Wednesday, December 31, 2008
But what is good? What is right? We have been taught in America that “freedom” is good, and that limiting your freedom is “bad” But is it good to use your freedom to harm another, or yourself? Is it bad to NOT be that free? This is the questions in my mind as I try to understand the people who run to the aid of the dissident from the FLDS faith. By their own admission they feel they are rescuing them from some sort of abuse. But what is the abuse that the so-called “lost boys” suffered? What was the “bad” that they had been subjected to? In all reality for the great majority of them, the only thing they were subjected to has been what the religion considered “good”, in fact almost all of the “good/abuse” they were subject to, most common sense folk and religions call “good”; selflessness, learning, personal responsibility and virtue. They were for the most part required to abstain from the entertainment of television, movies, suggestive and loud “music”, alcohol, drugs, and inappropriate mingling with girls.
They left the religion because of that horrid “abuse” called “strict religion”. Poor babies! Help them! Shelter them! Give them pacifiers and point at their evil parents and religious leaders and tell them “Oh, we will save you from those “bad” things. We will give you your “freedom” from “strict”. Unwilling to strive for religious righteousness, they sure aren’t too much “competition” for those who are.
I met with a couple of my former FLDS brothers and their former FLDS wives, (lost boys is quite an insult) and a cousin the other day. They were telling me how much the “help” some of the boys who ditched the FLDS community to escape “strict” and were living in the house off the bluff has not been as good as many believe. My cousin said it has made life much more difficult for some of those guys to give them such a free ride. He said it “ruined” them. All it was for them was a place to hang out with minimal supervision, schooling was required at first, but most of them were not in school anyway. Many had problems with drugs and alcohol, and have a hard time getting a job. I do hope the best for those guys, that they have a great life of their own choosing, but they shouldn’t be coddled in extra special ways simply because they are from the FLDS, and they definitely shouldn’t be continuously told how “bad” their family and religion was. Apparently some had even been told that their parents will be punished if they try to contact them. That is way beyond ridiculous.
In our society called America, where freedom is guaranteed by the Constitution, a document of written laws defining what the Federal Government can and cannot do, there are groups and sub groups of people. The founders believed that the larger the government, the greatest amount of freedom should be given, and the rights of individuals to govern themselves and their children should be where the strictest rules and infringements of “rights” should take place. That is what self government is all about.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Call on the Lord in mighty prayer.
That He will Zion’s bondage break
And bring to naught the fowlers snare.
He will regard His peoples cry,
The widows tear, the orphans moan.
The blood of those that slaughtered lie
Plead not in vain before his throne.
Though Zion’s foes have counseled deep,
Although they bind with fetters strong
The God of Jacob does not sleep
His vengeance will not slumber long
Then let your souls be stayed on God
A glorious scene is drawing nigh
Though tempests gather like a flood
The storm though fierce will soon pass by
With constant faith and fervent prayer
With deep humility of soul
With steadfast mind and heart prepare
To see the eternal purpose roll
Our God in judgment will come near
His mighty arm he will make bare
For Zion’s sake he will appear
Then O ye Saints, awake, prepare!
Awake in righteousness; be one
Or saith the Lord, “you are not Mine”
Yea like the Father and the Son
Let all the Saints in union join
-Eliza R Snow Smith
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Abortions to mothers under 20 – 9,807 (185 under 15)
Children born to mothers under 18 – 19,247
Marriages to teenage girls – 14,428 (76 under 15)
Abortions to mothers under 20 – 9,830 (207 under 15)
Children born to mothers under 18 – 18,988
Marriages to teenage girls – 13,372 (49 under 15)
Abortions to teenage mothers- 10,253 (224 under 15)
Marriages to teenage girls - 10, 209 (6 under 15)
Abortions to teenage mothers- 10,210 (191 under 15)
(Missing info due to incomplete reports)
Here is the breakdown of that horrid abuse called…
Legal "abuse" (marriages) to teen girls in Texas 2005
Baby girl "victims" 14 years old or younger
27 girls married 15-19 year old baby boy "victims"
19 girls married 20-24 year old men
2 girls married 25-29 year old men
1 girl married a 30-34 year old man
"Abused"(married) children who were 15-19 year old girl "victims"
3635 married 15-19 year old little boy "victims"
7673 married 20-24 year old men
1511 married 25-29 year old men
308 married 30-34 year old men
110 married 35-39 year old men
38 married 40-44 year old men
22 married 45-49 year old men
8 married 50-54 year old men
1 married a 55-59 year old man
1 married a 60-65 year old man
1 married a 65+ year old man
12 married men without the "perpetrator" (the state) getting the age of the man.
Legal “Abuse” (marriages) to teen girls in Texas 2006
(Even after the law was changed to "protect" them from the horror)
Baby girl "victims" 14 years old or younger
2 girls married 15-19 year old little boy "victims"
2 girls married 20-24 year old men
2 girls married 25-29 year old men
"Abused" (married) children who were 15-19 year old baby girl "victims"
3397 married 15-19 year old little boy "victims"
7691 married 20-24 year old men
1454 married 25-29 year old men
292 married 30-34 year old men
98 married 35-39 year old men
44 married 40-44 year old men
12 married 45-49 year old men
5 married 50-54 year old men
3 married 55-59 year old men
1 married a 65+ year old man
8 married men without the perpetrator (the state) getting the man's age
How many untold millions were "abused" because they were subjected to “see” these "victims" of the state?
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Cases of Drug abuse 0
Cases of VD 0
Cases of Alchohol Abuse 0
Cases of Tobacco use 0
Cases of malnutrition 0
Cases of abuse (Non-sexual) 0
Cases of poverty (Squalor) 0
Cases of Family fighting 0
Cases of sub-standard Scholastic abilities in children 0
Cases of thievery, mischievous-ness or juvenile violence 0
Cases of financial irresponsibility 0
Cases involving firearms 0
Cases of Pornography 0
Cases of suicidal tendencies 0
Cases of tax fraud or evasion 0
My question is: Why has not the CPS addressed these facts in their wonderful all inclusive report?
1 There has been no instances or indications of abortion among the FLDS
2 There are no instances or indications where there are children
that are not wanted and loved by their siblings or parents.
3 There are no instances among the children of the ranch where they
considered themselves "victims." (They are only victims because the
CPS says they are)
Just some more food for thought.
"Do not be discouraged when you hear of wars, and rumours of wars, and tumults, and contentions, and fighting, and bloodshed; for behold they are at the thresholds of our doors. Now, do not let your hearts faint; for all this will promote the kingdom of God, and it will increase upon the earth. Why? Because the world will decrease. We will be strengthened, while they will be weakened. Righteous principles will be multiplied and spread abroad, while wickedness will diminish and become limited in its power. The Saints of the Most High will increase. God's kingdom will increase upon the earth. And all we have to do, in order to increase, is to be sure that we are the children of God, inheritors of the blessings, promises, and faith of Abraham of old: then, whatever transpires, it is no matter."
