TRUTH NEVER CHANGES
A
PUBLICATION IN THE SPIRIT AND TRADITON OF TRUTH
MAGAZINE
Y VOLUME 10 August
2006 NUMBER 08 Y
Selected
Teachings, Writings & Compilations
of
Elder William
N. Baird
Part V
(Truth Never Changes, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 152-166)
Lehi Area Relief Society, Lehi, Utah
Genealogy—Apostleship—Godhead—Ordinances—Patriarchs—Law
of Adoption—Priesthood—Saviors on Mount Zion
The more I learn about the Gospel, the more I
realize I don’t know very much. The only difference between Lucifer and God
is not ordinance; he had to have the same ordinance God had.
|
IN THIS ISSUE:
Selected Teachings, Writings
& Compilations of
Elder Wm. N. Baird…………………………278
Questions to P. M. Opponents (Cont’d.)…….290
Commentary on……………………………...292
Quote………………………………………...294
Another Test
Oath………………………...…295
That Wicked Test
Oath……………………...295
Diary of Arnold Boss………………………..300
|
One has love; the other has the lack of it. To the extent that we have the ability to
love as God loves, we become like God. I think it carries more than that. We are given a heavy load and we carry it,
and those above us give us a heavier load and we carry that. And when we work for that there is an even
heavier load, more responsibility, until you are able to carry the
responsibilities of the Gods. And that
is the part of love.
Everything—ordinances, actions—everything is a part of love.
And what about
genealogy? I don’t see much genealogy going around in this group. What about if we love our posterity and
ourselves? What do we have to do to
prove that we have a right to be in God’s family?
(Voice in the audience: pure lineage?)
We have right to prove that we have the right
through our lineage, through our ancestors, all the way up to God and all the
way down to the eternities if we are to produce a race of Gods, generation
after generation after generation. How are we going to be
sealed into the family of God? I want to
know the answer on this. I am not trying
to be facetious—I would like somebody to tell me how far we have to go to be
sealed before we find our selves sealed to the Godhead?
(Voice: [unintelligible])
All right, then where do we go?
(Voice: We follow the Priesthood line.)
Now we are going to seal ourselves to the
Godhead. We go back to our father, and
our grandfather, and our great-grandfather.
How far back do we go? Does
it go father to father back through all ages of time to Adam?
(Voice: We have to follow the Priesthood.)
Okay—then who has the right to seal people to them?
(Voice: Those who have authority.)
Okay, what authority?
(Voice: The Priesthood of God.)
A Priesthood of our own—right? The Church tells me I must seal myself to my
ancestors generation by generation—what is wrong with this?
(Voice: [unintelligible])
They tell us that they will be welded together,
those who don’t measure up will be dropped out and they’ll just be welded
together. Now, what is wrong with it?
(Voice: There is the Law of Adoption.)
We are going to get into that.
(Voice: Is it wrong for somebody who has held the
Priesthood and had plural families sealed to them to be sealed to someone who
has not?)
We’ve got a problem here, haven’t we? It is not true that you can be sealed to
somebody that has lived a lesser law than you have lived. Now what are we going to do? We’ve got age after age and generation after
generation between us and Adam. What
are we going to do?
(Voice: Pure lineage—is that the purpose of
genealogy?)
(Voice: Could it be that I would have to be sealed
to my husband and he would have to be sealed to his Priesthood head and back
directly to Christ?)
We’ve got to go to Christ. But are we going to do like the Church says
and go all the way back to Adam and then to Christ? Then what lineage are we going through? Who is directly under Christ?
(Voice: The Prophet Joseph.)
The Prophet Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith died by the shedding of blood
that he could be the savior of this last dispensation. You were held back from the very beginning to
come forth in this generation to be saviors on Mount Zion to all other dispensations. Now do you understand what I’m talking
about? Joseph Smith died by the shedding
of blood just as Christ did that he could fulfill the office of Saviour to this
last dispensation. All of you people, if
you get sealed to somebody, will be sealed to Joseph Smith, who is sealed to
Christ, who is sealed to God the Father.
Do you realize how close that makes you to the
Godhead? Why are you given
such a privilege? What is going to happen to all of
those generations way back?
(Voice: They are sealed to us?)
They are sealed to us if we become a patriarch.
In the early days of the Church they did have the Law of Adoption, but it was only the Apostles who had men sealed to them as sons in the Law of Adoption. Why?
(Voice: [unintelligible])
I will have probably about three generations in my
sealing to Joseph Smith. He fulfilled
that qualification didn’t he? He is the
savior and provides a way for us in this dispensation, and we provide a way for
other dispensations. Where does that put
him? (V: ?) Okay.
If he is third member of the Godhead, then he moves up into the second
position, and who will be the third member of the Godhead?
(Voice: Brigham Young?)
Brigham Young is one of them.
(Voice: Would it be every one collectively that held
that position?)
In your own creation. We are told that we must consider ourselves
respectively as though we are Adam and Eve.
Elohim, Jehovah and Michael are perfectly represented as God the Father,
God the Son and the Holy Ghost. Elohim,
Jehovah and Michael are Adam, and we must consider ourselves as though we are
respectively Adam and Eve.
Now in this creation of the Godhead there was
Elohim, Jehovah and Michael, or Adam, who became the Father of his own
creation. In the Godhead we have God the
Father, and the Savior and Adam, who is the creator Godhead. Each one in their own creation, and they
became the father of their own family.
God says, “I created man in my own image, male and female.” What is God?
Male and female.
It is a unit. The
highest possible creation in the universe is the creation of another human
soul, or a God, or a race of gods, generation after generation; and a
man just cannot have a baby as easily as a woman, and the woman cannot do it
without the man. These two. The woman makes her husband a god by sealing
herself to him with her love. A woman
holds the key to the Holy Spirit of Promise in that marriage because
it is the woman’s love that seals herself to her husband. She says, “I will testify for you—I am
yours—I am going where you are going.”
When a woman gets to a point where she says, “Your
God will be my God; your people my people; whither thou goest I will go, and I
am in your hands,” she then has given her husband a marriage. A man can lead, guide and direct, but his love—no
matter how great—does not seal the marriage.
It is the woman’s love, and she seals herself to him. Then he takes that offering and he seals
himself to his Priesthood head with love, and so on up to God and so it is one.
I don’t know many things because I have not been
shown many things, but some things I have been shown, and I
tell you there is only one family in heaven. We will either be on the inside or the outside. And I tell you it is through genealogy
and sealing.
You say, “But Brother Baird, how can we do this if
we don’t have Temples in our hands?”
Nonsense. We are not ready. We are not ready. We don’t have our genealogy ready. Let me tell you, the Church is beating us
hands down in doing genealogy. We could
do everything else, everything that we’re supposed to do, and if we don’t
provide a way for those who have gone before who were valiant and did all they
could in the age of time that they lived in, to be sealed into the Family of
Heaven, we will not be there either. And
I tell you that I know that there will not hardly be time. There will hardly be time with both heaven
and earth working together through the Millennium to get this work done.
Priesthood is by lineage. Blessings come by lineage. Brethren, in the early days because
of the Law of Adoption, because only Apostles were permitted to have privileges
of having men sealed to them as sons in the Law of Adoption, some got
disgruntled, and worst of all, they got angry at the Apostles, but they got
more angry at Joseph Smith, and it was part of what caused Joseph Smith’s
death.
I’m beginning to teach the Law of Adoption, and I
know that it will open up, because again, only those in the top leadership
positions will be permitted this privilege, not because others are not worthy,
but because it takes this position to receive these ordinances. Then, it becomes the obligation of the
Apostles to give all their children their ordinances, and there will be
those that are unhappy because somebody is getting ahead of us, which they are
not, because if you are in the family of Gods, and you are a link in that
chain, it doesn’t matter where you are—it is always rising. If you are in that chain of Gods, you
are one of the gods, and nobody is ahead of anyone else. There is seniority, but that doesn’t mean
anything, the obligation is the same.
