A DISCOURSE DELIVERED BY PARLEY P. PRATT, IN THE TABERNACLE,GREAT SALT LAKE CITY, JULY 10, 1853
1:297
I hope the congregation will lend us their undivided attention, andexercise their faith and prayers for those that speak, that the truth maybe drawn out to the edification of all.
I always feel diffident to address the assemblies of the people of God,at the seat of the government of the church, knowing that there are manythat can edify and enlighten our minds better than I can. I always feelthat I would sooner hear than speak. But nevertheless, I feel it my dutyto impart my testimony, and exercise my gift among my brethren, accordingto my calling; I therefore shall address you for a while this morning.
There may be many strangers assembled with us as at this season of theyear; many are passing through this city from different parts of the world.The members of the Church need not complain, if I should address myselfto the people as if they were all strangers, on the principles that aresometimes designated "MORMONISM;" and confine myself to some ofthe plain, simple, introductory principles of that system. It will refreshthe minds of those acquainted with them, and perhaps edify them, and atthe same time edify others.
Suppose I were to ask a question this morning, as a stranger, "Whatis Mormonism?" I suppose it is known to most men at all conversantwith principles classed under that name, that it is a nickname, or a nameapplied by the public, and not used officially by the Church so called.Mormon was a man, a Prophet, an author, a compiler, and a writer of a book.Mormon was a teacher of righteousness, holding certain doctrines. The Churchof Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are agreed with Mormon, as well aswith many other ancient writers, and hold to the same principles; thereforetheir neighbours have seen fit to call those principles they hold, "MORMONISM."They might as well have called them, Abrahamism, Enochism, or Isaiahism;because the ancient Prophets, Patriarchs, and Apostles, held to the sametruths in general terms, only differing in circumstances, in distant countriesand ages of the world, and acted upon the same general principles, accordingto the particular circumstances that surrounded them. But the world, outof all the ancients, have selected one called Mormon, and all the principlesheld by all good, inspired men of all ages and countries they have seenfit to sum up, and call "Mormonism." Well, it is as well as anythingelse, for aught I know; the name does not affect the principles.
The word of God, as written in the good old Book, designates the peopleof God by the name of Saints; which name is almost or quite as ancient,as any writings extant. Saint was spoken of by Enoch long before the flood.The same term was applied to the people of God by the Prophets, the Psalmist,and by the writers of the New Testament.
Not only was this term applied to Saints in ancient days, but the Patriarchs,Prophets, and Apostles applied it prophetically, speaking of the peopleof God in the latter days, when the kingdom should be given to the peopleof God, and the principles of God should bear the rule over all the earth.Daniel and the other Prophets, in speaking of this subject, always callthem the Saints of the Most High. They do not call them "Mormonites,"Methodists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Jews, Pagans, or Mohammedans,nor yet Catholics; but the language of the Apostles and Prophets is, thatthe SAINTS of the Most High shall prevail-prevail over the world, establisha true order of government, and, in short, rule the lower world, and thatall the nations shall bow to him who is at their head, and to the principlesheld by them.
Why not this be continued and sustained, O ye people of Christendom,and, letting these party names go by the board, and be classed among thethings that were in the darker ages, come to the proper and correct Scripturelanguage, and when we speak of the people of God, call them SAINTS OF THEMOST HIGH?
Well, then, such is the name that the Church which I represent, do theirbusiness in. As such, they are known on their own records, and on the recordsof heaven, inasmuch as they are recognized there. But we know what the worldmean when they say "Mormonism," and "Mormon." What arethe principles called "Mormonism?" You may ask those who professto be instructors of the people abroad in the States, and elsewhere-andvery few of them will give you one correct idea in regard to the doctrinesof the Latter-day Saints. Indeed they have not informed themselves, butremain in ignorance on the subject; and when they would show others, ofcourse they cannot inform them correctly on the subject. But you will generallybe informed, that "Mormonism" is a new religion, that it is somethingnew under the sun, and of course is an innovation-a kind of trespass onChristianity, on the Bible, or on the good old way. "O," say someof the editors that ought to be the most enlightened, and that profess tobe, "if Mormonism prevails, Christianity will come down."
Now suppose that we examine, principle by principle, some of the fundamentalprinciples of "Mormonism," and see whether there is one item thatis new, or that is in any way all innovation on Christianity.
What is the first start towards an introduction of these principlesin this age, and the organization of a people? What is it that first disturbedthe world, or any part of it, or called the attention of the people towardsit, giving rise to the system now called "Mormonism?" It was theministration of angels to certain individuals; or in other words, certainindividuals in this age enjoyed open visions.
Now we will stop, right at this point; it is called "Mormonism."Let us dwell on it. Is that a new principle? Is it adding something to Christianity,or taking something from it? Do not let our modern notions weigh anything,but come right to the fact of the matter. If Peter the Apostle were hereto-day, and a person were to relate to him a vision wherein an angel appearedto him and said something to him, would Peter call together the rest ofthe Apostles, and sit in council on that man's head for error? Would theysay to that man, "Sir, you have introduced something here in your experiencethat is derogatory to Christianity, and contrary to the system of religionwe have taught, and introduced into the world?" I need not answer thisquestion, neither need I bring Scripture to show what were the teachingsand experience of Peter and the rest of the Apostles on this subject. TheBible is too common a book, too widely circulated in the world, and thepeople of the United States, especially, are too well read in its contentsto suppose, for a moment, that Peter or the rest of the Apostles would condemna man a because he believed in the ministration of angels, because he relatedan experience wherein he had had a vision of an angel.
Now that was the principle that disturbed this generation, in the commencementof the introduction of that which is now called "Mormonism"-aprinciple as common in the ancient Church as the doctrine of repentance.I will say more-it is a principle that has been common in all dispensations;it is a principle which was had before the flood, and fully enjoyed by theancient Saints, or at least held to by them; a principle that was commonamong them; not that every man attained to it.
But where can we read, under the, government of the Patriarchs, before,the flood or after it; before Moses or after him; before Christ or afterChrist-where can we read in sacred history of a people of God by whom thedoctrine of visions and ministering of angels would be discarded, or beconsidered erroneous? It was common to all dispensations, it was enjoyedby the Patriarchs and Prophets under the law of Moses, before it and afterit, and by the people of God among the Ten Tribes, and among the Jews. Wewill carry it still further. It was enjoyed among the Gentiles, before therewas a people of God fully organized among them in the days of Christ. Corneliushad the ministering of angels before he became a member of the ChristianChurch, or understood there was a crucified and risen Redeemer. He prayedto the living God, and gave alms of such things as he had. He was a goodman, and an angel came to him and told him his prayers were heard, and hisalms had come up as a memorial before God.
It is astonishing then, to me, that the modern Christian world considerthis a new doctrine, and innovation-a trespass on Christianity. No! it isas old as the world, and as common among the true people of God, as Hisevery day dealings with man. We will leave that point, and say, it is theChristian world, and not the Latter-day Saints, that have a new doctrine,provided they discard that principle.
What next? Why, that man, by vision, the ministering of angels, andby revelation, should be called with a high and holy calling-commissionedwith a holy mission to preach, and teach, and warn, and prophesy, and callmen to repentance. That was one of the first principles introductory towhat is now called "Mormonism" in this age.
Is there anything new about that, anything strange, anything that differsfrom the Patriarchal ages, from the Jewish economy, the Mosaic dispensation,or from the dispensation called Christian? Similar things happened beforeMoses, in his day, and after his day; and among the Prophets, and in differentages. Were not such things common in the days of Jesus Christ, and afterthat in the days of the Apostles? Was not John the Baptist thus commissioned?Was not Jesus thus commissioned. And were not His Apostles, Elders, andSeventies? After his resurrection and ascension into heaven, were not otherscalled, and ordained under the hands of those who were thus commissioned,and called sometimes by visions and revelations directing them to thosewho were thus commissioned in order to be ordained? That was no new doctrine,no innovation on Christianity, no perversion of the Scriptural system, norwas it anything new, unless you call the old principle new.
Well, then, that the man thus commissioned should call upon others toturn from their sins; and that an individual, a government, a house, a city,a nation, or a world of people should perish unless they did turn from theirsins-is that anything new? No. Every one conversant with the Bible willsay, that such things took place frequently under all the different dispensations.The heathen were warned in this way. Individuals, households, cities, nations,and the world have to be warned in this way, and especially under the Christiandispensation. So there was a special commission given to the servants ofGod, to go to all the world, and call upon everybody to repent, or wholenations should become disfranchised, scattered, and millions be destroyed,as for instance the Jews at Jerusalem, because they would not hearken toit. It is nothing new, to cry to all men to repent, and warn different citiesand nations of wars coming upon them, or that they will be damned if theydo not repent. This is one of the early principles called "Mormonism."Is there anything new in this? Is there anything strange or unscriptural?No; no sensible professing Christian will maintain such a point for a moment.
Suppose that some people should hearken, when the ministering of angelstakes place. Among many men one certain man is commissioned by revelationto preach the Gospel, and cry repentance. Suppose that some persons hearkenand repent, and he should take them and walk down to the water in the nameof the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and raise them againout of the water, to represent the death and burial of Jesus Christ, andhis resurrection from the dead; and to represent the faith of the individualthus ministered to, that he does believe in Jesus Christ, that he died,and that he did rise from the dead, and that he, the individual, does puthis trust and confidence in him for the remission of sins and eternal life-isthat anything new? Would that be new to Peter? Suppose some person was torelate before
Peter and Paul to-day, and the Christians with them, that lived whenthey lived-suppose they were all present, and this person told them thata man came along preaching repentance, and he called upon us to believein Jesus Christ, and we did so, believing their testimony, and they tookus and buried us in water, and raised us again out of the water unto newnessof life-would Peter or John blame him? Would Paul say, "It is somethingnew?" Or would he say, "Brother, thousands of us received thevery same thing in ancient days?"
The Catholic Church profess to be the true Church-the ground and pillarof the truth, handed down by regular succession from the ancient Church,of which they are still members; and their priesthood and apostles are nowof the very same Church which the New Testament calls the true Church atRome. These Roman Catholics of modern times profess to be members of thevery same Church that Paul wrote that epistle to. If they are, I will showyou to demonstration, if the Scriptures be true, that this doctrine called"Mormonism" is not a new doctrine. Paul, writing to that Church,of which they profess to be members, says, Know ye not, brethren, ye Romans,that as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have been baptizedinto his death, being buried with him by baptism into death, that like asChrist rose from the dead, even so ye may walk in newness of life? Now thisepistle containing this doctrine was written by Paul to the Church at Rome,and which these modern people called Roman Catholics profess to be membersof. If they are what they profess to be, every one of them have been buriedwith Christ in baptism, and have risen again to newness of life. We will,however, leave them to describe whether that is really the case, or whetherthey are contented to sprinkle a few drops of water on an infant's faceand call that burial! Paul said that was a principle of the true Churchof Rome that had been buried with Christ by baptism into death, and hadrisen to newness of life. Have these modern Roman Catholics gone forwardrepenting of their sins, and been buried in water, in the likeness of thedeath of Jesus Christ according to this pattern? If they have not, theyare a spurious Church of Rome, and not real. Therefore, if they be the realChurch of Rome, it will be no new thing to them when the Latter-day Saintsinform them upon being buried with Christ in the likeness of his death,&c. If this is a new doctrine to them, they had better be looking aboutthem to see if they have not got up a counterfeit Church of Rome, for Paulknew of only one, and the members of it were all buried with Christ in baptism.
If 500 persons here were to say they came repenting of their sins, andwent down and were buried in the waters of baptism, and had risen againto walk in newness of life, Paul would say, if he were here, "It isjust what we used to do in ancient times; and I wrote to the Church of Rome,telling them that as many of them as were baptized into Christ were baptizedinto his death, buried with him by baptism into death," &c.
Now if this doctrine is new to the church of Rome, then that is thatChurch, that priesthood, and those members that have introduced somethingnew, who are departing from the old Christian religion, and not the "Mormons."
This reasoning applies just the same to the Church of England. Theyhave just as good a right to have a Church in England as anywhere else-tohave a national Church of England by law established, but if they are atrue church of God, all of them have been buried with Christ in baptism&c., or the Apostle must have been mistaken, or there are two differentkinds of Gospel.
Now if I were speaking to the state church of England, or the statechurches of the Catholic world, I would tell them in the name of the LordJesus Christ to repent of their new doctrine, and come back to the old standardspoken of by the Apostle, when he says, "though we or an angel fromheaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preachedunto you, let him be accursed," &c.
I need not go through with this same application upon the Lutherans,upon the Presbyterians, upon the Methodists, and others, for all these peoplesprinkle infants; for the principle once carried out will apply to the whole.If they are Christians according to the doctrine of the ancient Church,they hold the doctrine of the Apostles, they have repented of their sins,after believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, and have been BURIED with Christby baptism into death, &c. If not, they may judge themselves, for Iwill not judge them. If they have got a new doctrine, different from thatbelieved by the Apostles, and the Latter-day Saints have got the old one,why not say, then, "If sectarianism prevails, Christianity, as heldby the Mormons will be in danger," instead of saying the opposite?Why not turn the thing right about? If we have no one new principle in ourreligion, why are we considered innovators, and opposed to Christianity?And why is Christianity in the world in danger if "Mormonism"prevails? It is because that floating Christianity, called so by the world,is a spurious one; they have departed from the doctrine of the Apostles.Then, I ask again, why say, "If Mormonism prevails Christianity isin danger?" for if it falls the better.
We have examined three general principles, to see if there is anythingnew in "Mormonism." First, the ministering of angels. Second,the commission of ministers, Apostles, Prophets, and Elders to administerin holy things, by revelation and the authority of heaven. Third, that allthose that hear them, believe their words, and repent of their sins, shallgo down into the waters of baptism and be immersed or buried in the nameof the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and thus show thatthey do believe in a crucified and risen Redeemer, and in the remissionof sins through his name. So far, I think, we have fairly stated some ofthe first principles of what the world calls "Mormonism;" andevery one who has heard us must decide that there is nothing new in theseprinciples, but rather, that those who have departed from them, are justlychargeable with introducing new things, and innovations on Christianity.
Now suppose that one, two, or a dozen, or a hundred thousand, or evenmillions of individuals thus baptized, should all come together, in theirseveral congregations, and should unite in earnest prayer, and a man commissionedin the ministry of Jesus Christ should rise and lay his hands on them, prayingthe Almighty God to give the Holy Spirit, and it be given as in days ofold, and he confirms that promise upon them according to the pattern inthe New Testament-would that be something new? Would it be an innovationupon Christianity? Would it be right to say "this is Mormonism, cometo do away with Christianity? Why, no! Every sensible man at all acquaintedwith the Holy Scriptures, would laugh at the idea. If the ancient Saintswere here, they would tell you that it was their ancient manner; they wouldask you if you had not read over their history, which describes how theHoly Spirit was administered in days of old. Every man who has read theBible, knows it. Well, then, the different sections of what is called Christianity,never do this, and call it something new. When the "Mormons" doit, they are at once charged with innovation; and yet we have not got anythingnew in that respect, but simply a restoration of that which was. They arethe persons chargeable with new doctrine, and not the Latter-day Saints.
Well, then, suppose that after this ordinance, the Holy Spirit fallsupon these congregations, or upon these individuals thus baptized and confirmed,and fills them, and enlightens their minds, and bears testimony to themof the truth which they have received, and confirms them in the faith ofit, and fills them with the spirit of utterance and prayer, and with giftswhereby they prophesy, or speak in tongues, lay hands on the sick and theyrecover, in the name of Jesus, or whereby they are filled with the spiritof any gift, renewed in their utterance, strengthened in their powers ofintellect, so as to be able to speak with eloquence to the edification ofothers by the word of wisdom, knowledge, and prophecy; or peradventure someone, two, or three of them have a heavenly vision, and happen to relateit-is this something new? Are these things an innovation on Christianity?
Let the Apostles of the ancient Church come up now, and be judges, notthese innovators. O yes, Saints of ancient days, are these things new toyou? "NO," they reply, "but just exactly what we used tohave among us; and you who have read the New Testament know it is so."If this, then, is "Mormonism," it is nothing new, but simply thatwhich should have been in the world in order to constitute true Christianity.
Now suppose, after all these have been established, the people organizeon them; and that in the enjoyment and cultivation of them, this peopleunite in their efforts, both temporally and spiritually, to build up themselvesas a people, and each other as individuals, in righteousness upon the earth;and the Spirit of the Lord God into which they were all baptized, shouldmake them very great in union-in union of effort, in counsel, in operation,in fellowship, in temporal things in a great measure, and in spiritual things,by which they are all of one heart and mind to a great degree, and growingin it every day-is this something new, because it is "Mormonism?"Or is this the very doctrine which was inculcated in days of old by theApostles of Jesus Christ?
It was the main object for which the Holy Spirit was given, that theymight all grow up in union, in fellowship, in co-operation, in holinessin the Lord. No man who has read the New Testament, will say this is NEW,when we say that the great object of the Gospel is, that we may all becomeone in Christ Jesus-one in knowledge, and in the love and practice of thepeaceable things of God. Is it anything new? No. Well, it is a part of whatthe world calls "Mormonism;" and I would to God it was more perfectedamong this people than it is.
If any one of these principles in practice, should prevail over thewhole world, it would be nothing new; but the world only hold this lastas a theory; as to the practice of it; they are strangers.
We have examined five or six general principles, called "Mormonism,"and found nothing new in them. "But," says one, "I heardyou had got a new Bible; that is certainly an innovation." But stop;suppose, on inquiry, you become as much surprised and disappointed as manyhave who have asked for a "Mormon Bible," and when we have presentedthem with one, behold, it is King James' translation of the Scriptures,the standard we read, containing the covenants, predictions, and hopes ofthe ancients, and the doctrines of Jesus Christ, just as we believe them,and hope for their fulfilment. Is that anything new?
"Well, if you have not a new Bible, you have certainly got a newbook." Is that anything strange? Have not other societies got new books?The Church of England have not only the Scriptures, but the Book of CommonPrayer, and the time was when they did not have such a book, therefore whenthey made that, it was something new. They are not alone in that, however,for the Methodists have a new book called the "Methodist's Discipline."One hundred and twenty years ago there was no such thing in existence. Ifhaving a new book be an innovation, then all are guilty of it as well asthe "Mormons."
"But those other people do not profess that their books are inspired,and we have learned that you have a book that you believe is inspired. Whatis it, anyhow?" This is all a fact, and if it is wrong we will cheerfullyplead guilty. We have got another book besides the Bible, that was an ancientbook, and profess that it is inspired, and was written by Prophets, andmen that enjoyed the ministering of angels, more or less of them, and hadcommunion with the heavens, and the spirit of prophecy. And moreover, weprofess that this ancient book was restored to the knowledge of the modernworld by inspiration, and the ministering of angels. Is that something new?It may be new to the world in its history, and in its bearings; in thatrespect it may be new to them; but suppose, after all, it should containno new doctrine, no new principle, no new prophecy, that is, differing fromor doing away that which is already extant in the Bible? Well, then, I donot say that it would be a new doctrine. Men had books revealed in the daysof old.
"If it is no new doctrine, and if its predictions do not differfrom those contained in the old and new Testaments, what is the use of it?"The same question was investigated in ancient times. A great conqueror hadtaken possession of an ancient library, when there were no printing presses,containing one hundred thousand volumes, all in manuscript, comprising morehistory than was in any library extant in the ancient world. The conquerorwas a Mahommedan. He wrote to the head of the department to know what todo with this library. It was invaluable in its cost and intrinsic worth."What shall I do with it?" The reply was, "If it agrees withthe Koran, we have no use for it; and if it does not agree with the Koran,it is false any how; so in either case burn it."
"Now if these Latter-day Saints have a book extant among them,and it agrees with the Bible, there is no kind of use for it," saysthe opposer, "for the Bible contains all that is necessary; if it doesnot agree with the Bible, it is false anyhow; so in either case burn it."This was a principle of Mahommedanism, and may be a principle of what iscalled modern Christianity. I hope not, however.
"What is the use of the book in question, anyhow?" Why, inthe first place, it differs in its history from the Bible. The Bible isa history of things that took place in Asia principally, and a little ofwhat took place in Europe and Africa. The Book of Mormon is a history ofthings in another hemisphere: The one book is the ancient history of theEastern Hemisphere, in part; and the other is a history of the Western Hemisphere,in part. Shall we say, because we have the history of one part of the world,that the history of the other part of the world is good for nothing? Couldthe rulers of nations realize that fact, and could they only have a copyin their libraries at the cost of $100,000, they would appropriate it forthis history of the Western Hemisphere.
Discredit it as you will, we have it in genuineness and in truth, writtenby the ancient Prophets that lived upon this land, and revealed in moderntimes by the ministering of angels, and inspiration from the Almighty. Itis in the world, and the world cannot get it out of the world. It is inthe world in six or seven languages of Europe. It is as important in itshistory as the Bible, and it is just as interesting and as necessary formen to get an understanding of the ancient history of America, as it isfor them to get an understanding of the history of Asia.
"But are the merits of history all that it is good for?" Itis good in doctrine also. If two or more writers, one living in Asia, andthe other in America, and cotemporary, have the same doctrine revealed tothem, and both bear record of the same plan of salvation, who is he thatshall say that the record of one is of no worth?
Is it not a satisfaction to sit down and read, that a country far removedfrom Bible scenes, from that part of the stage on which figured the Patriarchsof old, with Moses and the Jewish Prophets, John the Baptist, Jesus Christand the Apostles, was also the theatre of revelation, prophecy, visions,angels, of the ministration of the doctrine of Christ, of the organizationand government of his true Church; that there too were angels, that theretoo were Apostles, that there too was the word of God, that there too faithcame by hearing, and salvation by faith! Shall we say that such things andsuch good news are worth nothing, when that very news corroborates the songof the heavenly hosts, when they declared to the shepherds of Judea, injoyful songs, that they brought glad tidings of great joy, that should beto all people! And here comes a book informing us that these glad tidingswere also to another hemisphere at the same time.
Now, stop a moment, and let us reason. Suppose yourself an angel ofGod at that time, full of benevolence, full of joy, full of a soul-inspiringhope, full of charity for poor, ignorant, perishing mortals, and you feltso full of poetry, and song, and gladness, that you could scarcely holdyour peace. Suppose you had a bird's eye view of our little, dark, benightedworld, by soaring above it, and in a moment you could light down upon anypart of it. You come to Palestine, in Asia; that part of the globe is rollingunder your feet; you visit it, and sing to the shepherds the glorious tidingsof great joy, which shall be to all people: "for unto you is born thisday in the city of David, a Saviour which is Christ the Lord." Theearth rolls on about half way round, you look down again with a bird's eyeview, and you discover the Western Hemisphere, and it is full of people:I wonder whether your soul would still swell with the same glad tidings-orwould your charity have become exhausted? Would you not fly and declarethese glad tidings to them also, and sing them a song of joy, and tell themwhat day the Saviour was born, that would reach their case as well as thecase of those who dwelt upon the continent of Asia? "Yes," youreply, "if I were an angel, and had liberty to tell these glad tidings,I would never tell them to one part of the earth and go to sleep there,while the other part rolled under my feet unnoticed."
Were those angels commissioned and endowed to bear glad tidings to ALLPEOPLE, that the Saviour was born? I say that the choir of angels whichsang that song, had full liberty, not only to tell the plan of salvationto chosen vessels of the Lord in one country, but also to another country-notonly that the Saviour was born, in general terms, but the place where, andthe time when, he was born. These were the tidings, "Go to all people."An angel must be a limited being, or be very ignorant in geographical knowledge,or partake largely of sectarian feelings of heart, to bear such tidingsto one half of the globe, and not to the other.
I knew an infidel once, who did not believe in the Christian religion,not in the New Testament, nor in the Saviour of the world. I asked him whyhe did not believe this. "Because," says he, "according tothe New Testament the manifestation of such an important affair was so limited.Here was half of the world, according to the New Testament, that never heardof it. A message so important should have been made more public." "Well,"said I, "if I will produce you a record, and a history, as well authenticatedas the New Testament, showing that angels, the risen Saviour, holy inspiredProphets and Apostles, ministered in the western hemisphere, and preachedthe Gospel to every creature, and handed it down to ages, will you thenbelieve?" "Yes," he answered, "I will." I presentedhim the Book of Mormon, which he perused. I inquired if he now believed."Yes," he said, "I do." And he has lived a Christianuntil now, for aught I know. I have seen him in this congregation, and hemay be here to-day. His name is Alger.
What objection have you to the hope of eternal life being as widelydeveloped as the ravages of death, sorrow, and mourning? What objectionhave you to the angels of God, Apostles of God, the Son of God, or to theHoly Spirit of prophecy being poured out in more countries than one? Youmay say the keys of the Gospel were given to the Jewish Apostles, but theywere so far off as not to be able to reach the western hemisphere, evenif they had had knowledge of it. Were there ships and steam vessels to bearthem to this country? No. Was there any communication kept up, or was thiscountry known to them? No. But the waves, and winds, and elements, and thegreat depths that intervened, even the unexplored ocean, said to the ancientApostles, "Thus far shall ye go, and no further." This ocean howeverwas no barrier to the fleet-footed angel of God, to the risen Jesus, andto immortal man. They could come to this hemisphere, and reveal the thingsof heaven to the people, and could rejoice in the same glad tidings, whetherit was here or in Jerusalem, or if it were in the uttermost parts of theearth.
Though Peter was crucified at Rome, and Paul suffered in the same manner;though Saints of the Most High were slaughtered by thousands and tens ofthousands, and bled at the feet of Roman altars; yet a crucified and risenRedeemer, angels of God, and the Holy Spirit of truth that fills all things,were not thus curtailed and limited, but could minister truth to the utter-mostbounds of the universe of God, where intelligences were mourning in darkness;wherever the ravages of death had spread sorrow, wherever there was a brokenheart to be bound up, or wherever there was a despairing mortal to be inspiredwith hope, they could go and tell the glad tidings of life and salvation.The Book of Mormon says they did come to this continent. It is a historyof their coming, and contains the doctrine taught to the people here bythe risen Jesus, and by his predecessors. In short, the doctrine taughtand practised in ancient America is there portrayed, together with the historyof the people.
Again, is this book of no interest with regard to the prophetic value?It reveals many things not noticed by the Jewish Prophets. Did the old Prophetstouch upon every item that pertains to man in other countries? No, theydid not, only in general terms together with the rest of the world. Theseother Prophets portrayed many things not in their book, though agreeingwith it as far as it goes, but touching events on which their book is silent.
Has any person any cause to say that there has not been a multiplicityof revelations, testimony, prophecy, history, and doctrine developed invarious countries by the same Spirit of God, and by angels? And is not allthis of great worth, to compare, in order to blend it together, that wemay see more clearly the principles of the doctrine of salvation, and understandprophecy more extensively, especially in an age when the mind has been obscuredby priestcraft?
If these are the principles of "Mormonism," where can youpoint out an innovation of Christianity? "But is this all? No, thisis not all, and I shall not tell it all to-day. I do not know it all yet.I have been twenty three years learning "Mormonism." and I knowbut little of it. If any one expects to learn all the doctrines of "Mormonism,"he must learn more than twenty-three years. For be it known unto you all,that "Mormonism," instead of being confined to a few dogmas ofgeneral truths, opens the flood gates of all truth and knowledge, and teachesmankind to retain all the truth they can already comprehend, and comprehendas much more as they can all the time.
"Have you not other books?" Yes, we have histories and compilationsof the dealings of God with us as a people. We keep a record, if you mustknow, not only individually some of us, but as a Church, as a body, or community.We have revelation penned, revelations and visions penned, we have revelationand prophecy penned, we have knowledge penned, we have knowledge and principlepenned, we have principle and history penned; the history comprising buta small portion, such as can be written, revealed to us Latter-day Saints,and practised upon; so that our modern books are like the ancient books-amixture of revelation, prophecy, history, and doctrine. Has any person anyobjections to this? I ask, should an angel administer to this or that man,or suppose an open vision was manifested to him, revealing many precioustruths, would he not be a simpleton not to write it? If the power of God,and the ministering of God, and the visions of the Almighty are extant inthe world, these will be written. The practical part of history will bewritten, for if all were written, the world would not contain the books.The ancient Apostles and Prophets wrote a few of the items revealed to them,and a history of the practical workings of the system over which they presided.Do we differ from them? No.
"Well," says one, "to be plain with you, Mr. Speaker,we have been taught to believe that the one book, called the Bible, containsall the revelations that God ever revealed to man, therefore it is an innovationto offer anything else to the world as a revelation." This is a traditionof your own, so I have nothing to do with it. The Bible never taught thatto you, nor angels, neither did any minister of God ever teach it to you;and if it is a modern sectarian tradition, it is calculated to bind meninto cast iron creed, and the sooner you break the fetters the better; burstthem asunder, and come out into liberty and freedom, and know and understandthat there is no such doctrine in the broad principles of eternal truth,that heaven is full of knowledge, and the earth ought to be full of Prophets,heaven and earth full of angels, and both full of inspiration; and if theinhabitants of all the worlds of the universe were scribes, every bladeof grass a pen, and every ocean ink, they could not write all the doingsof the Almighty, of His servants, and of His angels. If I were to live formillions of years to come, and then millions of millions more, I expectthere would always be some being ready to reveal something new, and somebodywould write it. The art of writing will never cease. We may not have pensand ink, but we may have something better. Suffice it to say, that the artsand sciences will not come to an end, yet man may have been traditionatedto believe that one small book contains all that God ever said or did. Suchpersons are to be pitied, and not to be reasoned with.
What is "Mormonism?" It is a restoration by new revelation,by the authorities of heaven, by the ministration of angels, by the ordinationof Prophets and Apostles, and ministers or Elders, by their testimony andministry on the earth, by the organization of Saints, by the administrationof ordinances, by the operations of the Holy Spirit; it is a restorationof these ancient principles revealed from heaven, for the government ofman.
Says one, "You have said you are not going to tell the whole systemto-day." I do not know it all, and I shall not state the half I doknow. What I have said are a few every day items, a few of the first principlesof the Gospel of Christ, as believed and practised by the "Mormons."
I will tell one more before I close. "Your marriages," saysthe objector, "are founded upon principles entirely new, and differentfrom the Christian world." I says without any hesitancy, I defy theworld to establish that assertion. I say our marriage relations are nothingnew at all. There is no man, or set of men, or nation of men, where theBible is extant, and they are readers, but what know that the institutionsof marriage contained in the Bible, and the organization of families, differwidely from modern Christianity. We differ from modern Christianity, butnot from the Bible. Patriarchs of the remotest ages, that obeyed the LordGod in regard to their marriages and family organizations, have not disagreedwith us, nor we with them, so far as we and they have obeyed the law ofGod. If there is any difference at all, it was more developed among themthan it is among us, we being in our infancy. If it should happen to be,that the whole modern world differ from the Bible-have done away with thelaw of God, and we have come in contact with them, instead of with the wordof God, then the boot is on the other foot, and in reality what is saidto us applies to them. It is like the farmer and the lawyer. A certain farmercame to a neighbouring lawyer, and frankly confessed that his bull had hadthe misfortune to kill one of his (the lawyer's) oxen. The lawyer replied,"Thou art a very honest fellow, and will not think it wrong that Ihave one of the oxen in return." "But" said the farmer, "Iam mistaken, it was thy bull that killed my ox." "O," repliedthe lawyer, "that alters the case, and if, if, i-f-."
Now, then, if it is the whole Christian world, from Catholicism downto the latest of her daughters, that have made void the law of God, andtrampled under foot the institutions of heaven, the holy principles of matrimonyand family government, and have made them void also, by their traditions,and introduced that which God never did, and "Mormonism" has restoredthe law of God, in theory and practice, then it is the so called Christianworld, and not us, that are wrong. Whether it regards family organization,the law of God, Patriarchal government, ordinances, principles, and prophecy,I know of nothing new, or of nothing wherein we are innovators.
As I said before, and I am able to maintain it when called upon, "Mormonism"is a system which was understood and enjoyed by the ancients, and restoredunto us by revelation. And if carried out, what will it do? It will simplyfulfill the sayings of the Prophets, both ancient and modern, put down allwickedness, abuse, proscription, misrule, oppression, ignorance, darkness,and tyranny, and restore mankind to righteousness, truth, liberty, law,and government, in which the Lord's will will be done on the earth as itis in heaven. That is what "Mormonism" will do, when carried out.
May God bless you all. Amen.