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Of course there are different perspectives even within my own family, let alone the entire religion, and so I actually don't post as much here as I could. I try to limit myself in my writing too much about what I think personally. I think I will start another Blog that has my own views about more topics, and I hope those who read this from the FLDS religion will either send me things to write or email me and be added to the contributors of this blog.
I went back and read many signatures from that petition to the Senate, and those kinds of personal opinions, the wide and all inclusive ones, will help stem the tide of ALLOWABLE religious persecution and popular bigotry. The more who write out here the better, especially those who, unlike me, know what you are talking about. :O)
If you want to be completely anonymous, that is fine, just email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. Or if you want me to address something I might know about.
Thanks a bunch!
Friday, December 5, 2008
"I will now speak a little in regard to people's making themselves happy. We heard something upon that subject to-day and yesterday; and we frequently hear people preaching about heaven, paradise, and Zion; and if there is a comfort, a felicity, and good feeling, I want to say a few words about them; and I shall begin upon the doctrine so much beloved by Saint and sinner, and that is the plurality of women. The Saints like a plurality of wives, and the sinners like a plurality of men and women. I will say to the sisters that I have heard but very few women, and not a great many men, ever talk sensibly upon the plurality of wives. When they begin to talk about it, they exhibit, almost without an exception, passion instead of principle. Were we to appeal to passions of the people, we should promote the doctrine of a plurality of men and of women. But when we address ourselves to the Saints of the Most High God, it is very different and in a different light. It is for my sisters to be mothers of holy men and holy women-to receive and conceive in the name and by the power of the Holy Ghost-to bring forth their fruits to the praise and honour of the God of heaven. But what are the people doing here? "I want another wife," and almost universally passion is exhibited instead of principle.
"If the plurality of wives is to pander to the low passions of men and women, the sooner it is abolished the better. "How far would you go in abolishing it?" I would say, if the Lord should reveal that it is his will to go so far as to become a Shaking Quaker, Amen to it, and let the sexes have no connection. If so far as for a man to have but one wife, let it be so. The word and will of the Lord is what I want-the will and mind of God. He has revealed his mind and will. The time is coming when the Lord is going to raise up a holy nation. He will bring up a royal Priesthood upon the earth, and he has introduced a plurality of wives for that express purpose, and not to gratify lustful passion in the least. I would rather take my valise in my hand to-day, and never see a wife or a child again, and preach the Gospel until I go into the grave, than to live as I do, unless God commands it. I never entered into the order of plurality of wives to gratify passion. And were I now asked whether I desired and wanted another wife, my reply would be, It should be one by whom the Spirit will bring forth noble children. I am almost sixty years old; and if I now live for passion, I pray the Lord Almighty to take my life from the earth.
"I know the weaknesses of humanity, and I understand the passions of men and women. I am sorry for them. I wish they had grace according to their day, creating such fortitude in them that they would determine to suffer unto death rather than violate a holy command of the Almighty, or transgress the bounds God has set. "Is that the way you have lived?" It is. It is the example I have set before my family from the day the Lord opened my mind to see the Gospel. Ask these sisters (many of them have known me for years,) what my life has been in private and in public. It has been like the angel Gabriel's, if he had visited you; and I can live so still. But how are we to be made happy? There is one course-love the Giver more than the gift; love Him that has placed passion in me more than my passions. Let passion lie at the feet of judgment, and let every attribute that God has bestowed on me be devoted to the righteous cause he has commenced upon the earth. This, and this alone, produces happiness. He has brought us forth, and we live and see this day that Prophets, kings, and millions of great and good men have prayed to see, but died without the sight. When they looked at it in vision, it cast a halo, around which was like the dawning of heaven to their souls, and they shouted, "Hallelujah!" beholding the spirit and glory of these times that we now live in. And we yield to passion? I say, Shame on the individual that says passion has anything to do with his life. It is crucified. It lies, as it were, at the foot of the cross. That is my faith, and it has been my life.
"How will you be happy? Love the Giver more than the gift. Delight yourselves in your duties, mothers. Here are the middle-aged and the young. I am now almost daily sealing young girls to men of age and experience. Love your duties, sisters. Are you sealed to a good man? Yes, to a man of God. It is for you to bear fruit and bring forth, to the praise of God, the spirits that are born in yonder heavens and are to take tabernacles on the earth. You have the privilege of forming tabernacles for those spirits, instead of their being brought into this wicked world, that God may have a royal Priesthood, a royal people, on the earth. That is what plurality of wives is for, and not to gratify lustful desires. Sisters, do you wish to make yourselves happy? Then what is your duty? It is for you to bear children, in the name of the Lord, that are full of faith and the power of God,-to receive, conceive, bear, and bring forth in the name of Israel's God, that you may have the honour of being the mothers of great and good men-of kings, princes, and potentates that shall yet live on the earth and govern and control the nations. Do you look forward to that? or are you tormenting yourselves by thinking that your husbands do not love you? I would not care whether they loved a particle or not; but I would cry out, like one of old, in the joy of my heart, "I have got a man from the Lord!" "Hallelujah! I am a mother-I have born an image of God!" Let your prayers ascend to God, and that continually, that he will overshadow the child by the power of the Holy Ghost before and after its birth-that the Holy Ghost may attend it continually. The mother should inquire what her duty is. It is to teach her children holiness, prayer to God, and to trust in Him. Teach them the holy religion and the commandments that are calculated to sanctify the people and bring them into the presence of our Father and God. But no; too often it is passion. If my passion is served, I am in heaven. The fire will have to burn them up. We must live by principle; and if we do we shall attain to perfection-to being crowned with crowns of glory, immortality, and eternal lives. I would rather be purified here than to live ten thousand years to attain the same point in another existence. The man that enters into this order by the prompting of passion, and not with a view to honour God and carry out his purposes, the curse of God will rest upon him, and that which he seems to have will be taken from him and given to those that act according to principle. Remember it.
"The world cries out against this obnoxious doctrine, that I should have more wives than one. And what would they do? Destroy the virtue of every woman in this community if they had the power. What do they care about virtue? With comparatively few exceptions, no more than do the devils in hell. Most of the officers who have been sent here would have defiled every bed in this Territory, had they have had the power. Tell about this doctrine's being obnoxious to their delicate feelings! Yes, it is, in one sense. It keeps them at bay; it is hell to them; it is burning them up; and I say they may burn up, and they will.
"Elders of Israel, have you entered into the doctrine that has been revealed, through passion? If you have, you will find that that course will take that which you seem to have, and the Lord will say-"Let this man, that man, or the other man go, for he has acted on passion, and not on principle. Take that which he seems to have, and give it to him that has been faithful with the five, the two, the three, or the one talent." That is the way it will be, by-and-by.
