l_>'^i^iijO, I^ C^ VmJu-- I^^J^^^ ^f^^c^f^^^ cZ^^^^^^^^Lx.-.*^C^^<' THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS MORMONISM EXAMINED AND REFUTED ELDER DAVIS H. BAYS St. Louis CHRISTIAX PUBLISHING COMPANY Copyrighted, 1897, By CHRISTIAN PUBLISHING COMPANY. XLo /BSs Devoted "Mite WHO, THROUGH A LONG AND SERIOUS ILLNESS, NURSED ME BACK TO LIFE, AND ONLY FOR WHOSE WATCHFUL CARE THESE PAGES WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN WRITTEN, THIS VOLUME IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED PREFACE. The only apology the T^riter has to offer for presenting' this volume to the public, is the consciousness that such a work is needed. It is designed as an aid to those who care to become more thoroughly acquainted with the intricacies of Mormon theology, and especially those who have only been able to study it from the outside. With few excep- tions those who have undertaken to '^ expose" Mormonism have dealt with the follies and ^'grosser crimes" of the system, and have paid little or no attention to the fundamental principles upon which the Church of the Saints is based. No writer, so far as we are informed, has ever under- taken to analyze and refute, in a thorough, systematic manner, the doctrines and dogmas of Mormonism. In this volume we have endeavored to present the doctrines of the church as they are defined by its leading minds, together with the Biblical evidences adduced in their support, and then offer such evidences from scriptural and other sources as will, in the writer's opinion, overthrow the arguments presented, and prove the entire system erroneous. Reared in the faith of the Saints from early childhood, and having been, for twenty-seven years, a zealous advo- cate and defender of its peculiarities, the writer has bad rare opportunities for studying Mormonism from the inside. The line of argument usually employed by writers and speakers to refute the Mormon dogma is of such a character as to render success almost impossible. They depend very largely upon the current belief that the prophet's general reputation for veracity was bad; and that the Book of Mormon was concocted from the old Spaulding Romance. PREFACE In this work we rely upon nothing of this kind. We have something far better, and upon which we may confidently rely. We take up each proposition as it is presented by its friends, and then proceed to answer and refute their argu- ments in a fair, straightforward manner, demonstrating the fallacy and erroneousness of the entire system, from a purely Biblical and philosophical point of view. Containing, as the work does, full proof -texts and his- torical references upon every question discussed, it is a complete hand-book of ready reference, and is admirably adapted to the use of clergymen and others who may have the questions to meet, as well as a source of reliable infor- mation to the general reader. The work, in both its design and mode of argument, may truthfully be said to be original and altogether unique, and contains much valuable matter never before published. In collecting data for the work, I have been placed under obligations to a number of the leading scholars of the country, prominently among whom may be men- tioned President James B. Angell, of the University of Michigan; Ira Maurice Price, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Oriental Languages and Literatures, of the University of Chicago; Charles H. S. Davis, Ph.D., M. D., of Meriden, Conn., Dr. Chas. E. Moldenke, of New York, Specialist in Egyptology and Archeology, and Pres. W. R. Harper, of the University of Chicago. To these gentlemen, together with many others who have rendered valuable aid, the writer hereby tenders his expression of thanks. In the hope that this volume may be the humble means of reflecting needed light upon the themes discussed, and that it may accomplish the good for which it is intended, and without stopping to offer apologies for its many defects, we send this little book out into the world upon its mission of mercy and love. D. H. Bays. TABLE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTEE I. INTRODUCTORY. A remarkable claim — Marvelous if true— No middle ground — ^Either true or false — Apostle Pratt states the case — Origin of Mormon- ism — Joseph's vision — Churches all wrong — Their teachers cor- rupt — The angel Moroni — Hidden plates revealed — Urim and Thummim 17 CHAPTER II. Martin Harris and the stolen manuscript — Oliver Cowdery — His part in the work — Church organized — The Spaulding Romance — Deposited in Oberlin Library — Old theory abandoned— Sidney Rigdon not one of the originators — Book of Mormon, its pur- port—The American Bible— Apostles chosen — The First Presi- dency—The Patriarch — Otlier officers — Mormon intolerance- Doctrines of the Church 21 CHAPTER HI. The Mormon House — Its internal garnishment — Visions, dreams, etc. — All deceptive— Spiritual gifts — Were they to be perpetuated? — Mormonism affirms — It must prove — The apostolic commission —Its obligations perpetual— The signs promised were limited — The church perpetuated — Gates of hell shall not prevail against it 35 CHAPTER IV. Casting out devils— The Saints try it— Devils are obstinate— Epi- lepsy and insanity— A modern instance— Great trial to the faith- ful — Unknown tongues not necessary — Conditions have changed — An unkn'own tongue impossible — A tongue and its interpretation —Missionaries cannot speak in tongues— 1 Cor., twelfth chapter— 1 Cor., thirteenth chapter— Tongues shall cease and prophecies fail— A rule— Gifts for Gentiles— Take up serpents. . . 45 (7) 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTEK Y. Deadly things— Joseph's claim— Was he poisoned ?— The case exam- ined—Hair came out— Claim unsupported— Healing the sick— The writer's experience and disappointment— Then and now — Dis- couraged—A Mormon subterfuge— Bible miracles and latter day pretensions. . 62 CHAPTER VI. Other claims— The Adventists— Fi-ee Methodists— Dr. Dowie— The Cliurch of Rome— Their miracles lack authentication— The Church at Corinth— Spiritual gifts were for edification— Utah Church and its miracles— The sick healed— Cases cited— Are they genuine? —-The Reorganized Church— Excellent moral character of its mem- bership — Claims to miraculous powers — Tested by a simple rule — Miracles no longer necessary 70 CHAPTER VII. The Mormon Churcli a unique structure — Divided into many fac- tions—Which is right ?— King Strang— His kingdom— The Mor- mon idea of an apostolic church— Its ofBcers — Apostle's Kelley's rule for testing churches 75 CHAPTER YIII. The Reorganized Church deficient — The patriarch omitted — Only nine apostles — An argument examined — ^Polygamy and highway robbery— A corrupt tree— A bitter fountain— Duties of an apostle defined— Brighamite and Reorganized churches agree — The whole system is unscriptural 83 CHAPTER IX. Apostles in the primitive church— The apostolic office is ambassa- dorial, not executive— Ambassadors in the church now are unnec- essary and impossible— Mr. Kelley's rule applied— Apostolic suc- cession. 91 CHAPTER X. Nuts to crack— To the law and to the testimony— The Bible recog- nizes no First Presidency in the church — No Patriarch, no High Priests — ^Prom another standpoint— An elder is a Melchizedek priest— May give the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands. 101 TABLE OF CONTENTS 9 CHAPTER XL Church and kingdom synonymous— The church from John to the calling of the twelve without apostles— From 1830 to 1835 without apostles — Only elders — Fact and theory — Bible church and Mor- mon church compared — Branch president — Mr. Kelley's test applied to Mormon coin — Weighed in the balance and found wanting 106 CHAPTER XH. Foundation of the church— Various opinions on Matt. 18 : 18— Upon this rock — What rock ?— Joseph Smith's view— Apostle Smith examined — Revelation the foundation of the Mormon Church— The writer's heresy— Christ the rock, the foundation. . 112 CHAPTER XIH. The spiritual house — Christ the chief corner-stone — In types — Pillar of fire— The smitten rock— The question settled— No other founda- tion but Christ — Book of Mormon and the rock— Joseph Smith vs. Joseph Smith — Witnesses in the balances — Summary. . 134 CHAPTER XIV. Priesthood and preachers — Ministers must be called by revelation — Joseph was like Moses — Joseph and Oliver ordained to the Aaronic priesthood by an angel — Ordained by Peter, James and John to the Melchizedek priesthood— Questioned by President Smith of the Reorganized Church — His view criticised — How priesthood is conferred — Angels do not officiate at ordinations^ Who ordained Moses, Melchizedek or Christ ?— Christ the only Melcliizedek priest 132 CHAPTER XV. Priesthood— What is it ?— Webster i\s. Kelley — Mormon definition erroneous — Joseph's revelation on priesthood — Handed down from father to son— Isaiah lived in the days of Abraham— Moses ordained by his father-in-law, Jethro— Abraham ordained by Melchizedek— A table of dates and ordinations— Gad ordained Jeremy 1120 years before the prophet was born. . . 144 CHAPTER XVI. Apostles, then and now — How called ?— What is an apostle? — Called by Jesus personally — Not ordained by the laying on of hands — 10 TABLE OF CONTEXTS How were the apostles qualified ?— Endued Avith power from on high— Mormon apostles— How called ?— Chosen by Oliver Cow- dery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris — Names of the twelve apostles. 151 CHAPTER XVII. Joseph's apostles— How qualified— Tarry at Kirtland— Dedication of the Kirtland temple— House filled with angels — Questions and answers— Jesus did not appear— The Reorganized Church— When organized, and by whom — Of whom composed — Seven apostles chosen — Their names — Chosen by a committee of three— The lesser ordains the greater — Can a stream rise above its fountain ? — Apostasy of Apostle Briggs— Repudiates his^ own revelation — Three of the seven apostles reduced to the ranks— Ells and Derry chosen by a committee of three— Apostle Derry resigns— Summed up 158 CHAPTER XVIII. The Book of Mormon— What is it 1— History of a Jewish colony- Written on metallic plates— Plates discovered near Palmyra, New York — Joseph's account of the discovery — New revelation- Orson Pratt's view — All authority lost in the great apostasy- Restored by an angel— Joseph's key to the revelation of St. John — The man-child is the priesthood — Mr. Pratt answered— A mon- strous claim , .... 165 CHAPTER XIX. Is a new revelation necessary 1— The great' apostasy — Did it annul all existing authority ?— The great Jewish apostasy— Autljority not destroyed— Devout Zacharias— John the Baptist— The old kingdom and the new— Authority transferred— The latter day apostasy— How does it afEect the Mormon Church ?— Joseph's church apostatized— Church rejected of God— The Reorganized Church the result of apostasy— The Church of Christ transmitted from the times of the apostles 172 CHAPTER XX. A marvelous work and a wonder— An untenable claim — Prom Presi- dent Blair— His comments on Isaiah 29— Mr. Kelley's points of identity— Ariel— Old and new— Book to be taken out of the ground 182 TABLE OF COXTEXTS 11 CHAPTER XXI. The land shadowing with wings— Is it North and South American- Common ground — Ariel is Jerusalem — It shall be as Ariel — The Ariel of the West— A race ex terminated — Their History — The land shadowing with wings is Egypt, not America — Views of Ira Maurice Price, Ph. D 189 CHAPTER XXII. The book that is sealed — Isaiali, chapter twenty-nine — The words of a book — Presented to Prof. Charles Anthon — A woe pronounced against Jerusalem — The city where David dwelt— Inspired trans- lation — Different rendering of Isaiah twenty-nine — Quotation from — Comments — A safe rule — Isaiah twenty-nine relates to the destruction of Jerusalem — Ten propositions — No propliecy con- cerning a book — A question of exegesis and history — The prophecy of Isaiah concerning the destruction of Jerusalem literally ful- filled—Revolt of the ten tribes— Israel and Judah— The Assyrian captivity — A strange work 194 CHAPTER XXIII. The Babylonian captivity— Nebuchadnezzar— Siege of Jerusalem — • Raised forts against the city— Terms of Isaiah's prophecy — Jeremiah records its fulfillment — The nations that fight against Mount Zion — Become as the dream of a night vision — Have all passed away — Wise and prudent men — The blindness of all Israel — The Chaldean army besieges Jerusalem — Josephus describes it — Downfall of the Jewisli kingdom— A marvelous work and a wonder 20? CHAPTER XXIV. Professor Anthon and Martin Harris— The "words of a book" — Joseph Smith's transcript presented to the Professor— Read this, I pray thee — I cannot read a sealed book — Joseph Smith, not Martin Harris, made the statement— Times and Seasons for May 2, 1842— Mr. Kelley states the case— The Professor could not decipher the characters— Characters were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic— Self-contradictory— Correctly translated— Professor Anthon's statement— Contradicts Mr. Harris— No other witnesses — The statements compared— Smith-Harris testi- mony incompetent. . 220 12 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER XXV. The testimony of the three witnesses — A remarkable document — Apostle Pratt's view — An immense conclusion — The witnesses not deceived— The testimony is true or they are impostors— The line is drawn by Mormon authority — Are the witnesses unim- peachable ?— Direct and indirect evidence— The Mormon Church- Authority depends upon the veracity of these witnesses — An admission— A negative proposition — How established— An illus- tration 237 CHAPTER XXVI. The three witnesses— Did they see an angel ?— Impeaching the wit- nesses—Seven counts in the indictment— Eight witnesses— Testi- mony unimportant — Their defection from the prophet in Mis- souri—Stick to their original story— The three witnesses did not recant — Reasons for adhering to the original story— Afraid to expose the fraud— Better die with a lie on their lips than to divulge the secret— The touch of angelic hands in holy ordina- tion—How could they forsake the prophet ?— If I had seen the angel— A visit to David Whitmer— Did the witnesses reaffirm 'i— A letter from Martin Harris 244 CHAPTER XXVII. They did not see the angel— The reasons given— Egyptology little understood in 1830— Under the light of recent discoveries— The veil removed— Book of Mormon written in Egyptian— Orson Pratt's testimony— Testimony of Martin Harris— Were tlie char- acters on the plates Egyptian? — Fac-simile of the characters- Genuineness verified by Mormon authority. . . ' 254 CHAPTER XXVIII. The characters are not Egyptian— The testimony of scholars— Mr. Kelley's fac-simile— Submitted to scholars for examination— Ex- planatory letter— President James B. Angell's reply— A moral, not a linguistic question— Characters fraudulent— Chas. H. S. Davis, M. D., Ph. D.— Characters put down at random— Resem- ble nothing, not even shorthand— Not/an Egyptian letter or char- acter in it— A letter from Jerusalem — Dr. Charles E. Moldenke— The plates of the Book of Mormon a fraud— Egyptian and Arabic side by side— Is ridiculous and impossible— Characters bear no re- semblance to Egyptian or Assyrian— Testimony of the witnesses compared— Scholarship rs. ignorance— Conclusion of the whole matter 260 TABLE OF CONTENTS 13 CHAPTER XXIX. The Doctrines of Mormonism— What the Saints believe— The only way to be saved— Erroneous exegesis— Faith towards God- Repentance from dead works— Works of the law— Must leave them— Cannot perfect the believer— Character of the Hebrew letter— Hebrews 6: 1, 2 paraphrased— The doctrine of baptisms- Divers washings of the law— Baptize— Born— The difference— The law of life— The law of sin and death— Summary, . . 277 CHAPTER XXX. The laying on of hands— Is it an ordinance of the Gospel ?— Neither Christ nor the apostles enjoin it— Not a principle of the doctrine of Christ— Peter and John give the Holy Spirit— Paul at Ephesus — Classed among apostolic miracles— Not necessary to salva- tion—It is of Hebrew origin— The scape-goat— Sins laid upon the goat— Sins of the world laid upon Christ 291 CHAPTER XXXI. Testimony of the Book of Mormon— Does it teach the laying on of hands ?— Contains the fullness of the Gospel— The first Nephite Church— Alma the first high priest— No laying on of hands— One faith and one baptism— First appearance of Christ— His Doctrine —Taught his disciples— He neither taught nor practiced the lay- ing on of hands— Holy Spirit received without it— Nephite twelve disciples did not teach the doctrine— Its practice— Not an instance in the Book of Mormon— It is mentioned but once— Faitli, Repent- ance, Confession and Baptism— More than tins cometh of evil- Joseph and Oliver received the Holy Spirit without the laying on of hands— Resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment— Leav- ing the principles of the doctrine of Christ— What is meant by it? — Conclusion. ... - 303 CHAPTER XXXII. Mormon polygamy— Was Joseph Smith its author?— Became public soon after the prophet's death— Joseph's power over his people— An illustration— " Thou shalt give heed to all his words" — Doctrine and Covenants accepted— Polygamy practiced before Joseph's death— Questioned only by the Reorganized Church— The son guards the good name of his father— Polygamy a gradual growth— Book of Mormon condemns the doctrine— Early sus- picions—Charged with polygamy in 1835— Article on marriage- Does not exclude the practice— One man one wife-— One woman 14 TABLE OF COXTEXTS but one husband — John C. Bennett — The secret wife system — Trouble between Smith and Bennett — The Nauvoo Legion — A sham battle 318 CHAPTER XXXIII. Side-lights— A. H, Smith on polygamy — Those certificates— Dr. Ben- nett's apostasy — He divulges the secret wife system — Joseph denies — Hyrum Brown cut off from the church — Hyrum Smith denies — Denials examined — Priesthood and polygamy — Testimony of William Marks — Joseph Smith knew polygamy existed — A thus saith the Lord would have stopped it — Joseph alone respon- sible 331 CHAPTER XXXIV. Revelation on celestial marriage — Joseph Smith its author — A house of order — If any man marry him a wife— For time and all eter- nity — Passing the angels and the gods — Then shall they be gods — All manner of sins and blasphemies shall be forgiven —Shedding innocent blood the unpardonable sin— Abraham's wives— Sarah and Hagar — Isaac and Jacob — David and Solomon — Sealed on earth and sealed in heaven — Emma Smith — Must accept the celestial law or be destroj^ed— If a man espouse a virgin — If he espouse another he is justifi.ed — If he have ten virgins given him— The original wife — She must procure other wives for her lord, or be destroyed— Will reveal more hereafter— Mrs. Stenhouse — Celestial law, indeed !— Joseph must have written it. . 344 CHAPTER XXXV. Sprang from the same root— Shedding innocent blood— Evil and obscene practices — Who was their author ? — Fruit of the Mormon tree — History of the polygamy revelation — What Emma Smith says about it — Interviewed by her son — What her statement proves — Her testimony does not agree with that of Elder Marks — Brigham Young's testimony — A copy of the revelation preserved by Brigham — Published in 1852 — The Laws and Fos- ters — Nauvoo Expositor destroyed — The prophet arrested — Affidavits of Ebenezer Robinson and wife — Hyrum Smith taught them polygamy 359 CHAPTER XXXVI. Bearded the lion in his den — Alexander and David Smith in Utah — Deny that their father was in polygamy — Brighamites respond — Smith-Littlefield controversy — Positive proof that Joseph Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 15 had plural wives — Testimony of David Fullmer — Thomas Grover's letter — Certificate of Lovina Walker — Affidavit of Emily D. P. Young— Affidavit of Leonard Soby — What Z. H. Gurley says of Mr. Soby — Testimony of Mercy R. Thompson — She was sealed to Hyrum Smith — Her letter to President Smith — His view of the case — He accounts for the origin of polygamy — Summary. . 372 CHAPTER XXXVII. The gathering— A new Jerusalem promised— Western Missoum the land of Zion — Independence the central spot — Temple to be built — Saints begtn to gather — Established in Zion — A dark cloud arises — Driven from Jackson County — Zion in possession of the enemy — The redemption of Zion — How it is to be accomplished — A para- ble — Zion's camp — Baurak Ale — The Lord's warriors — Start for Zion — Meet a superior force — A narrow escape— A terrible storm — A new revelation — Army to disband— Wait for a little season — Cholera in the camp — Tried as Abraham— I will fight your bat- tles — Shall find grace and favor in the eyes of the people — Let my army become very strong — Far West — The Mormon war — Resist the militia — Several killed — Exterminating order of Gov. Boggs — Joseph and the leaders arrested — Mormons driven from the State — The whole gathering scheme a failure 391 CHAPTER XXXVIII. Prophecies of Joseph Smith — Were they fulfilled? — The rebellion of South Carolina— President Jackson and the Nullifiers — The great rebellion— War of 1861-5— The propliecy analyzed— Unful- filled — Letter to R. N. E. Seaton — Bloodshed, famine and earth- quakes — A desolating scourge — Letter to John C. Calhoun — Dire things predicted— The prophet grows eloquent— The whole pre- diction a failure. . 423 CHAPTER XXXIX. A letter to Elder T. E. L.— Modern revelation— Apostles and proph- ets — Church organization — Its various officers— Two Priest)] oods — "Those abominations "—Early Christians— A charge repelled — Those idolatrous Israelites — No new revelation necessary — The "basic idea of Mormonism" — An important question— The New Testament a perfect guide — Five pointed questions — Six reasons examined— The Bible a detector— A mere srcapping of incidents— The whole system wrong— Conclusion 438 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. A remarkable claim— Marvelous if true— No middle ground— Either true or false— Apostle Pratt states the case— Origin of Mormou- ism— Joseph's vision— Churches all wrong— Their teachers cor- rupt—The angel Moroni — Hidden plates revealed — LVim and Thummim. In order to a correct understanding of Mormon theology it becomes necessary to briefly state the ground upon which it is based. Mormonism sets up a cLaim which, if true, is simply marvelous. But if, on the other hand, it is false, it will at once be stamped as the most daring fraud, the most unscrupulous effort to deceive and mislead the unwary and credulous that was ever attempted at any period of the world's history. It will doubtless be conceded by all classes that no middle ground can, by any possible means, be taken upon this question. Mormonism is either absolutely true or unquestionably false. Its advocates claim it to be a system revealed directly from heaven by the personal ministry of angels, who conferred authority upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery by the " laying on of hands." There can be no possible chance for mistake or deception in this matter, so far as the originators of 2 (17j 18 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM the scheme are concerned. Upon this point Mr. Orson Pratt, one of the original twelve apostles, chosen under the direction of Joseph Smith, and declared in Mormon history to be the St. Paul of the nineteenth century, says: *' This book," referring to the Book of Mormon, *•* must be either true or false. If true, it is one of the •i most important messages ever sent from God to man. . . . If false, it is one of the most cunning, wicked, bold, deep-laid impositions ever palmed upon the world, calculated to deceive and ruin millions who will receive it as the word of God." (O. Pratt's works, Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, page 1). Under this view of the case, then, it becomes our duty to inquire whether this claim be true or false — whether it is supported by competent testimony. In treating this subject it is the intention of the writer to state every proposition to be discussed, when possible to do so, in the language of the friends and advocates of the system, and thus avoid all contro- versy respecting premises. Likewise every statement of fact shall be supported by Mormon authority, when practicable, or from other sources whose authenticity cannot be successfully controverted. It is not the purpose of the writer to make war upon people who honestly believe in the doctrines of Mormonism, but to present, rather, what appears to be good and valid reason for believing that the system had its origin in fraud and deception. We shall state as briefly as may be the entire ground upon which the system is based, and then proceed to examine each point under the light of such facts as are attainable. THE BOCTRIXES AND DOGMAS OF 2I0BM0XISM 19 OIUGIX OF MORMONISM. • Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon hierarchy, was born in Sharon, Windsor County, Vermont, De- cember 23, 1805. When about ten years of age he removed with his father's family to Pahnyra, Ontario County, New York. Here began his remarkable career as a relig- ious teacher. He was confessedly illiterate, but nature had endowed him with a clear, strong brain, and by sheer force of his intellectuality he was from the very beginning of his career a leader At about the age of fifteen he professed to have seen a remarkable vision. Two personages, he declares, stood above him in a "pillar of light." "One of them," he sa3's, "spoke to me, calling me by name, and said, ' This is my beloved Son ; hear him.' " Joseph then asked the Lord, for such he declared the personage to be, what church he should join. Concerning the answer which he received, Mr. Smith sa3's: "I was answered that I should join none of them, for they ivere all ivrong; and the personage who ad- dressed me said that all their creeds were an abomin- ation in Ids sight; and that the professors were all cor- rnpt.'" The above quotation is from TuUidge's Life of Joseph the Prophet, pages 3 and 4, published by the Eeorganized Church of Latter Day Saints at Lamoni, Iowa. This shows the light in which the founder of Mormonism viewed all other churches and creeds. The churches were all wrong, their creeds an abomin- ation, and their teachers and professors all corrupt. 20 THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MOHMOXISM Surely, according to " Joseph the Prophet/' the world was in a most deplorable condition. Three years later Joseph had another interview which lasted all night, but this time it w^as the angel Moroni who appeared. The angel told Joseph that " God had a work for him to perform " — that "there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this conti- nent " — and that deposited with these plates were " two stones in silver bows," by means of which the book must be translated. (See Tullidge's History, pages 9 and 10.) Here follows an interval of just four years to a day. During this time Joseph was seemingly on very inti- mate terms with the angel Moroni — said angel being none other than the departed spirit of the prophet Moroni, who wrote the closing book of the Book of Mormon, and who "hid up unto the Lord" the plates containing the record of his people. (See Book of Mormon, chapter 4, page *532.) Remembering exactly where he had " hid up " these plates, he of course experienced no difficulty in direct- ing Joseph to the very spot wheTe he had concealed them over 1400 years before. After four years of careful training under the tutelage of Moroni, Joseph was permitted to take the treasure from its long con- cealment and begin the translation of the sacred record by means of the " two stones set in a silver bow," otherwise known as the ''Urim and Thum- *NoTE.— Thecopv of the Book of Mormon from which I quote is known as the ''Palmyra edition," the first ever printed, and the pa^e number will not, therefore, agree with subsequent editions, but book and chapter I think are the same. CHAPTER 11. OLIVER COWDERY. Martin Harris and the stolen manuscript — Oliver Cowdery— His part in the woz'k — Church organized — The Spaulding Romance — Deposited in Oberlin Library— Old theory abandoned— Sidney Rigdou not one of the originators — Book of Mormon, its pur- port—The American Bible— Apostles chosen— The First Presi- dency — The Patriarch — Other officers — Mormon intolerance — Doctrines of the Church. About this time an individual appeared upon the scene who performed a very conspicuous and import- ant part in the development of the Mormon scheme. This man was Oliver Cowdery, a gentleman of con- siderable scholastic polish. He made the acquaintance of Joseph Smith some time after he had commenced the pretended trans- lation of the plates, assisted by one Martin Harris, a farmer of some means, who had become interested in the story concerning the angel and the plates. Harris wrote for Joseph till they had produced one hundred and sixteen pages of manuscript, which Harris was permitted to take with him to his home. This MS., it is charged, was stolen from Harris by an enemy, supposed to be his wife. This so interrupted the work of translation that no further work was done till Oliver Cowdery made the acquaintance of the young prophet, when the work was commenced anew. *'Two days after the arrival of Mr. Cowdery," says Joseph, " I commenced to translate the Book of ^lormon, and he commenced to write for me, which having continued for some time, I inquired of the (21) 22 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM Lord through the Urim and Thummim, and obtainea the following revelation." (Tullidge's Histoiy, page 35). Then follows a lengthy revelation, from which is excerpted the following : *' Behold, thou art Oliver, and I have spoken unto thee because of thy desire; therefore treasure up these words in thy heart. . . . And behold, I grant unto you a gift, if you desire it of me, to trans- late even as my servant Joseph." (Ibid, pages 36 and 37). I thus particularly refer to the circumstance of Oliver Cowdery's association with Joseph Smith in the very rise of Mormonism, for the purpose of cor- recting an error which for some unaccountable reason has become well-nigh universal. Except by those acquainted with the facts connected with the early stages of its development, it is generally believed that Sidney Rigdon was the chief abettor of Joseph Smith in concocting the Mormon scheme. The usual debater undertakes to trace the Book of Mormon to the Spaulding romance through Sidney Rigdon. Nothing can be more erroneous, and it will lead to almost certain defeat. The well-informed advocate of Mormonism wants no better amusement than to vanquish an opponent in discussion who takes this ground. The facts are all opposed to this view, and the defenders of the Mormon dogma have the facts well in hand. I speak from experience. As a matter of fact, Sidney Rigdon was an earnest and able advocate of the Reformation contempora- neously with Alexander Campbell, and pastor of a church at Mentor, Ohio, at the very time Joseph THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM 23 Smith and Oliver Cowdery were propagating Mor- monism in Kew York and Pennsylvania. Sidney Rig- don had never heard a Mormon sermon, nor had he ever seen a copy of the Book of Mormon till he was presented with one b}' Oliver Cowdery and Parley P. Pratt in the fall of 1830. It is an historical fact that Mr. Rigdon became a convert to the new religion through the preaching of these gentlemen during the visit referred to above. Mr. Rigdon's large influence and pursuasive elo- quence carried with him a great number of his admir- ers in that section of Ohio, which unquestionably gave the first decided impetus to the Mormon delu- sion. An eloquent speaker, and a gentleman of more than ordinary attainments, he soon became a recognized power in the propagation of the new faith . Success of the efforts put forth in this section of Ohio was doubtless the prime cause of the settle- ment at Kirtland a short time afterwards, and which in its turn led to the building of the Kirtland temple. In order to the successful refutation of the Mor- mon dogma it is not at all necessary to connect Sid- ney Rigdon with Joseph Smith in its inception. In fact, such a course will almost certainly result in failure; and the principal reason why it will fail is because it is not true. Truth is always better than error, and is much more easily maintained. THE SPAULDING ROMANCE. In this connection it may be well to remark that another error, closely allied to the above, and co-ex- tensive with it, is that which relates to what is popu- ^ 24 THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM r J larly known as the Solomon Spaulding romance, out of which, it has been uniformly urged, the Book of Mormon was concocted by Joseph Smith and Sidney * Kigdon. If it be true that the Book of Mormon is ^ nothing more than a revamped edition of the old Spaulding romance, then it follows that the former ^ must possess at least a few of the characteristics of sil the latter. Necessarily there would be a similarity in design, or a correspondence between the names, -5 neither of which is true. ^ The long-lost Spaulding story has at last been unearthed, and is now on deposit in the library of J ^ Oberlin College at Oberlin, Ohio, and may be exam- ^ S ined by an3^one who may take the pains to call on ^ \ President Fairchild, of that institution. ■^ *JJ In a letter to Joseph Smith, of Lamoni, Iowa, , . dated at Honolulu, Sandwich Islands, March 28, 1885, ^ S^ Mr. L. L. Eice, in whose possession the original U ^ Simulding story had been resting for forty-four years ^ i "^"^^^from 1839 to *1885— says : f. ', <■ ."There is no identity of names, of persons or ^~zi> places, and there is no similarity of style between J ^ > them. ... I should as soon think the book of P ^ Revelation was written by the author of ' Don Quix- i ^ ote,' as that the w^riter of this manuscript was the C ^ author of the Book of Mormon." X' ^ The writer has examined a certified copy of this V A remarkable document, and to say he was surprised is ^ ^ to express it moderately. Instead of exhibiting the ^ ^ qualities of a scholarly mind, as we had been led to ^ < believe it would do, quite to the contrary, it bears every mark of ignorance and illiteracy, and is evi- • "^t dently the product of a mind far below the average, Jk -4^ even in the ordinary affairs of life. A twelve-year-old THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 25 boy in any of our common schools can tell a better story and couch it in far better English. The -Sjymthlinf^sim^is-ri-fmhrrE^ Do not -attempt to rely upon, it — it will let you down. The entire theory connecting Sidney Rigdon and the Spaulding romance with Joseph Smith in origi- nating the Book of Mormon must be abandoned. We have something better. All Mormon history and biography agree in connecting Oliver Cowdery, a man the equal of Sidney Rigdon in point of scholastic attainments and personal polish, directly with Joseph Smith in every stage of the development of Mormon- ism. It was Oliver Cowdery — not Sidney Rigdon — who assisted in the so-called translation of the plates. It was he who helped to prepare the book for the press; and he it was, doubtless, wdio expected to share the profits arising from its sale. It was Cowdery, not Rigdon, who was in the woods with Smith when the angel — John the Baptist — is said to have laid his hands upon their heads and ordained them to what they call "the Aaronic Priesthood." It was Oliver Cowdery who was the first to receive baptism at the hands of Joseph Smith, and who in turn baptized the prophet. It was Oliver Cowdery who ordained Joseph Smith by the " laying on of hands," to be the "first elder of the church," and who in turn ordained Oliver to be the "second elder of the church;" and it was Oliver Cowdery who assisted Joseph in the organization of the church at Seneca, Fayette Co., N. Y., April 6, 1830. In order to verify the above statement of facts, the reader is referred to Tullidge's History, pages 35, 43, 44, 75 and 77. But no intelligent Latter Day Saint 26 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF M0BM0XIS21 will deny these statements. Thus it will be seen that Sidney Rigdon had absolutely nothing to do with originating Mormonism. THE FOUNDATION. That the whole Mormon superstructure is founded upon the Book of Mormon, no one will perhaps attemp>t to deny. If that book is true, then the authority of the Mormon Church is established beyond the possibility of reasonable doubt. But if it is false, then Mormonism may justly be branded as the most stupendous fraud of the ages, and its advo- cates are left without even the shadow of truth upon which to base their claim to divine authority. The divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon must, therefore, be sustained by the testimony of competent witnesses, or Mormonism is a failure. Can its claims be sustained by the evidence offered in its support? If not, then the book and the system built upon its claim to be a divine revelation must go down together. In order to properly test the claims of the book we must first understand just what these claims are. THE PURPORT OF THE BOOK OF 3IORMON. The Book of Mormon is represented to contain a detailed account of three separate colonies which set- tled upon the great American Continent, the first coming from the tower of Babel, the other two from Jerusalem. The most important of these was that led by one Lehi, and with which the Book of Mor- mon principally deals. This Lehi, a prophet, left Jerusalem, according to THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF M0R2I0XIS2I 27 the narrative, "in the commencement of the first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah" (B. of M., page 1), in the year 600, B. C. It describes the wanderings of the little band through the wilderness on foot till they reached the borders of the Red Sea, and their sojourn upon the banks of a large stream, which Jlows info the Red Sea. From this point they traveled in a south-south- easterly direction, till finally they came to the sea called *'Ireantum." Here they build a ship, and, under the direction of the self-appointed Nephi, the youngest of four brothers, sail for the "promised land;" but where the promised land was located, or in what direction, the record does not inform us. The book relates circumstantially the wanderings of the colony in the great wilderness in the promised land, till they finally settle somewhere in the interior. Dissension finally arises, and Nephi, with his two younger brothers, Jacob and Joseph, separated froui their elder brethren, Laman, Lemuel and Sam. Henceforth they were two separate peoples, known as "Nephites" and "Lamanites." The book gives a very full account of the numerous wars and conten- tions between the two races, till the Nephites became extinct, in the year A. D. 420, leaving the entire Con- tinent in possession of the Lamanites, from whom our American Indians are said to be descended. Instead of keeping their records on pap3Tus, as did the Hebrews in every age, they were written on "plates of brass," and in the Egyptian, instead of the Hebrew language. This is a very important point, and should be borne in mind. 28 THE DOCTBINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM For a more extended account the reader is referred to Tullidge's History, pages 45-64. The Book of Mormon, professedly written by a succession of prophets, stands to the inhabitants of Ancient America in the same relation that the Bible sustains to the Israelites. It is in fact the American Bible. The validity of this remarkable claim will be thoroughly examined under the proper head. APOSTLES CHOSEN. Having thus briefly sketched the rise of the Mor- mon hierarchy, let us now proceed to notice the dif- ferent stages of its development. When first organ- ized the church consisted of but six members. The new doctrine rapidly spread into the neighboring States, and among the accessions to the new church were such men as Sidney Rigdon, Parley P. Pratt, Brigham Young, Orson Pratt, Heber C. Kimball, Orson Hyde and others. It now became necessary, in the opinion of this modern seer, to effect a more complete organization of the church. Joseph, having conceived the idea of an apostolic church, received a "revelation" appoint- ing three men who were to choose the twelve apostles for the church of the new dispensation. At a meeting called for the purpose at Kirtland, O., Feb. 14, 1835, the "Twelve" were chosen in the following manner: "The three witnesses [to the Book of Mormon], namely, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris, united in prayer; they were then blessed by the laying on of the hands of the Presidency, and then proceeded to make choice of the Twelve." (Tul- lidge's History, page 150.) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM 29 On page 154 of the same work, in giving the apos- tolic charge, Oliver Cowdery sa3's : *'Have you desired this ministry with all your hearts? If you have desired it, you are called of God, not of man, to go into all the world." Continuing this charge to these apostles, Mr. Cow- dery says : " Remember, you are not to go to other nations till you receive your endowment. Tarry in Kirtlaiid until you are endowed with power from on high." (Ibid, page 157.) We cite the above in order to call attention to the marked difference between the Lord's method of calling twelve apostles and that employed by Joseph Smith, and shall give special attention to it in the proper place. THE FIRST PRESIDENCY. Not only was there a "quorum" of twelve apos- tles, but another "quorum" of vastly more impor- tance was called into existence, known as the " First Presidency." This body of dignitaries is a triumvirate, consisting of a "chief apostle and high priest, with two asso- ciate counselors." This is the highest official execu- tive body in the church. There is also another triumvirate of lower grade, composed of the "Presiding Bishop" and his two counselors. The Bishop has charge of the finances of the church, and should be a literal descendant of Aaron. But in the event that such descendant can not be found, a person of some other lineage may be chosen, as shown in Joseph's " revelation on priest- hood," as follows: 30 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM " The bishoprick is the presidency of this [Aaronic] priesthood, and holds the keys of authority of the same. No man has a legal right to this office, to hold the keys of this priesthood, except he be a literal descendant of Aaron. But as a high priest of the Melchisedek priesthood has authority to officiate in all the lesser offices, he may officiate in the office of bishop when no literal descendant of Aaro7i can be fonnd.'' (Tullidge's History, page 217; also Doctrine and Covenants, Sec. 68, Par. 2, page 199.) The italics are mine. But you may ask, How is it possible at this late day to determine this difficult question of Aaronic lineage? To ordinary mortals this would, I confess, prove an insurmountable barrier; but Joseph was a man of resources, and this matter of lineal descent was a trifling affair. You must bear in mind the fact that Joseph was in possession of that magical " Urim and Thum7nim^^' by means of which he had access to the fountains of till knowledge. Appealing to this, the question was soon settled. A Patriarch must be appointed whose duty and privilege it shall be to determine the lineage, not only of the man whose privilege it is to " hold the keys of this priesthood," but of any and every man who may be curious to know from just which of the twelve patriarchs of old he might be descended. THE PATRIARCH ANOINTED. Accordingly *'my servant Joseph Smith, Sen.," was duly consecrated to the patriarchate of the church. The particulars of this unprecedented trans- action are given by Tullidge, as follows: THE nOCTRTXES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM 31 " The interesting episode of anointing and blessing the first patriarch of the church, with the marvelous manifestations which then occurred, is spoken of by Joseph as follows: "We then laid our hands upon our aged father Smith, and invoked the blessings of heaven. I then anointed his head with the consecrated oil, and sealed many blessings upon him. The presidency then in turn laid their hands upon his head, beginning at the eldest, until they had all laid their hands upon him, and pronounced such blessings upon his head as the Lord put into their hearts, — all blessing him to be our Patriarch, to anoint our heads, and attend to all duties that pertain to his office." (TuUidge's His- tory, page 161.) This remarkable ceremony took place in the unfin- ished temple at Kirtland, Ohio, Jan. 21, 1836. On Feb. 28, 1835, two weeks after the twelve apos- tles were chosen, and at the same place, "The Apos- tles of the Seventies" were in part called and ordained. (Ibid, page 160.) OTHER OFFICERS. Then follows the "Quorum of High Priests," the bishop and his " two associate counselors," elders, " priests," teachers and deacons. As completed, the organization stands thus: 1. The First Presidency; 2. The Patriarch; 3. Twelve Apostles; 4. Seventies; 5. High Priests; 6. Bishops; 7. Elders; 8. Priests; 9. Teachers; 10. Deacons. The above officers are named in the order of their importance, and comprise the entire official force of the Mormon Church. No church organization short 32 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM of this will puss muster with any Latter Day Saint as the Church of Christ. Wm. H. Kelley, one of the twelve apostles of the " Eeorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints," in his work entitled "Presidency and Priesthood," after an exhaustive argument to prove the above organization to be strictly Biblical (see p. 83), clinches his argument with the following: ''After having made diligent search among all the societies and organizations extant, with your guide [the Bible] in hand, where do you find amidst them all, my friend and reader, an institution in exact accord with the pattern of Christ's Church? Ah, echo answers. Where? Yet one established according to this plan is all that God has ever deigned to acknowledge as his. What will you do? Throw away your guide, and join the daughters of the old mother, or some institution of men? You cannot afford to do this." (Presi- dency and Priesthood, pages 188 and 189.) Again: " Tired and discouraged, perhaps, you are ready to exclaim: With guide in hand, I have surveyed the whole of Christendom, and 1 have failed to find an organization in harmony with it, or anything approxi- mating it. I want to be saved! I must join some- thing or I am lost! Hold, sir! The daughters of 'Mystery, Babylon' cannot save you; neither any institution of man." (Ibid, pages 190 and 191.) In the foregoing extracts we have the very essence and spirit of the Mormon theology. The sentiment is that expressed by Joseph Smith, ^and is entertained by every branch and faction of the Mormon Church in every part of the world. It is the THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 33 spirit by which its ministry is controlled, although for prudential reasons they do not always declare it so plainly and bluntly as does Mr. Kelley. Of all religions extant to-day, Mormonism is the most exclusive and intolerant. How unlike the religion founded by Christ! How unlike the spirit of Mormon intolerance was that which characterized the teachings of the world's great Law-giver! He could say: *' He that is not against us is for us," but Joseph Smith says, substantially, that *'We are against every man and every church, because they arc allicroiuj; their creeds are an abomination^ and their teachers all corrupt.''^ Among ecclesiastical bodies the Mormon Church is the Ishmael of the nineteenth century. Its hand is against every man and every church. It tolerates nothing which is not purely Mormon in its origin and tendencies. THE DOCTRINES OF THE CHURCH. The doctrines of Mormonism are characterized by peculiarities as remarkable as they are, in many respects, erroneous. Briefly stated, they are as follows : "(1) Faith in God. (2) Faith in Jesus Christ. (3) In the Holy Ghost. (4) Belief in the doctrine of repentance. (5) In baptism. (6) In the laying on of hands. (7) In the resurrection of the dead. (8) Eternal judgment. (9) The Lord's Supper. (10) The washing of feet. These, together with . . . the endowment of the Holy Ghost as realized and enjoyed in the testimony of Jesus, — such as faith, wisdom, knowledge, dreams, prophecies, tongues. 