting “… the brethren were told that our success in the Church suits was in a great measure due to the fact that we have a partner of Justice {Stephen J.} Field of the Supreme Court of the United States in our employ, who is to receive a percentage of the money if the suits go in our favor, and the property is returned to us.”...Justice Field was not the only person of influence tempted by the church. President Benjamin Harrison’s secretary was helping the church.

From the column: The diaries of the late LDS Church Apostle, Abraham H. Cannon, stretching from 1889 to the end of 1895, is interesting church history reading. Signature Book’s “Candid Insights of a Mormon Apostle,” edited by scholar Edward Leo Lyman, provides readers glimpses into the wary, sometimes turbulent LDS history between the Manifesto against polygamy...The scion of a prominent Mormon family — his father, George Q. Cannon, was a fellow apostle — his diaries show how his high standing in the LDS Church encompassed not only religious duties, but high-stakes business, chicanery and politics. A thorough diarist, regular meetings of the church’s First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 Apostles are meticulously recorded.

1 posted on 12/11/2010 7:37:52 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
To re-emphasize, how prominent was this 1890s Mormon "apostle," Abraham H. Cannon?

#1 Became part-owner of the Lds Deseret News (owned now by the Lds church)

#2 He was the son of George Q. Cannon, who was- perhaps the longest-running highest hierarchical Mormon who never became a "prophet." (George Cannon was a "First Counselor" to four different Lds "prophets").

#3 The younger Cannon trepsed up & down Utah as one of the most common speakers to Mormons in the 1890s: From the article: Cannon was constantly taking trains up and down the state, speaking at stake conferences, settling church feuds, selecting new bishops and stake presidents. Cannon must have given hundreds of church-related talks a year.

IOW, he was not just some outback maverick Mormon leader. In fact...from the column:

A thorough diarist, regular meetings of the church’s First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 Apostles are meticulously recorded...Cannon details special meetings of the quorum where the apostles would speak frankly...

2 posted on 12/11/2010 7:38:52 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

You’re early today


3 posted on 12/11/2010 7:40:49 AM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
It will not matter that this article is written by an lds member in an lds paper. You will still be called a bigot and hater.
Given who found the lds, these revelations are not at all surprising.
I still wonder however, that when the lds went to the Utah territory why not stick with what they said god told them about polygamy and just become their own country and live they way they wanted. It sure was convenient that god changed his mind just in time to become a state.
4 posted on 12/11/2010 7:42:40 AM PST by svcw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
From the column: Glimpses of a high-level meeting are very interesting for history buffs. In one apostles’ session, Cannon recounts a debate over the Adam-God doctrine. The apostles disagree, but Cannon believes Adam must be more than just a spiritual brother. In another, the apostles discuss the status of the Holy Ghost — is he a son of God, only without a body?

For over 20 years, Brigham Young had taught that Adam was god...since Young died shortly before these discussions, it was still a relevant topic.

Tell us...though...imagine any church denomination naming its most prominent university after a leader who proclaimed to be God's living mouthpiece (& #1 at that) who didn't know who God was? And got confused between the character in the garden -- the creature -- and his Creator.

But contemporary Mormons do the exact same thing.

They call "God" a "god" (one of who knows how many)...and guess what? They, too, will join the ranks of godhood.

More man-god confusion.

'Twas only ONE man-God -- Jesus Christ -- whose birth we celebrate this season!

5 posted on 12/11/2010 7:44:14 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu; All

Perhaps those who are disciples of utterly corrupt wannabe polygamous “apostles” shouldn’t toss stones.


6 posted on 12/11/2010 7:50:31 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome; All
You’re early today

Well, you know what they say: An early bird gets the worms that were just feeding off of dead Mormon "apostles" whose corruption makes ya wonder what kind of a resurrection he'll have:

And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. (Jesus, John 5:29)

Oh, & for you non-Mormon Mormon allies...don't get too upset or offended on behalf of Mormons @ my John 5:29 quotation...you see, Joseph Smith redefined "damnation" as just being "damned up" for a time -- not locked away in hell for eternity...so Mormons generally believe the "damned" will be "loosed" to be "saved"...

How utterly "humorous," though, to think how Satan has...
...Convinced 2% of the American population that "the resurrection of damnation" is an eventual salvific "degree of glory."
...But considering the hundreds of millions of $ the Mormon church + individual members have spent upon...
...* Traveling to secure genealogical historical data
...* Researching genealogy
...* Storage of genealogical data bases
...* Retrieving such info
...* Developing spiritually-based genealogy curricula & indoctrinating their young on it
...* Engaged in energy exertion, time off of work, & worldwide construction of Mormon temples to perform temple works upon & in behalf of supposed dead spirits...
...All for the supposed "salvation" of these spirits...
...You can see that NO religious group in the world is more invested than the Mormons in "short-terming" hell (what they "spirit prison" -- a place that is essentially part of "the spirit world" where they believe EVERYBODY goes to for a time as part of their "eternal progression.")

What Mormons have done is essentially to short-circuit the cross of Jesus Christ.