"Sisters, do not ask whether you can make yourselves happy, but whether you can do your husband's will, if he is a good man. Teach your children; for you are their guardians, to act as father and mother to them until they are out of your care. The teachings and examples of our mothers have formed, to a great extent, our characters and directed our lives. This is their right, when they act by the power of the Priesthood, to direct the child until it is of a proper age, and then hand it over to the husband and father, and into the hands of God, with such faith and such love of virtue and truth, and with such love of God and its parents, that that child can never suppose that it is out of the hand and from under the control of the parent. Do not call it "mine." Let your maxim be, "This is not mine," whether you have one child or a dozen. "It is not mine, but the Lord has seen fit to let me bear the souls of the children of men. It is from my Father and God, and I will do my duty and hand it over to him," and have that faith that the child can never wring itself out of the hands of a good father and mother-can never stray away,-no, never. That is the privilege of mothers. It is you who guide the affections and feelings of the child. It is the mothers, after all, that rule the nations of the earth. They form, dictate, and direct the minds of statesmen, and the feelings, course, life, notions, and sentiments of the great and the small, of kings, rulers, governors, and of the people in general.
"Now, mothers, act upon principle, and see whether you can do anything to promote happiness in your families; see whether you can guide the minds of your children, teach them their letters, &c. I thought to speak upon the last-named point, but I will omit it. You can, at least, teach your children faith, and pay attention to knitting their stockings, making their clothing, &c.; see that the chickens are taken care of, that the milk is cleanly milked from the cow, and that the children are made comfortable. And if your husband is here or there, do not fret yourselves, whether he leaves you or not. If he is a good man, he can take of himself, and will safely return to you again. The mother that takes this course will be a happy mother-a happy woman. But where you find women jealous of each other, and "I am watching my husband," I would ask, Where are your children? They are nearly all the time in the mud, or in some mischief. And what are you doing, mother? You are "watching that man." "Who is he?" "He is my husband." I used to tell the sisters in Nauvoo that they did not care where their children were, if they could only keep in sight of their husbands.
"A traveller in the Eastern country overtook an old gentleman walking towards a town, and asked him, "Who is the great man of that little town? Who is your leading man? Who is the governor and controlling spirit of that little place?" The old gentleman replied, "I am the king of that little town." "Really," says the traveller, "are you the leading man?" "Yes, sir, I am king in that place, and reign as king." "How do you make this to appear? Are you in affluent circumstances?" "No, I am poor; but in that little village there are so many children. All those children go to my school; I rule the children, and they rule their parents, and that makes me king." I frequently think of this. Let the children rule the mother, and the mother the father, and that makes the children kings. How frequently you find this. How is it, my brethren? When you call your families together for prayers, where are your children? Were this question asked me, I should say, "I do not know." Mothers, where are your children? "We do not know; it is as much as we can do to be here." Why do you not have your children together? It is your duty to look after them; they should not be running at random in the streets. Some mothers will put a ten-dollar frock on a child and let it go straight into the mud, while they are watching the father and trying to keep him in bounds. Take care of your children, clothe them comfortably, and avoid all extravagance.
"Some mothers try to make father believe that a child five years old knows as much as the father. Another great cause of dissatisfaction is that so many women are such noble women, and know so much more than their husbands. They say, "This man is not capable of leading me." That is a positive proof to me that that man does not know his ability and calling. I will acknowledge that many women are smarter than their husbands. But when people are married, instead of trying to get rid of each other, reflect that you have made your choice, and strive to honour and keep it. Do not manifest that you have acted unwisely, and say that you have made a bad choice, nor let anybody know that you think you have. You made your choice; stick to it, and strive to comfort and assist each other."
Sunday, November 30, 2008
"The time was, when we were looked upon as deceivers, and that "Mormonism" would soon pass away, come to naught, and be forgotten. But the time has gone by when it is looked upon as a transient matter, or a bubble on the wave, and it is now taking a deep hold in the hearts and affections of all those, who are noble-minded enough to lay aside the prejudice of education, and investigate the subject with candor and honesty. The truth, like the sturdy oak, has stood unhurt amid the contending elements, which have beat upon it with tremendous force. The floods have rolled, wave after wave, in quick succession, and have not swallowed it up. "They have lifted up their voice; but the Lord of Hosts is mightier than the mighty waves of the sea"; nor have the flames of persecution, with all the influence of mobs, been able to destroy it; but like Moses' bush, it has stood unconsumed, and now at this moment presents an important spectacle both to men and angels. Where can we turn our eyes to behold such another? We contemplate a people who have embraced a system of religion, unpopular, and the adherence to which has brought upon them repeated persecutions. A people who, for their love for God, and attachment to His cause, have suffered hunger, nakedness, perils, and almost every privation. A people who, for the sake of their religion, have had to mourn the premature death of parents, husbands, wives, and children. A people, who have preferred death to slavery and hypocrisy, and have honorably maintained their characters, and stood firm and immovable, in times that have tried men's souls. Stand fast, ye Saints of God, hold on a little while longer, and the storm of life will be past, and you will be rewarded by that God whose servants you are, and who will duly appreciate all your toils and afflictions for Christ's sake and the Gospel's. Your names will be handed down to posterity as Saints of God and virtuous men." (Pg 184)
"Because we will not receive chastisement at the hands of the Prophets and Apostles, the Lord chastiseth us with sickness and death. Let not any man publish his own righteousness, for others can see that for him; sooner let him confess his sins, and then he will be forgiven, and he will bring forth more fruit. When a corrupt man is chastised he gets angry and will not endure it. The reason we do not have the secrets of the Lord revealed unto us, is because we do not keep them but reveal them; we do not keep our own secrets, but reveal our difficulties to the world, even to our enemies, then how would we keep the secrets of the Lord? I can keep a secret till Doomsday. What greater love hath any man than that he lay down his life for his friend; then why not fight for our friend until we die?" (Pg192)
"The work in which we are unitedly engaged is one of no ordinary kind. The enemies we have to contend against are subtle and well skilled in maneuvering; it behooves us to be on the alert to concentrate our energies, and that the best feelings should exist in our midst; and then, by the help of the Almighty, we shall go on from victory to victory, and from conquest to conquest; our evil passions will be subdued, our prejudices depart; we shall find no room in our bosoms for hatred; vice will hide its deformed head, and we shall stand approved in the sight of heaven, and be acknowledged the sons of God.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Great Salt Lake City, September 10, 1854.
By the request of our President, I arise this afternoon for the purpose of addressing you upon those subjects that may be presented to my mind, feeling joyful in my heart that I have the opportunity.
I do not say, as many others may have said, that it is a disagreeable task, or a very great cross, for me to address the Saints; this is not the case; it is a pleasure and a joy; and I feel to esteem it as a blessing from the hand of God, that I have the privilege from time to time of meeting with His people, and speaking about the great things that God has revealed, which belong to our peace, happiness, and welfare, both here and hereafter.
There is no other subject that I care much about. As it regards earthly things, temporal things, the riches of this world, or the honors of this world, I will not say they are of a secondary nature to me, but they are far beneath this; though they may be good in their place, yet my whole object and design, delight and joy, is to do the will of God, to benefit the children of men, and to seek after the welfare, happiness, and peace, not only of myself and family, but also of the whole human race, as far as it is within my power.
It does me good to return, after an absence of two years, and again look upon the faces of the brethren and sisters; there is something so different in the expression of your countenances from what we see abroad in the world; the principles of goodness, of righteousness, of virtue, and of holiness seem to be enstamped upon the countenances of the Saints of the living God; the spirit of meekness, of sobriety, of solemnity-a Godlike spirit is reflected in every feature of those who are truly good, which seems to carry peace, happiness, and joy to the hearts of those who gaze upon them with the same spirit. But after all, brethren, we are not near as good as we might be, in many respects. Though we are far in advance of the nations of the earth, though we have become far exalted above them in the principles of virtue, truth, righteousness, and a oneness of feeling, yet there is still room for improvement, and, while we remain here in the flesh, there will be room for improvement, upon all these principles, upon all the attributes of divinity, and upon everything that is good and Godlike.
There is one subject that presents itself to my mind, and upon which I have meditated in years past and gone, and which gave me great joy when I learned that it was being established in our midst. What is it? It is the consecration of the properties of the whole Church, according to the written revelations, commandments, and laws of the Most High God. I heard of this about the time I was starting upon the plains for this place, and it gave me great joy to learn that there was a prominent step taken at your last Conference to bring about and accomplish this object. I consider it is one of the most important objects to be accomplished among the Saints of Latter-days.
You may ask why? You may think that this contradicts my first statement-that the temporal things of this life are not even of a secondary consideration with me. They are not in one respect, but, in another, I consider them a part and portion of the religion that we as a people have embraced, and a very essential and necessary part too.
We read in the revelations that God has given, that the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof; well, if it is the Lord's and the fulness of it, then it does not belong to you nor me as individuals, exclusive of others. If the Lord had set apart, and consecrated, and given a certain portion of the earth to any individual with a deed and covenant, he might with some propriety call it his own; but all other deeds that are according to Gentile laws, and the institutions of the nations of the earth, do not, according to the laws and revelations of heaven, give to men the exclusive right to the things of this world, as their own; they are good enough in their place, for the Lord deals with the nations according to their light; and suffers laws to be enacted that are good in their place, and calculated to govern imperfect beings; laws to govern and control property; and in many respects, they are just adapted to the circumstances and conditions of the nations where they are enacted; and they are the means of doing much good in preserving what are termed the rights of individuals, and of the citizens generally; and they should not be done away, until circumstances will permit of their being superseded by a more perfect law. That more perfect order is what we wish to speak a few words upon at this present time.
The Lord told us something about it in the revelations He gave a long time ago, in the year 1831, when ancient "Mormonism," as it has often been termed, was first introduced; we call it ancient, because it seems quite long to us narrow minded creatures.
There were certain laws and revelations then given, in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, pertaining to the Lord's earth, and the righteous that He has upon it. I will repeat a small clause which was given before the Church was one year old, in March 1831. It reads thus-wherefore "it is not given that one man should possess that which is above another, wherefore the world lieth in sin." This was revealed above twenty-three years ago; we will again repeat it, "It is not given that one man should possess that which is above another, wherefore the world lieth in sin." Here was a hint of the more perfect law and order of things that God intended eventually to introduce among this people; and which I am happy to say, there has been a great step already taken at the last Conference to bring about; and I hope that I may be permitted to live to see this law carried out to the fullest extent among the Saints of the living God.
Remember, that as long as there is inequality in the things that belong to the Lord, the world lieth in sin. It is not given to them that they should possess one above another. I intend to explain how this is to be brought about, and also show how one man can possess hundreds and thousands of dollars, in a certain sense of the word, and another man only one dollar, and yet both, be equal; but they possess the same, not as their own, but as stewards of the Lord; it being the Lord's property.
We read, in another revelation that God gave in the early rise of this Church, that unless we are equal in earthly things, we cannot be made equal in heavenly things. Here is an equality preached. There must be equality in earthly things, in order that we may be equal in heavenly things. Now supposing the people were all to be made equal to-day, tomorrow they would, through circumstances, become unequal: but I will show you how this equality can be established upon an order that never can be shaken-that inequality, in regard to property, never more can be introduced among the Saints, that no circumstance which can transpire can make them unequal. If a fire should burn up a man's barn, and his stacks of grain, and every thing he has accumulated, I will prove to you that it does not render him unequal with his brethren on the principle the Lord has established and ordained; so that when this order is once established among this people, they will become equal in earthly things, which will prepare them to be made equal in heavenly things.
In the first place how shall we get at this order? In what manner and by what means shall we begin to lay the foundation of this equality? The Lord has told us, that it is required of every man in this Church to lay all things, not one tenth alone, but to lay all things before the Bishop of His Church; consecrate the whole of it-everything he has-his flocks and herds-his cattle, horses, and mules-his gold and silver-his wearing apparel, watches, jewellery, and everything he possesses; consecrate it; not keep back a portion like Annanias and his wife, but give everything-make a full consecration to begin with. (Voice in the stand, "Wives and children.") Yes, give wives and children of course: the wives have given themselves to their husband, and he has to consecrate them; they are the Lord's, He has only lent them to us.
Supposing that the people had complied with this law when it was first given, in every respect, instead of seeing inequality that has reigned for these many years in this Church, we should now have seen a different order of things. But we lacked experience, and there was too much covetousness in our hearts, for a full consecration of property, then. In consecrating property, we must, in the first place, remember that it is not ours. Why? Because the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof. We have no cattle, no gold or silver, no watches or jewellery, no property of any description, no houses, lands, or any thing else which is our own, if the fulness of the earth is the Lord's. Then in consecrating that which we have been in the habit of calling our own, we are only returning to the Lord His own property-that which we became legally possessed of according to the laws of man, but not according to the laws of God, He never having directly given us the things which we claim as ours; we have not got them according to the celestial law-according to the great principle and order God has established; but we came by them through speculation, trading, labor, etc., and after we thus got them they are the Lord's still. We consecrate this property-it all goes into the hands of the Bishop of the Church. If the whole Church were to consecrate in this way they would have nothing left of their own. Then, it would all be the Lord's, and it has to be consecrated too, says the revelation, with a covenant and a deed that cannot be broken; that is, according to the law of God and man, and if it is made according to the law of God in all respects, and also according to the law of the land in which we live, it will be in the situation the Lord wants it in, even the whole property of the Church.
We ask, are they not all equal now? Yes. If the whole Church have consecrated every thing in their possession to the Bishop, is there not a perfect equality among them before they get their stewardship? Yes: this makes them perfectly so, as far as property is concerned; they are all in a state of equality, owning nothing. What is the next step to be taken in order to bring about equality of property. The Lord says, "Let the Bishop appoint every man his stewardship," for, says the Lord, "It is required of every man to render an account of his stewship [stewardship], both in time and in eternity." Now the Bishop begins and parcels out to this man his stewardship, and to that one his stewardship, according to the counsels of the First Presidency of the Church-the authority that has the management and control of the Lord's property. Each one gets his stewardship.
Now supposing one man obtained double the quantity of another; it is not his, but the stewardship is the Lord's; consequently the man is on a perfect equality with his brother still. But there is another sense in which this equality may be made, so far as the consecrating of property to the Church is concerned, which includes the whole of it. I say, who does it belong to in another sense of the word? I have shown you that it belongs to the Lord, and if we are His, we shall inherit it with Him; consequently in another sense of the word it is all ours. If each one in the Church, then, possesses the whole of it, as joint heirs with the Lord, is there not an equality? You may diminish the common property or joint fund just as much as you please. Suppose it were diminished to one half by mobs, &c., it does not make the Church unequal, not in the least; for each one may be considered as the possessor of the whole; he inherits all things; he is a joint heir with Jesus Christ in the inheritance of the earth, and all the fulness thereof. Can you make any inequality here? If each man in the Church is a joint inheritor of all the property, and a part of it, it makes each one perfectly equal with the rest.
Now I defy you to bring about an equality upon any other principle. You may divide the properties of the Church to-day, yes, if it be possible, make perfectly equal division of it, so that every man in the whole Church should have his share, and let him call it his own; it would not be one day before there would be an inequality again introduced; and one man would possess that which is above another; it could not be otherwise; the changes, difficulties, want of judgment in the management and control of property, and all these things combined together, would serve to render these divided shares unequal; one man losing a large portion of his property through mismanagement; another by fire, by mobocracy, or in some other way, so that neither would have one half, one quarter, or perhaps one hundredth part as much as some of his brethren with whom he was only a short time before perfectly equal.
No equality can be brought about by dividing property; the Lord never intended such an order of things. It is not a division of property that is going to bring about a oneness among the Latter-day Saints in temporal things, but it is a union of property, that all the property may be united, and considered belonging to the Lord, and to every individual in the whole Church, as joint heirs with Him, or as His stewards. You may imagine, then, how my heart rejoiced, when I received a letter from our beloved President, informing me that steps had been taken for a full consecration of the property of the Church, to introduce the order of stewardships among the Saints of God.
But in regard to these stewardships, it is not needful or necessary, or the Lord never intended, that every man should possess an equal amount of stewardship with his brother. Why? Because God has given to some men greater ability to manage and control property than others. He may give to one, one talent; to another, two; to another, three; to another, five; and to another, ten; and then command them to make use of these talents according to the instructions and revelations given, and be accountable to Him who gave them. "It is required of every man," says the Lord, "to be accountable to me in their stewardships, both in time and in eternity;" consequently these stewards have to render all their accounts to some one in time, but to whom? To the Lord's Bishop-to those whom the Lord has appointed to receive the accounts. And if a man undertakes to squander the stewardship which the Lord has entrusted to him, He takes it away, and gives it to another who is a more wise steward; one who will manage His property in such a way as to benefit the whole; each one seeking the interest of the whole as well as of himself.
Each one is to be considered as possessor of all things in the Church; but if it be all common property, how is it that the Saints can get along and give an account of their stewardship of property? Will not one brother go and pick up his brother's plow, and take it off, without asking him for it, imagining that he is the possessor of all things? Yes, if that brother had no understanding he would do it, but when he comes to understand the law of the Lord, he will find that all these stewardships are controlled by the wisest kind of laws; hence the Lord says, "Thou shall not take thy brother's garment; thou shalt pay for that which thou dost receive from thy brother." Notwithstanding the whole property belongs to the Lord, and to each one as joint heirs, yet the Lord has given strict laws with regard to the stewardships, so that one has no business to go and pick up his neighbor's ax, or take any of his stewardship from him, without leave; but he is to pay for that which he receives from his brother steward, unless he borrow it by fairly asking for it.
On this principle it would be an easy matter for each steward to render an account of his time; and if necessary he could account for every item of his stewardship. But if it were permitted to run at random, according to the vague ideas of common stock in some societies in the world, away would go a man's hat, or his coat, and he could render no account of it at all. But according to the strict principle which the Lord has ordained, he could show to his Bishop a full account of everything in his stewardship-that he has gained so much here, and made so much there, upon the Lord's property. What says the Bishop? "Well done, good and faithful steward, thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will enlarge that stewardship," providing he had anything to enlarge it with. "You have gained other talents; you have increased upon that intrusted to your charge; you have not squandered it away foolishly for that which would not profit you."
There would be no desire on the part of stewards to steal, "For, says one, If I go and steal from another steward, it is all the Lord's, and it would do just as much good in the hands of that steward to whom it was intrusted, as if I were to possess it by stealing it from him."
How much every Saint ought to be interested for this order of things to be brought about, realizing that all the property of the Church is for his own good as well as for the good of the whole body.
But in regard to these inequalities in stewardship: I will show you another principle where men may have equal judgment, and yet there may be an inequality of stewardships; it is in consequence of the various branches of business in which they may be engaged. It is well known that for farming purposes, it does not require the same skill as for manufacturing many articles, nor the same capital. And the ingenious mechanic, who understands the nature or construction of machinery, might have to be intrusted with stewardship of one hundred thousand dollars worth of property to establish his manufactory, and work it so as to have it prove a benefit to the whole Church; and without this amount being put into his hands, as a steward, he might not be able to accomplish anything needed in the particular branch of manufacturing with which he was familiar. The stewardships, in such cases, would be different, not only in kind, but in the amount or value of the stewardship.
Let me illustrate this in another way; not but what I suppose all the Saints understand it, but you only want to be put in mind of that you have understood for years, but have not perhaps practised upon it; and unless a people practise upon that they do understand, it does not benefit them much. Suppose a man have twelve sons, and he had according to the laws of the land 78 acres of ground; he gives to his oldest son twelve acres as a steward; he gives to his next son eleven acres, and to the next ten, and so on down to the youngest; which he gives one acre; and says unto them, "Manage these different inheritances that I have set off to you, and gain all you can;" would those sons have any right or title to call that property their own? No: they would say, "It is father's property, and he has told us to go and occupy it, and he has given us rules by which we are to be governed; that the youngest may not encroach upon the oldest, nor any one encroach upon another, but that each stewardship may be managed and controlled according to the regulations he has given, and at the end of the year each of us must render strict account to our father of every iota of our business transactions, of our losses and gains in trading, etc." Now all this property, we see, belongs to the father, but it is all for the benefit of the twelve sons; they are all to be made joint heirs with the father in the possession of it. In due time, when they have learned the law the father has ordained, they will be prepared to enter as joint owners upon the grand inheritances, not only of acres, but to possess all things that the father has.
Temporal things are a type of heavenly things, as the Lord says, in one of the revelations, "All things have their likeness, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual." Does this order of things-the equality of property-have its likeness? Yes, in the heavens, and it is typical of that celestial order that we are all praying for, that we all desire the Lord to bestow upon us. We all feel very anxious to enter into the fulness of celestial glory, and inherit thrones and dominions, principalities and powers, and to have kingdoms appointed to us, and to receive crowns and to sway a sceptre over kingdoms, as wise rulers. If we want to get there, we must begin here, and learn the order that is to be there. If we should have a division of property here, as we have had heretofore, and continue this order of things, as has been for many years back, and never should begin to practise upon this equality of things which God has ordained in His law, when we come to enter the courts above, we should be ignoramuses; we could say, "We read in your law something about it, but the people did not practise it, they were careless, and did not keep the law." And now we do not know how to manage this celestial glory, and those kingdoms, and these worlds placed under our charge; for we are to give an account, not only in time, but in eternity, of our stewardship; consequently we must improve upon the true order of things here, which is typical of that which is hereafter; and if we learn the lessons here, everything there will be plain before us, and we will be able to enter into the very things we have been practising years before. There will be an inequality, no doubt, in some respects in the eternal worlds, in proportion to the eternal things that will be intrusted to the servants, as in temporal things; but there will be a perfect equality in another respect; the revelation says, "He maketh them equal in might, and in power, and in dominions."
Did you ever think of that? It is only in one respect. Each one will be made joint heir of all things in heaven, and upon earth. What more can a person want, if he is made a joint heir of all things; and one revelation says, he that is a faithful and wise steward in time shall inherit all things; consequently they are equal in dominion, and in power, and in might, as the vision states. This don't say that each one shall actually control, and govern, and manage all things; that is a very different thing; just as it is here in temporal things, though each person may be considered as the inheritor of all the properties of the Church; yet when he comes to the management of property, he has only a share; so in heavenly things, a person may have the management of only one world, or of two, or of three, or of as many as there are particles of dust that compose our globe, yet, after all, each can proclaim himself as the inheritor of all things, being a joint heir of the grand universal inheritance.
There is no division of celestial glory, imparting to each one an equality of dominion; and might, and power; it is not to be divided, but there is an equality in the union of all these things. That is what we want to get at here; we want to learn the alphabet of it here, and advance to the a, be, abbs, and get over into two syllables, and keep on until we understand all about the celestial order by practice in this world, and then we will learn the laws that are to govern the different individuals that control and manage certain portions of the great joint stock inheritance; we will learn the laws that are to rule and govern between man and man; and we will not be ignorant of it when we go into the next world, we will find there that one kingdom will not have the right to encroach upon the royalty of another and take away its right, but each one will be governed by true and holy laws. Upon this principle, and this only, can we understand those revelations which so often speak of the principles of equality in the eternal worlds. Equality of dominion we cannot understand, by supposing each person that comes into the celestial glory is going to have the same number of worlds, and of kingdoms, and thrones set off to him that those have who have been in the celestial glory millions of ages-that he is going to have the same number of principalities and powers, and servants or angels to wait upon him to carry out his commands. An equality of dominion is that that I have already explained, each one inheriting all things, according to the laws God has ordained for celestial beings, but not directly or personally controlling only that which is placed under his management.
Much might be said upon this subject; it is glorious, and it is a principle I wish the Saints in Utah may all be enlisted in, that it may be sought by the nations afar off, when they come to learn that this people are the people of God, and they are governed by God's laws; that they may see the order carried out before them in practice, that we may be looked to as a great light set upon the mountains, that will reflect upon all the face of the earth, and show the people the true order by practice, and then they will see the difference between God's order of the possession of property, and the little, narrow, contracted orders established by man; for each one is grasping for all he can get, oppressing the widow and the fatherless, bearing down his neighbor, and grinding him down in distress, tyrannising over mankind, because he has riches at his command. The Lord has seen this order long enough, and it is a stink in His nostrils, and He wishes it driven away from the earth, and He has given us instructions to do it away, and if we want to do it away, let us begin among ourselves first. I rejoice in this principle, because it takes away the idea of having so many poor in our midst. You know in the days of Enoch the Lord placed the people upon the high places and mountains, and they flourished, and He blessed them, and called them Zion because there was no poor among them, and the Lord was in their midst.
Now the Latter Day Zion is to be built up according to the same pattern, so far as circumstances will permit, for we expect that the Zion which was built up by Enoch, that had no poor in it, will come down again at the commencement of the Millennium to meet the Zion here, according to the song in the Book of Covenants, "The Lord has brought up Zion from beneath, the Lord has brought down Zion from above," and they shall gaze upon each other's countenances, and see eye to eye. When we get there how sadly we should be disappointed, if we should look forward upon all the vast extent of the Zion of Enoch, and all the Zions God has taken out of His creations to heaven, and should see no poor among them; and then we should look upon Zion brought up from beneath, containing poor and rich; should we not be ashamed? especially when we reflected that the law of God had been among us; we should not have boldness to gaze upon their countenances, unless we came into the same order of things that existed among them.
Let us prepare ourselves for the coming of Enoch's Zion, that we may have the same order of things among us that they had in the beginning. Then, again, it will be a glorious thing in many other respects. What is it that creates this great inequality that we naturally see in the world, in reward to the high and low? It is the difference of parentage in many respects. One man is so situated he can train up his children in all the learning of the day; he can take them into his carriage, and they can ride at their ease, and in their grandeur, while the poor and needy and destitute bow before them, or are trampled under their feet. There is no such thing as union there, because they were unequal to begin with. When the Saints have this established in their midst, you will see them all alike, where none can say that "such a person is richer than I am, and I have no right to associate with him." Neither can the rich look upon those that are poor, and say, "My children shall not marry with the poor, and unite with them in their festivities, &c., because I have more property than they;" all these things will be done away, and the principle of equality will be established, and all will be stewards of the Lord's property. That is what I wish to see-that when one family of children have the privilege of being educated, the rest should enjoy it; when one family are in possession of the good things of the earth, the rest should enjoy the same privileges also.
How do I feel, to take it home to myself? I long for the time to come when I can consecrate everything I have got; all the cattle I have; I have got some first-rate cattle, the Lord has prospered them. I want the time to come when I can consecrate every hoof of them; also my books, and the right and title I have to publish my words, also my wearing apparel, and my houses; they are not mine, and not being mine, I have no business with this property, only as the Lord sees fit to let me have it. When I have done this, if the Lord in His mercy will give me one team, five or ten teams, to make use of as His steward, I will endeavor to keep a record of that stewardship, of the losses and the gains of it, and will endeavor to render an account of it in time as well as in eternity, and an account of all things pertaining to it, and of my transactions in regard to it; for unless I am a wise and faithful steward in time, I never expect to inherit all things in eternity.
Having said this much, may the Lord bless you, and may His Holy Spirit be poured out upon you, and may your hearts be united to bring about this union; for if we unite ourselves together upon this principle, with all our hearts, mights, minds, and strength, laying aside all covetousness, there is not any power beneath the celestial kingdom that is able to prevail against us; we will prosper in all things, and the Lord will make us the richest of all people that have been upon the face of the earth for many generations, and He will bless our basket and our store, and increase and multiply the flocks and the herds in the fields, and cause them to flourish exceedingly, and make us mighty; and when we go forth He will make the nations to tremble before us, because His power and glory will be with us when we are doing His will and are united in one.