34 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM interpretation of tongues, visions, healings," etc. — (Presidency and Priesthood, pages 83 and 84). Mr. Kelley might have included in the above three Other points of doctrine, peculiarly Mormon, and without which the list is by no means complete, namely: the *' law of tithing," the *' gathering of the saints," and "baptism for the dead." Having presented what may fairly be termed the groundwork of Mormonism, I shall now proceed to a careful examination of the material entering into both its foundation and superstructure. The laws of construction require us to begin at the foundation and build upward; but, quite to the contrary, if we under- take to tear down and remove a useless and danger- ous structure, we usually begin at the top and work downward; and as the work in hand is destructive rather than constructive, we shall adopt the latter method. CHAPTER III. THE MORMON HOUSE — ITS INTERIOR GARNISHMENT. The Mormoa House — Its iutemal garnishment — Visions, dreams, etc. — All deceptive — Spiritual gifts — Were they to be i^erpetuated J — Mormonism affirms— It must pi'ove— The apostolic commission — Its obligations j^erpetual— The signs promised were limited — The church perpetuated— Gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The Latter Day Saints have constructed what they are pleased to call a " spiritual house," whose foun- dation is in fact the Book of Mormon, and whose essential frame-work is the various officials, from the "First Presidency" down to the deacon — ^with ''spir- itual gifts" for its internal garnishment. The advo- cates of Mormonism confidently assure us that this very remarkable structure is in perfect accord with the pattern left by the great Architect over eighteen centuries ago. "When an architect submits the phm for a building of specific dimensions, he usually submits therewith specifications setting forth the kind of materials to be used in its construction. The quality of the materials of which the building is constructed is of as much importance as that the structure shall be of the required dimensions. A fail- ure in this regard would be as fatal to the builder as if he had changed the style of architecture, or the dimensions of the building. It must likewise be borne in mind that the interior construction and finish are of as much importance as anv other part of the work. (35)" 36 THE DOCTRIXES A XI) DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM To the casual observer the edifice may have a very imposing appearance, but when examined by an expert and compared with the plans and specifications, it may be found woefully wanting in many important particulars as to both foundation and superstructure. And so it is with the spiritual house called the church. The important question, then, for us to consider is this: Does the Mormon structure fill the bill? Does it strictly accord with the plans and specifications? We shall see. The edifice must be constructed in every particular exactly according to the divine plan. Its interior adornments must be of the hind and of the quality called for in the contract, or it will not be accepted. Reader, did you ever carefully inspect the interior of this unique specimen of spiritual architecture? If not, just take a little stroll with me through its spacious corridors and numerous apartments. Re- markable as it may appear, this building has but one door — BAPTISM — and you can enter by no other. This admits you to the main hall. Here on the right is a room called *' wisdom." It contains a few pieces of bric-a-brac — somewhat attractive, but of very little practical value. The next one we enter has the word ''knowledge" written over the entrance. Upon entering this room you are conscious of a keen sense of disappointment. While the walls are hung with a few fairly good productions, the larger portion of the specimens exhibited are of inferior grade. The first room on the left, here, is denominated "DREAMS." This apartment is delightful. At once upon entering it you are carried away into that bliss- ful fairy-land, where all is quiet and peace, and where nothing is impossible. Dream on! dream on ! How THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 37 delightfully realistic! Never aroused from this bliss- ful slumber, you would never know sorrow — would never weep. But ah! "life is real, life is earnest," and sooner or later we must face its stern realities and taste the bitter as well as the sweet. Here is another large room furnished almost exactly like that we have just left — "visions." The effect may be pleasing, but O, how delusive! Nothing sub- stantial — nothing real about it all. "All is vanity and vexation of spirit." But here is another — "SPIRITUAL GIFTS." Perhaps this will be more satis- factory. It is said to be the exact duplicate of one of the most marvelously beautiful apartments in a very ancient building, designed by the most skillful architect the world ever knew. But, alas ! when you come to examine its furnishings the heart is faint with disappointment. You had every reason to expect, from representations made to you before entering, that every article in this room would be of purest gold of the most dazzling brightness. But on applying every known test — the most potent of which is experience — you turn away in sorrow and disgust. Instead of pure gold, you find the merest dross. Instead of the divine luster, you find only the tarnishment and rust pertaining to things earthly and impure. Disappointment meets you at every turn, and with bowed head and sad heart you seek the near- est exit, and make your way out into heaven's bright, refreshing sunlight, to seek relief from the disap- pointment and gloom which had overwhelmed you like a flood because of falsehood and deception. SIGNS, OR SPIRITUAL GIFTS. Covet earnestly the best gifts." (1 Cor. 12: 31). 38 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOKISM This injunction of the apostle is regarded by Latter Day Saints as being equivalent to a divine promise to perpetuate the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit to every age of the world, and that Christians may, therefore, prophesy in the sense of foretelling impor- tant events, speak in unknown tongues, interpret tongues, see visions, heal the sick, etc., as in the days of Christ and the apostles. But the Scripture upon which they chiefly rely to prove this position is the following: ** Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe. In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up ser- pents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them ; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." (Mark 16: 15-18). It is the boast of Latter Day Saints that no man living can possibly disprove or in any way invalidate their claim upon this point. In the first place the burden of proof lies with them. They affirm the per- petuity of these miraculous powers, while we simply deny. The man who affirms must prove what he affirms. It is entirely sufficient to meet an affirmative proposition with a bare denial. When affirmative evidence has been introduced, the negative may offer such evidence in rebuttal as may be deemed necessary. Thus it will be seen that we are under no obligation to disprove any affirmative proposition. In this issue Mormonism has affirmed something, and has offered testimony to prove it — is in fact the plaintiff in an action before the civilized world, and THE DOCTBIKES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 39 asks for judgment on the ground that the testimon}^ of its witnesses sustains the allegation. Their peti- tion sets up a claim that certain jewels — spiritual gifts — at one time in the possession of a woman of great distinction — the Church of Christ — rightfully belong to said plaintiff — the Mormon Church. St. Mark is the chief witness. He was likewise one of the executors of the will under whose provision the jewels were bequeathed to the woman. Now, does the testimony of Mark declare that these jewels were to be transmitted and delivered to persons claiming to be the legal heirs of said woman, who lived more than seventeen centuries after her death? Whether it does or not a careful examination of the testimony will determine. "With this text, as with nearly all others relied upon to establish the claims of Mormonism, the question is purely one of exegesis. While I am by no means vain enough to imagine that we shall be able to finally and forever settle this disputed question, yet I do indulge the belief that we shall be able to show the Mormon exegesis to be erroneous, and hence incompetent to sustain their contention. Let us now proceed to carefully analyze the terms of the commission quoted from Mark's testimou}', and note the result. " Go 2/e into all the world." Who go into all the world? The disciples — tJie eleven. No one else is addressed, and hence, no one else is included. This seems conclusive. ''Go ye.'' Go where? "Into all the world.'' Does this mean the disciples thus addressed — the eleven — were to go into every inhabited portion of the globe? Certainly not, for their labors were con- 40 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM fined almost exclusively to a small portion of south- western Asia and that portion of continental Europe bordering on the Mediterranean Sea. "Go ye and preach." Preach what? TJie Gospel. Go when? "After Pentecost, and continue to preach the Gospel during your natural lives." This was all they could do. Go to whom? " To every creature within your reach." What shall be the result? "He who hears you^ and receives the message which you declare, shall be saved. But he who hears you, and believes not the Gospel which you teach, shall be damned." So far we find nothing in the language of Mark to indicate that the promised " signs " were to extend to future ages; but on the contrary they were clearly intended as a necessary means to a desired end, and that end was the establishment of the church of Christ among the nations of the earth. "And these signs shall follow." Here is a promise; but to whom does it extend? Are there no limitations? Let us see. " And these signs shall follow tliem that believe.''' Follow them that believe what? Why, the Gospel, to be sure. "And these signs shall follow them that believe the Gospel? " Preached by whom? Why, by the disci- ples, of course, for none others were authorized. Analyzed, the proposition stands thus: "And these signs shall follow them that believe the Gospel preached by the disciples." Just that, and nothing more, is affirmed. This analj^sis shows most conclusively that the promise of miraculous powers was limited to the life- time of the first disciples — the eleven, and those upon whom they had laid their hands. No amount of THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 41 sophistry and false reasoning is competent to show that the promises contained in the apostolic commis- sion were ever intended to extend beyond the lifetime of the apostles. While the Great Commission to preach the Gospel and administer its ordinances was general, extending, under proper conditions, to every age and every nation under the heavens, the " signs," or miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, were confined, as we have already shown, to the times of the apostles. While these miraculous powers were limited to the apostolic age, the obligation to " preach the Gospel to every creature," along with the " conditions upon which sinners are accepted under the Gospel," as provided in the commission, was made perpetual. And right here is where the Saints make another serious, I might say fatal, blunder. They insist, with characteristic pertinacity, that the commission was a document wholly temporary in its character, while the "signs" were intended to be perpetual. It seems to me that any reasonable person, unbiased by preconceived opinion and fundamental error, ought, at a glance, to see the absurdity and unscripturalness of this position. If authority to preach the Gospel ceased loith the apostles, then most certainly the Church of Christ must cease to exist as soon as the persons composing it at the time of the death of the last apostle were all dead; and if this be true, then what becomes of the declaration of Christ: "Upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall 7iot prevail against it?'' (Matt. 16:18). In order that the " gates of hell " — the powers of darkness — should not prevail against the Church of Christ, authority to minister in Gospel ordinances 42 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM must be perpetuated. As the apostles could not them- selves personally deliver the divine message, com- mitted to them in the Great Commission, to all peo- ple, they very wisely, and doubtless by the command of God, set apart other faithful men to the work, and clothed them with authority to preach the Gospel and baptize penitent believers into the name of Jesus Christ. That such ministers — elders, or bishops, deacons and evangelists — were ordained by the apos- tles is perfectly clear, as the following shows : *' And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church. . . . And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more. . . Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." (Acts 20:17, 25, 28). "And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they com- mended them to the Lord, on whom they believed." (Acts 14:23). For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee. . . . For a bishop [elder] must be blame- less, as the steward of God, . . . holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers." (Titus 1:5, 7, 9). To Timothy Paul says : *'This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop [or elder], he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 43 wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hos- pitality, apt to teach. For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?'' (1 Tim. 3:1, 2, 5). Continuing, the apostle gives the following instruc- tions concerning deacons : *' Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double- tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre. . . . And let these also be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless." (1 Tim. 3:8, 10). *' And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they [the congregation] chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Procho- rus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch; whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them." (Acts 6:5, 6). Two of these deacons (as the seven are gener- ally conceded to have been), Stephen and Philip, afterwards became very prominent evangelists, ren- dering great service to the church. *'And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people." (Acts Q:^. See also chapters 7 and 8)o Besides the elders and deacons of the church, there were also men known as evangelists (see Eph. 4:11), whose duties correspond very nearly to those of the apostles, even performing great miracles, as in the cases of Stephen and Philip. These men were often co-laborers with the apostles, and were very efficient ministers of Christ. Of this class may be mentioned such men as John Mark the traveling companion of Paul and Barna- 44 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM bas (Acts 12:25; 15:37); Luke, the evangelist and "beloved physician," who also traveled with Paul (Acts 16:12; 20:5; Col. 4:14; 2 Tim 4:11). Along with these may also be mentioned Timothy, Titus, Barnabas, Judas and Silas (Acts 15:22), and many others. These men possessed authority to preach, baptize, set in order the churches, ordain other ministers^ and perform any and all duties pertaining to the Chris- tian ministry in order to the perpetuation of the Church of Christ. Thus it will be seen that this whole question depends upon " the statutes in such cases made and provided;" and as no divine statute can be found which provides for the establishment and perpetitation of the apostolic office, and for the continuation of miracles beyond the time of the apostles, we may, therefore, very justly conclude that no such thing was ever intended. As the divine code makes no provision for perpet- uating the apostolic office in the church, or for the extension of miraculous powers beyond their time, if any such powers be claimed in this age by people pre- tending to be divinely commissioned, that claim must be supported by the same class of incontrovertible evidence as that offered by the apostles of Christ. Otherwise it must be rejected. CHAPTER IV. CAST OUT DEVILS. Casting out devils— The saints try it— Devils are obstinate— Epi- lepsy and insanity — A modern instance — Great trial to the faitli- ful — Unknown tongues not necessary — Conditions have changed — An Unknown tongue impossible — A tongue and its interpretation — Missionaries cannot speak in tongues — 1 Cor., twelfth chapter — 1 Cor., thirteenth chapter — Tongues shall cease and prophecies fail — A rule — Gifts for Gentiles — Take up serpents. "7?i my name shall they cast out devils.''^ Did any Mormon prophet, priest or king, ever cast oat a devil — a real, genuine, live devil? Of course they will say, "Yes, many of them." But who among them has the ability to determine the presence of a devil, if, indeed, there be such a thing to-day as demoniacal possession? During my forty 3'ears of experience and observation among Latter Day Saints, I have never known a man among them, from Joseph Smith down through the ranks of apostles, high priest and Seventy — and I have personally known them all — who could distinguish, if, indeed, such dis- tinction in fact exists, between demoniacal possession and epileptic fits. Epilepsy is usually regarded as evidence 'prima facie of the presence of one or more devils, and frequent efforts are made to cast them out. In fact I confess to having, in connection with others, undertaken the job myself; but his satanic majesty was uniformly obstinate, and persistently refused to be cast out; and so the unfortunate suf- (45) 46 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM ferer continued to have fits right along, just the same as ever. These latter day devils not infrequently manifest their presence in the form of insanity, and I have never yet known a single instance where this kind of a "devil" was cast out. Many such cases are now being cared for in that modern and humane institu- tion known as the asylum for the insane. A very striking instance of this kind occurs to me which I will relate, and I do so with all due deference to the feelings of the unfortunate man's friends. It is per- haps the most remarkable instance of the kind on record, and this is my apology for presenting it. David H. Smith, a posthumous son of Joseph Smith, Jr., and brother of President Joseph Smith, of Lamoni, Iowa, when first I knew him, some thirty- five years ago, was a young man of rare mental endowments, with a brilliant future. A poet of no mean ability, and regarded as the modern "sweet singer of Israel," he at once became the idol of the Reorganized Church. By "revelation" through his brother Joseph, he was early called to a seat in the "quorum of the First Presidency." (See Tullidge's History, page 715.) Shortly after his elevation to this exalted position, he began to develop unmistakable signs of insanity. These symptoms continued to grow more alarming, notwithstanding the repeated administrations by anointing and the laying on of hands. The entire denomination, by appointment, at two different times observed a day of fasting and prayer especially for his recovery, but all to no purpose. The unfortunate young man continued to grow worse, till he was finally taken to the insane asylum at Elgin, TEE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 47 111., where he has been kindly cared for during the past eighteen or twenty years. I hope to be pardoned for thus alluding to the cir- cumstances of this sad case, as there is no intention to wound the feelings of anyone. I refer to it merely to show that when there is anything seriously the matter, the laying on of hands to heal the sick is a poor, miserable failure. This case was a source of severe trial to the faith of many, and no wonder. *'If," they would reason, "David was in reality called of God by revelation to be Joseph's counselor, why would the Lord permit him to become insane? — why can he not be healed?" And it will be conceded that these are very pertinent questions. UNKNOWN TONGUES. ^'They shall speak with new tongues.^'' The advocates of Mormonism maintain that the "new tongues " .here alluded to means unknown tongues, and that such tongues are to constitute one of the distinguishing characteristics of the Church of Christ in every age. Does it follow that because those under the ministry of the apostles could speak in unknown tongues it is therefore necessary for Christians to do so now? This question may be satis- factorily determined by ascertaining whether there exists any actual necessity for their presence in the church to-day. If the conditions are found to exist now that existed in the time of the apostles, then we may rea- sonably conclude that the power to speak in unknown tongues is as necessary now as then. But on the other hand, if conditions have changed — if conditions 48 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM which existed then do not exist to-day, then it will be just as reasonable to conclude that "unknown tongues/' as a '* spiritual gift," are wholly unneces- sary in order to the accomplishment of the purposes for which they were then intended. This brings us to inquire. Have the conditions changed f To this question there can be but one answer, and that is, Conditions have, materially changed. At the beginning of the Christian era the world lay en- wrapped in the somber robes of ignorance and super- stition. Educational facilities were confined to the wealthy. There were no schools to which the com- mon people had access. Languages of the neighbor- ing nations were not taught in colleges and universi- ties, and these unlettered Galileans were commanded to preach the Gospel to every nation, kindred, tongue and people. How could they do it? How could they reach the people? was the burning question of the times. God had provided a means, and that means was none other than "the gift of tongues" (see 1 Cor. 12: 10), and the only possible means of accomplishing the divine purpose. But how is it to-day? Ignorance and superstition have vanished before the advancing civilization of the ages; colleges and universities flourish in every civilized nation of the globe. In these institutions of learning are taught every written language and tongue employed by men. Besides this, the tongues and dialects of perhaps every nation or tribe of earth are understood and spoken. By this means, then, the Gospel may now be preached to every nation and tongue under th^e whole heavens. My Mormon friends, have conditions changed? Honestly answer. THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 49 and then decide as to whether "tongues" are neces- sary to-day. Adequate means to the accomplishment of an end is all that is necessary. More is superfluous, and may prove a hindrance rather than a means of advancing the end in view. To aid in preaching the Gospel to peoples of foreign tongue was the prHme object of this divine gift. Wherever the end sought can be accom- plished by, the employment of ordinary means, the extraordinary or supernatural becomes absolutely unnecessary, and may therefore be dispensed with. In this age of the world to speak in an unknown tongue is simply impossible, for the very excellent reason that an unknown tongue does not exist. Some- body understands it, and in it can declare the saving power of the Grospel of Christ. With these undis- puted and undisputable facts before him, what well- informed man can still honestly declare that the gift of unknown tongues is still necessary in order to preach the Gospel to " every creature?" Every man, in order to teach, must be qualified; and the principal qualification necessary to preach the Gospel to every creature in apostolic times was that pertaining to language — they must be able to speak in the language, or tongue, of the people to whom they were to go. Therefore the apostles were commanded to "tarry at Jerusalem" until they should be qualified by a special endowment with "power from on high." Accordingly, they waited till the day of Pentecost, when they received the promised induement, and were able to speak in un- known tongues. On that memorable occasion there were assembled "devout men out of every nation under heaven," 50 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM namely: "Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cap- padocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pam- phj'lia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Home, Jews and proselytes." (Acts 2: 5, 9, 10). Now, let it be remembered, these disciples were all Galileans, and yet every man, it mattered not what his nationality, heard the Gospel "in his own lan- guage, . . . in his own tongue" (verses 8 and 9). No need for the disciples to assure these people that they could speak in "unknown tongues," and no one asked for proof. Here was an oral and ocular dem- onstration of the fact — no possible chance for mis- take or doubt here — the evidence was overwhelming and conclusive. Unsought by the people and wholly unexpected by them, evidence of a character abso- lutely indisputable was oifered by divine power. Let Mormonism produce such evidence as this, and the w^orld will bow in reverent acknowledgment of its divine authority. But Mormonism never has pro- duced, and, we may safely say, it never can produce such evidence. It is not sufficient for some old woman or some weak-minded man to arise in a congregation of English-speaking people and deliver some strange jargon and call it an unknown tongue to be "inter- preted" by some other person equally weak or unscrupulous. This will never do. Sensible people want something better — something more convincing. To illustrate the uncertainty of these *' tongues " and "interpretations," even among Latter Day Saints themselves, 1 will relate an incident which came under my own observation. THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 51 At the Semi-Annual Conference of the Reorganized Church, held at Galland's Grove, Shelby Co., Iowa, Sept. 20, 1877, during an evening prayer service, "the gifts'' were enjoyed to a remarkable degree, and a sister (whose name is withheld for the reason that she had been the fourth polygamous wife of Lyman Wight, of Texas, one of Joseph Smith's apostles), arose in the large audience and spoke in tongues. On resuming her seat Elder Alfred Jackson gave the '* interpretation." Upon resuming his seat, and after a verse had been sung, Elder Ingvert Hansen arose and said: "Brethren, if you will pray for me I will try and give you the interpretation of Sister J.'s tongue, for the Spirit sa3^s to me that Bro. Jackson did not give it." Whereupon Bro. Hansen proceeded to give the "interpretation" of the "tongue." Comment is useless. Now, to conclude on this point, 1 think I am per- fectly safe in saying that no Mormon missionary, foreign or otherwise, ever preached the Gospel to congregations of foreign tongue, except as he had first learned to speak such language or tongue. Hav- ing sat, during a period of twenty-seven years, as a member of general conferences, I am in a position to know whereof I affirm. Missionaries are always selected with reference to their fitness for the work to be performed ; and to be able to speak the language of the people to whom they are sent is always considered a necessary quali- fication. Hence, a Frenchman is sent to France, a German to Germany, a Welshman to Wales, and so on. English-speaking people have been sent to the Society group and other islands of the Pacific, but in such 52 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM cases the speaker reaches the people through the medium of an interpreter, and never through the " gift of tongues." These missionaries must learn the language of the people, just as do the missionaries of other churches. One of the missionaries, writing from Papeiti, Tahiti, says: *' Mrs. Case did a good work in setting in order the Sunday-school, following Sr. Devore's plan of carr}'- ing on the work. She had a very great deal of writ- ing to do on the Sunday-school books of questions and answers, also about six weeks' work, making a complete copy of the Tahitian English Dictionary. I hope for the benefit of those lolio come to do labor here that the good brethren who have taken away the only copies of said booh obtainable, will remember to please return them to the mission.'' — 7%e Saints' Herald, for Feb. 3, 1897, page 72. If these people possess the same powers that were conferred upon the apostles and primitive saints, what need have they for a "Tahitian English Dic- tionary? " Why not reach these poor heathen in the same ivay, if they have the " s^me power," as did the apostles? ^. e., speak to them in their own language. Why consume precious time in learning the language of the natives, when an old-fashioned apostolic enduement is so easily attainable, and far more effective in reaching the desired end? The fact that these " inspired " missionaries must learn the language of the people to whom they are sent is proof positive that they cannot speak in unknown tongues. If these people would perform what they so liberally advertise, it would inspire con- fidence in their claim, and secure the respect and THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOEMOXISAf 53 esteem of an intelligent public, and assure their suc- cess. But this they never have done, and this they never can do. Empty claims are empty things, And empty heads oft make them ; — Empty bubbles all they seem, — The TRUTH will surely break them. But I think I hear some faithful saint in objection saying: "This cannot be true — the claim to divine power is not all an empty dream; it is no illusive phantasm, but real, and based upon a divine promise. These signs shall follow them that believe. The preaching of the Gospel, the signs that were to fol- low, and the salvation of the believer, were all placed upon the same footing, and where one ceases the other must fail. The signs were to follow tvhenever and wherever the Gospel is preached and obeyed." Not so fast, please, my good brother. This is the very question in controversy ; and the correctness of your position must be proved^ not assumed. Before such a claim can be accepted, it must be supported by some clear, direct statement of Scripture, or by actual and ocular demonstration. Can you produce such testimony? *'Yes," continues the objector, "I think such a statement may be found in Paul's first letter to the church at Corinth. Let me read it for you: *' ' Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. Ye know that ye were Gen- tiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led. Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. Now there are diversi- 54 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM ties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. But the manifes- tation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit with all. For to one is given b}^ the Spirit the word of wisdom ; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to another proph- ecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpreta- tion of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.' (1 Cor. 12: 1-11). *' Here," continues our friend, *' we have an apos- tolic letter exhorting the Corinthians to be not igno- rant concerning ' spiritual gifts ; ' and he shows them that they must be charitable. In the 13th chap- ter he informs them that they might have the gift of prophecy, and be able by faith to remove mountains, and yet be lost if they have not charity. He then devotes the next chapter to giving them proper in- structions with respect to the use of these gifts. Beginning with this injunction Paul says: **' Follow after charity, a?icZ desire spiritual gifts.'' (Chap. 14, verse 1.) " Certainly the apostle would not have been so par- ticular to give them this instruction had he not intended these gifts to continue. Why would he exhort them to desire spiritual gifts — to covet them earnestly — if he knew they were to pass away? " This seems a perfectly honest, as well as a very per- tinent question, and we shall try to answer it in the THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM 55 same spirit of candor in which it is propounded; for we desire the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. In order to correctly understand the Scriptures it is important to observe four things, namely: 1. Who is speaking or writing; 2. To whom the language is addressed; 3. What the principal subject, and 4. What the environments. With these points properly considered, we shall find little difficulty in arriving at the exact truth. In the case under consideration, 1. Paul is speaking; 2. The Corinthians are spoken to; 3. The *' spiritual gifts" are spoken of, and 4. The environments detri- mental to progress in Christian life. The epistle is addressed to Gentile Christians — a people who had but recently been converted from the worship of '* these dumb idols " (chapter 12: 2), and, ignorant of the true God, they were constantly inclin- ed, from force of old habits, to follow after their old teachers, " even as they had been led." These facts may serve as a key to unlock the door of mystery, and enable us to understand more clearly the purport of the apostle's letter. These Gentiles were weak and vacillating — were mere children, in fact, and were in constant need of a teacher. "These signs," primarily, were intended to ''confirm the word" (see Mark 16: 20), and none needed this confirmation more than the church at Corinth. Hence Paul's letter of instruction and en- couragement. These miraculous powers seem to have been of especial service in establishing the Gospel among the Gentiles; as, for example, Cornelius and his household 56 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM "spake in tongues and magnified God " (Acts 10: 46). These powers were conferred upon another Gentilo church — the Ephesian (Eph. 2: 11), by the laying on of Paul's hands, who '* spake with tongues and prophesied" (Acts 19: 6). Also concerning the church at Rome Paul said: **For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established.'" (Rom. 1: 11). From the above we learn two important facts : 1. The *' spiritual gifts" were more particularly bestowed upon the Gentile churches; and 2, That the prime o))ject was to establish them in the truth as it was revealed by Christ. That these gifts of the Holy Spirit were intended to continue with the church at Corinth till they had reached mature manhood in Christ, there is little room to doubt; and there is no intimation that they ever ceased from among them until the church itself became extinct. But because this is probably true, it affords no guarantee for the assertion that they were to be perpetuated. But, quite to the contrary, the apostle informed the church at Corinth that these miraculous gifts should cease, as I shall now undertake to prove. He says: "But covet earnestly the best gifts; and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way." (1 Cor. 12: 31). The apostle at once proceeds to describe this '* more excellent way" in the following forceful and most beautiful manner: "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sound- ing brass or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and" all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 57 that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. "And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I may give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. "Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envi- eth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endur- eth all things." (1 Cor. 13: 1-7). More excellent is this way than all things besides, and why? Because men may possess any and all the spiritual gifts, even including great faith — nay, all faith — without which it is " impossible to please God " (Heb. 11: 6); yet if they have not charity, it profits them nothing. Possessing all the "spiritual gifts," yet without charity, they must be finally lost. Hence, the saying of Jesus: "Many will say unto me in that day. Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name have done many wonderful works? And then I will profess unto them, 1 never Icneio you: depart from me, ye that work in- iquity." (Matt. 7: 22,23). Destitute of that principal Christian grace, char- ity, and although pleading in self-justification their possession of miraculous powers, yet it will be said unto them, " Depart from me, ye that work iniquity." They had not love, and " love is the fulfilling of the lawr Thus charity is contrasted with all spiritual gifts, and Paul singles out love as the summum bonum. 58 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM *' Charity never failetli: but whether there be prophcies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away." (Verse 8). Here we have a positiye declaration ; the spiritual gifts of w^hich he had been writing were to cease, and he particularly names that oi prophecy, which was re- garded as the greatest among them all. Love, you will doubtless have observed, is not named as a " spiritual gift." Why is this? Doubtless because in charity, or love, we have the sum of them all. Of the nine spiritual gifts named in the twelfth chapter, but one was permanent — faith. All others were to vanish — pass away. "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity." (Verse 13). Why was faith retained? Why was it not dismissed along Avith the other gifts? Evidently because it is the means to an end. All men are required to become godly; that is, become like God. *' God is love," and without love men cannot become like God. Without faith we could not love; without love we can never dwell with God, " for God is love." *' Hence Faith, the means, is in order to Love, the end." — Drainmond. That this is just what the apostle meant; that the miraculous powers w^ith which the early churches were so liberally endowed were to cease when the object for which they were given had been accom- plished — that is, when men had become estahlished — no better proof can be offered than the universally conceded fact that tliey have ceased. Prophecy declared they should cease, and history records the fact that they did cease. What better evi- THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 59 dence of the divine purpose can be offered? To say, as do the Saints, that they ceased because of the acci- dent of apostasy, is to impugn both the wisdom and the foreknowledge of God. Latter Day Saints say these miraculous powers ceased because of apostasy. This we most positively deny, and challenge the Saints to prove what they assert. After telling the Corinthians that prophecies should fail, tongues should cease and knowledge, as they had received it through these gifts, should vanish away, he proceeds to tell them tvhyit was to be so, and when it should occur. Of this he says: "For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But ivhen that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away." Here, as in every other case, the claim for the con- tinuity of the gifts of the Spirit, as it is urged by the Saints, depends entirely upon their exegesis of the text just quoted. Their argument to prove that the " signs " were to continue is based upon a peculiar and, as it appears to me, erroneous construction of the words, "When that which is perfect is come." Nothing is perfect but Christ, they tell us, and when the perfect Christ comes the second time, then, and not till then, the spiritual gifts were to cease. If their premise be correct, the conclusions will be admitted; but the premise is wrong. In the first place we admit, nay, we urge the fact that Christ is 2)erfect. Christ being perfect, any law that emanated from him must also be perfect. The Gospel law was given by him. Therefore the gospel law is perfect, and hence the declaration of James concerning ''the /)er/ecMaw of liberty" (Jas. 1: 25), in contradistinc- 60 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM tion to the '* law of sin and death," concerning which Paul says: "For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." (Rom. 8: 2). The apostle here speaks of this law as having eman- ated from Christ, and calls it "the law of the spirit of life/' and declares that it had made him free. James calls this same law " the p6'?/ec/ law of liberty." Evidently, then — and it is a fact not to be denied — the law of Christ was perfect. These Corinthians had not yet brought themselves under complete sub- jection to this law, and hence they were not free. They saw as but "through a glass darkly" — in fact, they were but mere children, having a very imperfect conception of the beauties and grandeur of the Gospel they had formally received. Paul wishes to encourage them to understand that as soon as they were able to bring themselves into perfect harmony with the " spirit of the law of life;" when that " perfect law of liberty" had made them /ree, as it had made him free ; when the perfect law of liberty had come to them in all liberating power as that in which it had come to him, then prophecies and tongues, for their instruction and confirmation, would be no longer needed, and should therefore cease. As children they saw "through a glass darkly;" but -svhen they should become men grown up in stature to the full " measure of the stature of Christ " "(Eph. 4: 13) they should see face to face. Then, "whether there be prophecies, they shall fail.'' Then, "whether there be tongues, they shall cease.'' If it shall be ursred that the foregoing views are THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 61 erroneous, and that the "signs" or "spiritual gifts" are still in the Church of Christ, then we demand of those making such claim that they produce the only evidence of which the case is susceptible, namely, perform the works in open daylight, in the presence of an unbelieving public, as did the apostles of Christ. SERPENTS. *' They shall take up serpents.^' There can be but one possible use for the exercise of this "gift," or "sign," and that is to prove a divine apostolic call. We have but one recorded instance of its employment — that of the apostle to the Gentiles, and this resulted in many conversions. The saints might secure similar results by the per- formance of similar works. But can they perform the works? Far from it! and, wisely, they never attempt such a thing. I have known a number of persons who were bitten by poisonous serpents, but not in a single instance was the victim willing to risk his faith. A pint of good brandy was always prefer- able, and far more effective. As a matter of fact, the average Mormon preacher is as much afraid of snakes as are ordinary mortals. He would not risk the bite of an adder or the sting of an asp for the possible salvation of the whole nation. His faith is very strong, but he takes no chances. CHAPTER V. DEADLY THINGS. Deadly things— Joseph's claim— Was he poisoned?— The case exam- ined—Hair came out— Claim unsupported— Healing the sick— The writer's experience and disappointment — Then and now— Dis- couraged— A Mormon subterfuge— Bible miracles and latter day pretensions. "7/ they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them.^^ Latter Day Saints, like all sensible people, avoid deadly poisons. Instances are of record, however, where it is claimed deadly poisons were administered without serious results, but in no single instance has such a claim been verified by competent testimony. Here is a case in point. Early in May, 1832, while Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, and Newell K. Whitney were returning by team from Independence, Mo., to Kirtiand, Ohio, at a point " between Vincennes, Ind., and New Albany, near the falls of the Ohio," the team ran away, and " in their efforts to escape from the coach, Mr. Whitney was so unfortunate as to sustain a compound fracture of the bones of one of his limbs,'* and they were compelled to put up at a wayside '* tavern," where they remained four weeks. "Here," says Mr. Smith's historian, "occurred quite a marvelous episode. The Anti-Mormons, it appears, attempted to poison the prophet, as a means (62) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 63 of cruelly testing whether the ' signs * followed the Mormons. Joseph says: *' ' One day, when I arose from the table, I walked directly to the door and began vomiting most pro- fusely. I raised large quantities of blood and poison- ous matter, and so great were the contortions of my muscular systeui, that my jaw was dislocated in a few moments. This I succeeded in replacing with my own hands, and I then made my way to Brother Whitney (who was on his bed) as speedily as possible. He laid his hands on me, and administered to me in the name of the Lord, and I was healed in an instant, although the effect of the poison had been so power- ful as to cause much of the hair to become loosened from my head.' " (TuUidge's History, pages 141, 142). Several points of objection may be urged against the probable truthfulness of this statement, and which tend to destroy its force. Among these are the following: 1. No proof is offered to show that poison of any character had been administered to Mr. Smith by Anti-Mormons or anybody else — he only suspects, something of the kind. 2. That it was done to "cruelly test whether the 'signs' followed the Mormons," is simply a wild assertion without a thing to support it. 3. No analysis of the alleged " blood and poison- ous matter " was ever made by a competent person to determine the fact that poison had been adminis- tered, and yet this is the only means, in this case, of determining the presence of poison. 4. The mere fact that Mr. Smith turned sick while at the dinner table is incompetent to establish C4 TEE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM the fact of poison, as this effect ma}' be produced in various ways. 5. The fact that Joseph soon recovered from this sudden attack of nausea after Whitney laid his hands on him, does not prove, nor even tend to prove, that Mr. Smith was healed, because that would be the natural result of ''profuse vomiting." 6. It is a fact that God never does things by halves, and it seems remarkably strange that the Lord would heal his own prophet, and do it " in an instant," and yet allow the poison to have such a powerful effect upon him as to cause the hair to fall from his head. Why did not the remedy save the prophet's hair? 7. But perhaps the most serious objection to this alleged case of healing arises from the following con- sideration, namely: If Joseph Smith had in fact been poisoned, either by an enemy or by accident, and if Mr. Whitney's administration by the laying on of hands, as a matter of fact, actually healed Joseph Smith, as claimed, then why in the name of common sense did not the combined effort of Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon heal Newell K. Whitney's broken leg? Why lay by at a public house, among enemies who sought their lives, waiting for Whitney's leg to get well by the slow processes of nature, when there was a prophet of God present who possessed such marvelous power? Why ivas it thus? Can any Lat- ter Day Saint answer? Viewing it from the standpoint of honesty and common sense, the whole thing looks like a fraud — an effort to deceive. The evidence does not support the proposition affirmed, and must therefore be rejected. THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM G5 HEAL THE SICK. Last, but by no means least, among the "signs" that should follow the believer was, " They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." Little was known at that age of the world concern- ing the science of medicine. Physiology had not yet been born. The action of the heart was little under- stood, and it remained for Harvey to discover the cir- culation of the blood. Physicians of that day were poweriess to contend with the malignant forms of disease which then afflicted humanity. To be able to do what the most skilled physicians failed to accomplish gave the apos- tles a prestige not otherwise attainable. The power to heal every manner of disease was a "sign" — a positive proof — to all those who obeyed the Gospel as preached b}" those unlettered fishermen that the God Avhom they preached had power to heal the soul as perfectly and as completely as the body. One they could believe because the other the}" had seen and felt. The apostles, in substance, said to the people, "If you will believe the Gospel, and obey all its demands, 3"Ou shall have power to lay your hands on the sick, just as you have seen us do, and they shall recover.'^ Believing, the people obeyed, and obeying, they received. Hence the concluding declaration: "And they [the disciples] went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and con- firming the word with signs following." (Mark 16:20). Had the signs failed to follow the obedient believer, or had they seemingly followed only at long intervals, the faith of the believer would have been destroyed 5 66 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM rather than confirmed. The unquestionable fulfill- ment of the promise must be the rule — not the excep- tion. To witness a seeming instance of healing among Latter Day Saints is the exception, not the rule. I feel perfectly safe in saying that on the average not more than one case in a hundred could be regarded as even seemingly successful. While in charge of the Southwestern Mission, in- cluding Texas, western Louisiana, Arizona and New Mexico, I kept a record of all administrations to the sick, noting time, place, the name of patient, the nature of the malady, by whom assisted, and the results. At the close of the year I found myself unable to report a single instance of healing in the entire mission. This was in 1878-9. You can only imagine my feelings of disappoint- ment and regret with this record staring me in the face, especially when many of those to whom I minis- tered had been brought into the church under my ministry. Often, very often, indeed, I would feel discouraged and sick at heart. I knew I was doing my best, arid I had every reason to believe the people were honest. I had told them the "signs" should follow, but I was made to realize they did not, and was amazed that the new converts did not manifest greater signs of disappointment; but most of them surmounted the difficulty, and for aught I know are still in the church. That the signs promised did follow those who received the teachings of the apostles of Christ there seems little room to doubt; but that they follow the honest believers in Mormonism, I have every reason in the world to deny. When Latter Day Saints are asked to prove their THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 67 ability to work miracles as did the apostles, they evade the issue by quoting the language of Christ to a class of wicked Jews : *'A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it l)ut the sign of Jonas." (Matt. 16: 4). This is a mere subterfuge on the part of Latter Day Saints. Neither Christ nor the apostles ever sought to evade the inquiries of an honest seeker after the truth in this manner. It is a tacit confession of ina- bility to perform what they advertise. Besides this, the most wicked Pharisees did not question th.Qfact that a miracle had been performed. They acknowl- edged the miracle, but attributed it to satanic power. (See Matt. 9: 32-34: 12: 22-24.) Not so to-da}^ That a miracle has been performed by any modern apostle or prophet is denied by thoughtful Christian people everywhere, and no rea- sonable demand for proof should be treated lightly by those pretending to possess such powers, and any attempt to evade the issue can only be regarded as an unmanly effort to shirk the responsibility the claim involves. When pressed further on this point they again quote the words of Christ : " He that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven shall hnow of the doctrine," and then invite you to test the matter by joining the Mormon Church, assuring you that by so doing you may get the proof that what they teach is true. This is but another in- genious effort to dodge the issue.' If you make the effort and do not receive what you had been led to expect — as you certainly will not — you are told it is because you lack faith — that you must persevere and C8 TUE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM not allow the devil to cheat you out of the prouii.sed blessing. You continue to strive, believing it is all your own fault that you do not receive *' the gifts," until finally you either convince yourself that you have received a "testimony" and become established in the faith, or, discouraged and disheartened, turn away ia disgust. How utterly unlike the apostolic method is all this I No such evasions were necessary theu, nor would they be now if Mormonisui possessed the powers claiuied for it. St. Paul, when withstood by Elymas the sor- cerer, who sought to "turn away the deputy from the faith," was able to say in the name of the Lord: " O full of all subtilty and mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right way of the Lord? And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt he blind, not seeing the sun for a season." (Acts 13:8-11.) No faith on the part of this sorcerer was necessary for Paul to perform this wonderful miracle. Nor yet was faith on the part of the recipient of the blessing required when Peter raised Dorcas from the dead. "But Peter put them all forth, and kneeled down and prayed; and turning him to the body said, Tabitha, arise. And she opened her eyes: and when she saw Peter she sat up. And he gave her his hand, and lifted her up, and when he had called the saints and widows, presented her alive. And it was known throughout all Joppa, and many believed on the Lord." (Acts 9:40-42). Here was a miracle performed by an apostle of Christ, that defied contradiction, and the result of it was, " many believed on the Lord." In this case two THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 69 very important facts appear. First : No f aitii by any one except Peter himself was necessary to the per- formance of this stupendous miracle: and, secondly: Being absolutely unquestionable, it was the direct means of many conversions. When any latter-day apostle shall duplicate these miracles, then, and not till then, shall he be able to maintain the claim of Mormonism to miraculous powers. CHAPTER VI. OTHER CLAIMS. Other claims — The Adventists — Free Methodists — Dr. Dowie — The Church of Rome — Their miracles lack authentication — The Church at Corinth — Spiritual gifts were for edification — Utah Church and its miracles — The sick healed— Cases cited — Are they genuine? The Reorganized Church — Excellent moral character of its mem- bership — Claims to miraculous powers — Tested by a simple rule — Miracles no longer necessary. Not only does every branch and faction of the Mormon Church, polygamous or otherwise, pretend to have power to work miracles, but this power is claimed by others, only in a somewhat modified form, perhaps. The Seventh Day Adventists get revela- tions through the "visions " of Mrs. Ellen G. White, of Battle Creek, Michigan; and the " Come-Outers," or *' Saints," as they prefer to be called, under the leadership of the late Elder Warner, of Michigan, and the Free Methodists, under Superintendent Eoberts, all urge, as a proof of their divine mission, that the sick are healed among them by the anointing and "laying on of hands," not to mention Dr. Dowie, of Chicago, and a score of other so-called divine healers. It is a well known fact in history that the Church of Rome has ever claimed the power to work miracles. Indeed, her claim to such power is thoroughly attest- ed, so far as mere interested human testimony is capable of such attestation. But who believes her miracles genuine? Nobody. The entire Protestant world is a unit in the rejection of her claim to miracu- lous powers. (70) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 71 The most remarkable thing about this whole affair is found in the fact that not one of these churches will admit the miracles of the other — neither can con- vince the other of its divine authority. To the think- ing mind the question very naturally arises : Do any of them possess the powers claimed? No sooner is the question asked than the answer comes with irre- sistible force that no such power is possessed by any of them, their pretensions to the contrary notwith- standing. No valid reason for the existence of such powers has ever been given. If, indeed, such powers are necessary to-day, God, having lost none of his power, would certainly demon- strate their existence in an unmistakable manner, as in former times. The fact that there is no satisfac- tory proof of their existence amounts to very strong presumptive evidence that they are wholly unneces- sary to the salvation of a fallen race. In fact, it is nowhere stated that such powers were ever necessary to salvation. Tongues, interpretations and prophecy — that is, teaching — were, in the apostles' time, a necessary means of edification, as appears from the testimony of Paul : "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him. . . . But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification and exhortation and comfort. " Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spirit- ual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. " How is it, then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. 72 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM Let all things he done unto edifying.'' (1 Cor. 14: 2,3, 12, 26). Thus the church at Corinth, composed of people of different tongues, were urged to covet such gifts as were necessary to their excellence '' to the edifying of the church," and to do this '* tongues " and " inter- pretations " must be employed. But when a church is composed of people all speaking the same language, or where the minister can speak the different lan- guages of those present, " the spiritual gifts " are not necessary to the " edifying of the church." Spiritual gifts, then, are clearly to edify and not to save. If not to save, and as the church may be edified without them, their employment is superfluous. Perhaps no people have ever been more boastful of miraculous powers than are the leaders of the church at Salt Lake City; and yet their vicious and corrupt practices have seldom been equaled, and perhaps never excelled. The following shows what wonderful things the}^ claim to have done: "healing of one born blind." . . "So the mother took another of her daugh- ters and put her upon his knee [that of an unbeliev- er], and said, 'Sir, is that child blind?' And after he had examined her eyes, he said, ''She is,' 'Well,' sard the mother, ' she was hoi'n blind: and she is now four years old, and I am going to take her to the elders of our church for them to anoint her eyes with oil and lay their hands upon her; and you can call again when you have time, and see her with her eyes open.' . . ' Well,' said he, 'if she does ever see, it will be a great proof.' " Accordingly, the mother brought the child to the THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS bB MORMOXISM 73 elders, and Elder John Hackwell anointed her eyes, and laid his hands upon her, only once ; and the Lord heard his prayer, so that the child can now see with both of her eyes as well as any other person. For which we feel thankful to our heavenly Father, and are willing to bear testimony of it to all the world. " Yours in the Kingdom of God, "George Halliday. ''P. S.— We, the father and mother of the child, do here sign our names to the above, as being true. "William Bounsell. "Elizabeth BouNSELL. "No 12 Bread Street., Bristol, England, Nov. 25, 1849." The above, with over a score of other similar cases, covering a variety of ailments, including leprosy, are recorded in the work from which this is taken. (See O. Pratt's works. Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, No. 5, page 71.) Mr. Pratt was at the time an apostle of the Utah Church and in charge of the English mission, and the parties to the alleged healing were members of the same church. Who can believe that a people who did not hesitate for a moment to violate every commandment of the Decalogue could possibly be blessed with such mar- velous power, while at the same time they are denied to the peace-loving and virtuous? The very claim is a burlesque on Christianity, and is alike repulsive to man and dishonoring to God. It cannot be true. If to be found anywhere within the domain of Mormonism, these "spiritual gifts" might, with a greater show of reason, be expected among the people of the Reorganized Church, whose membership, I am glad to say, are as a rule honest and law-abiding people, and the purity of whose lives no man may 74 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM truthfully question. I speak of this as the merest matter of justice to the membership of that church. But do they possess supernatural powers? With forty years of acquaintance with Mormonism in its various phases, common honesty impels me to say I have never known a single instance of miracu- lous power. I have witnessed, it is true, what I was at the time willing to call a miracle, because, like all others who believe in such things, I wished to have it so; but never have I witnessed anything which would bear the test of intelligent scrutiny, or be confirmed by candid, sober second thought. When, some years ago, I began a careful review of the entire ground upon which Mormonism is based, a simple rule assisted me very much in the solution of this vexed question. The rule was to accept nothing as miraculous which may be accounted for upon natural or scientific principles. This led me out of the woods. When tried by this simple rule no pre- tended miracle would stand the test. Respecting this question, then, I no longer ask myself if these miraculous gifts are attainable by Christians to-day, but rather, are their presence in the Church of Christ, or their possession by the indi- vidual, necessary for the formation and development of Christian character? Since the Scriptures nowhere declare that spiritual gifts, or power to work miracles, are in any sense necessary to the formation of true Christian charac- ter, or essential to the salvation of any man in any age, we shall certainly be perfectly safe in maintain- ing that their presence in the church is altogether immaterial, if not absolutely unnecessary. With this point satisfactorily settled, there exists no reason for concern. CHAPTER VII. CHURCH ORGANIZATION. The Mormon Church a unique structure — Divided into many fac- tions—Which is right?— King Strang— His Kingdom— The Mor- mon idea of an apostolic church— Its officers — Apostle Kelley's rule for testing churches. Having disposed of that part of the subject which relates to the "signs," or "spiritual gifts," let us now pass to a careful consideration of the organic structure of the Mormon Church. As between the different factions of the church which have arisen since the death of Joseph and Hyrum Smith, in June, 1884, there exists no differ- ence with respect to the organization of the church, with one single exception, namely, that of James J. Strang, late of Beaver Island, Lake Michigan, who inaugurated a slight change. Although claiming to be the legal successor to Joseph Smith, as "prophet, seer, and revelator," he skillfully avoided the triumvirate known as the "First Presidency," and assumed the modest title of king. This, of course, he had a perfect right to do. Being a " prophet, seer, and revelator," all he had to do was to get a new revelation authorizing the change, and no man in the kingdom dare question its validity. This done, the question was settled, Strang organ- ized the "Kingdom of God," and of course there could be no kingdom without a king — and Strang was the king. (75) 76 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM Perhaps few of 1113^ readers are aware that a king- dom, pure and simple, with all the appurtenances thereunto belonging, was once established, and for several years flourished in the United States, almost immediate!}^ under the shadow of the folds of " Old Glory;" yet such is the case. It is difficult to conceive how any intelligent man with the Bible in his hand could originate such a sys- tem of church government as that announced by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, and then have the effrontery to declare it to be an exact reproduction of the apostolic form of government. And it is equally strange that intelligent people can, by any specious method of reasoning, be induced to accept such a system as being strictly Biblical; and yet such is the case. It is not so much a matter of astonishment, however, in the case of those who have been schooled in Mormon theology from infancy. The very essence of the delusion has been infused into every fiber of brain and body, and is hard to eradicate; yet such persons may reason themselves out of it, if happily they are able to so far break away from early traditions as to allow themselves to reason. It is the boast of all Latter Day Saints that theirs is absolutely the only church in existence whose organi- zation is exactly in accord with the plan laid down in the New Testament. With one accord they echo the sentiment of Joseph Smith's angel Moroni, who sol- emnly declared the churches were all wrong, their creeds an ahominalion, and their teachers all corimpt. This unholy charge against every church and every creed in all Christendom should be repelled in the most decided manner, for the reason that it is not THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 77 true in fact, and is wholly unchristian in sentiment, yet it is perfectly in keeping with the spirit and tone of Mormon theology. Corruption, indeed! Where, under the broad can- opy of heaven, did there ever exist a people calling themselves Christian, who were more intolerably corrupt than the people who composed the different factions which grew up out of the wreck of the first Mormon Church after the death of the Smiths at Carthage, 111., in 1844? Let those who live in .glass houses beware how they cast stones. I shall endeavor to so completely overthrow the entire Mormon superstructure as to render its recon- struction absolutely impossible — show most conclu- sively, notwithstanding their boastful claim, that their organization is not only unscriptural, and therefore untenable, but that it stands without a parallel in the history of the ages. We shall now proceed to a critical examination of their claims upon this point, and review the scriptural texts upon which they rely for support. That there may be no controversy respecting the positions taken, I shall let their own w^riters state them. Wm. H. Kelley, one of the twelve apostles of the Reorganized Church, and a recognized authority in matters of doctrine, concerning church organiza- tion has this to say: *' In the New Testament there is a history given of the foundation of the Church of Christ in the times of the apostles. It sets forth the class of officers belonging thereto, and defines their duties." (Presi- dency and Priesthood, page 49). Mr. Kelley then proceeds to name each officer which the Mormon creed prescribes as being necessary 78 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF 2I0BM0NISM to the complete organization of the Church of Christ, as follows : *'(!) A chief apostle and high priest, with two associate counselors. (2) A quorum of twelve apostles. (3) Seventy elders. (4) Elders. (5) Bishops. (6) Priests. (7) Teachers. (8). Deacons. (9) High priests, evangelists and pastors in their proper places and order." (Presidency and Priest- hood, page 226. See also pages 42, 53 and 83). The writer then proceeds : " In the light of the above facts, can any organiza- tion, however proud and haughty in its claims or large its members, not having these God-sent and heaven-inspired officers, be the Church of Christ?" (Ibid, page 45). Here we have the whole thing in a nutshell. No church, except organized according to Mr. Kelley's '* pattern," can by any possible means be the Church of Christ. The antithesis of this proposition would be that any church organized according to this pattern must be the Church of Christ. Under this view of the case, will Mr. Kelley inform us just which of the seven or eight Mormon churches having such organ- ization is the genuine church? There are the Brig- hamite Church, the Josephites, the Strangites, the Rigdonites, the Whitmerites, the Brewsterites, and the Hedrickites, to say nothing of the half-dozen defunct organizations, among which was that led by William B. Smith, brother of the prophet. THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 79 Mr. Kelley, as a matter of course, will tell us that the Reorganized Church (the Josephites) is the only genuine, simon-pure, Mormon Church, while the Brighamites declare in the most vehement manner that *' young Joseph" is an apostate, wholly without authority, and that the true church is found only in Salt Lake City. This very question has been a bone of contention among the different factions of the Mormon Church ever since the death of Joseph Smith. Of one thing we are morally certain, and that is, they cannot all be the Church of Christ, for the reason that the Apostle Paul declares, *' Christ is not divided." Mr. Kelley devotes 107 pages of his book to the task of proving that the Protestant churches are in a hopeless state of division, and utterly without authority, to say nothing of the 82 pages devoted to the church of Rome. He refers more particularly to the different Baptist organiza- tions as illustrative of the perniciousness of division, and says : "But which Baptist church is the one standing in the true line of succession? This is not agreed upon by the Baptists themselves, and there are many Bap- tist churches; yet this is the important thing to men interested in knowing the true way." (Ibid, page 132). All the different Mormon churches named above claim to stand in *' the true line of succession " from Joseph Smith; and all that is affirmed of the Baptist churches will apply with equal force to the half-dozen or more Mormon churches now extant. Using Mr. Kelley's language, changing only the name of the church, we may very j)roperly ask the pertinent ques- tion: 80 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM *' Which Mormon church is the one standing in the true line of succession? This is not agreed upon between Mormons themselves, and there are many Mormon churches ; and yet tliis is the important thing to men interested in knowing the true way." How does your logic suit you, Mr. Kelley? When applied to your case, don't you think it proves just a little too much for the safety of your own position? This defender of Mormonism thus continues: ** Again this writer [D. B. Ray] has the courage to assert that ' no man can be in the church or kingdom of Jesus Christ who is not in that kingdom which has the succession from the apostolic age.' " (Ibid, page 133). Let us again make an application of Mr. Kelley 's logic. That gentleman has the *' courage to assert" that no man can be in the Church of Christ who is not in that church or kingdom having in its organic structure *' God-sent and heaven-inspired" apostles, prophets, and so on, and yet all Mormon churches are so organized. The logic of this position is clearly this: The church having this particular organization is the Church of Christ. All Mormon churches are so organized. Therefore, all Mormon churches are the churches of Christ. If Mr. Kelley's logic is sound, would not ordinar}^ prudence dictate that the Reorganized Church and the Utah organization shake hands across the bloody chasm, kiss and make up, and join their forces in a common cause against the "old mother'' and all her "daughters?" "A house divided against itself can- not stand." If the division of Methodists, Baptists, and other denominations, into separate and distinct organic THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 81 bodies, proves such churches to be without authority, as the advocates of Mormonism aver, then a like con- dition existing among Latter Day Saints will prove all Mormon churches equally unauthorized. The mere fact that a church may set apart twelve men and dub them *' apostles" cannot be accepted by sen- sible, thinking people as proof that such a body is the Church of Christ. Even were we to admit the jDeculiar organization advocated by Latter Day Saints to be the correct one, we should still be left in doubt as to which of them is right, for they have never been able to settle the question satisfactorily among themselves. But the question which more vitally concerns us at present is this: Does the Mormon Church, in its organic form, harmonize with that described in the New Testament? Mr. Kelley, as do all Latter Day Saints, insists that there must not be a thing omitted nor a single point added — it must be in '' exact accord with the pattern." A good physician should not refuse to take the medicine he prescribes for others when afflicted with the same disease; and Latter Day Saints cannot, therefore, refuse to be governed by the rule pre- scribed for the government of others. If the church organization described by Mormon writers, and uni- formly, and sometimes eloquently, urged by its preachers, shall be found to be in perfect harmony with the Bible, then I am free to admit that the Mor- mon Church is right, and everybody else is wrong. But, on the other hand, if they have either too much or too little, then they are in error, and should as frankly confess it. In seeking to determine this important question we must be goverened by a rule upon which there is per- 82 TRE DOCTRINES AND D0G2IAS OF MORMONISM feet agreement between the parties to the contro- versy. Defenders of the Mormon faith and doctrine can certainly have no ground of complaint if we ask them to submit to a rule of their own making — one by which they propose to test the claims of every other church. Mr. Kelley furnishes an excellent rule, to which I think the reader will most heartily sub- scribe, as follows: " To avoid imposition in finance, there is put in circulation a money test, by \vhich the holder of money is enabled to determine whether there is ten- dered to him true or false coin. When every mark or figure on a coin or bill tendered in exchange har- monizes with the detector, it is pronounced good money. But if there is anything found on the coin or in the bill, not to he found in the detector, or if there is something left out of the coin or bill that is found in the detector, it is rejected as spurious. " The New Testament contains the history of the formation of the primitive church; hence it is the test or detector by which all church organizations, claiming to be the true, are to be tried. . . . Then friend, seeker, take the New Testament in your hand as your guide and test by which to try systems. . . . Do not lose sight of the detector, or you will be in danger of being imposed upon by something man-made and spurious. The counterfeiter is abroad in tlieland.'' (Presidency and Priesthood, pages 49 and 50). The italics are mine. With this rule for our guide let us lay the Mormon system beside the '* detector," and see if it is able to stand the test. CHAPTER VIII. PATRIARCH OMITTED — APOSTLES WANTING. The Reorganized Church deficient — The patriarch omitted — Only nine apostles— An argument examined— Polygamy and highway robbery — A corrupt tree — A bitter fountain— Unties of an apostle defined — Brighamite and Reorganized churches agree — The whole system is unscriptural. Having already given the list of officers necessary to a properly organized church, from the Mormon point of view, it is unnecessary to reproduce it here. It is a remarkable fact that when preaching to the world — and that means everything not Latter Day Saints — they uniformly omit any reference to the First Presidency, the Patriarch, and High Priests. You will no doubt have observed that Mr. Kelley omits the Patriarch from his list of church officials, but for w4iat reason he fails to mention that important func- tionary does not appear, unless it be from a conscious- ness that no such officer is mentioned in the New Testament; and yet no Mormon Church is complete in its organization without that dignitary, as we have already shown. Two remarkable deficiencies have ever existed in the Reorganized Church, which may, with propriety, be mentioned in this connection, namely: 1. While the church has existed nearly forty-seven years, yet it has never had a full "quorum" of Twelve Apostles — the number usually being from seven to ten. 2. It has never had, in all these years, a Patriarch; (83) 84 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORJIOXISM and as the duty of that official is "to confer bless- ings " upon the members of the church, their k)ss can never be estimated. These defects in the organic structure of the church cause more or less uneasiness and comment upon the part of some of the leading men, and tlieir fears were not removed till April 15, 1894, when President Joseph Smith received the following revelation, in which the Lord is represented as saying: "It is not expedient in me that the Quorum of the Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles shall be filled, for reasons which will be seen and known unto you in due time." — Doctrines and Cove- nants, sec. 122, par. 4, page 353. Concerning the appointment and consecration of a Patriarch, the revelation continues: "For the same reasons in me that it is not expedi- ent to fill the quorums of the First Presidency' and the Twelve, who are apostles and high priests, it is not expedient that a Patriarch for the church should be indicated and appointed.'' — Ibid, page 358. This shows that the Patriarch is still regarded as a necessary part of the church machinery, and that the only thing in the way was a question of expediency. The Patriarchate was carefully kept in the Smith* *NoTE. — Since the above was written, a revelation was received by Rresideut Joseph Smith, at Lamoni, Iowa, April 9, 1897, appoint- ing his brother, Alexander H. Smith, to the Patriarchate of the Reorganized Church. Following is the language of the revelation : "Thus saith the Spirit of your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ : Your fastings and your prayers are accepted and have prevailed. "Separate and set apart my servant Alexander H. Smith to be a counselor to my servant, the President of the church, his brother ; and to be PatHarch to the church, and an evangelical minister to the whole church." (Minutes of General Conference, Lamoni, Iowa, April 6-16, 1897, page 28.) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM 85 family. It was first conferred upon the prophet's father, Joseph Smith, Sr., and later upon his elder brother Hyrum, who held the office at the time of his death. The position was a lucrative one, the Patriarch receiving, it is said, one dollar for each "blessing sealed upon the head " of the faithful. In order to prove their form of organization to be strictly Biblical, Latter Da}' Saints quote two passages of Scripture, as follows: "And God hath set some in the church, first apos- tles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." (1 Cor. 12: 28). "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. "And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and some pastors and teachers ; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edi- fying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried Patriarcl] Smith enjoys the unique distinction of being the only ecclesiastic to hold three offices at the same time, namely: A mem- ber of the "First Presidency," a "Patriarch," and '■'■ an evangelical minister to the whole church,^' the last named office being a new crea- tion, authorized by this new revelation. When will the official list be completed? The same revelation — par. 4 — also sets apart "my servants I. N. White, J. W. Wight [son of apostle Lyman Wight, of Texas], and R. C. Evans," to the apostleship, thus completing the organization of the "Quorum of Twelve." With the appointment of Bishop E. L. Kelley as a counselor pro tern, to President Smith, the organization of the church is completed for the first time during its entire existence. 86 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive." (Eph. 4: 8, 11, 12). It is maintained by Latter Day Saints that these Scriptures prove: 1. That God set in the church "apostles and prophets," as a necessary part of its organic struct- ure. 2. That inspired apostles and prophets were de- signed to continue in the Church of Christ in every age of the world. 3. That these inspired persons are necessary to the *'work of the ministry" — that is, to preach the Gos- pel and administer its ordinances — in every age. 4. That the apostles and prophets are a necessary safeguard against every form of fraud and deception. If the Scriptures quoted sustain the above views, then Christians everywhere should accept them. But if they do not, Latter Day Saints should renounce the heresy at once. Let us now review the ground of this claim and see if it be tenable. 1. While 1 Cor. 12: 28 affirms that " God set some in the church," and names apostles and prophets, among others, it does not intiipate that such officers are a necessary part of the church organization; in fact, it does not even call them "officers" of the church, nor does any other Scripture so declare. Nothing is here, then, to show that apostles and prophets were a part of the official and organic struc- ture of the church. 2. Ephesians 4: 11-14 declares that Christ gave ** gifts" unto men, and among other things he gave some apostles and prophets, but there is not one word about the office of apostle and prophet, much less a THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 87 provision to continue such " offices " in all ages of the world. 3. That inspired apostles and prophets are neces- to preach the Gospel and administer its ordinances is an assumption wholly unwarranted by the facts, and can be regarded only as the idle fancy of a brain dis- ordered by a false theology; and even Mormons themselves are forced to admit that elders may per- form all the duties necessary to induct *' foreigners and strangers " into the " commonwealth of Israel." 4. Which of the divine writers is so bold as to declare that the presence of apostles and prophets in the church is a safeguard against cunning and craft, fraud and deception? No such thought is suggested by the text quoted. That we may not be "tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine," and thus be safe from the wiles of the cunning and crafty, is conditioned on the fact *'that we henceforth be no more children,^' but instead be full-grown men — men so fully developed as to fill *'the measure of the stature of Christ." That the presence of apostles and prophets is no safeguard against fraud and deception will more fully appear as we proceed. If apostles and prophets were designed as a means of protection against fraud — to prevent the possibility of being ** carried about with every wind of doctrine," then how does it come that the Mormon Church has developed a greater amount of fraud, and its mem- bership have been " tossed to and fro," and carried about with " winds of doctrine" such as have never disturbed any other church or people? Will some- body answer? For instance, under the guidance of the "twelve 88 TEE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM apostles " set in the church organized by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, was developed that pernicious, soul-destroying " wind of doctrine " known as pol^^g- amy, but which is known among its devotees by the euphonious title of " Patriarchal marriage.'' Instead of preventing the iniquity, these modern apostles, under the eye of Joseph Smith, if not by his sanction and authority, were the instigators and teachers of the abomination. Who but these so-called apostles introduced and taught that damnable doctrine of human sacrifice known as " blood atonement," as it has been known to exist in Salt Lake City? Who but these same men made their ignorant dupes believe that " Adam is our God and our father, and the only God with whom we. have to do?" Who but these self-styled apostles and prophets taught their credulous followers that it was perfectly legitimate to despoil their enemies and rob the hated ** Gentiles?" This delicate operation was modestly called '* consecration," and King Strang was entitled to one-tenth of all such " consecrations." The writer speaks from observations made during more than a year's residence among them on Beaver Ishind, and was present when Strang was assassinated by two of bis followers. The list of unholy doctrines and practices might be extended indelinitely, but we desist. Enough has been said to show that the presence of so-called apos- tles in the church aifords no guarantee of purity, either in doctrine or practice. If it be true that *' a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit," or that " a bitter fountain cannot send forth sweet water," then, what must be said of the tree THE DOCTttlNES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 89 that has yielded such an abundant harvest of corrupt fruit, or of the fountain from which has flowed the bitter waters of vice and corruption, as those exhibit- ed under the different phases of Mormonism? Test- ing the system by this infallible rule, there can be but one conclusion reached, namely, the fruit being eviU the tree must have been corrupt; the stream being bitter, the fountain must have been imjntre. From the foregoing it will be seen that Mr. Kelley is evidently in error when he affirms that the passages of Scripture under consideration *' provide for the existence and necessity for the continuation of an in- spired ministry," including apostles and prophets. No such provision is made, and no such necessity is shown to exist. Of the duties of an apostle, the late Orson Pratt, of the Utah Church, says: "One of the important duties required of an apos- tle is to ADMINISTER THE SPIRIT. . . The Ordinance through which the Spirit is administered is the laying ON OF HANDS. (See Acts 8 and 19, and Hebrews 6.) "To the apostles were entrusted three very impor- tant ministrations for the salvation of man: "First. The ministration of tJie ivord. " Second. The ministration of the baptism of water. "Third. The ministration of the baptism of the Spirit." (O. Pratt's works. The Kingdom of God, part 1, page 7.) "These offices were created^ set, established by the Almighty in the priesthood, to receive occupants for the government and guidance of the church." (Presi- dency and Priesthood, page 43). Thus it will be seen that the two principal Mormon 90 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM Churches agree both as to the existence and duties of apostles in the church to-daj. Several serious objections may be urged against the last quoted statement, among which maybe named: 1. No such " offices " as those mentioned were ever ** created," and hence never received "occupants" for the *' guidance of the churches." 2. Such offices never having been created could not have been, and in fact were not, established in the Church of Christ. 3. Never having been established, it is impossible for them to continue. 4. No officer, it matters not how high, was ever set in the church for its " government and guidance." The Gospel, "the perfect law of liberty," was or- dained for the "government and guidance of the churches," and the officers were only its ministers. That "the universe is governed by law," is as true of the spiritual and divine, as it is of the physical world. I have diligently searched the Scriptures to find where, when and by whom such officers as those named by Mr. Kelley were " created" and " set" in the church established by Christ, and I am bold to declare that no such system can anywhere be found in the Bible. It is clearly and unmistakably modern in its origin, and purely and absolutely Mormon in its inception — " created " and foisted upon the public by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery as a new revela- tion. It is a fraud and a deception, and has not even the shadow of support in the Word of God. CHAPTER IX. Apostles in the primitive church— The apostolic office is ambassa- dorial, not executive — Ambassadors in the church now are unnec- essary and impossible— Mr. Kelley's rule applied — Apostolic suc- cession. In the face of the foregoing facts the Saints will no doubt continue to insist that apostles and prophets are a part of the constitutional organic structure of the church. That God set apostles in his church, none are dis- posed to question; but that apostles were a part of its official, organic structure, is most emphatically denied; and those who affirm as much are required to establish their contention by the production of com- petent evidence — such evidence as will e.stablish the fact beyond the possibility of reasonable doubt. AMBASSADORS. The twelve apostles were, in their official character, ambassadors; and were representative, rather than executive or judicial, officers, and as such were not a part of the internal organism of the body spiritual. Now, if we shall be able to establish this view by competent testimony, we shall have gained a point both material and relevant to the controversy, whose importance will be recognized at once. Then to the task let us hasten. Although having the privilege to minister in Gospel ordinances, if the apostles were ambassadors, the}' were not necessarily executive officers of the Church (Olj 92 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM of Christ by virtue of their apostleship. Bearing directly upon this question the apostle Paul says: *'For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel." (1 Cor. 1:17). To baptize is the function of an executive officer, while preaching the Gospel is the duty of a represen- tative official. Hence, Paul was specifically a repre- sentative of Christ. The same is true of all the apostles. The specific duty of the eleven, as set forth in the commission, was to "preach the Gospel." Incident- ally they might baptize, but their commission did not require them to do so. They 7nust preach Christ, but others might do the baptizing. A Paul may plant, while an Apollos may water. While Paul was not obliged to baptize, yet he says: *' Woe is me if I preach not the Gospel." If the office of the apostles was ambassadorial, it will doubtless readily be granted that they are at once removed from the domain of the executive and judi- cial, except in a manner purely ex-officio. What is true of one is true of a class. Hence, if one apostle was an ambassador, all were. The only thing necessary to a fair settlement of this question will be to determine whether the apostles were ambassabors in the proper sense of that term. But first, what is an ambassador? Webster defines the word thus : "The minister of the highest rank, employed by one prince or state at the court of another to manage the public concerns of his own prince or state, and representing the power and dignity of his own sover- eign." The apostle is "a minister of the highest rank," as THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 93 declared by all New Testament writers, and was employed by the "Prince of Peace " to represent his *' power and dignity " at the courts of all the princes of earth. The apostolic credentials were unquestion- able. They bore the insignia of divine approval in signs and miracles of an incontestable character. These facts alone declare in terms not to be misun- derstood, that the apostles were the ambassadors of Christ; but fortunately we are not left to inference for the determination of this question, for we have the express declaration of the Apostle Paul upon this point, as follows: . . . *' God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, . . . and hath committed unto w.s the word of reconciliation." To whom was the word of reconciliation com- mitted? Specifically to the apostles. (See Matt. 28: 19,20; Mark 16: 15-18). *' Now then toe [the apostles] are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." (2 Cor. 5:19, 20). Thus w^e have the proof that an apostle is an ambassador, and in his letter to the Church at Ephe- sus, Paul gives further assurance of this when he says, '• I am an ambassador in bonds " (Eph. 6: 20). This point, then, may be regarded as authorita- tively settled. The apostles of Christ were his ambas- sadors. The question now arises as to whether an ambas- sador is necessary either to the existence of a govern- ment or to its perpetuation. No one possessing ordinary intelligence would think of asserting that an ambassador is necessary to the existence of any form 94 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM of government, however desirable such a dignitary might be regarded. As well may we argue that the presence of our ambassador at the court of St. James is necessary to the existence of the government of the United States, as to declare the presence of apostles — ambassadors — in the Church of Christ is necessary to its existence. This government could recall every ambassador now representing the American people at foreign courts without interfering in the least with the constitutional form of its government. What is true of an earthly government, in this regard, may also be affirmed of the Church of Christ. Hence, the removal of the apostles from the church could in no possible manner interfere with, or change, the constitutional form of its government. Viewing the question from this standpoint, it becomes clear that neither apostles nor prophets are in the least necessary to the existence and perpetuity of the Church of Christ, and may be dispensed with, therefore, without interfering with its utility. But suppose we look at the question from another point of view, and test the argument by another Mor- mon rule. Most writers on the subject agree that the apostolic office expired with St. John; but the Saints deny this, and maintain that the office was never abolished, and that it did not expire with the apos- tles. To sustain this view they introduce what is considered a most potent argument — unanswerable, in fact— and which is employed in different forms by most of their leading speakers and writers, to prove that the apostolic office was to be perpetuated in the church. The argument consists in applying the well- TEE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 95 known rules of civil government to church affairs. Mr. Kelley states the case thus: *'The removing of the officer does not destroy the office, any more than the death of the President of the United States destroys the office which he holds. When the President dies, or is removed from office, or his term of office expires, by due process of law another may be appointed to fill the same office. The office remains, although the President is dead, and to have a government proper, another must take his place. So it is in all the essential offices of the government. This is true of the kingdom of God, or Church of Jesus Christ." (Presidency and Priest- hood, page 45). This is conceded to be a good and perfectly safe rule, and will aid us in determining the validity of the Mormon claim. Mr. Kelley informs us that "all the essential offices of the government" are filled and perpetuated "by due process of law," and makes the rule applicable to the offices of the church. By this we are led to understand that all essential offices of the church are provided for in the organic law, the same as in all civil governments, and all offices not so provided for, are merely provisional and temporary, and designed to cease when their temporary purposes have been served. Does the organic law of the Church of Christ make provision for the filling of the apostolic office upon the death or removal of the officer? If so, w^here may such law be found? Who filled St. Peter's chair after his death? and by what "due process of law" was his successor appointed? Who succeeded James and John in the apostolic office? and by virtue of 96 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM what law, and by whom were such successors made apostles? Who was St. Paul's successor? and by what *' process of law" was he created an apostle? Will some latter-day apostle or prophet answer? Biblical annals afford but one instance of attempted apostolic succession, namely, the appointment of Matthias to fill the place of Judas, the traitor. This case is remarkable in more than one respect. It serves to raise the question of succession, but fails to reveal any law by which any subsequent vacancy in the apostolic college should be filled, if indeed such vacancy was to be filled. A careful reading of the account (Acts 1 : 15-26) shows clearly that the eleven were governed, not by anything which the Master had taught them respecting this matter, but rather by their own conception of what ought to be done under the circumstances. Jesus had chosen twelve^ and they were of the impression that this number should be kept good. This view seems to have been con- firmed in their minds by the apparent applicability of certain Scriptures to the suicide of Judas, and the appointment of another to take his place. The action of the eleven, in forming what is deemed by some as a precedent, was doubtless prompted by an exegesis of what they seemed to think was a prophecy relating directly to the question they were then considering. This fact, and not that they were governed by any law then in existence, was their only authority for this remarkable transaction. There is not even an intimation that they were directed by the Holy Spirit in the matter. As a matter of fact, the Spirit had not yet been given by which it had been promised they should be guided into*' all truth." Hence, it is by no means certain THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 97 that the choosing of Matthias by 'Mot" was ever accepted and approved of God, but the circumstances tend rather to support the opposite view of the case. Matthias sank as utterly from view as did the individ- ual whom he had, by accident^ been chosen to suc- ceed. It may be unpopular to say so, but the writer does not believe the Scriptures referred to by Peter, who seems to have presented the matter to the meeting, has any reference whatever to Judas Iscariot or the betrayal of Christ. Detached from their contexts, and applied after the event supposed to be described had transpired, such an interpretation might seem feasible; but when taken in connection with the con- texts, and read and applied before the event had transpired, no such thought could possibly be sug- gested. No Jew — not even the apostles themselves — previous to the betrayal of Jesus, would have ever dreamed of making any such application of the texts. But this is merely suggestive. If we allow the correctness of the application of the Scriptures quoted, and that the apostles were acting under some pre-arranged plan in the divine economy, then we are confronted with the undeniable fact that this remarkable transaction on the part of the eleven cannot form a precedent for any future action of a similar character, for the reason that no possibility exists for the subsequent duplication of the tragic events which rendered such action possible, or in any sense necessary. That which is impossible of reproduction can never form a precedent. Another very important point is brought to view by a careful examination of this case, namely: In mak- 7 98 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM ing the selection, the apostles recognized the fact, and urged it as a necessary qualification, that to be an apostle one must be chosen who had been with Christ from the beginning, and the two men selected, Joseph and Matthias, to one of whom the lot must fall, had been with Jesus " from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from them," and that such persons only could " take part of this minis- istry and apostleship," and "be a witness with us of his resurrection.^^ (See verses 22-25). To be an apostle of Christ, then, these eleven understood that the following qualifications were absolutely necessary : 1. That the individual must have seen Christ. ** Am I not an apostle? Have 1 not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?'' (1 Cor. 9: 1. See also Luke 1:2; Acts 10: 41; 1 Cor. 15: 5-8; 2 Pet. 2: 16). 2. That he must have been with Christ from the '''''beginning,'^ Paul's apostleship was questioned on this ground. Instead of being a witness he had been a persecutor from the beginning, and hence was not acknowledged as an apostle of Christ until he was able to produce the "seal of his apostleship;" his miracles were unquestionable. 3. He must have been a " witness of his resurrec- tion." Those who regard this event as a precedent will find but little in it to encourage them in the belief of latter-day apostles. Who among them will dare say that he has seen Christ? and who declare he is a wit- ness of his resurrection? And yet these are qualifi- cations absolutely requisite to the apostleship, accord- ing to the so-called precedent. But to return to Mr. Kelley's rule. THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MO R MONISM 99 Every form of government designed to be perma- nent has a fundamental law or constitution, providing for not only the different offices, but also for specific rules by which such offices shall be filled when vacated by death or removal from office. Thus the Constitution of the United States "creates" the office of President. It likewise pro- vides permanent and specific rules by which the Pres- ident shall be elected and installed in his office. Each department of the government is provided for in like manner. And now, in pursuance of this excellent rule, will Mr. Kelley, or any other defender of this Mormon dogma, take the New Testament, the " guide," the ''detector," urged by Mr. Kelley with so much earn- estness, and which contains the only constitution of the Church of Christ, and show us: First. Where does the fundamental law of the church provide for the office of apostle? Second. Where may we find the law which -" cre- ates" the office of prophet? Third. What portion of the divine law provides for the manner of filling said offices when vacated by death or removal from office? Fourth. Are these officers elected or appointed? Fifth. If elected, how? If appointed, by whom? Sixth. What are the duties of apostles and proph- ets, respectively? Mr. Kelley has assured us that their duties are '' clearly defined " in the New Testament; perhaps he will be kind enough to explain. These questions are important and come strictly within the rule, and the advocates of the system should meet them fairly and squarely 100 THE DOCTRINES AXI) BOGMAS OE MORMONISM Now let the advocates of this unprecedented, un- heard-of organization of theirs show us good authority for their claim — give us chapter and verse in support of their position, or cease to ask an intelligent public to accept a dogma so palpably absurd. CHAPTER X. NUTS TO CRACK. Nuts to crack— To the law and to the testimony— The Bible recog-- nizes no First Presidency in the cliurch — No Patriarch, no Higli Priests — From another standpoint — An elder is a Melchizedek priest — May give the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands. " To THE law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isa. 8: 20.) This is a favorite text with all ministers of the Mormon Church, and is quoted to remind you that every church, both in organization and doctrine, must be in accord with the '* pattern" given in the Bible in every minute particular. Suppose we apply this divine injunction to their church organization, and see how it will work. Will some of those sticklers for "the law and the testimony " tell us where the New Testament describes the process of calling and setting apart a few of the officers of the Mormon Church? For instance, where does it say anything about the "First Presidency," consisting of "a chief apostle and high priest, with two associate counselors?" It will be interesting to know something about when Jesus called the "Patriarch" and "set" him in the church; and a short biographical sketch of that dignitary would be very interesting reading. Who will volunteer the information? Will some zealous defender of the Mormon theol- (101) 102 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM ogy tell US when and for what purpose Christ placed " High Priests " in his church? It might be well at the same time to give us a little information concern- ing the consecration of ** Patriarchs " and "High Priests."' It will be interesting to know when the Savior "created" the office of "priest" and "established" it in his church, and for what purpose. What is the duty of a priest? Come, brethren, " to the law and to the testimony." Will your system bear the test of the rule you have given us? The questions are full of interest alike to the unin- itiated and the experienced, and we hope some one interested in the defense of Mormon theology w^ill undertake a solution of the problem. But none better understand the difficulty of this task than do the advocates of this heresy. The leaders in thought among them well know that no support for such an absurdity can be found in the Word of God. Mr. Kelley devotes eighty-four pages of his book to the task of proving the "First Presidency" dogma, but, as even the most casual reader of the Bible must know, failed most signally. That gentleman enjoys the distinction of being the only man who ever essayed the defense of this creation of Mormonism in print. While his courage is certainly commendable, his judg- ment must be deprecated. Thus it will be seen that the faithful application of Mr. Kelley's rule excludes the possibility of apostles in any church in modern times, as the organic law of the Church of Christ makes no provision for the con- tinuation of such office. If the organic law makes no provision for the perpetuation of the apostolic THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 103 office, it proves that such office was not intended bj' the Law-giver to be continued. As Mr. Kelle}^ assures us that all " necessary " offices are provided for in the law, and since no provision is made for the continua- tion of apostles and prophets in the church, such officers can only be regarded as unnecessary, and being unnecessary, the apostolic office expivf^d with (he beloved discijyie. Nothing can be plainer. FROM ANOTHER STANDPOINT. Reasoning from another but kindred premise the same conclusion may be reached. Suppose we try it. Such officers only as are necessary to administer the laws of either church or state are to be regarded as essential to its existence or perpetuation. More than this would be superfluous, and therefore unnecessary. This proposition is so clearly evident that it may not be disputed. As already shown by the quotation from Mr. Pratt, the greatest apostle of Mormonism, the niost impoi- tant duty assigned to an apostle is to "administer THE spirit " by '* THE LAYING ON OF HANDS." It follows as a logical sequence that if this duty may legally be performed by any person other than an apostle, the presence of such officer would be wholly superfluous and hence unnecessary. If the apostle is the only official empowered to perform the laying on of hands, and if the laying on of hands be a divine requirement, then the presence of an apostle is an absolute necessity. But, on the other hand, if the laying on of hands is divinel}' imposed, which is by no means admitted, and if it can be accomplished by one not an apostle, then the apostle is an official absolutely nonessential. I shall now introduce a little 104 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM evidence from Mormon sources to prove that to min- ister in the hiying on of hands is not confined to the apostleship by any means, but that officials of inferior grade may perform that office. There are in the Mormon Church what they errone- ously call ''two priesthoods," namely, the "Melchize- dck and the Aaronic." Any officer "holding the Melchizedek priesthood," as the saying goes among the Saints, may officiate in all the ordinances of the church, including the " laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost." The "First Presidency," the "Twelve," the "Sev- enty," the "High Priests," the " Bislroprick," that is, the "Presiding Bishop and his two counselors," and the Elders, descending in the order named, are all described as " holding the Melchizedek i)riesthood," while the minor offices, namely, those of priest, teacher and deacon, come under the head of the lesser, or "Aaronic priesthood." From a work called the " Doctrine and Covenants," a book of Joseph Smith's revelations, I quote the fol- lowing: "There are, in the church, two priesthoods, name- ly: the Melchizedek and the Aaronic, including the Levitical priesthood. . . . The office of an elder comes under the priesthood of Melchizedek. Melchizedek priesthood holds the right of presidency, and has power and aatliority over all the offices in the churchy in all ages of the world, to administer in spiritual tilings. "The high p)riest and elder are to administer in spiritual things, agreeably to the covenants and com- mandments of the church; and they have a ?%A^ to officiate in all these offices of the church when there are THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 105 no higher authorities present. The elder has a right to officiate in his stead when the high priest is not present." (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. 104, par. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, pages 289, 290). The elde7\ then, may officiate in all the offices of the church the same as a high priest. He is authorized also to perform any office which the seventy may per- form — in fact, the only difference between them is the seventy must travel under the "direction of the twelve," while the elder is under no responsibility of " traveling in all the world." (See par. 41-43). An elder may, therefore, "administer the spirit by the laying on of hands." Hence, as an elder is authorized to perform all the offices necessary to induct people into the church and regulate the affairs thereof, no office higher than this is at all necessary. This unscriptural array of church dignitaries can only serve to encourage selfish aspirations to place and power. Thus it is made clear, Latter Day Saints themselves being the witnesses, that apostles and prophets, sev- enties and high priests, are in no sense a necessary part of the organic structure of even the Mormon Church, and may be discarded with impunity. CHAPTER XI. CHURCH AND KINGDOM. Church and kingdom synonymous— The church from John to the calling of the twelve without apostles — From 1830 to 1835 without apostles — Only elders — Fact and theory — Bible church and Mor- mon church compared — Branch president — Mr. Kelley's test applied to Mormon coin — Weighed in the balance and found wanting. As already shown by the testimony of Mr. Pratt, of the Utah Church, and Mr. Kelley, of the Reorgan- ized Church, the terms '* Church of Christ" and *' Kingdom of God," are used interchangeably. If we concede such use of the terms to be correct, we are thereby furnished with another very strong argument against the arrogant claims of Mormonism. Concern- ing the kingdom of God, Jesus, when teaching the Pharisees, said: *'The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth unto it." (Luke 16: 16). Here we have it plainly stated that the "kingdom of God " had its inception with John. If the terms "Kingdom of God" and "Church of Christ" are synonymous, then the Church of Christ had existed from the beginning of John's ministry to the calling of the twelve, without either apostles or prophets. Since the church existed from the beginning of John's ministry to the calling of the twelve without either apostles or prophets, it follows as a necessary (1U6J THE DOCTRJXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 107 sequence that neither was an essential part of its official membership. This, however, is ancient history, and may be ques- tioned by our Mormon friends, and so we shall come down to a period of later date for a little histor}^ relative to this matter, the authenticity of which no Latter Day Saint will care to deny. *'The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints," was organized with six members^ "at Fayette, Seneca Co., N. Y., Tuesday, the 6th day of April, 1830." (See Tullidge's History, page 75). This church, Mr. Kelley informs us, was *' regularly organized," at the above time and place. Query — How many apostles were included in this organization with six members? At the time this organization was effected, another important event occurred, namely, the ordination of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the " Melchizedek priesthood." The prophet himself, concerning the ordination, says: "I then laid my hands upon Oliver Cowdery and ordained him an elder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, after which he ordained me also to the office of an elder of said church.' (Ibid, page 75). Thus it will be seen that the highest officer in the church at the time of its organization was an elder. These two elders — Joseph and Olivier — at the time of organizing the church, " confirmed," by the la>jlng on of hands^ all persons who had previously been bap- tized, as the history of the event shows. Under the ministry of j)6rsons holding the office of an elder, and nothing higher, the Mormon Church flourished and continued to grow till Feb. 14th, 1835, when the twelve apostles were chosen. 108 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM If the church could exist and flourish from April 6, 1830, to Feb. 14, 1835, without apostles, why could it not continue to exist, and flourish, and grow, from 1830 to 1897? — and if that length of time, why not forever? Why cumber the church with apostles, when the elders may perform the work assigned to an apostle? But, on the other hand, if apostles, prophets, high priest and seventy are really necessary to its proper organization, then the church constituted April 6th, 1830, with elders only^ could not have been the Church of Christ, and its members, including Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, were still ** foreigners and strangers to the commonwealth of Israel." Which horn of the dilemma will our Mormon friends take? Either is fatal to their cause. Viewed from this standpoint it appears conclusive that apos- tles and prophets are superfluous and unnecessary. THE "test " APPLIED." The Mormon Church does not have in fact what is claimed for it in theory, as will abundantly apjDear as we proceed. Several officers which the Saints insist must be in the church in order to its complete organi- zation, are not to be found in their church as it actually exists. Allowing, for the sake of the argument, that prophets, seventies, evangelists, elders, bishops and pastors, are separate and distinct ranks of ministers, which is by no means conceded, then the Mormon Church organization evidently comes far short of the "pattern," as appears from the following com- parison: THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOm/OXrS.V 103 THE BIBLE ORGAXIZATIOX. THE MORMOX OROAXIZATION, 1. Apostles. 1. The First Presidency. 2. Proiihets. 2. The Patriarch. 3. Seventy. 3. The twelve apostles. 4. Evangelists. 4. The Seventy. 5. Pastors. 5. High Priests. 6. Elders. 6. Elders. 7. Bishops. 7. Bishops. 8. Teachers. 8. Priests. 9. Deacons. 9. Teachers. 10. Deacons. The titles in italics in the Bible list represent officers named in the Bible which are not found in the Mormon Church; while the titles in the Mormon list in similar type represent officers in the Mormon Church which are not found in the Bible. Thus it may be seen that three officers, namely, that oi prophet, evangelist SiXidi pastor., named in the Bible, and also in Mr. Kelley's list, are positively not to be found in any Mormon Church in existence. There is no official in all Mormondom known as a prophet. It is true that Joseph Smith, Jr., and the present Joseph Smith are called " prophets," and are so con- sidered, but I wish it distinctly understood that the office was that of the '"''Frist JPresidency,'^ smd not that of a prophet. 1 repeat it with emphasis: The office of prophet does not exist in the Mormon Church. The same is true of the evangelist and pastor. Xo man living ever saw a Mormon ''evangelist." He simply does not exist, and never did. Those doing evangelistic work are usually apostles, seventies, high priests or elders, but evangelists, never. Who ever heard of a Mormon " pastor? " Nobody. Such an officer does not exist even in name. The 110 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM minister having charge of a church is the "president of the branch," and usually holds the office of an elder, although other officers may officiate, as "branch president," but as pasto)\ never. On the other ha^ncl, four offices, namely, the "first presidency," the "patriarch," the "high priest," and the "priest," found in the Church of the Saints, and urged as absolutely essential to the existence of the Church of Christ, are not to be found in the New Testament — the "guide" — as every intelligent Bible reader is perfectly aware. I am somewhat at a loss to see how the advocates of the Mormon heresy can stand before an intelligent public and defend a sjstem abounding in heretical dogma with any hope of success. Yet upon mature reflection it may not seem so strange after all. As a matter of fact, they do not present the intricacies of the system — they say nothing that would seem untenable to the investigator. I am unable now to recall a single instance of any minister ever presenting this heresy to his audience. From force of habit, rather than from design, I am inclined to believe, the "first presidency," "pat- riarch," and "high priests" are kept well in the background, presenting only that for which a show of support may be found in the Bible, and thus avoid a defense of this clearly untenable doctrine. " To the law and to the testimony." If the " law " here means the law of Christ as found in the New Testament, and if the "testimony" has reference to the testimony or the apostles of Christ, then we ask, where does the law speak of a " first presidency," or the testimony of the apostles declare for the " pa- THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORAIOXISM 111 triarch " and "high priest" in the Church of Christ? *' Ah ! echo answers, Where? " DISTINGUISHING MARKS. Let us make a careful application of Mr. Kelley's " money test " to the Mormon *' coin or bill," and see whether it be genuine. Says Mr. Kelley: "When every mark and Jlgure on the coin or bill tendered in exchange liarmonizes ivith the detector, it is pronounced good money. But if there is anything found on the coin or bill not to be found in the detector, or if there is something left out of the coin or bill, that is found in the detector, it is regarded as spurious.^^ On the Mormon coin, as shown in the foregoing parallel lists, we have discovered four distinct and very important "figures" not found in the "detector," and three clearly defined "marks" which the " detector" requires, that are not found, on the coin. Tried by Mr. Kelley's "test," the money is most certainly spur-ious. Mr. Kelley's position is absolutely unique — he places a bank-note detector in the hands of the president of the bank, and then deliberately proceeds to pass a counterfeit bill on the cashier. Surely, "the counterfeiter is abroad in the land." Tried by the infallible rule, tested by the touch- stone of eternal truth, the organic structure of the Mormon Church is shown to be a failure and a fraud. One thing only remains to be done — write in flam- ing letters the Belshazzaran inscription, "Weighed in THE BALANCES, . . . AND FOUND WANTING," and nail it above the door of the Mormon superstructure, that he who runs may read. CHAPTER XII. FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH. Foundation of the church— Various opinions on Matt. 16 : 18 — Upon this rock — What rock?— Joseph Smith's view— Apostle Smith examined— Revelation the foundation of the Mormon Church— The writer's heresy — Christ the rock, the foundation. " Upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matt. 16: 18). The Church of Christ, as a spiritual superstructure, must rest upon a solid, permanent foundation. The above text declares that the church was to be built upon a specific rock — " upon this rock I will build my church." What is this particular rock upon which the Savior declared he would build his church? Upon this question three separate and distinct views are advanced, namely: First. The church of Rome maintains that St. Peter was the '*rock " upon which Christ declared he would build his church, because " Peter " means rock. "Thou art Peter — a rock — and upon this rock — Peter — I will build my church." Hence the dogma of Papal succession from St. Peter. Second. Another class of theologians— the Latter Day Saints — take unique ground upon this question and affirm that " revelation'' is the rock. They seem to derive this view from what Christ said to Peter, namely : "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and (112) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 113 blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but \ny Father which is in heaven." (V. 18.) This revelation, they tell us, is the rock upon which Jesus declares he will build his church. But they have something much stronger than this upon which their faith is based, — a more recent revelation. Here is what '* Joseph the prophet " says about it: ** Christ was baptized by John to fulfill all right- eousness; and Jesus in his teachings says, ' Upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.' AYhat rock? Revela- tion. ... I know what I say. T understand my mission; . . . God Almighty is my shield." (Tul- lidge's History, pages 414, 415.) On the preceding page the prophet assures us that this is no mere opinion, but that he speaks authorita- tively, saying: "Now I will give my testimony. I care not for man. I speak boldly and faithfully, and with author- ity." In a volume to which I do not now have access — "The Times and Seasons," the official organ of the church, published at Nauvoo, Illinois, and in Vol. 5, if I mistake not — the statement is more authoritative and emphatic than the above quotation from Tullidge, and is as follows: "Verily, thus saith the Lord, it is revelation." From the prophet the elders of every grade took their cue, and from the beginning until now they talk about being built upon the " rock, revelation," and few of them have the courage to preach anything else, for in so doing they would run up against a "thus saith the Lord " of Joseph Smith, and in the Mormon Church that has ever been a dangerous business. 114 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMON ISM Any man having the independence to question the correctness of an opinion backed by a " thus saith the Lord " of the prophet is considered on the high road to apostasy. The writer understands this from experience. Some twenty years ago apostle T. W. Smith wrote a pamphlet which was published by the Reorganized Church at Piano, Illinois, entitled, "The One Body," in which he undertook to prove that the apostles are the foundation oi the church, and that the "rock" Jesus referred to in his conversation with the apos- tles was "revelation." After quoting Eph. 2: 20, Mr. Smith says: " It is here assumed by some that the church is to be built upon the teachings of apostles and prophets, and not that apostles and prophets are to always be present as the foundation of the existing church.^' (One Body, pages 6, 7.) Promising to show the fallacy of the position which he creates, (for it is extremely doubtful if any scholar ever assumed such a position) Mr. Smith proceeds as follows : " So the Church of Christ, including the founda- tion [apostles] and the corner-stone [Christ], is built upon a rock; but what is the rock? . . . Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. . . . What rock? Peter? No; for Peter was one of the foundation stones, for he was an apostle, and could not be the rock on which the foundation is built. . . . Well, then, was it upon Christ? No; for he was the corner-stone, or head of the corner. Well, then, perhaps on the truth that Peter uttered. . . . Hardly; for while this is a cardinal principle in the Gos^pel, yet it is not the main one. . . . THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MOR MONISM 115 AYhat then? Blessed art thou, for, or because, it was not REVEALED b}' flesh and blood, but by the Father; that is to say, Peter receiv^ed this knowledge of the character of Christ by divine revelation." (Ibid, page 7.) We have permitted apostle Smith to tell his own story in his own way; and this is the position of the Reorganized Church in particular, and of Mormon churches in general. Mr. Smith's whole argument is based upon an as- sumed premise, namely, that the apostles and proph- ets are the foundation of tJit church. Not a word in Eph. 2: 20 about apostles being the foundation. In the next place he assumes that Christ himself was built upon the rock, thus reducing the Al[)ha and Omega of the Christian Church to the common level of fallible man. Such a method of reasoning can hardly be dignified by the term argument. In what follows we shall show the utter fallac}' and groundlessness of apostle Smith's positions. Not only does he undertake to defend the pet theory of Mormonism, but he positively declares that Christ is not the rock upon which the church was built, and upon which it still must rest. This set me to thinking, and I investigated the foundation question most thoroughly. I had not yet learned to doubt that ** revelation " was the rock — the foundation, — but I felt sure that apostle Smith's view was fundamentall}" and radically wrong. The investigation showed me that not only was T. W. Smith wrong, but that the entire church was in error, and had ever been. At first I was appalled by the discovery. I could no longer preach that " revelation " is the 116 THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM rock when everything pointed to Christ as ])eing the "sure foundation." But who was I that I should stand up against "the authority of the priesthood?" What right had I to question the uniform teachings of an "inspired ministry" and a "thus saith the Lord" of the prophet Joseph? What was I to do? I could no longer preach the heresy, hovvever much it might be required of me, and to remain silent would be to convict me, in the court of my own conscience, of moral cowardice. After much prayerful consideration and a fruitless struggle to render myself subservient to the " powers that be," the voice of conscience said to me. Be true to yourself, to your manhood, and to your own con- victions of right. Stand by the truth if the heavens fall. This decided me. A burden was removed and my course was now clear. President of the Southeastern Kansas District — which then, as now, included Southwestern Missouri — I was expected to preach the opening sei-mon of the conference. I did so, " Upon this rock 1 will build my church," serving as the text. To the consternation and chagrin of most of the ministers present, I exposed both horns of the heresy* , and established beyond controversy or reasonable doubt the fact that Christ was the rock — the founda- tion upon wdiich his church was built, and that both "revelation" and "apostles and prophets" were excluded from the foundation of the Church of Christ, whatever might be the foundation of others. I soon discovered that I had cast a stone into a hor- nets' nest, but I was fully assured that I had only cast a Gospel stone, and that others must follow. THE DOCTRINES AND DQGMAS OF MQRMQNISM 117 -even if, in their fury at being disturbed, the hornets should sting me. Through The Saints' Herald and from the pulpit the controversy went on for years, till the entire church was aroused to the importance of the ques- tion. In the meantime I had been taken to task by many of the leading men of the church, among whom were to be numbered President W. W. Blair, of the '* First Presidency," and ex-apostle Charles Derry — but now only a high priest — who insisted that my views were heretical, and the source of dissension and discord in the church, but when asked for the proof of my heresy they were only able to refer me to the declaration of Joseph Smith already quoted. Confident of the righteousness of my cause, and the ultimate triumph of truth over error, I resolved to force the issue to a final adjudication, and accord- ingly gave notice through The Saints' Herald, the oflScial organ of the church, that on the third day of the ensuing General Conference (1880) I should formally call up the vexed question for final action. Meanwhile many converts had been made to the **new departure," and I stood not alone in the con- test. At the appointed time the question was called up, and the preliminary struggle began. For some reason the conference did not seem willing to act upon it, and after consuming half the business session in an effort to have the question settled, further con- sideration was cut off by the prevalence of a motion to refer the matter to the "General Assembly," by which is meant an assembly of all the "Quorums" in the church, from the "First Presidency" down to the deacons. This " General Assembly" is the tribunal of last resort, and is convened only in cases of great 118 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM importance. Although several cases have been referred to that august body, the "Assembly" has never been convened in the history of the Reorgan- ized Church, and perhaps never will be. There the question was left, and there it is likely to remain. Viewing this seeming defeat in the light of a decided victory, I have never ceased to declare that Jesus, the Christ, is the Rock and the Founda- tion of the Christian's hope. If this position be the right one; if Christ is the Rock, then it follows, as night the day, that a church built upon any other foundation cannot be the Church of Christ. The founder of Mormonism declares, as we have seen, that the "rock" upon which his church is based is "revelation." The Book of Mormon is declared by every class and shade of the Mormon priesthood to be the greatest revelation of the ages. Being the greatest, from the Mormon standpoint, and so directly connected with the birth of Mormonism, it may very justly be termed the foundation of the Mormon Church. Syllogistically presented, the prop- osition would stand thus: Revelation is the foundation of the church. The Book of Mormon is a revelation. Therefore the Book of Mormon is the foundation of the church. Perhaps the advocates of this revelation dogma may not be willing to frankly admit the Book of Mormon to be the particular revelation upon which their church is built, yet it is safe to say that no Lat- ter Day Saint can be found who will not freely admit that only for Joseph Smith's revelation of the Book of Mormon no such organization as the "Church of THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 119 Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" would now be in existence. Technicalities aside, there can be no question that the revehition of the Book of Mormon is the real and only foundation of the Church of the Saints. I shall now undertake to show that Christ, and not revelation, is the *'rock" of Matt. 16: 18; and, therefore tlie foundation of the Christian super- structure. If in this effort we shall be successful, it will require no argument to prove that the Church of the Saints is on the wrong foundation, and hence cannot be the Church of Christ. In Mormon theology there are but two churches. One is the Church of Christ, and the other is "the church of the devil," quoth the Book of Mormon. " Behold, there is, save it be, tivo churclies: the one is the Church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the Church of the Devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the Church of the Lamb of God, belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abomina- nations, and she is the whore of all the earth." (B. of M., page 33). This narrows the issue down to a very simple prop- osition, namely, ^^ Mormonism against the world.'''' But we shall permit neither the Book of Mormon nor the arbitrary dictum of Joseph Smith to decide a question fraught with so much importance. We appeal to " the law and the testimony," which the Saints profess to so firmly believe, and to the arbitra- ment of whose testimony we are willing to submit the issue. " Upon this rock I will build my church." Upon what rock? Peter, revelation, Christ, are each, in 120 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM their turn, pronounced in answer to this important question. It is perfectly clear that somebody must be wrong. If Peter is the "rock," then the papal church is right, and all Protestants, including the Saints, are decidedly wrong. If, as they claim, " revelation " is the rock, then all others, both Catholic and Protestant, are in error, and Latter Day Saints only are right. But if Christ is the "rock" — the "Eock of Ages" — then both Catholics and Mormons are grossly in error, and neither can be the Church of Christ. I feel quite sure that even Latter Day Saints will admit the above to be a fair statement of the case. That Christ was the Divine Rock upon which were founded the hopes of a fallen race will clearly appear as we proceed. By a careful examination of the preceding part of the chapter from which the text is quoted, it will be seen that Christ was himself the absorbing topic of the conversation leading up to this remarkable decla- ration. Jesus inquires of the disciples: "Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am? " (V. 13). To this significant inquiry various answers were reported. Then addressing hiinself to the apostles, he says: "But whom say ye that I am? " (V. 15). Peter, always ready ^vith an answer, replies: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." (V. 16). Thus it appears that Jesus had drawn from Peter the exact reply which he sought. As compared to the question of his Sonship — his messianic mission — everything else sank into insignificance. This theme was paramount, and to which every other is subor- dinate and of secondary consideration. THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 121 Incidentally other topics were injected into the principal question — such as " thou art Peter; " ''flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee; " "I will build my church," etc., but the Christ was the absorb- ing theme, the underlying quantity, the fundamental quality — the Alpha and Omega of the entire dis- course. With this primal fact in view, let us now read, omitting the interlocutory form, and we have substantially the following: "Some men say I am John the Baptist; some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, but you say / am the Christ, and upon this rock I will build my church." Relieved from interlocution and redundancy of speech, this, and nothing more, is doubtless just what Jesus wished to impress upon the minds of his apostles, and is exactly what they afterwards declare, and hence, must have been just what they understood at the time It is, therefore, simply impossible that either "revelation," or apostles and prophets can form any part of the foundation of the Church of Christ. If, indeed, either Peter, or revelation, or apostles and prophets had ])een regarded as the foundation of the spiritual house, it is quite reasonable to conclude that some of the divine writers would have mentioned the fact. If neither is referred to as the "rock " or the "foundation," then it is fair to presume that no such thing was ever understood by them. What, then, saith the Scriptures? "To the law and to the testimony, for if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Jesus understood Ps. 118: 22 to apply to himself. (See Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17). He was " the stone which the builders refused," but who. 122 THE DOCTEIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMO^ISM nevertheless, '* became the head stone of the corner/' Keferring to the establishment of the spiritual Zion — the Church of Christ — the prophet Isaiah says : *' Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a pre- cious corner-stone, a sure foundation.'^ (Isa. 28: 16). There can be no mistake as to either the character of the stone or the purpose for which it was to be employed. This *' precious stone," which the prophet declares was to be laid in Zion, while it should become a *'rock of offense," and a '* stone of stumbling," it should also become a "sure founda- tion " to such as should receive the truth. If we shall be able to determine who or what this "foundation" was, we shall then have determined the meaning of the term " this rock," in Matt. 16:18; for the " rock," whatever that may be, was to be the foundation of the church. Concerning this matter Paul testifies as follows: "For they [Israel] stumbled at that stumbling- stone; as it is written. Behold, I lay in Zion a stum- blingstone and rock of offense: and whosoever believeth in him shall not be ashamed." (Rom. 9: 32, 33). Comment seems useless. Concerning the same matter Peter says : "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: if so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious. To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priest- hood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by .Tesiis Christ. THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 123 " Wherefore also it is contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner-stone, elect, pre- cious; and he that believeth on him shall not be con- founded. Unto you therefore which believe he is precious, but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made ^ the head of the corner, and a stone of stumbling, and ^ a rock of offense." (1 Pet. 2: 2-8). Here we have Peter's direct reference to Ps. 118:22, and Isa. 28:16, as having their fulfillment in Christ, and in this view Peter and Paul are in perfect accord. Peter arrogates not to himself the honor of being the rock upon which the Lord was to build his church, nor is there the slightest intimation by either of the apostles that "revelation " was the rock. That God revealed to the apostles the fact that Jesus was the Christ, there can be no doubt; but that such revelation was the rock upon which his church should rest, the evidence certainly does not show. 1 regard it as a truth not to be questioned that nowhere in the Bible — from Genesis to Revelation — is there an instance where the word*' rock" can be substituted by the word *' revelation " without doing violence to the obvious meaning of the passage. But the noun ''Christ" maybe used as synonymous with the word rock without such results, as may be seen by the following examples : *' Upon this Christ I will build my church." " To whom coming as unto the living Christ." "They all drank of that spiritual Christ," etc. So while the word rock does sometimes mean Christ, it never means revelation. CHAPTER XIII. THE SPIRITUAL HOUSE. The spiritual house— Christ the chief corner-stone — ^In types — Pillar of fire — The smitten rock — The question settled — No other founda- tion but Christ — Book of Mormon and the rock — Joseph Smith vs. Joseph Smith— Witnesses in the balances — Summary. As WE have already learned, Peter declares that Jesus was the "precious stone" of Isaiah, laid in divine wisdom, as the sure foundation of the "spirit- ual house" which God should build; and we find Paul in delightful harmony with this sentiment, as may be seen by the following : "Now therefore are ye no more foreigners and strangers, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and proph- ets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone ; in whom all the building fitly framed together grow- eth into an holy temple in the Lord." (*Eph. 2: 19-21.) Here the church is called "the building." This building was to grow into "an holy temple," whose " builder and maker is God." As to the foundation upon which this building — this "spiritual house" — was to rest, much depends. Upon what foundation, think 3^ou, would such a structure be likely to rest? Upon Peter? No. Upon "revelation?" Hardly. * This is the text quoted by Apostle Smith to prove that apostles were the foundation of the church, and that revelation is the rock upon which both Christ and the apostles are built. (124) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM 125 Upon what, then, does it rest? Let the apostle answer. Concerning these recently-baptized. converts at Ephesus who had now become "fellow-citizens with the saints," Paul says: ** You are of the household of God, and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets^ Jesus Christ being the chief corner-stone." Here the '* chief corner-stone" of Isaiah becomes the " foundation " of this great spiritual house — God's "building" — and we are assured that Christ, and not "revelation," is the basis upon which it securely rests. The foundation upon which the "household of God" were directed to rest their hopes v/as common to both the apostles of the Chris- tian age and the prophets of the Mosaic dispensation. It becomes important, then, that we shall under- stand just who or what was the " foundation of the apostles and prophets." With this determined, every thing else is made clear The journey of the Israelites from Egypt to Pales- tine was characterized by some of the most stupendous miracles of the ages, to say nothing of those wrought for their deliverance. They were instructed not only by the types and shadows of the law, but by the types of the grandest miracles the world ever knew. Fleeing from the wrath of Pharaoh and the bond- age of Egypt, the armies of Israel were protected from the assaults of a deadly enemy by the presence of " a pillar of cloud " by day and " a pillar of fire " by night. Later, when in the wilderness of Sinai they were famishing of thirst, the miracle of the smitten rock saved a nation. These were among the most significant incidents in the history of ancient Israel. They both unmistakably point to Christ. 126 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM With his rod Moses smote the great rock, and out gushed fountains of living water, from which Israel quenched his burning thirst. The smitten rock, the flowing fountain, the quenched thirst and the saved lives were all most strikingly typical of Christ. In the midst of a perishing world — perishing for the water of life — Jesus was smitten by the rod of Roman power. Smitten as the rock in the great desert, there gushed forth a ** fountain" in whose lavatory famishing souls may bathe, and at which they may freely drink and " never thirst again " — the water of life. This was the second exhibition of divine power pointing to the Rock Christ. When first they started from the land of bondage to the land of promised liberty, and the hosts of Israel were pursued by a relentless foe determined to return them to a slavery more terrible than death to a proud-hearted, liberty- loving people, they were saved by the timely inter- position of divine power. The Lord stood between the armies of Israel and the advancing hosts of Pharaoh, in a '* pillar of cloud " by day and a " pillar of fire" by night. Christ was their vanguard and their rearward. This "pillar" was their shade and protection through the day, and their light and guide through the shadows of the night. With reference to this marvelous event Paul has this to say: "Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spir- TEE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 127 itual Rock that followed them : and that Rock was — Peter." "Hold, sir! you have not quoted that correctly," someone exclaims. Possibly. Let us try again. " And that rock was — revelation." "Hold on, there! that is not right — that is the Mormon idea." Certainly it is, but you must remember the " Mor- mon idea" is the very thing we are after; and they say "revelation" is the rock, and it must read that way if their view is to be sustained. In order to make sure of the right let us now read again. "And they drank of that spiritual Rock that fol- lowed them, and that Rock ?^a6 Christ." (1 Cor. 10: 1-4.) That settles it. No Peter, no "revelation" here. Christ, the "spiritual Rock," was the " foundation" and only hope of the children of Israel in every time of trouble. Confirmatory of this, Moses afterwards said unto them : "The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken." (Deut. 18: 15; See Acts 3: 22.) Here again the great law-giver of Israel pointed them to Christ as being the Rock of their salvation. Not only, then, was Jesus regarded as being the "foundation" of the prophets, of whom Moses was chief, but also of the entire kingdom of ancient Israel. Upon him depended their hopes of future happiness and perpetual peace. He was likewise the Rock upon which spiritual Israel — the church — including the apostles and 128 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM prophets, founded their hopes of eternal life. This fact is rendered indisputable from the following: ''For we are laborers together with God; ye are God's husbandry, ye are GocVs building." If these Corinthians were God's building — God's house — it is pertinent to inquire, Upon what founda- tion were they built? That there may be no misun- derstanding, no quibbling as to the conclusion, we shall let the apostle himself answer. He continues: ''According to the grace of God which is given unto me as a wise masterl^uildcr I have laid the foun- dation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.'' (1 Cor. 3: 9-11.) Is further evidence necessary? Can you reasonably demand any additional proof that Jesus, the Christ, is the Rock — the foundation — upon which the church of God is built? Here we have the express declaration of a witness whom Latter Day Saints will not dare attempt to controvert, that Christ is not only the Rock, but that he is also the foundation upon which " God's build- ing " was based, and against which the " gates of hell " should not prevail. Not only so, but, in order to preclude the least shadow of doubt, he declares in the most positive terms that, '^ Other foundation can no man lay [not even Joseph Smith] than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.''' How are the Saints to defend Joseph Smith's inspired (?) dictum that "revelation" is the rock — the foundation — with such a declaration as this star- ing them in the face at every turn? They simply can not do it. They are unable to appeal to Joseph's ♦ THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM 129 "Inspired Translation," for it is a word-for-word reproduction, of every passage quoted, from the King James translation. Neither dare they invoke the aid of the Book of Mormon, for that clearly contradicts the prophet Joseph's *'thussaith the Lord " on the subject. Helaman, one of the chief judges of the people of Nephi, just before his death thus instructs his two sons: **And now, my sons, remember, remember, that it is upon the rock of our Redeemer, which is Christ, the Son of God, that ye must build your foundation, that when the devil shall send forth his mighty winds, yea, his shafts in the whirlwind; yea, when all his hail and mighty storm shall beat upon you, it shall have no power over you to drag you down to the gulf of misery and endless woe, because of the rock upon wJiich ye are built, which is a sure foundation." (See Helaman 2: 12, Book of Mormon, page 418, Palmyra edition.) Defenders of the "revelation" dogma cannot dodge this issue. The evidence is all against them and they must yield. As may be seen by the above, the Book of Mormon declares in language not to be mis- understood that the "rock" upon which the sons of Helaman were built — and Nephi was then its chief minister — was Christ, and that he was also the " sure foundation." The rock, then, was the foundation, and the foundation was Christ. In this controversy we have the Book of Mormon, the Inspired Translation, and we may include the book of "Doctrine and Covenants," all to stand arrayed against the pet theory of the Saints concern- ing the "rock revelation," and present the trouble- some and iconoclastic spectacle of 9 180 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM JOSEPH SMITH, THE PROPHET, VS. JOSEPH SMITH, THE PROPHET. Briefly summing up the testimony of the witnesses, the evidence in the case stands thus: FOR THE ROCK CHRIST. FOR THE ROCK REVELATION. Witnesses. Witnesses. 1. 'The Bible. 1. Joseph Smith. 2. The Inspired Translation. 3. Book of Mormon. 4. Doctrine and Covenants. It may readily be seen that our Latter Day Saint friends have the long end of the teeter-board, which may be the funny end, but it is also the dangerous one. My good brother Mormon, how do you like the long end of the plank? Does the altitude make you dizzy? Don't you have some misgivings about ever being able to set your foot on solid earth again? Come down from jour giddy perch, even if, cat- like, you have to climb backwards down the plank. Indulge no longer in theories of speculative theology. Never stop until you feel the solid earth beneath your feet, then dig down through all the superficial rubbish of modern revelation, and build your house upon the solid Rock, Christ. Built upon this Rock, the winds may blow and the storm beat u})on your house, but it cannot fall, *'for it is founded ui3on a rock" — the Rock of eternal ages. Thus it seems to me that he who runs may see that the Mormon house is built upon the wrong founda- tion — a foundation alike unauthorized, unstable and extremely dangerous; a building receiving not the sanction of the " wise masterbuilders " of former times. THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISU 131 Finally: A church built upon the wrong founda- tion is not the Church of Christ. The Mormon Church is built upon a wrong founda- tion. Therefore, the Mormon Church is not the Church of Christ. CHAPTER XIV. PRIESTHOOD AND TREACHERS. Priesthood and preachers — Ministers must be called by revelation — Joseph was like Moses — Joseph and Oliver ordained to the Aaronic priestliood by an angel — Ordained by Peter, James and John to the Melchizedek priesthood— Questioned by President Smith of the Reorganized Church — His view criticised— How priesthood is conferred — Angels do not officiate at ordinations — Wlio ordained Moses, Melchizedek, or Christ? — Christ the only Melchizedek priest. " No MAN taketh this honour unto himself but ho that is called of God as was Aaron." (Heb. 5: 4). Strangely enough, all Latter Day Saints, it matters not to which of the various factions of the Mormon Church they may belong, quote the above text to prove that all ministers of the Church of Christ, and especially those called to the higher *' offices in the priesthood," must be called by "revelation" as was Aaron. As ministers of other churches make no such claim they are, without exception, denounced by the Saints as ''false teachers," having a form of godliness, but "denying the power thereof." In other words, all ministers not called by a direct revelation from God through a prophet " like unto Moses," are utterly and absolutely without authority to minister in divine things. Joseph was "like unto Moses," and could, there- fore, call as many Aarons into the field as he choose. Revelations were in demand, and the prophet manu- (132) THE DOCTRISKS ASD I)()(i.\rAS OF MORMOXfSM i:',3 fjictured them by the gross. The fact is, these revehi- tion-made Latter Day priests })ear no more resem- blance to Aaron, either in duty or dignity, than does their prophet to the great law-giver of ancient Israel. Every thread in the Mormon fabric, both in warp and woof, upon close inspection is found to l)e the merest slioddy. The manner in which "the priesthood" was "con- ferred " upon Joseph and Oliver is enough to con- demn the entire system, and brand it as a fraud. As already shown, an angel, John the Baptist (!) came down from heaven, and laying his hands upon them ordained them to the ministry: " Upon you, my fellow-servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer upon you the priesthood of Aaron." (Smith's History, Vol. 1, page 34; also Tullidge's History, page 43). PETER, JAMES AND JOHN — DID THEY ORDAIN JOSEPH AND OLIVER? The messenger — John the Baptist — promised them that they should, in the near future, be ordained to the Melchizedek priesthood, without which they could not confirm the church by the laying on of hands. Accordingly, Peter, James and John — once apostles, but now angels, or "ministering spirits" — in due time appeared and ordained them to the higher, or Melchizedek priesthood, with which Mor- 'mon theology invests them. This ordination was performed by the laying on of hands; at least this is the tradition in the church, as it has been handed down from the earliest days of Mormonism, and as it has ever been taught by the 134 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM leading men among the Saints. As John the Baptist ordained Joseph and Oliver to the Aaronic priest- hood, so Peter, James and John ordained them to the Melchizedek priesthood. For the first time in the history of the denomination this is now called in question by President Joseph Smith of the Reorgan- ized Church. President Smith enters into a some- what elaborate argument to show that said ordination should be regarded in the light of an " appointment," and the actual and only ordination ever performed by the laying on of hands was when Joseph and Oliver ordained each other, at the time the church was organized. Concerning this matter President Smith says : "Some have concluded from the language found in Doctrine and Covenant, 26:3, . . . that Peter, James and John literally laid their own hands on the heads of Joseph and Oliver. But this command was to the effect that they should ordain each other." (Smith's History, vol. 1, page 63). Mr. Smith continues: " Some have supposed that they received two ordi- nations; one under the hands of Peter, James and John, and one by each other; but . . . there is no historical evidence of such an event." (Ibid, page 64). The historian continues his argument to show that no such ordination ever occurred, and urges that, "The words of the revelation, 'by whom I have ordained you,' do not furnish the proof." (Page 65). The above declaration is based upon the assump- tion, that, if the ordination ever occurred it must have been at the time " when the instruction was THE DOCTIUXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 135 given to ordain or when the ordination actually took place." (Page 65). This by no means follows. It is not claimed, neither is it pertinent to the issue, that they should be ordained by the angel and by each other at the same time and at the same place. President Smith does not even question the fact that Joseph and Oliver "received two ordinations" to the Aaronic priesthood, one by the angel, and "one by each other;" and yet the ordinations took place at two different times and iilaces. They were ordained by the angel while at prayer in the woods, and were then commanded to baptize each other. "Accordingly," says Joseph, " we ivent and were baptized, . . . after which I laid my hands upon his head and ordained him to the Aaronic priesthood; afterwards he laid his hands on me and ordained me to the same priesthood — for so we were commanded." (TuUidge's History, page 43). If the ordinations in this case were not simul- taneous, why does President Smith insist that the "two ordinations" to the Melchizedek priesthood should be at the same time? The "ordination" under the hands of Peter, James and John is understood to have occurred "in the wilderness, . . . on the Susquehanna River " (see Smith's History, page 65), while the ordination by each other occurred at the residence of "old Father Whitmer, in Fayette, Seneca Co., N. Y." (Ibid, page 65). While President Smith assures us that "there is no historical evidence of such an event," yet on the same page with this declaration, we find the following: " In regard to this event Oliver Cowdei-y is reported 136 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM by George Reynolds [:i Mormon writer] in his ' Mith of the Manuscript Found,' page 80, . . . assaying: 'I was also present with Joseph when the higher or Melchizedek priesthood was conferred by the holy angel from on high. This priesthood was then con- ferred on each other by the will and commandment of God." (Ibid, page 64.) Here we have two ordinations, one by an "angel from on high," the other by each other. How were these ordinations performed? Oliver says the Mel- chizedek priesthood tv^as "conferred" first by the angel, then by each other. In Mormon parlance and practice, how is priesthood conferred? By the la-ying on of hands, and never in any other way. *' Upon you, my fellow-servants, I confer the priest- hood of Aaron," and Joseph says the angel had his hands upon their heads at the time. This being the manner, and the only manner, of conferring priest- hood, then it follows as a logical necessity that when angels confer priesthood it is in exactly the same manner that men confer it, namely, by the laying on of hands. There is no possible means of escape from this conclusion. The revelation to which President Smith refers us, 26 : 3, declares that Peter, James and John were sent to Joseph and Oliver, and by whom they were ordain- ed. Joseph said these three apostle-angels came to them, and that he heard their voices " in the wilder- ness on the Susquehanna River," in Pennsylvania; and Oliver declares the Melchizedek priesthood was conferred, and presumably at this meeting, as it is the only reference to a visit from Peter, James and John. The revelation in question reads thus : " And also with Peter, and James, and John, whom THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 137 I have sent unto you, by whom I have ordained you and confirmed you," etc. (D. and C. 26: 3, page 113). The point raised by President Smith is that which relates to the meaning of the word ''ordain." He quotes Webster to show that to ordain does not neces- sarily mean to set apart a man to an office by the laying on of hands. This is undoubtedly correct; but the question is. Does the word as it is used in this revelation mean to ordain by the laying on of hands? or does it merely mean to appoint, to set in order, to regulate, etc.? If the words " by whom I have ordained you " mean only to adjust, regulate, set in order, etc., having no reference to the imposition of hands, it must mean the same thing when it relates to John the Baptist. In the same revelation, at paragraph 2 (page 112) we find this language: " Which John I have sent unto you, my servants, Joseph Smith, Jr. and Oliver Cowdery, to ordain you unto this first priesthood which you have received, that ye might be ordained even as Aaron." As the language is exactly similar, John was sent to ordain them to the Aaronic priesthood, while Peter, James and John were sent to ordain them to the Melchizedek priesthood. If in the one case ordina- tion is shown to have been performed by the laying on of hands, it will prove that the other must have been done in the same way. If to ordain here means simply and only to appoint, set in order, etc., then John the Baptist only appointed Joseph and Oliver to set things in order. In this case neither was ordained to the Aaronic priesthood by the laying on of hands, which would be to flatly contradict both Joseph and Oliver upon this point, and this will never do. 138 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM Concerning this ordination President Smith says: ** Friday, May 15, . . . the Aaronic priesthood was conferred upon them through the instrumentality of John the Baptist." (Smith's History, Vol. 1, page 34.) He then quotes Joseph as saying that John the Baptist, " having laid his hands upon us, he ordained us:' Here we have the fact established by the very best Mormon authority that to confer the priesthood is to ordain by the laying on of hands. Hence, when Peter, James and John ** conferred " the Melchizedek priesthood upon Joseph and Oliver, they did so by the laying on of hands. Briefly stated, the matter stands thus: If John the Baptist ordained Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the Aaronic priesthood by the laying on of hands, then Peter, James and John must have ordained them to the Melchizedek priesthood in precisely the same manner. If Joseph and Oliver were not so ordained, then neither of them possessed the Melchizedek priest- hood, and could not confer it upon each other, for the very palpable reason that they could not give or ** confer" what they did not possess; and hence if they were not thus ordained by Peter, James and John, then the Melchizedek priesthood has never been restored, and the entire Mormon Church is ahso- lutely without authority. This is the inevitable result of President Smith's logic. And it is thus rendered reasonably clear that both Joseph and Oliver were not only favored with numer- ous visits by heavenly messengers, but that they were actually ordained to the Gospel ministry by the in- THF DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 139 comparable touch of angelic hands. O, for the depravity of fallen human nature and the depravity of the human heart! What presumption! AYhat an unmitigated and heaven-daring fraud! What an unholy farce ! How dare these men make such pre- posterous and unprecedented claims? Where do we read of angels ordaining men to office by the laying on of hands? What angel ordained Melchizedek, the great high priest, to whom even Abraham, the friend of God, paid tithes? W^hat messenger left the courts of eternal glory, and wending his way to earth laid his hands upon Moses, the great law-giver of Israel, and ordained him to the priesthood of Melchizedek? What angel left the shining courts of the Eternal, and, descending to earth on lightning wing, laid his hands upon the Lord, the "King of glory," to ordain him a priest after the order of Melchizedek? No patriarch, no prophet or sage, not even the Lord himself, ever felt the touch of angelic hands in ordi- nation, and yet this daring pretender, this unblushing impostor, comes to an intelligent public with the incredible and unsupported story that God sent an angel to earth and ordained him and his accomplice, Oliver Cowdery, to be priests of the most high God! In the very nature of things such an event is simply impossible. There has been but one priest after the order of Melchizedek, and he was not such by the lay- ing on of hands of either angels or men ; and I chal- lenge the scholarship of the entire Mormon Church to give an instance of " conferring" the Melchizedek priest-hood upon either Christ or his apostles by the laying on of hands, or by any other means. Let the advocates of this heretical dogma step to 140 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM the front and defend their position if they are intelli- gently honest in what they profess to believe ; and we shall not limit them to the Bible for proof, as we might very properly do, but they may have access to the Book of Mormon, also, which, as the Saints claim, contains the ^^ fullness of the Gospel." Nowhere, and 1 speak advisedly, does the Book of Mormon hint, even remotely, that there were " two priesthoods" in the church among the Nephites, and the term ** Melchizedek Priesthood" is nowhere to be found in the book. The only reference to Melchize- dek is in Alma, tenth chapter, page 260, where the name occurs five times, but " the Melchizedek Priest- hood," and '*the Aaronic Priesthood," are terms nowhere to be found in the book. Melchizedek is referred to as having "received the office of the High Priesthood," but there is not the slightest intimation that such office was ** conferred " by the laying on of hands. It is likewise true that the Book of Mormon con- tains no account of the ordination of the Nephite ** twelve disciples" by the laying on of hands, either by Christ when he chose them, or by anybody else afterwards. The only record of the event says that he simply " Touched with his hand the disciples whom he had chosen, one by one, even till he had touched them all, and spake unto them as he touched them." (Book of Mormon, Nephi, chapter 10, page 493). Thus it appears that the revelation which contains the fidlness of the everlasting Gospel, is as silent as an Egyptian tomb on a question of paramount impor- tance with the Saints, namely, ordination to the apos- tleship by the laying on of hands. THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 141 MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTS. I have said that there has been but one Melchize- dek Priest since the time of Salem's great king- priest, and that was Christ. I have likewise declared that it is simply impossible that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery could have been Melchizedek priests, and I will state my reasons for this belief. First. The Bible contains no allusion to the fact that Moses, or any other prophet, priest " or king of Bible times was ever ordained a priest after the order of Melchizedek. If it were a common practice, as Mr. Kelley would have us believe, why was such prominence given to the fact that Christ was such an high priest? If Melchizedek high priests had come down in a regular line of descent from Moses to Christ, as Mr. Kelley tries to prove, and as Joseph's great ''revelation on Priesthood" affirms, why should Paul lay such stress upon this particular fact in the case of Christ? Why should it be regarded as a significant and very important fact that Christ was a "priest forever after the order of Melchizedek?'* (See Heb. 7:1-16). Second. The apostles of Christ were not — indeed they could not be — priests in any proper sense of that word, much less Melchizedek priests. The reasons which would preclude the apostles would also bar out Joseph Smith, or any other man. Two things are especially necessary in order to con- stitute a Melchizedek priest: First. The individual must be a king. Second. Being a king, he may become a priest. Hence, a priest of the Melchizedek order is at once a king and a priest — a king-priest. For proof of this read: 142 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM " For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also hing of Salem, which is King of peace:' (Heb. 7: 1,2). Of no other earthly king in Biblical history can as much be said. All kings, whether of Israel or of the Gentile nations, were "men of war." But here, amid the tumult of war and strife — a strife for mas- tery and dominion — we have a King, the ruler of a single city, who is dominated, by way of unique dis- tinction from all others, the "King of righteous- ness," the "King of peace," and his city was the city of peace, or Salem. The patriarchal and prophetic ages abounded in incidents which clearly foreshadowed Christ, and of which this is perhaps the most striking. In every minute particular he conformed to his great antetype, Melchizedek. Melchizedek was a king of righteousness, and so was Christ, and Jesus was in the pre-eminent sense of that term, the Prince of life — the King of Peace. Ordained of God, he gave himself as the great and last sacrificial offering under the law, for the redemption and salvation of the race. He was pro- claimed by angelic voices to be Heaven's great King. He was and is King of kings and Lord of lords. Hence, Paul's declaration that he was made " a priest /oreve?" after the order of Melchizedek." When Latter Day Saints shall give us proof, not assertion, bare and unsupported, that any other Mel- chizedek priest was ever ordained, either under the THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 143 law or under the Gospel, then, and not till then, will thinking people regard it as being necessary to exam- ine the claims of modern apostles and prophets to such an honor. Give us facts, gentlemen, and let your fine-spun theories rest. Were the apostles of Christ, or any other class of ministers of his church, ever referred to, or in any proper sense of that word regarded as kings? If so, then it was possible for them to become priests of the Melchizedek order; otherwise never. Not even a Mormon apostle will dare assume that the apostles were kings except in the sense that all God's people are, or may be, '* kings and priests unto God." If they were not kings in the proper sense of that word, they were not Melchizedek priests, and if they were not, and, indeed, could not become priests after the Melchizedek order on that account, then it is simply impossible that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cow- dery could have been such priests, all their pretended visions and revelations to the contrary notwithstand- ing; and if they were not ** ordained to the Melchize- dek priesthood," then they were deceivers, and Mor- monism is a fraud. CHAPTER XV. PRIESTHOOD WHAT IS IT? Priesthood— What is it?— Webster vs. Kelley— Mormon definition erroneous — Joseph's revelation on priesthood — Handed down from father to son — Isaiah lived in the days of Abraham — Moses ordained by his father-in-law, Jethro— Abraham ordained by Melchizedek — A table of dates and ordinations— Gad ordained Jeremy 1120 years before the prophet was bom. With Latter Day Saints of every class and name everything ecclesiastical depends upon the ''priest- hood." It is the touch-stone of all Mormon philoso- phy. Absolutely nothing can be accomplished without it. "No man can see God and live," quoth the prophet Joseph, without this priesthood. The definition of this word as authorized by our standards is altogether too limited for a Mormon writer or speaker. If for any reason he has occasion to appeal to a dictionary, he usually appends his own definition, as in the following from Mr. Kelley: "Priesthood — What is it? Webster defines it to be, ' " 1. The office or character of a priest.' * " 2. The order of men set apart for sacred offices.' "More fully defined, priesthood on earth [just as if there can be human priests in heaven] is the authority and order of God committed to men, by which they are duly empowered and commissioned to preach the Gospel and administer the ordinances thereof, namely, administer the Lord's Supper, ordain, and perform any and all other duties required in the administra- tion of the government of his church and kingdom (144) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 145 among men." (Presidency and Priesthood, page 1). It is really too bad that Noah Webster could not have been permitted to live contemporaneously with this linguistic luminary, for had he been so fortun- ate, had the wisdom of the gods of fortune so ordained, he would no doubt have been able *'more fully" and correctly to define this magical word ''priesthood." Lexicographers of the present and future, however, will doubtless avail themselves of the opportunity which this apostolic flash affords, and under the light of its beneficent rays correct Mr. Webster's blunder. Anybody can see that Mr. Kelley's definition does not define. It merely defines the duties of a priest as he understands them. The Saints talk of "priesthood" as a thing to be carried about in your vest pocket, or donned or laid aside as a Sunday suit. You may "hold" a priest- hood as a jug holds water, or as Douglass held Lincoln's hat. The individual Mormon preacher does not belong to the priesthood — to that " order of men set apart for sacred offices " — ^but the priesthood belongs to him; it has been "conferred" upon him, having "received" it under the hand of Elder Jones or Apostle Smith. To illustrate their manner of using the word, permit me to quote a few passages from Mr. Kelley's Presi- dency and Priesthood ; "The organization [of the church] took form in the offices of the priesthood." (Preface, page 8.) "God has C07n7mtted the priesthood as a means of authorizing men to minister." (Page 3.) "The inspired records clearly reveal and provide 146 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM for the existence of two priesthoods.'' (Page 3.) But Mr. Kelley fails to cite his readers to a single passage where this revelation is so clearly made, and he cannot do so for the reason that the inspired records make no such revelation. Instead of having two orders or grades of priesthood, the Saints have two 'priesthoods. *' These two priesthoods were conferred upon men, . . . as a means of authorizing them to administer acceptably in the government of God." (Page 4.) "The Gospel is administered by the authority of the Melchizedek priesthood." (Page 5.) But Mr. Kelley does not inform us where he finds authority for this remarkable statement. "The priesthood was not limited to a given time and then to cease. ... It was transmitted from Abel to Noah." (Page 6.) " Melchizedek held the high priesthood at this time and received it from his predecessors." (Page 6.) "Moses' father-in-law seems to have Ae?cZ the true priesthood." (Ibid.) You may be curious to know where Mr. Kelley gets all these odd notions about priesthood. I will try to enlighten you. None of these ideas are original with Mr. Kelley. From an acquaintance of nearly thirty- five years with that gentleman, I regard him as a man of too much good sense to ever have entertained such absurd notions had he not, like myself, been taught them from his infancy. They originated in the fertile brain of Joseph Smith, with many others of like character, as may be seen by the following: A revelation of Jesus Christ unto Joseph Smith, THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM Ul Jr., and six elders. . . . And the sons of Moses, according to the holy priesthood which he received under the hand of his father-in-law^ Jethro; and Jethro received it under the hand of Caleb; and Caleb received it under the hand of Elihu; and Elihu received it under the hand of Jeremy ; and Jeremy received it under the hand of Gad ; and Gad received it under the hand of Esaias; and Esaias received it under the hand of God. Esaias also lived in the days of Abraham and was blessed of him — which Abraham received the priesthood from Melchizedek, who re- ceived it through the lineage of his fathers^ even till Noah; and from Noah till Enoch through the lineage of their fathers; and from Enoch to Abel, who was slain by the conspiracy of his brother, who received the priesthood by the commandment of God, by the hand of his father Adam, who was the first man — tuhich -priesthood continueth in the church of God in all generations, and is without beginning of days or end of years." (Doc. and Cov., pages 223, 224.) This is a brief history of the Melchizedek priest- hood as it came down from the days of Adam. The revelation then continues: "And the Lord confirmed a priesthood also upon Aaron and his seed, throughout all their generations — which priesthood also continueth and abideth for- ever with the priesthood, which is after the holiest order of God: and this greater priesthood adminis- tereth the Gospel and holdeth the key of the myster- ies of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God; therefore, in the ordinances thereof the power of godliness is manifest; and without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the 148 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM flesh; for without this no 7nan can see the face of God, even the Father, and live." (See Doc. and Gov., sec. 83, par. 3). I wish now to call especial attention to a few points contained in the above. I have italicized in the quo- tation to avoid repetition. First. If Moses received the Melcliizedek priest- hood under the hand of his father-in-law, Jethro, it is one of the remarkable things in history that no mention is made of the fact by any of the divine writers. That an event of so much vital importance should be passed over without mention is altogether incredible, and cannot be true. Perhaps one of the most remarkable things about this ** revelation on priesthood," is found in the fact that Esaias — or Isaiah — is made the contemporary of Abraham, who received the priesthood under the hand of Melchizedek. Yet Esaias was, by some unaccountable means, placed under the necessity of receiving it " under the hand of God." Why did not Esaias receive the priesthood under the hand of Abraham at the time he was "blessed of him?" or, what would have been still better, perhaps, under the hand of Melchizedek himself? Why should God leave his throne in heaven, come to earth and ordain Esaias by the laying on of hands, when two such great priests as Melchizedek and Abraham were accessible to him? The idea is simply preposterous, and is but another exhibition of the wonderful power of imagination — the creative faculty — with which this remarkable man was so liberally endowed. While Abraham lived B. C. 1913, Isaiah, or Esaias, did not appear upon the stage of action till 1153 years TEE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 149 later, in the year B. C. 760. Joseph certainly neglected to consult his chronological tables while receiving this revelation. But it may be urged that the Esaias referred to was not Isaiah the prophet, but another man of the same name, who hved in the days of Abraham. Well, if we admit the possibility of this explanation, which is highly improbable, as no other Esaias is mentioned in Scripture history except the prophet, even then the so-called revelation is proved to be a fabrication from the following considerations, namely: 1. While it is possible that Jethro might have been ordained under the hand of Caleb — both being contemporary with Moses — it is simply impossible that the latter could have been ordained by Elihu, as may be seen by a glance at the following table; and the same is true of all the persons named: NAME. WHEN LIVING, DIFFERENCE IN- SCRIPTURAL B. C. TIME. REFERENCE. 1. \ Caleb. "( Elihu. 1452. 1171. 281. Num26:65. 1 Sam. 1 : 1. 2. \ Elilm. '( Jeremy. 3. { Jerem}'. "( Gad. 1171. 629. 442. Jer. 31:15; Mat. 2:17. 629. 1749. 1120. Gen. 30:11. (Gad. \ Esaias. 1749. 760. 989. Isa. 1:1; Acts. 8 : 28. Thus it appears that Elihu ordained Caleb 281 years before he was born; or, to reverse the condi- tions, Caleb had been dead 281 years when he was ordained by Elihu. 2. Elija had been dead 542 years when he was or- dained by Jeremy. a. Here we have Gad to have ordained Jeremy 150 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 1120 years before the prophet was born; and finally, 4. Esaias is represented to have ordained Gad to the '*Melchizedek priesthood," 989 years after the latter 's death. I certainly see no means by which Latter Day Saints can extricate themselves from the embarrass- ing predicament in which these figures place them. But the most absurd thing about the whole affair, and which stamps fraud upon the very face of the pre- tended revelation, is found in the representation that God vacated his throne in heaven, descend to earth, laid his hand upon Esaias and ordained him to the office of a priest after the order of Melchizedek. We might extend the list of Mormon absurdities relative to this question of priesthood, but enough has been said to show that the prophet gave free rein to his wildest fancies, and that his ** revelations " are the merest vagaries of the human mind, and wholly unreliable as a means of obtaining either light or truth. "Called of God as was Aaron," indeed! In the first place, the passage quoted has reference only to priests under the law, and does not, therefore, apply to the calling of Gospel ministers. Besides this, Aaronic priests, after the first revelation calling Aaron, and establishing the ride by which all sul>se- quent jjriests were to be chosen, were never called by revelation. The law provided that the sons of Levi should, from that time, be set apart — consecrated to this service. No revelation after that was necessary to set apart an Aaronic priest. The same rule applied to the calling of ministers of the Gospel obviates the necessity for any modern revelation in order to tlieir acceptance with God. CHAPTER XVI. APOSTLES, THEN AND NOW HOW CALLED? Apostles, then and now— How called?— What is an apostle?— Called by Jesus personally— Not ordained by the laying on of hands- How were the apostles qualified?— Endued with power from on high— Mormon apostles— How called?— Chosen by Oliver Cow- dery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris— Names of the twelve apostles. What is an apostle? Webster defines the word thus: "A person deputied to execute some important business, but appropriately a disciple of Christ com- missioned to preach the Gospel." The twelve whom Christ ordained were persons *' deputied to execute some important business," and that '' important business " was to preach the Gospel and permanently establish the Church of Christ. They were in fact Christ's ambassadors. Latter Day Saints claim not only that apostles must be in the church to-day because they were then, but they make the further claim that such apostles must be called to-day exactly as they were in the apostolic age. If we are to have apostles in the church now, I freely admit, nay, urge, that they must be called and qualified exactly in the same manner as were the first apostles. Any persons claiming to be apostles w^ho are not so called and qualified cannot be apostles of Christ, and should be rejected as impostors. This leads us to inquire, (151) 152 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM HOW WERE THE APOSTLES OF CHRIST CHOSEN? To Bible readers I hardly need say the call was personal and direct. To Peter and Andrew, James and John, he simply said, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men." (Matt. 4: 18-22). To Matthew, whom Jesus saw while " sitting at the receipt of customs, he said. Follow me. And he arose and followed him." (Matt. 9: ij). John extends the list to include Philip and Nathanael, to whom, as on other occasions, Jesus said, "Follow me." (John 1: 43-46). This is the unostentatious manner in which Jesus called his apostles. No formal ceremony of any kind. They were not even consecrated by the laying on of hands. From this we may very reasonably infer that apostles were not made, and indeed cannot be made, by the laying on of hands. Nay, I go further than this and declare that there is not an instance on record in the New Testament where any man ever laid his hands on another and ordained him to the office of an apostle. "Well," says the objector, " were not the twelve ordained by Jesus? Does he not say, 'I have "chosen you and ordained you?'" (See John 15: 16). Jesus certainly both chose and ordained his twelve disciples; but there is not the slightest hint that they were ordained by the laying on of hands. " Ordain : To appoint; to decree; to set; to establish; to insti- tute; to set apart for an office." — Webster. Thus it may be seen that the Avord "ordain " does not necessarily imply a consecration by the laying on of hands. In a recently published Church History, written hy President Joseph Smith and Apostle Heman C. Smith THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 153 of the Reorganized Church, we find an elaborate argument to prove that Peter, James and John did not ordain Joseph Smith to the Melchizedek priest- hood by the laying on of hands, a claim perhaps never before questioned by any Mormon writer. After quoting Webster, the following comments are offered : "Hence Peter, James and John could have been ordained by holding and exercising the power to direct, set in order, arrange, regulate, establish, appoint, decree, enact or institute, etc. In the absence of any evidence that Peter, James and John ordained in the sense of Webster's fourth definition [that is, " by the laying on of hands "] we are not justified as historians in saying that Joseph and Oliver were so ordained." (Smith's Church History, page 65.) Neither the authority cited nor the argument of the ai)Ove can be successfully questioned. Let us, there- fore, apply the rule to the case in hand. We have said that Jesus did not ordain his apostles by the laying on of hands, and insist that the meaning of the word does not necessarily imply such an act. Hence Jesus could have ordained his disciples by exercising the power to " direct, set in order, arrange, regulate, establish, appoint, decree, enact or institute;" and "in the absence of any evidence" that Jesus did ordain " according to Webster's fourth definition we are not justified in saying" that the apostles were so ordained. That they were so ordained we most em- phatically deny, and challenge the proof. This brings us to consider, HOW WERE THE APOSTLES QUALIFIED? The story is brief and is thus related by the wit- nesses : 154 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM " And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: But tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." (Luke 24:49.) " Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence." (Acts 1:5.) " And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, the}^ were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Acts 2: 1-4.) Who were present at this wonderful enduement meeting? " Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language." (Verse 6. See also verses 7-11.) What was the result of this marvelous exhibition of divine power? " Then they that gladly received his word were bap- tized: and Die same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.'' (Acts 2: 41.) These disciples were now qualified to *' go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature," it mattered not what his nationality or what his tongue. Bearing in mind the fact that, if apostles exist in this age, they must be called and qualified exactly as they were anciently, let us now determine — and from Mormon sources — just how the latter day apostles THE DOCTRFXES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 155 were called and qualified, and compare them with Christ's apostles. MODERN APOSTLES HOW CALLED? The twelve apostles of Joseph Smith were called at a meeting appointed by Joseph himself for that pur- pose, at Kirtland, Ohio, Feb. 14, 1835. President Smith, in stating the object of the meeting, said " it was made known to him by vision and by the Holy Spirit" that the meeting should be called. "President Joseph Smith, Jr., after making many remarks on the subject of choosing the Twelve, wanted an expression from the brethren, if they would be satisfied to have the Spirit of the Lord dic- tate in the choice of the elders to be apostles; where- upon all the elders present expressed their anxious desire to have it so. "President Joseph Smith, Jr., said that the first business of the meeting was, for the three ivitnes.ses of the Book of Mormon, to pray, each one, and then proceed to choose twelve men from the churchy as aj^os- tles, to go to all nations, kindreds, tongues and people. " The three witnesses; viz., Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris, united in prayer. "These three witnesses were then blessed by the laying on of the hands of the Presidency. " The witnesses fhen^ according to a former com- mandment, ipvoceeded to "make choice of the Twelve. Their names are as follows: 1. Lyman E. Johnson. 7. William E. McLcllin. 2. Brigham Young. 8. John F. Boynton. 3. Heber C. Kemball. 9. Orson Pratt. 4. Orson Hyde. 10. William Smith. 5. David W. Patten. 11. Thomas B. Marsh. 6. Luke Johnson. 12. Parley P. Pratt. 156 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM *'Lymau E. Johnson, Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball came forward; and the three witnesses laid their hands upon each one's head and prayed separately." (Smith's Church History, pages 540 and 541. Also page 538.) At subsequent meetings the other nine were in like manner ordained. (See page 542.) And thus were chosen the first twelve apostles of Mormonism. Reader, do you observe one single mark of similarity between the methods employed in call- ing the apostles of Jesus Christ, and those adopted b}' Joseph Smith in calling his twelve? Not the slightest. In the former case the disciples were not even known personally to the Saviour, much less to be his followers. (See John 1: 46.) Not so with Joseph Smith. His twelve were chosen from his tried followers, — most of them members of *' Zion's Camp," a company over 200 strong, who fol- lowed Joseph to Missouri, in 1834, to " redeem Zion," but who were so disastrously defeated in their pur- pose. (See list of names on pages 462-464, Smith's History.) To his twelve Jesus simply said, "Follow me." But Joseph said: " The first business of the meeting was for the three w^itnesses to choose the twelve apostles," and they chose them. The apostles of Christ were chosen by Jesus him- self, while those of Joseph were chosen by Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris. Jesus said, "I will make you fishers of men." But Joseph said, " xVre you satisfied to have the Spirit of the Lord dictate [to the three witnesses] in the choice of the elders to be apostles? " The apostles of Christ were chosen hefort the estab- THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 157 lishment of the church, while the apostles of Joseph were an after-thought, and were called five years after the establishment of his church. The apostles of Jesus were steadfast to the end; while many of Joseph's, and even the three witnesses who chose them, denounced Joseph and withdrew from the church, some three years after their ordina- tion. (See Smith's History pp. 651, 652, 657.) See also page 49, for an account of, and apology for, the disaffection of not only the three witnesses, but also that of the " eight witnesses." CHAPTER XVII. Joseph's apostles — how qualified — ^an imitation. Joseph's apostles — How qualified — Tarry at Kirtland — Dedication of the Kirtland temple — ^House filled with angels — Questions and answers — Jesus did not appear — The Reorganized Church — When organized, and by whom — Of whom composed — Seven apostles chosen — Their names — Chosen by a committee of three — The lesser ordains the greater — Can a stream rise above its fountain? — Apostasy of Apostle Briggs — Repudiates his own revelation — Three of the seven apostles reduced to the ranks — Ells and Derry chosen by a committee of three — Apostle Derry resigns— Summed up. In delivering the charge to the new apostles, Presi- dent Oliver Cowdery said: *'Have you desired this ministry with all your hearts? If you have desired it you are called of God, not man, to go into all the world." (Tullidge's His- tory, page 154). Further along in his address he charges them to, "Tarry at Kirtland until you are endowed with power, from on high." (Page 157). An imitation. In December following (1835), when addressing the twelve concerning the promised "endowment," Joseph said to them: " I feel disposed to speak a few words more to you, my brethren, concerning the endowment. All who are prepared, and are sufficiently pure to abide the presence of the Lord, will see him in the solemn assembly." (Smith's History, page 603). At this time the Kirtland temple was nearing com- pletion, and within its sacred walls the elders (158j THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 159 expected to receive their endowuient. Finished at last, Sunday, March 27, 1836, was the time appointed for its dedication. *' The dedication was looked forward to with intense interest, and when the day arrived a dense multitude assembled. ... At the hour appointed the assembly was seated, and President Rigdon began the services of the day. ''After singing by the congregation, Joseph offered the following dedicatory prayer. "After the close of the above prayer and singing by the choir, the Lord's Supper was administered, * After which,' says Joseph, 'I bore record of my mis- sion and the ministration of angels. . . . Presi- dent F. G. Williams arose, and testified that while President Rigdou was making his first prayer, an angel entered the window and took his seat between Father Smith and himself, and remained there during his prayer. President David Whitmer also saw angels in the house.' " ' At the evening meeting of the same day,' says Joseph, * Brother George A. Smith arose and began to prophesy, when a noise was heard like the sound of a rushing mighty wind, which filled the temple, and all the congregation simultaneously arose, being moved upon by an invisible power. Many began to speak in tongues and prophesy; others saw glorious visions; and I beheld the temple was filled with angels, which fact I declared to the congregation. The people of the neighborhood came running together, (hearing an unusual sound within, and see- ing a bright light like a pillar of fire resting upon the temple) and were astonished at what was transpir- IGO THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM ing." (Tullidge's History, pages 189, 190, 191, 199, 200). Without a word of comment we might let the mat- ter rest here, asking the reader to make his own com- parison of this so-called endowment with that of the apostles, yet I cannot forbear a few suggestions: 1. Who were present at the Kirtland endowment? Latter Day Saints only, so far as the history informs us. 2. Who undertood the "tongues" in which not one of the apostles is declared to have spohen? Not a soul, for they were all English-speaking people. 3. How many were converted by the presence of the houseful of angels? Not a soid, for no one saw them except Joseph and his "counselor," F. G. Williams, while at Pentecost three thousand were added to the church in a single day. Jesus did not appear at the endowment as Joseph said he would do — nothing but angels. 4. How many of the apostles of Christ denied the faith, and turned away from the Master after their endowment? Not one of them. And yet Presidents Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, Frederick G. Wil- liams; and Apostles Thomas B. Marsh, Wm. E. McLellin and John F. Boynton ; witness Martin Har- ris, and many others, all denounced the prophet and left the church after their " endowment." If they witnessed what is said to have transpired, it seems incredible that they should ever have thus fallen away. The reader must decide for himself whether the evidence is competent to prove what is alleged. One thing, however, is perfectly clear, and that is, not a point of similarity is to be found between the two events. THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 161 Passing now from the original Mormon Church and its apostles, let us take a brief view of the APOSTLES OF THE REORGANIZED CHURCH. At the death of Joseph and Hyrum Smith in 1844, the church was divided into various factions upon the question of leadership. The great body of the church followed Brigham Young and'* the twelve" to Utah. William B. Smith, brother of the prophet, had quite a following, but soon went to pieces on the rock of polygamy. James J. Strang, then of Wiscon- sin, but later of Beaver Island, Mich., had quite a following, while a ''company" followed Lyman Wright, one of Joseph's apostles, to the wilds of western Texas. The Reorganized Church is the youngest of the Mormon brood, and had its inception in Beloit, Wis., June 1st, 1852, and w^as finally organized April 6th, 1853. This organization was composed, in the beginning, of defections from Strang's church and that of Wm. B. Smith, principally on account of polygamy. (See Tullidge's History, page 594). "In obedience to the above instruction an article was written against polygayriy by J. W. Briggs." (Ibid, page, 594). At the Conference of April 6, 1853, a committee of three — not the "three witnesses," however — was appointed "to select seven men to be ordained into the quorum of apostles." " The committee of three . . . chose Zenas H. Gurley, Henry H. Deam, Jason W. Briggs, Daniel B. Razey, John Cunnmgham, George White and Reuben 11 162 THE DOCTBIXES AM) DOGMAS OF MORMONISM Newkirk, who were accordingly ordained." (TuU lidge's History, page 600). Thus three men, not Christ, chose the first apostles of the Reorganized Church, in accordance with the pattern set by Joseph in the beginning of Mormon- ism; and what constitutes the most remarkable feat- ure of the entire transaction is there was not a man in the conference, or in the church at the time, who held an office above that of "high priest," which, as you doubtless are aware, is lower in rank than that of an apostle. Query. — How can the lesser ordain the greater? Can the stream rise above its fountain? If not, then these high priests could not ordain apostles; and this being true, these seven men were not apostles, in any sense of that word. The '* revelation " — yes, they had a revelation to ^^ organize'^ — and this revelation was received through Jason W. Briggs, Nov. 18, 1851, and may be found in Tullidge's History, page 578. He became the President of the quorum of " twelve," and later, Historian of the church. But alas! how the mighty are fallen! Jason became dissatisfied with his own work; and by his actions, at least, renouncing his own *' revelation " and the work built upon it, he resigned his apostolic office and withdrew from the church at a conference held at Independence, Mo. Of the remaining j)ortion of these seven men, three of them were afterwards removed from office by reso- lution of a General Conference, held at Piano, 111., April 6, 1865, Joseph Smith presiding. Their names w^ere Daniel B. Razy, David Newkirk, and George White. (Tullidge's History, page 667). At tiie same conference another committee of tJtree THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 163 was appointed to select men for the apostleship. This committee, "Nominated Josiah Ells and Charles Derry to fill the places of D. B. Razy and David Newkirk in the Quorum of Twelve, which passed into a resolution, and they were ordained apostles under the hands of Joseph Smith, [son and successor to the original Joseph] James Blakeslee and Z. H. Gurley." (Ibid, page 667). Elder Charles Derry did not long remain in the "Quorum of Twelve." He resigned his apostleship soon after his return from the English Mission, for the reason, as he told the writer shortly afterwards, that he had no evidence that God had ever called him to be an apostle. He was too honest to retain a place of honor to which he felt assured God had never called him. He called on me a few days ago, and on departing left his benediction. He baptized me into the Reorganized Church nearly thirty-six years ago. I would that all men were like him in honor and integrity, and may his soul find rest and peace in the paradise of God. But other apostles have been called more recently, and by a different method. By means of a " revela- tion " to the present Joseph Smith, given March 1, 1873, seven other men were chosen to be apostles, and duly ordained by the laying on of hands. (See Tul- lidge's History, page 715). Of these all remained with the church except one, Zenas H. Gurley, who withdrew when Apostle J. W. Briggs stepped down and out. I have been thus particular to give the history of apostolic callings simply to show that no comparison can be made between the apostles of Christ and the 164 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM apostles of 7ne}L^ either as to their calling or their enduement or qualification. While the apostles of the Reorganized Church, like all others, claim miraculous powers, they do not pretend to have been "endued with power from on high," as were the apostles of old. In the foregoing we have shown : 1. That Joseph Smith's apostles are not apostles of Christ, because not one of them has ever professed to have seen Christ, which is one of the first qualifi- cations of an apostle. 2. That they were not called as Christ's apostles were, namely, hy Jesus himself^ but by three men — an earthly committee appointed by human means. 3. That the "endowment" they profess to have received was in no respect whatever like that of the groat Pentecost. 4. That while the apostles of Christ were steadfast unto death, the man-made Mormon apostles were ever vacillating or denying the faith. 5. That the powers possessed by the apostles of Christ were of a character not to be questioned by even the most skeptical, while the gauzy imitations of Joseph Smith were such as to fill honest men with shame and disgust, and to render skeptical many of the most faithful and believing. For these cogent reasons, together with those pre- viously given, any man of intelligence will be com- pelled to regard all pretenses to miraculous powers as fraudulent, and denounce all lattter-day pretenders to apostolic honors as pseudo-apostles. Wrong in doctrine, wrong in organization, with man-made and false apostles, the Mormon Church cannot bo the Cliurch of Christ, all her boastful claims to the contrary noth withstanding. CHAPTER XYIII. THE BOOK OF MORMON — WHAT IS IT? The Book of Mormon — What is it?— History of a Jewish colony- Written on metallic plates — Plates discovered near Palmyra, New York — Josepli's account of the discovery — New revelation — Orson Pratt's view — All authority lost in the great apostasy — Restored by an angel — Joseph's key to the Revelation of St. John — The man-child is the priesthood — Mr. Pratt answered — A mon- strous claim. The Book of Mormon is confidently believed by X/atter Day Saints of every name and class to be a divinely-inspired record of a people who came from Jerusalem some six hundred years before Christ, who, although few in number at the beginning (about twenty persons all told), grew into a " multitude of nations in the midst of the earth." (See Gen. 48: 15-19). This little colony, the book relates, were directed in their journey to the promised land by divine power. Although the Book of Mormon itself does not give a hint as to the direction their ship sailed, or the dis- tance traversed, yet it is maintained by its inter- preters and defenders that the little colony of Jews -landed on the west coast of South America, just south of the Isthmus of Panama; but the source from which this information is derived you are left to imagine, for the narrative is as silent as the tomb as to the point from which they sailed or the place where they landed. No attempt is made to describe the "promised (165) 166 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM land" either at the place of landing or at any point in the interior. Of course if the Book of Mormon be accepted as true, all these difficulties at once disappear; for the *' record" describes the terrible wars which led to the final extinction of the white or Nephite race by their copper-colored brethren, the Lamanites or American Indians, and gives an account of the last days of Moroni, who, (after all but himself had been slain in the decisive battle at Camorah — Indian Hill, New York — and where over '* two million '' Nephites fell, with nearly as many Lamanites) "hid up unto the Lord" the plates from which the Book of Mormon is said to have been translated. Following is the account of their discovery by Joseph Smith: '* Convenient to the village of Manchester, Ontario County, New York, stands a hill of considerable size, and the most elevated in the neighborhood.* On the west side of this hill, not far from the top, under a stone of considerable size, lay the plates deposited in a stone box." (Smith's History, Yol. 1, page 16.) If the above statement concerning the discovery of the gold plates in " Indian Hill," as the Manchester people call it, but known in Mormon parlance as '* Camorah," be accepted as correct, it does not only locate the Nephite colony upon this continent, but it proves the entire theory upon which Mormonism is based to be true. But the veracity of this remarka- ble claim is the very point in dispute, and the ques- tion as to whether ancient America was peopled by a colony of Hebrews from Jerusalem remains an open question. I shall now proceed to a direct examination of the ** evidences" adduced in support of this very fine THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM 167 theory. The Saints confidently assert that the Book of Mormon "came forth" in exact fulfiUment of many direct prophecies of the Bible; and this view is presented with so much plausibility that many are led to accept it. ' To pave the way for the more direct evidences in support of the Book of Mormon, the advocates of *'the latter-day work," as the Saints call it, claim that, owing to a total apostasy of the primitive Chris- tians from the original doctrines and practices of the church and the abrogation of all authority to minister in Gospel ordinances, a new revelation from God is indispensably necessary. Apostle Orson Pratt, universally conceded to be the ablest writer the Mormon Church ever produced, in a pamphlet entitled, *'More E-evelation is Indis- pensably Necessary," undertakes to establish this pet dogma of Mormonism. Following is one of his strongest arguments: *'The Church of Christ cannot exist on the earth without an authorized ministry. This ministry can not be called and authorized without new revelation. . . . Without new revelation every office in the church would necessarily become vacant. ... If revelation ceased at the close of the first century, it is not at all likely that any of the officers then holding authority would be alive a century afterwards ; and as they would have no authority to ordain others without new revelation, when they died the authority upon the earth would necessarily become extinct, . . . Hence, without continued revelation the church could no more continue its existence on the earth than a body could live without the spirit." (Pratt's works, More Revelation Necessary, page 18.) 168 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM Thus all authority, and even the church itself, ceased to exist when new revelations were no longer received, and revelation ceased because of a general apostasy. While the Latter Day Saints admit that Christ set up his kingdom, or established his church, and authorized his apostles and others to preach the Gospel and administer its ordinances, yet they claim, as the above extract clearly shows, that through apos- tasy all authority was taken from the earth, and the Church of Christ actually ceased to exist. ''The priesthood " — by which they mean authority — they tell us, " was taken from the earth," and cite certain Scriptures to prove it, and among them the follow- ing: "And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: and she brought forth a man-child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up to God and to his throne." (Rev. 12: 1, 5.) The woman, they very correctly hold, is the church, and the man-child, they erroneously maintain is " the priesthood." Concerning this Mr. Kelley says: "An angel of glory, — sent by Jesus . . . wends his way to earth, and conferred with his own pure hand and divinely uttered words the priesthood, — long since lost, taken to heaven, as represented by the man-child of Rev. 12, and thus authorize men once more, to preach the Gospel." (Presidency and Priest- hood, page 224.) In his "Key to the Revelation of St. John," Joseph Smith says : Q. " What are we to understand by the man-child, THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 169 in the 12th chapter of Revelation, and 5th verse? A. " We are to understand that the man-child is the priesthood." The above question and answer are quoted from memor}', and are substantially, if not verbally, cor- rect. The man-child was the priesthood; the priesthood was " caught up to God and to his throne," therefore, all authority to minister in divine things ivas taken from the earth. In harmony with this view. Apostle Orson Pratt says : " Since the church with its authority and poiuer has been caught away from the earth, the great ' mother of harlots,' with all her descendants, has blasphemously assumed authority of administering so7ne of the sacred ordinances of the Gospel." ("Revelation Necessary," as before quoted, page 18.) According to all Mormon lexicography Priesthood means, — " The authority of God committed to men, to preach the Gospel and administer the ordinances thereof." (Kelley.) The priesthood having been " caught up to heaven," no man on earth has authority to minister in Gospel or- dinances, and hence the necessity for a new revela- tion That there was, after the death of the apostles, a departure, in some measure, at least, from the sim- plicity of primitive methods, few Protestants care to deny; but that such departure involved the abroga- tion of all authority, they do not admit. The j^ropo- sition is one affirmed by the Latter Day Saints, and which they have utterly failed to establish by compe- tent testimony. 170 TEE BOCTBINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISU Mr. Pratt sums up the whole case iu a few words, — and ^no writer among the Saints has ever produced stronger reasoning, — when he says that *' the Church of Christ cannot exist without an authorized minis- try," and that ''this ministry cannot be authorized without new revelation,''' that is to say, every man called to the ministry must be called by a direct reve- lation from God. But is this true? Is it a fact that God has obligated himself to point out, by direct revelation, every man who officiates in his church. If so, where may we find such a declaration? That some individuals were miraculously called, as Paul, for example, nobody doubts; but that all men must be so called does not appear, and neither can it be proved. If Mr. Pratt's logic is good, and his premise be not at fault, then what becomes of the very first apostles chosen, himself among the rest, who were called, not by Christ, not by a revelation from God, but by three men, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Mar- tin Harris? If, indeed, ministers can only be chosen by direct revelation, how about the seven men, the first apostles of the Reorganized Church, who were also chosen by three men selected for that purpose, and not by revela- tion? If ministers can be called only by divine revelation, through what particular channel must such revelation come? "O," says one, "it must come through the prophet, the President of the church." Very well, but through which one of all the dozen or more presidents of as many different Mormon churches, must this revelation come? When some advocate of the Mormon heresy answers the above impertinent THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISaI 171 questions to the satisfaction of reasonable people, then, and not till then, need they expect to mislead thinking people by such modes of reasoning. The monstrous claim that no man, since the begin- ning of the third century, has been authorized to preach the Gospel till Joseph Smith and Oliver Cow- dery, by the hand of an angel, were so authorized, is simply blasphemous, almost heaven-daring. And all this is founded upon the assumption that the "priest- hood" was taken up to heaven, and all authority annulled because of apostasy. CHAPTER XIX. IS A NEW REVELATION NECESSARY Is a new revelation necessary?— The great apostasy — Did it annul all existing authority? — The great Jewish apostasy — Authority not destroyed — Devout Zacharias — John the Baptist — The old kingdom and the new — Authority transferred — The latter day apostasy — How does it affect the Mormon Church? — Joseph's church apostatized — Church rejected of God — The Reorganized Church the result of apostasy — The Church of Christ transmitted from the times of the apostles. The proposition to which I shall now address myself is this: Did the apostasy, which followed the death of the apostles, render a new revelation indispensably neces- sary ? If the above question be answered, affirmatively, then it logically follows that wherever there occurs an apostasy, general in its character, then all existing authority is thereby abrogated, and the necessity for a new revelation to restore it becomes absolutely imperative. Either this is true or it is a fact that apostasy does not annul existing authority. Please bear this in mind. In order to determine the facts relative to the mat- ter under consideration, it becomes necessary to examine a little history, both ancient and modern. That the Jewish people were in a lamentable state of apostasy at the time Christ came to minister among men, may not be seriously questioned by any well- informed Bil)le reader. The condition in which he THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 173 found the Israelites may be seen from such passages as the following: **0, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not." (Matt. 23: 37). '* Woe unto you. Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! . . . Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" (Vs. 29,33). *'That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar." (V. 35). *' Behold, your house shall be left unto you deso- late." (V. 38). *' He came to his own and his own received him not." (John 1:11). '*Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your traditions?" (Matt. 15:3). **It is written. My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves." (Matt. 21: 13). So wicked had become God's chosen people; so far lost were they in the mazy depths of apostasy, that their beloved city was laid waste, the temple destroyed and its altars desecrated, and the nation itself carried away into captivity among the Gentile nations of the earth, thus becoming **a hiss and a by-word " among the people. Not in the annals of the past can be found an apos- tasy so entire, so complete as that which befell the Jewish people, and yet the authority to minister at 174 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM the altar of God's house was not wanting. The apos- tas3^ great, and so well-nigh universal though it was, did not, and, indeed, could not, abrogate the author- ity of the faithful. Some there were, standing erect amid the wreck and ruin of a great nation, like the high rock in a great desert, who refused to bow the knee to Baal, and whose authority God was pleased to recognize. Such was the faithful, devout, Zacha- rias, to whom, indeed, an angel of God appeared, not to restore the authority lost through a general apostasy, but rather to assure this faithful servant that both his authority and his offerings were still recognized in the sight of heaven, and were accept- able. This divine messenger, instead of laying his hands on Zacharias to ordain him to the Aaronic priesthood, simply recognized existing authority by announcing the birth of John the Forerunner, a prophet who should go before the Lord and make straight the paths which had been made crooked through apos- tasy and disbelief. John came in the spirit of Elias — that is to say, he came as a means of restoring right- eousness — not priesthood. The foregoing historical facts prove, 1. That the apostasy of the masses does not, can- not, abrogate existing authority. 2. That authority once delegated can only be annulled by individual transgression. 3. That so long as there remains a righteous man on the earth, just so long does the authority remain to minister in divine things; and 4. That any man holding authority to minister be- fore God, may confer that authority upon others. Apostle Wm. H. Kelley, in his zeal to prove that THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM 175 both the "Melchizedek and Aaronic priesthoods" were transferred from the old dispensation to the new, admits that authority to minister under the law was not disturbed by the great Jewish apostasy. He says: . "John the Baptist held the Aaronic priesthood. ... He was aNazarite from his birth (Luke 1: 15), and doubtless consecrated to the priesthood as he was to the service of the Lord, being aNazarite." (Presi- dency and Priesthood, page 18.) " In the persons of Jesus and John, therefore, there were represented upon the shores of Jordan, . . • the Melchizedek and the Aaronic priesthoods, by which the Gospel was preached and administered." (Ibid, page 20.) If, as Mr. Kelley affirms, there were " two priest- hoods in the church," how did they get there? Fol- lowing is the explanation which he offers : " A new nation was to be born; a new kingdom set up. All the authority and excellencies attaching to the old Levitical * kingdom of priests ' were to be transferred to the neio kingdom:' (Ibid, page 33.) '' Tlie priesthood was transferred:' (Ibid, page 36.) (Italics are mine.) Thus Mr. Kelley shows most conclusively that the fearful apostate condition in which Jesus found the ''old levitical 'kingdom of priests,' " the priesthood, or " the authority and order of God committed unto men," as he defines '* priesthood," remained intact, and was " transferred " to the kingdom of Christ. Mr. Kelley, being an apostle, and therefore entitled ^ to all the powers pertaining to that office, ought to know whereof he affirms; and if he is right, then apostasy cannot annul existing authority. 176 THE DOCTBIKES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM Let Latter Day Saints remember this. While this view is contrary to all Mormon theology, it is at the same time a position which Latter Day Saints dare not question; for the moment they do so, that mo- ment they prove the Mormon Church and priesthood to be entirely destitute of authority. But the question may be asked, and doubtless will be by some, — '* Was not the authority to preach the Gospel and baptize believers into the church lost in the great apostasy after the death of the apostles? And was not this authority restored through Joseph Smith? If so, then, will it not remain, there still be- ing persons living who received it under the hands of Joseph and Oliver? " Well, let us see about that. In the first place we have shown by the facts of history and good Mormon authority — that of an inspired apostle — that author- ity cannot be destroyed, or cancelled, by a general apostasy — it must be absolutely universal, not a faith- ful, pure man left — and hence Joseph's claim to have *' restored " that which has not been shown to be lost is a glaring absurdity, to say the very least. All this talk about the loss of authority through apostasy is but an idle fancy based upon the wildest specula- tion, having no foundation in fact. But, for the sake of the argument, suppose we admit this groundless claim, what will be the result? If Joseph and Oliver received authority direct from heaven, and if others are now living who received it from them, then, according to this theory, the only way such authority can be retained is to avoid the fateful rock of *' apostasy," upon which it is claimed the original Church of Christ and the apostles were hopelessly wrecked. I think no sane, fair-minded THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 177 man will dispute the logic of this jDosition. "The same cause under like circumstances will invariably produce the same effect/' is a fundamental truth not to be questioned. The one question now to be determined is this: Has there been an apostasy from the original doctrines of Mormonism? Has the church organized by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery been perpetuated? or has there been a falling away from the original faith and doctrines of the church? To determine these questions will be to determine th.Q facts as to Mormon authority. If there has been no departure from the faith, if there have been no sinful innovations from any quar- ter, then whatever of authority Joseph and Oliver could confer still remains; but if there have been hurtful and destroying doctrines introduced into the church by its leaders, then by this act of apostasy all authority has been abrogated. If the Saints have " kept the faith," if there has been no departure from original Mormonism, then polygamy, ''blood atonement," the Adam-God doc- trine, Danites, or " destroying angels," and a thousand other abominable and soul-destroying doctrines were among the original tenets of the Mormon Church ; for that all these things were practiced and taught by the church in Utah none will pretend to deny. If these things were not a part of original Mormonism, then who can deny the fact that there has been a terrible, a most wicked apostasy from the original doctrines of the church? Reasoning from the premise furnished by the car- dinal facts of Mormon theology as urged by both founders and defenders of the Mormon Church as an 12 178 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM apology for its existence, all the authority that ever resided in the church has been forfeited because of apostasy. The Reorganized Church owes its existence to the apostasy of the original church. Had there been no departure from the faith, and had not this departure been of such a character as to cause what is known among the Saints as the '* rejection of the church," the Reorganized Church could never have had exist- ence. In one of Joseph's revelations, that of January 19, 1841, the matter is referred to as follows: " But I command you, all ye my saints, to build a house unto me; and I grant unto you a sufficient time to build an house unto me, and during this time your baptisms [in the Mississippi river] shall be acceptable unto me. But behold, at the end of this appoint- ment your baptisms for your dead shall not be accept- able unto me; and if ye do not these things, at the end of the appointment ye shall be rejected as a CHURCH icith your dead, saith the Lord your God." (Doctrine and Covenants, page 304.) This was a commandment to build the temple and Nauvoo House — "the Lord's boarding house." As an historical fact, the temple was never finished, which was admitted by even Brigham Young himself, as the following shows : '*Have you ever seen a temple finished since the church was commenced? No, you have not." (Re- jection of the Church, page 2. See also Journal of Discourses, published in Salt Lake City, Vol. 1, page 277.) In a tract published by the Reorganized Church we find the followinof: THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 179 "Now it is a well known fact that the Nauvoo House was built only part on the second storj^ and that the temple was never finished. ^^ (Page 1.) *'We now see that the temple was never built as commanded of God, and we are bound, therefore, to conclude that the church as organized, as also their baptisms for their dead, were rejected of God,'''' (Ibid, page 2.) A pamphlet entitled, "A Word of Consolation," by Jason W. Briggs, president of the Twelve Apostles of the Reorganized Church, contains the following: *'But let us return to the rejection of the church at Nauvoo, . , , This event [the death of Joseph and Hyrum Smith] produced all the phenomena characteristic of such a calamity. . . . Pretenders began to arise to allure the unwary into their fatal meshes, the devices of /Satan, to which the Saints had subjected themselves hy tui^ning from the laivof God,'''' (Page 8.) Thus it is made clear that the validity of the claim of the Reorganized Church to be the Church of Christ depends entirely upon the rejection of the original Mormon Church on account of apostasy. If the original Mormon Church was not rejected, then the Reorganized Church is not the Church of Christ. But if it was rejected, the rejection was due to a general apostasy, general and sinful disobe- dience ; and as such apostasy works the abrogation of all existing authority, the entire Mormon Church, reorganization and all, being deprived of authority and rejected of God, cannot be the Church of Christ. But the warmest advocate of the *' rejection" dogma will hardly be willing to accept the inevitable conclusion to which his reasoning leads. He will 180 . THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM probably argue that although the church became so corrupt that God would no longer acknowledge it as his, yet there were righteous individuals whose authority was not revoked, and who therefore were still authorized to officiate and confer authority upon others. Very well, if this view be accepted as the correct one — and to which we shall not object — the rule, when applied to the case of the first Christians, will prove beyond question or doubt that the authority to administer the ordinances of the Gospel remained with the church, and remaining, its ordinances could be administered and the church perpetuated. That Christianity has been transmitted to us from the times of the apostles is historically true. That it has been more or less corrupted cannot be denied; nor is this a matter of astonishment. A stream whose waters are sparkling and pure at the fountain-head may be tinged or discolored more or less because of the loose character of the soil through which it may flow on its journey to the sea; but as it continues to flow it is purified, and again becomes as clear and pure as when first it gushed from its rocky source. So with the Church of Christ. How is it to-day? Perhaps at no period of her history has the Church of Christ been characterized by such unquestionable deeds of charity and undoubt- ed personal purity as at the present time. The claim, then, that all authority conferred by Christ and the apostles was lost, and that no man possessed it until Joseph Smith received it back from heaven, is too absurd to be seriously considered for a single moment. The idea that Christ built his church upon a '*sure THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 181 foundation" and promised that "the gates of hell should not prevail against it," and yet leave it with- out the means of self-perpetuation and self-f)urifica- tion is altogether unbecoming the character and dignity and wisdom of the great Architect and Mas- ter-builder. No new revelation is necessary, then, in order to minister in Gospel ordinances. A reformation, not a restoration by means of a new revelation, is what the church needed, and the reformation came, and came to stay. This boastful, arrogant claim is thus shown to have not the shadow of ^support in either the facts of Scripture, history or rea^pu, and cannot, therefore, be true,, CHAPTER XX. *• A MARVELOUS WORK AND A WONDER." A marvelous work and a wonder — An untenable claim— From Presi- dent Blair — His comments on Isaiah 29 — Mr. Kelley's points of identity — Ariel — Old and new — Book to be taken out of the ground. Having shown that there exists no necessity for a new revelation to restore authority which had never been lost, and that the entire claim urged by Latter Day Saints as an apology for the appearance of the Book of Mormon is based upon an assumed promise, we might here dismiss the entire question ; but as the scriptural arguments advanced by the Saints to prove the Book of Mormon a divine revelation are wholly untenable, I shall now proceed to show the utter fallacy of the positions assumed. In pursuance of this pleasant task I shall, as here- tofore, let good Mormon authorities state the prem- ises upon which they predicate their arguments. In a published sermon by President W. W. Blair, delivered at Laomi, Iowa, Nov. 27, 1892, on the Book of Mormon, from the text, *' A Marvelous Work and a Wonder," he presents the view uniformly enter- tained by Latter Day Saints respecting the *' coming forth of the Book of Mormon," as the favorite phrase runs with them, and endeavors to show how perfectly the 29th chapter of Isaiah sustains their contention. Elder Blair was considered one of the most scholarly and eloquent men in the church, and (182) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 183 this, it may be remarked, was one of his favorite topics. Although lengthy quotations are not considered just the proper thing, and are sometimes tedious, yet on occasions like this we regard it as quite necessary, in order that no dispute may arise respecting the premise upon the correctness of which the entire argument depends. I wish to call the reader's atten- tion to the ingenious manner in which Elder Blair sandwiches in his own ideas (in brackets), in order to give the proper tone and coloring to the passage necessary to the maintenance of his peculiar views, lie begins by saying: '' I will read a portion of Holy Writ that is a prom- ise and a prophecy concerning an extraordinary work —a work that God decreed to establish and carry forward in these latter days. "I do not expect to exhaust the subject that stands revealed in the chapter, but to simply present some of its salient points and bring from other portions of Scripture, as also from history, evidences that the work which is here described has been begun, and that it is being carried forward, all in fulfillment of this word of prophecy. I commence at the ninth verse of the twenty-ninth chapter of Isaiah: " * Say yourselves and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink. [They have partaken of the cup of Mystery Babylon]. For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes : the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.' ''You will notice that it is a peculiar work that is in contemplation. . . . 184 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM *' 'And the vision of all [that is, of these seers and rulers, and prophets] is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men delivered to one that is learned, saying, Eead this, I pray thee; and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed: and the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith, I am not learned. Wherefore the Lord said [here comes the promise] , Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honor me, but have removed their hearts far from me, and their fear towards me is taught by the precepts of men: there- fore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall per- ish, and the understanding of their prudent meu shall be hid. [Mark you; this relates to matters of relig- ion; that is, it pertains to the government of God. These wise and prudent are the professedly wise teachers of religion]. Woe to them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us? Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay [you see by this that religious matters are then wrong side up ; are in a confused state] : for shall the work say of him that made it, He maketh me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He hath no understanding? Is it not yet a very little while [that is, a little while after God commences this marvelous work and a wonder], and Lebanon [Palestine] shall be turned into a fruitful field, and the fruitful field shall be esteemed as a forest? And in that day [when God turns Lebanon into a fruitful field] shall THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMOXISM 185 the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the bliud shall see out of obscurity and out of dark- ness. The weak also shall increase their joy in the Lord [and why? Manifestly for the reason that God just then set his hand to do this marvelous work and a wonder], and the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel. [They rejoice because they receive the ' marvelous work and a wonder ' that the Holy One of Israel hath established] .... They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine.' " I have read this chapter and made these explana- tions that you may see the scope, at least in the out- lining, of what we propose by the blessing of God to present to you in our endeavor to prove that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not a man-made church, but that it was founded in the wisdom of God." (Pages 1, 2). After referring to Joseph Smith's vision, finding the plates, and translating the Book of Mormon, Elder Blair asks: '*Is not this the book described in the 29th chapter of Isaiah, the words of which were delivered to one that is learned for him to read, but he could not?" Commenting on the same chapter, Mr. Kelley makes the following argument: '*The points of identity between the predictions as found in the twenty-ninth chapter of Isaiah and their fulfillment in the revelation of the Book of Mormon, as the ' book that is sealed ' of verse eleven, . . . are many and most wonderfully striking." He then proceeds to give them as follows : *' (1) A certain people was to be unto the Lord ' as Ariel.' . . . Accepting that 'Ariel' proper was 186 THE DOCTUIXES AXD DOGMAS OF M0EM0XIS2I the city or people where David dwelt, Jerusalem, then the jDeople who were to be unto the Lord ' as Ariel ' were to dwell elsewhere, become great, and constitute a new 'lion of God,' or dwell as around * the hearth of God.' . . . The Margin reads, * Woe to Ariel, to Ariel of the city where David dwelt. ' So we have presented in these texts what may be termed an old and a new ' Ariel.' A comparison between two. The reading is, ' It shall be unto me as Ariel. " (2) This new ' Ariel ' after becoming great was to be * camped against,' besieged, and 'forts' raised against it. It was to be ' brought down,' and ' speak out of the ground.' ' Thy speech shall be low out of the dust,' as one that has a familiar spirit 'out of the ground.' 'Thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.' (Y. 4.) "By reason of the great destruction which would eventually be sent upon this people, it is said their ' strangers ' and ' terrible ones ' would be like ' small dust ' and as ' chaff that passeth away.' (v. 5.) Dis- sension, conflict, war, 'thunder,' 'storm,' 'earth- quake,' ' tempest,' and the ' flame of devouring fire,' were to unite as the wrath of God to bring about their utter destruction. (V. 6.) "Now, the only way that a people could ' speak out of the ground,' or 'whisper out of the dust' to in- telligent mortals, in fulfillment of this prediction, would be that their history should be written at some period in the day of their power and pros^Derity, and it become lost, rest in mute silence among their for- mer habitations or desolations, since their ' terrible ones ' became as the ' chaff that passeth away,' and be discovered and brought to light by some means or other ' out of the ground,' to be read by an intelligent THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OP MORMOSISAf 187 world that knew not of them. Such a histoiT is clearly indicated in verse 11, as the ' vision of all ' which was to become as the * words of a book that is sealed,' and to be of special notice and importance at the time of its revealment.' Such are the claims set forth in the Sealed Book, or Book of Mormon." (Presidenc}^ and Priesthood, pages 197, 198, 199.) Thus it will be seen that the advocates of Mormon hierarchy regard the 29th chapter of Isaiah as being a prophecy whose direct accomplishment is found in the "coming forth of the Book of Mormon," and the establishment of the " marvelous work and a won- der" — Mormonism. The reader cannot have failed to notice the inge- nuity of these giants of Mormon theology in the pre- sentation of their case. President Blair is careful to create the impression that the "book" of Isaiah's prophecy came forth at the exact period predicted, that is, when the religious world was all "wrong side up" — in a "state of confusion" and "hopeless division." In fact the whole chapter "relates to matters of religion," and "these wise and prudent are the professedly wise teachers of religion," in our own times. Then after referring to the "book" which Isaiah is supposed to declare shall be taken "out of the ground," Elder Blair, in a tone of exult- ant triumph, asks: " Is not this the book described in the 29th chapter of Isaiah?" In my analysis of this chapter, I shall be able to show most conclusively that Isaiah has no reference, whatever, to any book which should be taken " out of the ground," or anywhere else; not even from Joseph 188 TEE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM Smith's fertile brain, whence the Book of Mormon unquestionably had its origin. Mr. Kelley points out several " points of identity " between the ** predictions of Isaiah," and their ful- fillment in the '* revelation of the Book of Mormon," which have no existence save only in the mind of one imbued with the spirit of Mormon theology. CHAPTER XXI. **THE LAND SHADOWING WITH WINGS" — IS IT NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA ? The land shadowing with wings— Is it North and South American- Common ground— Ariel is Jerusalem— It shall be as Ariel— The Ariel of the West— A raceexterminated— Their History —The land shadowing with wings is Egypt, not America— Views of Ira Maurice Price, Ph. D. The 29th chapter of Isaiah, which is believed by the Saints to contain a prediction concerning the Book of Mormon, begins by pronouncing a *' woe " upon Jerusalem, thus: '' Woe to Ariel, to Ariel, the city where David dwelt." (V. 1.) In harmony with all scholars of eminence, Mr. Kelley, as we have seen, takes the ground, as do all the leading minds among the Saints, that Ariel here means Jerusalem, as shown from the fact that it was *'the city where David dwelt," — was the capital city of the people of Israel. (See 2 Sam. 5 : 5-7.) To begin with, then, we stand upon common ground respecting the application of the word Ariel — Ariel is Jerusalem. This furnishes the key by which we may unlock the door that shall lead out into the open sunlight of truth. ''Woe to Ariel, to Ariel, the city where David dwelt; add ye year to year; let them kill sacrifices. Yet I will distress Ariel, and there shall be heaviness and sorrow. And it shall be unto me as Ariel." (Verses 1 and 2.) (189) 190 TEE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF 2rORMOXISM According to this reading a comparison is here in- troduced between Ariel, or Jerusalem, and some other land or people, who should become unto the Lord AS Ariel. Where is this land? Who are the people here described? These are very important questions in Mormon theology, and so Mr. Kelley con- cludes that, "We have presented in these texts what may be termed an old and a new Ariel." As it was with the '* old Ariel," so shall it be with the new. To locate the land of this new Ariel — this new Jerusalem — is a labor of love very dear to the hearts of all Latter Day Saints, for the reason that everything Mormon depends upon it. "Woe to the laud shadowing with wings, which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia." (Isa. 18: 1.) This prophecy, according to Mormon exegesis, re- lates to North and South America, which lie between the world's two great oceans, expanded like the " shadowing wings " of some great tropic-bird. Even the character of the government which should finally prevail in " the land shadowing with wings" is supposed to be indicated. The great American eagle, whose wide-spread, " shadowing wings " in our coat-of-arms, representing the escutcheon of Ameri- can liberty, is supposed to have been foreseen by the prophet. Upon the land " shadowing with wings, " or Amer- ica, the "New Ariel" of Mr. Kelley's imagination is located. The Ariel of the West, according to this view, must share the fate of the Ariel of the East, that is, it must be " brought down " by a powerful foe, and should, like a familiar spirit, "speak out of the ground." This can only be accomplished, we are THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MO R MONISM 191 told, by means of a written history, concealed for ages, but at last brought to light by miraculous power. The Book of Mormon, it must be borne in mind, professes to contain the "written history" of this new Ariel. The "Nephites " were a people '* terrible from their beginning hitherto" (Isa. 18: 2), but were exterminated by their more wicked brethren, the "Lamanites," about A. D. 420. The account of this war of extermination, together with their forms of religion, was written on metallic plates, brass and gold, and were concealed by Moroni, one of the Nephite prophets, and the only survivor of his race, and were finally discovered and translated by Joseph Smith, in fulfillment of the 29th chapter of Isaiah. This theory, it must be confessed, is indeed fine; and if the theory is sustained by the facts, it amounts to a very strong presumption in favor of Mormonism. But if the facts are oijposed to the theory, then the whole argument breaks down, and Joseph Smith stands revealed an impostor and the Book of Mor- mon a fraud. Will the theory bear the test of truth? We shall see. If the country described in Isaiah 18: 1, as "the land shadowing with wings," be America, and if the 29th chapter relates to events that were to transpire on this continent, and which, as a matter of fact, did take place as predicted, then all candid people will readily concede the fact that the Book of Mormon is probably true. But if the "land shadowing with wings" is shown to be not the land of America, but some other land. 192 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM and if it shall transpire that the events described in the 29th chapter of Isaiah relate not to the people of ancient America, but to the people of Israel, then the Book of Mormon cannot be true, and Latter Day Saints should frankly admit the fact, confess their error, and openly renounce the heresy. Is America the land shadowing with wings? Let us see. " Woe to the land shadowing with wings which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia.''^ The land here described lies beyond the rivers of Ethiopia from Palestine, where the prophet resided. What direction is Ethiopia from Jerusalem? Directly souths as may be seen by any good map of Africa. The "rivers of Ethiopia" are the rivers of Africa, the Nile and its tributaries. Hence, the land de- scribed is Egypt, not America. In further proof of this we read : ** And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall hiss for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypl^ and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria." (Isa. 7: 18.) Perhaps a more accurate rendering of the passage in question would be: *' Woe to the land of the rus- tling of wings." Concerning this, and in answer to questions relative to this and other Scriptures, Ira Maurice Price, Ph. D., Associate Professor of Semitic Languages and Literatures in the University of Chica- go, says: " ' The land of the rustling of wings ' is Egypt, full of buzzing flies, gnats, etc., and the last passage [Isa. 7: 18, quoted above,] compared with hosts of warriors of Egypt and Ethiopia. * Beyond the rivers THE DOCTIilXES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 193 of Ethiopia,' i. e., extending southward even through and beyond Ethiopia to remotest lands." Confirmatory of this view, the character of the **woe" pronounced in the 18th chapter is thus described : *' Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia; so shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and bare- foot." (Isa. 20: 3,4.) It is thus shown to be simply impossible that Amer- ica can be "the land shadowing with wings," for the very cogent reason that the land thus described lies SOUTH of Palestine, while America, as every school- boy knows, is directly west. No amount of sophistry or special pleading can change the facts of geography involved in this ques- tion, and so all this fine-spun theory, together with the fabric reared upon it, falls to the ground a hope- less mass of ruin, never again to be reconstructed. 13 CHAPTER XXII. THE BOOK THAT IS SEALED. The book that is sealed— Isaiali, chapter twenty-nine — ^The words of a book — Presented to Prof. Charles Anthon — A woe pronounced against Jerusalem — The city where David dwelt — Inspired trans- lation — Different rendering of Isaiah twenty-nine — Quotation from — Comments — A safe rule — Isaiah twenty-nine relates to the destruction of Jerusalem — Ten propositions — No prophecy con- cerning a book — A question of exegesis and history — The prophecy of Isaiah concerning the destruction of Jerusalem literally ful- filled — Revolt of the ten tribes— Israel and Judah— The Assyrian captivity — A strange work. " i^ND the vision is all become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed." (Isaiah 29: 11.) Having disposed of that part of the argument which is based upon the eighteenth chapter of Isaiah, let us now return to a consideration of the twenty- ninth chapter. As already shown, the Saints believe that the "book that is sealed," mentioned at the eleventh verse of this chapter, has direct reference to the Book of Mormon. When Joseph Smith had transcribed some of the *' caractors " said to be found on the plates, he trans- lated a part of them and gave them to Martin Harris, a farmer of limited attainments, with instructions to call upon Professor Charles Anthon, of New York, and see if he could read them. '* Harris carried out his instructions." Handing the transcript to the Professor, with a request to read it, he is represented as saving he could not translate them, but if he had (194) THE DOCTIilXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMQXISM 195 the phites he might be able to do so. Upou being informed that " a part of the plates were sealed," the Professor replied, ** I cannot read a sealed book." How beautifully this story seems to fit the case. Isaiah says the ''words of a book," not the book, were "delivered to one that is learned," but he could not read them; while the " book " was "delivered to him that is not learned," who should be able to read it. The most distinguished Professor of Semitic Lan- guages of that day could not decipher the "words" of the book, but the entire book was read— translated by a man so lamentably ignorant of even his mother tongue that he could not correctly spell the simply word character.* How supremely ridiculous and absurd ! Perhaps it is unfortunate that I should have referred to this fact, for the proverbial illiteracy of the boy prophet is one of the stock arguments em- ployed to prove the " marvelous work and a wonder " to be of God. But we shall see about this later. If these " plates " were written in Egyptian, Arabic, Assyrian and Aramaic, and were translated by a man wholly ignorant of these languages, it would amount to an argument absolutely unanswerable; and this is exactly what it is claimed has been done. Upon the truthfulness of this claim depend the veracity of the Book of Mormon and the prophetic character of Joseph Smith, its pretended translator. If these signs or letters are not "the true charac- ters," if they shall prove to be but a clumsy effort to deceive, then we have in this act exhibited an amount of that modern commodity known as " cheek " which stands without a parallel in the annals of all time. 196 THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM The fact is, the twenty-ninth chapter of Isaiah bears no more relation to the Book of Mormon or the inhabitants of pre-historic America than does Homer's Iliad to the aboriginal inhabitants of Australia or the nomadic tribes of Asia. If the prophecy of this chapter does not apply to America and its former inhabitants, to what or to whom does it have reference? It related to Jerusa- lem and the children of Israel, as we shall show most conclusively. That the '* woe," or calamity, predicted of Ariel relates to Jerusalem, perhaps all are agreed; but in order that no possible disagreement may arise respect- ing this primal question, the following is introduced in its support: " In Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months; and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty and three years over all Israel and Judah." (2 Sam. 5: 5.) David took the city from the Jebusites about the year 1043 B. C. After this it was called Zion, or "the city of David " (verse 7), and here the warrior-king continued to dwell till the day of his death. This removes all doubt as to the fact that "Ariel" is Jerusalem, " the city where David dwelt." Joseph Smith's " Inspired Translation" makes this point stronger, if possible, than does the Common Version. In this translation of the Bible it is no unusual thing to find verses added, and in many instances entire chapters are manufactured out of whole cloth and added to the word of God. But as we design devoting a chapter to this subject we dismiss it for the present with a mere reference to the fact that in both the Old and New Testaments the THE DOCTBIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 197 authorized texts are changed to suit the fancy of the *' translator ! " That Joseph's translation confines this prophecy to Jerusalem and her people will clearly appear as we proceed. Had Mr. Kelley consulted Joseph's "In- spired Translation " and governed his remarks accord- ingly, he could not have given expression to his theory concerning the " old and the new Ariel," for Joseph's rendering utterly demolishes the very foun- dation upon which his theory is founded. Instead of making a comparison between Ariel and some people who should become unto the Lord as Ariel, ^. e., the extinct races of America, the "new translation " lays the whole scene of the prophecy at Jerusalem. In order to a correct understanding of the purport of this so-called translation, let us substitute Jerusa- lem for Ariel, as, meaning the same, they may be used interchangeably, and it will read thus: "Woe to Jerusalem, to Jerusalem, the city where David dwelt? Add ye year to year, let them kill sac- rifices. Yet I will distress Jerusalem, and there shall be heaviness and sorrow ; for thus hath the Lord said unto me. It shall be unto Jerusalem ; that I the Lord will camp against her round about, and will lay siege against her with a mount, and I will raise forts against her. "And she shall be brought down, and shall speak out of the ground, and her speech shall be low out of the dust; and her voice shall be as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and her speech shall whisper out of the dust." (I. T., Isa. 29: 1-4). Thus it may be seen that the "woe" relates to Jerusalem, and to Jerusalem only. 198 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM If the argument be made that the " speaking out of the ground," and ** whispering out of the dust," refer to the "written history" of the people upon whom the predicted calamity should fall; and if this "book," mentioned in verse 11, is to betaken "out of the ground," then the book containing such written history must be discovered in the region where the calamity occurred. As this particular "woe" relates to Jerusalem and her people, the Book of Mormon cannot be the "book" described. The Saints believe that the " coming forth of the Book of Mormon," as they term it, completely and most perfectly fulfills this prophecy in every minute particular. If it does, then the Saints are right, and the Book of Mormon is true; but if they are wrong in their exegesis, the book cannot be a revelation from God. The advocates of Mormonism are persistent in urging that "no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.^^ (2 Pet. 1: 20). The rule is a good one and perfectly safe. Keep- ing this rule in view let us inquire: Does the Book of Mormon contain an account of the land and people upon whom this calamity is pronounced? If so, then it must give an account of the overthrow and desola- tion of Jerusalem, and the captivity of the people of Israel. This conclusion is inevitable, for the reason that no other people are descynhed in Isaiah's proph- ecy. But if the book does not describe the desolation of Jerusalem, but a people quite distinct from the Jews and upon the American continent, then it is per- fectly clear that there can be no connection between THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOEMOXISAT lUD this prophec}' and the events described in the Book of Mormon. The "Inspired Translation" being the witness, every prediction made, and every event which tran- spired, had direct reference to Jerusalem and her dis- obedient people, together with the " multitude of all the nations " that should "fight against Mount Zion," and could, therefore, have no possible reference to an extinct race of men upon this or any other conti- nent. There can be no reasonable excuse oifered, nor any intelligent reason given, for the transfer of the scene of this prophecy from Palestine, where it clearly belongs, to America, where it as certainly was never intended to apply. In order to emphasize this point and render it plain beyond a doubt, let us item- ize the events predicted in the order in which they occur, as follows: 1. A "woe" is pronounced against Jerusalem, "the city where David dwelt." 2. This woe was to be the direct result of a besieg- ing army: "I will camp against thee round about, and will raise forts against thee." 3. Jerusalem shall be "brought down," and utterly destroyed. 4. Jerusalem, after she is "brought down," shall "speak out of the ground," and shall " whisper out of the dust" (verse 4). 5. The "multitude of her strangers" shall be very numerous — "like small dust," the particles of which cannot be numbered (verse 5). 6. These " terrible ones " shall come upon them " at an instant suddenly" (verse 5). 7. Jerusalem should be visited with other great 200 THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM calamities, culminating in " flames of devouring fire" (verse 6). 8. " The multitude of all the nations that fight against Jerusalem " should finally pass away, and be- come *' as the dream of a night vision" (verses 7, 8). 9. The condition of the elewish people is then described as "drunken," and in a state of " deep sleep," their '* prophets," their "rulers and their seers" all being " covered" (verses 9, 10). 10. " The vision of all " — the prophets, the rulers, the seers and the people alike — had become clouded, and their spiritual perceptions so blunted that they could no more "read" he handwriting of God con- cerning their future than they could read the words of " a book that is sealed." (V. 11.) Thus, by ten consecutive steps — ten material and important points in this remarkable prophecy — we have reached what the Saints consider the vital and most important point in the whole chapter, namely, " a hook that is sealed.''^ They treat this as a prophecy setting forth a real, genuine hooh that should actually and really be taken out of the ground. Now, I am about to make a state- ment that may astonish them, but which is neverthe- less true, and that statement is simply this: I affirm, and do so without the least fear of success- ful contradiction, that the twenty-ninth chapter of Isaiah contains no prophecy whatever concerning a ^'book,'' much less that 3, ''sealed book" should, at any time, or by any person or persons, be taken " out of the ground." This proposition is easily understood, containing no ambiguity; and if it is erroneous, let the error be shown. Point to chapter and verse containing THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM 201 a prophecy concerning a '' book " to " come forth " at any time or in any place, and thus silence, once for all, every opposition. But aside from this, suppose we proceed to ex- amine the question on the hypothesis that a " book" — a real book — was actually to "come forth" out of the ground, and see how much it supports the claim made for the Book of Mormon. If this supposed book is to be understood as containing the written history of the people described in the prophecy, and was to be taken out of the ground in the locality where the events predicted were to transpire, then we cannot escape the conclusion that the " book " must make its appearance at Jerusalem, that being the place designated, and not in America. If the "three wit- ness " were, according to the " Inspired Translation," to add their testimony to the genuineness of the book, then, they, too, must have been residents of Jerusa- lem, where the " book " was to make its appearance. But instead of this the plates from which it is claimed Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mor- mon are said to have been discovered near Palmyra, N. Y., the home of Martin Harris, one of the " three witnesses." If the Book of Mormon contains a history of the destruction of " Ariel," the city where David dwelt, in Palestine, how came that history to be deposited in " Indian Hill," New York? Will you please explain? " But," you reply, " we do not claim that the Book of Mormon gives an account of the destruction of Jerusalem, but of another people, who were to be unto the Lord as Ariel." Very well, then, accepting your explanation, the Book of Mormon cannot be the scaled book of the twenty-ninth chapter of Isaiah, 202 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISAC the words of which were to be given to " him that is learned," for the very cogent reason that the " In- spired Translation," as already shown, locates the entire scene of this prophecy at Jerusalem. To briefly summarize, the " Inspired Translation " describes the destruction of Jerusalem and the deso- lation of Palestine, while the Book of Mormon de- scribes a series of wars between two peoples, the des- olation of the entire land "northward and south- ward," and the final extinction of the more civilized of the two contending races. It is impossible, then, that the Book of Mormon could have " come forth " in fulfillment of a prophecy made in reference to a different place, and a different people, from the place and people described by the Book of Mormon. It seems to me simply impossible that the Saints can extricate themselves from the difficulty in which these undeniable facts inevitably place them. If Isaiah's prophecy had its fulfillment in what they are pleased to call "the coming forth of the Book of Mormon," then the extraordinary claims they make for the book are seemingly valid, and should be allowed. But, on the other hand, if the facts do not justify the conclusions, then surely the Saints ought to abandon their claim for the divine origin of the book, and account for its existence in some other way. This whole matter, then, is thus narrowed down to a question of exegesis and history. From the foregoing summary of the principal points of this prophecy, it is shown most conclusively that the prediction of every event is made of Jerusa- lem and her people, otherwise the " Inspired Transla- tion " is a failure and a fraud. As lovers of truth, and as fair and unbiased students of prophecy and THE DOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM 20S Biblical history, we are forced to the undeniable con- clusion that every, line of this wonderful prophecy had its complete accomplishment in the subsequent history of the Israelitish people in the utter destruc- tion of their beloved city by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, some 588 years before our era, and 124 years after the prediction was made. That these are facts, not mere assertions, we shall now endeavor to prove. Latter Day Saints are very fond of quoting, when testing the doctrines and faith of others, the following words of Isaiah: " To the law and the testimony, for if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isa. 8: 20.) And I am quite sure they cannot object if we apply this test to their interpretation of the passage under considera- tion. Holding the advocates of this view to the rule they prescribe for others, let us now proceed to a very careful consideration of the facts relative to the ac- complishment of this remarkable prophecy. In order to a correct understanding of the prediction, it will be necessary that we understand the condition of both Judah and Israel at the time the prophet wrote. Ac- cording to the most authentic chronological data, Isaiah began his prophetic career in the last year of Uzziah's reign, about 758 years B. C, and " prophe- sied during the space of about forty-five years." (Sacred Biography and History, by Tiffany, page 188.) At this time "two tribes," or the Jews, dwelt in Judah, with headquarters at Jerusalem, while the ten tribes, or the house of Israel, occupied the land of Israel, with Samaria as their capital city. This divi- sion among the descendants of Abraham occurred at 204 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM the time of the revolt in the days of Rehoboam, in the year 976, B. C, or two hundred and eighteen years before Isaiah began to prophesy. Let us now take our stand along with this great prophet at Jerusalem, the place of his residence, and follow his prediction closely. The first thing of im- portance to claim our attention will be the question, Of whom does the prophet speak, and against whom is his " woe " directed? In order to avoid the possi- bility of any disagreement upon this point, suppose we let the prophet answer the question in his own language : *'The vision of Isaiah the son of Amos, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. ^^ (Isa. 1:1.) His first complaint seems to be of the rebellious, and disobedient spirit of the Israelites dwelling at Samaria. Of them he says: " I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me." V. 2. After enumerating their many sins and greater iniquities, the prophet then makes the follow- ing specific declaration concerning them : *' Your country is desolate, your cities are hurned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your pres- ence, and it is desolate^ as overthrown by strangers." (Verse 7.) And so with alternate warnings and ex- hortations to repentance, he continues, to the close of the chapter, to plead with the rebellious house of Israel. Substantially the same prediction is made by Hosea, who was contemporaneous with Isaiah, in the follow- ing language: " Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword." (Hosea 13: 16.) Were these predictions by both Isaiah and Hosea, THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOyiSM 205 concerning the people of Samaria, literally and cir- cumstantially fulfilled? If they were, then we may reasonably expect those made concerning Judah and Jerusalem to have a like accomplishment. That they were fulfilled in a very striking and literal manner, every student of Biblical history is fully aware. From the time this prophecy was made, let us pass over a period of some thirty-seven years and see what then transpired. In the year 721 B. C, which was in the time of Hoshea's reign over Israel at Samaria, Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, came up against Sama- ria and "besieged it three years," and, "In the ninth year of Hoshea, the king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah and Habor by the river of Gazam, and in the cities of the Medes." (2 Kings 17: 3-6.) So important is this fact of history, that the histo- rian, in chapter eighteen, verses 9 to 11, repeats it with emphasis. By the armies of this invading king their land was literally " devoured by strangers," their cities made desolate, and the once powerful armies of Israel led away captive into Assyria. Can anything be plainer? Can any fact be suscep- tible of stronger proof, than that that part of the prophecy of Isaiah which relates to Samaria has been completely and literally fulfilled in the historic events just related? It seems impossible that anyone who believes this — and who can doubt it? — can for one moment doubt that the prophecies relating to " Judah and Jerusalem," as recorded in the twenty-ninth chapter of Isaiah, must be fulfilled in the same strik- ing and literal manner. And that such is the case, I shall now proceed to prove beyond question or doubt. Having disposed of that part of the prophec}^ 206 THE DOCTRTXES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM which relates to Israel and Samaria, let us now turn our attention to that portion which describes Judah and Jerusalem. In order that he may not be misunderstood, and so misrepresented, the prophet again assures us in chap- ter two, verse one, that his prediction is '' concerning Judah and Jerusalem." Again in the twenty-eighth chapter we have the still further assurance that he speaks of the Jewish people and of Jerusalem in par- ticular, as recorded in the following language: ''Wherefore hear the word of the Lord, ye scornful men, that rule Jerusalem. For the Lord shall rise up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the val- ley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, his strange work; and bring to pass his act, his strange act." (Isa. 28: 14, 21.) That Jerusalem is the subject of the prophecy is now placed beyond doubt, and that the " strange work" was to be wrought in her midst, and the "strange act" was to be directed against these *' scornful men that rule Jerusalem," and incidentally against the whole people, is rendered equally appar- ent. While this, to my mind, is perfectly clear, I am quite aware that Latter Day Saints view it very dif- ferently. The Eeorganized Church maintains, as also do all of the various factions which have grown up out of the ruins of the original Mormon Church, that this ''strange work," and this " strange act," have been accomplished in the revelation of the Book of Mormon, through Joseph Smith, and the " restora- tion " of the Apostolic church and doctrine, all of which is predicted in the 29th chapter of Isaiah. Let us now proceed to examine this matter in a straightforward, honest way, and see who is right. CHAPTER XXIII. The Babylonian Captivity— Nebuchadnezzar — Siege of Jerusalem — Raised forts against the city — Terms of Isaiah's prophecy — Jeremiah records its fulfillment— The nations that fight against Mount Zion— Become as the dream of a night vision— Have all passed away — Wise and prudent men — The blindness of all Israel — The Chaldean army besieges Jerusalem — Josephus describes it — Downfall of the Jewish kingdom— A marvelous work and a wonder. It will be quite unnecessary for me to enter into details as to the subject matter of this prophecy, as this has already been done. It will, therefore, be regarded as quite sufficient to inquire as to whether the prediction of Isaiah has or has not had its accom- plishment in the subsequent history of Jerusalem and her people. The place described as the scene of this prophecy is Jerusalem, "the city where David dwelt." At the time ih.Q "woe" was pronounced Jotham was proba- bly king of Judah. The city was to be in a state of " distress" because of the '* multitude of strangers " that should "camp against her round about," and should " raise forts against her." This means that a great army, irresistible in force and numbers, was to " lay siege " against this stronghold of Judah, and as the result of this persistent attack Jerusalem was to be "brought down " and should be made tb " speak out of the ground." Says the prophet concerning Jerusalem : "Thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be as of one that hath a familiar spirit, (207) 208 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM out of the ground, and th}' speech shall whisper out of the dust" (verse 4.) "Thou shalt be visited of the Lord of hosts with thunder, and with earth- quake, and with great noise, with storm and tempest, and the/ame of devouring fire " (verse 6.) With the "woe" thus briefly outlined, let us now carefully examine subsequent history for evidences of its accomplishment. Some eight years after Samaria had been taken by Shalmanesser, king of Ass3'ria, Sennacherib, his suc- cessor to the throne of the Assyrian Empire, "came up against all the fenced cities of Judah and took them," and placed Hezekiah, king of Judah, under heavy tribute, but failed to subjugate the city of Jerusalem. (See 2 Kings 18: 13-16.) His army de- feated by the display of miraculous power, Senna- cherib returned to Nineveh, where he was shortly afterwards assassinated by one of his sons. The good king Hezekiah died about the 3'ear 710 B. C, and his wicked son Manasseh succeeded him, and reigned in his stead. Under his rule the people became very wicked, so much so that the Lord said concerning them: "Behold, I am bringing such an evil upon Jerusalem and Judah that whosoever hear- eth of it both of his ears shall tingle." (2 Kings 21 : In passing briefly over this period of Jewish history it is not in the least difficult to discover that the people became more and more corrupt until they were finally ripe for destruction. Their career of sin and wickedness was "suddenly" brought to an end by the invasion of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, during the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah. A graphic description of the terrible calamity which befell the THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 209 city may be found in the twenty-fifth chapter of 2 Kings, as follows: " And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he and all his host, against Jerusalem and pitched against it; and they huilt forts against it round about. And the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zede- kiah. And on the ninth day of the fourth month the famine prevailed in the city, and there was no bread for the people of the land. And the city was broken up, and all the men of Avar fled by night by the way of the gate between the walls, which is by the king's garden, . . . and the king went the way toward the plain. " And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebu- chadnezzar, king of Babylon, came Nebuzar-adan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Baby- lon, unto Jerusalem: and he burnt the house of the Lord, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man's house burnt he with fire. And all the army of the Chaldees that were with the captain of the guard brake down the walls of Jerusalem round about. *'Now the rest of the people that were left in the city, and the fugitives that fell away to the king of Babylon, with the remnant of the multitude, did Nebuzar-adan the captain of the guard carry away. So Judah was carried away out of the land.'" (2 Kings 25: 1-4, 8-11, 21.) To the above Jeremiah adds his testimony in the following language : " In the ninth year of Zedekiah, king of Judah, in 14 210 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM the tenth month, came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babj'lon and all his army against Jerusalem, and they besieged it. And the Chaldeans burned the king's house and the houses of the people with fire, and brake down the walls of Jerusalem." (Jer. 39: 1, 8.) *' And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he and all his army, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it, and hidlt forts against it round about. " So the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah. And in the fourth month, in the ninth day of the month, the famine waxed sore in the city, so that there was no bread for the people of the land. Then the city was broken ?fj9." (Jer. 52: 4-7.) When we pause to consider the fact that Jeremiah, one of the witnesses quoted above, was among the captives, and, therefore, an eye witness to the events described, and the further fact that the "woe" described by this prophet occurred nearly one hun- dred and twenty years after the *'woe" predicted against Jerusalem by the prophet Isaiah, there remains little room for any doubt that one prophet was but writing the history of an event predicted by the other. At the risk of being regarded as somewhat tedious, I will venture to call attention to the striking similar- ity of the specific terms employed by the two writers. 1. Isaiah says his *' woe" was predicted of Jerxi- salem, "the city where David dwelt." Jeremiah says he was writing of a calamity which befell that city. 2. Isaiah says, "There shall be heaviness and (verse 2). THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 211 Jeremiah says, "The famine was sore in the city, so that there was no bread for the people of the land," thus causing heaviness and sorroiv (verse 6). 3. Isaiah says, " I will ca7np against thee round about " (verse 3). Jeremiah says, "Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came . . against Jerusalem and intched (cam])ed) against it " (verse 4). 4. Isaiah saj^s, " I will lay siege against thee with a mount " (verse 3). Jeremiah says, "So the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah" (verse 5). 5. Isaiah says, "I will raise forts against thee" (verse 3). Jeremiah says, "And . . . Nebuchadnezzer . built forts against it round about" (verse 4). 6. Isaiah says, "Thou shalt be brought down'' (verse 4). Jeremiah says, "Then the city was brohen up.''' 7. Isaiah says, " Thou shalt be visited of the Lord of hosts with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest, and the Jiaine oj devouring fire ' ' (verse 6 ) . Jeremiah says the city was utterly destroyed by fire: " Now, in the fifth month, and the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchad- nezzar, king of Babylon, came Nebuzar-adan, captain of the guard which served the king of Bab^don, into Jerusalem, and burned the house of the Lord, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusaletn^ and all the houses of the great men, burned he with fire \ And all the army of the Chaldeans, that were with 212 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM the captain of the guard, brake kown the walls of Jerusalem round about." (Jer. 52: 12-14). Here we have seven points of identity and agree- ment between the prophecy of Isaiah, and its f uliill- ment in the recorded history of its accomplishment by Jeremiah. i Add to the testimony of Jeremiah that of 2 Kings 25:8-10 — the language being exactly that of the prophet just quoted — and we have evidence absolutely unquestionable, so perfect is the agreement between the prophecy and its subsequent fulfillment, and proves, beyond the possibility of a reasonable doubt, that the prediction of Isaiah 29 : 1-4 had its complete accomplishment in the utter destruction of "Ariel, the cit}^ where David dwelt," the captivit}^ of the Jews, and the overthrow of their kingdom. Should any additional proof be required, it may very readily be furnished in the history of the nations engaged in this terrible work of desolation. It is not infrequently the case that God punishes the wicked nations or individuals employed as a means in the execution of divine justice. Of this fact we have a very striking illustration in the subsequent over- throw and subjugation of the Babylonian Empire. But before passing to a brief consideration of this bit of history, let us follow this prophecy of Isaiah a little further; for as I now view it, the prophecy of Babylon's destruction is recorded in verses seven and fourteen, inclusive, of the twenty-ninth chapter. The particular reason offered for the careful exami- nation of this matter may be found in the fact that the Saints place, as I think, an unwarranted con- struction upon the passages to be reviewed. Along with all their leading minds, such as Blair, Kelley, THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM 213 Porscutt, Lambert and Derry, Latter Day Saintt^ maintain that the later portions of this chapter refer to the spiritually blind and "drunken" condition of the religious world at the present age; while others think quite differently. To what, in reality, are but flights of Oriental imagery and comparison, they give a literal construction. But these things we may con- sider in their proper place, if time and space will permit. At the close of the sixth verse, after declaring the utter destruction of Jerusalem by " flames of devour- ing fire," the prophet proceeds to unfold the destiny of the Chaldean army, and the overthrow of the Babylonian Empire, who were the direct instruments employed in the destruction of the " City of David," in the following graphic, yet highly poetic, style: *'And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel, even all that fight against her and her munition [fortification], and that distress her, shall be as a dream of a night vision.'' (Isa. 29: 7). Let us now inquire: Who are to become as the " dream of a night vision? " The answer cannot be misunderstood. It is "the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel" — Jerusalem— the nations of Babylon, Syria, Egypt and Assyria, who at different periods were engaged in war against Jeru- salem and Judah, but specifically that of Babylon. Their extinction was to be so nearly absolute as to render them to future ages as " the dream of a night vision;" even as of "an hungry man," who thinks he is eating, but who only awakes to find himself hungry still. To show beyond doubt that tliis is a represen- tation of the future condition of these nations, the prophet concludes the eighth verse by saying: "So 214 THE DOCTBINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM shall all the nations be that fight against Mount Zion." I wish to call particular attention to the fact that this prediction is made concerning the nations that should fight against "Mount Zion," and not against a people who, at some remote age of the past, may have lived and warred with one another upon the American continent. These nations have all passed away, and have become, indeed, as the *' dream of a night vision." Not one of them remains to tell the story of their former greatness. Continuing, at the ninth versee, the prophet exclaims: *' Stay yourselves, and wonder; cry ye out and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink." Who are represented as being *' drunken," and who " stagger? " Let the next verse answer; and remem- ber, the language is addressed to the inhabitants of Jerusalem: "For the Lord hath poured out upon you (the Jews) the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: your prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered." (V. 10). Here we have the fact, not only as to who were to be drunken and stagger, but the, very cause of this condition. These Jews, at the time we are describ- ing, were overcome by the " spirit of deep sleep, ^^ thus closing their eyes, so that to them their "prophets and seers" were "covered," or hidden from their view. None escaped the terrible drowsiness of this overpowering spirit of sleep. It included in its sombre folds every phase of Jewish life: even their " rulers and seers " were involved to a very remark- able degree. Oppressed by this "spirit of deep sleep," THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MOEMOSISM 215 whenever they attempted to move they would inevit- ably and unavoidably " stagger." Eespecting the lamentable condition of both priest and people, the learned as well as the unlearned, the prophet, in the following verse says: "And the vision of all, [including their " rulers and seers,"] is become unto you as the words of a book [the marginal reading is letter'] that is sealed, which men delivered to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith, I cannot, for it is sealed. And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned." (Verses 11, 12.) Let us now proceed to analyze this text and see if we can learn the real facts therein set forth. We learn : 1. That a certain people were reduced to a state of drunken stupor, not from wine or strong drink, but from a condition of " deep sleep " into which they had fallen, as the result of sin. . 2. That this condition was general, including many of their prophets, their rulers and their seers. 3. The people referred to were the people of an- cient Israel, but specifically the Jews. 4. That the " learned " were reduced to the same lamentable condition as that of the unlearned. They could neither see nor read the words of the letter. Clearly, and undoubtedly, all that is meant by the eleventh verse is, that the people were morally de- based and spiritually blind,— so blind, indeed, that they were as utterly incapable of reading the designs of God concerning themselves, as the learned man would be to " read a letter that is sealed," or for the "unlearned " man to read the same letter if the seal 21G THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM were broken and the letter laid open before his eyes. The fact is perfectly clear that neither could read a letter under these conditions; and would, therefore, blindly stagger on to the end of the road that should ultimately lead to their destruction. Because of these conditions, the prophet continues thus: " Wherefore the Lord said. Forasmuch as this people [the Jews] draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honor me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precepts of men; therefore, behold I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people^ even a marvelous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the under- standing of their prudent men shall be hid." (Verses 13, 14.) Notwithstanding their generally depraved and be- nighted condition, the Jewish people, at the time of their desolation, had a few " wise " and " prudent " men among them. A marvelous work, "even a mar- velous work and a wonder," was to be performed '* among this people," and these "wise men" fully understoood the nature of this work, and strove earn- estly to avert the pending calamity by giving them wise counsel, and exhorting them to repentance. Prominently among their "wise men" were Jere- miah, Ezekiel and Hosea. But the wisdom of their " wise men " was allowed to " perish," and the " understanding of their ^?*MC?en^ men" was "hid" from this gainsaying people be- cause of their great iniquity and their lamentable and hopeless state of blindness. At the time Isaiah delivered this wonderful proph- ecy, not one of her rulers or j)rinces believed Jeru- THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONTSM 217 salem could be taken by an enemy, so perfect was their confidence in the strength of her fortifications and the impregnability of her walls. From the time when David, the great warrior-king, first established his capital here, till the time of Isaiah's prophecy, it had successfully resisted the assaults of every enemy, no matter what his strength, till it had become the settled conviction that no power on earth could bring her under subjection, and render her tributary to a Gentile nation. But notwithstanding all this the Lord said, "Behold I will proceed to do a marvelous work, even a marvelous work and a wonder mnong this people.''^ Even when the Chaldean army had encamped ''roundabout" the city, and had proceeded to "raise forts" against her, building mounds, says Josephus, in height, equal to the height of the walls of the city, those within had no fears of being over- powered and defeated by this great " multitude of strangers." I quote from Josephus upon this point af follows : "Now the King of Babylon was very intent and earnest upon the siege of Jerusalem ; and he erected towers upon great banks of earth, and from them repelled those that stood upon the walls: he also made a great number of such banks round about the whole city, whose height was equal to those walls. However, those that were within bore the siege with courage and alacrity, for they were not discouraged, either by the famine or the pestilential distemper, but were of cheerful minds in the prosecution of the war. . . And this siege they endured for eighteen months, until they were destroyed by the famine, and by the darts which the enemy threw at them 218 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM from the towers." (Antiq.Book 10, cli.8,pp. 253, 254). Nothing, perhaps, could appear more marvelous to this very confident people than to see the victorious Chaldean army enter the city, after having battered down her walls, and to witness the complete over- throw of their proud kingdom, and behold the dese- cration and destruction of their magnificent temple by *' flames of devouring fire;" and yet it was done. This "marvelous work and a wonder," predicted by Isaiah, was accomplished in a most striking and literal manner, as we have just seen by the testimony of both Jeremiah, the prophet, and Flavins Josephus, the historian. Having witnessed the terrible devastation of his beloved city, and the reduction of his people to a state of servitude and bondage, the prophet mourn- fully exclaims, as if in great surprise: "How doth the city sit solitary that was full of people! how is she become as a widow! she that was great among the nations, and princess among the provinces, how is she become tributary! " (Lam. 1:1). As a reason assigned for this distressed condition of his people, Jeremiah says: "Jerusalem hath grievously sinned; therefore she is removed. . . . Her filthiness is in her skirts ; she remembereth not her last end ; therefore she came down wonderfully : she hath no comforter." (Vs. 8, 9). Isaiah predicted of Jerusalem, "Thou shalt be brought down; " and Jeremiah records the fact that "she came down wonderfully." That it is not forcing the sense of the passage in Isaiah to say the "marvelous work and a wonder" can be nothing more nor less than the work of deso- lation just described, will be rendered apparent from. THE DOCTBINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 219 the following declaration of the prophet Jeremiah : "The kings of the earth, and all the inhabitants of the world, w^ould not have believed that the adver- sary and the enemy should have entered into the gates of Jerusalem." (Lam. 4: 12). To Jeremiah, as well as to "the prophets, the rulers, and the seers," it was a '* marvelous " thing that the "enemy" should have "entered into the gates of Jerusalem." Whatever is "marvelous" is at the same time a ivonder. Hence, the Lord did a " marvelous work, even a marvelous work and a won- der," when he permitted the enemy to enter into the gates of the beloved city and batter down her walls, burn with "flames of devouring fire" the beautiful and costly temple ; rob the house of the Lord of its magnificent treasure, and carry the daughters of Zion away captive into Babylon. We venture the assertion that not in all history can there be found a circumstance that looks so much like a complete and circumstantial fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy as this. Certainly the vague theory concerning the Book of Mormon does pot contain one single element of its accomplishment. Every material point advanced in its support is seriously in question. Not one thing claimed by its advocates is conceded. Not a scholar of the century, the most advanced period of the world's history, has ever given it his support. The entire premise is founded in the most wild and reckless speculation of an uncul- tivated mind. Nothing is proved. All is assumed. But this cannot be affirmed of the present argu- ment. The premise is a clear, w-ell-defined statement of prophecy, and the conclusion derived from the premise is supported by plain, unquestionable facts of history. CHAPTER XXIV. PROFESSOR ANTHON AND MARTIN HARRIS. Professor Anthon and Martin Harris— The "words of a book" — Joseph Smith's transcript presented to the Professor— Read this, I pray thee— I cannot read a sealed book — Joseph Smith, not Martin Harris, made the statement— Times and Seasons for May 2, 1842— Mr. Kelley states the case— The Professor could not decipher the characters— Characters were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic— Self-contradictory — Correctly translated— Professor Anthon's statement — Contradicts Mr, Harris — No other witnesses— The statements compared — Smith-Harris testi- mony incompetent. Having discussed that portion of the question which relates to Isaiah's prophecy and its fulfillment in the history of the Israelitish people, I wish now to take up the claim respecting the presentation of certain characters by Martin Harris to Professor Charles Anthon, of New York City, for examination by that gentleman. These characters are said to have been transcribed from the plates of the Book of Mormon by Joseph Smith. This transcript was taken to the city and presented to the Professor, with the request to decipher them. This transcript is claimed to be the *' words of a book," mentioned in Isaiah 29: 11, and hence the fulfillment of the prophecy. As to the object of this interview all parties are agreed. But as to what Avas said and done at the time there is quite a difference. The statements of Pro- fessor Anthon differ very materially from those made by Mr. Harris. The statement of Mr. Harris has never been verified; in fact, there is no evidence that (220) THE DOCTBIXES AND DOGMAS OF MORMOXISM 22L he ever made the statement attributed to him. The document is open to at least two serious objections, namely : 1. No competent witness has left his testimony concerning what transpired, except the Professor himself — no proof that "the words of a book " were presented to Mr. Anthon with a request to read them. If so, who is the witness? and where is his testimony? 2. No competent witness has ever said that Pro- fessor Anthon admitted that he could not read or decipher the characters presented to him. If so, who is the witness? when did he testify? and where is his testimony recorded? These are questions material to the issue. If it transpires that no competent witness has ever testified to the material points in this controversy, the entire case must fail for want of proof. As to the first count in the allegation, it is claimed that, in accord- ance with Isaiah 29: 11, " the words of a book" were presented to Professor Anthon, who was asked to read them, but who, upon learning that a miracle was in some way connected with the discovery of the plates from which the characters were transcribed, and a part of which were sealed, said, " I cannot read a sealed book." (See Presidency and Priesthood, page 203.) In the circumstances of this visit, it is claimed, were fulfilled that portion of Isaiah's prophecy which relates to "the book that is sealed." The point we wish to examine in a fair, careful manner is this: Do the facts, as gleaned from the testimony of the witnesses, sustain the allegation? Did Professor Anthon admit that he could not deci- pher the characters presented to him, as claimed? 222 THE DOCTRIXES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM As a matter of fact, this is the only answer he could have made in order to meet the demands of this par- ticular case. Had he professed to be able to " read " the words of the so-called '* sealed book," the object of Mr. Harris' visit to the Professor would have been signall}' defeated, and no semblance to a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy would be discoverable. The terms of this prediction are: '''Head this, I jDray thee: and he saith, I cannot, for it is sealed." The most casual observer cannot fail to notice the striking similarity between the form of words used by Isaiah and that put into the mouth of Professor Anthon by the man who made the so-called report of what he said. This similarity of verbal construction becomes rather significant when we consider the date of the utterance of Professor Anthon and that of the individual by whom it was reported and published. We have said no competent witness has ever testi- fied to the statement attributed to Professor Anthon. In order to determine this point, let us go to the very bottom of the whole matter, and see if Martin Harris, the man who, it is said, made the visit to Professor Anthon, has ever said one word about it. The state- ment of Harris is of first importance, as that of any other person, except Professor Anthon himself, would come under the head of "hearsay" evidence, and would therefore be excluded by any court of law on the ground of incompetency. This remarkable statement appeared for the first time in the church organ, at Nauvoo, Illinois, known as "The Times and Seasons," Vol. 3, No. 13, in the issue for May 2, 1842, and is made, not by Martin Harris, but by Joseph Smith, Jr. Instead of being the testimony of Harris, as it should be to give it THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 223 validity, it is but a second-hand statement of Joseph Smith as to what Harris had told him. If Martin Harris ever made such a statement as that attributed to him, why not produce that state- ment instead of Joseph Smith's version of it? The very fact of Harris' persistent silence upon a subject of so much importance to those concerned may very properly be construed to mean that he never made the statements attributed to him, and that as a matter of fact they may be, and probably are, but a '* revised version " of what he did say, made and published some fourteen years later by an interested party to bolster up an error and a fraud which at the time had obtained a degree of currency that brought it into public prominence. Produce the published statement of Martin Harris, well authenticated, and it will greatly strengthen this peculiar claim, and at the same time relieve its de- fenders of the necessity of quoting Joseph Smith's version of that statement. Produce it, and let the world see and read the well-attested statement of Martin Harris himself, over his own signature, that the judgment of an enlightened and intelligent pub- lic may be passed upon its merits. From an experi- ence of some thirty-five or forty years in the church, I shall venture the assertion that no such statement of Martin Harris can be produced. But, for the sake of the argument, let us admit that Harris did present the "words," or characters, to Prof. Anthon, and what do we have? Not a fulfill- ment of Isaiah 29: 11, but the exact opposite, as will appear as we proceed. Joseph Smith makes Harris to put these words into 224 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM Prof. Anthon's mouth: " I cannot read a sealed book." Every writer who has made any attempt to defend the claims of the Book of Mormon on this ground has urged as an argument full of potency, that the learned professor could not decipher the characters submitted to him. Upon this point Elder Wm. H. Kelley says : **Both he [Prof. Anthon] and Dr. Mitchell were waited upon by Mr. Harris with a copy of the charac- ters, and they examined them, just as affirmed by Mr. Harris, and as predicted in the twenty-ninth chapter of Isaiah, and eleventh verse, would be done, which is the main point in the investigation, and that neither of them was able to decipher them." (Presidency and Priesthood, p. 205.) Here we have the affirmation of Mr. Kelley, (and he is considered good authority,) that the " charac- ters " were presented to the Professor, and that neither he nor Dr. Mitchell was able to decipher them, and that their failure to do so is "the main point in the investigation." In this declaration Mr. Kelley but repeats the position, and reflects the senti- ment of all the leading minds of the denomination from its rise to the present day. With this view of the case firmly fixed in the mind, let us recall the wit- ness, Martin Harris, for re-direct examination: Question. Mr. Harris, please state what you know of a conversation which is said to have taken place some time in February, 1828, in the city of New York, between 3^ourself and one Prof. Charles Anthon, concerning the translation of certain charac- ters, which it is claimed were presented to him. Answer. " I went to the city of New York, and THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 225 presented the characters which had been transcribed, with the translation thereof to Prof. Anthon, a gen- tleman celebrated for his literarj- attainments. Prof. Anthon stated that the translation was correct; more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those that were not translated, and he said they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic, and he said they were the true characters." (Presidency and Priesthood, p. 202.) The above statement is held up to the world as the testimony of Martin Harris, but which, as a matter of fact, as I shall show, is but the unsupported state- ment of Joseph Smith. While, in their eagerness to make the prediction of Isaiah and the alleged fulfillment agree, they claim that Prof. Anthon could not decipher these charac- ters, said to be Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic, yet Joseph Smith makes Mr. Harris to assert that Prof. Anthon was not only able to do so, but that he actually did *' decipher the characters," and told the plain, "simple-hearted farmer" just what the characters were, and that they had been correctly translated, a thing utterly impossible had the profes- sor not been able to '' read," or translate, the char- acters presented to him. If this part of the Smith-Harris " testimony " can be relied upon as valid, then the twenty-ninth chapter of Isaiah could not possibly have been fulfilled in this event, for the very good reason that the " learned " man of Isaiah's prophecy says, " 1 cannot read it, for it is sealed." Instead of Mr. Anthon saying, 1 can- not, he says, I can; and. Smith and Harris being the witnesses, he did read it. What, then, becomes of the claim of Mr. Kelley, and other prominent writers, 15 22G THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM that Prof. Authon " could not decipher the char- acters? " Did it ever occur to you that this document, so much relied upon to support this claim for the Book of Mormon, is actually self -contradictory? And yet such is the case. That part of the statement just quoted, says, in substance, that Prof. Anthon could, and in fact did, '*read" the words or characters submitted to him by Martin Harris, while the latter part of the statement represents Mr. Anthon as saying, " I cannot read a sealed book." If Prof. Anthon really examined the characters and declared them to have been '' correctly translated," then it is clear to the most casual observer that he must have been able to decipher the characters in which the " sealed book " was said to have been writ- ten. If by his great learning this distinguished professor of languages could translate the characters in which it is claimed the Book of Mormon was written, then it is absurd in the extreme to urge that Joseph Smith, or any other man, should be divinely inspired in order to their translation. If Mr. Anthon did not decipher the characters pre- sented to him, then his alleged statement or certifi- cate, that said characters had been correctly transla- ted, is absolutely worthless, and amounts to nothing by way of proving what is claimed for the Book of Mormon. If he did decipher them — 'which he must have done in order to render the alleged certificate of any value — then it does not come within the range of Isaiah's prophecy, for he declares that when the *' words" THE nOCTRlXES AXD DOGMAS OF MOBMOXTSM 227 were presented, the "learned man" should say, "I cannot read them." On which horn of the dilemma, think you, will the defenders of Mormonism prefer to fall? Either will prove fatal to their cause. In view of the facts as they appear upon the face of this document, it seems clear that Prof. Anthon never could have made the statement put into his mouth by the Smith-Harris testimony, namely, " I cannot read a sealed book." This bit of testimony — if the statement may be dignified by this title — is rendered incompetent, as the witness clearly and unmistakably contradicts him- self upon what Mr. Kelley declares to be " the main point in this investigation." A witness who con- tradicts himself upon the principal point involved, invalidates his testimony, and is accounted as of no value in the establishment of the question in contro- versy. The so-called testimony of Martin Harris having been examined, let us now call the next, and only other witness ever introduced upon this point. Strange as it may appear, this witness is none other than Prof. Anthon himself. His statement is intro- duced by another party, and for an entirely different purpose, namely, to disprove the very thing sought to be established by the advocates of Mormonism. This witness was introduced by E. D. Howe, in a work called "Mormonism Unveiled," published in 1834. The object in publishing this statement of Prof. Anthon was to prove the Book of Mormon a fraud, and the " characters " but a bungling attempt to deceive the credulous. As this entire case depends upon what both parties 228 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM to the controversy call the testimony of Prof. Anthon, it becomes necessary, in order to understand the true status of this question, to here quote such part of the testimony of this witness as relates directly to the subject under consideration. Rehitiv^e to this matter, Prof. Anthon says : "Some years ago a plain, apparently simple-hearted farmer, called on me with a note from Dr. Mitchell, of our city, now dead, requesting me to decipher, if possible, a paper which the farmer would hand me, and which Dr. Mitchell confessed he had been unable to understand. When I asked the j^erson who brought it how he obtained the writing, he gave me, as far as I now recollect, the following account. A gold book, consisting of a number of plates of gold fastened together in the shape of a book by wires of the same metal, had been dug up in the north- ern part of the state of New York, and along with the book an enormous pair of gold spectacles. These spectacles were so large that if a person attempted to look through them, his two eyes would have to be turned toward one of the glasses merely, the specta- cles in question being altogether too large for the human face. ''Whoever examined the plates through the spec- tacles was enabled not only to read them, but under- stand their meaning. All of this knowledge, how- ever, was confined, at that time, to a young man who had the trunk containing the plates and spectacles in his sole possession. He put on the spectacles, or rather looked through one of the glasses, and deci- phered the characters in the book, and having com- mitted some of them to paper, handed copies to a person outside. THE DOCTRINES AXD DOaMAS OF MORMOXrSAf 229 *' This paper was in fact a singular scroll. It con- sisted of all kinds of crooked characters, disposed in columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who had before him at the time a book con- taining various alphabets, Greek and Hebrew letters, crosses and flourishes. Roman letters inverted or placed sideways, were arranged in perpendicular col- umns, and the whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle, divided into various compartments, decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican Calendar given by Humboldt." (Presidency and Priesthood, pp. 203, 204, as quoted by W. H. Kelley from K. D. Howe's works, p. 272). This quotation is made by Mr. Kelley with the view to strengthen the statement of Martin Harris con- cerning the latter's visit to Prof. Anthon, as will appear from the following: *' This statement of Martin Harris is corroborated and confirmed by Prof. Anthon himself." (Presi- dency and Priesthood, p. 203). We now have before us two several statements, namely, one made by Martin Harris in a second-hand way through Joseph Smith, as touching the visit of Harris to Prof. Anthon in 1828, with a paper con- taining a transcript of the characters from the gold plates ; and another declared to be the verified state- ment of the Professor concerning the same visit, and his conversation with the *' simple-hearted farmer" concerning the plates and characters in question. It will doubtless be observed that these statements differ materially as to what occurred on that occasion. Harris states that Prof. Anthon declared they were ''the true characters," and that said characters were 230 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM *' Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic," and that Smith's translation of them was correct. But Prof. Authon flatly contradicts this statement, as clearly appears from the above quotation. Instead of pronouncing them *' true characters," he avers that the paper presented by Harris *' was in fact a strange scroll,'' consisting of "all kinds of crooked characters," with some *' Greek and Hebrew letters (as he remembered it) crosses and flourishes," but not one word about either Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assy- rian or Arabic. Which of the statements are we to believe? It is quite apparent that the witnesses radically disagree upon the material points in issue. When witnesses disagree upon a point material to the issue, the credibility of such witnesses must be taken into consideration in order to the arrival at just conclu- sions. A witness who has no personal interest in the ques- tions involved, and who is of good moral character, is entitled to full credence. But if the witness be an interested party, or if his general veracity is bad, then his testimony must be received with a degree of allowance commensurate with existing facts. The only two witnesses in this case are Prof. Charles Anthon on the one hand, and Martin Harris on the other. To apply the above rule (and it is a rule by which courts of justice are invariably gov- erned, and the justice of which is never questioned), let us inquire whether these witnesses, or either of them, were interested, directly or indirectly, in the question now under consideration. It certainly cannot be maintained with any degree of candor that Joseph Smith and Martin Harris, the THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 231 two moving spirits in the " golden plate " scheme, were not directly interested in a matter fraught with so much importance to themselves. If they succeed, bright prospects of both wealth and renown are be- fore them. If they fail, poverty and ignominy are their lot. At the time of this interview they were unknown to the public, having nothing to lose, but everything to gain in the event of success. On the other hand. Prof. Anthon was a scholar and linguist of great renown, and a gentleman of unques- tionable veracity, having in view, as a man of letters, only the development of such facts as would tend to the general advancement of literature and science. Hence, his only interest in this paper handed him by the ** simple-hearted farmer " was to arrive at the exact truth concerning the peculiar characters which the paper contained. He had no reputation either to make or to lose in this transaction. The result of the examination could not in the least affect his standing before the general public, either as a gentle- man or scholar, and he cannot, therefore, be con- sidered in any sense an interested witness in the case. This, to the writer, seems to be a fair and impartial 'view of the matter as it now stands. I am quite aware, however, that the genuineness of Mr. Anthon's statement, as published by E. D. Howe, is questioned by those interested in the defense of the Book of Mormon, on the ground that Howe was an enemy to the Latter Day Saints. But I confess I do not see how this enmity towards the church on the part of E. D. Howe could in the least affect the statement voluntarily made by the eminent professor. It is unreasonable to believe that an obscure editor of a village paper — a man whose reputation at the time 232 TEE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM scarcely exceeded the bounds of his State — could ex- ercise such influence as to induce a man of Prof. Anthon's standing to make a statement utterly false and misleading. Besides this, Prof. Anthon's statement appeared in Mr. Howe's work as early as 1834; and if it had been a vile fabrication — a malicious, misleading false- hood — perpetrated by Mr. Howe, as has been charged, the fact might easily have been determined by simply calling Mr. Anthon's attention to the matter, and securing his denial of its truthfulness. Although the professor lived thirty-three years after the publication of Howe's book, having died in 1867, no such denial was ever sought or obtained. The presumption would, therefore, naturally be that Mr. Anthon's statement, as published by E. D. Howe, is substan- tially, if not circumstantially correct. Having briefly examined the testimony of the wit- ness, and the source through which it has been trans- mitted to us, on the one hand, let us now proceed to examine the evidence as presented by the other side, and the channels through which it comes to us. To begin w^ith, and in order to be perfectly fair, I shall concede the witnesses on both sides to be of good moral character, and that their veracity has never been questioned. As we have already seen, the testimony of Martin Harris and that of ]Prof. Anthon differ materially on very important points, and hence both cannot be true. It is* not deemed necessary to repeat the testimony of Mr. Harris, but merely to examine the channel through which we have received it. I wish again to call attention to the fact that the statement attributed to Martin Harris concerning his THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 233 interview with Prof. Anthon never saw the light of day, so far as the public is concerned, till May 2, 1842, fourteen years after the event is said to have taken place; and it was then made public, not by Martin Harris, but by Joseph Smith, the very man, above all others on earth, the most directly inter- ested. From the church organ, a weekly paper pub- lished at Nauvoo, 111., of which Joseph Smith was the editor, the following extract is quoted. Joseph Smith says : '' Some time in the month of February [1828] the aforementioned Martin Harris came to our place [in Pennsylvania], got the characters which I had drawn from the plates, and started with them to the city of New York. For what took place relative to him and the characters, I refer to his own account of the cir- cumstances, as he related them to me, after his re- turn, which was as follows: 'I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Prof. Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments.' " etc., etc. (Times and Seasons, No. 13, Vol. 3, May 2, 1842.) Thus it will be seen that the statement generally attributed to Martin Harris, is nothing more nor less than a repetition by Joseph Smith of what he says Harris told him of the alleged interview with Prof. Anthon. The legal value of this statement, as every intelligent reader knows, amounts to absolutely noth- ing, and, so far as the testimony of this witness is con- cerned, the fact is just as far from being proved as if he had never made the statement. Mr. Harris is the only competent witness on this side of the case, and 234 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM he never testified — Mr. Smith simply speaks for him. The best evidence, and, in fact, the only evidence, of which this case is susceptible, would be the solemn affirmation, or what would be still better, perhaps, the sworn statement of Mr. Harris. But no such statement or affirmation was ever obtained from him. Not a scrap of anything Martin Harris ever wrote — if he ever wrote anything on the subject — can be ad- duced in support of this claim concerning his inter- view with Prof. Anthon. Every rule, either of law or usage, will exclude Joseph Smith's statement as to what Harris said con- cerning the Anthon-Harris interview, so long as the testimony of the latter was attainable. Harris lived nearly, or quite, fortyyears 2iiievM.Y . Smith's death, in 1844, and his testimony was, therefore, easily obtain- able, had he been willing to verify Mr. Smith's state- ment as made in the Times and Seasons. As he never did this, it is clearly presumable, as well as highly probable, that he never made the statement attribu- ted to him. This view is rendered still more probable when the fact is considered that he denounced Smith and left the church several years before Mr. Smith's death. The foregoing is a brief summary of the facts as we have them from authentic Mormon sources, and prove beyond all doubt or controversy that the state- ment always attributed to Martin Harris, as a matter of fact cmne from Joseph Smith, the so-called trans- lator of the " gold plates." The testimony is thus shown to be both ex parte and hearsay, and is, therefore incompetent, and hence in- admissible. These objections do not, and indeed cannot, apply THE DOCTRINES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 235 to the testimony of Prof. Anthon, as presented to the public by E. D. Howe, for the very good reason that he made the statement himself — it is not Howe's ver- sion of it — directly to the public, and no competent witness has ever attempted to contradict him. In fact, Joseph Smith, eight years after Prof. Anthon's statement, or affidavit, was made public, was the first and only man to attempt a denial of the matters and things therein set forth, and that, too, in the very face of the fact that he had no possible chance of knowing whether the statements were true or false, he having never met Prof. Anthon, nor cor- responded with him on this very important subject. Did it ever occur to you that the perpetual silence of Martin Harris, and the method of all the leading minds of the church to "fight shy" of Prof. Anthon on this point (not one of them, so far as I know, ever having made an effort to obtain from him a state- ment confirmatory of their claim), looks just a little suspicious? Does it not look just the least bit like they were afraid his testimony \vould upset the whole theory? It certainly looks so to me. The foregoing analysis of the 29th chapter of Isaiah shows most conclusively that the prophecy has no reference whatever to America and its inhabitants, but to Jerusalem and the people of Israel. It is impossible, therefore, that the Book of Mormon can be a revelation from God, "brought forth" in ful- fillment of Isaiah's prophecy, or any other Scripture. All this talk, therefore, about "the book that is sealed," is simply and only "a cunningly devised fable," invented to bolster up a falsehood, and has no foundation in the truth. Not one fact — and facts 236 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM are said to be stubborn things — can be adduced in its support. The '•^woi^ds of a book that is sealed," as well as the "book" itself, were simply employed by the prophet as symbols to illustrate the utter blindness of the Israelitish people, as already shown, and can, therefore, have no possible reference to the visit of Martin Harris to Prof. Anthon, with the so-called words of a book, transcribed from the plates. CHAPTER XXV. TESTIMONY OF THE THREE WITNESSES. The testimony of the three witnesses— A remarkable document- Apostle Pratt's view— An immense conclusion-The witnesses not deceived— Their testimony is true or they are impostors— The line is drawn by Mormon authority-Are the witnesses unim- peachable?— Dii-ect and indirect evidence— The Mormon Church- Authority depends upon the veracity of these witnesses— An admission-A negative proposition— How established -An illus- tration. Following is the testimony of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon, and whose declarations are regarded as absolutely unanswerable. These wit- nesses say : *'Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come, that we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, his brethren, and also of the people of Jared, which came from the tower of which hath been spoken; and we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety, that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and that they have been shewn unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and (237) 238 THE DOCTBINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true; and it is marvelous in our eyes: Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen." Oliver Cowdery. David Whitmer. Martin Harris. These three witnesses, it is maintained by the advo- cates of the Mormon hierarchy, stand alike unim- peached and unimpeachable. Whether the Saints are right in this claim remains to be seen. I am not aware that any attempt has ever been made to ana- lyze the testimony of the " three witnesses," and test their utterances by the introduction of the testimony of other witnesses, but I shall do so in these pages. So confident, indeed, are Latter Day Saints that the testimony of these three men cannot be invalid- ated, or made void, that Apostle Orson Pratt defies the world to refute their testimony concerning the Book of Mormon. He says: '* If he, [Joseph Smith] was sincere, then the Book of Mormon is a divine revelation, and this church must' be ' the only true and living Church of Christ THF DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOEMONISM 239 upon the face of the whole earth,' and there is no salvation in any other. This is an immense conclu- sion, but we can come to no other, the moment we admit his sincerity." (Pratt't Works, Evidences of the Book of Mormon and Bible Compared, page 55.) Respecting the testimony of Joseph Smith and the three witnesses, Mr. Pratt says: '' No reasonable person will say that these persons were themselves deceived; the nature of their testi- mony is such that they must either be bold, daring impostors, or else the Book of Mormon is true." (Ibid, page 50.) Relative to the same matter. President Joseph Smith of Lamoni, Iowa, says: *'The testimony of these witnesses is plain, and of a nature to preclude the possibility of their having been deceived. They could not have been mistaken, hence their testimony is true, or they are liars."— (Smith's History, page 48.) Thus the line is drawn, and thinking people are forced to choose between Joseph and Mormonism on one hand, and the entire Christian world on the other; and when these are judged by the results, by their fruits, the choice may with safety be made. If these four men told the truth, then Mormonism is true, and men can only reject it " under the penalty of eternal damnation." Truly, as Mr. Pratt says, '* this is an immense conclusion," and yet there is no middle ground. The aggressive methods of Mr. Pratt, Mr. Kelley, President Smith, and in fact all other well-informed Latter Day Saints, force us in dealing with this question, to treat Joseph Smith and the three witnesses, either as saints and absolutely right, or as base impostors and intentional deceivers. 240 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM It is rather painful to be driven to such extremes. Christian people would rather believe a man deceived and honestly in error than be forced to regard him as a designing impostor and an unmitigated fraud. But since President Smith and Mr. Pratt inform us that the facts claimed in the present instance pre- clude the possibility that "these four persons were themselves deceived," we are compelled — though ever so much against our will — to treat them as willful deceivers. Deceived or deceivers they most certainly must be, for Mr. Pratt declares, and very correctly as we must admit, that '* the nature of their testimony is such that they must either be bold, daring impos- tors, or else the Book of Mormon is true." ARE THE WITNESSES UNIMPEACHABLE? With reference to the impeachability of the wit- nesses Apostle Pratt has this to say: "But in order to prove that the witnesses of the Book of Mormon are all impostors, it will be neces- sary to prove that they did not see and hear an angel — that they did not see the plates in the angel's hand — that they did not hear the voice of the Lord declar- ing that they were translated correctly. All reason- able men will admit that it is impossible for any negative testimony to be found to prove directly that God did not send his angel to reveal and confirm the truth of the Book of Mormon; and as there is no direct evidence to negative their testimony and prove them impostors, therefore if it be possible to prove them such it can only be done by some indirect evi- dence arising from the circumstances of the case, or from the nature of the message itself, as being con- tradictory to some known truth." (Ibid, page 55.) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM 241 From the foregoing it may be seen that this re- nowned philosopher and apostle of Mormonism takes an intelligent and comprehensive view of the question he discusses. He fully realizes the fact that there is no room for the chief actors in this unique drama to be deceived, and that the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, as well as the authority of the Mormon Church, depends upon the veracity of these witnesses. Confident he must be of his ability to sustain the veracity of his witnesses, as may be seen by the fol- lowing: " These witnesses have neither of them denied the bold and fearless, though humble, testimony which they have sent forth to all nations. No man living can prove that an angel did not appear to them. There is nothing in the nature of the event, )ior in any of the ci rcumsta,nces connected with it^ that would render it absurd, unscriptural, unreasonable or im- probable. . . . Therefore, no man living has the least authority for condemning these witnesses as impostors. Indeed, there cannot be brought the least shadow of evidence, either direct or indirect, to prove that their testimony concerning the angel is false. Therefore, as their testimony cannot be proved false, the Book of Mormon stands upon a foundation as firm as the rock of ages, and as secure as the throne of the Almighty." (Ibid, page 56.) Mr. Pratt then reaches his peroration as follows: "All men among all nations, kindreds, tongues and people are required, under the penalty of eternal damnation, to believe, receive and obey the Book of Mormon, unless they can prove the witnesses thereof impostors. And this they cannot do.'' (Ibid, page 56.) The italics are mine. 16 242 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM I am now about to admit a fact that I once believed would prove fatal to the position of any man making it, namely: I concede that if the testimony of these witnesses cannot be proved false, that their testimony is flatly contradicted by many known truths, their statement concerning the angel is unquestionably true, and the Book of Mormon, therefore, is a divine revelation. The reader will doubtless have observed that our admission of Mr. Pratt's conclusions is as frank and unreserved as are the premises from which he derives them. We desire to meet this issue fairly and squarely, having perfect assurance that the truth is mighty and will prevail. If Mormonism is the embodiment of a revelation from God, let it triumph; but if it be a fraud, a base deception, let it be crushed to earth to rise again no more forever. Mr. Pratt, as do all defenders of this Mormon dogma, depends upon the inability of his opponents to prove a negative. If the testimony of these witnesses cannot be proved untrue, if these witnesses cannot be proved impostors, then, according to Mormon logic, the Book of Mormon must be true. Two objections may, with all propriety, be urged against this mode of argument, namely : First. Every known rule of logic or law requires the party who affirms a matter in dispute to jprove, by competent testimony, that which he affirms to be true in a manner so clear as to leave no room for reason- able doubt. Failing in this he simply loses his case, with nobody to blame but himself. Second. No man is required to prove a negative. This is but the consequence of the above rule. THE BOCTRIXES AXD DOGMAS OF MORMOXISAI 243 While under no obligation to do so, yet negative propositions are quite often proved by defendants. Where this can be done it makes a strong case doubly strong. A negative proposition can be established only by the introduction of evidence to prove a fact which is utterly incompatible with the alleged fact in iquestion. Thus A swears he saw B kill C at a given time and place. This is called direct, or positive testimony. To prove that he did 7iot kill C as charged in the indictment, B shows by numerous witnesses whose veracity cannot be questioned that at the exact time he is charged with having committed the crime he was fifty miles distant from the place where the crime was committed. B thus proves that he did not kill C, and A's testimony is thereby rendered worthless, while A himself stands impeached. In this case B is said to have proved an alibi. The circumstances of the case must harmonize in every detail with the facts as they are set up in the petition. If there is one material fact which is in- compatible with what is alleged to have transpired, it materially weakens the plaintiff's cause; and if the point in question be fundamental, it utterly destroys it. Governed by these rules, I shall proceed at once to examine each material point in the testimony of these witnesses, and see if they are in accord with known truths. CHAPTER XXVI. DID THEY SEE AN ANGEL ? The three witnesses— Did they see an angel?— Impeaching the wit- nesses — Seven counts in the indictment — Eight witnesses — Testi- mony unimportant — Their defection from the prophet in Mis- souri — Stick to their original storj- — The three witnesses did not recant — Reasons for adhering to the original story — Afraid to expose the fraud — Better die with a lie on their lips than to divulge the secret — The touch of angelic hands in holy ordina- tion — How could they forsake the prophet? — If I had seen the angel— A visit to David Whitmer — Did the witnesses reaflBrm?— A letter from Martin Harris. In the examination of tlie testimony of '*the three witnesses," please bear in mind the fact that we have undertaken to prove a negative, — or to put it in different form, to impeach these witnesses. Such points as we shall be able to sustain by suitable evi- dence will be regarded as so many counts in the articles of impeachment as having been proved. The several counts in this indictment are as fol- lows : These three witnesses claim : 1. That they saw an angel of God descend from heaven. 2. That said angel held in his hand the gold plates from which tli« Book of Mormon was translated. 3. That certain letters or characters were engraved upon these plates. 4. That said letters or characters were '* trans- lated by the gift and power of God," and therefore, 5. That the " voice of God " declared unto them that said plates had been translated correctly. (244) THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM 245 6. That this "record" contains the history of ■ancient America; and 7. That "the voice of God" commanded them "to bear testimony of these things." These several points are either true or false. If true, the Book of Mormon is a divine revelation, and the Mormon Church the only church of Christ. If they are false, then the Book of Mormon is a fraud, Joseph Smith and "the three witnesses" were im- postors, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints a failure. Mr. Pratt, as we have already seen, presents as a matter of first consideration and importance the fact that neither of the three witnesses ever "denied the bold and fearless testimony which they have sent forth to all nations." Besides the three witnesses named there were also eight others, four of whom were Whitmers, and three were Smiths, with one Page. These witnesses merely testify to having seen "the plates of which hath been spoken," and which they declared had " the appearance of gold." They also saw the engravings on the plates which had the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. In the excerpt which follows, the " eight witnesses " are included. Concerning their defection from the prophet and withdrawal from the church. President Joseph Smith, in his Church History, says: " It is true that some of them became disaffected during the troublesome times in Missouri, and that differences arose between them and Joseph Smith; but these differences did not occur on account of the Book of Mormon or the testimony before published 246 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM Their contention arose from other causes, real or supposed, and did not affect their attitude towards the book. . . . *' Some strong and perhaps harsh statements were made during this controversy, but this only argues that they were not afraid of retaliation by way of exposure of previous frauds." (Smith's History, Vol. 1, page 49.) I quote the foregoing to show that all Mormon writers of eminence regard the circumstance of these witnesses having remained steadfast to their original deplaration concerning the angel and the plates, as being a very strong presumptive evidence of their sincerity, and the truthfulness of what they affirm. This by no means follows. Thousands of men guilty of greater offenses than that of these witnesses (allowing them to have been guilty of perpetrating a fraud) have gone into eternity protesting their inno- cence when they had been proved guilty beyond the shadow of doubt. Does the fact that these witnesses stuck to their original story told about the angel prove the story true? By no means. No reasonable man can claim that it can do more than raise the presumption that they may have been sincere; but it by no means proves their sincerity. If good reason can be shown for believing that silence, or even a reaffirmation of the original story, would be more profitable to them, then instead of confirming the presumption of sincerity, it would most certainly raise a presumption of fraud. It will readily be granted that if their testimony be true, nothing would be more natural than that they should adhere to their original declarations until the THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 247 day of their death. Bat let us suppose the whole thing was a conspiracy and a fraud ; then what would be the probable course of these witnesses? Would one of them, because he had disagreement with the arch-conspirator, be likely to go out on the streets and denounce his co-conspirator as a cheat, a liar and a fraud, knowing that while doing so he would lay his own hypocritical, fraudulent conduct bare to the gaze of an indignant public? Would he be likely to uncork the vials of his own guilty wrath against his followers, when he knew it would be but the signal for his own exposure to the righteous con- tempt of an injured public? Hardly. No such course would be in the least probable. The interest of these four men in keeping their own counsel was mutual. If one suffered, they must all suffer. If one was exposed, all must be exposed. If there is anything in this wide world that a criminal fears and dreads, it is exposure. The character of this fraud, if fraud it be, is such as to forever ruin the prospects and blast the hopes of any man, or set of men, once the fraud should be made public. For a man to confess his complicity in such a nefarious transaction, would be to confess himself capable of any crime in the catalogue, and would set the mark of Cain upon his brow, and brand his posterity with the ineradicable mark of infamy. Could either of the witnesses afford to do this? Better, far, to smother their conscience, or at least put it to sleep, than face the storm of indignation that must inevitably follow exposure. So such men would view it. That these witnesses, during a serious difficulty between themselves, did not expose one another, but 248 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM continued to tell the same old story concerning the angel and the plates, proves nothing beyond the fact that the secret that formed the bond of their union was common to them all, and could not with impu- nity be divulged by either. Better go down to their graves with a lie upon their lips, than to divulge a secret, the revelation of which would cover their names with infamy, and mantle the cheeks of their innocent children with the blush of shame and regret. That these witnesses turned away from the church and denounced their leader, is already in evidence. To believe that these men saw an angel, and heard the voice of God to declare that Joseph Smith, by the power of God, had correctly translated the characters on the plates, and then in a very short time turn away from him and denounce him, is incredible. It is unreasonable that any ordinary matter of disagree- ment should produce such a result. If in company with Joseph Smith these witnesses saw the angel and heard the voice of God, they would have been willing to condone his faults and stand by him through any trial and in any emergency. But understanding his searet, they were unable and unwilling to make allowance for his faults. Who can be made to believe that, if Oliver Cow- dery with Joseph Smith bowed in the lonely wood at noon-tide, and there, in the sweet solitude and grand- eur of nature's great temple, received the divine impress of angelic hands in holy ordination, he could ever be induced to turn away and forsake him? Who can believe that after all this he could bring himself to denounce the prophet called of God to oi)en up the work of the seventh and last dispensa- THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 249 tion — even the " dispensation of the fullness of times?" It is impossible to believe that these witnesses, and especially Oliver Cowdery, knowing that the church organized by Joseph and Oliver, if their testimony is true, must be the only Church of Christ on earth, would deliberately withdi'Ew from it, and live and die without its protecting fold? And yet this is exactly what they did. If I had seen an angel; if I had heard the voice of God; if I had bowed by Joseph's Smith's side and felt the touch of angel hands in ordination, and heard the declaration that he was a prophet of the living God, all the combined powers of earth and hell could never have induced me to forsake him. And 3'et this is exactly what Oliver Cowdery did. No, sir, I cannot believe it — it is too absurd. These witnesses never saw the angel ; they heard not the voice of God, or they never could have pursued the course they did later in life. President Joseph Smith and apostles W. H. Kelley and Heman C. Smith, are particular to state that they saw David Whitmer and talked with him concerning Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, the other two witnesses, and their attitude towards the Book of Mormon. I am glad to be able to state that I, too, visited David Whitmer and talked with him on the same subject many years before either of the above named gentlemen had seen him. During the interview I made special inquiry concerning Oliver Cowdery, as I had been informed that he died an infidel. This he informed me was incorrect. He apologized for Oliver's persistent refusal to return to the fellowship 250 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM of the church by saying that Joseph Smith's conduct during the troubles in Missouri had rendered Oliver, his brother-in-law, very skeptical, but that he was not an infidel. It seems impossible that Oliver should become skeptical respecting divine things, or even indifferent towards them, if he had in reality seen what he claimed to have witnessed. Upon the whole the con- duct of these witnesses certainly raises the presump- tion of fraud respecting their connection with the origin of Mormonism. It is an old saying and a true one, that "actions speak louder than words;" and in this case the actions of these witnesses certainly give the lie to their words. DID THE WITNESSES REAFFIRM? As to whether these witnesses did or did not reaf- firm their former testimony is a matter of indiffer- ence, for the reasons alread}" assigned. That David Whitmer did so, and for reasons which directly con- cerned himself, may not be questioned; but that Oliver Cowdery ever did so is extremely doubtful. President Smith, in his church history, undertakes to prove that both Cowdery and Harris reaffirm their statement concerning the angel and the plates, but his authority is questionable. He reproduces from George Reynolds' " Mith of the Manuscript Found," a quotation from the Deseret News, the Brighamite organ of Salt Lake City, a journal by no means reliable in matters of this kind, as the people of the Reorganized Church have ever maintained. The extract refers to a conference of the Brighamite Church held at Council Bluffs, Iowa, Oct. 21, 1848, when Oliver Cowdery, it is claimed. THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 251 was present, and, in a short address, reaffirmed his former testimony. In this roundabout way he is reported to have said: " In the early history of this church I stood identi- fied with her, and one in her councils. ... I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages), as it fell from the lips of the prophet, Joseph Smith, as he translated it by the gift and power of God, by the means of the Urim and Thummim, or, as it is called by that book, ' holy in- terpreters.' I beheld with my own eyes and handled with my hands the gold plates from which it was translated. I also saw with my eyes and handled with my hands the ' holy interpreters.' That book is true. Sidney Rigdon did not write it. Mr. Spaulding did not write it. I wrote it myself as it fell from the lips of the prophet." (Smith's History, Vol. 1, page 50.) Allowing that Oliver Cowdery uttered the exact words as reported, it lacks every important element of his original testimony. His original declaration was that he saw an heavenly angel and heard the voice of God, the only two things in his testimony which are of any value. In his so-called reaffirma- tion he makes not the slightest reference to either. He simply affirms what I have heard a thousand Lat- ter Day Saints declare, that the Book of Mormon was translated by " the gift and power of God," and was therefore true. He says not one word about seeing an angel nor hearing the voice of God, the only means of render- ing his knowledge absolute and unmistakable. If Oliver Cowdery ever made that speech — which is extremely doubtful — why did he omit the only two ^52 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM points that are of the least historical or legal import- ance? Evidently it was because he knew the ** tes- timony of the three witnesses " was false, and he did not care to repeat it. Now a word concerning Martin Harris. Following is the manner in which this witness reaffirms his tes- timony. In a private letter to one H. B. Emerson, of New Richmond, Ohio, and as it seems, in answer to questions touching the matter, Mr. Harris is rep- resented as saying: *' Smithfield, Utah, Nov. 23, 1870. *'Mr. Emerson, Sir: — I received your favor. In reply I will say concerning the plates : I do say that the angel did show me the plates containing the Book of Mormon. Further, the translation that I carried to Prof. Anthon was copied from these same plates ; also, that the professor did testify to it being a cor- rect translation." (Ibid, pages 50, 51.) Except in a letter to the same person written the year following " by a borrowed hand," in which he reaffirms his testimony concerning the angel and the plates, the above is the only time, so far as the writer is aware, that Martin has ever said anything for the pub- lic respecting the matter ; and it is the only reference be has ever made, in writing, to his visit to Professor Anthon. Compare the language of this letter with the statement attributed to him by Joseph Smith, on page 224, and you will see at a glance that the lan- guage is that of Joseph Smith and not that of the illiterate and " simple-hearted farmer." David Whitmer was compelled, in order to keep up appearances, to reaffirm his testimony, for the reason that he was himself the president of a Mormon church whose authority was dependent upon the val- THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 255 idity of ordinations performed by Joseph Smith. And to deny his former testimony would be to pro- claim himself an impostor, and his church a fraud. And this, for prudential reasons, he could not afford to do. All the circumstances considered, it would be the wise but selfish policy of those witnesses to allow their secret to die with them, and thus save them- selves from ignominy while living, and their posterity from shame and disgrace after their death. The foregoing facts form the basis for a strong presumption in the minds of persons not previously committed to a belief in the story, that the whole thing was a conspiracy to deceive and mislead the unwary, for the purpose of achieving wealth and renown. CHAPTER XXVII. THEY DID NOT SEE THE ANGEL. Tliey did not see the angel— The reasons given — Egyptology little understood in 1830— Under the light of recent discoveries — The veil removed— Book of Mormon written in Egyptian— Orson Pratt's testimony — Testimony of Martin Harris — Were tlie char- acters on the plates Egyptian? — Pac-simile of the characters — Genuineness verified by Mormon authority. In the preceding chapter we have presented facts which are of such a character as to create not only a grave doubt as to the sincerit}^ of the four witnesses to the Book of Mormon, but to actually raise a very strong presumption of guilt. As already quoted, Mr. Pratt has sought to assure us that "no man living can prove that an arigel did not appear to them." The reason assigned by this astute defender of Mormonism is this: ** There is nothing in the nature of the event itself, nor in any of the circumstances connected with it, that would render it absurd, unscriptural, unreason- able or improbable. . . . Indeed, there cannot be brought the least shadow of evidence, either direct or indirect, to prove that their testimony concerning the angel is false." As an additional reason why the witnesses cannot be proved impostors, Mr. Pratt tells us just what he thinks must be proved, and which, in his opinion, was utterly impossible. On page 35 of the work last quoted he says that in order to prove these witnesses to be impostors it will be necessary to show: (254) THF DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM 255 1. That the four witnesses (which include Joseph Smith) '* did not see and hear an angel." 2. " That they did not see the plates in the angel's hand;" and, 3. '' That they did not hear the voice of the Lord declaring that they were not translated correctly." These propositions, being of a negative character, are more difficult of proof; and at the time he made them (1850) Mr. Pratt no doubt considered it a matter of impossibility that they could be disproved. And this was probably the case at that early day. But the last half of the present century has wrought miracles in the way of revealing the secrets of the remote past. Keys have been discovered in recent years by which the tombs and temples of ancient Egypt have been made to yield up their hidden treasures of knowledge greatly to the benefit and enlightenment of the modern world. In 1830, when the Book of Mormon appeared, and in 1850, when Mr. Pratt threw down his challenge to the scholarship of the world to prove the testimony of the witnesses false, comparatively little was known concerning the language and literature of the world's most ancient civilization. A dense veil of mystery, deep and seemingly impenetrable, hung, like the pall of death, over all ancient Egypt. This veil has at last been lifted, the gloom of centuries penetrated, and ancient Egypt to-day stands revealed to the admiring gaze of the nineteenth century. Her language is now as easily read as are the languages of ancient Babylon and Assyria. The Book of Mormon, while professedly written by Hebrews and their descendants, is said to have been 256 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM written in Egyptian. A very unusual thing, indeed, for a writer to abandon his own language and adopt one of a foreign nation, and especially one so little understood as that of the Egyptians. Relative to this the Book of Mormon says : "I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in all the learning of my father; . . . [and] I make a record in the hmguage of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.'' (1 Nephi 1: 1, page 1.) Again : "For he [Lehi], having been taught in the language of the Egyptians, therefore he could read these en- gravings, and teach them to his children." (B. of M., page 154.) Concerning the plates of the Book of Mormon and the engravings upon them, Mr. Pratt says: '* Each plate was not far from seven by eight inches in width and length, being not quite as thick as common tin. Each was filled on both sides with engraved Egyptian characters." (Pratt's works. Evi- dences of the B. of M. and Bible Compared, page 49.) Martin Harris, it will be remembered, says that the characters were Egyptian. Moroni, who " hid up the record unto the Lord," (see Mormon, chapter 4, page 532) says: *'And now behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge of the characters, which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech." (Ibid, page 538.) Although altered somewhat, the characters were Egyptian, nevertheless. THE DOCTRI^'ES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 257 There can be no question, then, that the language of the plates was Egyptian. Not the slightest intima- tion that any other language was ever employed in keeping these records, and hence no other letters, signs or characters could possibly have been used. The reader will please bear this in mind, as it forms the basis upon which the argument now to be offered is predicated. If the plates were engraved with some other characters or letters, Greek and Hebrew, for instance, the testimony of the witnesses is thereby proved false. Again, if it should be claimed that not only Egyp- tian, but other characters or letters, were employed, such as Assyrian, Arabic and Aramaic, and none of these characters are found on the plates, then it follows as an unanswerable fact that the plates are a fraud, and the testimony of the '*four witnesses " to the Book of Mormon is therefore proved false beyond question or doubt. I wish now to lay down as the major premise in this argument a proposition which no man, I care not what his religious faith may be, will care to dispute, namely: Neither God himself nor an angel of his presence can be made a party to fraud and deception ; that they can neither by voice nor by their presence give countenance and encouragement to falsehood; that what they shall utter must be absolutely and undoubtedly true. This fact being conceded, then it must follow as a logical necessity that if God or an angel be represent- ed by men as having sanctioned, approved and affirm- ed an alleged fact, and the thing alleged or affirmed shall afterwards be proved untrue, then the men who bore such testimony have testified falsely, and are 17 258 THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM therefore proved impostors ; the very thing that Mr. Pratt says cannot be done. There remains, therefore, but one question now to be decided, which, in the very nature of the case, must finally and forever settle this matter concerning the testimony of these '*four witnesses," and that question is this: WERE THE CHARACTERS ON THE PLATES EGYPTIAN? In his eagerness to give face to his fraud, Joseph Smith transcribed some of his signs, letters, or char- acters, and sent them by Martin Harris to Professor Charles Anthon to be translated. This one act of daring egotism has rendered it possible to test this marvelous claim, as it could in no other possible man- ner ever have been tested. This identical transcript fell into the hands of David Whitmer, along with the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon (and how this happened the writer has never learned) and was by him carefully preserved. Photographic copies were made of the original, some of which are now extant. Plates have been made and fac-similes printed in various books published by the Mormon Church, among thcQi Smith's Church History and Kelley's Presidency and Priesthood. Concerning its genuineness Mr. Kelley remarks: " Here is presented a fac-simile of the characters sent by Mr. Smith to Prof. Anthon and Dr. Mitchell by Martin Harris. . . . These characters were photographed from the original document borne by Mr. Harris at the direction of David Whitmer, who had in his possession at the time said paper. They THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MORMONISM 259 were carefully examined and compared by the author." Relative to the same matter, President Joseph Smith says: " The paper containing the characters (not trans- lated) which Martin Harris carried to Professor Anthon was carefully preserved, copied and photo- graphed. We have examined them when in the hands of the late David Whitmer. Without further com- ment we herewith present a fac-similie from a plate used in Presidency and Priesthood by W. H. Kelley. The reader can examine them, compare them with Professor Anthon's statements, examine the evidence, and form conclusions accordingly." (Smith's His- tory, Vol. 1, page 22.) There can be no possibility of any mistake as to the genuineness of the characters. Made by Joseph Smith's own hand, preserved by David Whitmer, one of the " three witnesses," photographed, printed and published by Mormon authority, precludes the possi- bility of doubt as to their genuineness. But one point now remains to be settled, namely: Are these characters Egyptian? CHAPTER XXVIII. THE CHARACTERS ARE NOT EGYPTIAN — THE TESTIMONY OF SCHOLARS. The characters are not Egyptian — The testimony of scholars — Mr. Kelley's fac-simile — Submitted to scholars for examination — Ex- planatory letter — President James B. Angell's reply — A moral, not a linguistic question — Characters fraudulent— Chas. H. S. Davis, M, D., Ph. D.— Characters put down at random— Resem- ble nothing, not even shorthand— Not an Egyptian letter or char- acter in it — A letter from Jerusalem — Dr. Charles E. Moldenke — The plates of the Book of Mormon a fraud — Egyptian and Aj-abic side by side — Is ridiculous and impossible — Characters bear no re- semblance to Egyptian or Assyrian — Testimony of the witnesses -compared — Scholarship vs. ignorance — Conclusion of the whole matter. In the very nature of the case, the entire question is narrowed down to one of language. Everything now depends upon the one question, Were the char- acters on the plates Egyptian? If they were, then I am free to admit that the Mormon Church is the Church of Christ. If they were not Egyptian, then the church of the Saints is not the Church of Christ, and they should honestly admit the fact. In order to satisfactorily determine this important question — important because fundamental — the writer pursued the only course by which it is possible to set- tle a linguistic question, and that is to submit the fac-simile to the most eminent scholars of our time for careful examination. Unwilling to trust to the accuracy of a transcript made in the ordinary wav, I cut the plate out of a {260} THE DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS OF MOBMONISM 261 copy of Mr. Kelley's book, and submitted it to a few of the best Egytologists of the present time, with a request for each to pass his professional opinion upon the unique document. Each of the gentlemen ad- dressed returned a prompt answer, neither of them knowing what the other had said; or, to be more ac- curate, neither knew that anybody else was to answer the questions, and hence there could be no possibility that the statement of one could be influenced by that of another. In this manner each depended entirely upon his own knowledge of the question to be considered, and was, therefore, entirely free from any bias that might arise from having previously read the opinions of another, thus securing the independent opinion of some of the finest scholars in the Oriental languages that our country affords. The accompanying plate, an exact reproduction of Mr. Kelley's photographic copy, will give the reader an opportunity to make a more extended examination should he desire to do so. To each of the gentlemen whose testimony is sub- mitted herewith, was addressed a letter of explana- tion and inquiry, substantially as follows: "Dear Sir: I herewith inclose what purports to be a fac-simile of the characters found upon the gold plates from which it is claimed the Book of Mormon was translated. The advocates of Mormonism main- tain that these characters are ' Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic' '' So far as I am informed, these characters have never been submitted to scholars of eminence for examination; and as the languages named fall within your province, including Egyptology and Archeology, 2 r^ s. ^ TS -4-3 S §