← Back to Prince’s Research Excerpts: Priesthood & Mormonism Index

Prince’s Research Excerpts: Priesthood & Mormonism – 1886

Below you will find Prince’s research excerpts titled, “Priesthood, 1886.” You can view other years here.

Search the content below for specific dates, names, and keywords using the keyboard shortcut Command + F on a Mac or Control + F on Windows.


PRIESTHOOD, 1886.

1886:  6 Mar.:  Joseph affirmed that P, J & J visited him.

“Joseph Smith affirmed that Peter, James and John visited him, and conferred on him authority to administer the holy ordinances of the Gospel through which every honest-hearted man and woman was promised the Holy Ghost, and a perfect knowledge of the doctrine.”  (Lorenzo Snow, 6 Mar., 1886; JD 26:375)

10 Mar.:  Handling of funds of Seventies Quorums.

“To the Presidents and members of the Quorum of the Seventies, greeting.  Dear Brethren:

The opportunity not being afforded us at present, of visiting each Quorum of the Seventies in this and adjoining Territories, we take this method of giving our brethren a few words of instruction, and especially of informing them concerning the Receipt and Disbursement of Funds, which the various Quorums have so kindly provided.  For your efforts in this direction, as in all other requirements, we feel truly grateful, and desire that all who are associated with us in our important labors should know what we are doing for the advancement of the Quorums, and how the means intrusted to use are expended.  We therefore present herewith a financial statement for the year ending Feb. 28th, 1886, which will show our receipts and disbursements during that time.

It has been deemed advisable in the past to call upon you to establish a Quorum Fund, supported by the payment of 50 cents annually form each President and member, and that it be sent to Bro. Robert Campbell as General Secretary and Treasurer, creating and supporting what we have called the Seventies’ General Fund; to this call some of the Quorums have responded quite liberally.

The money received during the year has been disbursed in paying indebtness which has accrued in previous years and in meeting our current expenses.  We feel very much encouraged by the hearty response our brethren has given in thus loosing our hands and enabling us to meet the financial responsibilities pertaining to the organization and development of this great body of the Priesthood.

We also, design, dear brethren, that when our funds shall be large enough, to assist those who are suddenly called to take foreign missions and those who are unable to furnish the necessary means to enable them to fill the same.

[page 2] We hope to see our brethren so regulate their financial affairs that they may be free from the bondage of debt, and thus be constantly in a condition to leave at a moments’ notice and go wherever they may be sent to preach the gospel.  Quite a number of our brethren in times past and recently have sent to us a request to be excused from taking a mission because of financial embarrassment.  We deem it advisable to say to the Seventies, that it is their duty to place themselves, as soon as possible, in a condition that will enable them to respond at once to any call made by their brethren presiding over them in the Priesthood.

We have to remind you again, that quite a number of the Presidents of Quorums have not yet forwarded to Bro. Campbell their Bishops’ Recommends, and it is highly necessary that this should be attended to at once; that these documents may be found on file in our office at headquarters.

Some of the brethren have been quite slow in forwarding their genealogical reports of the Quorums.  We wish them to respond to this request heretofore made upon them as soon as possible.

Many are still without their licenses.  The necessary steps should be taken immediately to procure them; the method of which you are, no doubt, familiar with through our former instructions given on this subject.

We are gratified to learn by the reports made recently, that your Quorum meetings are uniformly held, and that in some instances as many as from one to five Theological classes have been established in each Quorum District; showing that you are not only manifesting a laudable zeal for the cause of God, but exhibiting a desire to learn His ways more perfectly, and preparing for the time when you shall be called to disseminate the principles of eternal truth to the honest in heart among every nation and kindred, tongue and people.  

[page 3] That the hallowed influence of the Spirit of God may be with you to prosper you in every good word and work is the sincere desire and prayer of your brethren and fellow-laborers in the cause and kingdom of God.

H. S. ELDREDGE, Presiding,

ROBERT CAMPBELL, Sec’y and Trea’s.

Salt Lake City, March 10, 1886.” (Levi Edgar Young Papers, Utah State Historical Society, B12, Box 8, Fd 12, Misc Pamphlets, 10 Mar 1886)

17 Mar.:  Power and danger of secret societies.

“The power which has been developed and exhibited in the boycotting exploits of the Knights of Labor in various parts of the United States, is highly suggestive.  It shows to some extent what may be done, under the pressure of circumstances, by an organization so widely extended under strong and careful direction and administration.  It is claimed by a leading man in the ranks of the Knights, or rather in the commandery, that the simultaneous movements of the order in different places were mere coincidences, and not the results of a concerted plan.  This may be true, but the indications are strongly to the contrary.  They bear every appearance of general direction from some central authority.

But if they are simply coincidences, they are no less suggestive of wonderful possibilities.  If such great results can be achieved and such effects produced, when no guiding hand has directed the common outbreak, what could not be accomplished with these potent forces if managed from a central source of regulation?  The possibilities loom up into gigantic proportions, and it needs no stretch of the imagination to forsee most astonishing probabilities.

The organization called the Knights of Labor is not, at present, so revolutionary in its nature and purposes as many of the secret organizations with which society is afflicted.  It is not so radical, nor destructive, nor menacing to existing affairs as they.  But it wields enormous power by reason of its growing membership and its general extension.  And its very moderation gives it influence among working people rather than among adventurers, anarchists and conspirators against society.  And herein is the probability of its becoming formidable in the changes that will arise, and the complications that may be expected, in the coming conflicts between labor and capital.

The feelings of animosity that are growing up between employers and employed in many parts of this nation as well as in Europe, are likely to become stronger and more bitter as population increases and wages become less.  It will not take very much pressure to so change the policy and principles of a wide-spread, compact and earnest organization, as to make it really revolutionary and terrible in its action and power throughout the land.

We look for the greatest troubles with which this nation will be afflicted to come from the secret societies that are lurking and working beneath the surface of society.  And they are not far distant.  The woes pronounced by the ancient seers of this land upon the nations that permit those secret works of darkness to flourish in their midst, were uttered with a full view of their workings and results.  Those troubles are bound to come.  And when the outbreaks occur which are impending, it would not be at all surprising if societies organized with more pacific motives and designed only to aid the working population by laweful methods, should join in the disturbances which are fomented for the pulling down of wealth and ower and the professed deliverance of the masses from injustice and poverty.

We do not think it wise for any of our people to unite and become identified with these secret societies, no matter how pacific and apparently harmless may be their present programmes and intentions.  Our people should unite and throw in all their powers together, with a single eye and aim.  Our forces should not be divided.  Everything necessary to promote the welfare of the people of God can be found within the fold of the Church and kingdom of God.  In that should be centred all their interests.

We do not oppose those organizations for the amelioration of the condition of toiling mankind.  At the same time, we see no need for our friends to become identified with them.  Our advice would be, Let them go their way and we will go ours.  We have interests higher and more exalting than anything in which they are engaged, and it is not good policy for Latter-day Saints to be mixed up with other societies, organizations, cliques or cabals of any description.

We are a people who have been called out of the world for a special work that is divine.  And when the difficulties arise that are sure to come, we will not be required to mingle in the strife nor be complicated in the troubles, but are destined to be saviors of our country, its constitution, the principles given by inspiration to its founders, and to maintain that liberty and those rights of man that will yet be the glory and the pride of a people freed from the evils that now threaten the world.  Be wise, and keep clear from all worldly entanglements.”  (Editorial, “Power and Danger of Secret Societies,” DN 35(9):136, 17 Mar., 1886)

23 Apr.:  Excommunication.

“Excommunicated.

Oakley, April 18, 1886.

This is to certify that, at a public meeting of the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in Oakley, held this day, Ammon Tolman was excommunicated for the crime of adultery.

H. D. Haight, Bishop,

H. H. Severe, Clerk.”

(Reprint of report of 23 Apr.; DN 35(15):233, 28 Apr., 1886)

26 May:  Common consent.

“The demand made of the ‘Mormon’ Church to give up a part of its creed to please the majority of the American people, proceeds from egotism, intolerance and arrogance combined.  It supposes that, ‘We, the majority, must be right because we are the biggest.’  It acts on the principle of might over right.  And it assumes to dictate and compel where it cannot rightfully command or polemically convince.  It also largely springs from ignorance.  If people who talk so glibly on this demand understood the subject, they would see that it is impossible for the ‘Mormon’ Church to do anything of the kind.  And further, they would perceive that no person, power, body or authority under heaven has the right to make any such requirement.  The Church is independent in its sphere, and has the right to hold any doctrine that seems right to the majority of its members, and to promulgate it as an article of faith.

But there is a great deal of misinformation in regard to the position of the Church in relation to the laws which the ‘Mormon’ people are asked to promise to obey.  It is represented that if the Church would only do so and so, if the Church would command this obedience, if the Church would remove alleged pressure upon the people, the whole thing would be so easy that falling of a log would be hard labor in comparison.  When it is known that these same people who are to be relieved, instructed, commanded and so on, are themselves the Church, perhaps the folly of all this talk will dawn upon the minds of those who have been misled by it.

Every man or woman, every boy or girl, who has been baptized into the ‘Mormon’ Church and remains in its fellowship, has an equal vote in its affairs as an organized ecclesiastical body.  One of the principles of its constitution is that ‘all things shall be done by common consent.’  It takes the whole body to comprehend the Church.  the head is but a part of it.  The revelations of God are just as binding upon the head as upon the foot.  And the leaders of the Church are no more responsible for the doctrines that form the accepted creed of the Church than the members are.  They cannot change a principle.  It is not for them to set aside a decree of the Almighty.  The body of the people understand what the Lord has communicated concerning the principle of celestial marriage, and if a leader was to depart from it, his defection would be a matter of regret, but not of difference to their faith or practice.

It is not within the province of any man to direct the people to disobey the law of God.  The idea that this could be done in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is entirely erroneous.  It may as well be dismissed from the consideration of the ‘Mormon’ question by those who wish to discuss it or to arrive at correct conclusions.

The law of God and a statute made by man appear to be in conflict.  What are the ‘Mormons’ to do in relation to the matter, and what is the attitude of their Church?  The answer is, every man stands upon his own agency, and the Church does not interfere with it.  He can take his choice.  He is left free to act upon his volition.  He can learn what is right if he wishes to do so, and need be in no doubt about it.  But his course is open and no obstruction is placed in his way or force exercised to restrain or compel him to proceed.

But it is claimed that men who have agreed to obey the law as construed by the courts are punished, ostracised, ruined in business, threatened in various ways, and those who would do so are terrorized into refusal to comply.  Who claims it?  Not the parties themselves.  There is no man who has made the promise who utters such a complaint, there is no man who has refused who has alleged that he has been in any way compelled to do so.  Who, then, brings these charges against the Church?  No one that we know of, except a few vile scribes who uphold the very worst elements of society, apologize for bestial corrup0tion as ‘the common vices of humanity,’ and advocate the gambling house, the drinking den and the brothel as antidotes to ‘Mormonism.’  They make the assertions, they repeat them without the slightest foundation for their falsehoods, and keep up the assault with little obstruction because decent people do not care to be always noticing their blackguardism.

They refer to a gentleman who has figured prominently in this condition, and every now and then impudently drag his name before the public in an attempt to illustrate their charge, while his position and exemption from harm are proofs of the falsehood of the accusation.  The DESERET NEWS pointed out the error of the position he took, as it had the right to do.  And this is cited as proof of ostracism, denouncement and ruination.  It is repeatedly asserted that the article was written by President George Q. Cannon.  We have never noticed the falsehood before.  It is uttered with frequent repetition to make it appear that the leaders of the Church figure in these matters.  Other articles that have appeared in these columns have been attributed by those reckless scribes, for the same purpose, to the same author.

We feel highly flattered when our poor efforts are taken for the productions of an able mind, and a powerful pen that has not been wielded for this paper since the gifted gentleman named relinquished its editorial charge.  But we deny that he was the author of the the article referred to, or others that have been attributed to him.  He neither wrote, dictated or suggested them and had nothing to do with the responsibility for them.  If the statements that have been so repeatedly made are mistakes, they show the incapacity of those who fall into them to distinguish between the well known styles of different writers.  But we believe they are not blunders.  They are wilful falsehoods invented for a purpose.

We are willing to shoulder all the responsibility that belongs to us.  We do not wish to shirk any of it.  We claim the right to express approbation or disapprobation of the public acts of men, whether they be officials or otherwise.  But we have sought to injure no one who has chosen to obey man rather than God.  He stands or falls for himself.  He makes his own choice.  He takes all the risks in either direction.  Neither the Church nor any man in it will assume the consequences of his acts.  He will be judged in the great day, for himself.

We have our views of duty and right in the light given to us.  We expect to express those views as they are, while opportunity is afforded us.  And we have as much right to show up one side of this question as our opponents have to exhibit the other; and, as we think, more right to do so than they have to misrepresent and utter wilful falsehoods to bolster up a false position.  We interfere with no man’s liberty either of conscience or conduct.

And we maintain that every soul in this Church is free to pursue that course which he chooses.  If he violates the rules of the Church and does not repent he will be excommunicated on proof of his wrong.  But he will not be injured in body or in business by any force or edict of the Church.  No man who has simply made the agreement which is sought to be forced upon the acceptance of the ‘Mormons’ has been ever cut off the Church for doing so, and every assertion that he has been molested in any way for his act is a gross and palpable falsehood.

The Church proclaims its doctrines, it lays down rules for the government of its members in that capacity, it says what is right and what is wrong ‘reproves, rebukes and exhorts with all longsuffering and doctrine,’ but it uses no force of any description to coerce any of its adherents, and there are no freer people under the heavens than the Latter-day Saints, commonly but improperly called ‘Mormons.'”  (Editorial, “Individual Freedom in the ‘Mormon’ Church,” DN 35(19):296-297, 26 May, 1886)

6 Jun.:  Rebaptism and reconfirmation.

“Bros. John F. & Wm B. Laub & their wives & Bro Jacab Laub were all baptised for the renewal of covenences and Tacy Hunt baptised for the remission of sins, or first bapti.  I assisted Uncle John Pulsipher in confirming them.”  (Orson W. Huntsman diary, 6 Jun., 1886; LC Collection)

1 Jul.:  Lesser priesthood most in contact with people.

“It is the lesser Priesthood that is brought most in contact with the people.  If wolves or coyotes, or dogs or scabby sheep are in the flock, they should soon find it out; and if they suffer them to remain without trying to drive them off great blame rests upon them.

These reflections have suggested themselves by hearing the young man, Flowers, who killed his wife and her mother and shot himself, a short time since, was a member of the Church.  We do not know the particulars of the case, and therefore cannot speak definitely about it.  But when we heard that he was a member of the Church we were greatly shocked.  From the reports that have been made of him, he was a drunkard, a violent character and a dangerous man.  Perhaps he had not long been a man of this character.  If he had been, he should not have been allowed to remain in the Church.  An awful responsibility would rest upon some of the officers of the Church if they were to permit such wickedness to exist in the Church.”  (George Q. Cannon, JI 21(13):200, 1 Jul., 1886)

8 Sep.:  Cleansing the Church.

“The Elders upon whom devolves the duty of teaching the Saints in a public capacity are largely actuated by the spirit to reprove, admonish and entreat.  This is the genius of genuine teachers in the community.  Like sleepless ‘watchmen,’ they are lifting up the warning voice concerning  evils that are creeping in among the flock.  It is specially urged upon the officers of the Church that they perform the important duty of ridding the body religious of corrupted and dead members.  The condition of the people requires just such an attitude on the part of those who wish to see the purity of the Church maintained and perpetuated.

If the Lord holds in His hand a sore scourge for application upon the wicked of the world, justice, upon which His throne is seated, requires that He shall not pass by with impunity those who profess His name who perpetrate similar evils for which He will condemn the nations.  Neither will He hold those wholly guiltless who suffer such things to exist in the community of Saints whose duty it is to see that they are eliminated that the Church may be preserved, so far as practicable, free from sin and uncleanness.

There are two processes by which they desired object can be attained.  (1) By means of repentance of the wrongdoer.  Of course this applies only to that class of offenders whose infractions of the laws of God are not of that gross and flagrant character  that demands their unconditional expulsion.  THen it is the plain duty of the officers to labor with backsliders and offenders with the sole object of bringing them to repentance.  We are of opinion that more can be accomplished in this line in a private capacity than by public teaching.  In fact the very position of a backslider and offender is such that it is rare that he accepts of an opportunity to be taught and admonished in a public assembly.  Even when he happens to be present, he is left free to take general teachings or strictures home to himself or conveniently imagine they have an application to other people.  No so when approached privately; then matters can be brought directly home to himself.  Teachings and advice thus tendered are also accompanied by the personal influence of those who seek his welfare.  If the teacher be exemplary, as he should be, this will have considerable weight.

In order to have influence with an offender against the laws of the Church, he who seeks to reclaim him whould not approach him in a combative, denunciatory or querilous spirit.  He should be dealt with in the spirit of friendship and sympathy, the welfare of the individual being the chief object in connection with inducing him to repent.  Men and women as a rule will listen with respect to people who are seeking their interest.  And if they are convinced that such is the case they will not be likely to cast aside their advice as a trifle unworthy of notice.

Experience has convinced us of the greater potency of private methods of reclamation over those of a more public character.  Their efficacy has been demonstrated abroad as well as at home.  People abroad are frequently captivated and struck by the force and truth of the preaching of the Elders.  But this effect is often more or less evanescent.  Let the Elder who is kind and persuasive mingle among the people, gain their good feelings in that way, even without his saying a great deal about religion, the foundation for conversion of lovers of truth is laid, for the explanations of the missionary will be listened to, their acceptance being made more sure by the confidence reposed in him and the esteem in which he is held.  And so it is in the gathering place of the Saints.  Perhaps, if a little more of that zeal and care exhibited in making converts to the faith were shown here in preserving people in it and their feet from going onto forbidden paths, a better and purer condition would exist.

At no time in our history has it been more necessary for all good men in the Church to act for the benefit and purification of Zion.  Every man should, in the language of revelation, be diligent and stand in his own place and not in that of another, that harmony may be preserved and all conflicts and disagreements disappear.  Many of the chief watchmen (including the venerable President of the Church) whose hearts yearn after the welfare of the community, are hunted as were the servants of God in ancient times.  Their voices are no longer heard in the congregations of the people, to direct them in the ways of righteousness.  The Spirit of God is being withdrawn from the nations, and Satan has great power over the hearts of the children of men.  He is also making a powerful effort here to draw away the Saints from the restraints of their religion.  Inducements to indulgence in wrong are multiplying on every hand, and the plank upon which the people may glide down to destruction is being oiled for the hoped-for occasion.  And we say here, with a solemn desire for the weal of the community, that all those who are not possessed of and enveloped by the Spirit of God, taking the promptings of that Divine influence for their guide, are in danger.  The spirit of lewdness, of lying, of sabbath breaking, of a disposition to be ‘lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God’ is abroad in the earth.  It is more or less manifest here, for those who have not yet rid themselves of the spirit of the world are liable to be affected by the influences by which it is moved.  Those who suffer themselves to be overcome and will continue in wrong-doing have no rightful lot nor part among the people of God.

When calls to repentance fail, recourse should invariably be had to the law of the Church.  ‘He who sinneth and repenteth not shall be cast out and shall not have place among you.’  The commandment is express and unqualified.  It is the final means of purification of the Church, the initiatory process being repentance.  If the latter is not exhibited by the wrong-doer after being labored with, the Almighty will hold the sluggish watchmen who fail to apply the law responsible to some degree at least for the corruption of the Church of Christ, whose power is clogged not only by the presence among the faithful of the unrepentant sinner, but by the effects of the latter’s example, for every man, good or bad, has an influence in one direction or the other.  It should also be remembered that within the ranks there is no privileged class.  Partiality in the enforcement of the law of God is a solemn and inexcusable mockery, such as must fill the angels with sorrow and disgust.  If the law is applied in some cases while others equally flagrant are allowed to pass as if they had no existence, those who are dealt with have some ground of complaint, notwithstanding that the decrees in reference to them may be founded in justice.

Difficulties stand in the way of the officers in complying with the requirement to cleanse the interior of the platter.  They may appear almost insurmountable.  But as a rule they will dissolve before the action of the preayerful, upright, just and conscientious man.  It does not seem that it would be judicious to make an onslaught upon those guilty of what might be termed minor offenses until those of a more heinous character are disposed of, for it is not consistent to neglect the ‘weightier matters of the law,’ and attach too much comparative importance to those that are lighter.

In all these matters two prime objects should be kept in view–the salvation of those in error and the welfare of the Church as a whole.  All personal and selfish ends should be eliminated, for the condemnation of those who use a sacred calling for the gratification of personal feelings and the attainment of selfish ends, will be great.  And whether in calling the backslider to repentance, or the application of the law in relation to offenders, there should be no pomposity nor harshness.  Such exhibitions are inconsistent with the proper use of authority.  And it is in the exercise of power that a man shows the greatness or littleness of his soul.

In this connection, we cannot do beter than quote from the words of the Propeht Joseph Smith, as contained in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants:

That the rights of the Priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that 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 dominion, or compulsion, upon the souls of the children of men, in any degre 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.”

(Editorial, “About Cleansing the Church,” DN 35(33):536, 8 Sep., 1886)

6 Oct.:  Presidents’, Bishops’, Teachers’ pastoral duties.

“We again call upon the Presidents of Stakes and the Bishops of Wards to look carefully after the wants of all who are within their jurisdiction and stand in need of assistance.  Especially should the families of those who are in prison, or who have been compelled to flee, or who are upon missions, be tenderly cared for.  They need both aid and sympathy.  Those upon whom the heavy hand of persecution does not personally rest should be willing to share the burdens of their afflicted brethren and sisters, by contributing to the comfort and sustenance of those who are deprived of the society and guidance of husbands and fathers for righteousness’ sake.  By so doing they will lay up treasures in heaven, and share the reward for these trials.  The weight of this persecution falls upon the women and children.  Deprived of the presence and support of their husbands and fathers, upon whom they have been accustomed to rely, they are comparatively helpless and naturally a prey to deep anxiety.  The care and training of the children thus bereaved devolves upon their mothers, whose burden is made doubly heavy to bear.  The Teachers should be particularly diligent in visiting such families, and in watching over their welfare.  Thus the hands of the mothers should be strengthened, the young encouraged, the wayward admonished, and the heroic example of the heads of those households held up for admiration; and everything possible should be done to make their situation tolerable and pleasant.  In this way we can bear each other’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ, and witness to our God and to the world, that though we may not personally suffer persecution, our sympathy and faith are with those who are afflicted for adherence to their religion, and that we are ready and willing to do our part and manifest our devotion to the cause of Christ.”  (First Presidency Epistle, 6 Oct., 1886.  In Clark, Messages 3:76)

9 Oct.:  Joseph said Peter, James and John visited him.

“While attending college at Oberlin, Ohio, in the spring of 1836, I had occasion to visit Kirtland, some sixty miles distant, where two of my sisters were residing.  At that time this was the principal settlement of the Mormons.  Joseph Smith, his  counselors and leading Elders then had their homes in that locality, and the Saints had just completed a beautiful edifice called a temple.  I became acquainted with Joseph Smith, his counselors, and a number of the prominent leaders.  I attended several of their meetings, at which it was their custom for lay members, both men and women, to speak–give their experiences, and testify regarding their extraordinary spiritual manifestations.  I talked with these people, their prominent Elders, with Joseph and his aged father, the Patriarch of the Church.  I marvelled and was exceedingly astonished while listening to what they solemnly declared regarding their wonderful experiences.

The strange things I heard and saw at their prayer and testimony meetings, those marvelous experiences as related by men and women whose sincerity and honesty I could not doubt, and as they asserted these were the natural and legitimate fruits of obedience to what they called the restored New Testament gospel, together with the priesthood, which held the keys of right to administer its ordinances of baptism for the remission of sins, and the laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Ghost.  These things, as I said, overwhelmed me with astonishment.  Joseph Smith assumed this position which no false prophet would dare–viz: that he had received the visitation of three angels, Peter, James and John, who, in the name and by the command of the Son of God, authorized him to preach the gospel, administer its ordinances, and promise the Holy Ghost, which would impart a knowledge of his authority and divine mission, and his right to organize the Church of God on the earth, to prepare a people for the second advent of the Son of Man.  Under these circumstances, gentlemen, I could not otherwise than believe that Joseph Smith was honest and sincere; and I knew that his statement was of that peculiar character in which with him there could be no chance for deception; and such testimony, if false, could be no less than positive villainy.  In view of these facts, gentlemen, I felt it my duty to accept this gospel–and would you not yourselves?”  (Lorenzo Snow, 9 Oct., 1886, “How I Gained My Testimony of the Truth,” YWJ 4(5):215-216, Feb., 1893)

13 Oct.:  Duties of Teachers.

“A friend who has resided tow years in Manti, Sanpete County, draws our attention to a subject which he deems of much importance.  As to the vital character of the question we heartily agree with him.  During the period named he has been visited but once by a person officiating as a Teacher, and says that the hands at the Temple boarding house are seldom or never visited by one acting in that capacity.  This situation may possibly be superinduced by the local ecclesiastical officials being reticent with regard to assuming jurisdiction in their religious capacity over those whom they probably look upon in the light of visitors.  There is no necessity for any feeling of that character, however, as they are under their supervision, so far as their offices admit, just as effectively as if they were actual residents.  If it were otherwise those Saints who may be absent from their permanent homes would be minus the supervisory care of the Church.

The question of the duties of the Teacher, from a general standpoint, as regards the entire Church, is one of great interest.  It would not be stretching the truth of the position to assume that, speaking as a whole, they are very imperfectly performed.  Every man should stand in his own calling and not in that of another, and all its duties should be executed intelligently and thoroughly.  He who accepts of the office of a Teacher should, by consulting the revelations on the subject, and by a prayerful spirit and reflection become familiar with its obligations.  He will thus be in a position to act with intelligence.  The next step, to insure thoroughness, is to allow no ordinary circumstances to constitute an obstacle to prevent him performing the duty he has undertaken.

It is the prerogative of the Teacher to be a peacemaker, and bring about a settlement of all disagreements and disputes between the Saints under his care, and where this is impracticable, to report to the Bishop, that such cases may be adjudicated in the Court which is composed of the last named official and his Counselors.  It is always the better way, however to bring about reconciliation in the earlier stage.  By this procedure the important element of unity in the Church is preserved and maintained.

It is incumbent upon the same officer to see that the Saints ‘meet often together, or, in other words, that they attend meetings that they may be instructed in matters pertaining to the duties of their religion, partake of the sacrament, etc., that the spirit of the Gospel may not languish amongst them.  In this way life is infused throughout the body-religious.

One of the most important duties of the Teacher is to ‘see that no iniquity exists in the Church.’  If professing Latter-day Saints are guilty of any of the grosser offenses, it is his duty to seek diligently to discover the fact and report to the Bishop, that the offenders may be dealt with according to the covenants and commandments.  It is always in order for the officer named to use an influence to bring sinners to repentance, and to take a course generally so as to prevent any of the sheep of the flock that can be saved from being lost.  In this way abominations and ever species of wickedness are eliminated and the purity of the Church maintained.  This duty of the Teachers of itself exhibits the importance of the office.  Its duties lie at the root of matters, and without their performance the more advanced processes of the organization cannot be fully operated.

The spirit of peace must accompany the Teacher, and he must be an exemplification of the principles he should enunciate.  Otherwise his operations will be practically without weight.  It will be absurd and inconsistent for him to advise the people to attend meetings if he personally absents himself from the gatherings of the Saints.  If he be an unobliging neighbor, quarrelsome and a backbite, with what degree of complacency can he reprove those who are in the same way disposed?  If he is unchaste, his instructions on personal purity are but boomerangs that strike back upon himself, even if he is the only one near acquainted with his departures from the law of the Lord.

The objects for which the office of Teacher was placed in the Church cannot be attained by the person who holds it going around his district in a rush, as a matter of form, to enable him to subsequently report that he has gone through his field and ‘found all the Saints about as usual.’  Entering the houses of the Saints and talking about the weather, the crops, business and other people’s affairs will not accomplish the desired end.

When the Teacher enters the house of a Latter-day Saint he should be given a cordial welcome.  He may move in a humble sphere, so far as the things of the world are concerned, but he is a servant of God, and as such he should be treated.  He should be given an opportunity to perform the duties of his calling.  Household work and, other occupations should be temporarily suspended and the head of the house shoiuild call the members of the family together and to order, and inform the Teacher that they are ready to receive whatever instructions he may be ready to impart.

Doubtless if the duties of the teacher were more intelligently, thoroughly and effectively performed than they have been and are the Church would be more vigorous and healthful than it is to-day.”

(Editorial, “The Duties of the Teacher in the Church,” DN 35(39):614, 13 Oct., 1886)

13 Oct.:  Ecclesiastical vs. civil law.

“A letter has been handed to us from a distant settlement, in which the writer desires some explanation through this paper, for general benefit, on the subject of the course to be pursued towards offenders against the laws of the land and of the Church.  A case that arose in his neighborhood has given rise to this application.

Two brethren quarrelled over some dispute and came to blows.  The encounter was witnessed by several persons and was publicly known.  Yet no action was taken either before the Ward or before a court.  The affair caused much discussion, and it was contended by some that the parties ought to have made a public confession of their wrong.  The writer of the letter added to this the opinion that they ought then to have been taken before a Justice of the Peace and punished for their offense.  But many condemned the latter idea and also the action taken by him in another case.  When acting as Justice of the Peace he passed sentence upon a brother guilty of a breach of the peace.  His course, he says, was considered a violation of the law of God that brother should not go to law against brother.

The law of the Lord requires that he who offends many shall be chastened before many; that he who offends openly shall be rebuked openly.  (D&C 43:90-91)  It is the duty of the Teachers ‘to see that there is no iniquity in the Church, neither hardness with each other,’ etc.  Such a case as that described should be reported to the Bishop of the Ward, who should take such action as the circumstances require.  It is not for us to say what ought to be done in any given occurrence.  On general principles, however, the course to be pursued is clear.  He who sins before many should be rebuked before many, and when members of the Church make a public scandal they should make a public acknowledgment.  Circumstances vary in different cases, and it is for the local authorities to determine each case upon its own merits.

It is quite right that those who break the law of the land should be punished by the law of the land.  If men steal, or murder, or commit crime of any kind they are amenable to the criminal law.  Neither the Justice or the jury that tries an offender of that kind, nor the officers making the arrest or the witnesses who truly testify in the case, if all brethren, violate the rule of th Church that brother shall not go to law against brother.  That regulation applies to civil cases, to disputes between members of the Church that can be settled by aid of the Teachers or before the Church courts.  It does not refer to breaches of the criminal law.  The distinction is obvious.  Everybody ought to understand it and perceive the difference.  The Church does not try men and women for crimes against the public, except so far as their fellowship and standing in the Church are affected.  The penalties of the criminal law must be inflicted by that law.

If a member of the Church breaks the law, a brother or sister is not under condemnation for assisting in the vindication of the law, unless it is done vindictively, in a spirit of malice or revenge.  But civil suits are another thing entirely.  If a man steals, he is liable to arrest and punishment, even if the person from whom he has stolen has no desire to complain against him.  The law claims him and provision is made to inflict its penalties upon him.  It is a public offense and passes from private management.  But if a man owes another a debt and does not pay it, that is a private affair which can be settled between the parties or with the aid of the Church.  And not until those means which the Church has provided to secure justice between brethren have been exhausted, has the wronged brother the right, as a Church member, in such case to appeal to the secular law.  So with disputes between brethren on any private matter.

But though it is right and proper that he who breaks the criminal law shall be punished by the criminal law, it does not follow that in every case a quarrel like that described must of right and necessity be brought to criminal trial.  A peace officer witnessing a fight ought to arrest the parties, and the fact that he is a brother and they are brethren should have nothing to do with his course.  The law is no respector of persons.  It knows neither ‘Mormon’ nor ‘Gentile,’ saint nor sinner.  But every person is not required to turn common informer.  If two men quarrel and come to blows, and neither of them makes a legal complaint against the other, we know of no requirement that binds every witness to the quarrel to make complaint before a magistrate.  At the same time, if a bystander does this he cannot be condemned for going to law with his brother, for, as we have shown, that rule relates to the civil and not the criminal law.

A little common sense, good judgment and calm discretion should be exercised in such matters.  Excessive desire to magnify petty offenses and make a public affair of something that could be settled in private without injury to the community, is to be discouraged everywhere.  Justices of the Peace should not be overanxious for business.  Constables should do their duty without partiality.  But small disturbances can often be quelled without the necessity of a judicial investigation.

It is a shame and disgrace to any persons calling themselves members of the Church to be engaged in a personal physical encounter.  Think of Saints fighting with each other!  Such conduct cannot be tolerated by the Church.  Men who so far forget themselves and their covenants as to commit this wrong, ought to be willing to confess their sin and ask forgiveness of those whom they offend.  And if they sin before many they should be rebuked before many, that they may be ashamed and that others may be deterred from similar wrong-doing.

And the hands of the conservators of the public peace should be strengthened.  Rowdyism and violence should be discouraged.  The local courts are organized for the purpose of protecting the public welfare.  They should, with their officers, be honored in their sphere.  It would be a great deal better for some people inclined to lawlessness to be brought before the local courts and punished, than be allowed to proceed in their evil ways to the disturbance of the public and their own progress on the path of destruction.

Let each organization claim its own.  The Church has its sphere, the courts have theirs.  Neither should interfere with the other.  Order should be maintained, even if the exercise of the powers of both are necessary to its maintenance.  And those who are in authority will be held responsible for the proper discharge of their duties or the neglect of their responsibilities.  ‘Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.”  (Editorial, “Ecclesiastical, Civil and Criminal Law,” DN 35(39):614-615, 13 Oct., 1886)

15 Oct.:  Power of opposition to priesthood always here.

“When the Priesthood is on the earth there is always an opposing power which manifests itself in various ways to deceive the people.”  (George Q. Cannon, JI 21(20):317, 15 Oct., 1886)

26 Oct.:  Never a more critical time for the priesthood.

“There never was a time when the Holy Priesthood, in its various branches, offices and labors, had a greater work to perform, than in our day.  The searching out of iniquity, the purifying, sanctifying, and cleansing of the people, the uniting of the Saints and the general perfecting off Zion rest upon the brethren and the Holy Priesthood who dwell in Zion.”  (First Presidency Epistle, 26 Oct., 1886.  In Clark, Messages 3:98)

3 Nov.:  Home Gospel Dept./Duties of Priests.

“Recently we drew the attention of the Priesthood and Saints to the important character of their duties in relation to tithes, offerings and certain matters pertaining to Ladies’ Relief Societies.  There are many other practical matters that are largely, and some of them almost totally, neglected.  As they are at the root of spiritual life, they cannot be ignored with impunity.

The Lord, when He organized the Church, instituted a complete system, which has attracted the wonder of those even who are opposed to it.  It is to be presumed that He instituted no superfluity in connection with the religious body.  It is not only absurd but sacrilegious to suppose such a thing.  Yet as a Church we largely denote by our actions that we entertain such a conception of His doings.  He has provided for every branch of labor necessary to carry the work of establishing the truth on the earth to a successful issue.  Through the active operation of the Higher Priesthood the Gospel is carried to the nations afar and the people who accept the divine message are gathered to the place appointed as the present central location of the Church.

Equal provision has been made by divine wisdom and appointment to convey the Gospel to the people after they come here, not only through the agency of public meetings, but to tak eit in letter and spirit, to their firesides.  If one half the zeal were manifested in the latter department of the labor that is exhibited in the former, the general condition of the people would be incomparably in advance of what it is.  Not only is the home department of evangelization censruably neglected, but some of the means by which it can be successfully prosecuted are practically set aside.  The right to thus ignore an instrumentality which has been divinely instituted is, to put it mildly, decidedly questionable.

In connection with this subject it may be consistently asked: Where is the Priest?  Has he, so far as his parctical duties are concerned, been shelved as effectively as some people dispose of the books containing the revelations of the Lord to the people in this last dispensation?  If he has been thus laid away, we will lift him from the obscure corner into which he has been thrust and see whether the dust-marks can be wiped from his garments, which have certainly not been worn threadbare by hard work.  If he is left to rust or be covered over with cob-webs, how much better is the situation of his superiors in office than that of the anti-revelation sectarian preacher, who exclaims in relation to the glorious gifts of the Gospel enjoyed anciently–‘These things are all done away, being no longer needed?’  Not much better, if any, so far as the setting aside of any one thing which the Lord has established for a purpose is concerned.

An application to the Book of Doctrine and Covenants (page 125) shows that–‘The Priest’s duty is to preach, teach, expound, exhort, and baptize, and administer the sacrament, and visit the house of each member, and exhort them to pray vocally and in secret and attend to all family duties.’  He is empowered, by virtue of his calling, and by appointment–which latter, however, in these days, he seldom receives–to carry the Gospel into the houses of Saints.

It may be urged that there are so few Priests–pure and simple–that to use them for a labor so extensive is scarcely practicable.  This scarcity is caused by so many of the brethren having been ordained to the higher offices of the Priesthood.  But this is no practical reason at all; otherwise it would apply with equal force to the Teacher.  It is safe to say that comparatively few of those who officiate in the latter capacity hold the office, being merely authorized to act in it by appointment, on the rule that the higher officer can legally perform the functions of the lesser.  If this rule is good in reference to the Teacher it has equal weight with regard to the Priest.

This carrying of the Gospel, with its benigh spirit and blessings into the homes of the Saints must be attended to.  If it is not, there will continue to be, as there is, to a large extent, a spiritual sickness that needs dispelling.  It is necessary to meet every class of cases.  None should be denied the bread of life–not one.  If it is necessary to keep spiritual life glowing in the bosoms of those who are situated so they can attend the public gatherings of the Saints, how much more powerfully does this have application with regard to those who cannot?  There are hundreds, and we might not be far out of the way in saying thousands, of people more especially our sisters, peopole who are sick, and those whose circumstances detain them, who do not have opportunities of meeting in public gatherings, and they are therefore denied the privilege of partaking of the sacrament of the Lord’s supper and other blessings refreshing to the soul.  And they are thus permitted to languish in spiritual obscurity.  This is all wrong, especially as the Lord has provided for these blessings to be conveyed to those who are unable to go to the places where they are ordinarily dispensed.

Why cannot the Priesthood be employed in this legitimate channel of his duty?  An empty echo comes back as an unsatisfactory reply.

Let each Bishop look about him and see whether the necessity for adopting these suggestions exists in his jurisdiction.  The investigation will render him more familiar with the condition of his flock, with whose status, individually and collectively, he should be thoroughly acquainted.  He will find as a rule, that there is ample work for the Priest as well as the Teacher.  He holds the keys, by virtue of his office, of presidency over the Lesser Priesthood, and it is his duty to point out and direct the labors of those who officiate in its capacities.  In the language of revelation on the subject–‘Let every man learn his duty, and to act in the office in which he is appointed, in all diligence.  He that is slothful, shall not be counted worthy to stand, and he that learns not his duty and shows himself not approved, shall not be counted worthy to stand.'”  (Editorial, “The Home Gospel Department,” DN 35(42):664, 3 Nov., 1886)

15 Nov.:  Justice and mercy by Church officers.

“There seems to be among many of the officers of the Church a want of understanding respecting justice and mercy.  A good many seem to have the idea that they are prompted by feelings of mercy for the sinner when they tolerate him and do not deal strictly with him.

The most merciful Bishop is the one who requires the sinners to comply with the law of God.  If a member of his ward commits a wrong, he instructs his teachers to visit him and lay before him the law and its penalty.  If the sinner repents, he ought to be and will be willing to comply with every requirement of the law.  He will satisfy the full demands of justice and say: ‘I have sinned; I have broken the law of God; I am sorry therefor and repent thereof, and am willing to endure the full penalty of the law.’

This is the feeling which every true penitent has when he sees his sin in the true light.

Every officer of the Church, who loves justice, feels the same.  He may pity the sinner; he may have deep regret, because he yielded to temptation and transgressed the law of God; but he will feel that mercy cannot rob justice.  Desiring the salvation of the sinner, he knows that the best service he can render him is to have him comply strictly with the full demands of justice.  When this is done, mercy can interpose, and claim its rights on behalf of the sinner, but not until then.

Here it is where many well-meaning officers and members err.  They assert the claims of mercy on behalf of the sinner before justice is satisfied; and the result is, if their views prevail–a patched-up, miserable affair, that leaves the sinner in a bad plight, dissatisfied with himself and self-condemned, because he feels in his secret heart that he has not made the proper atonement for his sin.

Who is the best friend to the sinner: the officer who calls him to a strict account for his transgression, or the officer who, through a feeling of mistaken clemency, permits him to pass along without making the necessary reparation?

The latter is not a true friend to the man who sins; he is really his enemy.

A Bishop who permits a man to go on in the transgression of the law of God, may think himself a kind and benevolent man; but so far as that transgressor is concerned, he is doing him a great injury; for if he truly loved the sinner’s soul and had his salvation at heart, he would take every means in his power to check him in his wickedness and to bring him to a realizing sense of his true condition.  By promptly attending to this, a person who has taken the first step in sin may be checked in his downward course.  His conscience may be pricked and he may be aroused to his danger.  Whereas, if he be allowed to proceed and take one step after another without receiving remonstrance or warning, the difficulty of repenting is greatly increased.  Who can tell how many men and women might have been saved from falling into grave transgressions, or in some cases, into apostasy, if some kind friend or friends had visited and plead with and warned them in time?

From many wards reports come which show there is great lack of vigilance and care on the part of the officers in dealing with transgressors.  Men and women are permitted to hold a membership in the Church, some of whom say they have no faith in this principle or the other principle of the gospel, and others of whom are guilty of sins, such as drunkenness, Sabbath-breaking, blasphemy, back-biting, not to mention sins of a grosser character.  Yet they are tolerated as members; their names are permitted to remain upon the books of the Church; and notwithstanding the bad character of their lives, if they choose to come to meeting, they are permitted to partake of the sacrament without a question or remonstrance!

The President or Bishop who will permit such characters to remain connected with the Church, or to share in its ordinances, will have a great sin to answer for, and condemnation will rest upon him.”  (George Q. Cannon, JI 21(22):348-349, 15 Nov., 1886)

24 Nov.:  Church can’t fellowship evil.

“We have received a correspondence from a man who holds a responsible ecclesiastical position in a ward of Millard Stake.  Taking it as a whole, our judgment is that no good purpose would be subserved by its publication.  This opinion is based on the fact that certain evils that are described, being strictly local, should be dealt with in that capacity, with a view to their correction, so far as the Church is concerned.  In that regard they come more or less under the immediate purview of the writer of the communication.  If any good would result from more pointedly designating the particular settlement involved and giving publicity to the full details, this would be done.

One of the lamentable features described is the imbibing of strong drink by a number of youths, causing the usual disgraceful results of fighting, profanity and disturbance of the peace.  Not the smallest among the wrongs perpetrated was the dispensing by the co-op store of the place of the vile stuff which produced these shameful and demoralizing effects.  That institution was consequently the first cause of the commotion, such participation being highly discreditable.

So far as persons claiming to be Latter-day Saints take part in or aid any such disreputable and unchristianlike proceedings, they should be dealt with in an ecclesiastical capacity, with a view to bringing them to repentance; and in case they continue in their wickedness, the Church should manifest that it has no fellowship for such doings or those who engage in them.  This applies everywhere else as well as to the locality alluded to.  If the law of God in relation to offenders is trampled under foot and those who set it at defiance are not dealt with in the spirit of it, those whose duty it is to see in enforced participate in the guilt involved.

The writer of the letter asserts in pretty plain terms that one of his counselors in the position he occupies is not acting in harmony with the interests of the community.  The columns of a newspaper are not the proper medium through which to prefer that charge, neither is the general public the proper party before whom it should be laid.  Each Stake and Ward is in an organized condition, and all matters of that character should be dealt with and adjusted before and by the courts and authorities therein.  It may here be stated, however, that no body of the Church can prosper when there is a want of harmony among the presiding officers. A jar at the head causes a shock to affect all the subordinate members of the body.  No schism of that character should be permitted to exist.

While upon this subject we will take the liberty of reproducing, from the columns of the Juvenile Instructor, an article from the pen of the editor of that magazine.  It covers a good deal of ground upon an important subject, and is in exact harmony with our own views:

There seems to be among many of the officers of the Church a want of understanding respecting justice and mercy.  A good many seem to have the idea that they are prompted by feelings of mercy for the sinner when they tolerate him and do not deal strictly with him.

The most merciful Bishop is the one who requires the sinners to comply with the law of God.  If a member of his ward commits a wrong, he instructs his teachers to visit him and lay before him the law and its penalty.  If the sinner repents, he ought to be and will be willing to comply with every requirement of the law.  He will satisfy the full demands of justice and say: ‘I have sinned; I have broken the law of God; I am sorry therefor and repent thereof, and am willing to endure the full penalty of the law.’

This is the feeling which every true penitent has when he sees his sin in the true light.

Every officer of the Church, who loves justice, feels the same.  He may pity the sinner; he may have deep regret because he yielded to temptation and transgressed the law of God; but he will feel that mercy cannot rob justice.  Desiring the salvation of the sinner, he knows that the best service he can render him is to have him comply strictly with the full demands of justice.  When this is done, mercy can interpose, and claim its rights on behalf of the sinner, but not until then.

Here it is where many well-meaning officers and members err.  They assert the claim of mercy on behalf of the sinner before justice is satisfied; and the result is, if their views prevail–a patched-up, miserable affair, that leaves the sinner in a bad plight, dissatisfied with himself and self-condemned, because he feels in his secret heart that he has not made the proper atonement for his sin.

Who is the best friend to the sinner; the officer who calls him to a strict account for his transgression, or the officer who, through a feeling of mistaken clemency, permist him to pass along without making the necessary reparation?

The latter is not a true friend to the man who sins; he is really his enemy.

A Bishop who permits a man to go on in the transgression of the law of God, may think himself a kind and benevolent man; but so far as that transgressor is concerned, he is doing him a great injury; for if he truly loved the sinner’s soul and had his salvation at heart, he would take every means in his power to check him in his wickedness and to bring him to a realizing sense of his true condition.  By promptly attending to this, a person who has taken the first step in sin may be checked in his downward course.  His conscience may be pricked and he may be aroused to his danger.  Whereas, if he be allowed to proceed and take one step after another without receiving remonstrance or warning, the difficulty of repenting is greatly increased.  Who can tell how many men and women might have been saved from falling into grave transgressions, or in some cases, into apostasy, if some kind friend or friends had visited and plead with and warned them in time?

From many wards reports come which show there is a great lack of vigilance and care on the part of the officers in dealing with transgressors.  Men and women are permitted to hold a membership in the Church, some of whom say they have no faith in this principle or the other principle of the gospel, and others of whom are guilty of sins, such as drunkenness, Sabbath-breaking, blasphemy, back-biting, not to mention sins of a grosser character.  Yet they are tolerated as members; their names are permitted to remain upon the books of the Church; and notwithstanding the bad character of their lives, if they chose to come to meeting, they are permitted to partake of the sacrament without a question or a remonstrance!

The President or Bishop who will permit such characters to remain connected with the Church, or to share in its ordinances, will have a great sin to answer for, and condemnation will rest upon him.”

(Editorial, “The Church Cannot Fellowship Evil nor its Perpetrators,” DN 35(45):711, 24 Nov., 1886)

11 Dec.:  Who should receive MP?

“Resolved, by the High Council, that the Bishops of this Stake be instructed to use greater diligence in training the youth of Israel, in the duties of their calling, in the Lesser Priesthood, and that they only recommend men to receive the Melchisedek Priesthood as the Spirit gives them evidences of their worthiness for such promotion.

Angus M. Cannon, 

President of Salt Lake Stake of Zion.”

(Reprint of report of 11 Dec.; DN 35(48):764, 15 Dec., 1886)

15 Dec.:  Appeal for all 70s to register.

“TO THE SEVENTIES.

(Note: Presidents of Stakes, Bishops and all Presiding Officers will please give this appeal all possible publicity in their meetings.)

Salt Lake City, Dec. 15, 1886.

To all Presidents and Members of the Seventies’ Quorums.

Dear Brethren:  On the 13th of April, 1883, instructions were given by the First Presidency of the Church upon the organization of the Seventies and a plan was proposed, snactioned by the voice of revelation, whereby this body of the Priesthood might be placed in perfect working order.  Since that time no effort has been spared to induce all the brethren who considered themselves Seventies to procure their Bishops’ recommends of good standing, by the presentation of which their names could be enrolled on the new general and quorum records.  That our labors have been to some extent fruitless is apparent from the meagre reports which have been forwarded from some of the quorums.  We are therefore led to the conclusion that many professed Seventies are either through thoughtlessness, carelessness or faithlessness unworthy of the Priesthood conferred upon them.

In order, however, that no person may be left unnotified of his duties, we make this final appeal to all whose names are not yet recorded to immediately obtain their Bishop’s recommends and have their names properly enrolled; and the Presidents and clerks of the various quorums are hereby instructed to no longer consider such persons as members of their organizations who fail to attend to this important duty before the first day of April, 1887.

We sinderely trust that this matter will receive the immediate and careful attention of all concerned, and that the Seventies’ organization may thus soon become the effective and complete body which it was and is designed it should be.

Your brethren in the Gospel,

Henry Herriman,

H. S. Eldredge,

Jacob Gates,

Abraham H. Cannon,

Seymour B. Young,

C. D. Fjeldstead,

John Morgan,

First Seven Presidents of the Seventies.”

(DN 35(49):781, 22 Dec., 1886)

22 Dec.:  Training in the Priesthood.

“The resolution of the High Council of this Stake of Zion published in Friday evening’s Deseret News, is worthy the attention of others than those to whom it is specially addressed.  The necessity of training the young men of the church in the duties of the lesser or Aaronic Priesthood, before they are placed under the responsibilities of the higher or Melchisedek Priesthood, must be readily seen as soon as it is pointed out.  There may be exceptions to this, but there can be no doubt that it should be the rule.

There is a very large body of Elders in the Church, and this is quite right in consideration of the magnitude of the great latter-day work which is yet but dimly opened to the general view.  All the officers and quorums and helps in the Priesthood, will yet be needed for the labors that will in due time devolve uon the servants of the Lord clothed upon with His authority.  But it cannot be denied that there are many who have the name of Elders who seem little entitled to the office.  They do not appear to seek for the spirit of their calling.  They are dead-heads in the Priesthood.

Some of these have been recommended to that office simply to give them an opportunity of receiving the blessings of the House of the Lord.  This in our opinion is not according to the Divine design.  It was no doubt intended of the Lord that men only should be ordained to this high and holy office who are adapted and qualified to discharge its duties and honorably bear its obligations.

It would seem that if a young man is fit to go into the Temple, receive its ordinances and enter into the holy estate of sacred matrimony, he is worthy to receive that portion of the Melchisedek Priesthood.  This no doubt is correct.  But it does not follow that he is worthy of either because he wants to marry within the rules of the Church and has paid his tithing.  He should have been found personally worthy and qualified for ordination before he is recommended from his Ward.  The rule which permits marriages between members of the Church who have not received the ordinances of the Lord’s House, by the Bishops in the respective Wards is a wise and benificent one, and it precludes the necessity of recommending persons who are not found fully worthy to the blessings of the Temple.  It is desirable, of course, that every young man and every young lady who enters into the marriage relation should be qualified and worthy to be sealed according to the law of the Priesthood.  But it is and will be a fact that some are not so qualified and worthy, and the next best things is then in order.

In order to train our young men so that when the proper time arrives they may be ready to assume the responsibilities of the higher Priesthood, they should, as a rule, be inducted into the duties of the lesser, by ordination into the quorums which have been organized according to divine revelation.  The quorums of the Aaronic Priesthood are under the direction of the Bishopric.  The Priests’ quorums must be presided over directly by Bishops.  The Teachers and the Deacons quorums should be filled up by youths and others who manifest a desire and disposition to serve the Lord, and they should be instructed in the principles of the Gospel and the duties of these callings as a gradation towards the higher offices in the Church.

A very wide field is open to the lesser Priesthood.  Read the duties required of its incumbents in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. They are vitally important.  The very life and purity of the Church are to some extent dependent upon the faithful discharge of those duties.  The Deacon is to help the Teacher, and the Teacher the Priest, in house to house visitations and ministry.  If those duties were properly attended to, how thoroughly organized we would be, how much iniquity might be rooted out and, what is far better, prevented, and how much strife might be quelled or avoided!  There are many things which are aired in public that have no business to be brought before a congregation; they belong to the ministrations in private of the lesser Priesthood.  Men who hold such callings are expected to be peace-makers; to teach family duties; to promote internal harmony and purity; to lead to the performance of both private and public duties; to build up the Church on the inside and watch over its interests.

If the Bishops would make special labor of keeping up these quorums and promoting their efficiency and interest, they would accomplish a glorious work in Israel, and the youths thus trained would be fit for higher responsibilities as soon as they reach to man’s estate.  And then the promotion, as suggested by the High Council, shoulid be as the Spirit of God shall dictate.  Personal preferences and family connections should cut no figure in the matter.  The gifts and callings of God to a man and the whisperings of the Holy Ghost in reference to him, should be the guide in ordinations to any office in the Church of Christ.  And whatsoever is more or less than this ‘cometh of evil.’

We impress upon all who are interested in the welfare of Zion, the need and wisdom of uniting in carrying out the suggestion contained in the Resolution of the High Council of this Stake.”  (Editorial, “Training in the Priesthood,” DN 35(49):774, 22 Dec., 1886)

22 Dec.:  The art of presiding.

“Considerable interest has been taken by the Saints in articles that have appeared of late upon subjects in line with the spirit of internal progress.  So far as we can learn, they have not been without profit.  They have been prompted by a recognition of the fact that the development of the internal strength will the better enable the Church to withstand the violent assaults made upon it from without.

A subject that presents itself in that connection is the necessity for every man who has been appointed to any capacity of presidency in the wards or branches of the Church, whether it be high or humble, acting in his position harmoniously with the genius of the Gospel.  The organization as a whole being the most complete in existence necessarily involves an exceedingly large number of presiding positions of various grades, rendering the subject under consideration all the more important.

The art of presiding among the people of God is one of the greatest of Divine gifts to man, and to be entrusted with an office of that nature is one of much importance, no matter how humble it may be–because of its responsibilities.  It involves authority over the heritage of God, and great will be the condemnation of those who treat it lightly or use it wrongfully.  Poverty, riches and other conditions common to mortals test the characters of individuals, but none causes the true nature of a man to stand out in such conspicuous relief as power.  By its exercise he will exhibit, without fail, the largeness or the contracted character of his soul.

The man who is most fitted to preside over his fellows is he who is able to do so without appearing to.  He carries himself with that admirable deportment which si the outgrowth of dignity of character combined with humility, exhibiting that patience and long suffering which were among the chief traits of the Savior’s harmonious character.  By manifesting a due consideration for the situation, circumstances, degree of intelligence and other elements among those of whom he has the watchcare, he is made strong.  Such men are essentially great, no matter how humble may be their ordinary sphere of life, and where they preside, those who are subordinate to them instinctively submit to their direction.

The most obnoxious manner of presiding is the antipodes of the one just described, being what might be termed the assertive method.  It is exhibited by frequent announcement of the character of the position held by the person acting in it, the implication being that that fact alone should be deemed sufficient to insure obedience.  Acting as if everything necessary to be accomplished could not possibly be properly done unless personally attended to by the individual presiding, is another phase of the same style.  By some a most important factor in the art of presidency seems to be lost sight of–that it consists mostly of using others to the best possible advantage for the furtherance and development of the work; making the best possible utilization of the material at command.  No material that is fit for use should be left to languish in a state of dormancy.  Nature and nature’s God inform us, in thunder tones, that activity is life and stagnation is death.

It may be accepted as a truism that no man can completely fulfil the obligations of presidency unless he be informed upon the duties and functions of every position within the range of his jurisdiction.  If he be ignorant in this regard, intelligent direction on his part is an impossibility.  HOw needful then that those who preside in any capacity within the Church place themselves in the position of men of ‘sound understanding.’

In the matter of measures, those who direct affairs in the wards and other divisions of the Church will find that there is great advantage in intelligent explanations.  They form an excellent preparatory process, placing the minds of the people in a position to intelligently accept of propositions when they are advanced.  By this means those interested are enabled to give their consent understandingly, having been previously convinced of the necessity for the action.  thus the presiding officer carries his flock with him, which makes him a tower of strength for good in their midst.  In fact the whole forms a symmetrical entity, the head being firmly joined to the body and recognizing the utility of each member in its place.”  (Editorial, “The Art of Presiding,” DN 35(49):776, 22 Dec., 1886)