Journals of Discourses 2: pg96
Monday, November 10, 2008
But when faith disappears, and is replaced by fear and justification for disobedience to the faith, it is like a light switch being turned off, everything sacred becomes everything hated. We are each light bulbs, and when someone explains most everything as dark, it is pretty obvious that the light bulb of faith is off.
Most people are rather indifferent about how other groups of people believe and live. Even though they do have prejudices against them, (to justify and elevate their own views and lifestyle) they usually don’t become crusaders without the help of information and leadership from ex members who paint everything possible with the dark colors of bitterness. The worse they make it look, the more support and celebrity they get, and the less likely anyone asks for a second opinion.
There are three central issues about the FLDS religion that are awesome to those who ascribe to the faith, things that are celebrated and loved, and looked forward to in heaven, but the bitter ex members vilify and hate the very most; they are marriage selection through prayer and revelation, Celestial plural marriage, and the United Order with a Prophet.
The apostates and their cult following call them: “forced assigned marriage”, “brainwashed sex slaves”, and “abusive Nazi dictator controlling their lives through fear”. The devil himself couldn’t twist the religion worse, and yet that is not the worst. They include “racial hatred”, and “blood atonement” as some central theme for the FLDS against those who apostatize. Only filthy and murderous hearts would spread such things.
I have seen and know families that I can say without a doubt “That is how it is in heaven”, I have seen and been a part of marriages that can never be described to me in anything less than direct from God, and the happiest and most wonderful way to ever enter the commitment to a wife or husband. And I have loved and longed to be a part of, and seen men who eat and sleep with a longing to help one another because they love God and His Prophet. These things are so very sacred and wonderful, and heavenly to me. I have seen heaven in part. I know what heaven feels like and I know what those who live as if they are already there act like. My very life is worth less to me than my longing to be with those people, and that man I call prophet.
It is because of me and my love, and the love others have for these wonderful doctrines and great men, that the apostates and their followers, with the media and government officials who love their dark hearted stories, hate the FLDS; most especially the leader. And it doesn't matter what his name is.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Those who will not try to understand never will, and those who search my words to try to find evil in it, always will, so for them I can do nothing.
The culture we are raised in creates our perspective somewhat, second only to our personal choice, and I grew up with many brothers and sisters and my father has more than one wife. I know that my mothers are wonderful, and happy, and they would not change their lifestyle or religious beliefs any more than my father would. I know this is true for hundreds of my family members. But I guess I have been "brainwashed" to believing that it is normal. I went to Alta Academy and knew Dan Fischers family well, and Ward Jeffs family well, but I did not know that their home life was not as good as mine.
Yet in discussing the polygynist life with others who feel it is wrong, and that it is their duty to vilify the FLDS, they will tell stories of horrors in their own families and then try to blame that o n the religion of the FLDS; and say it is because of polygamy that some women and children have been abused among the FLDS. I think they are brainwashed, because I know they are wrong.
Polygyny is no more abusive than Monogamy, it is a family choice that the FLDS believe is sacred and wonderful if lived in righteousness.
Friday, October 24, 2008
When Joseph Smith ordained the twelve apostles, they were placed in seniority one to another from oldest to youngest. That made Thomas B Marsh the president of the twelve, David W Patten second, and Brigham Young third. Lyman Johnson, who was one of the youngest was ordained first, and Brigham Young was ordained second. Thomas B Marsh and Lyman Johnson apostatized before Joseph passed away, and David Patten was killed in Missouri. And when Joseph Smith was killed there were many who apostatized, who did not believe Brigham Young was the prophet and followed other men. Those men were not "taken down" by God. God allows men to lead people astray if they will, but God never will lead a good person astray.
Brigham Young was the Prophet from 1844 to 1877, thirty-three years. Through most of those years Wilford Woodruff was believed by many to be senior to John Taylor because he was older, and as Joseph originally placed them in seniority according to age, Wilford Woodruff believed it to be still true as well, even though John Taylor helped to ordain Wilford Woodruff. Prior to Brigham Young's passing he made it very clear that where he was not John Taylor presided.
Brigham Young passed away in 1877 and from that time Wilford Woodruff was not close to John Taylor. He was senior in age, as was Orson Pratt, because for many years he was believed to be senior in Priesthood authority. Although this was corrected by Brigham Young shortly before he passed away, Wilford Woodruff went to the Lord asking about being co-equal in authority with John Taylor, he wrote a supposed revelation to the church while John Taylor was still alive, and still the prophet over the people.
Wilford Woodruff wrote "Thus saith the Lord unto My servant John Taylor...", and then later wrote: "And while my servant John Taylor is your President, I wish to ask the rest of my servants of the Apostles the question, although you have one to preside over your Quorum, which is the order of God in all generations, do you not, all of you, hold the apostleship, which is the highest authority ever given to men on earth? You do. Therefore you hold in common the Keys of the Kingdom of God in all the world."
This was completely wrong, and out of order for him. The other two largest of the fundamentalist Mormon groups, the AUB and the Centennial Park people both hold on to this as a revelation, and it was a major reason they split from the FLDS. The AUB has it included in the Four Hidden Revelations.
In 1879, the George Reynolds decision in the Supreme Court made the anti-plural marriage laws binding. Overturning the First Amendment and attempting to stop the Celestial Law. This is shortly before Wilford Woodruff wrote his "revelation" to John Taylor.
A 1882 Revelation to John Taylor states clearly regarding the prerequisite to ordaining men to the High Priesthood: "if he will conform to my law; for it is not meet that men who will not abide my law shall preside over my priesthood"
The 1886 was not submitted to the church because the Prophet John Taylor was in hiding, he was already being hunted by many at the time. He had been in hiding for over a year when George Q Cannon brought him a manifesto to consider, and that is when the Lord gave the 1886 at the home of John W Woolley. John Taylor said he would rather his tongue severed from his mouth than to sanction a manifesto, and his arm removed before he would sign it.
John Taylor passed away in 1887 while still hiding. Many who were in the Mormon church wanted to have plural marriage done away because of the persecution, relatively few were committed to living the highest law and the government was taking all of the property of the church. Wilford Woodruff became the President of the church even though he was not close to the Prophet John Taylor, or ever attempted to see him while in hiding. He was the next in line by ordination, not by unity.
The 1890 Manifesto does not state that the Church will not perform or sanction plural marriage, but rather that they denied that they were doing so. The problem was that was not true, as there are many documented cases proving otherwise besides Wilford Woodruffs own marriage in 1897. Brigham Young Jr who would have succeeded Wilford Woodruff had he lived, and John W Taylor were apostles and married after that, among many others.