They reference themselves as "saviors" in this process above. I mean who needs Jesus as "Savior" when Mormons like Lds "prophet" John Taylor was especially fond of this self-described term applied to temple Mormons doing temple works?

7 posted on 12/11/2010 8:09:19 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Sounds like a PR move to promote a book of diaries that have already (in expurgated version) been published.
The Field quote is interesting. While it is true that Justice Field dissented in the seminal court case of Mormon Church v. US (136 US 1) (where the Supreme Court held that Congress could lawfully seize church property), the court holding contradicts Cannon’s asserted claim that the church was successful in such suits. Moreover, Justice Field was a fierce defender of property rights who needed little prompting (let alone bribing) to rule that way in a court case.
Without reading the entire book it’s difficult to judge the book’s validity.


8 posted on 12/11/2010 8:15:33 AM PST by CivilWarguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

nah. It’s the hungry bird who gets the worm.

They are more motivated and will kick the early birds azz every time.

Natural law.

Thanks for the post. Very interesting and it seems we know more about LDS and its founders than modern day adherents.


9 posted on 12/11/2010 8:26:20 AM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CivilWarguy

I admit to being a little confused. The statement regarding Justice Field refers to a PARTNER of Field. Does the statement mean to imply that the PARTNER of Field would funnel funds to the Justice? Are there other entries stating Field was being paid funds? Interesting.


10 posted on 12/11/2010 10:17:30 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

BTW, before the anti-Mormon labels are falsely trotted out..


ROFL!!!

Falsely? ROFL!!


11 posted on 12/11/2010 11:12:29 AM PST by Paragon Defender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CivilWarguy
Justice Field was a fierce defender of property rights who needed little prompting (let alone bribing) to rule that way in a court case.

Say a pro-life incumbent is running again for the same office. Would they be...
(a) Motivated to accept a campaign contribution from a pro-life group;
(b) Or should we conclude (like you have) that a "fierce defender" of pre-born civil rights would "need...little prompting" to legislate in a pro-life manner -- and would therefore reject such campaign contributions.

Your reasoning doesn't make sense.

Of course, in my example, legislators taking such campaign contributions is legal; whereas a judge who is already bent a certain way on an issue but doesn't want to turn away an extra cash flow -- well, that's illegal.

12 posted on 12/11/2010 2:27:36 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

LDS President Thomas S Monson and false prophet Dallin Oaks hang out with fellow Mormon in good standing Harry Reid and Marxist in Chief Barack Hussein Obama.

Shame, Shame, SHAME !

13 posted on 12/11/2010 4:31:15 PM PST by SENTINEL (Mormonism...from Ezra Taft Benson to Reid and Romney in only one generation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
So are you finally admitting that Mormon publications are the best resource for showing the lies of Mormonism, that their own work is anti-mormon by nature...

Well progress is a good thing, congrats...

14 posted on 12/12/2010 2:33:33 AM PST by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Thanks once again for showing how corrupt these SC judges are!

He sure was NOT a MORMON; therefore probably a MEMBER of one of the APOSATE ‘christian’ churchs of the day.

(You know the kind: they actually PAY their ‘ministers’ - spit!)

—MormonDude(I’m sure that Resty and PD and Norm feel the same on this, too.)


15 posted on 12/12/2010 4:23:38 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: svcw
I still wonder however, that when the lds went to the Utah territory why not stick with what they said god told them about polygamy and just become their own country and live they way they wanted. It sure was convenient that god changed his mind just in time to become a state.

You hateful BIGOT!

GOD did nothing of the KIND!!

Once again, an ANTI shows that they DO NOT know what our history is!!!


 
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages,
which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort,
I hereby declare my 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.
 
Wilford Woodruff

President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
 
September 24th, 1890

16 posted on 12/12/2010 4:27:16 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
 
They reference themselves as "saviors" in this process above.
 
NO!
You just HAVE to be kidding; right???

 




"He (Joseph Smith) is the man through whom God has spoken... yet I would not like to call him a savior, though in a certain capacity he was a god to us, and is to the nations of the earth, and will continue to be."
 - Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 8:321
 
 
"You call us fools; but the day will be, gentlemen and ladies, whether you belong to this Church or not, when you will prize brother Joseph Smith as the Prophet of the Living God, and look upon him as a god..."
- Herber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses 5:88
 
 
"If we get our salvation, we shall have to pass by him [Joseph Smith]; if we enter our glory, it will be through the authority he has received. We cannot get around him [Joseph Smith]"
- (as quoted in 1988 Melchizedek Priesthood Study Guide, p. 142)
 
 
There is "no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith. If Joseph Smith was verily a prophet, and if he told the truth...no man can reject that testimony without incurring the most dreadful consequences, for he cannot enter the kingdom of God"
- Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p.190
 
 
"I tell you, Joseph holds the keys, and none of us can get into the celestial kingdom without passing by him. We have not got rid of him, but he stands there as the sentinel, holding the keys of the kingdom of God; and there are many of them beside him. I tell you, if we get past those who have mingled with us, and know us best, and have a right to know us best, probably we can pass all other sentinels as far as it is necessary, or as far as we may desire. But I tell you, the pinch will be with those that have mingled with us, stood next to us, weighed our spirits, tried us, and proven us: there will be a pinch, in my view, to get past them. The others, perhaps, will say, If brother Joseph is satisfied with you, you may pass. If it is all right with him, it is all right with me. Then if Joseph shall say to a man, or if brother Brigham say to a man, I forgive you your sins, "Whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them;" if you who have suffered and felt the weight of transgression—if you have generosity enough to forgive the sinner, I will forgive him: you cannot have more generosity than I have. I have given you power to forgive sins, and when the Lord gives a gift, he does not take it back again."
 - Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.154-155
 
 
 
"It is because the Lord called Joseph Smith that salvation is again available to mortal men.... If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation,"
 - Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 396, 670
 


They succeeded in killing Joseph, but he had finished his work.
He was a servant of God, and gave us the Book of Mormon.
He said the Bible was right in the main, but, through the translators and others, many precious portions were suppressed, and several other portions were wrongly translated; and now his testimony is in force, for he has sealed it with his blood.
As I have frequently told them, no man in this dispensation will enter the courts of heaven, without the approbation of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jun.
Who has made this so?
Have I?
Have this people?
Have the world?
No; but the Lord Jehovah has decreed it.
If I ever pass into the heavenly courts, it will be by the consent of the Prophet Joseph.
If you ever pass through the gates into the Holy City, you will do so upon his certificate that you are worthy to pass.
Can you pass without his inspection?
No; neither can any person in this dispensation, which is the dispensation of the fulness of times.
In this generation, and in all the generations that are to come, everyone will have to undergo the scrutiny of this Prophet.
They say that they killed Joseph, and they will yet come with their hats under their arms and bend to him; but what good will it do them, unless they repent?
They can come in a certain way and find favor, but will they?
 Brigham Young,

--JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, vol. 8, p. 224



 
Dear Reader: what does it sound like to YOU?

17 posted on 12/12/2010 4:31:14 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
Falsely? ROFL!!

ALMOST true!

But I wear the ANTI-mormonISM label proudly, even while LOVING you, PD!

18 posted on 12/12/2010 4:34:21 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
 
 Look REALLY close in this 'declaration' to see where GOD said to do anything.....



 
 
 
OFFICIAL DECLARATION—1

To Whom It May Concern:

Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy

I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.

Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my 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.

There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.

WILFORD WOODRUFF
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 




President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:

“I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.”

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.

Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.







 

EXCERPTS FROM THREE ADDRESSES BY
PRESIDENT WILFORD WOODRUFF
REGARDING THE MANIFESTO

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty. (Sixty-first Semiannual General Conference of the Church, Monday, October 6, 1890, Salt Lake City, Utah. Reported in Deseret Evening News, October 11, 1890, p. 2.)

It matters not who lives or who dies, or who is called to lead this Church, they have got to lead it by the inspiration of Almighty God. If they do not do it that way, they cannot do it at all. . . .

I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. . . .

The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.

The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?

The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place
if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for . . . any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves.  I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.

. . . I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. II went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. . . .

I leave this with you, for you to contemplate and consider. The Lord is at work with us.
(Cache Stake Conference, Logan, Utah, Sunday, November 1, 1891. Reported in Deseret Weekly, November 14, 1891.)
 
 
 

Now I will tell you what was manifested to me and what the Son of God performed in this thing. . . . All these things would have come to pass, as God Almighty lives, had not that Manifesto been given. Therefore, the Son of God felt disposed to have that thing presented to the Church and to the world for purposes in his own mind. The Lord had decreed the establishment of Zion. He had decreed the finishing of this temple. He had decreed that the salvation of the living and the dead should be given in these valleys of the mountains. And Almighty God decreed that the Devil should not thwart it. If you can understand that, that is a key to it.
 
(From a discourse at the sixth session of the dedication of the Salt Lake Temple, April 1893. Typescript of Dedicatory Services, Archives, Church Historical Department, Salt Lake City, Utah.)
 

 
 
 
 
What kind of  'Leadership' is THIS???
 
compared to...
 
 
 
 
Hebrews 11:35-40
 35.  Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.
 36.  Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison.
 37.  They were stoned ; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated--
 38.  the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. 
 
 
or compared to...
 

Acts 4:19.  But Peter and John replied, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God.
 


 
So much for an 'Everlasting Covenant' that thundered out of Heaven!!!
 
Well; it DID last about 47 years!
 



 
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriage...
I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws..."

~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President

 

19 posted on 12/12/2010 4:42:05 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Uh, Colofornian, it’s YOUR reasoning that’s flawed, in that you conflate a political candidate’s campaign contributions with bribing a judge. In political bribery, you bribe the “swing vote” legislators first.
If the Mormons had wished to win the case, they would have bribed judges other than Field—who was going to rule their way bribe or not. I’m not saying they didn’t bribe judges—I’m merely saying that the one diary excerpt that was published above, standing alone, makes little sense.
BTW, I’m not Mormon, and don’t have any interest in this other than as a legal scholar.


20 posted on 12/12/2010 8:01:53 AM PST by CivilWarguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson