A Joseph F. Smith Quote Timely For This Election Year

[Scott Lloyd]

This past weekend I attended the BYU Church History Symposium focusing on the era of President Joseph F. Smith, the sixth president of the Church.

One of the speakers gave this quotation from President Smith that I found particularly timely in this election year when a Mormon is the frontrunner in the race for his party's nomination:

"We refuse to be bound by interpretations which others place upon our beliefs or by what they allege must be the practical consequences of our doctrine. We deny that either our belief in divine revelation or our anticipation of the coming Kingdom of God weakens in any degree the genuineness of our allegiance to our country."

This quote was also given:

"In answer to the charge of disloyalty founded upon alleged secret operations against our government, we declare to all men that there is nothing treasonable or disloyal in any ordinance ceremony or ritual of the church. We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges and the individual rights of its members as citizens denied."

Apparently, mistrust of Mormons in politics was a problem back then, 106 years ago, as it is today.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[volgadon]

Apparently, mistrust of Mormons in politics was a problem back then, 106 years ago, as it is today.

If anything, it was more severe back then.

[Cobalt-70]

If anything, it was more severe back then.

It was far more severe back then. Not even in the same ball park. The controversy then was whether or not Mormons were so subversive to what America stood for that a Mormon could be seated in the U.S. Senate. People wondered whether or not it was even possible for Mormons to be good, patriotic Americans. At the time, Mormons still covenanted in the temple to never stop praying that God would take vengeance against the United States for the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum, and prominent Mormons, including Joseph F. Smith himself, were still polygamists and therefore outlaws.

[volgadon]

It was far more severe back then. Not even in the same ball park. The controversy then was whether or not Mormons were so subversive to what America stood for that a Mormon could be seated in the U.S. Senate. People wondered whether or not it was even possible for Mormons to be good, patriotic Americans. At the time, Mormons still covenanted in the temple to never stop praying that God would take vengeance against the United States for the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum, and prominent Mormons, including Joseph F. Smith himself, were still polygamists and therefore outlaws.

Yes, I know. I was aiming for an understated effect.

[Avatar4321]

Kind of hard to judge whether it was more severe back then than now when we havent even seen how bad it will get now. Just MHO

[cinepro]

Anyone who thinks a Mormon is going to have a negative effect on our national government is clueless about what goes on in Washington.

Mormons should be more concerned about Romney's Mormonism being corrupted by Washington, not vice-versa.

[Cobalt-70]

Anyone who thinks a Mormon is going to have a negative effect on our national government is clueless about what goes on in Washington.

Mormons should be more concerned about Romney's Mormonism being corrupted by Washington, not vice-versa.

And nobody can say that a Mormon president would be more beholden to Thomas Monson than somebody like Santorum would be to the Pope, or for that matter, politicians in general to their campaign contributors. Even if it were true that Romney would be beholden to the LDS hierarchy, why would that be worse than than all the other types of covert political influences that Americans now tolerate, and even celebrate?

[KevinG]

We should investigate his ties to Ann Romney. Who can resist the influence of a Mormon wife and what is this secret "relief society" we keep hearing about?

[Scott Lloyd]

Yes, I know. I was aiming for an understated effect.

As was I.

[thesometimesaint]

Article Six of the United States Constitution

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Except when it comes to Mormons?

[Cobalt-70]

Article Six of the United States Constitution The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Except when it comes to Mormons?

This passage was not applicable to B.H. Roberts and Reed Smoot. A "religious test" is an oath that someone might be required to subscribe to in favor of some religious doctrine (such as, to use a British example, that the king of England is the head of the Church). Moreover, Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution says, "Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members." So it may refuse to seat any duly elected member for any reason, and its decision is not appealable to the Supreme Court.

[orion88]

Apparently, mistrust of Mormons in politics was a problem back then, 106 years ago, as it is today.

I think the biggest opposition to Mormonism in the past was polygamy, most likely the reason

why Mr. Smith was killed.

Mr. Romney should be fine.

[Xander]

Mormons should be more concerned about Romney's Mormonism being corrupted by Washington, not vice-versa.

Too late for that.

[Xander]

Apparently, mistrust of Mormons in politics was a problem back then, 106 years ago, as it is today.

As it is today? You're comparing apples and sea weed.

Today there are a number of Mormon Senators and Congressmen who have obtained office without anyone noticing or caring that they're Mormon. Now we have a Mormon who is probably going to win the Republican nomination for President, which he could never do without the support of Evangelicals.

At what point will Mormons admit that theirs is an imagined state of persecution?

Atheists have a much, much harder time obtaining office than do Mormons.

[KevinG]

As it is today? You're comparing apples and sea weed.

Today there are a number of Mormon Senators and Congressmen who have obtained office without anyone noticing or caring that they're Mormon. Now we have a Mormon who is probably going to win the Republican nomination for President, which he could never do without the support of Evangelicals.

At what point will Mormons admit that theirs is an imagined state of persecution?

Atheists have a much, much harder time obtaining office than do Mormons.

For your statement to make anysense you would have to agree that Mistrust = Persecution. FYI - it doesn't. I don't think any Mormon or Mormon Apologist made the case that we ere persecuted in this day and time. Simply mistrusted. And with the misinformation some of our critics are more than willing to spread it is no wonder why.

[Xander]

If Romney loses to Obama, and he probably will, I predict an onslaught of Mormon indignation like never before. We're going to hear all kinds of excuses about how he lost because he was Mormon. Four years ago Dan Peterson tried to blame Mike Huckabee when Romney lost the nomination, for saying something about LDS doctrine. I forget what it was.

[Xander]

For your statement to make anysense you would have to agree that Mistrust = Persecution. FYI - it doesn't. I don't think any Mormon or Mormon Apologist made the case that we ere persecuted in this day and time. Simply mistrusted. And with the misinformation some of our critics are more than willing to spread it is no wonder why.

106 years ago it was persecution. Mistrust would be an extreme understatement. Today it is neither mistrust nor persecution. And there is little misinformation being used by the critics. It is for the most part, true information that Mormons would rather keep out of the public arena. For instance, six years ago Lawrence O'Donnell was wrong to say blacks couldn't join the Church until 1978. But for non-LDS this is really a distinction without much of a difference as the ban on priesthood comes across as just as racist. I can't think of anything else really that can be considered misinformation, that is regularly circulated in the media about Mormons. Most of it is just stuff Mormons don't want to have to explain, so they tend to downplay it.

[Xander]

It is only a matter of time that the Temple gets more attention than the Church bargained for. People are naturally inquisitive, and as soon as Romney wins the nomination, the investigations into Mormon practices will take on a life of its own. There is simply no way in the world the American people are going to not investigate or wonder more about what the most powerful man in the world is doing behind closed doors in a religious temple. Think of the criticism of "Obama the secret Muslim Kenyan" x 3. Expect to see the garments shown in all their glory on cable news networks and documentaries on the ties between Mormon temples and freemasonry, etc.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Xander

[Xander]

And nobody can say that a Mormon president would be more beholden to Thomas Monson than somebody like Santorum would be to the Pope, or for that matter, politicians in general to their campaign contributors. Even if it were true that Romney would be beholden to the LDS hierarchy, why would that be worse than than all the other types of covert political influences that Americans now tolerate, and even celebrate?

I agree Romney is far more loyal to his campaign contributors than he is the Church. Compare his flips on things like abortion, with his adamant refusal to condemn even the most atrocious misogyny by Limbaugh, simply because Clear Channel directors have contributed nearly a million to his campaign. Romney has always been a politician up for the highest bidder and only 9% of his campaign donations come from small donations of $200 or less. Compare that to Obama's 60%. He's a politician for the minority rich and the numbers and polls reflect that reality.

Of course, when he loses, all the rage here will be about how he lost because of his religion.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Xander

[KevinG]

If Romney loses to Obama, and he probably will, I predict an onslaught of Mormon indignation like never before. We're going to hear all kinds of excuses about how he lost because he was Mormon. Four years ago Dan Peterson tried to blame Mike Huckabee when Romney lost the nomination, for saying something about LDS doctrine. I forget what it was.

It was Huckabees use of the "other Christ" lines which had a big impact on the Southern primaries. I lived here, I work elections and I know what the impact of mistrust was. Huckabee was my favorite candidate until he pulled that cynical and unprofessional move.

[KevinG]

106 years ago it was persecution. Mistrust would be an extreme understatement. Today it is neither mistrust nor persecution. And there is little misinformation being used by the critics. It is for the most part, true information that Mormons would rather keep out of the public arena. For instance, six years ago Lawrence O'Donnell was wrong to say blacks couldn't join the Church until 1978. But for non-LDS this is really a distinction without much of a difference as the ban on priesthood comes across as just as racist. I can't think of anything else really that can be considered misinformation, that is regularly circulated in the media about Mormons. Most of it is just stuff Mormons don't want to have to explain, so they tend to downplay it.

Saying modern Mormons live in an "imagined state of persecution" is misinformation. That was the misinformation I was referring to. Yours.

[KevinG]

It is only a matter of time that the Temple gets more attention than the Church bargained for. People are naturally inquisitive, and as soon as Romney wins the nomination, the investigations into Mormon practices will take on a life of its own. There is simply no way in the world the American people are going to not investigate or wonder more about what the most powerful man in the world is doing behind closed doors in a religious temple. Think of the criticism of "Obama the secret Muslim Kenyan" x 3. Expect to see the garments shown in all their glory on cable news networks and documentaries on the ties between Mormon temples and freemasonry, etc.

That goes with the territory- it will provide great missionary opportunities and a chance to set the record straight.

[KevinG]

I agree Romney is far more loyal to his campaign contributors than he is the Church. Compare his flips on things like abortion, with his adamant refusal to condemn even the most atrocious misogyny by Limbaugh, simply because Clear Channel directors have contributed nearly a million to his campaign. Romney has always been a politician up for the highest bidder and only 9% of his campaign donations come from small donations of $200 or less. Compare that to Obama's 60%. He's a politician for the minority rich and the numbers and polls reflect that reality.

Of course, when he loses, all the rage here will be about how he lost because of his religion.

You lack understanding of how a Governor Governs and a President Presides. His platform positions do not have to be lock step with his personal beliefs to make him a good leader. Reagan would not have made the republican nominee in the 80's if he were held to the conservative litmus test for today's candidates during his service as California Governor.

But this is political isn't it?

[Scott Lloyd]

I think the biggest opposition to Mormonism in the past was polygamy, most likely the reason

why Mr. Smith was killed.

Mr. Romney should be fine.

Actually, polygamy was never more than a rumor during the Illinois period of LDS Church history. The Latter-day Saints were driven from their homes in New York, Ohio, Missouri and Illinois and ultimately forced to make an exodus to the Rocky Mountains outside the then-existing confines of the United States before plural marriage was publicly acknowledged and became a major public issue.

For example, in the mob manifesto in Missouri, a secret document by which members of the mob pledged to drive the Mormons from their homes in Jackson County, you will see no reference to plural marriage. There are other reasons given, such as Mormon opposition to slavery.

In short, it is a misconception that Joseph Smith was murdered because of polygamy or that it played a prominent role in the oppression inflicted upon the Latter-day Saints prior to the move to the Mountain West and the establishment of Salt Lake City. Too often it is falsely presented in an effort to rationalize what is one of the most shameful chapters in American history.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Cobalt-70]

Actually, polygamy was never more than a rumor during the Illinois period of LDS Church history. The Latter-day Saints were driven from their homes in New York, Ohio, Missouri and Illinois and ultimately forced to make an exodus to the Rocky Mountains outside the then-existing confines of the United States before plural marriage was publicly acknowledged and became a major public issue.

For example, in the mob manifesto in Missouri, a secret document by which members of the mob pledged to drive the Mormons from their homes in Jackson County, you will see no reference to plural marriage. There are other reasons given, such as Mormon opposition to slavery.

In short, it is a misconception that Joseph Smith was murdered because of polygamy or that it played a prominent role in the oppression inflicted upon the Latter-day Saints prior to the move to the Mountain West and the establishment of Salt Lake City. Too often it is falsely presented in an effort to rationalize what is one of the most shameful chapters in American history.

Polygamy did play a small part in Smith's death, but it was an incidental part. It was one of the main reasons why William Law and Robert Foster decided Smith was a fallen prophet, and one of the things mentioned in the Expositor, but the non-Mormon residents of Illinois were more generally upset because they believed Smith was acting above the law, and the destruction of the Expositor only seemed to confirm that. Polygamy was just one example among many in which Smith was said to be operating above the law.

It is hard to say that Smith's death was the result of religious persecution. The anger was apparently more political than religious. Smith's enemies like William Law and Robert Foster had nothing against Mormonism, and in fact they still believed in Mormonism. The religious-directed persecution against Mormons as a people, which led to their expulsion from Nauvoo, mainly developed in the couple of years after Smith's death. Before then, the anger was focused mainly on Smith personally.