The Priesthood is one; the obligation is one; the chain of gods is one
from the top to the bottom, and we must seal ourselves together—together with
our dead—to the Gods. And we must help
our posterity seal themselves together with their dead, to us, and so on down.
I marvel. We
are told not to go into debt to our
enemies, and yet the more we serve those who lead us, the more in
debt we become to them. You
cannot serve those who are senior to you in the Priesthood too much because
anything you give will be immediately returned to you and a measure to
spare. How can you serve God too much? When you serve those who have gone before
you, who are senior to you in that chain, in that line or lineage of Priesthood
that is above us, who are reaching down to help us, and we help them help us;
all we do is become indebted to them, and the more we serve them, the more
indebted we become to them.
I was privileged to travel with Rulon (Allred) for
about five years, almost everywhere he went.
Not everywhere, but most places I was able to go with him. I learned to love him and I think that any
man that hasn’t learned to love a man senior to him in the Priesthood with all
his heart, might, mind and strength, has missed much.
(Voice: About the Law of Adoption, you said that
only Apostles will be able to have men sealed to them as sons.)
Only those who have had all of their
ordinances. The only reason that
the Apostles have had that privilege and others do not, is that those men have
had all of their ordinances. If another
man has had all of his ordinances, he’ll be an Apostle, too. There is
nothing about the Apostleship that puts a man any better or higher than any
other man, except that it takes that position.
If you’ve received all your ordinances, then you can help others
receive theirs—can’t you? You cannot
give an ordinance you yourself have not received.
Now I want to get into something else. I don’t want to go into this in absolute
detail; I want to leave some of it for you to think about. I’m going to read to you out of page 82 of
the second volume of the Journal of Discourses if I don’t get
my knuckles rapped because of what I’ve said here tonight. I preached it just about word for word in
Montana in open meeting with Owen sitting there listening to me and he didn’t
stop me. Sometimes he gets up and stops
me. He has on occasion, got up and said,
“You’re teaching too much.” He has a
right to do that. Any man that would be
offended because the head of the Priesthood gets up and says, “Let’s not teach
that right now,” they are wrong—because he has that right. Not only does he have that right, if he feels
that way, he has the obligation.
Now I’m going to refer here (J. of D. 2:82) to the
Marriage at Cana. It is my understanding
that Christ was the bridegroom on that occasion:
Now there
was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion,
please tell who was. If any man can show
this, and prove that it was not the Savior of the world, then I will acknowledge
I am in error. We say it was Jesus
Christ who was married, to be brought
into the
relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified.
“Has he
indeed passed by the nature of angels, and taken upon himself the seed of
Abraham, to die without leaving a seed to bear his name on the earth?” No.
But when the secret is fully out, the seed of the blessed will be
gathered in, in the last days; and he who has not the blood of
Abraham
flowing in his veins, who has not one particle of the Savior’s in him, I am
afraid is a stereotyped Gentile, who will be left out and not be gathered in
the last days…
(Voice: Is there such a thing as being adopted in?)
Yes, he can be adopted in. Now let’s say I don’t have the proper blood,
but I have the blood of Abraham, but I married Joye, and she’s got the
blood. She is of the correct
lineage. I cannot hold a position of
leadership, but my children can. Am I
getting my point across?
There will be those who will say, “Well, I know a
man who held a leadership position and he was a Gentile.” I don’t believe that he ever held that
position in its fullness. He may have
been given the right to act in that position, but he never actually held it in
and of himself. He could only hold it
and act through someone else. I want to
read that again.
(Voice: Who is speaking?)
Orson Hyde.
I’m almost certain it was Orson Hyde.
Now listen to it again:
“But when
the secret is fully out, the seed of the blessed shall be gathered in, in the last days; and he who has not
the blood of Abraham flowing in his veins, who has not one particle of the
Savior’s in him, I am afraid is a stereotyped Gentile, who will be left out and
not be gathered in the last days; for I tell you it is the chosen of God, the seed
of the blessed, that shall be gathered in, in the last days.”
I tell you that it is the seed of the blessed, the
chosen of God, the seed of the blessed that will be gathered in, in the last
days.
(Voice: Isn’t that pre-ordination?)
No, that is not pre-ordination. You are blessed before you ever come into
this world with these blessings—they are given to you as a gift from God. You do not earn the blessings—they
are given
to you as a gift—you earn the right to keep them. Now do you understand what I said? You cannot say you have the right to the
blessings by any other thing, except the grace of God.
(Voice: The man who was born a Gentile, was he not
born in that position because of the things he did or did not do in the
pre-existence?)
Yes. Have you
ever wondered why you are able to accept these beautiful things of the Gospel,
and somebody else in your own family is not able to accept them? They could not. Do you know why they could not? There are three lineages: There is a lineage
of the blessed; the lineage of the adopted; and the lineage of the cursed. The cursed cannot accept the gospel. He may actually give you reason to believe
that he is going to, but he can’t—he is not capable of it.
(Voice: Does that reach into the pre-existence?)
Yes. It is
because of the blessings that they turn away from in the pre-existence or
before that. There is the lineage of the
adopted, and they can accept part of the Gospel, but they cannot accept it
all. There has never been a time, before
the pre-existence or before that when men could not say, “I am.”
(Voice: Did we have knowledge way back then?)
There never was a time when you couldn’t make a
choice. There never was a time when men
could not say, “I am.” There never was a
time when you were not an entity. You have traveled an eternity to where you
are now. Lucifer says, “Don’t
live the Fulness of the Gospel; give it up.
There will be a time when it will be easier for you to live it; wait a
little while—just wait.” And he lies,
because there never is any time, except now.
Tomorrow never comes and yesterday is already gone. All we have is now. If we wait, we procrastinate the day of our
inheritance.
“And now
as I have said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I
beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until
the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity,
behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night
of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed. Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that
awful crisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit
which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that
same spirit will have power to possess your body…” (Alma 34:33-34)
I have a brother-in-law that said to me, “We can
live these laws in the Millennium.”
And I said to him, “Well, Bill, you’re going to die;
how are you going to get into the Millennium?”
He says, “I’ll be resurrected.”
I said, “What are you going to be resurrected to if
you don’t live a Celestial Law?”
He looked at me—he knew—and he said, “Well, that
shot that argument.”
He had read enough
to know that if you don’t live a Celestial Law, you cannot be
resurrected into a Celestial situation.
And he is dead; he’s gone. Both
he and his wife were killed in an automobile accident. This was hard on me because I loved that
man. I know it was hard on Joye, too,
because she loved her sister so. He and
I did many things together. We went into
business together; we went fishing together; we failed in business together;
and I failed in teaching him the Gospel.
He knew, but he didn’t do anything about it. I don’t know what his position will be, but I
would rather that he had at least accepted it to a point where he said, “I will
live it if I can.” Because he said he
couldn’t.
There are three lineages: The lineage of the
blessed; the lineage of the adopted and the lineage of the cursed. You can have all three in the same
family. You say, “How can you have all
three?” I don’t know. I only know that you can have all three of
these. God the Father had the three in
His family. He had those that were good,
those that were bad, and those in the middle.
All the prophets of God all the way down through from Adam to the
present time had three lineages in their own family.
(Voice: Is the cursed lineage the Canaanite
lineage?)
Part of it.
Why? Why are they cursed?
(Voice: They cannot hold the Priesthood.)
Why cannot they hold the Priesthood?
Why cannot they hold the Priesthood?
(Voice: They didn’t want it.)
There! You
can turn away from the blessings. Not
even God can withhold the blessings, but you can turn away from them. Only you can take your blessings from
yourself. Once Priesthood is given, it
cannot be taken from anybody; they must depart from it. Somewhere, they departed from the
Priesthood. They withdrew to the point
that they did not accept all of the Priesthood.
The New and Everlasting Covenant includes
every ordinance, every law, every privilege, every obligation ever given to man on earth. If we lose any portion of it, including
genealogy, we will lose the whole as far
as being exalted is concerned.
(Voice: Apparently, the doctrine has been going around
that children who were not conceived under wedlock are considered less valiant
children, but I have heard that it is better to be conceived in love out of
wedlock than not be conceived in love in wedlock.)
You cannot conceive a child that will be a prophet
of God unless there is love. I don’t
care whether there is wedlock or not; a marriage is not really consummated
without love. I told you at the start of
this class that it is a woman’s love that seals a marriage, not the words that are said over them.
They should be there; it should
have the sanction of the Priesthood of God, but it is not a marriage until
a woman makes it a marriage with her love. Does that answer your question?
(Voice: I understand that, but I wonder about those
children conceived out of—even Christ came through somewhat a lineage of
illegitimacy…)
Well, it was not illegitimate.
(…no, not with Him, but there was a little slip-up
back there...)
There wasn’t a slip-up. She had a right to conceive…
(…there was David back there.)
Okay, I stand corrected.
(That’s what I was talking about. Are those children considered less valiant if
they are not conceived in wedlock? I
doubt it because I know people who were, and they are in high positions.)
All of you, every one of you people came through a
lineage that was without wedlock at one time or another. In England people could not afford to get
married—it cost too much. The average
person, and I’m sure that every one of you had those in your lineage who could
not afford to get married. It wasn’t
that they didn’t want to get married—they did—but they would just start living
together. They would promise, and they
did, and they stayed and were honorable people, and they lived together and
they raised honorable children. As far
as God is concerned, if you do the best you can under the adverse conditions,
and you live the best you can under such circumstances, it is a pure
lineage. Does that answer your question?
There was a couple, and I think he became a Stake
President, and they raised a bunch of good kids. They were going back to the Temple with one
of their older children, one of the first to be married. They went through the
endowment, and then they were taken to the Sealing Room. We could see these parents—there was a whisper,
whisper, back and forth—and this was distracting to the man trying to perform
the ceremony. He said, “Dear Sister, Brother, is there something wrong?”
They said, “Is this necessary to be married?”
“Yes, It is necessary to be married—why?” He asked.
“Well, we never had it. We just went through the endowment and went
down and got dressed, went home and raised a family,” they replied.
They had all their children with them, so he married
them, sealed all their children to them and married the young couple. He gave them all their ordinances properly
before he sealed the young couple. They
all went home happy. Do you think for
one instant that that wasn’t a beautiful family or a righteous family? It is a thrill to see somebody do everything
they possibly can and still end up making up mistakes that can be ratified by
God and made right. It makes it so that
perhaps some of us will have a chance.
I want to tell you how I feel. I look over this room and I know that there
are men and women here probably more worthy than I. I marvel that I am privileged to associate
with such beautiful people. I get to
thinking about it sometimes when I’m driving along, and I think about the beautiful
privilege that I have to associate with good people. Perfect?
No. Righteousness is not
perfection—righteousness is a desire to do right above all else, even in our
weaknesses or because of the circumstances.
I’m grateful for men in this Priesthood who are not perfect;
otherwise I could not associate myself with them. I’m grateful for my wives who are not
perfect; otherwise they couldn’t possibly stand me. I’m grateful that my Priesthood heads were
enough ahead of me that they could lead me along so that I could learn. I studied profusely before coming into this
work, and all I had was a bunch of knowledge rattling in my head and nothing
fit. It wasn’t until I came into this
work and these men started teaching me that anything fit together, that it made
sense.
(Voice: I
wanted to comment on what was said about David and Bathsheba: They said there
was a ‘slip-up’, but there wasn’t. That
marriage was meant to be. The lineage
was right. David’s sin was in not
allowing the Lord to do it—he took it upon himself.)
He took it before it was his, didn’t he?
(Voice: I’m glad that was brought out because in the
case I was thinking of, the child who was born out of wedlock has so far proved
to be the more worthy child out of the whole family. I realize that about David and Bathsheba. There are reasons for these things, and I don’t
believe those children are less valiant.)
(Voice: The child that was conceived out of wedlock
to David died.)
Yes, he died.
(Voice: Bathsheba was given to him before other
children were born. Solomon came through
Bathsheba after she was married to David, and he was the Savior’s progenitor,
not the child conceived out of wedlock.)
I don’t want this to get too far afield.
“And for this cause, that men might
be made partakers of the glories which were to be revealed, the
Lord sent forth the fullness of his gospel, his everlasting covenant, reasoning
in plainness and simplicity—To prepare the weak for those things which are
coming on the earth, and for the Lord’s errand in the day when the weak shall
confound the wise, and the little one become a strong nation, and two shall put
their tens of thousands to flight.” (D&C
133:57-58)
Has this happened? Or is it yet to happen? If it hasn’t happened, it appears to me as
though the fulness of the gospel still must be lived to
prepare the weak for those things, which are coming. Let me read that again. (Reads the same verses) Has it happened? Section 133 is just full of things that are
going to come. It tells us that the
fulness of the gospel is to prepare us for those things, which are coming, and
they haven’t happened yet.
(Voice: Is that referring to the two prophets in
Jerusalem, or is it something that hasn’t yet happened?)
It could be, it could be anyone. The point is, it is to prepare all
of us, not just to prepare those two that are in Jerusalem, and it may refer to
those two that will put their tens of thousands to flight. Brothers and sisters, if you raise your hand
and I don’t call on you, it is because I want to follow through in sequence. I get started down this road and the next
thing you know we get going down another road.
It’s not that that isn’t a good road to go down, but that isn’t the one
I had planned. I have something I would
like to get over.
What is our obligation pertaining to genealogy? Who are the only men—couples—when I say men I mean
man and woman. Who are the only men who can
actually perform the labors for those who have gone before us? Those who have received all their
ordinances. They used to
call them Patriarchs. They used to
have on the genealogy sheet the name of the patriarch of that particular
family. Do you know why they took it
off? They took it off because there are
no Patriarchs in the Church, or if there are they are so well concealed that
they don’t declare that they are Patriarchs, so now, they have family
representatives.
Now if we are the only people—if you are the only
people who can qualify to have men sealed to you—and you must have men sealed
to you or you cannot perform the labors for those who have gone before—if you
are the only ones on the whole earth in all dispensations that can do this, you
should know that the last shall be first and the first shall be last. We were held to come forth in the last dispensation
when all the gospel is on the earth.
Why? What if a man has ten wives,
and each one of them have a different lineage?
All of these people are the responsibility of that man that married
those ten women. He must see that those people
that are married must be sealed to somebody.
Who is the only person he has the right to seal them to? He must seal them to himself. He can seal them to somebody that has given
their permission to have them sealed to them.
They cannot be sealed to just anybody. It must be somebody that has given
their permission, and somebody that is qualified. Do you know how many people in this world are
truly qualified to have people sealed to them?
One man. There is only
one man on the face of the whole earth who is a full-fledged God. That shows you how selective it is. And then there are others, because Christ
asked for them.
When He could ask for anything He wanted, the only
thing He asked is that those who are valiant, those who repent, those who
believe in Him and believe in God, and who live the laws of the Gospel, that He
could have them. That’s all He
asked. And if it were not for that, we
wouldn’t have a chance. There’s one man
that asked, “If this man will do this and this and this, Father, could he come
and be with me?”
He said, “Yes,” because He couldn’t deny Him.
Then He picked a group of men and made them
apostles.
He says, “You help all these other people with their
ordinances so they can come and be with me.”
Then He says, “Get them to help other people, and
get them sealed to them so that they, too can come and be with me.”
Now He is our Savior, and the reason He is our
Savior is that He wants us to be with Him, and He had the right to ask for
us. Through Him, because Christ had the
right, we have the right of asking for those people that we get sealed to us,
and they have the right to have their families sealed to them. Now you can say, ‘They won’t be exalted,’ and some
of them won’t, but that makes no difference.
Am I getting my point across?
Do you understand what it means to be a Savior on
Mount Zion? It is to help Christ—to help
our Lord and Savior bring souls to Him. Where they could not do it
for themselves, we have the right and privilege to help Him do His work, and by
doing this; we become Saviors on Mount Zion. Christ is the Savior, but we are
saviors. Christ is the head, but we are
heads. Christ is the King, the Priest,
but we get to also participate in everything He does—but only through
genealogy.
There are some of you that have lineage where
you are the only persons, you and your husband—speaking Relief Society-wise—you
and your husband are the only tie that all of these people have to God, as Christ is the
only tie we have to God. There is
nothing that Christ does that we cannot do also. We must do it through Him and because
of Him. It is because our Father and our
Older Brother that we are able to do anything, and when we get all
through, all we’ll be able to say is that we helped Christ to complete His
work.
I can do nothing in and of myself. Somebody says, ‘I taught that man the
Gospel.’ I cannot teach any man
the Gospel; all I can do is jog his memory until he remembers what God taught
him before he got here. If I jog that
man’s memory, he’ll feel good and he’ll remember, ‘Oh, of course—that’s
right!’ And the reason he can do that is
because his spirit knew it. It was taught
to him before he got here. If it were
not taught to him, if he went fishing, sluffed school, he gets to be a
Negro. He gets to be something
else—anyway, he doesn’t get to hold the fulness of Priesthood—he can’t
understand it.
There are three lineages. I’m trying to get my point over and that is
the only thing I’m trying to make. If I
can do just the one thing. Now I’ve had
things happen to me and things that have come to me over my lifetime that has
jogged my memory again and I know that we must start in our genealogy and get
prepared so that God can give us these ordinances so that we can give them to
our dead. And if we don’t get prepared,
we’ll have nobody to blame. Not
the Church for taking the Temples away from us.
We only have ourselves to blame if we’re not doing the work. We have a deal that goes up like this in our
genealogy, and like this in our posterity, and we’re sitting right in that
little point.
We’re the only people, in many instances that can do
anything for those people. It is your
father and mother, and their father and mother and it gets
bigger and bigger. Who else is going to do it if the Patriarchs of Israel take their responsibility? Are the Catholics going to do it? Are the Mormons going to do it? Who else has got the keys? Who else has got the knowledge? Who else has the right to do these things? If
we don’t do it for our ancestors, can we do anything for our posterity? Can we do anything at all for God if we don’t
take care of our genealogy? Have I got
my point across?
It takes lineage, it takes the ordinances,
it takes a Patriarch, it takes the Apostleship; it takes all
these things to do it. Who else is going to do it? Brother
Musser wanted the people to have their ordinances—he tried to prepare a
people—they wouldn’t. Brother Rulon
tried to prepare a people—they wouldn't.
Brother Owen wants all you people to have your ordinances. Are we going to not do it again? Part of the ordinances is the sealing of our
genealogy and out people to us. We
cannot do that—we cannot have our blessings until we do this—and we cannot seal
anybody to anything until we are ready to do the whole job.
We can start, but it is not complete until we are
sealed to God. You must have a lineage,
father to son right down to you, that you have a right to the Priesthood, to
prove that you have a right to the sealing, that you have a right to the New
and Everlasting Covenant. What is
the New and Everlasting Covenant? The
Covenant is new to you. It is
Everlasting because it is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. In the Temple you first receive the old
covenant or the new covenant, and that leads us to the New and Everlasting
Covenant that is the fulness of the glory and all things.
I ask God’s blessings upon you. I
bless you that you will receive your understanding, your responsibility because
God has charged us with it. I bless
you to this end, in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.
The
Kingdom
Or
Nothing!!!
MISSION STATEMENT
Truth Never Changes does not represent any
organization, neither is it the voice for any religious group, church,
&c. We are not a corporation.
We encourage family
patriarchal organizations. No one here
considers himself the “One Mighty & Strong” to set any church or group in
order. We believe in the perpetuation of
the Fulness of the Gospel as revealed by the Prophet Joseph Smith by the Lord
Jesus Christ. We believe in the
preservation of all of the ordinances of the Holy Priesthood.
We invite any reader to contribute
articles, poetry and faith-promoting experiences that would be uplifting in
nature. We reserve the right to deny or
edit any (or all) portion(s) of contributed material. All contributions will remain on file and the
identity of the author will remain anonymous, as we believe in keeping an eye
single to the Glory of God and not men.
Controversial material or opposite viewpoints will be printed, providing the material is in good taste. The opinions expressed are not necessarily the opinions of Truth Never Changes nor its voluntary staff—they are the opinions of each individual writer.
Truth Never Changes provides all individuals
the opportunity to express themselves in accordance with their Constitutional
Rights. Often, many voices aren’t heard because
of the circumstances they are placed in.
One, being a member of a church or group, may not have the opportunity
to speak due to possible repercussions or consequences. Truth Never Changes provides that
opportunity through anonymity.
Most back issues are
available at a $5 fee. We reserve the
right to deny subscription/service to anyone.
Shoes, shirt and tie required!
PO Box 433 angelwolf51@yahoo.com
St. Johns, AZ 85936 sanhedrin70@yahoo.com
QUESTIONS
TO PLURAL MARRIAGE OPPONENTS
(Orson Pratt, The
Seer, pp.191-192)
If among the people of God, polygamy is not more pleasing
than monogamy or the one wife system, why did God command Israel to kill all
their male captives and to save all the virgins alive for themselves? Why did He command them to do this as a
general rule in all their future wars against foreign cities and nations? Was it not instituted an order to supply
Israel with women enough to make a nation of polygamists? Was it not in this way, that He intended to
greatly multiply Israel and make them as the sands upon the sea shore,
according to the promises made to their polygamist ancestors?
If among the righteous polygamists are not more honorable
in the sight of God than the monogamists, why is it that God generally chose
the former to be deliverers, judges, rulers, kings, priests, prophets, and
patriarchs, in preference to the latter?
Why was Gideon who had many wives and no less than seventy-two sons,
chosen to deliver Israel? Why did the
King of kings and the Lord of lords choose to be born into this world in a
family whose ancestors were noted polygamists?
Do not all these things prove, that among the righteous, God preferred
the system of polygamy to that of monogamy?
If polygamy was not permitted in the Christian
Church, why did Paul require Timothy to select from among the church members
men who were the husbands of one wife for the offices of bishops and
deacons? If there were no polygamists in
the church, would it have been possible for Timothy to have selected them? And if not possible, why did Paul give the
advice? Does not this prove most
conclusively that polygamy did exist in that church? Does Paul anywhere represent polygamy to be
evil or immoral? Did not he require such
selections to be made in order that these officers might not be encumbered with
the cares of a large family? It might be
necessary sometimes under particular circumstances, to select young men that
were single of ordination, to be sent on particular missions, where even one
wife would be a great encumbrance and for the time being a hindrance to their
usefulness. Because, under such
circumstances, instructions were given to select single men; should it therefore
be inferred that it was sinful for others to be husbands? So, likewise, considering the arduous duties,
required of bishops and deacons, Paul thought best to select for these offices
husbands having one wife; should it therefore be inferred that it was sinful
for other husbands to have more than one?
Did our Saviour or any of his Apostles ever forbid
polygamy of condemn it as sinful? If not
why should Christendom no condemn it? Do
they think to be more righteous in this respect, than Jesus Christ the great
Author of Christianity?
There are hundreds of thousands of polygamists among
the various nations of the earth who have married their wives according to the
laws of their respective governments.
When Christendom send forth their missionaries to convert them, in what
way can they be admitted into the church?
Must they divorce all their wives but one? If so, which one shall they retain, and which
ones shall they cast away upon the cruel mercies of the world? A certain wealthy, kind, and benevolent man,
in Asia who knows nothing of Christianity, purchases for himself ten virgins
and marries them all at the same time, according to the customs and laws of his
country. Each of his wives raises up
unto him four children. After which a
missionary from Christendom happens along and preaches to him and his numerous
family, Christianity: he, and his ten wives, and forty children, all believe
and wish to be baptized into the Christian Church. He is told by the missionary that he must
divorce all his wives but one, without which he cannot be received. But neither the missionary nor the man
himself know of any rule to decide which one of the ten is to be retained? They were all married to him at the same
time; all have been true to him; and each have borne him an equal number of
children. But at length, without any
rule, the decision is made; nine-tenths of his dear family are put away; not
however, without a heart-rending sacrifice of feelings on the part of himself
and his beloved family. He and his one
wife are now admitted into the church and considered good Christians. But two-thirds of his family who are thus
torn from his embrace and cast out, begin to doubt very seriously whether
Christianity is as good as the religion of their own nation. They begin to think that a religion that will
thus break up families cannot be good; they renounce it at once, and turn to
their idolatry. As for the other third
of the sorrowful outcast wives, perhaps they even have a feint lingering hope
that Christianity is a true system of religion; but having no husband and
protector, they finally meet with an opportunity of marrying idolatrous
husbands; and after a while, having no Christian husbands to guide them, they
entirely lose what little faith they had, and embrace again the religion of
their husbands and fathers, and the poor children follow the examples of their
mothers. Thus the nine wives and
thirty-six children who believed in Christianity and would have entered the church
with their husband and father, had they not been put away, are forced into
circumstances, calculated to destroy and entirely eradicate from their minds
all faith in the Christian religion.
Does Christianity require missionaries to pursue such a course among
polygamist nations? Does it require them
to tear asunder family ties; to break up and scatter in some instances
nine-tenths of those who are nearer and more precious to each other than
life? Does it require them to pursue a
course calculated in its very nature, to make them loathe and detest
Christianity, as more cruel in their estimation than the grave? By what law of Christianity do they teach
such to divorce any one of their wives, except for the cause of adultery? O Christendom, where is thy consistency! It is gone!
It is fled! And absurdity and
every species of wickedness have taken the place thereof! Thou corruptest the nations with thy
whoredoms, and yet thou wouldst feign persuade them that thou are righteous;
but the day is at hand when thine iniquities shall be proclaimed upon the house
tops, and thou shall be judged for all thy filthiness and abominations, and
shall be cast down by devouring fire.
Then shall come salvation, and glory, and honor, and power, and the
reign of peace, and the day of the righteous, wherein Abraham and his wives
together with all his seed that are righteous, shall inherit the earth, and
reign for ever and ever.
—COMMENTARY—
ON
TEST OATHS
“…are not the executive and judiciary expected to
administer the law as they find it?
Certainly, and if they would confine themselves to this, all honorable
men would sustain them. But governors
are nowhere authorized to introduce test oaths, in violation of law…” John Taylor, J of D, 25:354
What is a Test
Oath? Often throughout the Church
history—post Manifesto—we read of these documents administered by the Church to
obtain the allegiance of the members, to the prescribed conditions or men’s
interpretations of the “law,” as well as an oath extracted to observe the said
conditions or interpretations. These
test oaths, likewise “weed out” the undesirable “flaws”, to which “justice” and
“punishment” are executed.
In 1935, in a town called Short Creek, such an oath
was fostered to ascertain the loyalties of the Saints—the town largely being
imbued with pre-Manifesto characteristics.
“The following test oath was given to members
of the Short Creek Branch which all the members, with the exception of one
family, refused to sign. Twenty-one
members were excommunicated as a result.
A copy of this first test oath at Short Creek, in 1935, as follows:
TO WHOM IT MAY
CONCERN—
I, the
undersigned member of the Short Creek Branch of the Rockville Ward of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly declare and affirm, that
I, without any mental reservation whatever, support the Presidency of the
Church; and that I repudiate those who are falsely accusing them, and that I
denounce the practice and advocacy of plural marriage as being out of harmony
with the declared principle of the Church at the present time.
Signed________________________
“This was perhaps the beginning of the use of
test oaths in the Church. This oath is
clearly meant to coerce members into supporting and sustaining the leaders of
the Church into blind obedience. Even if
the members didn’t believe in plural marriage, they couldn’t sign this oath if
they were intelligent enough not to consign their eternal destiny into the
hands of mortal men. It explains that
any mental reservation for not supporting the leaders is a sin worthy of
excommunication. Being subject to a
leadership which requires such servitude “without any mental reservation
whatever”, is equal to the demands of any European or Oriental dictator.” (O.
Kraut, Compromise & Concession, Pioneer Press, pp. 164)
The Church used this test oath and others in the
future, with similar impositions, with the sole purpose of gauging “worthiness”
and to “screen iniquity.” Sadly, the
Priesthood—in our day and age—has utilized these same tactics, and adopted
these wicked practices.
What happened to ones free agency to choose? What happened to the Lord’s warning of
leaning upon the arm of flesh because flesh will fail us? (D&C 1:19). What happened to free thinking? Time and time again, “We have learned by sad experience
that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a
little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise
unrighteous dominion.” (D&C
121:39)
“Because their hearts are set so much upon
the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not
learn this one lesson—That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably
connected with the powers of heaven, and the powers of heaven cannot be
controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. That they may be conferred upon us, it is
true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our
vain ambition, or to exercise control or compulsion upon the souls of the
children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw
themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen
to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
Behold, ere, he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the
pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.” Ibid. 121:35-38)
It falls upon us to be those of the few who are not
only called, but also chosen. And this
concept of “following the Living Prophet” that has crept amongst our fellow
Saints in Bluffdale and Montana is a false and perilous practice. Nothing is gained by following a man—follow
the Lord Jesus, and live by His example.
The brethren are merely a tool in the Lord’s hands, to administer those
eternal blessings to the living and the dead—and to point the way back to the
celestial kingdom. All men will be held
accountable before the Lord. All
deeds—both concealed and conspicuous—will be made known on day.
It falls upon us to remain obstinate against these
foolish, yet dangerous test oaths, BECAUSE THEY DEPRIVE MEN OF THEIR GOD-GIVEN
FREE AGENCY. Always, always strive to
preserve the Fullness of the Gospel and the Priesthood in its purity. It is our duty and we must pray we never
fail.
“We
hold that a companion law to the United Order, is the law of Patriarchal Marriage,
a necessary element of which is known as plural marriage—the law comprehending
the eternity of the marriage relation; that this law of marriage was restored
to the earth through the Prophet Joseph Smith, and that its exactments are
eternal—the only marriage law recognized as legal in the Celestial heavens, it
being the law which our Father in Heaven and His Son Jesus Christ are adhering
to. This is the great social law of
heaven, through which eternal increase is awarded—the law that makes it possible
for men to become Kings & Priests unto the Most High and heirs with Him to
all eternity.
“We
hold that this law of eternal marriage was restored to earth by the Almighty
through His Prophet Joseph Smith in this dispensation, NEVER AGAIN TO BE TAKEN
AWAY OR SUSPENDED; that it is a law of the Holy Priesthood, over which the
Church has no jurisdiction, further than to accept or reject the same, and to
discipline ITS MEMBERS with reference thereto.”
—Joseph White Musser, TRUTH magazine, Vol. 16, No. 1, June, 1950.
Another
Test Oath
(Compromise & Concession, pp. 165-167, Ogden Kraut, Pioneer Press)
Another test oath came out in the Church about four years
after the one used at Short Creek. It
was revised and used in many of the wards and branches. This second test oath read:
1.
That I solemnly declare and affirm that I support the
Presidency and Apostles and the other General Authorities of the Church.
2. That I accept and believe
the solemn affirmation by the Presidency and Apostles of the Church that no one
of them is living a double life; that I repudiate those who are accusing them
of leading such a life.
3. That I accept the “Official
Declaration” or Manifesto of October 6, 1890, as interpreted by the President
of the Church and accepted by the Church as being the word and the will of the
Lord to this people and Church on the subject of plural marriage.
4. That we believe and accept
the Articles of Faith of the Church promulgated by the Prophet Joseph, and have
particularly in mind Article Twelve thereof. (We believe in being subject to
kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and
sustaining the law.)
5. That I denounce the practice
and advocacy of plural marriage as contrary to the word and will of the Lord
and tot he declared principles governing the Church in accordance to the word
and will of the Lord; and that I, myself, am not living in such marriage
relationship nor counseling nor advising others to do so.
________________________________________________________________________
That
Wicked Test Oath
(TRUTH,
6:100)
Rexburg, Idaho
November 18, 1939
Rexburg Stake Presidency
Rexburg, Idaho
Dear Brethren:
Inasmuch as you have been
called upon to act in a matter that is no doubt distasteful and unpleasant may
I express my appreciation and gratitude for you kindness and the thoughtful
consideration that you have shown towards me. The confidence that you have
exhibited I hope shall always be justified.
From my youth I have had a
burning desire to know and to defend the truth and the right as God has given
me the light to see it for there is a conviction borne upon my soul that truth
and right shall triumph over all and with the shield of truth I can pass
through the dark valley of slander, abuse, scandal, and misrepresentation
undaunted and unscathed, calmly and unflinchingly, look the world in the eye
with full assurance that truth shall triumph over error, and right over wrong.
In this day of confusion,
bickerings, contentions, disputations, denials, and affirmations, when the
human mind seems beclouded with error and darkness, and truth seems hidden
behind a veil of tradition and superstition, popular conception, irresistibly
moved to importune my Maker for light to see and to know the truth; for it is
the truth that I want, not camouflage or subterfuge, but facts; and in my
desire to know the truth I should be willing to give my all to possess it.
Inasmuch as you are under
orders to require my signature to a pledge (the purpose of which I can only
surmise), I feel that I must qualify the same by giving you my understanding of
its contents, and so I will treat it in its five major points, each in their
order:
1): That I “solemnly declare and affirm that I support
the Presidency and Apostles and other General Authorities of the Church.”
This matter we have
discussed before. Particularly have I
been questioned concerning my belief in the President and his qualification as
Prophet, Seer and Revelator. Now it seems
to me that we should be reluctant to embarrass the President by forcing him to
divulge these qualifications. I have
heard it affirmed that he has never received a revelation. Can anyone state from knowledge that he
possesses the Seer Stone (the requisite of a Seer)? Has anyone ever heard him prophesy?
No doubt it was an unpleasant
experience for President Joseph F. Smith to testify under oath in the Smoot
investigation concerning such matters and to state that while he was designated
as a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator that he has never received a revelation for
the Church or an individual revelation for himself.
Now, Brethren, why should
the President be criticized for his seeming lack of these prophetic powers if
the Lord has not seen fit to speak to the people through him or to endow him
with prophetic powers. Perhaps it is because
the people are not worthy. And now I
wish to declare that I sustain and affirm my support and pledge obedience to
all the righteous acts and admonitions of all the General Authorities.
2): That I “ACCEPT AND BELIEVE the solemn affirmation
by the Presidency and Apostles of the Church that no one of them is living a
double life; that I repudiate those who are accusing them of leading such a
life.”
To
this proposition I cannot reply because I know nothing regarding their private
lives and my testimony regarding the same would have no value in any court in
the land.
What
is inferred by the statement “living a double life” is not clear to me. I know that some have been accused of living
in plural marriage but I know nothing about their marriage relations. I do know, however, from study, research,
records, and confessions made under oath, and from personal testimony that not
only a number of their predecessors and lessor lights, but great numbers of
other church members not only entered Plural Marriage but lived in that
relation after the Manifesto of 1890 and that the greater part of them were
never disciplined for it.
Does
living a double life mean that the brethren are accused of making statements
out of harmony with the facts? If so I
regret to state that years ago I came into possession of a book written by
President Grant’s brother-in-law, Bishop Heber Bennion, entitled, Supplement to Gospel Problems, and
learning that the statements made in that book were a challenge to my
understanding of many Gospel problems, so I began a deep study of books,
records, documents, and testimonies of living witnesses. In 1931 I came into a possession of what is
known as the Four Revelations, those
of 1880, 1882, 1886, and 1889. I read
them with a prayerful heart to know of their worth. They rang true. Investigation proved them genuine.
At
the October 1932 Conference President Ivins, referring to these four
revelations, stated in substance: There has been scattered about the Temple lot
some supposed revelations which cannot be found in the Church Archives and they
must not be considered authentic. (You
brothers that were present will remember that incident). That statement startled me for I had found
reference to the Revelation of 1880 in President
Wilford Woodruff’s Life and comments concerning its contents.
In President John Taylor’s Life, I found
the Revelation of 1882 in its fullness.
In March, 1933, I had a letter from President B. H. Roberts
acknowledging these revelations to be genuine.
I showed this letter to five prominent members of our stake. One is now Bishop and one, a High Councilman.
In
the Official Statement dated June 17, 1933 sent to Stake Presidents and Ward
Bishops in pamphlet form and published in the Church Section of the Deseret
News, both of which I have, the existence of the revelation of 1886 is
denied. In discussing this denial with
an elderly lady of notable parentage she stated, “I am going to tell you
something. I’m an old lady. I was personally acquainted with President
Taylor’s son, Apostle John W. Taylor. I
knew him well and he stated on many occasions that he knew that his father
received that revelation and rather than deny the truth he would suffer himself
to be drawn and quartered.”
Later
I saw a photostatic copy of the original in President John Taylor’s handwriting
and obtained a copy for myself. I have
compared it with other specimens of President Taylor’s handwriting and they
appear identical. Other statements made
in that Official Document are entirely at variance with statements and
testimonies made under oath and recorded in the Historical Record of the Church
and I find other statements and doctrines taught today that do not harmonize
with the records of the past.
Now,
brethren, I am not responsible for these things. I regret their existence. Such discrepancies do not urge well for
harmony between brethren. Truth is always consistent with itself. It is error that causes confusion, doubts,
suspicions, and uncertainty.
3): That I “Accept the ‘Official Declaration’ or
Manifesto of October 6, 1890, as interpreted by the President of the Church and
accepted of the Church as being the word and the will of the Lord to this
people and Church on the subject of plural marriage.”
This
statement is not clear to my mind. Does
“being the word and will of the Lord” mean that it was a revelation?
It
was not considered as such until recent date.
The subject is so vast that space does not permit me to dwell upon
it. Suffice it to say I have gone
through a bound volume of the Deseret News of 1890. I read all the sermons delivered at the
Conference at which the Manifesto was presented, and nothing was said
indicating that the Lord had anything to do with it. I have gone chairman of the United States
Commission through A. B. Carlton’s works, he being for Utah under the
anti-polygamy laws of Congress and for seven years a member of the Commission
and obtained from him the views of the government on the same.
In
the Commission’s report to Congress dated September 29, 1887, these statements
are made: “The great mass of the Mormon people are making an effort for the
abandonment of the particle of polygamy—Mormonism must yield to the inexorable
logic of civilization. Polygamy must go
and its obliteration will sooner or later be an accomplished fact.”
From
this time forward the Church members, clamoring for a change of policy and for
peace with the Government, greatly increased until the President was forced to
act in obedience to the will of the people.
From
my studies of the histories of the lives of our leaders and the many records
safely say that if the well informed on this subject would voice their honest
convictions they would say that this “Manifesto” was simply a political
document, written not in the words of a revelation but in the language of an
attorney, intended as an expediency to mitigate the troubles of the saints of
that time.
The
reason and purpose for its issue is given in a letter addressed to the
President of the United States in 1891 and written over the signatures of the
Presidency and the Twelve Apostles of the Church. In this letter they state “To be at peace
with the Government and are in harmony with their fellow citizens who are not
of their faith and to share in the confidence of the Government and people, our
people have voluntarily put aside something which all their lives they have
believed to be a sacred principle.”
Now
if that was the reason, as they state, why should we persist in placing the
responsibility on the Lord. Needless to
say the Manifesto has been a bone of contention from the day it was issued
until the present, and because of it, friendly ties have been torn asunder,
brethren in bonds of fellowship have parted company and gone their separate
ways, family ties disrupted, and a spirit of bitterness and misunderstanding
engendered. I dare say the greater part
of the Mormon people have never read the Manifesto.
4); “That we believe and accept the Articles of Faith of the Church
promulgated by the Prophet Joseph, and have particularly in mind article Twelve
thereof.” (We believe in being subject
to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and
sustaining the law.)
I
can subscribe to this without reservation providing the Eleventh Article of Faith
is included which reads: “We claim the privilege of worshipping
Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men
the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.” And providing it is further supplemented by
the word of the Lord on this matter which reads: “And now verily I say unto you
concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people shall observe to
do all things whatsoever I command them.
And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting the
principles of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges belongs to all
mankind and is justifiable before me—And as pertaining to the law of man
whatsoever is more or less than this cometh of evil—and I give unto you a
commandment—that ye shall live by every word which proceedeth forth out of the
mouth of God.” (D&C 98:4-11)
May I
say in this connection if I was forced to make a choice between obeying a law
of God and an unrighteous human law, I would not pledge myself to obey the
latter.
Blackstone
has said in connection with this subject: Any law that runs counter to divine
law is invalid.
5): “That I denounce the practice and advocacy of plural marriage as
contrary to the word and will of the Lord and to the declared principles governing
the Church as adopted by the Church in accordance to the word and will of the
Lord; and that I, myself, am not living in such a marriage relationship nor
counseling nor advising others to do so.”
To this
proposition I will say that inasmuch as the Church has entered into a covenant
with the Government it is their solemn duty to the Government to abide by the
covenant and let me state emphatically that I am not now and never have lived
in such marriage relationship, notwithstanding the scurrilous tales of
scandlemongers, talebearers, and character assassins to the contrary, nor have
I counseled nor advised others to do so.
Now
brethren, I have tried to state my position and understanding of these matters
as I have found them to be. If I am in
error I will be indeed grateful to the one that sets me right. From my youth I have had a love in my heart
for the Gospel of Jesus Christ and have prized next to my mortal life my
standing and membership in the Church and acknowledge with gratitude the
testimony and knowledge I have of God’s work.
My trust is not in man or in his precepts but in the Lord and His
eternal word.
If
the purpose or intent of this pledge is what I suspect it to be, to place a
seal upon my lips and deprive me of the greatest heritage God has vouchsafed to
man, my agency and right to live my own life, to think my own thoughts, and to
voice my honest convictions, and to enjoy the rights guaranteed under the
constitution of our country; if such is the case, the very thought does violence
to my conscience for there are certain things that are dearer to me than life.
Sincerely your brother,
(Signed) JOSEPH T. JONES
Excerpts From The
PRISON DIARY
OF
ARNOLD BOSS
PART III
June 12, 1945
Rulon
Allred tried to benefit some of the inmates here in connection with his
knowledge as a chiropractor, but the Warden forbade it, saying, “All you civil
rights are taken away from you; you forfeited them when you came to prison.”
* * *
June
16, 1945
The
Salt Lake Tribune, this morning carried this information:
“CULTISTIS
APPEAL WRIT DECISION”
The
legal battle of Albert Edmond Barlow and 14 other defendants in the recent
polygamy trials to avoid serving prison terms from one to five years for
unlawful cohabitation moved a second time to the State Supreme Court denying a
petition for a writ of habeas corpus.”
Inquired
about the law of circumcision of Joseph.
He gave reasons for its continuance. The reasons are physiological. It tends to personal purity. It existed before Moses’ day, and is a ritual
that will be re-installed, Joseph said.
It is a part of the restitution of all things. The Saints are not ready for it yet.
I
was told by Brother John Y. he intends having his family re-baptized for a
renewal of their covenants when he gets out of prison. This will not be for a remission of their
sins.
Brother
John Y. said in the presence of Joseph where I was, “he had received assurance
that our prayers had been heard, but was told nothing concerning the time of
our deliverance.
Joseph
and I spent considerable time discussing the Celestial Order of bringing
children into the world. He frowned down
upon rumors being circulated, and believed in, by some of the brethren coming
from the outside. Most all that have
reached us have come through one individual only, Rulon Allred. He said these matters should not be counted
on. Said it would have to be checked.
Had
another chicken dinner today. I remained
in my cell most of the time reading. All
the brethren went outside in the yard.
While outside, they were called together and told, “That we were not
united as one heart and mind. There was
too much loud talk, loud laughter, too much mixing up with undesirables who
were inmates; that we were not pure in mind and body.”
After
all the brethren had come back from the outside, Joseph told some of us, “We
can get out of here just as soon as we are ready, but that we had to quit our
foolishness.”
Monday, June 18, 1945
While
Charles and I were working together in the field, we discussed several
matters. I related an experience seven
weeks old. I had a dream in which I saw
more brethren called into the council.
The brethren being called was a messy affair. Things did not all appear right; things were
dirty. He replied, “It is right; other
men have been called. Three men were
added to the council. Inasmuch as
nothing has been said publicly about the matter, he had not a word to anyone either.”
The
brethren in their order called were Guy Musser, Rulon Jeffs and Richard Jessop.
Edmond
F. Barlow said, “He had received information direct from Bountiful many people
there were back of every man and his family of the men in prison, and would see
to it there was not want. They had
brought supplies to his family as evidence of this. These supplies were left at the Meeting House;
they believing it was Edmond’s home. He
said the people felt outraged out there over what had taken place that it was a
blot upon the church and leaders for what they had done to us.
Learned
Ann and Ethel had gone to the Morrison home to live.
Tuesday, June 19
Cutting
weeds. At four PM when we returned to
our cells, Joseph McKnight, our attorney, for the writ of habeas corpus, was at
the office to meet us. We were asked if
we would be satisfied if both sides submit their briefs and neither of the
parties appear for oral arguments. If we
could not consent to this, then we would have to wait until September
next. If we consented, there would be an
answer very sooner and we would then know our fate. We gave direction to go ahead without oral
arguments.
In
the evening, in Brother John Y’s cell, I told them of my dream of some two
months ago. He said, “Yes, there have
been some changes made and additions made in the council.” He told me the three who had been called,
but he said, “silence is the best policy now.”
I
expressed my views on other things; these, Brother John confirmed as being
right.
These
were associated with men shedding their blood to save others, and sometimes
this was necessary. Men do have their
blood shed for the people.
I
asked John where I could locate the House of Esau today? His reply was, “I think they are the
Gentiles.”
I
asked this, “John, the sealing authority is the highest authority on
earth. To be able to perform a ceremony,
supported by the Holy Spirit of Promise as I understand it, there is nothing
higher.”
He
said, “That is right.”
I
said, “Well then, if that is true, where that authority is exercised, why then
is it, that that same authority that performs the highest acts, cannot perform
the lesser ordinances, such as giving the garment of the Priesthood,
endowments? Joseph the Prophet gave the
twelve and their wives and others their endowments; in later days men received
them on Ensign Peak, even before the Salt Lake Endowment House was built.”
His
answer was, “That question I cannot answer; I don’t know. The Lord will have to answer you that.”
June 21, 1945
On
arising this morning, the cell doors were opened before we got out of bed. Later, Joseph called at my door and said,
“Good morning. In years to come you and your
posterity will look back to this place and time, and will thank the Lord for
the privilege you have had of being in prison.”
After
work, in the evening, I was notified my Inspired Version of the Bible had
come. In place of going outside after
supper to walk around, I spent most of the time in Joseph’s cell.
I asked him what the
forbidden fruit was that Eve had partaken of?
I said some, in the early days, claim it was the sex life; others say it
is not so.
Joseph answered me, saying, “It was the first; and that Cain was not
the son of Seth’s mother. He was another
woman’s son. The father being the
negative power. As Adam and Eve came
here resurrected beings and begat flesh and bones for their children, so the
negative power (Devil—not Lucifer who fell) an immortal being came and
multiplied. Cain was a catch-colt. There are two powers; there are two eternal
powers, both over there and here. And so
they exist upon all worlds. Two powers
exert themselves to exalt and to try men.”
I asked Joseph who the House
of Esau was?
He replied, “The French nation. Esau sold his birthright, and for this act
his posterity has suffered for all these hundreds of years. The Scripture says, ‘in the last days,
Ephraim shall save the house of Esau.’
It means, they then will have paid the price of their father’s sin and
will get the Gospel and Priesthood and will be saved.”
Joseph said in my presence,
in I. W’s and Lyman’s, it was his understanding the sealed portion of the
record Joseph Smith had handled, when he translated the Book of Mormon from it,
that this sealed portion was now
translated. It is waiting for us to get
ready to receive it. We are not waiting
for it to come to us to be translated.
It will come forth, after the House of God is on its way being set in
order.
Joseph also told us, “The Lord has a very definite and special purpose in our being here
in prison. When this is accomplished,
then we would go out and be endowed with power from on high; we will then
receive the Second Comforter. We would have
power given us we did not now have. We
have the authority now, but then would go forth with greater power and
authority from God. We would be sent
among the people; fear would come over the enemy lawyers, judges and all our
enemies.”
He told us, “The Mormon people who have rejected the
gospel would go to hell for a thousand years; and there remain before they
would hear it again. Others who have not
heard of it, will have that opportunity.”
He told us every person born since the death of Jesus
Christ, (all who will ever get into the Celestial Kingdom), will have to pass
by Joseph Smith. This Priesthood,
meaning as represented by the Council now in prison, all Church leaders will
have to receive their authority; the authority they have cast out from among
them and bow down before it. When Joseph
the Prophet comes, he will straighten matters out in very short order.
June 26, 1945
I asked Joseph what Brother
John W. Woolley was put out of the Salt Lake Temple for?
He answered: “He was in charge of the ordinance
work. He went out in about 1911, while
President Joseph F. Smith presided over the Church. Joseph F. Smith performed a plural ceremony
and he, John W. Woolley, took the rap for it.”
In the Improvement Era for June,
1945, there is an article on page 338 by John D. Giles on “RESTORATION OF THE
MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD,” with maps. Get
it for my library. He attempts to
proximate the location where Peter, James, and John made their appearance. It has never been done by map before.
On page 354 is “Ward
Teachers Message for June 1945.” It
deals with sustaining General Authorities and what ones status is, if they
differ with Doctrine with them.
* * *
July 3
Today, Joseph wrote a letter
to the Church President. He did not tell
me of this; I learned of it through others.
I laughed over what I was told.
July 4, 1945
A holiday. No work.
There was some entertainment here today.
Some people from the city were here.
I went to attend it, but no sooner got started than I was called to the
gate. My mother was there to visit
me. We spoke for a long while. I was allowed to speak through an iron gate
to her. This affected me so much I could
not hold my feelings. I burst into
tears. I have never had such a feeling
before in my life. To think I could not
embrace the soul that gave me birth was more than I could keep locked up. She was also affected, but held up
wonderfully. She is a great soul. God bless her. She would follow her children to the ends of
the earth, if they needed help or comfort.
Joseph McKnight, our
attorney called here today. In his
interview with Joseph, he told him, “The County Attorney, Mr. Roberts, had
defaulted in writing his brief.” It
means he will ask for more time, but McKnight said he was protesting it. He intended to appear before the Supreme
Court Justices and demand our release.
We hope it works out that way.
We had a fine July 4
dinner—we had chicken. In the late
afternoon, I saw a picture show called, “Going My Way.” It was a good show.
July 6, 1945
This morning the Warden
called Joseph into his office and said, “Hereafter, only (your) legal wives and
her children would be allowed to visit us in the future.”
He made other statements,
among which he again said, “(You) men were not criminals,” yet our families are
being forbidden to see us.
Notwithstanding, this statement, he claims he has to enforce an
order. Pressure evidently is coming from
outside sources—political and religious.
All the men have been very cheerful since we came in here; maybe this
has reached the public and they intend by the new order to break our spirits
and crush the hearts of our wives and children at home. Several of the brethren have felt this very
keenly for a while today. It seems the
spirit that sought to crush us on the outside has extended into the prison now.
Arthur Halladay, my
step-son, called to see me today for the first time.
July 7, 1945
The work undertaken by
prison authorities here (it was in the nature of the defense work for the
government) ended today. I understood it
was all over the prison authorities refusing to pay the men for their services
in connection therewith. They only get
.25 cents per week. A government
official was here today and stopped all further shipments of war material into
this prison.
Joseph Lyman Jessop left for
the Point of the Mountain today. He will
be out there permanently, I understand.
Several of us brethren started working at the State Fairgrounds today
for the first time.
July 10, 1945
Rulon Allred asked to go to
the Point of the Mountain today to keep Lyman company. He was granted the privilege. We seem to be broken up, some leaving for
distant ground.
July13, 1945
This morning one of the
inmates, a murderer, was shot near sunrise.
We heard the shots very plainly.
There was an awful spirit all through our cells through the night. I feel the power of Lucifer here. It is so thick it can be cut with a
knife—figuratively speaking.
July 14, 1945
Twelve of us brethren were
taken back and forth to the State Fairgrounds all week. John, Joseph, Edmond and I. W. Barlow were
left here.
Joseph called me into his
cell today and read me his preface for the new Adam-God edition soon to be
reprinted with some additions. The first
edition has been exhausted. Also on
“Items on Priesthood.”
There will also be a new
work on the subject of the “United Order” printed soon. Joseph also said, “Up to date they had now
spent some $25,000 on court proceedings in defending our rights, etc., but the
advertising the Principle of Plural Marriage has received before the Mormon
people, this nation and the world, in connection with this expense is cheap,
very cheap.” These were remarks made to
me by Joseph.
(To be continued…)
HOLINESS
Y
TO THE LORD
TRUTH NEVER CHANGES
VOLUME 10, NUMBER 08
AUGUST 2006
No comments:
Post a Comment