And thus we have record of the 1880 "revelation" to Wilford Woodruff declaring he was "co-head" of the church. "Hold the keys in common" was the wording he used. Wilford Woodruff DID lose his seniority, which REQUIRES unity and obedience to the Law and the Prophet. When you read the Bible, the story of Elisha holding the mantle of Elijah is very relevant in how you understand who the Prophet is. Also the story of David and Saul is relevant to the Woolley men, for after David was anointed King he would not "set on the Lords anointed" even though Saul had lost his way. That is how John Woolley and Lorin Woolley treated Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, and Joseph F Smith. Many men stayed in good standing in the church and married plural wives at this time without the President of the Church approving, but the Prophet was doing it. John and Lorin Woolley were given this authority in 1886, and when the Manifesto was read and sustained, those men who sustained it as a revelation lost their Priesthood authority.
John W Woolley was a very reserved man, and did not ever preach that he was the prophet, as he was very humble. And yet he continued to go to the LDS temple and worked there as the Temple Sealer (or the one who performed the wedding ceremonies) after the 1886 revelation. He, like David of Old did not "set on the Lords anointed" He was a close friend of Joseph F Smith, and they conferred together often, even after Joseph F Smith became president of the Church. He did not draw any attention to himself or speak in meetings or gather a separate people, he only continued to do what he was instructed by John Taylor after the 1886 revelation was given. And that was to perform weddings for those who wanted to live the Celestial law. After Joseph F Smith publicly announced the "second manifesto" he suffered quite a bit, for the other Apostles were going to depose him, John Woolley said he "sweat drops of blood", he then sanctioned plural weddings in secret up until his death. He performed the wedding of John W Woolley and his wife in 1910. It was not until Heber J Grant became President of the church that the church President began fighting the Celestial Law of Marriage in actual deed. Any who were devout up to that time could be married in the Celestial Law if they made the effort, as did John Y Barlow:
"I went on a mission, and while there I supposed this thing was all done away with. I came back and what did I see? I saw the President of our Stake -- and by the way, the President of our Stake was a brother to Brother [Heber J.]Grant -- and I saw two of his counselors, and all of them had taken plural wives. I thought to myself, "What is the matter here? There is something wrong somewhere. I am going to find out." So I commenced praying to God. I got the answer. I got it very, very plain. I might relate a little bit to you how it came about.
"I knew that this was going on, but who was doing it I didn't know. I was sure it was going on, for I had a brother that had gone into it, and Brother Thomas Steed and Walter and a great many others had gone into it, and I knew they were good men. So I got a chance. A young lady came to my home and was ready to go into it; so I went to Salt Lake to find out what to do. I approached half a dozen or more to find out what I should do. Finally, one said to me, "Think of the man that bore the strongest testimony you ever knew." I did. He lived out of town. I went to the depot and took the train to where he was. When I got there, he was standing at the depot waiting for me. I started to tell him what I wanted. He said, "Hold on, I will tell you what you want. I was out "Ward teaching" and God told me to come and meet you." I was going to tell him what I wanted, and he said, "I will tell you what you want." He explained to me the whole thing -- how it was and what they were doing. This is how I came to get in this work. Then after I found out it was right and could get it done, he said, "I will be downtown Thursday, or Tuesday, and I will take you to a man that can do it." He took me. I said, "How did you get your authority?" It was perfectly explained satisfactory to me. After he did it, he said, "Now, have your wife go get her endowments." So I went back, and she got a recommend and we all went to the temple. We fasted and prayed for three days, and the morning we went to the temple, I was called up first to stand in the prayer circle. I was called to take that woman through the veil. After that, I was patted on the shoulder and the brother said, "Be careful, Brother Barlow. I knew it the moment you stepped in here. God bless you. Be careful!" That was one of the greatest testimonies to me. Since then, I have had ever so many testimonies." (John Y Barlow 3/25/48)
God will not lead a righteous people astray, but He requires those who call themselves by His name to KNOW they are doing His will. He will send them tests, and requires them to make sure they are doing right no matter what. Those who were doing this during the 1880's and stayed with the doctrine of the Priesthood were no longer LDS after the passing of Joseph F Smith. The Church and any people who were just along for the ride and made no effort to sustain the Celestial Law were cut off from the authority of the Priesthood when the Church began excommunicating those who lived the Celestial Law. The Church authorities apostatized.
To search out and live the Priesthood law of marriage was available for everyone in the Church who would make the effort. All of the FLDS people now are descendants of, or are themselves those who seek after the Celestial Law. Not one marriage in the LDS Church is valid in the Celestial Kingdom, they must be performed by those who hold the Priesthood and live the Celestial Law. Many will be done for the righteous among the LDS and other people during the Millennium. God knows what He is doing, and He knows what we are doing, so we must know what we are doing is what HE wants us to be doing..
Will you hear this little prayer?
I seek for you to hear today
My anxious prayer in some small way
I know I am slow, and far behind
I’m not always sweet, pure, and kind
But still my Father I will pray
With all my heart anyway!
For just one thing I ask
One single solitary task
Nothing is to great for Thee
Even if it is just for little me
All I ask from you today
O If there is any way!
Tell those I love with all my soul
Just how much I love them so!
Thursday, October 16, 2008
"I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support – rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill.
"Mr. Speaker – I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount. There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt. The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."
He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.
Like many other young men, and old ones, too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.
I went early to his room the next morning and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table. I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied:
"You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it."
He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished he turned to me and said:
"Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."
I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:
"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way.
"The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.
The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them.
"So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: "Don't be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted."
He replied: "I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say."
I began: "Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and – "
"'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.'
This was a sockdolager... I begged him to tell me what was the matter.
"Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the Constitution to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is."
"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question."
"No, Colonel, there's no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"
"Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with."
"Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?"
Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:
"Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."
"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."
I have given you an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:
"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."
"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:
"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it full. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said there at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."
He laughingly replied:
"Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."
"If I don't," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."
"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."
"Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name."
"My name is Bunce."
"Not Horatio Bunce?"
"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me; but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go."
We shook hands and parted.
It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.
At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.
Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.
I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before.
I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him – no, that is not the word – I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.
But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted – at least, they all knew me.
In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:
"Fellow citizens – I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."
I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:
"And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.
"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."
He came upon the stand and said:
"Fellow citizens – It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today."
He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.
I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.
"Now, Sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.
"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men – men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased – a debt which could not be paid by money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."
My Father wanted me to post this.
Friday, October 10, 2008
He just so happened to be walking down Memorial St in Hildale when I was loading up to go on a picnic. He called out "HI AL!" and came walking to me with a great big smile. I greeted him just as warmly and shook his hand. I don't know why, but I have never loved a brother more, he treated me like his best friend and bore his testemony to me of the Priesthood and the Prophet and the work of Zion. He was so filled with love even for me that I cannot even describe it. We stood there and spoke for 45 minutes... I will never forget that... How I want to be like WILL!
But that is not why I started this post. I want everyone to go and read about Will's son Willson, and his experience with CPS. Here: