Tag: Utah

  • Utah Women’s Equality

    Utah Women’s Equality

    For the fourth year in a row, Utah has been named the worst state for women’s equality, as it still lags behind the state ranked 49th — Idaho.

    2021’s Best and Worst States for Women’s Equality
    The Salt Lake Tribune, August 23, 2021
    https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/08/23/utah-ranked-worst-state/

    The husband, the holder of the household, is established this day in this marriage covenant as the head of the family and the breadwinner. It may be hard for you to recognize this role, young lady, but your happiness is conditioned upon it.

    That All May Be Edified, Boyd K. Packer, p230, pub. 1982.
    https://deseretbook.com/p/all-may-edified-plans-building-spirituality-boyd-k-packer-4204?variant_id=106457-paperback

  • Russell M. Nelson’s Flaming Spiral Dive Miracle

    Russell M. Nelson’s Flaming Spiral Dive Miracle

    I remember vividly an experience I had as a passenger in a small two-propeller airplane. One of its engines suddenly burst open and caught on fire. The propeller of the flaming engine was starkly stilled. As we plummeted in a steep spiral dive toward the earth, I expected to die. Some of the passengers screamed in hysterical panic. Miraculously, the precipitous dive extinguished the flames. Then, by starting up the other engine, the pilot was able to stabilize the plane and bring us down safely.

    Doors of Death, Russell M. Nelson, Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, General Conference Address, April 1992
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1992/04/doors-of-death?lang=eng

    Attention Billy L Abram

    Per telephone conversation this date this is additional information on safety and compliance record summary of Sky West Airlines which we provided to you Jan 6 1977 Sky West Airlines has had 3 engine failures from Oct 17 1976 through Nov 24 1976 First incident involved Cessna 210 N30796 on Oct 17 1976 Ferry flight conducted under part 91 Investigation revealed exhaust valve failure Total time on engine 1270 hours No injuries to pilot No damage to aircraft Second incident occurred Nov 11 1976 involving Piper PA 31 N74985 Pilot experienced rough engine on scheduled flight between Salt Lake City and St George 3 passengers on board Engine was feathered and precautionary landing made at Delta Utah per instructions company manual Investigation revealed cylinder base studs sheered As result of occurrence Sky West changed maintenance procedures by checking torque studs at each 100 hour inspection No damage to aircraft No injuries to crew or passengers Third incident occurred on Nov 24 1976 involving Cessna 206 N72161 Ferry flight No passengers or cargo on board After takeoff from St George Utah pilot heard loud bang and engine stopped Made emergency landing one mile south of St George No injuries to crew or damage to aircraft Investigation revealed failure of crankshaft counter weight retaining pin After third incident Salt Lake City Gado made an indepth investigation of engine failures and maintenance practices of airline Engine failures not related even though they occurred in short timeframe No deficiencies found in maintenance practices of carrier After second incident a Lycoming service representative schooled all pilots on proper operation of Lycoming engines Found that company was operating engines in accordance with Lycoming’s recommendations All occurrences were reported on SDR’s No violations filed as result of investigations.

    Civil Aeronautics Board Reports, Volume 73, By United States. Civil Aeronautics Board · 1977.
    Page 1090, Sky West Airlines, Incident on November 11, 1976.
    https://www.google.com/books/edition/Civil_Aeronautics_Board_Reports/wNa3AAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=skywest%20incidents%201976&pg=PA1090&printsec=frontcover

    Other Recommended Reading:

  • Out of Wedlock

    Out of Wedlock

    Excerpt from an April 1930 General Conference talk by Sylvester Q. Cannon: 1

    BENEFITS OF HIGH MORAL STANDARDS 

    Now what are the evidences as to the benefits of the observance by the Latter-day Saints of high moral standards as compared with other people ? I would like to take the opportunity to give you certain government statistics. The Church does not keep record of births out of wedlock, but the government records for Utah and Idaho, where the majority of the Latter-day Saints live, as compared with the rest of the United States, show that the illegitimate birth rate in each of these two states is less than one-third. And that is true also of still-births out of wedlock. Is that any evidence to you as to the benefits of the observance of the declarations of God and the teachings by the leaders 

    References

    References
    1 April 1930 General Conference – https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1930a
  • Slavery in Scriptures

    Slavery in Scriptures

    Excerpt from an October 2020 General conference talk by Quentin L. Cook:1

    This was a time of tension on several fronts. Many Missourians considered Native Americans a relentless enemy and wanted them removed from the land. In addition many of the Missouri settlers were slave owners. And felt threatened by those who were opposed to slavery. 

    In contrast our doctrine respected the Native Americans and our desire was to teach them the gospel of Jesus Christ. 

    With respect to slavery our scriptures have made it clear that no man should be in bondage to another. 

    From the Bible, 1 Peter 2:18:2

    18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.

    On February 4, 1852 an ‘Act of Relation to Service’ was passed in the Utah territory, making slavery legal. 1 Several weeks later, the ‘Act for the Relief of Indian Slaves and Prisoners’ was passed on March 7, 1852, specifically dealing with Indian slavery. 3

    A speech by Governor Brigham Young in Joint Session of the Legislature, January 23, 1852: 3

    “I have this section in my hand, headed “An Act in Relation to African Slavery.” I have read it over and made a few alterations. I will remark with regard to slavery, inasmuch as we believe in the Bible, inasmuch as we believe in the ordinances of God, in the Priesthood and order and decrees of God, we must believe in slavery. This colored race have been subjected to severe curses, which they have in their families and their classes and in their various capacities brought upon themselves. And until the curse is removed by Him who placed it upon them, they must suffer under its consequences; I am not authorized to remove it. I am a firm believer in slavery.

    Now to the case before us with regard to slavery, with regard [to] slaves that [are] Africans, or that are English, or that [are] Dutch, or ourselves—I go in for making just such laws as we want upon that matter, independent of any other nation under the heavens; let us do that [which will bring about what] we want to be done regardless of the abuses of despotic governments. Whether they deem it to be right or wrong is no matter to me, but to do the thing we ought to do, to secure those blessings we are in pursuit of, ought to be the first and most weighty consideration with us; that is my mind upon this matter. This case comes up and causes feelings of not a pleasing character in the minds of some.

    The African enjoys the right of receiving the first principles of the Gospel; this liberty is held out to all these servants. They enjoy the liberty of being baptized for the remission of sins and of receiving the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands; they enjoy the privilege of living humbly before the Lord their great Master, so as to enjoy the spirit of the Lord continually. In short, as far as the common comforts of life, salvation, light, truth, enjoyment, and understanding are concerned, the Black African has precisely the same privilege as the white man. But they cannot share in the Priesthood; they cannot bear rule; they cannot bear rule in any place until the curse is removed from them; they are a “servant of servants.” We are servants, as Counselor George Smith has stated; he says he is a slave; he has been driven from his home and his rights—we are all servants. Now suppose that we should have a servant, and he should be a Negro; it is all right; it is perfectly reasonable and strictly according to the Holy Priesthood. I loathe the abuses to which the slave in a great many instances is exposed, although as a general thing that part of the Negro race that are in servile bondage, are much more comfortable and better provided for than the lower classes of the nations of Europe.

    Though the enlightened nation, England, has abolished slavery in her colonies, yet the most damnable slavery exists at the very heart of the nation. I am bold to say that you cannot find a Black man or woman in the United States that has traveled through the period of his life in hunger in the midst of plenty. Yet there are millions upon millions in the cities of Europe who have lived amidst the choicest luxuries of life and died at last in starvation; thousands died of starvation in England the year that I was in that country. That is meaner slavery than to set them to work in growing cotton and sugar, etc. I would not wish to go to the enlightened nation of England to know what slavery is because they are so far sunken in iniquity and so deeply degraded. People contend about it to know what it is; we know it exists, and such a thing shall and will exist until the Lord God shall remove it; until then it will and ought to exist. There are many brethren in the South, a great amount of whose means is vested in slaves. Those servants want to come here with their masters; when they come here, the Devil is raised. This one is talking, and that one is wondering. A strong abolitionist feeling has power over them, and they commence to whisper round their views upon the subject, saying, “Do you think it’s [146] right? I am afraid it is not right.” I know it is right, and there should be a law made to have the slaves serve their masters, because they are not capable of ruling themselves.

    When the Lord God cursed old Cain, He said, “Until the last drop of Abel’s blood receives the Priesthood, and enjoys the blessings of the same, Cain shall bear the curse;” then Cain is calculated to have his share next and not until then; consequently, I am firm in the belief that they ought to dwell in servitude.

    The caption of this bill I don’t like, I have therefore taken the liberty to alter it. I have said, “An Act in Relation to Manual Service,” instead of “African Slavery.” I have also altered the latter part of it. I am willing the bill should be thrown back to be remodeled.

    I would like masters to behave well to their servants, and to see that every person in this territory is well used. When a master has a Negro and uses him well, he is much better off than if he was free. As for masters knocking them down and whipping them and breaking the limbs of their servants, I have as little opinion of that as any person can have; but good wholesome servitude, I know there is nothing better than that.

    Suppose I am in England and bring over 100 persons, males and females, and they pledge themselves to pay me in labor, but as soon as they arrive here they refuse to abide by their contract and turn around and abuse their benefactors. See the abuse that Dan Jones has received, who prevailed upon Sister Lewis to spend almost every dime she possessed to help individuals to this place; they curse both her and him and this they will continue to do, waxing worse and worse until they go down to hell (I say they ought to be her servants). Many more such cases could be brought to bear. There should be a law to govern this, that those who have made contracts to labor, they may perform their labors according to said contracts.”

    References

    References
    1 2020 General conference talk by Quentin L. Cook – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/broadcasts?lang=eng&video=October-2020-General-Conference
    2 Peter 2:18, King James Version Bible – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/nt/1-pet/2?lang=eng
    3 Speech by Governor Brigham Young in Joint Session of the Legislature, January 23, 1852 – https://archive.org/details/CR100317B0001F0014
  • Fair Shake

    Fair Shake

    Excerpt from an April 17, 1860 New York Times article, ‘Polygamy and its Fruits’:1

    ‘Some time ago HEBER KIMBALL was lecturing some missionaries who were preparing to start out on foreign missions, in the Tabernacle, and said to them: “Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother Missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake.” The old reprobate then had at least a score of women whom he called wives.’

    References

    References
    1 April 17, 1860 New York Times article, ‘Polygamy and its Fruits’ – https://www.nytimes.com/1860/04/17/archives/from-utah-polygamy-and-its-fruitsthe-missionariesthe-pony.html
  • NAACP

    NAACP

    Excerpt from a Salt Lake Tribune article from June 8 2020, ‘Despite joining President Nelson in call to end racism, NAACP would like to see the LDS Church do more.’: 1

    In yet another symbolic gesture of racial unity, LDS Church President Russell M. Nelson joined with top NAACP leaders Monday in calling for an end to “prejudice of all kinds.”

    High-level representatives of the two groups delivered much the same message opposing racism as they had two years ago but during a much different moment — coming amid nationwide protests in the wake of the George Floyd killing.

    “Unitedly we declare that the answers to racism, prejudice, discrimination and hate will not come from government or law enforcement alone,” they wrote in an op-ed for Medium. “Solutions will come as we open our hearts to those whose lives are different than our own, as we work to build bonds of genuine friendship, and as we see each other as the brothers and sisters we are — for we are all children of a loving God.”

    Theirs is an unexpected and unfolding collaboration.

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ centurylong ban barring blacks from its all-male priesthood and from its temples kept the Utah-based faith at odds with the NAACP well after the ban ended in 1978.

    Now, 42 years after that prohibition was lifted, the nation’s oldest civil rights organization and the church have become increasingly friendly, but their emerging partnership has not borne the fruits that some NAACP leaders had hoped.

    While he supports the sentiments expressed in Monday’s article, Wil Colom, special counsel to the NAACP president, said the group “hasn’t seen very much” progress on joint projects.

    The LDS Church has united with the historic black activists, the Medium piece said, to explore “ways to work together to improve self-reliance and upward mobility for inner-city and minority families.”

    Indeed, the two organizations have collaborated on a handful of employment and education initiatives. But those were “minor efforts,” Colom said. They “do not befit the stature and magnitude of what the LDS Church can do and should do.”

    The NAACP is “looking forward to the church doing more to undo the 150 years of damage they did by how they treated African Americans in the church,” Colom said, and by their “endorsement of how African Americans were treated throughout the country, including segregation and Jim Crow laws.”

    Derrick Johnson — the NAACP president and CEO, who signed the op-ed with Nelson and who met in Salt Lake City with the Latter-day Saint leader in May 2018 — said Monday that Colom was authorized to speak for the organization.

    “Since the relationship, formalized just two years ago, both organizations have learned much about one another,” church spokesman Doug Andersen said Monday. “Pilot projects involving money management and self-reliance have been completed in cities throughout the country with more to come. Senior leaders from both organizations continue to engage in determining how best to meet the practical needs of both organizations.”

    Monday’s article, also signed by Leon Russell, NAACP board chairman, and the Rev. Amos C. Brown, chairman emeritus of religious affairs for the group, decried Floyd’s death while in Minneapolis police custody as a “heinous act of violence” and urged “government, business, and educational leaders at every level to review processes, laws, and organizational attitudes regarding racism and root them out once and for all.”

    Saying that the “wheels of justice should move fairly for all,” the leaders lamented the “anger, hate, contempt and violence spilling onto America’s streets” and prodded parents, family members and educators to teach children to “love all, and find the good in others.”

    Both groups “have learned lessons from the past,” the joint commentary piece stated. “Both of us have been willing to listen to and learn from each other.”

    But there seems to be “no willingness on the part of the church,” Colom said, “to do anything material.”

    He looks forward “to their deeds matching their words,” he said. “It’s time now for more than sweet talk.”

    References

    References
    1 Salt Lake Tribune article from June 8 2020, ‘Despite joining President Nelson in call to end racism, NAACP would like to see the LDS Church do more.’ – https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2020/06/09/despite-joining-president/?fbclid=IwAR2nZ_cHBXw3mvFJEP7s8rwlBq3fEPqdtjuAEVBHEv6hm2hf4MTjZ9LZAao
  • Covid-19

    Covid-19

    Excerpt from a Mar 23, 2020 Deseret News article, “1st Utahn to die of COVID-19 attended Bountiful temple last week, church confirms”: 1

    Utah Department of Health officials announced the Davis County man’s death on Sunday in a news conference. They said he was over the age of 60 and had tested positive for COVID-19 on Saturday. He was treated for two days at Lakeview Hospital in Bountiful before he died.

    Hours after the news conference, the church announced on Sunday evening that it had closed the temple. The Bountiful temple was the first of the church’s 17 Utah temples to close due to the pandemic.

    Excerpt from an October 1950 General Conference address by Ezra Taft Benson: 2

    “If we are living the gospel, we will feel in our hearts that the First Presidency of the Church not only have the right, but are also duty bound under heaven to give counsel on any subject which affects the temporal or spiritual welfare of the Latter-day Saints.”

    References

  • Vainest City

    Vainest City

    Fox 13 News, February 24, 2016:1

    “Forbes Magazine ranked Salt Lake City as “America’s vainest city” in 2007. With nearly six plastic surgeons for every 100,000 people, that’s 2.5 times the national average.”

    Excerpt from a 2007 Forbes article, America’s Vainest Cities: 2

    As the number of cosmetic procedures nationwide continues to surge, we looked at which cities have most embraced market demand for taut faces, lush lips and flat abs. There were predictable entries like New York, Miami and Los Angeles, but also surprising ones like Louisville, Ky., and Nashville, Tenn. Most shocking of all was the town that ranked first: Salt Lake City.

    True to the Faith, A Gospel Reference, pub. 2004:3

    Tattooing

    Latter-day prophets strongly discourage the tattooing of the body. Those who disregard this counsel show a lack of respect for themselves and for God. The Apostle Paul taught of the significance of our bodies and the danger of purposefully defiling them: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are” (1 Corinthians 3:16–17).

    If you have a tattoo, you wear a constant reminder of a mistake you have made. You might consider having it removed.

    Body Piercing

    Latter-day prophets strongly discourage the piercing of the body except for medical purposes. If girls or women desire to have their ears pierced, they are encouraged to wear only one pair of modest earrings.

    Those who choose to disregard this counsel show a lack of respect for themselves and for God. They will someday regret their decision.

    The Apostle Paul taught of the significance of our bodies and the danger of purposefully defiling them: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are” (1 Corinthians 3:16–17).

  • Honesty

    Honesty

    Excerpt from the 2011 Gospel Principles manual, Chapter 31: Honesty: 1

    There are many other forms of lying. When we speak untruths, we are guilty of lying. We can also intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.

    The Mantle Is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect, Boyd K. Packer, Address to religious educators at a symposium on the Doctrine and Covenants and Church history, Brigham Young University, 22 August 1981: 2

    The fact that I speak quite directly on a most important subject will, I hope, be regarded as something of a tribute to you who are our loyal, devoted, and inspired associates.

    I have come to believe that it is the tendency for many members of the Church who spend a great deal of time in academic research to begin to judge the Church, its doctrine, organization, and leadership, present and past, by the principles of their own profession. Ofttimes this is done unwittingly, and some of it, perhaps, is not harmful.

    It is an easy thing for a man with extensive academic training to measure the Church using the principles he has been taught in his professional training as his standard. In my mind it ought to be the other way around. A member of the Church ought always, particularly if he is pursuing extensive academic studies, to judge the professions of man against the revealed word of the Lord.

    Many disciplines are subject to this danger. Over the years I have seen many members of the Church lose their testimonies and yield their faith as the price for academic achievement. Many others have been sorely tested. Let me illustrate.

    During my last year as one of the supervisors of seminaries and institutes of religion, a seminary teacher went to a large university in the East to complete a doctorate in counseling and guidance. The ranking authority in that field was there and quickly took an interest in this personable, clean-cut, very intelligent, young Latter-day Saint.

    Our teacher attracted attention as he moved through the course work with comparative ease, and his future looked bright indeed—that is, until he came to the dissertation. He chose to study the ward bishop as a counselor.

    At that time I was called as one of the General Authorities and helped him obtain authorization to interview and send questionnaires to a cross-section of bishops.

    In the dissertation he described the calling and ordination of a bishop, described the power of discernment, the right of a bishop to receive revelation, and his right to spiritual guidance. His doctoral committee did not understand this. They felt it had no place in a scholarly paper and insisted that he take it out.

    He came to see me. I read his dissertation and suggested that he satisfy their concern by introducing the discussion on spiritual matters with a statement such as “the Latter-day Saints believe the bishop has spiritual power,” or “they claim that there is inspiration from God attending the bishop in his calling.”

    But the committee denied him even this. It was obvious that they would be quite embarrassed to have this ingredient included in a scholarly dissertation.

    It is as Paul said: “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14).

    He was reminded of his very great potential and was told that with some little accommodation—specifically, leaving out all the spiritual references—his dissertation would be published and his reputation established. They predicted that he would become an authority in the field.

    He was tempted. Perhaps, once established, he could then insert this spiritual ingredient back into his work. Then, as an established authority, he could really help the Church.

    But something stood in the way: his faith, his integrity. So, he did the best he could with his dissertation. It did not contain enough of the Spirit to satisfy him, and too much to have been fully accepted by his worldly professors. But he received his degree.

    His dissertation is not truly the scholarly document it might have been, because the most essential ingredient is missing. Revelation is so central a part of a bishop’s experience in counseling that any study which ignores it cannot be regarded as a scholarly work.

    He returned to the modest income and to the relative obscurity of the Church Educational System.

    I talked to this teacher a day or two ago. We talked about his dissertation and the fact that it was never published. He has been a great influence among the youth of the Church. He did the right thing. He summed up his experience this way: “The mantle is far, far greater than the intellect; the priesthood is the guiding power.” His statement becomes the title for this talk and embodies what I hope to convey to you.

    I must not be too critical of those professors. They do not know of the things of the Spirit. One can understand their position. It is another thing, however, when we consider members of the Church, particularly those who hold the priesthood and have made covenants in the temple. Many do not do as my associate did; rather, they capitulate, cross over the line, and forsake the things of the Spirit. Thereafter, they judge the Church, the doctrine, and the leadership by the standards of their academic profession.

    This problem has affected some of those who have taught and have written about the history of the Church. These professors say of themselves that religious faith has little influence on Mormon scholars. They say this because, obviously, they are not simply Latter-day Saints but are also intellectuals trained, for the most part, in secular institutions. They would that some historians who are Latter-day Saints write history as they were taught in graduate school, rather than as Mormons.

    If we are not careful, very careful, and if we are not wise, very wise, we first leave out of our professional study the things of the Spirit. The next step soon follows: we leave the spiritual things out of our lives.

    I want to read to you a most significant statement by President Joseph F. Smith, a statement that you would do well to keep in mind in your teaching and research, and one which will serve as somewhat of a text for my remarks to you:

    “It has not been by the wisdom of man that this people have been directed in their course until the present; it has been by the wisdom of Him who is above man and whose knowledge is greater than that of man, and whose power is above the power of man. … The hand of the Lord may not be visible to all. There may be many who can not discern the workings of God’s will in the progress and development of this great latter-day work, but there are those who see in every hour and in every moment of the existence of the Church, from its beginning until now, the overruling, almighty hand of Him who sent His Only Begotten Son to the world to become a sacrifice for the sin of the world.” (In Conference Report, Apr. 1904, p. 2; emphasis added.)

    If we do not keep this constantly in mind—that the Lord directs this Church—we may lose our way in the world of intellectual and scholarly research.

    You seminary teachers and some of you institute and BYU men will be teaching the history of the Church this school year. This is an unparalleled opportunity in the lives of your students to increase their faith and testimony of the divinity of this work. Your objective should be that they will see the hand of the Lord in every hour and every moment of the Church from its beginning till now.

    As one who has taken the journey a number of times, I offer four cautions before you begin.

    First Caution

    There is no such thing as an accurate, objective history of the Church without consideration of the spiritual powers that attend this work.

    There is no such thing as a scholarly, objective study of the office of bishop without consideration of spiritual guidance, of discernment, and of revelation. That is not scholarship. Accordingly, I repeat, there is no such thing as an accurate or objective history of the Church which ignores the Spirit.

    You might as well try to write the biography of Mendelssohn without hearing or mentioning his music, or write the life of Rembrandt without mentioning light or canvas or color.

    If someone who knew very little about music should write a biography of Mendelssohn, one who had been trained to have a feeling for music would recognize that very quickly. That reader would not be many pages into the manuscript before he would know that a most essential ingredient had been left out.

    Mendelssohn, no doubt, would emerge as an ordinary man, perhaps not an impressive man at all. That which makes him most worth remembering would be gone. Without it he would appear, at best, eccentric. Certainly, controversy would develop over why a biography at all. Whoever should read the biography would not know, really know, Mendelssohn at all—this, even though the biographer might have invested exhaustive research in his project and might have been accurate in every other detail.

    And, if you viewed Rembrandt only in black and white, you would miss most of his inspiration.

    Those of us who are extensively engaged in researching the wisdom of man, including those who write and those who teach Church history, are not immune from these dangers. I have walked that road of scholarly research and study and know something of the dangers. If anything, we are more vulnerable than those in some of the other disciplines. Church history can be so very interesting and so inspiring as to be a very powerful tool indeed for building faith. If not properly written or properly taught, it may be a faith destroyer.

    President Brigham Young admonished Karl G. Maeser not to teach even the times table without the Spirit of the Lord. How much more essential is that Spirit in the research, the writing, and the teaching of Church history.

    If we who research, write, and teach the history of the Church ignore the spiritual on the pretext that the world may not understand it, our work will not be objective. And if, for the same reason, we keep it quite secular, we will produce a history that is not accurate and not scholarly—this, in spite of the extent of research or the nature of the individual statements or the incidents which are included as part of it, and notwithstanding the training or scholarly reputation of the one who writes or teaches it. We would end up with a history with the one most essential ingredient left out.

    Those who have the Spirit can recognize very quickly whether something is missing in a written Church history—this in spite of the fact that the author may be a highly trained historian and the reader is not. And, I might add, we have been getting a great deal of experience in this regard in the past few years.

    President Wilford Woodruff warned: “I will here say that God has inspired me to keep a Journal History of this Church, and I warn the future Historians to give Credence to my History of this Church and Kingdom; for my Testimony is true, and the truth of its record will be manifest in the world to Come.” (Journal of Wilford Woodruff, 6 July 1877, Historical Department, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; emphasis added. Spelling and punctuation have been standardized.)

    Second Caution

    There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not.

    Some things that are true are not very useful.

    Historians seem to take great pride in publishing something new, particularly if it illustrates a weakness or mistake of a prominent historical figure. For some reason, historians and novelists seem to savor such things. If it related to a living person, it would come under the heading of gossip. History can be as misleading as gossip and much more difficult—often impossible—to verify.

    The writer or the teacher who has an exaggerated loyalty to the theory that everything must be told is laying a foundation for his own judgment. He should not complain if one day he himself receives as he has given. Perhaps that is what is contemplated in having one’s sins preached from the housetops.

    Some time ago a historian gave a lecture to an audience of college students on one of the past Presidents of the Church. It seemed to be his purpose to show that that President was a man subject to the foibles of men. He introduced many so-called facts that put that President in a very unfavorable light, particularly when they were taken out of the context of the historical period in which he lived.

    Someone who was not theretofore acquainted with this historical figure (particularly someone not mature) must have come away very negatively affected. Those who were unsteady in their convictions surely must have had their faith weakened or destroyed.

    I began teaching seminary under Abel S. Rich, principal. He was the second seminary teacher employed by the Church and a man of maturity, wisdom, and experience. Among the lessons I learned from him was this: when I want to know about a man, I seek out those who know him best. I do not go to his enemies but to his friends. He would not confide in his enemy. You could not know the innermost thoughts of his heart by consulting those who would injure him.

    We are teachers and should know the importance of the principle of prerequisites. It is easily illustrated with the subject of chemistry. No responsible chemist would advise, and no reputable school would permit, a beginning student to register for advanced chemistry without a knowledge of the fundamental principles of chemistry. The advanced course would be a destructive mistake, even for a very brilliant beginning student. Even that brilliant student would need some knowledge of the elements, of atoms and molecules, of electrons, of valence, of compounds and properties. To let a student proceed without the knowledge of fundamentals would surely destroy his interest in, and his future with, the field of chemistry.

    The same point may be made with reference to so-called sex education. There are many things that are factual, even elevating, about this subject. There are aspects of this subject that are so perverted and ugly it does little good to talk of them at all. They cannot be safely taught to little children or to those who are not eligible by virtue of age or maturity or authorizing ordinance to understand them.

    Teaching some things that are true, prematurely or at the wrong time, can invite sorrow and heartbreak instead of the joy intended to accompany learning.

    What is true with these two subjects is, if anything, doubly true in the field of religion. The scriptures teach emphatically that we must give milk before meat. The Lord made it very clear that some things are to be taught selectively, and some things are to be given only to those who are worthy.

    It matters very much not only what we are told but when we are told it. Be careful that you build faith rather than destroy it.

    President William E. Berrett has told us how grateful he is that a testimony that the past leaders of the Church were prophets of God was firmly fixed in his mind before he was exposed to some of the so-called facts that historians have put in their published writings.

    This principle of prerequisites is so fundamental to all education that I have never been quite able to understand why historians are so willing to ignore it. And, if those outside the Church have little to guide them but the tenets of their profession, those inside the Church should know better.

    Some historians write and speak as though the only ones to read or listen are mature, experienced historians. They write and speak to a very narrow audience. Unfortunately, many of the things they tell one another are not uplifting, go far beyond the audience they may have intended, and destroy faith.

    What that historian did with the reputation of the President of the Church was not worth doing. He seemed determined to convince everyone that the prophet was a man. We knew that already. All of the prophets and all of the Apostles have been men. It would have been much more worthwhile for him to have convinced us that the man was a prophet, a fact quite as true as the fact that he was a man.

    He has taken something away from the memory of a prophet. He has destroyed faith. I remind you of the truth Shakespeare taught, ironically spoken by Iago: “Who steals my purse steals trash; ’tis something, nothing; / ’Twas mine, ’tis his, and has been slave to thousands— / But he that filches from me my good name / Robs me of that which not enriches him / And makes me poor indeed” (Othello, act 3, sc. 3, lines 157–61).

    The sad thing is that he may have, in years past, taken great interest in those who led the Church and desired to draw close to them. But instead of following that long, steep, discouraging, and occasionally dangerous path to spiritual achievement, instead of going up to where they were, he devised a way of collecting mistakes and weaknesses and limitations to compare with his own. In that sense he has attempted to bring a historical figure down to his level and in that way feel close to him and perhaps justify his own weaknesses.

    I agree with President Stephen L Richards, who stated:

    “If a man of history has secured over the years a high place in the esteem of his countrymen and fellow men and has become imbedded in their affections, it has seemingly become a pleasing pastime for researchers and scholars to delve into the past of such a man, discover, if may be, some of his weaknesses, and then write a book exposing hitherto unpublished alleged factual findings, all of which tends to rob the historic character of the idealistic esteem and veneration in which he may have been held through the years.

    “This ‘debunking,’ we are told, is in the interest of realism, that the facts should be known. If an historic character has made a great contribution to country and society, and if his name and his deeds have been used over the generations to foster high ideals of character and service, what good is to be accomplished by digging out of the past and exploiting weaknesses, which perhaps a generous contemporary public forgave and subdued?” (Where Is Wisdom? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1955], p. 155.)

    That historian or scholar who delights in pointing out the weakness and frailties of present or past leaders destroys faith. A destroyer of faith—particularly one within the Church, and more particularly one who is employed specifically to build faith—places himself in great spiritual jeopardy. He is serving the wrong master, and unless he repents, he will not be among the faithful in the eternities.

    One who chooses to follow the tenets of his profession, regardless of how they may injure the Church or destroy the faith of those not ready for “advanced history,” is himself in spiritual jeopardy. If that one is a member of the Church, he has broken his covenants and will be accountable. After all of the tomorrows of mortality have been finished, he will not stand where he might have stood.

    I recall a conversation with President Henry D. Moyle. We were driving back from Arizona and were talking about a man who destroyed the faith of young people from the vantage point of a teaching position. Someone asked President Moyle why this man was still a member of the Church when he did things like that. “He is not a member of the Church,” President Moyle answered firmly. Another replied that he had not heard of his excommunication. “He has excommunicated himself,” President Moyle responded. “He has cut himself off from the Spirit of God. Whether or not we get around to holding a court doesn’t matter that much; he has cut himself off from the Spirit of the Lord.”

    Third Caution

    In an effort to be objective, impartial, and scholarly, a writer or a teacher may unwittingly be giving equal time to the adversary.

    Someone told of the man who entitled his book an Unbiased History of the Civil War from the Southern Point of View. While we chuckle at that, there is something to be said about presenting Church history from the viewpoint of those who have righteously lived it. The idea that we must be neutral and argue quite as much in favor of the adversary as we do in favor of righteousness is neither reasonable nor safe.

    In the Church we are not neutral. We are one-sided. There is a war going on, and we are engaged in it. It is the war between good and evil, and we are belligerents defending the good. We are therefore obliged to give preference to and protect all that is represented in the gospel of Jesus Christ, and we have made covenants to do it.

    Some of our scholars establish for themselves a posture of neutrality. They call it “sympathetic detachment.” Historians are particularly wont to do that. If they make a complimentary statement about the Church, they seem to have to counter it with something that is uncomplimentary.

    Some of them, since they are members of the Church, are quite embarrassed with the thought that they might be accused of being partial. They care very much what the world thinks and are very careful to include in their writings criticism of the Church leaders of the past.

    They particularly strive to be acclaimed as historians as measured by the world’s standard. They would do well to read Nephi’s vision of the iron rod and ponder verses 24–28.

    “And it came to pass that I beheld others pressing forward, and they came forth and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron; and they did press forward through the mist of darkness, clinging to the rod of iron, even until they did come forth and partake of the fruit of the tree.

    “And after they had partaken of the fruit of the tree they did cast their eyes about as if they were ashamed. [Notice the word after. He is talking of those who are partakers of the goodness of God—of Church members.]

    “And I also cast my eyes round about, and beheld, on the other side of the river of water, a great and spacious building; and it stood as it were in the air, high above the earth.

    “And it was filled with people, both old and young, both male and female; and their manner of dress was exceeding fine; and they were in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit.

    “And after they had tasted of the fruit they were ashamed, because of those that were scoffing at them; and they fell away into forbidden paths and were lost.” (1 Nephi 8:24–28; emphasis added.)

    And I want to say in all seriousness that there is a limit to the patience of the Lord with respect to those who are under covenant to bless and protect His Church and kingdom upon the earth but do not do it.

    Particularly are we in danger if we are out to make a name for ourselves, if our “hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that [we] do not learn this one lesson—

    “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 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.” (D&C 121:35–38.)

    There is much in the scriptures and in our Church literature to convince us that we are at war with the adversary. We are not obliged as a church, nor are we as members obliged, to accommodate the enemy in this battle.

    President Joseph Fielding Smith pointed out that it would be a foolish general who would give access to all of his intelligence to his enemy. It is neither expected nor necessary for us to accommodate those who seek to retrieve references from our sources, distort them, and use them against us.

    Suppose that a well-managed business corporation is threatened by takeover from another corporation. Suppose that the corporation bent on the takeover is determined to drain off all its assets and then dissolve this company. You can rest assured that the threatened company would hire legal counsel to protect itself.

    Can you imagine that attorney, under contract to protect the company, having fixed in his mind that he must not really take sides, that he must be impartial?

    Suppose that when the records of the company he has been employed to protect are opened for him to prepare his brief he collects evidence and passes some of it to the attorneys of the enemy company. His own firm may then be in great jeopardy because of his disloyal conduct.

    Do you not recognize a breach of ethics, or integrity, or morality?

    I think you can see the point I am making. Those of you who are employed by the Church have a special responsibility to build faith, not destroy it. If you do not do that, but in fact accommodate the enemy, who is the destroyer of faith, you become in that sense a traitor to the cause you have made covenants to protect.

    Those who have carefully purged their work of any religious faith in the name of academic freedom or so-called honesty ought not expect to be accommodated in their researches or to be paid by the Church to do it.

    Rest assured, also, that you will get little truth, and less benefit, from those who steal documents or those who deal in stolen goods. There have always been, and we have among us today, those who seek entrance to restricted libraries and files to secretly copy material and steal it away in hopes of finding some detail that has not as yet been published—this in order that they may sell it for money or profit in some way from its publication or inflate an ego by being first to publish it.

    In some cases the motive is to destroy faith, if they can, and the Church, if they are able. The Church will move forward, and their efforts will be of little moment. But such conduct does not go unnoticed in the eternal scheme of things.

    We should not be ashamed to be committed, to be converted, to be biased in favor of the Lord.

    Elder Joseph Fielding Smith pointed out the fallacy of trying to work both sides of the street: “You may as well say that the Book of Mormon is not true because it does not give credence to the story the Lamanites told of the Nephites” (Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine, Apr. 1925, p. 55).

    A number of years ago, professors from Harvard University who were members of the Church invited me to lunch over at the Harvard Business School faculty dining room. They wanted to know if I would join them in participating in a new publication; they wanted me to contribute to it.

    They were generous in their compliments, saying that because I had a doctorate a number of people in the Church would listen to me, and being a General Authority (at that time I was an Assistant to the Twelve), I could have some very useful influence.

    I listened to them very attentively but indicated at the close of the conversation that I would not join them. I asked to be excused from responding to their request. When they asked why, I told them this: “When your associates announced the project, they described how useful it would be to the Church—a niche that needed to be filled.” And then the spokesman said, “We are all active and faithful members of the Church; however, …”

    I told my two hosts that if the announcement had read, “We are active and faithful members of the Church; therefore, …” I would have joined their organization. I had serious questions about a “however” organization. I have little worry over a “therefore” organization.

    That however meant that they put a condition upon their Church membership and their faith. It meant that they put something else first. It meant that they were to judge the Church and gospel and the leaders of it against their own backgrounds and training. It meant that their commitment was partial, and that partial commitment is not enough to qualify one for full spiritual light.

    I would not contribute to publications, nor would I belong to organizations, that by spirit or inclination are faith destroying. There are plenty of scholars in the world determined to find all secular truth. There are so few of us, relatively speaking, striving to convey the spiritual truths, who are protecting the Church. We cannot safely be neutral.

    Many years ago Elder Widtsoe made reference to a foolish teacher in the Mutual Improvement Association who sponsored some debate with the intent of improving the abilities of the young members of the Church. He chose as a subject “Resolved: Joseph Smith was a prophet of God.” Unfortunately, the con side won.

    The youngsters speaking in favor of the proposition were not as clever and their arguments were not as carefully prepared as those of the opposing side. The fact that Joseph Smith remained a prophet after the debate was over did not protect some of the participants from suffering the destruction of their faith and thereafter conducting their lives as though Joseph Smith were not a prophet and as though the church he founded and the gospel he restored were not true.

    Fourth Caution

    The final caution concerns the idea that so long as something is already in print, so long as it is available from another source, there is nothing out of order in using it in writing or speaking or teaching.

    Surely you can see the fallacy in that.

    I have on occasion been disappointed when I have read statements that tend to belittle or degrade the Church or past leaders of the Church in writings of those who are supposed to be worthy members of the Church. When I have commented on my disappointment to see that in print, the answer has been, “It was printed before, and it’s available, and therefore I saw no reason not to publish it again.”

    You do not do well to see that it is disseminated. It may be read by those not mature enough for “advanced history,” and a testimony in seedling stage may be crushed.

    Several years ago President Ezra Taft Benson spoke to you and said: “It has come to our attention that some of our teachers, particularly in our university programs, are purchasing writings from known apostates … in an effort to become informed about certain points of view or to glean from their research. You must realize that when you purchase their writings or subscribe to their periodicals, you help sustain their cause. We would hope that their writings not be on your seminary or institute or personal bookshelves. We are entrusting you to represent the Lord and the First Presidency to your students, not the views of the detractors of the Church” (The Gospel Teacher and His Message [address delivered to Church Educational System personnel, 17 Sept. 1976], p. 12.)

    I endorse that sound counsel to you.

    Remember: when you see the bitter apostate, you do not see only an absence of light, you see also the presence of darkness.

    Do not spread disease germs!

    I learned a great lesson years ago when I interviewed a young man then in the mission home. He was disqualified from serving a mission. He confessed to a transgression that you would think would never enter the mind of a normal human being.

    “Where on earth did you ever get an idea to do something like that?” I asked.

    To my great surprise he said, “From my bishop.”

    He said the bishop in the interview said, “Have you ever done this? Have you ever done that? Have you ever done this other?” and described in detail things that the young man had never thought of. They preyed upon his mind until, under perverse inspiration, the opportunity presented itself, and he fell.

    Don’t perpetuate the unworthy, the unsavory, or the sensational.

    Some things that are in print go out of print, and the old statement “good riddance to bad rubbish” might apply.

    Elder G. Homer Durham of the First Quorum of the Seventy told of counsel he had received from one of his professors who was an eminent historian: “You don’t write [and, I might add, you don’t teach] history out of the garbage pails.”

    Moroni gave an excellent rule for historians to follow:

    “For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

    “But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.” (Moroni 7:16–17.)

    It makes a great deal of difference whether we regard mortality as the conclusion and fulfillment of our existence or as a preparation for an eternal existence as well.

    Those are the cautions I give to you who teach and write Church history.

    There are qualifications to teach or to write the history of this church. If one is lacking in any one of these qualifications, he cannot properly teach the history of the Church. He can recite facts and give a point of view, but he cannot properly teach the history of the Church.

    I will state these qualifications in the form of questions so that you can assess your own qualifications.

    Do you believe that God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ personally appeared to the boy prophet, Joseph Smith, Jr., in the year 1820?

    Do you have personal witness that the Father and the Son appeared in all their glory and stood above that young man and instructed him according to the testimony that he gave to the world in his published history?

    Do you know that the Prophet Joseph Smith’s testimony is true because you have received a spiritual witness of its truth?

    Do you believe that the church that was restored through him is, in the Lord’s words, “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased” (D&C 1:30)? Do you know by the Holy Ghost that this is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints restored by heavenly messengers in this modern era; that the Church constitutes the kingdom of God on earth, not just an institution fabricated by human agency?

    Do you believe that the successors to the prophet Joseph Smith were and are prophets, seers, and revelators; that revelation from heaven directs the decisions, policies, and pronouncements that come from the headquarters of the Church? Have you come to the settled conviction, by the Spirit, that these prophets truly represent the Lord?

    Now, you obviously noted that I did not talk about academic qualifications. Facts, understanding, and scholarship can be attained by personal study and essential course work. The three qualifications I have named come by the Spirit, to the individual. You can’t receive them by secular training or study, by academic inquiry or scientific investigation.

    I repeat: if there is a deficiency in any of these, then, regardless of what other training an individual possesses, he cannot comprehend and write or teach the true history of this Church. The things of God are understood only by one who possesses the Spirit of God.

    Now, what about that historian who defamed the early President of the Church and may well have weakened or destroyed faith in the process? What about other members of the Church who have in their writings or in their teaching been guilty of something similar?

    I want to say something that may surprise you. I know of a man who did something quite as destructive as that who later became the prophet of the Church. I refer to Alma the Younger. I learned about him from reading the Book of Mormon, which in reality is a very reliable history of the Church in ancient times.

    You are acquainted with the record of Alma as a young man. He followed his father, the prophet Alma, about, and ridiculed what his father preached. He was, in that period of his life, a destroyer of faith. Then came a turning point. Because his father had prayed for it, he came to himself. He changed. He became one of the great men in religious history.

    I want to say something to that historian and to others who may have placed higher value on intellect than upon the mantle.

    The Brethren then and now are men, very ordinary men, who have come for the most part from very humble beginnings. We need your help! We desperately need it. We cannot research and organize the history of the Church. We do not have the time to do it. And we do not have the training that you possess. But we do know the Spirit and how essential a part of our history it is. Ours is the duty to organize the Church, to set it in order, to confer the keys of authority, to perform the ordinances, to watch the borders of the kingdom and carry burdens, heavy burdens, for others and for ourselves that you can know little about.

    Do you know how inadequate we really are compared to the callings we have received? Can you feel in a measure the weight, the overwhelming weight, of responsibility that is ours? If you look for inadequacy and imperfections, you can find them quite easily. But you may not feel as we feel the enormous weight of responsibility associated with the callings that have come to us. We are not free to do some of the things that scholars think would be so reasonable, for the Lord will not permit us to do them, and it is his church. He presides over it.

    There is another part of the on-going history of the Church that you may not be acquainted with. Perhaps I can illustrate it for you.

    A few years ago it was my sad privilege to accompany President Kimball, then President of the Twelve, to a distant stake to replace a stake leader who had been excommunicated for a transgression. Our hearts went out to this good man who had done such an unworthy thing. His sorrow and anguish and suffering brought to my mind the phrase “gall of bitterness.”

    Thereafter, on intermittent occasions, I would receive a call from President Kimball: “Have you heard from this brother? How is he doing? Have you been in touch with him?” After Brother Kimball became President of the Church, the calls did not cease. They increased in frequency.

    One day I received a call from the President. “I have been thinking of this brother. Do you think it is too soon to have him baptized?” (Always a question, never a command.) I responded with my feelings, and he said, “Why don’t you see if he could come here to see you? If you feel good about it after an interview, we could proceed.”

    A short time later, I arrived very early at the office. As I left my car I saw President Kimball enter his. He was going to the airport on his way to Europe. He rolled down the window to greet me, and I told him I had good news about our brother. “He was baptized last night,” I said.

    He motioned for me to get into the car and sit beside him and asked me to tell him all about it. I told him of the interview and that I had concluded by telling our brother very plainly that his baptism must not be a signal that his priesthood blessings would be restored in the foreseeable future. I told him that it would be a long, long time before that would happen.

    President Kimball patted me on the knee in a gentle gesture of correction and said, “Well, maybe not so long. …” Soon thereafter the intermittent phone calls began again.

    I want to tell you of another lesson I received. Many years ago, when I was a new General Authority and not very experienced, I was called to the office of the First Counselor in the First Presidency. “We find you are going to the West Coast for conference this weekend. We wonder if you would leave a day or so early to help with a problem at a mission headquarters in another city.”

    A missionary had confessed to transgression, and the mission president was reluctant to take action. I was instructed to see that a court was convened and that the missionary was excommunicated.

    I went, and I interviewed the elder at great length. I then went to a park to think and pray about it. It was an unusual case, most unusual. After two hours, I telephoned the member of the First Presidency from a pay telephone and told him a little of what I had learned and of how I felt about the matter. He asked what I wanted to do. Hesitantly I told him I wanted to delay, to take no action now. Then I said, “But, President, tell me to do it, again, and I will do it.”

    His voice came over the telephone and seemed like thunder to me: “Don’t you go against the voice of the Spirit!”

    I had learned a great lesson. I have never forgotten it, and the inspiration greatly affected the outcome when final action was taken.

    Do not yield your faith in payment for an advanced degree or for the recognition and acclaim of the world. Do not turn away from the Lord nor from his Church nor from his servants. You are needed—oh, how you are needed!

    It may be that you will lay your scholarly reputation and the acclaim of your colleagues in the world as a sacrifice upon the altar of service. They may never understand the things of the Spirit as you have a right to do. They may not regard you as an authority or as a scholar. Just remember, when the test came to Abraham, he didn’t really have to sacrifice Isaac. He just had to be willing to.

    Now a final lesson from Church history, one that illustrates the kind of thing from the past that builds faith and increases testimony.

    William W. Phelps had been a trusted associate of the Prophet Joseph Smith. Then, in an hour of crisis when the Prophet needed him most, he turned against him and joined the apostates and oppressors who sought the Prophet’s life.

    Later, Brother Phelps came to himself. He repented of what he had done and wrote to the Prophet Joseph Smith, asking for his forgiveness. I want to read you the letter the Prophet Joseph wrote to Brother Phelps in reply.

    I confess also that many times I have moaned in agony when I have thought of the many incidents of this kind that researchers have discovered when they have pored over the record of our history but have left them out of their writings for fear they would be regarded as not worthy of a scholarly review of Church history.

    Now the letter.

    “Dear Brother Phelps: …

    “You may in some measure realize what my feelings, as well as Elder Rigdon’s and Brother Hyrum’s were, when we read your letter—truly our hearts were melted into tenderness and compassion when we ascertained your resolves, &c. I can assure you I feel a disposition to act on your case in a manner that will meet the approbation of Jehovah, (whose servant I am), and agreeable to the principles of truth and righteousness which have been revealed; and inasmuch as long-suffering, patience, and mercy have ever characterized the dealings of our heavenly Father towards the humble and penitent, I feel disposed to copy the example, cherish the same principles, and by so doing be a savior of my fellow men.

    “It is true, that we have suffered much in consequence of your behavior—the cup of gall, already full enough for mortals to drink, was indeed filled to overflowing when you turned against us. One with whom we had oft taken sweet counsel together, and enjoyed many refreshing seasons from the Lord—’had it been an enemy, we could have borne it.’ …

    “However, the cup has been drunk, the will of our Father has been done, and we are yet alive, for which we thank the Lord. And having been delivered from the hands of wicked men by the mercy of our God, we say it is your privilege to be delivered from the powers of the adversary, be brought into the liberty of God’s dear children, and again take your stand among the Saints of the Most High, and by diligence, humility, and love unfeigned, commend yourself to our God, and your God, and to the Church of Jesus Christ.

    “Believing your confession to be real, and your repentance genuine, I shall be happy once again to give you the right hand of fellowship, and rejoice over the returning prodigal …

    “‘Come on, dear brother, since the war is past,

    For friends at first, are friends again at last.’

    “Yours as ever,

    “Joseph Smith, Jun.”

    (History of the Church, 4:162–64.)

    Brother Phelps did return to full fellowship. He was a writer of hymns. The one we sang to open this meeting, “Praise to the Man,” was written by Brother Phelps, as were “O God, the Eternal Father,” “Now Let Us Rejoice,” “Gently Raise the Sacred Strain,” “The Spirit of God Like a Fire”—to mention but a few.

    Oh, how great the loss to the Church if Brother Phelps had not returned. And how great would have been the tragedy for him.

    When I read about our Brethren of the past, I am overwhelmed with humility. Consider the Prophet Joseph Smith and the little opportunity he had for formal schooling. Read the letters written in his own hand, and you will know that he could not spell correctly. Oh, how grateful he must have been for a scribe. I have wept when I have contemplated what they accomplished with what little they had. I sense how grateful they were to those who stood by them.

    To you who may have lost your way, come back! We know how that can happen; we have walked that path of research and study. Come help us!—you with your scholarship and your training, you with your bright, intelligent minds, you with your experience and with your academic degrees.

    How grateful we are today for the many members who have special gifts and special training that they devote to the building up of the Church and kingdom of God and to the protecting of it.

    May God bless you who so faithfully compile and teach the history of the Church and build the faith of those you teach. I bear witness that the gospel is true. The Church is His church. I pray that you may be inspired as you write and as you teach. May His Spirit be with you in rich abundance.

    As you take your students over the trails of Church history in this dispensation, yours is the privilege to help them to see the miracle of the Restoration, the mantle that belongs to His servants, and to “see in every hour and in every moment of the existence of the Church … the overruling, almighty hand of [God]” (Joseph F. Smith, in Conference Report, Apr. 1904, p. 2).

    As you write and as you teach Church history under the influence of His Spirit, one day you will come to know that you were not only spectators but a central part of it, for you are His Saints.

    This testimony I leave, with my blessings, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

  • Stone Cut Out of the Mountain

    Stone Cut Out of the Mountain

    Excerpt from a Salt lake Tribune article, published January 05, 2020: 1

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recorded its smallest membership growth in Utah in at least three decades this past year. And, in 2019, 14 of the state’s 29 counties saw the actual number of members decline.

    Doctrine and covenants 65:2 2

    2 The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth, until it has filled the whole earth.

    Additional resources:

    http://ldschurchgrowth.blogspot.com/

    References

    References
    1 Utah sees Latter-day Saint slowdown and membership numbers drop in Salt Lake County – https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2020/01/05/utah-sees-latter-day/
    2 Doctrine and covenants 65:2 – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/65?lang=eng
  • Bankruptcy

    Bankruptcy

    Utah Ranks in the Top 10 Bankruptcy Filing States Per Capita 1

    Excerpt from the June 1980 Ensign, First Presidency Message, Marion G. Romney: 2

    Tithing is not a free-will offering; it is a debt, payment of which brings great blessings.

    I consider the payment of tithing a sound financial investment. To those who pay their tithing, the Lord has said that he will “open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

    The payment of tithing is also worthwhile as fire insurance. Through his prophets the Lord has told us that incident to his second coming, there will be a great conflagration. Malachi thus refers to it in connection with his pronouncement about tithes and offerings.

    I know from my own experience, and I bear you my witness, that there is a peace and a comfort and an assurance which comes to one who pays an honest tithing. If you ever come to a time when you don’t know how much you owe, pay a little more. It is better to over-pay than to under-pay.

    References

    References
    1 Personal bankruptcy rate in the United States as of September 2019, by state (per 100,000 population) – statista – https://www.statista.com/statistics/303570/us-personal-bankruptcy-rate/
    2 June 1980 Ensign, First Presidency Message, Marion G. Romney – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1980/06/concerning-tithing?lang=eng
  • Equal Rights Amendment 3

    Equal Rights Amendment 3

    Church Spokesman Doug Anderson, December 3 2019: 1

    “The church’s position on this issue [Equal Rights Amendment] has been consistent for more than 40 years”

    Excerpt from a March 1980 Ensign article, ‘Frequently Asked Questions about the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment’:2

    What would be the impact of the ERA on homosexual marriages?

    In hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Paul A. Freund of Harvard Law School testified: “Indeed if the law must be as undiscriminating concerning sex as it is toward race, it would follow that laws outlawing wedlock between members of the same sex would be as invalid as laws forbidding miscegenation [interracial marriages]” (Senate Report 92–689, p. 47).

    Passage of the ERA would carry with it the risk of extending constitutional protection to immoral same-sex—lesbian and homosexual—marriages. The argument of a homosexual male, for example, would be: “If a woman can legally marry a man, then equal treatment demands that I be allowed to do the same.” Under the ERA, states could be forced to legally recognize and protect such marriages. A result would be that any children brought to such a marriage by either partner or adopted by the couple could legally be raised in a homosexual home. While it cannot be stated with certainty whether this or any other consequence will result from the vague language of the amendment, the possibility cannot be avoided.

    :::

    Excerpt from a Statement from the First Presidency, ‘First Presidency Reaffirms Opposition to ERA’, October 1978: 3

    “From its beginning, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has championed the rights of women in our society. We recognize that there have been injustices to women before the law and in society in general. There are additional rights to which women are entitled. We would prefer to see specific injustices resolved individually under appropriate specific laws. We firmly believe that the Equal Rights Amendment is not the proper means for achieving those rights because:

    “a. Its deceptively simple language deals with practically every aspect of American life, without considering the possible train of unnatural consequences which could result because of its very vagueness—encouragement of those who seek a unisex society, an increase in the practice of homosexual and lesbian activities, and other concepts which could alter the natural, God-given relationship of men and women.

    :::

    Excerpt from an address By Boyd K. Packer, January 8, 1977:4

    We cannot eliminate, through any pattern of legislation or regulation, the differences between men and women.

    There are basic things that a man needs that a woman does not need. There are things that a man feels that a woman never does feel.

    There are basic things that a woman needs that a man never needs, and there are things that a woman feels that a man never feels nor should he.

    These differences make women, in basic needs, literally opposite from men.

    A man, for instance, needs to feel protective, and yes, dominant, if you will, in leading his family. A woman needs to feel protected, in the bearing of children and in the nurturing of them.

    Have you ever thought what life would be like if the needs of men and women were naturally precisely the same?

    What would it be like if they both naturally needed to feel dominant all of the time, or both naturally needed to feel protected all of the time?

    How disturbed and intolerable things would be.

  • Equal Rights Amendment 2

    Equal Rights Amendment 2

    Church Spokesman Doug Anderson, December 3 2019: 1

    “The church’s position on this issue [Equal Rights Amendment] has been consistent for more than 40 years”

    Excerpt from a March 1980 Ensign article, ‘Frequently Asked Questions about the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment’:2

    What would be the impact of the ERA on homosexual marriages?

    In hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Paul A. Freund of Harvard Law School testified: “Indeed if the law must be as undiscriminating concerning sex as it is toward race, it would follow that laws outlawing wedlock between members of the same sex would be as invalid as laws forbidding miscegenation [interracial marriages]” (Senate Report 92–689, p. 47).

    Passage of the ERA would carry with it the risk of extending constitutional protection to immoral same-sex—lesbian and homosexual—marriages. The argument of a homosexual male, for example, would be: “If a woman can legally marry a man, then equal treatment demands that I be allowed to do the same.” Under the ERA, states could be forced to legally recognize and protect such marriages. A result would be that any children brought to such a marriage by either partner or adopted by the couple could legally be raised in a homosexual home. While it cannot be stated with certainty whether this or any other consequence will result from the vague language of the amendment, the possibility cannot be avoided.

    :::

    Excerpt from a Statement from the First Presidency, ‘First Presidency Reaffirms Opposition to ERA’, October 1978: 3

    “From its beginning, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has championed the rights of women in our society. We recognize that there have been injustices to women before the law and in society in general. There are additional rights to which women are entitled. We would prefer to see specific injustices resolved individually under appropriate specific laws. We firmly believe that the Equal Rights Amendment is not the proper means for achieving those rights because:

    “a. Its deceptively simple language deals with practically every aspect of American life, without considering the possible train of unnatural consequences which could result because of its very vagueness—encouragement of those who seek a unisex society, an increase in the practice of homosexual and lesbian activities, and other concepts which could alter the natural, God-given relationship of men and women.

    :::

    Excerpt from an address By Boyd K. Packer, January 8, 1977:4

    We cannot eliminate, through any pattern of legislation or regulation, the differences between men and women.

    There are basic things that a man needs that a woman does not need. There are things that a man feels that a woman never does feel.

    There are basic things that a woman needs that a man never needs, and there are things that a woman feels that a man never feels nor should he.

    These differences make women, in basic needs, literally opposite from men.

    A man, for instance, needs to feel protective, and yes, dominant, if you will, in leading his family. A woman needs to feel protected, in the bearing of children and in the nurturing of them.

    Have you ever thought what life would be like if the needs of men and women were naturally precisely the same?

    What would it be like if they both naturally needed to feel dominant all of the time, or both naturally needed to feel protected all of the time?

    How disturbed and intolerable things would be.

    References

    References
    1 Rally in Utah State Capitol puts focus on Equal Rights Amendment – https://www.deseret.com/utah/2019/12/3/20992717/equal-rights-amendment-rally-utah
    2 Frequently Asked Questions about the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1980/03/the-church-and-the-proposed-equal-rights-amendment-a-moral-issue/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-proposed-equal-rights-amendment-a-closer-look?lang=eng
    3 First Presidency Reaffirms Opposition to ERA – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1978/10/news-of-the-church/first-presidency-reaffirms-opposition-to-era?lang=eng
    4 The Equal Rights Amendment, January 8, 1977 – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1977/03/the-equal-rights-amendment
  • Equal Rights Amendment

    Equal Rights Amendment

    Church Spokesman Doug Anderson, December 3 2019: 1

    “The church’s position on this issue [Equal Rights Amendment] has been consistent for more than 40 years”

    Excerpt from a March 1980 Ensign article, ‘Frequently Asked Questions about the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment’:2

    What would be the impact of the ERA on homosexual marriages?

    In hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Paul A. Freund of Harvard Law School testified: “Indeed if the law must be as undiscriminating concerning sex as it is toward race, it would follow that laws outlawing wedlock between members of the same sex would be as invalid as laws forbidding miscegenation [interracial marriages]” (Senate Report 92–689, p. 47).

    Passage of the ERA would carry with it the risk of extending constitutional protection to immoral same-sex—lesbian and homosexual—marriages. The argument of a homosexual male, for example, would be: “If a woman can legally marry a man, then equal treatment demands that I be allowed to do the same.” Under the ERA, states could be forced to legally recognize and protect such marriages. A result would be that any children brought to such a marriage by either partner or adopted by the couple could legally be raised in a homosexual home. While it cannot be stated with certainty whether this or any other consequence will result from the vague language of the amendment, the possibility cannot be avoided.

    :::

    Excerpt from a Statement from the First Presidency, ‘First Presidency Reaffirms Opposition to ERA’, October 1978: 3

    “From its beginning, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has championed the rights of women in our society. We recognize that there have been injustices to women before the law and in society in general. There are additional rights to which women are entitled. We would prefer to see specific injustices resolved individually under appropriate specific laws. We firmly believe that the Equal Rights Amendment is not the proper means for achieving those rights because:

    “a. Its deceptively simple language deals with practically every aspect of American life, without considering the possible train of unnatural consequences which could result because of its very vagueness—encouragement of those who seek a unisex society, an increase in the practice of homosexual and lesbian activities, and other concepts which could alter the natural, God-given relationship of men and women.

    :::

    Excerpt from an address By Boyd K. Packer, January 8, 1977:4

    We cannot eliminate, through any pattern of legislation or regulation, the differences between men and women.

    There are basic things that a man needs that a woman does not need. There are things that a man feels that a woman never does feel.

    There are basic things that a woman needs that a man never needs, and there are things that a woman feels that a man never feels nor should he.

    These differences make women, in basic needs, literally opposite from men.

    A man, for instance, needs to feel protective, and yes, dominant, if you will, in leading his family. A woman needs to feel protected, in the bearing of children and in the nurturing of them.

    Have you ever thought what life would be like if the needs of men and women were naturally precisely the same?

    What would it be like if they both naturally needed to feel dominant all of the time, or both naturally needed to feel protected all of the time?

    How disturbed and intolerable things would be.

  • Conversation with Brigham

    Conversation with Brigham

    Brigham Young Interview by Horace Greeley (New York Tribune editor), ‘Two Hours With Brigham Young’, Salt Lake City, Utah, July 13, 1859: 1

    My friend Dr. [John M.] Bernisel, M.C. [Mormon Church], took me this afternoon, by appointment, to meet Brigham Young, President of the Mormon Church, who had expressed a willingness to receive me at 2 P.M. We were very cordially welcomed at the door by the President, who led us into the second-story parlor of the largest of his houses (he has three), where I was introduced to Heber C. Kimball, Gen. [Daniel H.] Wells, Gen. [James] Ferguson, Albert Carrington, Elias Smith, and several other leading men in the Church, with two full-grown sons of the President. After some unimportant conversation on general topics, I had come in quest of fuller respecting the doctrines and polity [organization] of the Mormon Church, and would like to ask some questions bearing directly on these, if there were no objections. President Young avowed his willingness to respond to all pertinent inquiries, the conversation proceeded substantially as follows:

    H.G. — Am I to regard Mormonism (so-called) as a new religion, or as simply a new development of Christianity?

    B.Y. — We hold that there can be no true Christian Church without a priesthood directly commissioned by and in immediate communication with the Son of God and Savior of mankind. Such a church is that of the Latter-Day Saints, called by their enemies Mormons; we know no other that even pretends to have present and direct revelations of God’s will.

    H.G. — Then I am to understand that you regard all other churches professing to be Christian as The Church of Rome regards all churches not in communion with itself — as schismatic, heretical, and out of the way of salvation?

    B. Y. — Yes, substantially.

    H.G. — Apart from this, in what respect do your doctrines differ from those of our Orthodox Protestant Churches — the Baptist or Methodist, for example?

    B.Y. — We hold the doctrines of Christianity, as revealed in the Old and New Testaments — also in the Book of Mormon, which teaches the same cardinal truths, and those only.

    H.G. — Do you believe in the doctrine of the Trinity?

    B. Y. — We do; but not exactly as it is held by other churches. We believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, as equal, but not identical — not as one person [being]. We believe in all the Bible teaches on this subject.

    H.G. — Do you believe in a personal devil — a distinct, conscious, spiritual being, whose nature and acts are essentially malignant and evil?

    B.Y. — We do.

    H.G. — Do you hold the doctrine of Eternal Punishment?

    B.Y. — We do; though perhaps not exactly as other churches do. We believe it as the Bible teaches it.

    H.G. — I understand that you regard Baptism by Immersion as essential.

    B.Y. — We do.

    H.G. — Do you practice Infant Baptism?

    B.Y. — No.

    H.G. — Do you make removal to these valleys obligatory on your converts?

    B.Y. — They would consider themselves greatly aggrieved if they were not invited hither. We hold to such a gathering together of God’s People as the Bible foretells, and that this is the place and now is the time appointed for its consummation.

    H.G. — The predictions to which you refer have, usually, I think, been understood to indicate Jerusalem (or Judea) as the place of such gathering.

    B.Y. — Yes, for the Jews — not for others.

    H.G. — What is the position of your Church with respect to Slavery?

    B.Y. — We consider it of Divine institution, and not to be abolished until the curse pronounced on Ham shall have been removed from his descendants.

    H.G. — Are there any slaves now held in this Territory?

    B.Y. — There are.

    H.G. — Do your Territorial laws uphold Slavery?

    B.Y. — Those laws are printed — you can read them for yourself. If slaves are brought here by those who owned them in the States, we do not favor their escape from the service of those owners.

    H.G. — Am I to infer that Utah, if admitted as a member of the Federal Union, will be a Slave State?

    B.Y. — No; she will be a Free State. Slavery here would prove useless and unprofitable. I regard it generally as a curse to the masters. I myself hire many laborers and pay them fair wages; I could not afford to own them. I can do better than subject myself to an obligation to feed and clothe their families, to provide and care for them, in sickness and health. Utah is not adapted to Slave Labor.

    H.G. — Let me now be enlightened with regard more especially to your Church polity [government]; I understand that you require each member to pay over one-tenth of all he produces or earns to the Church.

    B.Y. — That is a requirement of our faith. There is no compulsion as to the payment. Each member acts in the premises according to his pleasure, under the dictates of his own conscience.

    H.G. — What is done with the proceeds of this tithing?

    B.Y. — Part of it is devoted to building temples and other places of worship; part to helping the poor and needy converts on their way to this country; and the largest portion to the support of the poor among the Saints.

    H.G. — Is none of it paid to Bishops and other dignitaries of the Church?

    B.Y. — Not one penny. No Bishop, no Elder, no Deacon, or other church officer, receives any compensation for his official services. A Bishop is often required to put his hand in his own pocket and provide therefrom for the poor of his charge; but he never receives anything for his services.

    H.G. — How then do your ministers live?

    B.Y. — By the labor of their own hands, like the first Apostles. Every Bishop, every Elder, may be daily seen at work in the field or the shop, like his neighbors; every minister of the Church has his proper calling by which he earns the bread of his family; he who cannot or will not do the Church’s work for nothing is not wanted in her services; even our lawyers (pointing to Gen. Ferguson and another present, who are the regular lawyers of the Church) are paid nothing for their services; I am the only person in the Church who has not a regular calling apart from the Church’s service, and I never received one farthing from her treasury; if I obtain anything from the tithing-house, I am charged with and pay for it, just as anyone else would; the clerks in the tithing-store are paid like other clerks, but no one is ever paid for any service pertaining to the ministry. We think a man who cannot make his living aside from the Ministry of Christ unsuited to that office. I am called rich, and consider myself worth $250,000; but no dollar of it was ever paid me by the Church or for any service as a minister of the Everlasting Gospel. I lost nearly all I had when we were broken up in Missouri and driven from that State; I was nearly stripped again when Joseph Smith was murdered and we were driven from Illinois; but nothing was ever made up to me by the Church, nor by any one. I believe I know how to acquire property and how to take care of it.

    H.G. — Can you give me any rational explanation of the aversion and hatred with which your people are generally regarded by those among whom they have lived and with whom they have been brought directly in contact?

     B.Y. — No other explanation than is afforded by the crucifixion of Christ and the kindred treatment of God’s ministers, prophets, saints in all ages.

    H.G. — I know that a new sect is always decried and traduced — that it is hardly ever deemed respectable to belong to one — that the Baptists, Quakers, Methodists, Universalists, &c., have each in their turn been regarded in the infancy of their sect as the off-scouring of the earth; yet I cannot remember that either of them were ever generally represented and regarded by the older sects of their early days as thieves, robbers and murderers.

    B.Y. — If you will consult the contemporary Jewish accounts of the life and acts of Jesus Christ, you will find that he and his disciples were accused of every abominable deed and purpose — robbery and murder included. Such a work is still extant, and may be found by those who seek it.

    H.G. — What do you say of the so-called Danites, or Destroying Angels, belonging to your Church?

    B.Y. — What do you say? I know of no such band, no such persons or organization. I hear of them only in the slanders of our enemies.

    H.G. — With regard, then, to the grave question on which your doctrine and practices are avowedly at war with those of the Christian world — that of a plurality of wives — is the system of your Church acceptable to the majority of its women?

    B.Y. — They could not be more averse to it than I was when it was first revealed to us as the Divine Will. I think they generally accept it, as I do, as the will of God.

    H.G. — How general is polygamy among you?

    B.Y. — I could not say. Some of those present [heads of the Church] have each but one wife; others have more: each determines what is his individual duty.

    H.G. — What is the largest number of wives belonging to any one man?

    B.Y. — I have fifteen; I know no one who has more but some of those sealed to me are old ladies whom I regard rather as mothers than wives, but whom I have taken home to cherish and support.

    H.G. — Does not the Apostle Paul say that a bishop should be “the husband of one wife”?

    B.Y. — So we hold. We do not regard any but a married man as fitted for the office of bishop. But the Apostle Paul does not forbid a bishop from having more wives than one.

    H.G. — Does not Christ say that he who puts away his wife, or marries one whom another has put away, commits adultery?

    B.Y. — Yes; and I hold that no man should ever put away a wife except for adultery — not always even for that. Such is my individual view of the matter. I do not say that wives have never been put away in our Church, but that I do not approve of the practice.

    H.G. — How do you regard what is commonly called the Christian Sabbath?

    B.Y. — As a divinely appointed day of rest from secular labor on that day. We would have no man enslaved to the Sabbath, but we enjoin all to respect and enjoy it.

        Such is, as nearly as I can recollect, the substance of nearly two hours’ conversation, wherein much was said incidentally that would not be worth reporting, even if I could remember and reproduce it, and wherein others bore a part; but as President Young is the first minister of the Mormon Church, and bore the principal part in the conversation, I have reported his answers alone to my questions and observations. The others appeared, uniformly to defer to his views, and to acquiesce fully in his response and explanations. He spoke readily, not always with grammatical accuracy, but with no appearance of hesitation or reserve, and with no apparent desire to conceal anything, nor did he repel any of my questions as impertinent. He was very plainly dressed in thin summer clothing, and with no air of sanctimony or fanaticism. In appearance he is a portly, frank, good-natured, rather thick-set man of fifty-five, seeming to enjoy life, and be in no particular hurry to get to heaven. His associates are plain men, evidently born and reared to a life of labor, a looking as little like crafty hypocrites or swindlers as any body of men I ever met. The absence of cant or shuffle from their manner was marked and general, yet, I think I may fairly say that their Mormonism has not impoverished them — that they were generally poor men when they embraced it, and are now in very comfortable circumstances — as men averaging three and four wives apiece certainly need to be.

        If I hazard any criticisms on Mormonism generally, I reserve them for a separate letter, being determined to make this a fair and full expose of the doctrine and polity in the very words of its Prophet, so far as I can recall them. I do not believe President Young himself could present them in terms calculated to render them less obnoxious to the Gentile world than the above. But I have the right to add here, because I said it to the assembled chiefs at the close of the above colloquy, that the degradation (or, if you please, the restriction) of Woman to the single office of child-bearing and its accessories, is an inevitable consequence of the system here paramount. I have not observed a sign in the streets, an advertisement in the journals, of this Mormon metropolis, whereby a woman proposes to do anything whatever. No Mormon has ever cited to me his wife’s or any woman’s opinion on any subject; no Mormon woman has been introduced or has spoken to me; and, though I have been asked to visit Mormons in their houses, no one has spoken of his wife (or wives) desiring to see me, or his desiring me to make her (or their) acquaintance, or voluntarily indicated the existence of such a being or beings.

        I will not attempt to report our talk on this subject, because, unlike what I have above given, it assumed somewhat the character of a disputation, and I could hardly give it impartially; but one remark made by President Young I think I can give accurately, and it may serve as a sample of all that was offered on that side.

        It was in these words, I think exactly: “If I did not consider myself competent to transact a certain business without taking my wife’s or any woman’s counsel with regard to it, I think I ought to let that business alone.”

        The spirit with regard to Woman, of the entire Mormon, as of all other polygamic systems, is fairly displayed in this avowal. Let any such system become established and prevalent, and Woman will soon be confined to the harem, and her appearance on the street with unveiled face will be accounted immodest. I joyfully trust that the genius of the Nineteenth Century tends to a solution of the problem of Women’s sphere and destiny radically different from this.

            H.G.

    References

    References
    1 ‘Two Hours With Brigham Young’, September 17, 1859, Millennial Star – https://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/digital/collection/MStar/id/23441
  • Don’t Know

    Don’t Know

    Excerpt from a Church News article, ‘President Ballard said missionaries shouldn’t invite people to be baptized without feeling the Spirit. Here’s why’, June 26 2019: 1

    “PROVO, Utah — Missionaries need to recognize the Spirit and teach by the Spirit more than at any time in our history, said President M. Russell Ballard during the 2019 New Mission Leadership Seminar on June 24.
    “If we help create a mission culture based on Spirit-led invitations that allow others to have spiritual experiences, our missionaries will feel the power of God as they witness the changes occurring inside the hearts and minds of all those they find and teach,” said President Ballard, acting president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.
    Speaking to 164 new mission presidents and their companions gathered at the Provo Missionary Training Center for the conference, President Ballard said gospel invitations — especially invitations to be baptized — should be Spirit-led.

    Some missionaries have felt pressure to invite people to be baptized during the first lesson or even the first contact. “These missionaries have felt that inviting people to be baptized the very first time they meet them demonstrated the missionaries’ faith and supports their thinking that inviting people to be baptized early is what is expected,” he said. “Other missionaries have felt that an invitation to be baptized early allowed them to promptly separate the wheat from the tares. In this case, some see the baptismal invitation as a sifting tool.”

    Church leaders don’t know where these practices began, but “it was never our intention to invite people to be baptized before they had learned something about the gospel, felt the Holy Ghost, and had been properly prepared to accept a lifelong commitment to follow Jesus Christ,” said President Ballard. “Our retention rates will dramatically increase when people desire to be baptized because of the spiritual experiences they are having rather than feeling pressured into being baptized by our missionaries.”



    Excerpt from ‘Discussion One, The Plan Of Salvation’ an LDS missionary teaching manual, Pub. 1986: 2

    “You Can Be Baptized 

    As the Lord answers your prayers and you feel that this message is true, we hope you will want to follow Christ by being baptized. 

    Invite: As prompted by the Spirit, you could now invite the investigators to be baptized.“

    Excerpt from ‘Discussion Two, The Gospel Of Jesus Christ’ an LDS missionary teaching manual, Pub. 1986: 3

    Commitment Invitation: Baptism 

    One of the most basic ways in which God asks us to be obedient is by being baptized. As we said a few minutes ago, when we are baptized, we enter into a covenant with God. The Book of Mormon teaches that Christ set the example for us by being baptized. His baptism was a witness that he would be obedient to all the commandments of his Father. [ Read and discuss 2 Nephi 31:4-7.] 

    Will you follow the example of Christ by being baptized by someone holding the priesthood authority of God? 

    Invite: Unless otherwise prompted by the Spirit, you should at this point invite the investigators to be baptized on a specific date. If they need additional preparation for this commitment, use the “Invitation to Be Baptized” in the instruction booklet. 

    References

    References
    1 ‘President Ballard said missionaries shouldn’t invite people to be baptized without feeling the Spirit. Here’s why’, June 26 2019, Church News – https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2019-06-26/president-ballard-baptize-2019-mission-leadership-seminar-50222
    2 Discussion One, The Plan Of Salvation – https://archive.org/details/Discussion1ThePlanOfSalvation
    3 Discussion Two, The Gospel Of Jesus Christ – https://archive.org/details/Discussion2TheGospelOfJesusChrist/page/n1
  • Day of the Lamanites

    Day of the Lamanites

    Excerpt from an October 1960 General Conference Address by Spencer W. Kimball: 1

    “The work is unfolding, and blinded eyes begin to see, and scattered people begin to gather. I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today as against that of only fifteen years ago. Truly the scales of darkness are falling from their eyes, and they are fast becoming a white and delightsome people.”

    “The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, fifteen of the twenty were as light as Anglos; five were darker but equally delightsome. The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.

    At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl — sixteen — sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident she was several shades lighter than her parents — on the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather. There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was some shades lighter than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated. “

    References

    References
    1 Spencer W. Kimball, October 1960 General Conference – https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1960sa/page/n33
  • Tell Them How to Vote

    Tell Them How to Vote

    Excerpt from a CBS News’ 60 Minutes interview with Gordon B. Hinckley, April 7, 1996: 1

    “We urge our people to exercise their franchise as citizens of this nation, but we do not tell them how to vote, and we do not tell the government how it should be run.”

    Email sent to Utah LDS Members sent August 23, 2018 opposing medical marijuana ballot initiative: 2

    “Dear Brothers and Sisters,

    In November, Proposition 2, an initiative which would legalize the sale and use of marijuana, will appear on the ballot. Its proponents assert that it will make medical marijuana available to those suffering with debilitating pain and other infirmities. However, in truth it goes much further, creating a serious threat to health and public safety, especially for our youth and young adults, by making marijuana generally available with few controls.

    The Church joins a coalition of medical experts, public officials, and community stakeholders in calling for a safe and compassionate approach to providing medical marijuana to those in need. The Church does not object to the medicinal use of marijuana, if doctor prescribed, in dosage form, through a licensed pharmacy.

    As a member of the coalition, we urge voters of Utah to vote NO on Proposition 2, and join us in a call to state elected officials to promptly work with medical experts, patients, and community leaders to find a solution that will work for all Utahns, without the harmful effects that will come to pass if Proposition 2 becomes law.

    For more information on Proposition 2 please refer to this legal analysis prepared for the Church by Kirton McConkie.”

    References

    References
    1 CBS News’ 60 Minutes interview with Gordon B. Hinckley, April 7, 1996 – https://youtu.be/_kP0ZDg2HAg
    2 Church sends email to Utah Latter-day Saints urging them to vote no on marijuana initiative – https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900029230/mormon-church-sends-email-to-utah-latter-day-saints-urging-them-to-vote-no-on-marijuana-initiative.html
  • Skin

    Skin

    1 Nephi 12:23, Book of Mormon: 1

    23 And it came to pass that I beheld, after they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations.

    1 Nephi 13:15, Book of Mormon: 2

    15 And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain.

    2 Nephi 5:21-23, Book of Mormon: 3

    21 And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.

    22 And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities.

    23 And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord spake it, and it was done.

    2 Nephi 30:6, Book of Mormon (1830 Edition): 4

    And then shall they rejoice: for they shall know that it is a blessing unto them from the hand of God; and their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and a delightsome people.

    Jacob 3:5-9, Book of Mormon: 5

    5 Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.

    6 And now, this commandment they observe to keep; wherefore, because of this observance, in keeping this commandment, the Lord God will not destroy them, but will be merciful unto them; and one day they shall become a blessed people.

    7 Behold, their husbands love their wives, and their wives love their husbands; and their husbands and their wives love their children; and their unbelief and their hatred towards you is because of the iniquity of their fathers; wherefore, how much better are you than they, in the sight of your great Creator?

    8 O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God.

    9 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers.

    Alma 3:5-10, 14-17, Book of Mormon: 6

    5 Now the heads of the Lamanites were shorn; and they were naked, save it were skin which was girded about their loins, and also their armor, which was girded about them, and their bows, and their arrows, and their stones, and their slings, and so forth.

    6 And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.

    7 And their brethren sought to destroy them, therefore they were cursed; and the Lord God set a mark upon them, yea, upon Laman and Lemuel, and also the sons of Ishmael, and Ishmaelitish women.

    8 And this was done that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren, that thereby the Lord God might preserve his people, that they might not mix and believe in incorrect traditions which would prove their destruction.

    9 And it came to pass that whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed.

    10 Therefore, whosoever suffered himself to be led away by the Lamanites was called under that head, and there was a mark set upon him….

    14 Thus the word of God is fulfilled, for these are the words which he said to Nephi: Behold, the Lamanites have I cursed, and I will set a mark on them that they and their seed may be separated from thee and thy seed, from this time henceforth and forever, except they repent of their wickedness and turn to me that I may have mercy upon them.

    15 And again: I will set a mark upon him that mingleth his seed with thy brethren, that they may be cursed also.

    16 And again: I will set a mark upon him that fighteth against thee and thy seed.

    17 And again, I say he that departeth from thee shall no more be called thy seed; and I will bless thee, and whomsoever shall be called thy seed, henceforth and forever; and these were the promises of the Lord unto Nephi and to his seed.

    3 Nephi 2:14-16, Book of Mormon: 7

    14 And it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites;

    15 And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites;

    16 And their young men and their daughters became exceedingly fair, and they were numbered among the Nephites, and were called Nephites.

    Mormon 5:14-15, Book of Mormon: 8

    14 And behold, they shall go unto the unbelieving of the Jews; and for this intent shall they go—that they may be persuaded that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God; that the Father may bring about, through his most Beloved, his great and eternal purpose, in restoring the Jews, or all the house of Israel, to the land of their inheritance, which the Lord their God hath given them, unto the fulfilling of his covenant;

    15 And also that the seed of this people may more fully believe his gospel, which shall go forth unto them from the Gentiles; for this people shall be scattered, and shall become a dark, a filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which ever hath been amongst us, yea, even that which hath been among the Lamanites, and this because of their unbelief and idolatry.

    Mormon 9:6, Book of Mormon: 9

    6 O then ye unbelieving, turn ye unto the Lord; cry mightily unto the Father in the name of Jesus, that perhaps ye may be found spotless, pure, fair, and white, having been cleansed by the blood of the Lamb, at that great and last day.

    :::

    Excerpt from the October 1960 LDS General Conference, Spencer W. Kimball: 10

    “At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl—sixteen—sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident she was several shades lighter than her parents—on the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather. There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was some shades lighter than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.”

    References

    References
    1 1 Nephi 12:23, Book of Mormon – https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/12.23
    2 1 Nephi 13:15, Book of Mormon – https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/13.15
    3 2 Nephi 5:21-23, Book of Mormon – https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/5.21-23
    4 2 Nephi 30:6, Book of Mormon (1830 Edition) – http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/123
    5 Jacob 3:5-9, Book of Mormon – https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/jacob/3.5-9
    6 Alma 3:5-10, 14-17, Book of Mormon – https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/alma/3
    7 3 Nephi 2:14-16, Book of Mormon – https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/2.14-16
    8 Mormon 5:14-15, Book of Mormon – https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm/5?lang=eng
    9 Mormon 9:6, Book of Mormon – https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm/9.6
    10 The Day of the Lamanites -1960 General Conference, Spencer W. Kimball – http://scriptures.byu.edu/#:t443:g882
  • Talk of Love

    Talk of Love

    A January 5, 1965 address at BYU by Spencer W. Kimball, ‘Love vs. Lust’: 1

    “My beloved young people:

    While this is a grave responsibility, and not an easy one, I am eager to discuss with you some matters of grave importance.

    I love youth. I rejoice when they grow up clean and stalwart and tall. I sorrow with them when they have misfortunes and remorse and troubles.

    Numerous disasters have occurred in mid-ocean by collisions of ships and sometimes with icebergs, and numerous people have gone to watery graves.

    Soon, such a thing will not be possible, for ships will be equipped with radar equipment which will alert ships’ officers should a collision be imminent. A tape will be played automatically, booming from the darkened bridge: “This is an alert. This ship is approaching an object. This is an alert. This ship is approaching an object.” And the voice will not be stilled until the mate comes to the radarscope and turns the recorder off. This will enable ships to alter their courses and save lives.

    I believe our young people are wholesome and basically good and sound; but they, too, are traveling oceans which to them are at least partially uncharted, where there are shoals and rocks and icebergs and other vessels, and where great disasters can come unless warnings are heeded.

    Yesterday as my jet plane soared in the air gaining altitude, the voice of the stewardess came clearly over the loud-speaker: “We are moving into a storm area. We shall skirt the danger, but there may be some turbulence. Be sure your seat belts are securely fastened.”

    And, as a leader of the Church and in a measure being responsible for youth and their well-being, I raise my voice to say to the youth: “You are in a hazardous area and period. Tighten your belts, hold on, and you can survive the turbulence.”

    I interview thousands of young people and many seem to flounder. Some give excuses for their errors and indulge in unwarranted rationalizations. Today I hope I may be able to clarify, at least in some areas, the stand of the God of Heaven and His Church on some vital issues.

    May I speak first of words and relate them to my theme? There is magic in words properly used. Some people use them accurately, while others sloppily.

    Words are means of communication, and faulty signals give wrong impressions. Disorder and misunderstandings are the results. Words underlie our whole life and are the tools of our business, the expressions of our affections, and the records of our progress. Words cause hearts to throb and tears to flow in sympathy. Words can be sincere or hypocritical. Many of us are destitute of words and, consequently, clumsy with our speech, which sometimes becomes but babble. Paul said:

    Except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. (1 Cor. 14:9.)

    And then Peter speaks of Paul and says of his epistles:

    “. . . in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. (2 Pet. 3:16.)

    Touring foreign lands, one comes to realize his utter helplessness without understandable words and symbols.

    The workmen engaged in building the Tower of Babel were craftsmen, skilled in their trades. Take away their tools: they will replace them. Take away their skills: they will learn anew. But take away their means of communication with one another and the building of the tower has to be abandoned. (Royal Bank of Canada Letter.)

    Words which confuse the hearer or reader are worse than valueless. A reasonable vocabulary of well-chosen words provides us with shadings of meaning and enables us to speak finely instead of coarsely.

    Words which are synonyms have much in common but still have peculiar application, such as “child and urchin,” “hand and fist,” “misstatement and lie.” Now, note the difference in the four-word sentences: “John looked at Mary”; “John glanced at Mary”; “John gazed at Mary”; “John glared at Mary.”

    A true definition of style is, “Proper words in proper places with thoughts in proper order.”

    The plain way of writing conceals great art. As you avoid pomposity, ambiguity and complexity, you attain simplicity, which is the greatest cunning. It conveys proper meaning into the minds of others straight away, without effort for them. They get a feeling of sincerity and integrity, for who can be suspicious of the motives of one who speaks plainly? “Sour notes do not become sweet because the musician is in white tie and black tails.”

    Words should be kind and gentle or firm and bold, according to the need of the moment. Words which betray are unkind and words which befuddle are frustrating.

    Some people have excellent ideas, but their thoughts either beat about aimlessly in their heads, finding no communication package in which to emerge, or they come out distorted and in fragments.

    Every person should say what he means, speaking clearly and distinctly. The politician particularly should pay attention to the niceties of language so as to address the voters meaningfully and not deceitfully. The deforming of meaning for political ends has become too commonplace. In our lives, we should express clearly what we have in mind, just as a purchaser would say: “I wish to buy three rolls of Kodak Ektachrome X Color Film, Daylight Ex. 127.” And the clerk knows exactly what is wanted.

    So in social life, and certainly in morals, there should be a careful selection of the right word to express the thought.

    It is reported that a Russian child has a primer of 2,000 words in the first grade and of 10,000 words in the fourth, while his opposite number in the United States has a primer of 1,800 words; and that the Russian child is reading Tolstoy while the same aged child in the United States is working his way through a book entitled, A Funny Sled. This charge is made in an article in Horizon of July, 1963.

    Even examinations now in many cases do not require expressions by students. They may place an “X” in an appropriate square and avoid intellectual effort in marshalling thoughts and expressing them coherently, and have about a fifty percent chance of being right even in a guess.

    Without discipline, language declines into flabby permissiveness, into formlessness and mindlessness. It deteriorates into what the late James Thurber called “our oral culture of pure babble.”

    Now, you may wonder why I have introduced my talk with the subject of words. May I lead you out with a few four-letter words to think about: fine, fire; good and grow; home, hide, hell, help; and tire, tide, tell and toll; wilt, wish, weak, worn, and weep. Then, there are these: limp, life, live, lurk, love and lust.

    Ah! Here I have finally found the two words on which I wish to dwell: love and lust-words strong and powerful-words which are life and death words-love and lust.

    Let me begin with a story. Across the desk sat a handsome, young nineteen-year-old and a beautiful, shy, but charming eighteen-year-old. They appeared embarrassed, apprehensive, near-terrified. He was defensive and bordering on belligerency and rebellion. There had been sexual violations throughout the summer and intermittently since school began, and as late as last week. I was not so much surprised. I have had these kinds of visits many times; but what did disturb me was that they seemed little, if any, remorseful. They admitted they had gone contrary to some social standards, but quoted magazines and papers and speakers approving pre-marital sex and emphasizing that sex was a fulfillment of human existence.

    Finally, the boy said, “Yes, we yielded to each other, but we do not think it wrong because we love each other.” I thought I had misunderstood him. Since the world began, there have been countless immoralities, but to hear them justified by Latter-day Saint youth shocked me. He repeated, “No, it is not wrong because we love each other.” Here was one of those misused four-letter words.

    They had repeated this abominable heresy so often that they had convinced themselves, and a wall of resistance had been built, and behind this wall they stubbornly stood almost defiantly. If there had been blushes of shame at first, such had been neutralized with their logic. Deeply entrenched were they in this rationalization. Had they not read in some university papers of the new freedom where pre-marital sex was sanctioned, at least not forbidden? Did they not see the looseness in every show, on every stage, on TV screens and magazines? Had they not discussed this in the locker room and in private conversation? Had it not been fairly well established, then, in their world, that sex before marriage was not so wrong? Did there not need to be a trial period? How else could they know if they would be sexually compatible for marriage ? Had they not, like numerous others, come to regard sex as the basis for living ?

    And a proverb came to my mind:

    Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness. (Prov. 30:20.)

    In their rationalization they have had much cooperation, for, as Peter said:

    “… there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways. . .” (2 Pet. 2:1-2.)

    And Peter says further:

    “. . . they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, . . . the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” (2 Pet. 3:16.)

    And here they are, false teachers everywhere, using speech and pornographic literature, magazines, radio, TV, street talk-spreading damnable heresies which break down moral standards, and this to gratify the lusts of the flesh.

    Lucifer in his diabolical scheming deceives the unwary and uses every tool at his command. Seldom does one go to a convention, a club meeting, a party or social gathering without hearing vulgarity, obscenity and suggestive stories.

    Peter again cautioned us:

    Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour. (1 Pet. 5:8.)

    And the Savior said that the very elect would be deceived by Lucifer if it were possible. He will use his logic to confuse, and his rationalizations to destroy. He will shade meanings, open doors an inch at a time, and lead from purest white through all the shades of gray to the darkest black.

    Young people are confused by the arch deceiver who uses every device to deceive them.

    This young couple looked up rather startled when I postulated firmly and with positiveness, “No, my beloved young people, you did not love each other. Rather, you lusted for each other.” And here was the other misused word.

    Paul told Titus:

    Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.

    They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. (Titus 1:15-16.)

    I am sure that Peter and James and Paul found it unpleasant business to constantly be calling people to repentance and warning them of dangers, but they continued unflinchingly. So we, your leaders, must be everlastingly at it; if young people do not understand, then the fault may be partly ours. But, if we make the true way clear to you, then we are blameless.

    If when he [the watchman] seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people;

    Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head.

    He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul.

    But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand. (Ezek. 33:3-6.)

    So, I wish today to help define meanings of words and acts for you young people, to fortify you against error, anguish, pain and sorrow.

    The boy and girl sat still and respectfully. I was not sure if they were comprehending. Apparently, their wrong concepts had been bolstered so long and firmly it was hard for them to change immediately.

    Now we talked again about words-short words like lift and lean, hide and lurk, flee and stay, lose and gain, fall and rise, open and shut, lure and save, lose and gain, live and dead, hell and home and again, love and lust. The beautiful and holy word of love they had defiled until it had degenerated to become a bedfellow with lust, its antithesis.

    As far back as Isaiah, deceivers and rationalizers were condemned:

    Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

    Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! (Isa. 5:20-21.)

    And, we might add: Woe unto those who wrest the scriptures to interpret them to cover their weaknesses. The young couple had excused and justified their transgression on the grounds that they loved each other. Is there a word in the dictionary more misused and prostituted than the word “love”?

    Many of the modern terms for sin were not used in the scriptures and in olden days, and some people, therefore, excuse their contaminations because the age-old transgressions were not identified with modern terms. But, if one reads the scriptures carefully, all sins are denounced there in every shade of error. Again, the great Peter said:

    Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul. (I Peter 2: 11.)

    Surely, every soul who has reached the age of accountability, and especially those who have received the Holy Ghost after baptism, knows the difference; but so often we hear what we want to hear and we see what we want to see. There is a definite war against the soul when evil is perpetrated. And I challenge any normal baptized person who says he did not know he was doing wrong. There is no compatibility between sin and righteousness, between guilt and peace.

    Paul charged the Corinthians:

    Flee fornication …. He that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. (1 Cor. 6:18.)

    And in order to avoid the disasters, Paul cautioned: “Do not company with fornicators.” And he urged people to keep good company and not eat with the evil ones who would tempt them, and then concludes: “Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” (See 1 Cor. 5:9-13.)

    Oh, if our young people could learn this basic lesson to always keep good company, to never be found with those who tend to lower our standards! Let every youth select associates who will keep him on tiptoes, trying to reach the heights attained. Let him never choose associates who encourage him to relax in carelessness.

    We must repeat what we have said many times: Fornication with all its big and little brothers and sisters was evil and wholly condemned by the Lord in Adam’s day, in Moses’ day, in Paul’s day, and in our own day. The Church has no tolerance for any kind of perversions. The Lord has indicated His lack of tolerance, stating:

    For I the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance. (D&C 1:31.)

    Yet, He loves the repentant one. Paul said that even the converted Gentiles should be taught to “abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication,” and other deviations. (Acts 15:20.) He wrote the Romans that corrupt practices called fornication were extant among them. He exhorted the Galatians, lashing out against the “works of the flesh . . adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,” and then he added “that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Gal. 5:19-21.)

    They are like the:

    Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. (Jude 13.)

    These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage. (Jude 16.)

    Let it be known positively that the Church is not softening its standards, nor abandoning its Godgiven practices. Those who interpret the scriptures to justify their own pernicious ways are spoken of in the Book of Mormon:

    . . . They are led about by Satan, even as chaff is driven before the wind, or as a vessel is tossed about upon the waves, without sail or anchor, or without anything wherewith to steer her; and even as she is, so are they. (Mormon 5:18.)

    My young couple who had so seriously sinned were listening, and I reminded them of the statement of Mormon, where the Nephites, guilty of fiendish, abominable acts, had taken prisoners the daughters of the Lamanites, and:

    After depriving them of that which was most dear and precious above all things, which is chastity and virtue-(Moroni 9:9).

    They tortured and murdered them.

    When the scriptures are so plain, how can anyone justify immoralities and call them love? Is black white? Is evil good? Is purity filthiness?

    As I looked the boy in the eye, I said, “No, my boy, you were not expressing love when you took her virtue.” And to her, I said, “There was no real love in your heart when you robbed him of his chastity. It was lust that brought you together in this most serious of all practices short of murder. Paul said, ‘Love worketh no ill to his neighbour.’ (Rom. 13:10.)”

    I continued, “If one really loves another, one would rather die for that person than injure him. At the hour of indulgence, pure love is pushed out one door while lust sneaks in the other. Your affection has been replaced with biological materialism and uncontrolled passion. You have accepted the doctrine which the devil is so eager to establish-that sex relations are justified on the grounds that it is a pleasurable experience in itself and is beyond moral consideration.

    “When the unmarried yield to the lust which induces intimacies and indulgence, they have permitted the body to dominate and have placed the spirit in chains. It is unthinkable that anyone could call this love. You have ignored the fact that all situations or conditions or actions whose pleasures or satisfactions end with the termination of the act will never produce great peoples nor build great kingdoms.

    “In order to live with themselves, people who transgress must follow one path or the other of two alternatives. The one is to sear the conscience and dull the sensitivity with mental tranquilizers so that the transgression may be continued; the other is to permit remorse to lead to total conviction, repentance and eventual forgiveness.”

    This conviction is the element of which my two young visitors were quite devoid. They were somewhat like the unrepentant of whom Isaiah spoke:

    And the mean man boweth not down, and the great man humbleth himself not, therefore, forgive him not.(2 Ne. 12:9.)

    No one can ever be forgiven of any transgression until there is repentance, and one has not repented until he has bared his soul and admitted his intentions and weaknesses without excuses or rationalizations. He must admit to himself that he has grievously sinned. When he has confessed to himself without the slightest minimizing of the offense, or rationalizing its seriousness, or soft-pedaling its gravity, and admits it is as big as it really is, then he is ready to begin his repentance; and any other elements of repentance are of reduced value, until the conviction is established totally, and then repentance may mature and forgiveness may eventually come.

    Because of this widespread tolerance toward promiscuity, this world is in grave danger. When evil is decried and forbidden and punished, the world still has a chance. But when toleration for sin increases, the outlook is bleak and Sodom and Gomorrah days are certain to return.

    We were in Los Angeles years ago when the news broke of the illicit affair of a certain movie actress, from which she became pregnant. Because of her popularity, it was big news in heavy headlines in every paper in the land. We were not so surprised at her adultery-it was reported to be common in Hollywood as well as in the world generally. But that such dissoluteness should be approved and accepted by society shocked me. The Los Angeles papers took a poll of the people-club women and ministers, employers and employees, stenographers and teachers and housewives-and almost without exception, as though it were a child’s indiscretion, these community leaders found little fault and criticized as “puritanical” and “victorian” those who disapproved. “Let her live her own life,” they said. “And, why should we interfere with people’s personal liberties?” In state and nation and across the seas, toleration for sin is terrifying.

    There is no shame. Isaiah again strikes the sin:

    The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves. (Isa. 3:9.)

    That the Church’s stand on morality may be understood, we declare firmly and unalterably it is not an outworn garment, faded, old-fashioned, and threadbare. God is the same yesterday, today and forever, and His covenants and doctrines are immutable; and when the sun grows cold and the stars no longer shine, the law of chastity will still be basic in God’s world and in the Lord’s Church. Old values are upheld by the Church not because they are old, but rather because through the ages they have proved right. It will always be the rule.

    I continued with the young couple, saying, “The youth of today are seeing too many ‘adults only’ movies which exploit sex. There are too many open dormitories on campus, too many mattress parties for adolescents, too many girls with extreme dresses, tight sweaters, calling attention to sex. And, there are too many young men with tight, suggestive attire. Youth generally have heard too many advertisements over radio and television and seen too many in newspapers and on billboards and in magazines where sex is used as a stimulus in selling. There have been too many parked automobiles. They have read too many novels where sex is the central, dominant theme.”

    “What kind of a world would we have,” I asked these young people, “if this heresy which you have espoused of pre-marital sex looseness and alleged free love were in order?” The world, already ill, would expire.

    We are not speaking of a sex-free world any more than we are speaking of a sexy world, for a sexless civilization would die in one generation if indeed it could be born. A sexy civilization will die of its own rottenness when it is ripe in iniquity. Pure sex life in proper marriage is approved. There is a time and an appropriateness for all things which have value. In ancient days, one city or one civilization could disintegrate without seriously disturbing other parts of the world, but today our communication and transportation facilities make the whole world one community.

    In our mass-production age in recent years, “we have witnessed the reduction of persons to things in a code number, a subscriber, a punched card. Each reduction indicates that the person is expendable, replaceable.. . .” “A person is not a function nor a means nor an instrument, but an end in himself; but the world speaks with a voice amplified by a thousand television stations and a half million printing presses.” It advances the biological materialism that man is a consuming, reproducing function, a collection of skills, or a unit in the labor force. This renders men functionaries and destroys their being and loses for them their self, dwarfed by a gigantic universe out there. This is hauntingly true as people are “used” to gratify physical passions in illegitimacy.

    This repulsive sense of “thinghood” is portrayed well in a few lines from John Pauker in the New Republic, January 5, 1963:

    I looked and looked again. There were no people.

    The people had disappeared. The people were gone.

    But the things they had created were still there.

    A suit of clothes and a gown walked arm in arm.

    With a dog at the end of a leash. The dog was there

    And snarling. In the street, vehicular traffic

    Flowed as usual but without drivers or riders ….

    Electric razors razed and revolvers fired

    As usual. The things went through their paces

    And seemed to be enjoying themselves highly.

    I longed to look in a mirror but did not dare.

    We really do not love things. We use things like doormats, automobiles, clothing, machines; but we love people by serving them and contributing to their permanent good. The Lord seemed to recognize this when He said:

    But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. (Matt. 6:33.)

    And again, the difference was made manifest in His instructions to Peter, when He asked three times of that worthy:

    Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these?

    To which Peter responded:

    Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. And the answer came:

    Feed my lambs. Feed my sheep. (See John 21:15-17.)

    What were the things, “these things,” which took second place to his love for his Lord and his fellow men? I think they must have been ships and nets and fish and desires and wants and even passions.

    Sexual encounters outside of legalized marriage render the individual a thing to be used, a thing to be exploited, and make him or her exchangeable, exploitable, expendable and throw-awayable.

    And when we come before the great Judge at the bar of justice, shall we stand before Him as a thing or as a person, as a depraved body of flesh and carnal acts, or as a son of God standing straight and tall and worthy? And as we answer the vital questions, will we be able to say, “I builded, I did not tear down; I lifted, I did not pull down; I grew, I did not shrivel; I helped others grow, I did not dwarf them; I helped, I did not hinder; I loved intensely and blessed, I did not lust toward exploitation to injure”?

    My young couple were still rationalizing and excusing themselves, and I said again, “Every kind of sex exploit for the unmarried from the first lustful stirrings of passions relating to self or to others is a sin, and thought habits are perverted and lives are blemished, and God’s laws are broken, and penalties will be paid.”

    Like some high pressure salesmen who claim far more for their product than can possibly be delivered, sex exploitation promises what it can never produce nor deliver. So, outside of marriage, improper sex life can bring only disappointment, disgust, and usually rejection “while it propels its participants down the long corridor of repeated encounters which are destined to fail.”

    Very often the couple-the two people who have been promiscuous, who have been wanton, who have crossed the lines of propriety-become disgusted with each other and discontinue associations altogether. How many come to dislike, if not to hate, the partner in sin.

    Illicit sex is a selfish act, a betrayal, and is dishonest. To be unwilling to accept responsibility is cowardly, disloyal. Marriage is for time and eternity. Fornication and all other deviations are for today, for the hour, for the “now.” Marriage gives life. Fornication leads to death. Pre-marital sex promises what it cannot possibly produce or deliver. Rejection is often the fruit as it moves its participants down the long highway of repeated encounters.

    The Eighth of the Ten Commandments says: “Thou shalt not steal.” Yet the immoral act is exploitation and robbery in its worst expression.

    It is taking with or without permission the most priceless, the most unrecoverable, the most unreturnable possession of an individual-chastity and virtue. In one dark, unglorious hour, lives can be taken or shattered; but in a long lifetime, health lost may possibly be regained, wealth lost may someday be accumulated again, freedom lost may be fought for and possibly recovered, but chastity gone is gone forever, and virtue stolen cannot be returned. Is not this one of the prime reasons why this forbidden thing is so heinous like murder, for neither can ever be wholly compensated nor returned nor undone?

    “THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY” (and we add its twin, FORNICATION) and also “THOU SHALT NOT KILL” came ‘ringing down from Mount Sinai. One can take a life easily but he can never restore that life. And so it is that when the pangs of futility and remorse impress the uselessness of the act, there must come the time when the fornicator or adulterer, like the murderer, wishes he could hide-hide from all the world, from all the ghosts and especially from his own-and there is no place to hide. There are dark corners and hidden spots and closed cars in which the transgression can be committed, but to totally conceal is impossible. There are no nights so dark, no rooms so tightly locked, no canyons so closed in, no deserts so uninhabited that one can find a place to hide his sins from himself nor from his Lord. Eventually, one must still face himself and his Great Judge.

    Cain had difficulty hiding. The Lord had asked, “Where is Abel, thy brother?” And Cain had boldly replied, “I know not. Am I my brother’ s keeper?” Did he think he was deceiving the Lord or himself? The next question was no simple inquiry, but an accusation and a condemnation, “What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground . . . which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand. “. . . a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. “And Cain said unto the Lord, My punishment is greater than I can bear. “Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth.” (Gen. 4:9-14.)

    That was true of murder. In a lesser degree, it is true of illicit sex, which, of course, includes all petting, fornication, adultery, homosexual acts, and all other perversions. The Lord may say to offenders, as He did to Cain, “What hast thou done?” The children thus conceived make damning charges against you; the companions who have been frustrated and violated condemn you; the body that has been defiled cries out against you; the spirit which has been dwarfed convicts you. You will have difficulty throughout the ages in totally forgiving yourself.

    After looking down at the crumpled body at his feet, and especially after the torments of hell began to persecute him and the ghost of his brother began to follow him, Cain must have wished that he could give Abel’ s life back. The Lord did not curse Cain; it was Cain who, breaking eternal law, cursed himself. And every man or woman who is guilty of moral misconduct may look down upon defiled bodies, his own and others; he may recognize frustrated and distorted minds; and as the ghosts begin to follow, he is certain to wish with all his heart that he could give back chastity and restore tranquility and peace in the minds and hearts and lives of those whom he has damaged.

    From the same tablet, from the same Sinai, came the Laws of God. After creating man in His own image, male and female, God then performed the holy marriage ceremony for eternity for His Adam and Eve. And in this beginning, He established a pattern of sex life consistent with all reason and propriety. In that first marriage blessing, the Lord commanded these two beings, who were complementary to each other, to multiply by being fruitful and bringing children into the world. Cain and Abel were only two of their many sons and daughters. This command did not give license to merely satisfy biological urges, for God followed it with the command,

    Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Gen. 2:24.)

    To cleave is to adhere closely, to cling; and the Lord gave as the purpose for their cleaving, the peopling of the earth, the replenishing of the earth, the subduing of the earth, the dominion over the earth. There was high purpose in the creation and in the proper associations of husband and wife, but intimacies could never be defended outside of marriage.

    The pre-marital sex act is a deception. It is a lie. The Lord asked:

    “If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he . . . give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask for an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? (Luke 11:11-12.)

    Bread is the staff of life, while a stone is lifeless, indeed, sometimes death dealing. The fish as food builds and sustains the body, as does the egg; but the serpent destroys life and is the symbol of death. Love is promised and is delivered.

    Proper sex functions bring posterity, responsibility, and peace; but pre-marital sex encounters bring pain, the loss of self-esteem, spiritual death, unless there is a total, continuing repentance.

    What are the fruits of immorality? Instead of multiplying and replenishing the earth, every effort is made to avoid conception and the birth of progeny. Since Adam no soul has ever been made happy by transgressing. The Lord said:

    “Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” (Matt. 7:19-20.)

    “And now also the ax is laid unto the root of the trees.” (Matt. 3:10.)

    And the warning is repeated:

    Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. (Matt. 7:15.)

    Could there possibly be a single good fruit which comes from pre-marital indulgence?

    Our great accumulated scientific knowledge about our bodies and their functioning, and our minds and their operating, seems not to have been translated into righteousness. As an example, all that we have learned of late from research about the ill effects of tobacco has done little to discourage its use, even as the holy revelations were ignored. And all that has been said from a medical and scientific standpoint about the social diseases seems to have deterred people very little from immorality-in fact, little more if any than the commandments of the Lord. For, in a recent local paper, we read of the great increase in VD in the big cities of our land.

    It is not so much what we know but what we do about what we know. Dr. Jenkins of the Utah State Health Department is quoted as saying that gonorrhea and syphilis epidemics are raging at this very moment in thirty of the nation’s largest cities.

    The Deseret News of December 13, 1964, quotes an Associated Press writer out of Washington as saying: “Some experts see a ‘general decline in morals’ and point to the sharpest rises of V.D. among teenagers.”

    We live in a sterile age, or so it seems-an age when young people turn to sex to escape loneliness, frustration; insecurity and lack of interest. “What can we do?” the youth complain. They are little interested in reading and family associations and youth socials and the community dance. They must have something more exciting. Long ago they ceased making their own entertainment which could be as clean and worthy as they wished to make it. Today, then, they look at television and go to shows in town, and to the so-called “passion pits,” where they are over-stimulated sexually. Oh, for a generation of youth who would move back to simplicity, away from the “canned” programs in most of which are ingredients to stimulate and stir the human passions!

    When we talk of sex, our first thought is adultery or fornication; but our second one, and close on its heels, is the sex stimulation to self and others, sometimes called “petting.” It is a damaging and a damning transgression in its own right, and then, of course, it is also the gateway to the final acts of fornication and adultery.

    And the world will go on dying-destroying itself until people begin to use words in their true meanings, “calling a spade, a spade” and not a spoon; calling “petting” a deep sin and not a harmless diversion– until we rip its disguising mask from its ugly face and strip from its lustful body the sheep’s clothing with which the vicious wolf has concealed his mean self.

    The young man is untrue to his manhood who promises popularity, good times, security, fun, and even love, when all he can give is passion and its diabolical fruits-guilt complexes, disgust, hatred, abhorrence, eventual loathing, and possible pregnancy without legitimacy and honor. He pleads his case in love and all he gives is lust. Likewise, the young lady sells herself cheap. She asks him for a fish; he gives her a serpent. He asks her for bread and she gives him a stone. She reaches for figs, and thorns are pressed into her hand. He would have grapes but gets a bramble bush. She asks for eggs and he stings her with a scorpion. The result is damage to life and canker to the soul.

    Reverend Lawrence Lowell Gruman says: “It is indeed a quaint morality that belittles sex and shrinks human beings to pleasure-seeking dwarfs, for if sex is good, as eating and sleeping are good, then it, too, has specific limits and an appropriate place and that place is within marriage.”

    And still these young people talk of love. What a corruption of the most beautiful term! The word is prostituted also in the realm of homosexuality. Both are in the realm of taking, not giving; killing, not saving; destroying, not building. The fruit is bitter because the tree is corrupt. Their lips say, “I love you.” Their bodies say, “I want you.” Love is kind and wholesome. To love is to give, not to take. To love is to serve, not to exploit.

    We sing of love in popular songs when we really are coveting and wanting and lusting. Why do people deceive themselves and others? Why not call it what it actually is?

    Undoubtedly Potiphar’s wife flattered Joseph and expressed her alleged love for him at first. When this failed, she tried force and intrigue; and, failing there, she tried to cover with blackmail. With such a clear conscience, Joseph’s dark dungeon must have been to him a pleasant prison. At least here he was safe from exploitation and contamination. She said to Joseph, “I love you.” What she wanted was not Joseph but his handsome, appealing body.

    Dr. Gruman says: “The sexual encounter ought to be a full and free affirmation of the other person, …a total commitment to him, and that spells permanence and permanence is spelled out in marriage ….

    If you love another person fully, wholly, unselfishly, then respect the sexual life of that person by surrounding him with marriage. Using and being used, we fail as human beings and sons of God.”

    What is love? Many people think of it as mere physical attraction and they casually speak of “falling in love” and “love at first sight.” This may be Hollywood’s version and the interpretation of those who write love songs and love fiction. True love is not wrapped in such flimsy material. One might become immediately attracted to another individual, but love is far more than physical attraction. It is deep, inclusive and comprehensive. Physical attraction is only one of the many elements, but there must be faith and confidence and understanding and partnership. There must be common ideals and standards. There must be a great devotion and companionship. Love is cleanliness and progress and sacrifice and selflessness. This kind of love never tires nor wanes, but lives through sickness and sorrow, poverty and privation, accomplishment and disappointment, time and eternity. For the love to continue, there must be an increase constantly of confidence and understanding, of frequent and sincere expression of appreciation and affection. There must be a forgetting of self and a constant concern for the other. Interests, hopes, objectives must be constantly focused into a single channel.

    For many years, I saw a strong man carry his tiny, emaciated, arthritic wife to meetings and wherever she could go. There could be no sexual expression. Here was selfless indication of affection. I think that is pure love. I saw a kindly woman wait on her husband for many years as he deteriorated with muscular dystrophy. She waited on him hand and foot, night and day, when all he could do was to blink his eyes in thanks. I believe that was love.

    I knew a woman who carried her little unfortunate child until the body was too heavy to carry, and then she pushed her in a wheel chair for the following years until her death. The deprived child could never express an appreciation. It seems to me that that was love. Another mother visited regularly her son who was in the penitentiary. She could receive nothing from him. She gave much, all she had.

    If anyone feels that petting or other deviations are demonstrations of love, let him ask himself: “If this beautiful body which I have misused suddenly became deformed, or paralyzed, would my reactions be the same ? If this lovely face were scarred by flames, or this body which I have used suddenly became rigid, or this keen mind which I have enjoyed were suddenly to become blank, would I be such an ardent lover? If senility or any of its approaches suddenly fell upon my sweetheart, what would my attitudes be?” Answers to these questions might test one to see if he really is in love or if it is only physical attraction which encouraged the improper physical contacts. The young man who protects his sweetheart against all use or abuse, against insult and infamy from himself or others, could be expressing true love.

    But the young man who uses his companion as a biological toy to give himself temporary satisfaction-that is lust, and is at the other end of the spectrum from love. A young woman conducts herself to be attractive spiritually, mentally and physically but will not by word nor dress nor act stir nor stimulate to physical reactions the companion beside her. That could be true love. That young woman who must touch and stir and fondle and tempt and use knows not love. That is lust and exploitation.

    Sometimes, there are twins, like Jacob and Esau, and the one is hairy and crude and evil; the other is smooth and clean and personable. There were two brothers, the sons of Adam-the one, crude, selfish, evil; the other, good and faithful and worthy. Their names also were four-letter words-Cain and Abel. And such words as love and lust are direct opposites.

    Speaking to my young couple, I said again, “No, it is not love if it manipulates; it is selfishness. It is not love if it neglects the welfare of the other: it is irresponsibility.

    “If sex relations merely become a release or a technique and the partner becomes exchangeable, then sex returns to the compulsive animal level.

    “Immorality brings generally a guilt deep and lasting. And this is a factor certainly not to be overlooked. These unresolved guilt complexes are the stuff of which mental breakdowns come, the building blocks of suicide, the fabric of distorted personalities, the wounds that scar or incapacitate individuals or families.

    “The Revelator, John, gives this: And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. (Rev. 20:12.)

    And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev. 20:15.)

    “And a question that surely arises when that vital moment comes is, will we stand before the Great Judge and be proud or ashamed, satisfied or frustrated? And no normal youth or adult who has received the Holy Ghost can conscientiously claim that he did not know that these things were transgressions.

    Pre-marital sex affairs are wrong, not because the Church declares against them, but the Church declares against them because they are wrong and because they hurt and destroy people who are God’s children.”

    The young couple still was sitting before me. They mentioned a possible future marriage, apparently thinking to impress me, and were a bit startled when I said with positiveness, “You should be married-and immediately.” And I quoted this scripture:

    “And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.” (Ex. 22:16.) and again from Moses: “If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; . . . she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.” (Deut. 22:28-29.)

    These two folks were “damaged goods.” They had prostituted each other. They had toyed with each other’s body. But now they were almost horrified at the suggestion of immediate marriage, and he remonstrated: “Why, we couldn’t marry. We are not ready for marriage. We haven’t completed our education. We have no employment. We are not ready to make a home. We are not prepared to buy clothing, pay rent, buy cars, employ physicians, buy groceries, pay hospital bills. We haven’t finished our education. We are not ready to assume the responsibilities of parenthood.”

    And then I asked, as kindly as I could, “Then why did you precipitate yourselves into that situation? Why did you do the act which would make you parents? Why did you engage in the associations that would demand a home, employment, status? Your very irresponsible act identifies you as most immature. You do not know the meaning of responsibility, but you have pushed yourselves prematurely into adulthood. You should now meet the responsibilities as best you can. You are hardly able to walk alone as little children, and yet you are likely now to be parents. You have not passed the tests in the grade school yet, and now you are enrolled in college. You made the choice when you broke the law of chastity and gave up your virtue. That hour, freedom was replaced with tyrannical fetters. You accepted shackles and limitations and sorrows and eternal regrets when you could have had freedom with peace.”

    King Benjamin said:

    And now, I say unto you, my brethren, that after ye have known and have been taught all these things, if ye should transgress and go contrary to that which has been spoken, that ye do withdraw yourselves from the Spirit of the Lord, that it may have no place in you to guide you in wisdom’s paths that ye may be blessed, prospered, and preserved —

    I say unto you, that the man that doeth this, the same cometh out in open rebellion against God; therefore he listeth to obey the evil spirit, and becometh an enemy to all righteousness; therefore, the Lord has no place in him, for he dwelleth not in unholy temples.

    Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever.

    And now I say unto you, that mercy hath no claim on that man; therefore his final doom is to endure a a never-ending torment.” (Mosiah 2:36-39.)

    Now, it would be wholly improper to so completely condemn sex sins without explaining to those who may already have yielded to these persuasions and temptations and have defiled themselves that there is eventual forgiveness, providing, of course, that there is commensurate repentance. “The way of the transgressor is hard,” and tough and long and thorny. But the Lord has promised that for all those sins and errors outside of the named unpardonable sins, there is forgiveness. But, many people misunderstand the principle of repentance and have the misconception that the changing of a policy, the breaking of a habit, or a few prayers can bounce them back in moments or hours the long distance that they skidded over months and possibly years.

    The Lord has said, “I will remember their sins no more,” and, “Thou shalt forgive them.” But sometimes it takes as long or longer to climb back up the steep hill than it did to skid down it. And it is often much more difficult.

    We mentioned self-conviction above. One has not begun his repentance until that is complete. But when a total self-conviction is stirred to a new life, and prayers have been multiplied and fasting, through humility, intensified, and weeping has been sanctified, repentance then begins to grow and, eventually, forgiveness may come. The king had said that the unrepentant would have a “lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever.” (Mosiah 2:38.)

    And the Prophet Jacob said that those who reject the gospel and resist repentance would “stand with shame and awful guilt before the bar of God.” (Jacob 6:9).

    A basic thought which none may overlook is the statement of the Prophet Amulek:

    And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins,…and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins. (Alma 11:37.)

    But to those who have broken the law of chastity and who have complied as above, there is the promise of forgiveness, and the Lord charges the leaders of His Church when they have totally repented, “Thou shalt forgive them.”

    And He says:

    “Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more. By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins –behold, he will confess them and forsake them.” (D&C 58:42-43.)

    Paul called attention to the Corinthian Saints:

    For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle. (1 Cor. 14:8.)

    And I believe the youth of Zion want to hear the clear and unmistakable tones of the trumpet, and it is my hope that I can play the tune with accuracy and precision so that no honest person will ever be confused. I hope fervently that I am making clear the position of the Lord and His Church on these unmentionable practices.

    Masturbation, a rather common indiscretion, is not approved of the Lord nor of His Church regardless of what may have been said by others whose “norms” are lower. Latter-day Saints are urged to avoid this practice.

    A person is the maker of himself. He may control his own destiny, if he is normal. James Allen says:

    “… A man is literally what he thinks, his character being the complete sum of all his thoughts…. Act is the blossom of thought, and joy and suffering are its fruits . . . let a man radically alter his thoughts, and he will be astounded at the rapid transformation it will effect in the material conditions of his life…”

    James Allen again says:

    …Man is manacled only by himself: thought and action are the jailers of Fate-they imprison, being base; they are also the angels of Freedom-they liberate, being noble.

    Anyone fettered by this weakness should abandon the habit before he goes on a mission or receives the Holy Priesthood or goes in the temple for his blessings.

    Sometimes masturbation is the introduction to the more serious sins of exhibitionism and the gross sin of homosexuality. We would avoid mentioning these unholy terms and these reprehensible practices were it not for the fact that we have a responsibility to the youth of Zion that they be not deceived by those who would call bad, good, and black, white.

    This unholy transgression is either rapidly growing or tolerance is giving it wider publicity. If one has such desires and tendencies, he overcomes them the same as if he had the urge toward petting or fornication or adultery. The Lord condemns and forbids this practice with a vigor equal to His condemnation of adultery and other such sex acts. And the Church will excommunicate as readily any unrepentant addict.

    Again, contrary to the belief and statement of many people, this sin, like fornication, is overcomable and forgivable, but again, only upon a deep and abiding repentance which means total abandonment and complete transformation of thought and act. The fact that some governments and some churches and numerous corrupted individuals have tried to reduce such behavior from criminal offense to personal privilege does not change the nature nor the seriousness of the practice. Good men, wise men, God-fearing men everywhere still denounce the practice as being unworthy of sons of God; and Christ’s Church denounces it and condemns it so long as men have bodies which can be defiled. Earlier in our treatise we quoted Peter as having said, “I beseech you . . . abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul.” (1 Pet. 2:11.)

    And James says:

    “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways…. Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.

    “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

    “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

    “Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

    “Do not err, my beloved brethren .”(James 1:8, 12-16.)

    This heinous homosexual sin is of the ages. Many cities and civilizations have gone out of existence because of it. It was present in Israel’s wandering days, tolerated by the Greeks, and found in the baths of corrupt Rome. In Exodus, the law required death for the culprit who had sex play with animals, the deviate who committed incest, or the depraved one who had homosexual or other vicious practices.

    This is a most unpleasant subject to dwell upon, but I am pressed to speak of it boldly so that no student in this University, nor youth in the Church, will ever have any question in his mind as to the illicit and diabolical nature of this perverse program. Again, Lucifer deceives and prompts logic and rationalization which will destroy men and make them servants of Satan forever.

    Remember, Paul told Timothy:

    For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Tim. 4:3-4.)

    Let it never be said that the Church has avoided condemning this obnoxious practice nor that it has winked at this abominable sin. And I feel certain that this University will never knowingly enroll an unrepentant person who follows these practices nor tolerate on its campus anyone with these tendencies who fails to repent and put his or her life in order.

    May we return to words? In my Bible concordance, there are 550 listed references pertaining to love. They do not interpret it as carnal, sexual, handling, fondling, petting, perversions, nor fornication. In the same concordance, there are 53 references to adultery, and not one of them seems to connect this condemned sexual act with real affection which is love. I also found 32 references to fornication, but I found none which identified the forbidden act as holy, sacred love.

    Men talk of the love act and making love and the love life when what they mean is something quite different, and there can be no proper love life outside of proper marriage.

    Paul made this clear when he said,

    Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. (1 Cor. 6:13.)

    This would apply also to the other detestable sex manifestations named above.

    And Paul further gave to the Corinthians a stinging lashing when he indicated these sins must be overcome:

    Be not deceived: neither fornicators,…nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6:9-10.)

    Again, for clarification, let it be known that fornication is the same act as adultery, except the former pertains to unmarried people and the latter to married people. The words are often interchangeable in the Bible and the penalty of the law was death, as indicated when the Scribes and Pharisees brought to the Savior the woman taken in adultery and they indicated:

    Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? (John 8:5.)

    It is notable that the Redeemer did not negate the law, but He put His enemies to flight by a clever ruse, saying to them: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (John 8:7.)

    And further, there is no evidence that the Savior granted to her forgiveness. He did send her away to repent.

    I do not find in the Bible the modern terms “petting” nor “homosexuality,” yet I found numerous scriptures which forbade such acts under by whatever names they might be called. I could not find the term “homosexuality,” but I did find numerous places where the Lord condemned such a practice with such vigor that even the death penalty was assessed.

    And the Lord calls all such to repent. His words are most impressive:

    “Therefore I command you to repent–repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth…”

    And we refer the reader to the balance of that reference in D&C 19:15-18.

    We have stated that even this ugly practice can be overcome and can be forgiven. As one of many who might be considered authority, I quote one from the Medical World News, June 5, 1964:

    The effectiveness of therapy depends on the depth of entrenchment of the perversion, as well as the strength of the patient’s desire to modify it.

    This statement by the Public Health Committee of the New York Academy of Medicine agrees with our philosophy. Man is created in the image of God. He is a god in embryo. He has the seeds of godhood within him and he can, if he is normal, pick himself up by his bootstraps and literally move himself from where he is to where he knows he should be. As stated above, the longer the habit has been fostered, the harder it is to break.

    To clarify the matter for those who are honest, it must be stated that it is a “damnable heresy,” as Paul says, when men claim that “God made them that way,” or that such a life is just another different but acceptable way of life. All nature, reason, scripture and revelation cry out against such a claim. But it can be corrected and overcome. May I quote from a former article of my own: “Men have come dejected, discouraged, embarrassed, near terrified and have gone out later full of confidence and faith in themselves, with self-respect returned, with the confidence of their families, their home ties strengthened and ready to manfully take their part in proper society and even in the Church on an approved cured basis.

    “In some cases, they have been men with families, and we have had wives come in to tearfully thank us for bringing their husbands back to them. Wives have not always known what had been wrong, but they had sensed something serious and realized that they had lost their husbands. We have seen men come first with downward glances and leave months later looking us straight in the eye. We have had them admit after the first interview, ‘I am glad that I was arrested. I have tried and tried to correct my error but knew I would have to have help and had not the courage to ask for it.’ In a few months, some have totally mastered themselves, while others linger on with less power and requiring more time to make the total comeback. We realize that the cure is no more permanent than the individual makes it so, and is like the cure for alcoholism, subject to continued vigilance. To such men, we say, ‘Physician, heal thyself,’ and promise him if he will stay away from the haunts and the temptations and the former associates, he may heal himself, cleanse his mind, and return to his normal pursuits and a happy state. The cure for this malady lies in self-mastery, which is the fundamental basis of the whole gospel program.”

    “God made me that way,” some say, as they rationalize and excuse themselves for their perversions. “I can’t help it,” they add. This is blasphemy. Is he not made in the image of God, and does he think God to be “that way”? Man is responsible for his own sins. It is possible that he may rationalize and excuse himself until the groove is so deep he cannot get out without great difficulty, but this he can do. Temptations come to all people. The difference between the reprobate and the worthy person is generally that one yielded and the other resisted. It is true that one’s background may make the decision and accomplishment easier or more difficult, but if one is mentally alert, he can still control his future. That is the gospel message-personal responsibility.

    To the person blaming his perversions on his parents-man is punishable for his own sins. He can, if normal, rise above the frustrations of childhood and stand on his own feet and answer roll call.

    And if the yielding person continues to give way numerous times, he may finally reach the point of no return where he does not want to return. And the Lord says, “My Spirit shall not always strive with man, saith the Lord of Hosts .” (D&C 1:33 .)

    The doctors whose report is quoted above state without equivocation, “The homosexual is not a special order of creation.” (For further consideration of this subject, the reader is referred to the address “A Counseling Problem in the Church” by the same author, given to the seminary and institute instructors of the Church, July 16, 1964.) [Available only at the Office of Institutes and Seminaries, Brigham Young University.]

    And then, I found the 550 references to love. They had related generally to pure, holy love. Sometimes it was called charity. Lust and carnal desires were not mentioned. I found where Paul said that to have charity or real love is greater than to be a prophet, to understand mysteries, or to have great knowledge. It is greater than to have much faith, or extended power even to remove mountains. And in following the concordance on this subject of love, Paul contrasted the two four-letter words for Timothy:

    Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. (2 Tim. 2:22.)

    And Peter said that charity or love would cover a multitude of sins. (See 1 Pet. 4:8.)

    And from the Song of Solomon of Solomon comes this:

    For love is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave: the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a most vehement flame. (Song of Solomon 8:6.)

    Jeremiah quotes the Lord: “I have loved thee with an everlasting love.” (Jer. 31:3.)

    And Ezekiel contrasts these words of love and lust:

    “The people . . . hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with their mouth they shew much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness.” (Ezek. 33:31.)

    As we speak of real love, a new concept comes into our minds: The Lord said:

    By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. (John 13:35.)

    And, He continues:

    This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (John 15:12-13.)

    And John said:

    We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. (1 Jn. 3:14.)

    And in the Beatitudes, the Lord said:

    Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. (Matt. 5:43-44.)

    In none of these quotes is the slightest implication of bodily contact, of lust, of desire, of passion. Certainly, this is the test of love. It is honor and integrity and obedience.

    And Paul, speaking to the Saints, said: “Husbands, love your wives .”

    This is no carnal commandment. There is no sex in this command, for they were already legal partners.

    And then he continues:

    “…even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; . . . So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh …”(Ephesians 5:25, 28-29.).

    And as Paul continues, he says:

    For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. (Eph. 5:31.)

    The proper sexual life between husband and wife is only a part of this important commandment. When a man and a woman love the spouse as they love themselves, only rich and wonderful fruits come from such a tree.

    And Paul, speaking to Titus, exhorts:

    “The young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children. To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands….” (Titus 2:4-5.)

    Can you see anything vulgar, destructive, earthy, fleshly or carnal in any of these teachings? They loved their husbands and then their children. This real love has no lust involved. And then, we have the great examples:

    For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16.)

    This was the Savior of the world, who with His supreme love made the supreme sacrifice and gave a life that no one could take from Him, because He loved us so. This is love-sacred, holy love.

    And now, my dear young people, I have spoken frankly and boldly against the sins of the day. Even though I dislike such a subject, I believe it necessary to warn the youth against the onslaught of the arch tempter-who, with his army of emissaries and all the tools at his command, would destroy all the youth of Zion, largely through deception, misrepresentation, and lies.

    My beloved young folks, do not excuse petting and body intimacies. I am positive that if this illicit, illegal, improper, and lustful habit of “petting” could be wiped out, that fornication would soon be gone from our world. Remember what the Lord said:

    Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

    But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (Matt. 5:27-28.)

    And if there has been lust, repent of it and keep your minds clean, and convict yourself of serious evil if you permit your minds to dwell upon these forbidden things or your hands or bodies to yield to the call of lust.

    May I close with this scripture from Mormon:

    Be wise in the days of your probation; strip yourselves of all uncleanness; ask not, that ye may consume it on your lusts, but ask with a firmness unshaken, that ye will yield to no temptation, but that ye will serve the true and living God. (Morm. 9:28.)

    In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.”

    References

    References
    1 Spencer W. Kimball, ‘Love vs. Lust – https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/spencer-w-kimball_love-vs-lust/
  • Death Penalty

    Death Penalty

    A January 5, 1965 address at BYU by Spencer W. Kimball, ‘Love vs. Lust’: 1

    “My beloved young people:

    While this is a grave responsibility, and not an easy one, I am eager to discuss with you some matters of grave importance.

    I love youth. I rejoice when they grow up clean and stalwart and tall. I sorrow with them when they have misfortunes and remorse and troubles.

    Numerous disasters have occurred in mid-ocean by collisions of ships and sometimes with icebergs, and numerous people have gone to watery graves.

    Soon, such a thing will not be possible, for ships will be equipped with radar equipment which will alert ships’ officers should a collision be imminent. A tape will be played automatically, booming from the darkened bridge: “This is an alert. This ship is approaching an object. This is an alert. This ship is approaching an object.” And the voice will not be stilled until the mate comes to the radarscope and turns the recorder off. This will enable ships to alter their courses and save lives.

    I believe our young people are wholesome and basically good and sound; but they, too, are traveling oceans which to them are at least partially uncharted, where there are shoals and rocks and icebergs and other vessels, and where great disasters can come unless warnings are heeded.

    Yesterday as my jet plane soared in the air gaining altitude, the voice of the stewardess came clearly over the loud-speaker: “We are moving into a storm area. We shall skirt the danger, but there may be some turbulence. Be sure your seat belts are securely fastened.”

    And, as a leader of the Church and in a measure being responsible for youth and their well-being, I raise my voice to say to the youth: “You are in a hazardous area and period. Tighten your belts, hold on, and you can survive the turbulence.”

    I interview thousands of young people and many seem to flounder. Some give excuses for their errors and indulge in unwarranted rationalizations. Today I hope I may be able to clarify, at least in some areas, the stand of the God of Heaven and His Church on some vital issues.

    May I speak first of words and relate them to my theme? There is magic in words properly used. Some people use them accurately, while others sloppily.

    Words are means of communication, and faulty signals give wrong impressions. Disorder and misunderstandings are the results. Words underlie our whole life and are the tools of our business, the expressions of our affections, and the records of our progress. Words cause hearts to throb and tears to flow in sympathy. Words can be sincere or hypocritical. Many of us are destitute of words and, consequently, clumsy with our speech, which sometimes becomes but babble. Paul said:

    Except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. (1 Cor. 14:9.)

    And then Peter speaks of Paul and says of his epistles:

    “. . . in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. (2 Pet. 3:16.)

    Touring foreign lands, one comes to realize his utter helplessness without understandable words and symbols.

    The workmen engaged in building the Tower of Babel were craftsmen, skilled in their trades. Take away their tools: they will replace them. Take away their skills: they will learn anew. But take away their means of communication with one another and the building of the tower has to be abandoned. (Royal Bank of Canada Letter.)

    Words which confuse the hearer or reader are worse than valueless. A reasonable vocabulary of well-chosen words provides us with shadings of meaning and enables us to speak finely instead of coarsely.

    Words which are synonyms have much in common but still have peculiar application, such as “child and urchin,” “hand and fist,” “misstatement and lie.” Now, note the difference in the four-word sentences: “John looked at Mary”; “John glanced at Mary”; “John gazed at Mary”; “John glared at Mary.”

    A true definition of style is, “Proper words in proper places with thoughts in proper order.”

    The plain way of writing conceals great art. As you avoid pomposity, ambiguity and complexity, you attain simplicity, which is the greatest cunning. It conveys proper meaning into the minds of others straight away, without effort for them. They get a feeling of sincerity and integrity, for who can be suspicious of the motives of one who speaks plainly? “Sour notes do not become sweet because the musician is in white tie and black tails.”

    Words should be kind and gentle or firm and bold, according to the need of the moment. Words which betray are unkind and words which befuddle are frustrating.

    Some people have excellent ideas, but their thoughts either beat about aimlessly in their heads, finding no communication package in which to emerge, or they come out distorted and in fragments.

    Every person should say what he means, speaking clearly and distinctly. The politician particularly should pay attention to the niceties of language so as to address the voters meaningfully and not deceitfully. The deforming of meaning for political ends has become too commonplace. In our lives, we should express clearly what we have in mind, just as a purchaser would say: “I wish to buy three rolls of Kodak Ektachrome X Color Film, Daylight Ex. 127.” And the clerk knows exactly what is wanted.

    So in social life, and certainly in morals, there should be a careful selection of the right word to express the thought.

    It is reported that a Russian child has a primer of 2,000 words in the first grade and of 10,000 words in the fourth, while his opposite number in the United States has a primer of 1,800 words; and that the Russian child is reading Tolstoy while the same aged child in the United States is working his way through a book entitled, A Funny Sled. This charge is made in an article in Horizon of July, 1963.

    Even examinations now in many cases do not require expressions by students. They may place an “X” in an appropriate square and avoid intellectual effort in marshalling thoughts and expressing them coherently, and have about a fifty percent chance of being right even in a guess.

    Without discipline, language declines into flabby permissiveness, into formlessness and mindlessness. It deteriorates into what the late James Thurber called “our oral culture of pure babble.”

    Now, you may wonder why I have introduced my talk with the subject of words. May I lead you out with a few four-letter words to think about: fine, fire; good and grow; home, hide, hell, help; and tire, tide, tell and toll; wilt, wish, weak, worn, and weep. Then, there are these: limp, life, live, lurk, love and lust.

    Ah! Here I have finally found the two words on which I wish to dwell: love and lust-words strong and powerful-words which are life and death words-love and lust.

    Let me begin with a story. Across the desk sat a handsome, young nineteen-year-old and a beautiful, shy, but charming eighteen-year-old. They appeared embarrassed, apprehensive, near-terrified. He was defensive and bordering on belligerency and rebellion. There had been sexual violations throughout the summer and intermittently since school began, and as late as last week. I was not so much surprised. I have had these kinds of visits many times; but what did disturb me was that they seemed little, if any, remorseful. They admitted they had gone contrary to some social standards, but quoted magazines and papers and speakers approving pre-marital sex and emphasizing that sex was a fulfillment of human existence.

    Finally, the boy said, “Yes, we yielded to each other, but we do not think it wrong because we love each other.” I thought I had misunderstood him. Since the world began, there have been countless immoralities, but to hear them justified by Latter-day Saint youth shocked me. He repeated, “No, it is not wrong because we love each other.” Here was one of those misused four-letter words.

    They had repeated this abominable heresy so often that they had convinced themselves, and a wall of resistance had been built, and behind this wall they stubbornly stood almost defiantly. If there had been blushes of shame at first, such had been neutralized with their logic. Deeply entrenched were they in this rationalization. Had they not read in some university papers of the new freedom where pre-marital sex was sanctioned, at least not forbidden? Did they not see the looseness in every show, on every stage, on TV screens and magazines? Had they not discussed this in the locker room and in private conversation? Had it not been fairly well established, then, in their world, that sex before marriage was not so wrong? Did there not need to be a trial period? How else could they know if they would be sexually compatible for marriage ? Had they not, like numerous others, come to regard sex as the basis for living ?

    And a proverb came to my mind:

    Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness. (Prov. 30:20.)

    In their rationalization they have had much cooperation, for, as Peter said:

    “… there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways. . .” (2 Pet. 2:1-2.)

    And Peter says further:

    “. . . they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, . . . the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” (2 Pet. 3:16.)

    And here they are, false teachers everywhere, using speech and pornographic literature, magazines, radio, TV, street talk-spreading damnable heresies which break down moral standards, and this to gratify the lusts of the flesh.

    Lucifer in his diabolical scheming deceives the unwary and uses every tool at his command. Seldom does one go to a convention, a club meeting, a party or social gathering without hearing vulgarity, obscenity and suggestive stories.

    Peter again cautioned us:

    Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour. (1 Pet. 5:8.)

    And the Savior said that the very elect would be deceived by Lucifer if it were possible. He will use his logic to confuse, and his rationalizations to destroy. He will shade meanings, open doors an inch at a time, and lead from purest white through all the shades of gray to the darkest black.

    Young people are confused by the arch deceiver who uses every device to deceive them.

    This young couple looked up rather startled when I postulated firmly and with positiveness, “No, my beloved young people, you did not love each other. Rather, you lusted for each other.” And here was the other misused word.

    Paul told Titus:

    Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.

    They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. (Titus 1:15-16.)

    I am sure that Peter and James and Paul found it unpleasant business to constantly be calling people to repentance and warning them of dangers, but they continued unflinchingly. So we, your leaders, must be everlastingly at it; if young people do not understand, then the fault may be partly ours. But, if we make the true way clear to you, then we are blameless.

    If when he [the watchman] seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people;

    Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head.

    He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul.

    But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand. (Ezek. 33:3-6.)

    So, I wish today to help define meanings of words and acts for you young people, to fortify you against error, anguish, pain and sorrow.

    The boy and girl sat still and respectfully. I was not sure if they were comprehending. Apparently, their wrong concepts had been bolstered so long and firmly it was hard for them to change immediately.

    Now we talked again about words-short words like lift and lean, hide and lurk, flee and stay, lose and gain, fall and rise, open and shut, lure and save, lose and gain, live and dead, hell and home and again, love and lust. The beautiful and holy word of love they had defiled until it had degenerated to become a bedfellow with lust, its antithesis.

    As far back as Isaiah, deceivers and rationalizers were condemned:

    Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

    Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! (Isa. 5:20-21.)

    And, we might add: Woe unto those who wrest the scriptures to interpret them to cover their weaknesses. The young couple had excused and justified their transgression on the grounds that they loved each other. Is there a word in the dictionary more misused and prostituted than the word “love”?

    Many of the modern terms for sin were not used in the scriptures and in olden days, and some people, therefore, excuse their contaminations because the age-old transgressions were not identified with modern terms. But, if one reads the scriptures carefully, all sins are denounced there in every shade of error. Again, the great Peter said:

    Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul. (I Peter 2: 11.)

    Surely, every soul who has reached the age of accountability, and especially those who have received the Holy Ghost after baptism, knows the difference; but so often we hear what we want to hear and we see what we want to see. There is a definite war against the soul when evil is perpetrated. And I challenge any normal baptized person who says he did not know he was doing wrong. There is no compatibility between sin and righteousness, between guilt and peace.

    Paul charged the Corinthians:

    Flee fornication …. He that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. (1 Cor. 6:18.)

    And in order to avoid the disasters, Paul cautioned: “Do not company with fornicators.” And he urged people to keep good company and not eat with the evil ones who would tempt them, and then concludes: “Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” (See 1 Cor. 5:9-13.)

    Oh, if our young people could learn this basic lesson to always keep good company, to never be found with those who tend to lower our standards! Let every youth select associates who will keep him on tiptoes, trying to reach the heights attained. Let him never choose associates who encourage him to relax in carelessness.

    We must repeat what we have said many times: Fornication with all its big and little brothers and sisters was evil and wholly condemned by the Lord in Adam’s day, in Moses’ day, in Paul’s day, and in our own day. The Church has no tolerance for any kind of perversions. The Lord has indicated His lack of tolerance, stating:

    For I the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance. (D&C 1:31.)

    Yet, He loves the repentant one. Paul said that even the converted Gentiles should be taught to “abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication,” and other deviations. (Acts 15:20.) He wrote the Romans that corrupt practices called fornication were extant among them. He exhorted the Galatians, lashing out against the “works of the flesh . . adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,” and then he added “that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Gal. 5:19-21.)

    They are like the:

    Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. (Jude 13.)

    These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage. (Jude 16.)

    Let it be known positively that the Church is not softening its standards, nor abandoning its Godgiven practices. Those who interpret the scriptures to justify their own pernicious ways are spoken of in the Book of Mormon:

    . . . They are led about by Satan, even as chaff is driven before the wind, or as a vessel is tossed about upon the waves, without sail or anchor, or without anything wherewith to steer her; and even as she is, so are they. (Mormon 5:18.)

    My young couple who had so seriously sinned were listening, and I reminded them of the statement of Mormon, where the Nephites, guilty of fiendish, abominable acts, had taken prisoners the daughters of the Lamanites, and:

    After depriving them of that which was most dear and precious above all things, which is chastity and virtue-(Moroni 9:9).

    They tortured and murdered them.

    When the scriptures are so plain, how can anyone justify immoralities and call them love? Is black white? Is evil good? Is purity filthiness?

    As I looked the boy in the eye, I said, “No, my boy, you were not expressing love when you took her virtue.” And to her, I said, “There was no real love in your heart when you robbed him of his chastity. It was lust that brought you together in this most serious of all practices short of murder. Paul said, ‘Love worketh no ill to his neighbour.’ (Rom. 13:10.)”

    I continued, “If one really loves another, one would rather die for that person than injure him. At the hour of indulgence, pure love is pushed out one door while lust sneaks in the other. Your affection has been replaced with biological materialism and uncontrolled passion. You have accepted the doctrine which the devil is so eager to establish-that sex relations are justified on the grounds that it is a pleasurable experience in itself and is beyond moral consideration.

    “When the unmarried yield to the lust which induces intimacies and indulgence, they have permitted the body to dominate and have placed the spirit in chains. It is unthinkable that anyone could call this love. You have ignored the fact that all situations or conditions or actions whose pleasures or satisfactions end with the termination of the act will never produce great peoples nor build great kingdoms.

    “In order to live with themselves, people who transgress must follow one path or the other of two alternatives. The one is to sear the conscience and dull the sensitivity with mental tranquilizers so that the transgression may be continued; the other is to permit remorse to lead to total conviction, repentance and eventual forgiveness.”

    This conviction is the element of which my two young visitors were quite devoid. They were somewhat like the unrepentant of whom Isaiah spoke:

    And the mean man boweth not down, and the great man humbleth himself not, therefore, forgive him not.(2 Ne. 12:9.)

    No one can ever be forgiven of any transgression until there is repentance, and one has not repented until he has bared his soul and admitted his intentions and weaknesses without excuses or rationalizations. He must admit to himself that he has grievously sinned. When he has confessed to himself without the slightest minimizing of the offense, or rationalizing its seriousness, or soft-pedaling its gravity, and admits it is as big as it really is, then he is ready to begin his repentance; and any other elements of repentance are of reduced value, until the conviction is established totally, and then repentance may mature and forgiveness may eventually come.

    Because of this widespread tolerance toward promiscuity, this world is in grave danger. When evil is decried and forbidden and punished, the world still has a chance. But when toleration for sin increases, the outlook is bleak and Sodom and Gomorrah days are certain to return.

    We were in Los Angeles years ago when the news broke of the illicit affair of a certain movie actress, from which she became pregnant. Because of her popularity, it was big news in heavy headlines in every paper in the land. We were not so surprised at her adultery-it was reported to be common in Hollywood as well as in the world generally. But that such dissoluteness should be approved and accepted by society shocked me. The Los Angeles papers took a poll of the people-club women and ministers, employers and employees, stenographers and teachers and housewives-and almost without exception, as though it were a child’s indiscretion, these community leaders found little fault and criticized as “puritanical” and “victorian” those who disapproved. “Let her live her own life,” they said. “And, why should we interfere with people’s personal liberties?” In state and nation and across the seas, toleration for sin is terrifying.

    There is no shame. Isaiah again strikes the sin:

    The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves. (Isa. 3:9.)

    That the Church’s stand on morality may be understood, we declare firmly and unalterably it is not an outworn garment, faded, old-fashioned, and threadbare. God is the same yesterday, today and forever, and His covenants and doctrines are immutable; and when the sun grows cold and the stars no longer shine, the law of chastity will still be basic in God’s world and in the Lord’s Church. Old values are upheld by the Church not because they are old, but rather because through the ages they have proved right. It will always be the rule.

    I continued with the young couple, saying, “The youth of today are seeing too many ‘adults only’ movies which exploit sex. There are too many open dormitories on campus, too many mattress parties for adolescents, too many girls with extreme dresses, tight sweaters, calling attention to sex. And, there are too many young men with tight, suggestive attire. Youth generally have heard too many advertisements over radio and television and seen too many in newspapers and on billboards and in magazines where sex is used as a stimulus in selling. There have been too many parked automobiles. They have read too many novels where sex is the central, dominant theme.”

    “What kind of a world would we have,” I asked these young people, “if this heresy which you have espoused of pre-marital sex looseness and alleged free love were in order?” The world, already ill, would expire.

    We are not speaking of a sex-free world any more than we are speaking of a sexy world, for a sexless civilization would die in one generation if indeed it could be born. A sexy civilization will die of its own rottenness when it is ripe in iniquity. Pure sex life in proper marriage is approved. There is a time and an appropriateness for all things which have value. In ancient days, one city or one civilization could disintegrate without seriously disturbing other parts of the world, but today our communication and transportation facilities make the whole world one community.

    In our mass-production age in recent years, “we have witnessed the reduction of persons to things in a code number, a subscriber, a punched card. Each reduction indicates that the person is expendable, replaceable.. . .” “A person is not a function nor a means nor an instrument, but an end in himself; but the world speaks with a voice amplified by a thousand television stations and a half million printing presses.” It advances the biological materialism that man is a consuming, reproducing function, a collection of skills, or a unit in the labor force. This renders men functionaries and destroys their being and loses for them their self, dwarfed by a gigantic universe out there. This is hauntingly true as people are “used” to gratify physical passions in illegitimacy.

    This repulsive sense of “thinghood” is portrayed well in a few lines from John Pauker in the New Republic, January 5, 1963:

    I looked and looked again. There were no people.

    The people had disappeared. The people were gone.

    But the things they had created were still there.

    A suit of clothes and a gown walked arm in arm.

    With a dog at the end of a leash. The dog was there

    And snarling. In the street, vehicular traffic

    Flowed as usual but without drivers or riders ….

    Electric razors razed and revolvers fired

    As usual. The things went through their paces

    And seemed to be enjoying themselves highly.

    I longed to look in a mirror but did not dare.

    We really do not love things. We use things like doormats, automobiles, clothing, machines; but we love people by serving them and contributing to their permanent good. The Lord seemed to recognize this when He said:

    But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. (Matt. 6:33.)

    And again, the difference was made manifest in His instructions to Peter, when He asked three times of that worthy:

    Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these?

    To which Peter responded:

    Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. And the answer came:

    Feed my lambs. Feed my sheep. (See John 21:15-17.)

    What were the things, “these things,” which took second place to his love for his Lord and his fellow men? I think they must have been ships and nets and fish and desires and wants and even passions.

    Sexual encounters outside of legalized marriage render the individual a thing to be used, a thing to be exploited, and make him or her exchangeable, exploitable, expendable and throw-awayable.

    And when we come before the great Judge at the bar of justice, shall we stand before Him as a thing or as a person, as a depraved body of flesh and carnal acts, or as a son of God standing straight and tall and worthy? And as we answer the vital questions, will we be able to say, “I builded, I did not tear down; I lifted, I did not pull down; I grew, I did not shrivel; I helped others grow, I did not dwarf them; I helped, I did not hinder; I loved intensely and blessed, I did not lust toward exploitation to injure”?

    My young couple were still rationalizing and excusing themselves, and I said again, “Every kind of sex exploit for the unmarried from the first lustful stirrings of passions relating to self or to others is a sin, and thought habits are perverted and lives are blemished, and God’s laws are broken, and penalties will be paid.”

    Like some high pressure salesmen who claim far more for their product than can possibly be delivered, sex exploitation promises what it can never produce nor deliver. So, outside of marriage, improper sex life can bring only disappointment, disgust, and usually rejection “while it propels its participants down the long corridor of repeated encounters which are destined to fail.”

    Very often the couple-the two people who have been promiscuous, who have been wanton, who have crossed the lines of propriety-become disgusted with each other and discontinue associations altogether. How many come to dislike, if not to hate, the partner in sin.

    Illicit sex is a selfish act, a betrayal, and is dishonest. To be unwilling to accept responsibility is cowardly, disloyal. Marriage is for time and eternity. Fornication and all other deviations are for today, for the hour, for the “now.” Marriage gives life. Fornication leads to death. Pre-marital sex promises what it cannot possibly produce or deliver. Rejection is often the fruit as it moves its participants down the long highway of repeated encounters.

    The Eighth of the Ten Commandments says: “Thou shalt not steal.” Yet the immoral act is exploitation and robbery in its worst expression.

    It is taking with or without permission the most priceless, the most unrecoverable, the most unreturnable possession of an individual-chastity and virtue. In one dark, unglorious hour, lives can be taken or shattered; but in a long lifetime, health lost may possibly be regained, wealth lost may someday be accumulated again, freedom lost may be fought for and possibly recovered, but chastity gone is gone forever, and virtue stolen cannot be returned. Is not this one of the prime reasons why this forbidden thing is so heinous like murder, for neither can ever be wholly compensated nor returned nor undone?

    “THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY” (and we add its twin, FORNICATION) and also “THOU SHALT NOT KILL” came ‘ringing down from Mount Sinai. One can take a life easily but he can never restore that life. And so it is that when the pangs of futility and remorse impress the uselessness of the act, there must come the time when the fornicator or adulterer, like the murderer, wishes he could hide-hide from all the world, from all the ghosts and especially from his own-and there is no place to hide. There are dark corners and hidden spots and closed cars in which the transgression can be committed, but to totally conceal is impossible. There are no nights so dark, no rooms so tightly locked, no canyons so closed in, no deserts so uninhabited that one can find a place to hide his sins from himself nor from his Lord. Eventually, one must still face himself and his Great Judge.

    Cain had difficulty hiding. The Lord had asked, “Where is Abel, thy brother?” And Cain had boldly replied, “I know not. Am I my brother’ s keeper?” Did he think he was deceiving the Lord or himself? The next question was no simple inquiry, but an accusation and a condemnation, “What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground . . . which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand. “. . . a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. “And Cain said unto the Lord, My punishment is greater than I can bear. “Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth.” (Gen. 4:9-14.)

    That was true of murder. In a lesser degree, it is true of illicit sex, which, of course, includes all petting, fornication, adultery, homosexual acts, and all other perversions. The Lord may say to offenders, as He did to Cain, “What hast thou done?” The children thus conceived make damning charges against you; the companions who have been frustrated and violated condemn you; the body that has been defiled cries out against you; the spirit which has been dwarfed convicts you. You will have difficulty throughout the ages in totally forgiving yourself.

    After looking down at the crumpled body at his feet, and especially after the torments of hell began to persecute him and the ghost of his brother began to follow him, Cain must have wished that he could give Abel’ s life back. The Lord did not curse Cain; it was Cain who, breaking eternal law, cursed himself. And every man or woman who is guilty of moral misconduct may look down upon defiled bodies, his own and others; he may recognize frustrated and distorted minds; and as the ghosts begin to follow, he is certain to wish with all his heart that he could give back chastity and restore tranquility and peace in the minds and hearts and lives of those whom he has damaged.

    From the same tablet, from the same Sinai, came the Laws of God. After creating man in His own image, male and female, God then performed the holy marriage ceremony for eternity for His Adam and Eve. And in this beginning, He established a pattern of sex life consistent with all reason and propriety. In that first marriage blessing, the Lord commanded these two beings, who were complementary to each other, to multiply by being fruitful and bringing children into the world. Cain and Abel were only two of their many sons and daughters. This command did not give license to merely satisfy biological urges, for God followed it with the command,

    Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Gen. 2:24.)

    To cleave is to adhere closely, to cling; and the Lord gave as the purpose for their cleaving, the peopling of the earth, the replenishing of the earth, the subduing of the earth, the dominion over the earth. There was high purpose in the creation and in the proper associations of husband and wife, but intimacies could never be defended outside of marriage.

    The pre-marital sex act is a deception. It is a lie. The Lord asked:

    “If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he . . . give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask for an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? (Luke 11:11-12.)

    Bread is the staff of life, while a stone is lifeless, indeed, sometimes death dealing. The fish as food builds and sustains the body, as does the egg; but the serpent destroys life and is the symbol of death. Love is promised and is delivered.

    Proper sex functions bring posterity, responsibility, and peace; but pre-marital sex encounters bring pain, the loss of self-esteem, spiritual death, unless there is a total, continuing repentance.

    What are the fruits of immorality? Instead of multiplying and replenishing the earth, every effort is made to avoid conception and the birth of progeny. Since Adam no soul has ever been made happy by transgressing. The Lord said:

    “Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” (Matt. 7:19-20.)

    “And now also the ax is laid unto the root of the trees.” (Matt. 3:10.)

    And the warning is repeated:

    Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. (Matt. 7:15.)

    Could there possibly be a single good fruit which comes from pre-marital indulgence?

    Our great accumulated scientific knowledge about our bodies and their functioning, and our minds and their operating, seems not to have been translated into righteousness. As an example, all that we have learned of late from research about the ill effects of tobacco has done little to discourage its use, even as the holy revelations were ignored. And all that has been said from a medical and scientific standpoint about the social diseases seems to have deterred people very little from immorality-in fact, little more if any than the commandments of the Lord. For, in a recent local paper, we read of the great increase in VD in the big cities of our land.

    It is not so much what we know but what we do about what we know. Dr. Jenkins of the Utah State Health Department is quoted as saying that gonorrhea and syphilis epidemics are raging at this very moment in thirty of the nation’s largest cities.

    The Deseret News of December 13, 1964, quotes an Associated Press writer out of Washington as saying: “Some experts see a ‘general decline in morals’ and point to the sharpest rises of V.D. among teenagers.”

    We live in a sterile age, or so it seems-an age when young people turn to sex to escape loneliness, frustration; insecurity and lack of interest. “What can we do?” the youth complain. They are little interested in reading and family associations and youth socials and the community dance. They must have something more exciting. Long ago they ceased making their own entertainment which could be as clean and worthy as they wished to make it. Today, then, they look at television and go to shows in town, and to the so-called “passion pits,” where they are over-stimulated sexually. Oh, for a generation of youth who would move back to simplicity, away from the “canned” programs in most of which are ingredients to stimulate and stir the human passions!

    When we talk of sex, our first thought is adultery or fornication; but our second one, and close on its heels, is the sex stimulation to self and others, sometimes called “petting.” It is a damaging and a damning transgression in its own right, and then, of course, it is also the gateway to the final acts of fornication and adultery.

    And the world will go on dying-destroying itself until people begin to use words in their true meanings, “calling a spade, a spade” and not a spoon; calling “petting” a deep sin and not a harmless diversion– until we rip its disguising mask from its ugly face and strip from its lustful body the sheep’s clothing with which the vicious wolf has concealed his mean self.

    The young man is untrue to his manhood who promises popularity, good times, security, fun, and even love, when all he can give is passion and its diabolical fruits-guilt complexes, disgust, hatred, abhorrence, eventual loathing, and possible pregnancy without legitimacy and honor. He pleads his case in love and all he gives is lust. Likewise, the young lady sells herself cheap. She asks him for a fish; he gives her a serpent. He asks her for bread and she gives him a stone. She reaches for figs, and thorns are pressed into her hand. He would have grapes but gets a bramble bush. She asks for eggs and he stings her with a scorpion. The result is damage to life and canker to the soul.

    Reverend Lawrence Lowell Gruman says: “It is indeed a quaint morality that belittles sex and shrinks human beings to pleasure-seeking dwarfs, for if sex is good, as eating and sleeping are good, then it, too, has specific limits and an appropriate place and that place is within marriage.”

    And still these young people talk of love. What a corruption of the most beautiful term! The word is prostituted also in the realm of homosexuality. Both are in the realm of taking, not giving; killing, not saving; destroying, not building. The fruit is bitter because the tree is corrupt. Their lips say, “I love you.” Their bodies say, “I want you.” Love is kind and wholesome. To love is to give, not to take. To love is to serve, not to exploit.

    We sing of love in popular songs when we really are coveting and wanting and lusting. Why do people deceive themselves and others? Why not call it what it actually is?

    Undoubtedly Potiphar’s wife flattered Joseph and expressed her alleged love for him at first. When this failed, she tried force and intrigue; and, failing there, she tried to cover with blackmail. With such a clear conscience, Joseph’s dark dungeon must have been to him a pleasant prison. At least here he was safe from exploitation and contamination. She said to Joseph, “I love you.” What she wanted was not Joseph but his handsome, appealing body.

    Dr. Gruman says: “The sexual encounter ought to be a full and free affirmation of the other person, …a total commitment to him, and that spells permanence and permanence is spelled out in marriage ….

    If you love another person fully, wholly, unselfishly, then respect the sexual life of that person by surrounding him with marriage. Using and being used, we fail as human beings and sons of God.”

    What is love? Many people think of it as mere physical attraction and they casually speak of “falling in love” and “love at first sight.” This may be Hollywood’s version and the interpretation of those who write love songs and love fiction. True love is not wrapped in such flimsy material. One might become immediately attracted to another individual, but love is far more than physical attraction. It is deep, inclusive and comprehensive. Physical attraction is only one of the many elements, but there must be faith and confidence and understanding and partnership. There must be common ideals and standards. There must be a great devotion and companionship. Love is cleanliness and progress and sacrifice and selflessness. This kind of love never tires nor wanes, but lives through sickness and sorrow, poverty and privation, accomplishment and disappointment, time and eternity. For the love to continue, there must be an increase constantly of confidence and understanding, of frequent and sincere expression of appreciation and affection. There must be a forgetting of self and a constant concern for the other. Interests, hopes, objectives must be constantly focused into a single channel.

    For many years, I saw a strong man carry his tiny, emaciated, arthritic wife to meetings and wherever she could go. There could be no sexual expression. Here was selfless indication of affection. I think that is pure love. I saw a kindly woman wait on her husband for many years as he deteriorated with muscular dystrophy. She waited on him hand and foot, night and day, when all he could do was to blink his eyes in thanks. I believe that was love.

    I knew a woman who carried her little unfortunate child until the body was too heavy to carry, and then she pushed her in a wheel chair for the following years until her death. The deprived child could never express an appreciation. It seems to me that that was love. Another mother visited regularly her son who was in the penitentiary. She could receive nothing from him. She gave much, all she had.

    If anyone feels that petting or other deviations are demonstrations of love, let him ask himself: “If this beautiful body which I have misused suddenly became deformed, or paralyzed, would my reactions be the same ? If this lovely face were scarred by flames, or this body which I have used suddenly became rigid, or this keen mind which I have enjoyed were suddenly to become blank, would I be such an ardent lover? If senility or any of its approaches suddenly fell upon my sweetheart, what would my attitudes be?” Answers to these questions might test one to see if he really is in love or if it is only physical attraction which encouraged the improper physical contacts. The young man who protects his sweetheart against all use or abuse, against insult and infamy from himself or others, could be expressing true love.

    But the young man who uses his companion as a biological toy to give himself temporary satisfaction-that is lust, and is at the other end of the spectrum from love. A young woman conducts herself to be attractive spiritually, mentally and physically but will not by word nor dress nor act stir nor stimulate to physical reactions the companion beside her. That could be true love. That young woman who must touch and stir and fondle and tempt and use knows not love. That is lust and exploitation.

    Sometimes, there are twins, like Jacob and Esau, and the one is hairy and crude and evil; the other is smooth and clean and personable. There were two brothers, the sons of Adam-the one, crude, selfish, evil; the other, good and faithful and worthy. Their names also were four-letter words-Cain and Abel. And such words as love and lust are direct opposites.

    Speaking to my young couple, I said again, “No, it is not love if it manipulates; it is selfishness. It is not love if it neglects the welfare of the other: it is irresponsibility.

    “If sex relations merely become a release or a technique and the partner becomes exchangeable, then sex returns to the compulsive animal level.

    “Immorality brings generally a guilt deep and lasting. And this is a factor certainly not to be overlooked. These unresolved guilt complexes are the stuff of which mental breakdowns come, the building blocks of suicide, the fabric of distorted personalities, the wounds that scar or incapacitate individuals or families.

    “The Revelator, John, gives this: And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. (Rev. 20:12.)

    And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev. 20:15.)

    “And a question that surely arises when that vital moment comes is, will we stand before the Great Judge and be proud or ashamed, satisfied or frustrated? And no normal youth or adult who has received the Holy Ghost can conscientiously claim that he did not know that these things were transgressions.

    Pre-marital sex affairs are wrong, not because the Church declares against them, but the Church declares against them because they are wrong and because they hurt and destroy people who are God’s children.”

    The young couple still was sitting before me. They mentioned a possible future marriage, apparently thinking to impress me, and were a bit startled when I said with positiveness, “You should be married-and immediately.” And I quoted this scripture:

    “And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.” (Ex. 22:16.) and again from Moses: “If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; . . . she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.” (Deut. 22:28-29.)

    These two folks were “damaged goods.” They had prostituted each other. They had toyed with each other’s body. But now they were almost horrified at the suggestion of immediate marriage, and he remonstrated: “Why, we couldn’t marry. We are not ready for marriage. We haven’t completed our education. We have no employment. We are not ready to make a home. We are not prepared to buy clothing, pay rent, buy cars, employ physicians, buy groceries, pay hospital bills. We haven’t finished our education. We are not ready to assume the responsibilities of parenthood.”

    And then I asked, as kindly as I could, “Then why did you precipitate yourselves into that situation? Why did you do the act which would make you parents? Why did you engage in the associations that would demand a home, employment, status? Your very irresponsible act identifies you as most immature. You do not know the meaning of responsibility, but you have pushed yourselves prematurely into adulthood. You should now meet the responsibilities as best you can. You are hardly able to walk alone as little children, and yet you are likely now to be parents. You have not passed the tests in the grade school yet, and now you are enrolled in college. You made the choice when you broke the law of chastity and gave up your virtue. That hour, freedom was replaced with tyrannical fetters. You accepted shackles and limitations and sorrows and eternal regrets when you could have had freedom with peace.”

    King Benjamin said:

    And now, I say unto you, my brethren, that after ye have known and have been taught all these things, if ye should transgress and go contrary to that which has been spoken, that ye do withdraw yourselves from the Spirit of the Lord, that it may have no place in you to guide you in wisdom’s paths that ye may be blessed, prospered, and preserved —

    I say unto you, that the man that doeth this, the same cometh out in open rebellion against God; therefore he listeth to obey the evil spirit, and becometh an enemy to all righteousness; therefore, the Lord has no place in him, for he dwelleth not in unholy temples.

    Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever.

    And now I say unto you, that mercy hath no claim on that man; therefore his final doom is to endure a a never-ending torment.” (Mosiah 2:36-39.)

    Now, it would be wholly improper to so completely condemn sex sins without explaining to those who may already have yielded to these persuasions and temptations and have defiled themselves that there is eventual forgiveness, providing, of course, that there is commensurate repentance. “The way of the transgressor is hard,” and tough and long and thorny. But the Lord has promised that for all those sins and errors outside of the named unpardonable sins, there is forgiveness. But, many people misunderstand the principle of repentance and have the misconception that the changing of a policy, the breaking of a habit, or a few prayers can bounce them back in moments or hours the long distance that they skidded over months and possibly years.

    The Lord has said, “I will remember their sins no more,” and, “Thou shalt forgive them.” But sometimes it takes as long or longer to climb back up the steep hill than it did to skid down it. And it is often much more difficult.

    We mentioned self-conviction above. One has not begun his repentance until that is complete. But when a total self-conviction is stirred to a new life, and prayers have been multiplied and fasting, through humility, intensified, and weeping has been sanctified, repentance then begins to grow and, eventually, forgiveness may come. The king had said that the unrepentant would have a “lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever.” (Mosiah 2:38.)

    And the Prophet Jacob said that those who reject the gospel and resist repentance would “stand with shame and awful guilt before the bar of God.” (Jacob 6:9).

    A basic thought which none may overlook is the statement of the Prophet Amulek:

    And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins,…and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins. (Alma 11:37.)

    But to those who have broken the law of chastity and who have complied as above, there is the promise of forgiveness, and the Lord charges the leaders of His Church when they have totally repented, “Thou shalt forgive them.”

    And He says:

    “Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more. By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins –behold, he will confess them and forsake them.” (D&C 58:42-43.)

    Paul called attention to the Corinthian Saints:

    For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle. (1 Cor. 14:8.)

    And I believe the youth of Zion want to hear the clear and unmistakable tones of the trumpet, and it is my hope that I can play the tune with accuracy and precision so that no honest person will ever be confused. I hope fervently that I am making clear the position of the Lord and His Church on these unmentionable practices.

    Masturbation, a rather common indiscretion, is not approved of the Lord nor of His Church regardless of what may have been said by others whose “norms” are lower. Latter-day Saints are urged to avoid this practice.

    A person is the maker of himself. He may control his own destiny, if he is normal. James Allen says:

    “… A man is literally what he thinks, his character being the complete sum of all his thoughts…. Act is the blossom of thought, and joy and suffering are its fruits . . . let a man radically alter his thoughts, and he will be astounded at the rapid transformation it will effect in the material conditions of his life…”

    James Allen again says:

    …Man is manacled only by himself: thought and action are the jailers of Fate-they imprison, being base; they are also the angels of Freedom-they liberate, being noble.

    Anyone fettered by this weakness should abandon the habit before he goes on a mission or receives the Holy Priesthood or goes in the temple for his blessings.

    Sometimes masturbation is the introduction to the more serious sins of exhibitionism and the gross sin of homosexuality. We would avoid mentioning these unholy terms and these reprehensible practices were it not for the fact that we have a responsibility to the youth of Zion that they be not deceived by those who would call bad, good, and black, white.

    This unholy transgression is either rapidly growing or tolerance is giving it wider publicity. If one has such desires and tendencies, he overcomes them the same as if he had the urge toward petting or fornication or adultery. The Lord condemns and forbids this practice with a vigor equal to His condemnation of adultery and other such sex acts. And the Church will excommunicate as readily any unrepentant addict.

    Again, contrary to the belief and statement of many people, this sin, like fornication, is overcomable and forgivable, but again, only upon a deep and abiding repentance which means total abandonment and complete transformation of thought and act. The fact that some governments and some churches and numerous corrupted individuals have tried to reduce such behavior from criminal offense to personal privilege does not change the nature nor the seriousness of the practice. Good men, wise men, God-fearing men everywhere still denounce the practice as being unworthy of sons of God; and Christ’s Church denounces it and condemns it so long as men have bodies which can be defiled. Earlier in our treatise we quoted Peter as having said, “I beseech you . . . abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul.” (1 Pet. 2:11.)

    And James says:

    “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways…. Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.

    “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

    “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

    “Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

    “Do not err, my beloved brethren .”(James 1:8, 12-16.)

    This heinous homosexual sin is of the ages. Many cities and civilizations have gone out of existence because of it. It was present in Israel’s wandering days, tolerated by the Greeks, and found in the baths of corrupt Rome. In Exodus, the law required death for the culprit who had sex play with animals, the deviate who committed incest, or the depraved one who had homosexual or other vicious practices.

    This is a most unpleasant subject to dwell upon, but I am pressed to speak of it boldly so that no student in this University, nor youth in the Church, will ever have any question in his mind as to the illicit and diabolical nature of this perverse program. Again, Lucifer deceives and prompts logic and rationalization which will destroy men and make them servants of Satan forever.

    Remember, Paul told Timothy:

    For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Tim. 4:3-4.)

    Let it never be said that the Church has avoided condemning this obnoxious practice nor that it has winked at this abominable sin. And I feel certain that this University will never knowingly enroll an unrepentant person who follows these practices nor tolerate on its campus anyone with these tendencies who fails to repent and put his or her life in order.

    May we return to words? In my Bible concordance, there are 550 listed references pertaining to love. They do not interpret it as carnal, sexual, handling, fondling, petting, perversions, nor fornication. In the same concordance, there are 53 references to adultery, and not one of them seems to connect this condemned sexual act with real affection which is love. I also found 32 references to fornication, but I found none which identified the forbidden act as holy, sacred love.

    Men talk of the love act and making love and the love life when what they mean is something quite different, and there can be no proper love life outside of proper marriage.

    Paul made this clear when he said,

    Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. (1 Cor. 6:13.)

    This would apply also to the other detestable sex manifestations named above.

    And Paul further gave to the Corinthians a stinging lashing when he indicated these sins must be overcome:

    Be not deceived: neither fornicators,…nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6:9-10.)

    Again, for clarification, let it be known that fornication is the same act as adultery, except the former pertains to unmarried people and the latter to married people. The words are often interchangeable in the Bible and the penalty of the law was death, as indicated when the Scribes and Pharisees brought to the Savior the woman taken in adultery and they indicated:

    Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? (John 8:5.)

    It is notable that the Redeemer did not negate the law, but He put His enemies to flight by a clever ruse, saying to them: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (John 8:7.)

    And further, there is no evidence that the Savior granted to her forgiveness. He did send her away to repent.

    I do not find in the Bible the modern terms “petting” nor “homosexuality,” yet I found numerous scriptures which forbade such acts under by whatever names they might be called. I could not find the term “homosexuality,” but I did find numerous places where the Lord condemned such a practice with such vigor that even the death penalty was assessed.

    And the Lord calls all such to repent. His words are most impressive:

    “Therefore I command you to repent–repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth…”

    And we refer the reader to the balance of that reference in D&C 19:15-18.

    We have stated that even this ugly practice can be overcome and can be forgiven. As one of many who might be considered authority, I quote one from the Medical World News, June 5, 1964:

    The effectiveness of therapy depends on the depth of entrenchment of the perversion, as well as the strength of the patient’s desire to modify it.

    This statement by the Public Health Committee of the New York Academy of Medicine agrees with our philosophy. Man is created in the image of God. He is a god in embryo. He has the seeds of godhood within him and he can, if he is normal, pick himself up by his bootstraps and literally move himself from where he is to where he knows he should be. As stated above, the longer the habit has been fostered, the harder it is to break.

    To clarify the matter for those who are honest, it must be stated that it is a “damnable heresy,” as Paul says, when men claim that “God made them that way,” or that such a life is just another different but acceptable way of life. All nature, reason, scripture and revelation cry out against such a claim. But it can be corrected and overcome. May I quote from a former article of my own: “Men have come dejected, discouraged, embarrassed, near terrified and have gone out later full of confidence and faith in themselves, with self-respect returned, with the confidence of their families, their home ties strengthened and ready to manfully take their part in proper society and even in the Church on an approved cured basis.

    “In some cases, they have been men with families, and we have had wives come in to tearfully thank us for bringing their husbands back to them. Wives have not always known what had been wrong, but they had sensed something serious and realized that they had lost their husbands. We have seen men come first with downward glances and leave months later looking us straight in the eye. We have had them admit after the first interview, ‘I am glad that I was arrested. I have tried and tried to correct my error but knew I would have to have help and had not the courage to ask for it.’ In a few months, some have totally mastered themselves, while others linger on with less power and requiring more time to make the total comeback. We realize that the cure is no more permanent than the individual makes it so, and is like the cure for alcoholism, subject to continued vigilance. To such men, we say, ‘Physician, heal thyself,’ and promise him if he will stay away from the haunts and the temptations and the former associates, he may heal himself, cleanse his mind, and return to his normal pursuits and a happy state. The cure for this malady lies in self-mastery, which is the fundamental basis of the whole gospel program.”

    “God made me that way,” some say, as they rationalize and excuse themselves for their perversions. “I can’t help it,” they add. This is blasphemy. Is he not made in the image of God, and does he think God to be “that way”? Man is responsible for his own sins. It is possible that he may rationalize and excuse himself until the groove is so deep he cannot get out without great difficulty, but this he can do. Temptations come to all people. The difference between the reprobate and the worthy person is generally that one yielded and the other resisted. It is true that one’s background may make the decision and accomplishment easier or more difficult, but if one is mentally alert, he can still control his future. That is the gospel message-personal responsibility.

    To the person blaming his perversions on his parents-man is punishable for his own sins. He can, if normal, rise above the frustrations of childhood and stand on his own feet and answer roll call.

    And if the yielding person continues to give way numerous times, he may finally reach the point of no return where he does not want to return. And the Lord says, “My Spirit shall not always strive with man, saith the Lord of Hosts .” (D&C 1:33 .)

    The doctors whose report is quoted above state without equivocation, “The homosexual is not a special order of creation.” (For further consideration of this subject, the reader is referred to the address “A Counseling Problem in the Church” by the same author, given to the seminary and institute instructors of the Church, July 16, 1964.) [Available only at the Office of Institutes and Seminaries, Brigham Young University.]

    And then, I found the 550 references to love. They had related generally to pure, holy love. Sometimes it was called charity. Lust and carnal desires were not mentioned. I found where Paul said that to have charity or real love is greater than to be a prophet, to understand mysteries, or to have great knowledge. It is greater than to have much faith, or extended power even to remove mountains. And in following the concordance on this subject of love, Paul contrasted the two four-letter words for Timothy:

    Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. (2 Tim. 2:22.)

    And Peter said that charity or love would cover a multitude of sins. (See 1 Pet. 4:8.)

    And from the Song of Solomon of Solomon comes this:

    For love is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave: the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a most vehement flame. (Song of Solomon 8:6.)

    Jeremiah quotes the Lord: “I have loved thee with an everlasting love.” (Jer. 31:3.)

    And Ezekiel contrasts these words of love and lust:

    “The people . . . hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with their mouth they shew much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness.” (Ezek. 33:31.)

    As we speak of real love, a new concept comes into our minds: The Lord said:

    By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. (John 13:35.)

    And, He continues:

    This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (John 15:12-13.)

    And John said:

    We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. (1 Jn. 3:14.)

    And in the Beatitudes, the Lord said:

    Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. (Matt. 5:43-44.)

    In none of these quotes is the slightest implication of bodily contact, of lust, of desire, of passion. Certainly, this is the test of love. It is honor and integrity and obedience.

    And Paul, speaking to the Saints, said: “Husbands, love your wives .”

    This is no carnal commandment. There is no sex in this command, for they were already legal partners.

    And then he continues:

    “…even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; . . . So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh …”(Ephesians 5:25, 28-29.).

    And as Paul continues, he says:

    For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. (Eph. 5:31.)

    The proper sexual life between husband and wife is only a part of this important commandment. When a man and a woman love the spouse as they love themselves, only rich and wonderful fruits come from such a tree.

    And Paul, speaking to Titus, exhorts:

    “The young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children. To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands….” (Titus 2:4-5.)

    Can you see anything vulgar, destructive, earthy, fleshly or carnal in any of these teachings? They loved their husbands and then their children. This real love has no lust involved. And then, we have the great examples:

    For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16.)

    This was the Savior of the world, who with His supreme love made the supreme sacrifice and gave a life that no one could take from Him, because He loved us so. This is love-sacred, holy love.

    And now, my dear young people, I have spoken frankly and boldly against the sins of the day. Even though I dislike such a subject, I believe it necessary to warn the youth against the onslaught of the arch tempter-who, with his army of emissaries and all the tools at his command, would destroy all the youth of Zion, largely through deception, misrepresentation, and lies.

    My beloved young folks, do not excuse petting and body intimacies. I am positive that if this illicit, illegal, improper, and lustful habit of “petting” could be wiped out, that fornication would soon be gone from our world. Remember what the Lord said:

    Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

    But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (Matt. 5:27-28.)

    And if there has been lust, repent of it and keep your minds clean, and convict yourself of serious evil if you permit your minds to dwell upon these forbidden things or your hands or bodies to yield to the call of lust.

    May I close with this scripture from Mormon:

    Be wise in the days of your probation; strip yourselves of all uncleanness; ask not, that ye may consume it on your lusts, but ask with a firmness unshaken, that ye will yield to no temptation, but that ye will serve the true and living God. (Morm. 9:28.)

    In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.”

    References

    References
    1 Spencer W. Kimball, ‘Love vs. Lust – https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/spencer-w-kimball_love-vs-lust/
  • Masturbation

    Masturbation

    A January 5, 1965 address at BYU by Spencer W. Kimball, ‘Love vs. Lust’: 1

    “My beloved young people:

    While this is a grave responsibility, and not an easy one, I am eager to discuss with you some matters of grave importance.

    I love youth. I rejoice when they grow up clean and stalwart and tall. I sorrow with them when they have misfortunes and remorse and troubles.

    Numerous disasters have occurred in mid-ocean by collisions of ships and sometimes with icebergs, and numerous people have gone to watery graves.

    Soon, such a thing will not be possible, for ships will be equipped with radar equipment which will alert ships’ officers should a collision be imminent. A tape will be played automatically, booming from the darkened bridge: “This is an alert. This ship is approaching an object. This is an alert. This ship is approaching an object.” And the voice will not be stilled until the mate comes to the radarscope and turns the recorder off. This will enable ships to alter their courses and save lives.

    I believe our young people are wholesome and basically good and sound; but they, too, are traveling oceans which to them are at least partially uncharted, where there are shoals and rocks and icebergs and other vessels, and where great disasters can come unless warnings are heeded.

    Yesterday as my jet plane soared in the air gaining altitude, the voice of the stewardess came clearly over the loud-speaker: “We are moving into a storm area. We shall skirt the danger, but there may be some turbulence. Be sure your seat belts are securely fastened.”

    And, as a leader of the Church and in a measure being responsible for youth and their well-being, I raise my voice to say to the youth: “You are in a hazardous area and period. Tighten your belts, hold on, and you can survive the turbulence.”

    I interview thousands of young people and many seem to flounder. Some give excuses for their errors and indulge in unwarranted rationalizations. Today I hope I may be able to clarify, at least in some areas, the stand of the God of Heaven and His Church on some vital issues.

    May I speak first of words and relate them to my theme? There is magic in words properly used. Some people use them accurately, while others sloppily.

    Words are means of communication, and faulty signals give wrong impressions. Disorder and misunderstandings are the results. Words underlie our whole life and are the tools of our business, the expressions of our affections, and the records of our progress. Words cause hearts to throb and tears to flow in sympathy. Words can be sincere or hypocritical. Many of us are destitute of words and, consequently, clumsy with our speech, which sometimes becomes but babble. Paul said:

    Except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. (1 Cor. 14:9.)

    And then Peter speaks of Paul and says of his epistles:

    “. . . in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. (2 Pet. 3:16.)

    Touring foreign lands, one comes to realize his utter helplessness without understandable words and symbols.

    The workmen engaged in building the Tower of Babel were craftsmen, skilled in their trades. Take away their tools: they will replace them. Take away their skills: they will learn anew. But take away their means of communication with one another and the building of the tower has to be abandoned. (Royal Bank of Canada Letter.)

    Words which confuse the hearer or reader are worse than valueless. A reasonable vocabulary of well-chosen words provides us with shadings of meaning and enables us to speak finely instead of coarsely.

    Words which are synonyms have much in common but still have peculiar application, such as “child and urchin,” “hand and fist,” “misstatement and lie.” Now, note the difference in the four-word sentences: “John looked at Mary”; “John glanced at Mary”; “John gazed at Mary”; “John glared at Mary.”

    A true definition of style is, “Proper words in proper places with thoughts in proper order.”

    The plain way of writing conceals great art. As you avoid pomposity, ambiguity and complexity, you attain simplicity, which is the greatest cunning. It conveys proper meaning into the minds of others straight away, without effort for them. They get a feeling of sincerity and integrity, for who can be suspicious of the motives of one who speaks plainly? “Sour notes do not become sweet because the musician is in white tie and black tails.”

    Words should be kind and gentle or firm and bold, according to the need of the moment. Words which betray are unkind and words which befuddle are frustrating.

    Some people have excellent ideas, but their thoughts either beat about aimlessly in their heads, finding no communication package in which to emerge, or they come out distorted and in fragments.

    Every person should say what he means, speaking clearly and distinctly. The politician particularly should pay attention to the niceties of language so as to address the voters meaningfully and not deceitfully. The deforming of meaning for political ends has become too commonplace. In our lives, we should express clearly what we have in mind, just as a purchaser would say: “I wish to buy three rolls of Kodak Ektachrome X Color Film, Daylight Ex. 127.” And the clerk knows exactly what is wanted.

    So in social life, and certainly in morals, there should be a careful selection of the right word to express the thought.

    It is reported that a Russian child has a primer of 2,000 words in the first grade and of 10,000 words in the fourth, while his opposite number in the United States has a primer of 1,800 words; and that the Russian child is reading Tolstoy while the same aged child in the United States is working his way through a book entitled, A Funny Sled. This charge is made in an article in Horizon of July, 1963.

    Even examinations now in many cases do not require expressions by students. They may place an “X” in an appropriate square and avoid intellectual effort in marshalling thoughts and expressing them coherently, and have about a fifty percent chance of being right even in a guess.

    Without discipline, language declines into flabby permissiveness, into formlessness and mindlessness. It deteriorates into what the late James Thurber called “our oral culture of pure babble.”

    Now, you may wonder why I have introduced my talk with the subject of words. May I lead you out with a few four-letter words to think about: fine, fire; good and grow; home, hide, hell, help; and tire, tide, tell and toll; wilt, wish, weak, worn, and weep. Then, there are these: limp, life, live, lurk, love and lust.

    Ah! Here I have finally found the two words on which I wish to dwell: love and lust-words strong and powerful-words which are life and death words-love and lust.

    Let me begin with a story. Across the desk sat a handsome, young nineteen-year-old and a beautiful, shy, but charming eighteen-year-old. They appeared embarrassed, apprehensive, near-terrified. He was defensive and bordering on belligerency and rebellion. There had been sexual violations throughout the summer and intermittently since school began, and as late as last week. I was not so much surprised. I have had these kinds of visits many times; but what did disturb me was that they seemed little, if any, remorseful. They admitted they had gone contrary to some social standards, but quoted magazines and papers and speakers approving pre-marital sex and emphasizing that sex was a fulfillment of human existence.

    Finally, the boy said, “Yes, we yielded to each other, but we do not think it wrong because we love each other.” I thought I had misunderstood him. Since the world began, there have been countless immoralities, but to hear them justified by Latter-day Saint youth shocked me. He repeated, “No, it is not wrong because we love each other.” Here was one of those misused four-letter words.

    They had repeated this abominable heresy so often that they had convinced themselves, and a wall of resistance had been built, and behind this wall they stubbornly stood almost defiantly. If there had been blushes of shame at first, such had been neutralized with their logic. Deeply entrenched were they in this rationalization. Had they not read in some university papers of the new freedom where pre-marital sex was sanctioned, at least not forbidden? Did they not see the looseness in every show, on every stage, on TV screens and magazines? Had they not discussed this in the locker room and in private conversation? Had it not been fairly well established, then, in their world, that sex before marriage was not so wrong? Did there not need to be a trial period? How else could they know if they would be sexually compatible for marriage ? Had they not, like numerous others, come to regard sex as the basis for living ?

    And a proverb came to my mind:

    Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness. (Prov. 30:20.)

    In their rationalization they have had much cooperation, for, as Peter said:

    “… there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways. . .” (2 Pet. 2:1-2.)

    And Peter says further:

    “. . . they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, . . . the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” (2 Pet. 3:16.)

    And here they are, false teachers everywhere, using speech and pornographic literature, magazines, radio, TV, street talk-spreading damnable heresies which break down moral standards, and this to gratify the lusts of the flesh.

    Lucifer in his diabolical scheming deceives the unwary and uses every tool at his command. Seldom does one go to a convention, a club meeting, a party or social gathering without hearing vulgarity, obscenity and suggestive stories.

    Peter again cautioned us:

    Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour. (1 Pet. 5:8.)

    And the Savior said that the very elect would be deceived by Lucifer if it were possible. He will use his logic to confuse, and his rationalizations to destroy. He will shade meanings, open doors an inch at a time, and lead from purest white through all the shades of gray to the darkest black.

    Young people are confused by the arch deceiver who uses every device to deceive them.

    This young couple looked up rather startled when I postulated firmly and with positiveness, “No, my beloved young people, you did not love each other. Rather, you lusted for each other.” And here was the other misused word.

    Paul told Titus:

    Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.

    They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. (Titus 1:15-16.)

    I am sure that Peter and James and Paul found it unpleasant business to constantly be calling people to repentance and warning them of dangers, but they continued unflinchingly. So we, your leaders, must be everlastingly at it; if young people do not understand, then the fault may be partly ours. But, if we make the true way clear to you, then we are blameless.

    If when he [the watchman] seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people;

    Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head.

    He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul.

    But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand. (Ezek. 33:3-6.)

    So, I wish today to help define meanings of words and acts for you young people, to fortify you against error, anguish, pain and sorrow.

    The boy and girl sat still and respectfully. I was not sure if they were comprehending. Apparently, their wrong concepts had been bolstered so long and firmly it was hard for them to change immediately.

    Now we talked again about words-short words like lift and lean, hide and lurk, flee and stay, lose and gain, fall and rise, open and shut, lure and save, lose and gain, live and dead, hell and home and again, love and lust. The beautiful and holy word of love they had defiled until it had degenerated to become a bedfellow with lust, its antithesis.

    As far back as Isaiah, deceivers and rationalizers were condemned:

    Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

    Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! (Isa. 5:20-21.)

    And, we might add: Woe unto those who wrest the scriptures to interpret them to cover their weaknesses. The young couple had excused and justified their transgression on the grounds that they loved each other. Is there a word in the dictionary more misused and prostituted than the word “love”?

    Many of the modern terms for sin were not used in the scriptures and in olden days, and some people, therefore, excuse their contaminations because the age-old transgressions were not identified with modern terms. But, if one reads the scriptures carefully, all sins are denounced there in every shade of error. Again, the great Peter said:

    Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul. (I Peter 2: 11.)

    Surely, every soul who has reached the age of accountability, and especially those who have received the Holy Ghost after baptism, knows the difference; but so often we hear what we want to hear and we see what we want to see. There is a definite war against the soul when evil is perpetrated. And I challenge any normal baptized person who says he did not know he was doing wrong. There is no compatibility between sin and righteousness, between guilt and peace.

    Paul charged the Corinthians:

    Flee fornication …. He that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. (1 Cor. 6:18.)

    And in order to avoid the disasters, Paul cautioned: “Do not company with fornicators.” And he urged people to keep good company and not eat with the evil ones who would tempt them, and then concludes: “Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” (See 1 Cor. 5:9-13.)

    Oh, if our young people could learn this basic lesson to always keep good company, to never be found with those who tend to lower our standards! Let every youth select associates who will keep him on tiptoes, trying to reach the heights attained. Let him never choose associates who encourage him to relax in carelessness.

    We must repeat what we have said many times: Fornication with all its big and little brothers and sisters was evil and wholly condemned by the Lord in Adam’s day, in Moses’ day, in Paul’s day, and in our own day. The Church has no tolerance for any kind of perversions. The Lord has indicated His lack of tolerance, stating:

    For I the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance. (D&C 1:31.)

    Yet, He loves the repentant one. Paul said that even the converted Gentiles should be taught to “abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication,” and other deviations. (Acts 15:20.) He wrote the Romans that corrupt practices called fornication were extant among them. He exhorted the Galatians, lashing out against the “works of the flesh . . adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,” and then he added “that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Gal. 5:19-21.)

    They are like the:

    Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. (Jude 13.)

    These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage. (Jude 16.)

    Let it be known positively that the Church is not softening its standards, nor abandoning its Godgiven practices. Those who interpret the scriptures to justify their own pernicious ways are spoken of in the Book of Mormon:

    . . . They are led about by Satan, even as chaff is driven before the wind, or as a vessel is tossed about upon the waves, without sail or anchor, or without anything wherewith to steer her; and even as she is, so are they. (Mormon 5:18.)

    My young couple who had so seriously sinned were listening, and I reminded them of the statement of Mormon, where the Nephites, guilty of fiendish, abominable acts, had taken prisoners the daughters of the Lamanites, and:

    After depriving them of that which was most dear and precious above all things, which is chastity and virtue-(Moroni 9:9).

    They tortured and murdered them.

    When the scriptures are so plain, how can anyone justify immoralities and call them love? Is black white? Is evil good? Is purity filthiness?

    As I looked the boy in the eye, I said, “No, my boy, you were not expressing love when you took her virtue.” And to her, I said, “There was no real love in your heart when you robbed him of his chastity. It was lust that brought you together in this most serious of all practices short of murder. Paul said, ‘Love worketh no ill to his neighbour.’ (Rom. 13:10.)”

    I continued, “If one really loves another, one would rather die for that person than injure him. At the hour of indulgence, pure love is pushed out one door while lust sneaks in the other. Your affection has been replaced with biological materialism and uncontrolled passion. You have accepted the doctrine which the devil is so eager to establish-that sex relations are justified on the grounds that it is a pleasurable experience in itself and is beyond moral consideration.

    “When the unmarried yield to the lust which induces intimacies and indulgence, they have permitted the body to dominate and have placed the spirit in chains. It is unthinkable that anyone could call this love. You have ignored the fact that all situations or conditions or actions whose pleasures or satisfactions end with the termination of the act will never produce great peoples nor build great kingdoms.

    “In order to live with themselves, people who transgress must follow one path or the other of two alternatives. The one is to sear the conscience and dull the sensitivity with mental tranquilizers so that the transgression may be continued; the other is to permit remorse to lead to total conviction, repentance and eventual forgiveness.”

    This conviction is the element of which my two young visitors were quite devoid. They were somewhat like the unrepentant of whom Isaiah spoke:

    And the mean man boweth not down, and the great man humbleth himself not, therefore, forgive him not.(2 Ne. 12:9.)

    No one can ever be forgiven of any transgression until there is repentance, and one has not repented until he has bared his soul and admitted his intentions and weaknesses without excuses or rationalizations. He must admit to himself that he has grievously sinned. When he has confessed to himself without the slightest minimizing of the offense, or rationalizing its seriousness, or soft-pedaling its gravity, and admits it is as big as it really is, then he is ready to begin his repentance; and any other elements of repentance are of reduced value, until the conviction is established totally, and then repentance may mature and forgiveness may eventually come.

    Because of this widespread tolerance toward promiscuity, this world is in grave danger. When evil is decried and forbidden and punished, the world still has a chance. But when toleration for sin increases, the outlook is bleak and Sodom and Gomorrah days are certain to return.

    We were in Los Angeles years ago when the news broke of the illicit affair of a certain movie actress, from which she became pregnant. Because of her popularity, it was big news in heavy headlines in every paper in the land. We were not so surprised at her adultery-it was reported to be common in Hollywood as well as in the world generally. But that such dissoluteness should be approved and accepted by society shocked me. The Los Angeles papers took a poll of the people-club women and ministers, employers and employees, stenographers and teachers and housewives-and almost without exception, as though it were a child’s indiscretion, these community leaders found little fault and criticized as “puritanical” and “victorian” those who disapproved. “Let her live her own life,” they said. “And, why should we interfere with people’s personal liberties?” In state and nation and across the seas, toleration for sin is terrifying.

    There is no shame. Isaiah again strikes the sin:

    The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves. (Isa. 3:9.)

    That the Church’s stand on morality may be understood, we declare firmly and unalterably it is not an outworn garment, faded, old-fashioned, and threadbare. God is the same yesterday, today and forever, and His covenants and doctrines are immutable; and when the sun grows cold and the stars no longer shine, the law of chastity will still be basic in God’s world and in the Lord’s Church. Old values are upheld by the Church not because they are old, but rather because through the ages they have proved right. It will always be the rule.

    I continued with the young couple, saying, “The youth of today are seeing too many ‘adults only’ movies which exploit sex. There are too many open dormitories on campus, too many mattress parties for adolescents, too many girls with extreme dresses, tight sweaters, calling attention to sex. And, there are too many young men with tight, suggestive attire. Youth generally have heard too many advertisements over radio and television and seen too many in newspapers and on billboards and in magazines where sex is used as a stimulus in selling. There have been too many parked automobiles. They have read too many novels where sex is the central, dominant theme.”

    “What kind of a world would we have,” I asked these young people, “if this heresy which you have espoused of pre-marital sex looseness and alleged free love were in order?” The world, already ill, would expire.

    We are not speaking of a sex-free world any more than we are speaking of a sexy world, for a sexless civilization would die in one generation if indeed it could be born. A sexy civilization will die of its own rottenness when it is ripe in iniquity. Pure sex life in proper marriage is approved. There is a time and an appropriateness for all things which have value. In ancient days, one city or one civilization could disintegrate without seriously disturbing other parts of the world, but today our communication and transportation facilities make the whole world one community.

    In our mass-production age in recent years, “we have witnessed the reduction of persons to things in a code number, a subscriber, a punched card. Each reduction indicates that the person is expendable, replaceable.. . .” “A person is not a function nor a means nor an instrument, but an end in himself; but the world speaks with a voice amplified by a thousand television stations and a half million printing presses.” It advances the biological materialism that man is a consuming, reproducing function, a collection of skills, or a unit in the labor force. This renders men functionaries and destroys their being and loses for them their self, dwarfed by a gigantic universe out there. This is hauntingly true as people are “used” to gratify physical passions in illegitimacy.

    This repulsive sense of “thinghood” is portrayed well in a few lines from John Pauker in the New Republic, January 5, 1963:

    I looked and looked again. There were no people.

    The people had disappeared. The people were gone.

    But the things they had created were still there.

    A suit of clothes and a gown walked arm in arm.

    With a dog at the end of a leash. The dog was there

    And snarling. In the street, vehicular traffic

    Flowed as usual but without drivers or riders ….

    Electric razors razed and revolvers fired

    As usual. The things went through their paces

    And seemed to be enjoying themselves highly.

    I longed to look in a mirror but did not dare.

    We really do not love things. We use things like doormats, automobiles, clothing, machines; but we love people by serving them and contributing to their permanent good. The Lord seemed to recognize this when He said:

    But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. (Matt. 6:33.)

    And again, the difference was made manifest in His instructions to Peter, when He asked three times of that worthy:

    Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these?

    To which Peter responded:

    Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. And the answer came:

    Feed my lambs. Feed my sheep. (See John 21:15-17.)

    What were the things, “these things,” which took second place to his love for his Lord and his fellow men? I think they must have been ships and nets and fish and desires and wants and even passions.

    Sexual encounters outside of legalized marriage render the individual a thing to be used, a thing to be exploited, and make him or her exchangeable, exploitable, expendable and throw-awayable.

    And when we come before the great Judge at the bar of justice, shall we stand before Him as a thing or as a person, as a depraved body of flesh and carnal acts, or as a son of God standing straight and tall and worthy? And as we answer the vital questions, will we be able to say, “I builded, I did not tear down; I lifted, I did not pull down; I grew, I did not shrivel; I helped others grow, I did not dwarf them; I helped, I did not hinder; I loved intensely and blessed, I did not lust toward exploitation to injure”?

    My young couple were still rationalizing and excusing themselves, and I said again, “Every kind of sex exploit for the unmarried from the first lustful stirrings of passions relating to self or to others is a sin, and thought habits are perverted and lives are blemished, and God’s laws are broken, and penalties will be paid.”

    Like some high pressure salesmen who claim far more for their product than can possibly be delivered, sex exploitation promises what it can never produce nor deliver. So, outside of marriage, improper sex life can bring only disappointment, disgust, and usually rejection “while it propels its participants down the long corridor of repeated encounters which are destined to fail.”

    Very often the couple-the two people who have been promiscuous, who have been wanton, who have crossed the lines of propriety-become disgusted with each other and discontinue associations altogether. How many come to dislike, if not to hate, the partner in sin.

    Illicit sex is a selfish act, a betrayal, and is dishonest. To be unwilling to accept responsibility is cowardly, disloyal. Marriage is for time and eternity. Fornication and all other deviations are for today, for the hour, for the “now.” Marriage gives life. Fornication leads to death. Pre-marital sex promises what it cannot possibly produce or deliver. Rejection is often the fruit as it moves its participants down the long highway of repeated encounters.

    The Eighth of the Ten Commandments says: “Thou shalt not steal.” Yet the immoral act is exploitation and robbery in its worst expression.

    It is taking with or without permission the most priceless, the most unrecoverable, the most unreturnable possession of an individual-chastity and virtue. In one dark, unglorious hour, lives can be taken or shattered; but in a long lifetime, health lost may possibly be regained, wealth lost may someday be accumulated again, freedom lost may be fought for and possibly recovered, but chastity gone is gone forever, and virtue stolen cannot be returned. Is not this one of the prime reasons why this forbidden thing is so heinous like murder, for neither can ever be wholly compensated nor returned nor undone?

    “THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY” (and we add its twin, FORNICATION) and also “THOU SHALT NOT KILL” came ‘ringing down from Mount Sinai. One can take a life easily but he can never restore that life. And so it is that when the pangs of futility and remorse impress the uselessness of the act, there must come the time when the fornicator or adulterer, like the murderer, wishes he could hide-hide from all the world, from all the ghosts and especially from his own-and there is no place to hide. There are dark corners and hidden spots and closed cars in which the transgression can be committed, but to totally conceal is impossible. There are no nights so dark, no rooms so tightly locked, no canyons so closed in, no deserts so uninhabited that one can find a place to hide his sins from himself nor from his Lord. Eventually, one must still face himself and his Great Judge.

    Cain had difficulty hiding. The Lord had asked, “Where is Abel, thy brother?” And Cain had boldly replied, “I know not. Am I my brother’ s keeper?” Did he think he was deceiving the Lord or himself? The next question was no simple inquiry, but an accusation and a condemnation, “What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground . . . which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand. “. . . a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. “And Cain said unto the Lord, My punishment is greater than I can bear. “Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth.” (Gen. 4:9-14.)

    That was true of murder. In a lesser degree, it is true of illicit sex, which, of course, includes all petting, fornication, adultery, homosexual acts, and all other perversions. The Lord may say to offenders, as He did to Cain, “What hast thou done?” The children thus conceived make damning charges against you; the companions who have been frustrated and violated condemn you; the body that has been defiled cries out against you; the spirit which has been dwarfed convicts you. You will have difficulty throughout the ages in totally forgiving yourself.

    After looking down at the crumpled body at his feet, and especially after the torments of hell began to persecute him and the ghost of his brother began to follow him, Cain must have wished that he could give Abel’ s life back. The Lord did not curse Cain; it was Cain who, breaking eternal law, cursed himself. And every man or woman who is guilty of moral misconduct may look down upon defiled bodies, his own and others; he may recognize frustrated and distorted minds; and as the ghosts begin to follow, he is certain to wish with all his heart that he could give back chastity and restore tranquility and peace in the minds and hearts and lives of those whom he has damaged.

    From the same tablet, from the same Sinai, came the Laws of God. After creating man in His own image, male and female, God then performed the holy marriage ceremony for eternity for His Adam and Eve. And in this beginning, He established a pattern of sex life consistent with all reason and propriety. In that first marriage blessing, the Lord commanded these two beings, who were complementary to each other, to multiply by being fruitful and bringing children into the world. Cain and Abel were only two of their many sons and daughters. This command did not give license to merely satisfy biological urges, for God followed it with the command,

    Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Gen. 2:24.)

    To cleave is to adhere closely, to cling; and the Lord gave as the purpose for their cleaving, the peopling of the earth, the replenishing of the earth, the subduing of the earth, the dominion over the earth. There was high purpose in the creation and in the proper associations of husband and wife, but intimacies could never be defended outside of marriage.

    The pre-marital sex act is a deception. It is a lie. The Lord asked:

    “If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he . . . give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask for an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? (Luke 11:11-12.)

    Bread is the staff of life, while a stone is lifeless, indeed, sometimes death dealing. The fish as food builds and sustains the body, as does the egg; but the serpent destroys life and is the symbol of death. Love is promised and is delivered.

    Proper sex functions bring posterity, responsibility, and peace; but pre-marital sex encounters bring pain, the loss of self-esteem, spiritual death, unless there is a total, continuing repentance.

    What are the fruits of immorality? Instead of multiplying and replenishing the earth, every effort is made to avoid conception and the birth of progeny. Since Adam no soul has ever been made happy by transgressing. The Lord said:

    “Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” (Matt. 7:19-20.)

    “And now also the ax is laid unto the root of the trees.” (Matt. 3:10.)

    And the warning is repeated:

    Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. (Matt. 7:15.)

    Could there possibly be a single good fruit which comes from pre-marital indulgence?

    Our great accumulated scientific knowledge about our bodies and their functioning, and our minds and their operating, seems not to have been translated into righteousness. As an example, all that we have learned of late from research about the ill effects of tobacco has done little to discourage its use, even as the holy revelations were ignored. And all that has been said from a medical and scientific standpoint about the social diseases seems to have deterred people very little from immorality-in fact, little more if any than the commandments of the Lord. For, in a recent local paper, we read of the great increase in VD in the big cities of our land.

    It is not so much what we know but what we do about what we know. Dr. Jenkins of the Utah State Health Department is quoted as saying that gonorrhea and syphilis epidemics are raging at this very moment in thirty of the nation’s largest cities.

    The Deseret News of December 13, 1964, quotes an Associated Press writer out of Washington as saying: “Some experts see a ‘general decline in morals’ and point to the sharpest rises of V.D. among teenagers.”

    We live in a sterile age, or so it seems-an age when young people turn to sex to escape loneliness, frustration; insecurity and lack of interest. “What can we do?” the youth complain. They are little interested in reading and family associations and youth socials and the community dance. They must have something more exciting. Long ago they ceased making their own entertainment which could be as clean and worthy as they wished to make it. Today, then, they look at television and go to shows in town, and to the so-called “passion pits,” where they are over-stimulated sexually. Oh, for a generation of youth who would move back to simplicity, away from the “canned” programs in most of which are ingredients to stimulate and stir the human passions!

    When we talk of sex, our first thought is adultery or fornication; but our second one, and close on its heels, is the sex stimulation to self and others, sometimes called “petting.” It is a damaging and a damning transgression in its own right, and then, of course, it is also the gateway to the final acts of fornication and adultery.

    And the world will go on dying-destroying itself until people begin to use words in their true meanings, “calling a spade, a spade” and not a spoon; calling “petting” a deep sin and not a harmless diversion– until we rip its disguising mask from its ugly face and strip from its lustful body the sheep’s clothing with which the vicious wolf has concealed his mean self.

    The young man is untrue to his manhood who promises popularity, good times, security, fun, and even love, when all he can give is passion and its diabolical fruits-guilt complexes, disgust, hatred, abhorrence, eventual loathing, and possible pregnancy without legitimacy and honor. He pleads his case in love and all he gives is lust. Likewise, the young lady sells herself cheap. She asks him for a fish; he gives her a serpent. He asks her for bread and she gives him a stone. She reaches for figs, and thorns are pressed into her hand. He would have grapes but gets a bramble bush. She asks for eggs and he stings her with a scorpion. The result is damage to life and canker to the soul.

    Reverend Lawrence Lowell Gruman says: “It is indeed a quaint morality that belittles sex and shrinks human beings to pleasure-seeking dwarfs, for if sex is good, as eating and sleeping are good, then it, too, has specific limits and an appropriate place and that place is within marriage.”

    And still these young people talk of love. What a corruption of the most beautiful term! The word is prostituted also in the realm of homosexuality. Both are in the realm of taking, not giving; killing, not saving; destroying, not building. The fruit is bitter because the tree is corrupt. Their lips say, “I love you.” Their bodies say, “I want you.” Love is kind and wholesome. To love is to give, not to take. To love is to serve, not to exploit.

    We sing of love in popular songs when we really are coveting and wanting and lusting. Why do people deceive themselves and others? Why not call it what it actually is?

    Undoubtedly Potiphar’s wife flattered Joseph and expressed her alleged love for him at first. When this failed, she tried force and intrigue; and, failing there, she tried to cover with blackmail. With such a clear conscience, Joseph’s dark dungeon must have been to him a pleasant prison. At least here he was safe from exploitation and contamination. She said to Joseph, “I love you.” What she wanted was not Joseph but his handsome, appealing body.

    Dr. Gruman says: “The sexual encounter ought to be a full and free affirmation of the other person, …a total commitment to him, and that spells permanence and permanence is spelled out in marriage ….

    If you love another person fully, wholly, unselfishly, then respect the sexual life of that person by surrounding him with marriage. Using and being used, we fail as human beings and sons of God.”

    What is love? Many people think of it as mere physical attraction and they casually speak of “falling in love” and “love at first sight.” This may be Hollywood’s version and the interpretation of those who write love songs and love fiction. True love is not wrapped in such flimsy material. One might become immediately attracted to another individual, but love is far more than physical attraction. It is deep, inclusive and comprehensive. Physical attraction is only one of the many elements, but there must be faith and confidence and understanding and partnership. There must be common ideals and standards. There must be a great devotion and companionship. Love is cleanliness and progress and sacrifice and selflessness. This kind of love never tires nor wanes, but lives through sickness and sorrow, poverty and privation, accomplishment and disappointment, time and eternity. For the love to continue, there must be an increase constantly of confidence and understanding, of frequent and sincere expression of appreciation and affection. There must be a forgetting of self and a constant concern for the other. Interests, hopes, objectives must be constantly focused into a single channel.

    For many years, I saw a strong man carry his tiny, emaciated, arthritic wife to meetings and wherever she could go. There could be no sexual expression. Here was selfless indication of affection. I think that is pure love. I saw a kindly woman wait on her husband for many years as he deteriorated with muscular dystrophy. She waited on him hand and foot, night and day, when all he could do was to blink his eyes in thanks. I believe that was love.

    I knew a woman who carried her little unfortunate child until the body was too heavy to carry, and then she pushed her in a wheel chair for the following years until her death. The deprived child could never express an appreciation. It seems to me that that was love. Another mother visited regularly her son who was in the penitentiary. She could receive nothing from him. She gave much, all she had.

    If anyone feels that petting or other deviations are demonstrations of love, let him ask himself: “If this beautiful body which I have misused suddenly became deformed, or paralyzed, would my reactions be the same ? If this lovely face were scarred by flames, or this body which I have used suddenly became rigid, or this keen mind which I have enjoyed were suddenly to become blank, would I be such an ardent lover? If senility or any of its approaches suddenly fell upon my sweetheart, what would my attitudes be?” Answers to these questions might test one to see if he really is in love or if it is only physical attraction which encouraged the improper physical contacts. The young man who protects his sweetheart against all use or abuse, against insult and infamy from himself or others, could be expressing true love.

    But the young man who uses his companion as a biological toy to give himself temporary satisfaction-that is lust, and is at the other end of the spectrum from love. A young woman conducts herself to be attractive spiritually, mentally and physically but will not by word nor dress nor act stir nor stimulate to physical reactions the companion beside her. That could be true love. That young woman who must touch and stir and fondle and tempt and use knows not love. That is lust and exploitation.

    Sometimes, there are twins, like Jacob and Esau, and the one is hairy and crude and evil; the other is smooth and clean and personable. There were two brothers, the sons of Adam-the one, crude, selfish, evil; the other, good and faithful and worthy. Their names also were four-letter words-Cain and Abel. And such words as love and lust are direct opposites.

    Speaking to my young couple, I said again, “No, it is not love if it manipulates; it is selfishness. It is not love if it neglects the welfare of the other: it is irresponsibility.

    “If sex relations merely become a release or a technique and the partner becomes exchangeable, then sex returns to the compulsive animal level.

    “Immorality brings generally a guilt deep and lasting. And this is a factor certainly not to be overlooked. These unresolved guilt complexes are the stuff of which mental breakdowns come, the building blocks of suicide, the fabric of distorted personalities, the wounds that scar or incapacitate individuals or families.

    “The Revelator, John, gives this: And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. (Rev. 20:12.)

    And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev. 20:15.)

    “And a question that surely arises when that vital moment comes is, will we stand before the Great Judge and be proud or ashamed, satisfied or frustrated? And no normal youth or adult who has received the Holy Ghost can conscientiously claim that he did not know that these things were transgressions.

    Pre-marital sex affairs are wrong, not because the Church declares against them, but the Church declares against them because they are wrong and because they hurt and destroy people who are God’s children.”

    The young couple still was sitting before me. They mentioned a possible future marriage, apparently thinking to impress me, and were a bit startled when I said with positiveness, “You should be married-and immediately.” And I quoted this scripture:

    “And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.” (Ex. 22:16.) and again from Moses: “If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; . . . she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.” (Deut. 22:28-29.)

    These two folks were “damaged goods.” They had prostituted each other. They had toyed with each other’s body. But now they were almost horrified at the suggestion of immediate marriage, and he remonstrated: “Why, we couldn’t marry. We are not ready for marriage. We haven’t completed our education. We have no employment. We are not ready to make a home. We are not prepared to buy clothing, pay rent, buy cars, employ physicians, buy groceries, pay hospital bills. We haven’t finished our education. We are not ready to assume the responsibilities of parenthood.”

    And then I asked, as kindly as I could, “Then why did you precipitate yourselves into that situation? Why did you do the act which would make you parents? Why did you engage in the associations that would demand a home, employment, status? Your very irresponsible act identifies you as most immature. You do not know the meaning of responsibility, but you have pushed yourselves prematurely into adulthood. You should now meet the responsibilities as best you can. You are hardly able to walk alone as little children, and yet you are likely now to be parents. You have not passed the tests in the grade school yet, and now you are enrolled in college. You made the choice when you broke the law of chastity and gave up your virtue. That hour, freedom was replaced with tyrannical fetters. You accepted shackles and limitations and sorrows and eternal regrets when you could have had freedom with peace.”

    King Benjamin said:

    And now, I say unto you, my brethren, that after ye have known and have been taught all these things, if ye should transgress and go contrary to that which has been spoken, that ye do withdraw yourselves from the Spirit of the Lord, that it may have no place in you to guide you in wisdom’s paths that ye may be blessed, prospered, and preserved —

    I say unto you, that the man that doeth this, the same cometh out in open rebellion against God; therefore he listeth to obey the evil spirit, and becometh an enemy to all righteousness; therefore, the Lord has no place in him, for he dwelleth not in unholy temples.

    Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever.

    And now I say unto you, that mercy hath no claim on that man; therefore his final doom is to endure a a never-ending torment.” (Mosiah 2:36-39.)

    Now, it would be wholly improper to so completely condemn sex sins without explaining to those who may already have yielded to these persuasions and temptations and have defiled themselves that there is eventual forgiveness, providing, of course, that there is commensurate repentance. “The way of the transgressor is hard,” and tough and long and thorny. But the Lord has promised that for all those sins and errors outside of the named unpardonable sins, there is forgiveness. But, many people misunderstand the principle of repentance and have the misconception that the changing of a policy, the breaking of a habit, or a few prayers can bounce them back in moments or hours the long distance that they skidded over months and possibly years.

    The Lord has said, “I will remember their sins no more,” and, “Thou shalt forgive them.” But sometimes it takes as long or longer to climb back up the steep hill than it did to skid down it. And it is often much more difficult.

    We mentioned self-conviction above. One has not begun his repentance until that is complete. But when a total self-conviction is stirred to a new life, and prayers have been multiplied and fasting, through humility, intensified, and weeping has been sanctified, repentance then begins to grow and, eventually, forgiveness may come. The king had said that the unrepentant would have a “lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever.” (Mosiah 2:38.)

    And the Prophet Jacob said that those who reject the gospel and resist repentance would “stand with shame and awful guilt before the bar of God.” (Jacob 6:9).

    A basic thought which none may overlook is the statement of the Prophet Amulek:

    And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins,…and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins. (Alma 11:37.)

    But to those who have broken the law of chastity and who have complied as above, there is the promise of forgiveness, and the Lord charges the leaders of His Church when they have totally repented, “Thou shalt forgive them.”

    And He says:

    “Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more. By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins –behold, he will confess them and forsake them.” (D&C 58:42-43.)

    Paul called attention to the Corinthian Saints:

    For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle. (1 Cor. 14:8.)

    And I believe the youth of Zion want to hear the clear and unmistakable tones of the trumpet, and it is my hope that I can play the tune with accuracy and precision so that no honest person will ever be confused. I hope fervently that I am making clear the position of the Lord and His Church on these unmentionable practices.

    Masturbation, a rather common indiscretion, is not approved of the Lord nor of His Church regardless of what may have been said by others whose “norms” are lower. Latter-day Saints are urged to avoid this practice.

    A person is the maker of himself. He may control his own destiny, if he is normal. James Allen says:

    “… A man is literally what he thinks, his character being the complete sum of all his thoughts…. Act is the blossom of thought, and joy and suffering are its fruits . . . let a man radically alter his thoughts, and he will be astounded at the rapid transformation it will effect in the material conditions of his life…”

    James Allen again says:

    …Man is manacled only by himself: thought and action are the jailers of Fate-they imprison, being base; they are also the angels of Freedom-they liberate, being noble.

    Anyone fettered by this weakness should abandon the habit before he goes on a mission or receives the Holy Priesthood or goes in the temple for his blessings.

    Sometimes masturbation is the introduction to the more serious sins of exhibitionism and the gross sin of homosexuality. We would avoid mentioning these unholy terms and these reprehensible practices were it not for the fact that we have a responsibility to the youth of Zion that they be not deceived by those who would call bad, good, and black, white.

    This unholy transgression is either rapidly growing or tolerance is giving it wider publicity. If one has such desires and tendencies, he overcomes them the same as if he had the urge toward petting or fornication or adultery. The Lord condemns and forbids this practice with a vigor equal to His condemnation of adultery and other such sex acts. And the Church will excommunicate as readily any unrepentant addict.

    Again, contrary to the belief and statement of many people, this sin, like fornication, is overcomable and forgivable, but again, only upon a deep and abiding repentance which means total abandonment and complete transformation of thought and act. The fact that some governments and some churches and numerous corrupted individuals have tried to reduce such behavior from criminal offense to personal privilege does not change the nature nor the seriousness of the practice. Good men, wise men, God-fearing men everywhere still denounce the practice as being unworthy of sons of God; and Christ’s Church denounces it and condemns it so long as men have bodies which can be defiled. Earlier in our treatise we quoted Peter as having said, “I beseech you . . . abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul.” (1 Pet. 2:11.)

    And James says:

    “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways…. Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.

    “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

    “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

    “Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

    “Do not err, my beloved brethren .”(James 1:8, 12-16.)

    This heinous homosexual sin is of the ages. Many cities and civilizations have gone out of existence because of it. It was present in Israel’s wandering days, tolerated by the Greeks, and found in the baths of corrupt Rome. In Exodus, the law required death for the culprit who had sex play with animals, the deviate who committed incest, or the depraved one who had homosexual or other vicious practices.

    This is a most unpleasant subject to dwell upon, but I am pressed to speak of it boldly so that no student in this University, nor youth in the Church, will ever have any question in his mind as to the illicit and diabolical nature of this perverse program. Again, Lucifer deceives and prompts logic and rationalization which will destroy men and make them servants of Satan forever.

    Remember, Paul told Timothy:

    For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Tim. 4:3-4.)

    Let it never be said that the Church has avoided condemning this obnoxious practice nor that it has winked at this abominable sin. And I feel certain that this University will never knowingly enroll an unrepentant person who follows these practices nor tolerate on its campus anyone with these tendencies who fails to repent and put his or her life in order.

    May we return to words? In my Bible concordance, there are 550 listed references pertaining to love. They do not interpret it as carnal, sexual, handling, fondling, petting, perversions, nor fornication. In the same concordance, there are 53 references to adultery, and not one of them seems to connect this condemned sexual act with real affection which is love. I also found 32 references to fornication, but I found none which identified the forbidden act as holy, sacred love.

    Men talk of the love act and making love and the love life when what they mean is something quite different, and there can be no proper love life outside of proper marriage.

    Paul made this clear when he said,

    Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. (1 Cor. 6:13.)

    This would apply also to the other detestable sex manifestations named above.

    And Paul further gave to the Corinthians a stinging lashing when he indicated these sins must be overcome:

    Be not deceived: neither fornicators,…nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6:9-10.)

    Again, for clarification, let it be known that fornication is the same act as adultery, except the former pertains to unmarried people and the latter to married people. The words are often interchangeable in the Bible and the penalty of the law was death, as indicated when the Scribes and Pharisees brought to the Savior the woman taken in adultery and they indicated:

    Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? (John 8:5.)

    It is notable that the Redeemer did not negate the law, but He put His enemies to flight by a clever ruse, saying to them: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (John 8:7.)

    And further, there is no evidence that the Savior granted to her forgiveness. He did send her away to repent.

    I do not find in the Bible the modern terms “petting” nor “homosexuality,” yet I found numerous scriptures which forbade such acts under by whatever names they might be called. I could not find the term “homosexuality,” but I did find numerous places where the Lord condemned such a practice with such vigor that even the death penalty was assessed.

    And the Lord calls all such to repent. His words are most impressive:

    “Therefore I command you to repent–repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth…”

    And we refer the reader to the balance of that reference in D&C 19:15-18.

    We have stated that even this ugly practice can be overcome and can be forgiven. As one of many who might be considered authority, I quote one from the Medical World News, June 5, 1964:

    The effectiveness of therapy depends on the depth of entrenchment of the perversion, as well as the strength of the patient’s desire to modify it.

    This statement by the Public Health Committee of the New York Academy of Medicine agrees with our philosophy. Man is created in the image of God. He is a god in embryo. He has the seeds of godhood within him and he can, if he is normal, pick himself up by his bootstraps and literally move himself from where he is to where he knows he should be. As stated above, the longer the habit has been fostered, the harder it is to break.

    To clarify the matter for those who are honest, it must be stated that it is a “damnable heresy,” as Paul says, when men claim that “God made them that way,” or that such a life is just another different but acceptable way of life. All nature, reason, scripture and revelation cry out against such a claim. But it can be corrected and overcome. May I quote from a former article of my own: “Men have come dejected, discouraged, embarrassed, near terrified and have gone out later full of confidence and faith in themselves, with self-respect returned, with the confidence of their families, their home ties strengthened and ready to manfully take their part in proper society and even in the Church on an approved cured basis.

    “In some cases, they have been men with families, and we have had wives come in to tearfully thank us for bringing their husbands back to them. Wives have not always known what had been wrong, but they had sensed something serious and realized that they had lost their husbands. We have seen men come first with downward glances and leave months later looking us straight in the eye. We have had them admit after the first interview, ‘I am glad that I was arrested. I have tried and tried to correct my error but knew I would have to have help and had not the courage to ask for it.’ In a few months, some have totally mastered themselves, while others linger on with less power and requiring more time to make the total comeback. We realize that the cure is no more permanent than the individual makes it so, and is like the cure for alcoholism, subject to continued vigilance. To such men, we say, ‘Physician, heal thyself,’ and promise him if he will stay away from the haunts and the temptations and the former associates, he may heal himself, cleanse his mind, and return to his normal pursuits and a happy state. The cure for this malady lies in self-mastery, which is the fundamental basis of the whole gospel program.”

    “God made me that way,” some say, as they rationalize and excuse themselves for their perversions. “I can’t help it,” they add. This is blasphemy. Is he not made in the image of God, and does he think God to be “that way”? Man is responsible for his own sins. It is possible that he may rationalize and excuse himself until the groove is so deep he cannot get out without great difficulty, but this he can do. Temptations come to all people. The difference between the reprobate and the worthy person is generally that one yielded and the other resisted. It is true that one’s background may make the decision and accomplishment easier or more difficult, but if one is mentally alert, he can still control his future. That is the gospel message-personal responsibility.

    To the person blaming his perversions on his parents-man is punishable for his own sins. He can, if normal, rise above the frustrations of childhood and stand on his own feet and answer roll call.

    And if the yielding person continues to give way numerous times, he may finally reach the point of no return where he does not want to return. And the Lord says, “My Spirit shall not always strive with man, saith the Lord of Hosts .” (D&C 1:33 .)

    The doctors whose report is quoted above state without equivocation, “The homosexual is not a special order of creation.” (For further consideration of this subject, the reader is referred to the address “A Counseling Problem in the Church” by the same author, given to the seminary and institute instructors of the Church, July 16, 1964.) [Available only at the Office of Institutes and Seminaries, Brigham Young University.]

    And then, I found the 550 references to love. They had related generally to pure, holy love. Sometimes it was called charity. Lust and carnal desires were not mentioned. I found where Paul said that to have charity or real love is greater than to be a prophet, to understand mysteries, or to have great knowledge. It is greater than to have much faith, or extended power even to remove mountains. And in following the concordance on this subject of love, Paul contrasted the two four-letter words for Timothy:

    Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. (2 Tim. 2:22.)

    And Peter said that charity or love would cover a multitude of sins. (See 1 Pet. 4:8.)

    And from the Song of Solomon of Solomon comes this:

    For love is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave: the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a most vehement flame. (Song of Solomon 8:6.)

    Jeremiah quotes the Lord: “I have loved thee with an everlasting love.” (Jer. 31:3.)

    And Ezekiel contrasts these words of love and lust:

    “The people . . . hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with their mouth they shew much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness.” (Ezek. 33:31.)

    As we speak of real love, a new concept comes into our minds: The Lord said:

    By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. (John 13:35.)

    And, He continues:

    This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (John 15:12-13.)

    And John said:

    We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. (1 Jn. 3:14.)

    And in the Beatitudes, the Lord said:

    Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. (Matt. 5:43-44.)

    In none of these quotes is the slightest implication of bodily contact, of lust, of desire, of passion. Certainly, this is the test of love. It is honor and integrity and obedience.

    And Paul, speaking to the Saints, said: “Husbands, love your wives .”

    This is no carnal commandment. There is no sex in this command, for they were already legal partners.

    And then he continues:

    “…even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; . . . So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh …”(Ephesians 5:25, 28-29.).

    And as Paul continues, he says:

    For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. (Eph. 5:31.)

    The proper sexual life between husband and wife is only a part of this important commandment. When a man and a woman love the spouse as they love themselves, only rich and wonderful fruits come from such a tree.

    And Paul, speaking to Titus, exhorts:

    “The young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children. To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands….” (Titus 2:4-5.)

    Can you see anything vulgar, destructive, earthy, fleshly or carnal in any of these teachings? They loved their husbands and then their children. This real love has no lust involved. And then, we have the great examples:

    For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16.)

    This was the Savior of the world, who with His supreme love made the supreme sacrifice and gave a life that no one could take from Him, because He loved us so. This is love-sacred, holy love.

    And now, my dear young people, I have spoken frankly and boldly against the sins of the day. Even though I dislike such a subject, I believe it necessary to warn the youth against the onslaught of the arch tempter-who, with his army of emissaries and all the tools at his command, would destroy all the youth of Zion, largely through deception, misrepresentation, and lies.

    My beloved young folks, do not excuse petting and body intimacies. I am positive that if this illicit, illegal, improper, and lustful habit of “petting” could be wiped out, that fornication would soon be gone from our world. Remember what the Lord said:

    Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

    But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (Matt. 5:27-28.)

    And if there has been lust, repent of it and keep your minds clean, and convict yourself of serious evil if you permit your minds to dwell upon these forbidden things or your hands or bodies to yield to the call of lust.

    May I close with this scripture from Mormon:

    Be wise in the days of your probation; strip yourselves of all uncleanness; ask not, that ye may consume it on your lusts, but ask with a firmness unshaken, that ye will yield to no temptation, but that ye will serve the true and living God. (Morm. 9:28.)

    In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.”

    References

    References
    1 Spencer W. Kimball, ‘Love vs. Lust – https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/spencer-w-kimball_love-vs-lust/
  • Cleanse the Land

    Cleanse the Land

    Excerpt from ‘The Seer’ by LDS Apostle Orson Pratt, March 1853, Pg. 43: 1

    “Let this nation put these evils from their midst; let them enact strict laws to protect the virtue of the country; let the heaviest penalties be inflicted upon all public prostitutes, and upon all those who encourage the same, either by precept or example ; let the priests and the people, the rulers and the ruled, clothe themselves in sackcloth and weep before the Lord for the sins of the nation, which have reached unto the heavens and cry aloud for vengeance ; let them cleanse the land and wipe out of existence these soul-destroying abominations : then let them teach Utah virtue, and their precepts will be heard and their admonitions received; then will the valiant-hearted sons and daughters of the Mountain Territory believe that there is virtue still left in the land ; and then shall the nation find favor in the sight of heaven, and rise up in strength, in power, in glorious majesty, and extend their dominions east, west, north, and south, and shall rule in triumph and everlasting honor unto the ends of the earth. But until then let them hide their faces in shame and blush in deep silence at the floodgates of iniquity which pour forth their torrents of corruption and death in all parts of the land.”

    References

    References
    1 The Seer edited by Orson Pratt – https://archive.org/details/seereditedbyorso01unse
  • Jackson County

    Jackson County

    Excerpt from a October 1900, General Conference address by George Q. Cannon: 1

    “I have had resting upon my mind now for some time a feeling to call upon the Latter-day Saints and tell them that the coming of the Lord is near, even at our doors. I have been greatly impressed with this feeling. I know that Jesus is coming, and I feel that, as a people and as individuals, we ought to prepare for His coming. It ought to be our study every day how we can best prepare for His coming. While the angels themselves do not know when He will come, yet they do know, and we know also, -for God has revealed it to us-” that Jesus will come. He will come suddenly, when the world is unprepared for Him, and when He will be least expected by the inhabitants of the earth, and perhaps by us. He commands us to be “looking forth for the coming of the Son of Man, for He cometh in an hour you think not.” There may be many of us, and I hope there will be, who will be prepared for that great and glorious event. “

    “If it be true, as I testify it is, that the coming of the Lord is not far distant, ought we not as a people and as individuals to prepare ourselves by listening to the instructions that we receive, and putting our households and all our affairs in such a condition that if the Lord should come suddenly upon us we should be prepared for His coming? We should see to it that nothing is left undone by us, no commandment unfulfilled, no counsel or instruction disregarded; but that our lives and the lives of our families as far as we can control them, are brought into such a condition as to be prepared for that glorious event; that we shall have oil in our lamps, and the lamps be trimmed and burning, that when we lay down at night, if the Lord should come, as He has said he would, like a thief in the night, we would not be unprepared for His coming. “

    “Many who are now within the sound of my voice have been promised that they shall live, if they have faith, to behold the second coming of the Lord. The Lord has also promised that certain events shall take place while men that are standing in the generation in which these promises were made will yet be alive. All these promises go to show that it is not wise for us to put off the day of preparation and to think, “Oh! the Lord delayeth His coming. He may come while my children, or my grandchildren, or some of my posterity are living, but he will not come in my day.”

    Excerpt from a October 1900, General Conference address by Prophet Lorenzo Snow: 2

    “Now the time is fast approaching when a large portion of the people that I am now addressing will go back to Jackson county. A great many people that are now dwelling in the State of Utah will have this privilege. Whether I, President Cannon, President Smith, or all the brethren of the Twelve will go back I know not. But a large portion of the Latter-day Saints that now dwell in these valleys will go back to Jackson county to build a holy city to the Lord, as was decreed by Jehovah and revealed through Joseph Smith.”

    References

    References
    1, 2 Conference Report, October 1900 – https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1900sa
  • This Generation

    This Generation

    Excerpt from a October 1900, General Conference address by George Q. Cannon: 1

    “I have had resting upon my mind now for some time a feeling to call upon the Latter-day Saints and tell them that the coming of the Lord is near, even at our doors. I have been greatly impressed with this feeling. I know that Jesus is coming, and I feel that, as a people and as individuals, we ought to prepare for His coming. It ought to be our study every day how we can best prepare for His coming. While the angels themselves do not know when He will come, yet they do know, and we know also, -for God has revealed it to us-” that Jesus will come. He will come suddenly, when the world is unprepared for Him, and when He will be least expected by the inhabitants of the earth, and perhaps by us. He commands us to be “looking forth for the coming of the Son of Man, for He cometh in an hour you think not.” There may be many of us, and I hope there will be, who will be prepared for that great and glorious event. “

    “If it be true, as I testify it is, that the coming of the Lord is not far distant, ought we not as a people and as individuals to prepare ourselves by listening to the instructions that we receive, and putting our households and all our affairs in such a condition that if the Lord should come suddenly upon us we should be prepared for His coming? We should see to it that nothing is left undone by us, no commandment unfulfilled, no counsel or instruction disregarded; but that our lives and the lives of our families as far as we can control them, are brought into such a condition as to be prepared for that glorious event; that we shall have oil in our lamps, and the lamps be trimmed and burning, that when we lay down at night, if the Lord should come, as He has said he would, like a thief in the night, we would not be unprepared for His coming. “

    “Many who are now within the sound of my voice have been promised that they shall live, if they have faith, to behold the second coming of the Lord. The Lord has also promised that certain events shall take place while men that are standing in the generation in which these promises were made will yet be alive. All these promises go to show that it is not wise for us to put off the day of preparation and to think, “Oh! the Lord delayeth His coming. He may come while my children, or my grandchildren, or some of my posterity are living, but he will not come in my day.”

    Excerpt from a October 1900, General Conference address by Prophet Lorenzo Snow: 2

    “Now the time is fast approaching when a large portion of the people that I am now addressing will go back to Jackson county. A great many people that are now dwelling in the State of Utah will have this privilege. Whether I, President Cannon, President Smith, or all the brethren of the Twelve will go back I know not. But a large portion of the Latter-day Saints that now dwell in these valleys will go back to Jackson county to build a holy city to the Lord, as was decreed by Jehovah and revealed through Joseph Smith.”

    References

    References
    1, 2 Conference Report, October 1900 – https://archive.org/details/conferencereport1900sa
  • Discernment

    Discernment

    From the Salt lake Tribune via AP:1

    In this photo taken April 22, 1980, Mark W. Hofmann, left, and LDS Church leaders N. Eldon Tanner, Spencer W. Kimball, Marion G. Romney, Boyd K. Packer and Gordon B. Hinckley examine the Anthon transcript in Salt Lake City. Back in October 1985, when Hofmann killed two people with homemade pipe bombs in an attempt to divert attention from his double-dealing and dishonesty, the Utah-based church restricted access to its historic archives and promoted only a canonized — some would say narrow — view of the faith’s founding. No more. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has opened its archives, posted thousands of documents online, produced groundbreaking research on its past and published a dozen recent essays on controversial historical developments.

    From the October 1980 Ensign, ‘Fraudulent Documents from Forger Mark Hofmann Noted’: 2

    As a result of the confession of convicted murderer and forger Mark William Hofmann, numerous historical documents are now known to be forgeries.

    The announcements and texts of some of these documents were published in Church periodicals, and the documents have been used in good faith since 1980 in manuals and discussions by leaders, teachers, and members of the Church. The following documents and their fraudulent contents should not be used, even though they may have appeared in previous Church publications:

    The Charles Anthon transcript, purportedly reformed Egyptian characters copied by Joseph Smith from the Book of Mormon gold plates in 1828. (See Ensign, Jun. 1980, July 1980, Dec. 1983.)

    The Joseph Smith III blessing, falsely represented as a father’s blessing given by the Prophet Joseph Smith on 17 January 1844 to his son, Joseph Smith III, to the effect that this son was his appointed successor. (See Ensign, May 1981.)

    The Lucy Mack Smith letter of 23 January 1829, falsely said to have been written by Joseph Smith’s mother. It presents details that purportedly came from the 116 lost manuscript pages of the Book of Mormon, including the idea that Ishmael, whose daughters married the sons of Lehi and Sariah, was the brother of Sariah. (See Ensign, Oct. 1982, Dec. 1983.)

    The Martin Harris letter of 13 January 1873 to Walter Conrad, purportedly in the handwriting of Martin Harris’s son, Martin Harris, Jr., and signed by Martin Harris, who would have been eighty-nine years old at the time. This fraudulent text reaffirms the testimony of Martin Harris as one of the Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon. (See Ensign, Nov. 1982, Dec. 1983.)

    The David Whitmer letter of 2 April 1873 to Walter Conrad, ostensibly written by another of the Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon, fraudulently reaffirming David Whitmer’s testimony. (See Ensign, Dec. 1983.)

    Two pages of the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon, covering Helaman 14:20 to 15:12, as well as parts of Mosiah 2:6–7 and 2:17–18, ostensibly written by Oliver Cowdery as Joseph Smith dictated the translation. (See Ensign, Oct. 1983, Dec. 1983.)

    The E. B. Grandin contract of 17 August 1829, falsely purported to be a financial agreement between printer Egbert B. Grandin and Joseph Smith for the first printing of the Book of Mormon. (See Ensign, Dec. 1983.)

    A “Joseph Smith, Jr.” signature in a first-edition copy of the Book of Mormon. While the signature is a Mark Hofmann forgery, a Joseph Smith letter on virtue mentioned in the same news article was from another source and is considered authentic. (See Ensign, Sept. 1985.)

    The Martin Harris letter (popularly known as the white salamander letter), purportedly written in 1830 by Martin Harris to William W. Phelps. This letter contains a spurious account of problems encountered by Joseph Smith in obtaining the gold plates.

    The Josiah Stowell letter, purportedly written by Joseph Smith in 1825. It contains information indicating Joseph Smith was involved in folk magic. Before being labeled a forgery, this letter was believed to contain the earliest surviving handwriting of the Prophet.

    Mark Hofmann also claimed to be in the process of purchasing a collection of writings by William E. McLellin, one of the original members of the Council of the Twelve, who later apostatized and lost his membership in the Church, but who never recanted his testimony of the Book of Mormon. (See Ensign, Feb. 1986.) Although documents written by William E. McLellin may exist, Hofmann has confessed that his own professed “collection” does not.

    Hofmann was also the source of a widely circulated rumor concerning an early history by Oliver Cowdery purportedly owned by the Church. This nonexistent history falsely credits Joseph Smith’s brother Alvin with a role in obtaining the gold plates. (See the Church’s disclaimer in the Ensign, Dec. 1986; see also Ensign, Aug. 1987.)

    See also:

  • Allegations

    Allegations

    Church Statement About Alleged Sexual Assault by Former Mission President – March 20 2018:  1

    “This matter [allegation of sexual abuse] was brought to the attention of the Church in 2010, when this former Church member, who served briefly as a missionary in 1984, told leaders of the Pleasant Grove Utah West Stake that she had been sexually assaulted by the president of the Provo Missionary Training Center, Joseph Bishop, 25 years earlier. They listened carefully to the claims being made and then this was immediately reported to the Pleasant Grove Police Department, and the police interviewed her at that time. The Church does not know what she said in that interview, but the Church received no further communication from the police concerning the matter.

    At the same time, the Church referred these allegations to the local ecclesiastical leaders of Joseph Bishop. Those leaders met with Mr. Bishop, who denied the allegations. Unable to verify the allegations, they did not impose any formal Church discipline on Mr. Bishop at that time.”

     

    LDS Church spokesman Eric Hawkins, February 6 2018: 2

    “Church representatives have spoken with legislators to express support for (HB330), which is intended to protect the confidentiality of sensitive private conversations, including those between ecclesiastical leaders and their members”

    References

    References
    1 Church Statement About Alleged Sexual Assault by Former Mission President – https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/statement-former-mission-president-alleged-abuse-joseph-l-bishop-march-2018
    2 Bill would require consent to record a conversation in Utah, Deseret News – https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900009626/bill-would-require-consent-to-record-a-conversation-in-utah.html
  • For the Widows

    For the Widows

    Excerpts from ‘Evidences and Reconciliations’ by Apostle John A. Widtsoe, 1943: 1

    “Plural marriage has been a subject of wide and frequent comment. Members of the Church unfamiliar with its history, and many non-members, have set up fallacious reasons for the origin of this system of marriage among the Latter-day Saints.

    The most common of these conjectures is that the Church, through plural marriage, sought to provide husbands for its large surplus of female members. The implied assumption in this theory, that there have been more female than male members in the Church, is not supported by existing evidence. On the contrary, there seem always to have been more males than females in the Church. Families — father, mother, and children — have most commonly joined the Church. Of course, many single women have become converts, but also many single men.

    The United States census records from 1850 to 1940, and all available Church records, uniformly show a preponderance of males in Utah, and in the Church. Indeed, the excess in Utah has usually been larger than for the whole United States, as would be expected in a pioneer state. The births within the Church obey the usual population law – a slight excess of males. Orson Pratt, writing in 1853 from direct knowledge of Utah conditions, when the excess of females was supposedly the highest, declares against the opinion that females outnumbered the males in Utah. The theory that plural marriage was a consequence of a surplus of female Church members fails from lack of evidence.

    Another conjecture is that the people were few in number and that the Church, desiring greater numbers, permitted the practice so that a phenomenal increase in population could be attained. This is not defensible, since there was no surplus of women…”

     

    Census of Population and Housing – https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html

     

     

    References

    References
    1 ‘Evidences and Reconciliations’, John Widtsoe – https://archive.org/details/evidencesreconci03widt
  • Can’t Leave it Alone

    Can’t Leave it Alone

    Excerpt from a Utah State University baccalaureate address by Boyd K. Packer: 1

    “They leave the Church but they can’t leave it alone”

     

    Excerpt from an address by David O. McKay given to the North British Mission 1 March 1961: 2

    “Every member is a missionary. He or she has the responsibility of bringing somebody: a mother, a father, a neighbor, a fellow worker, an associate, somebody in touch with the messengers of the gospel.”

     

    References

    References
    1 “Go and Bring In Those People Now on the Plains” (We Are Our Brothers’ Keepers), Vaughn Featherstone, Aug. 11, 1981 – https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/vaughn-j-featherstone_go-bring-people-now-plains-brothers-keepers/
    2 TEACHINGS OF PRESIDENTS OF THE CHURCH: DAVID O. MCKAY, “Every Member a Missionary” – https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-david-o-mckay/chapter-6?lang=eng#note10-
  • Segregation

    Segregation

    Excerpts from a 1954 Address by Apostle Mark E. Petersen, ‘Race Problems As They Affect The Church’: 1

    “It is a good thing to understand exactly what the Negro has in mind on this subject, I’ll be talking about other races besides Negroes, of course, but it is the Negro question which pinpoints it, so I would like to talk first of all about the Negro and his civil rights. We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject any more than any other subject.”

    “I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a café where white people sit. He isn’t just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. From this and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not. be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that, we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that they used to say about sin, “First we pity, then endure, then embrace.””

    “Is there any reason to think that the same principle of rewards and punishments did not apply to us and our deeds in the pre-existent world as will apply hereafter? Is there reason then why the type of birth we receive in this life is not a reflection of our worthiness or lack of it in the pre-existent life? We must accept the justice of God. He is fair to all. He is not a respector of persons. He will meet to us according to what we deserve. With that in mind, we can account in no other way for the birth of some of the children of God in darkest Africa, or in flood-ridden China, or among the starving hordes of India, while some of the rest of us are born in the United States? We cannot escape the conclusion that because of performance in our pre-existence some of us are born as Chinese, some as Japanese, some as Indians, some as Negroes, some as Americans, some as Latter-day Saints. There are rewards and punishments, fully in harmony with His established policy in dealing with sinners and saints, regarding all according to their deeds.”

    “Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation. When He permitted the banishment of Hagar and Ishmael again He indulged in segregation. In the case of Jacob and Esau, He engaged in segregation. When He preserved His people Israel in Egypt for 400 years, He engaged in an act of segregation, and when He brought them up out of Egypt and gave them their own land, He engaged in an act of segregation. We speak of the miracle of the preservation of the Jews as a separate people over all these years. It was nothing more or less than an act in segregation. I’m sure the Lord had His hand in it because the Jews still have a great mission to perform. In placing a curse on Laman and Lemuel, He engaged in segregation. When He placed the mark upon Cain, He engaged in segregation. When he told Enoch not to preach the gospel to the descendants of Cain who were black, the Lord engaged in segregation. When He cursed the descendants of Cain as to the Priesthood, He engaged in segregation. When He forbade intermarriages as He does in Deuteronomy, Chapter 7, He established segregation.”

    “Who placed the Negroes originally in darkest Africa? Was it some man, or was it God? And when He placed them there, He segregated them.”

    “The Lord segregated the people both as to blood and place of residence, at least in the bases of the Lamanites and the Negroes we have the definite word of the Lord himself that He placed a dark skin upon then: as a curse — as a sign to all others. He forbade inter-marriage with them under threat of extension of the curse (2 Nephi 5:21) And He certainly segregated the descendants of Cain when He cursed the Negro as to the Priesthood, and drew an absolute line. You may even say He dropped an iron curtain there. The Negro was cursed as to the Priesthood, and therefore, was cursed as to the blessings of the Priesthood. Certainly God made a segregation there.”

    “Think of the Negro, cursed as to the Priesthood. Are we prejudiced, against him? Unjustly, sometimes we’re accused of having such a prejudice. But what does the mercy of God have for him? This Negro, who in the pre-existence life lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in the lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa – if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the Celestial Kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get a Celestial resurrection. He will get a place in the celestial glory. He will not go then even with the honorable men of the earth to the Terrestrial glory, nor with the ones spoken of as being without law.”

    “Well, what about the removal of the curse? We know what the Lord has said in the Book of Mormon in regard to the Lamanites – they shall become a white and delightsome people. I know of no scripture having to do with the removal of the curse from the Negro.”

    “Now what is our policy in regard to intermarriage? As to the Negro, of course, there is only one possible answer. We must not intermarry with the Negro.”

    “If there is one drop of Negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isn’t any argument, therefore, as to inter marriage with the Negro, is there? There are 50 million Negroes in the United States. If they were to achieve complete absorption with the white race, think what that would do. With 50 million Negroes inter-married with us, where would the priesthood be? who could hold it, in all America? Think what that would do to the work of the Church!”

    “I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world, but let them enjoy these things among themselves. I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation? It reminds me of the scripture on marriage, “what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Only here we have the reverse of he thing–what God hath separated, let not man bring together again.”

     

    References

    References
    1 Apostle Mark E. Petersen address given at The Convention of Teachers of Religion On The College Level, Provo, Utah August 27, 1954. Race Problems As They Affect The Church – https://archive.org/details/RaceProblemsAsTheyAffectTheChurchMarkEPetersen
  • One Drop

    One Drop

    Excerpts from a 1954 Address by Apostle Mark E. Petersen, ‘Race Problems As They Affect The Church’: 1

    “It is a good thing to understand exactly what the Negro has in mind on this subject, I’ll be talking about other races besides Negroes, of course, but it is the Negro question which pinpoints it, so I would like to talk first of all about the Negro and his civil rights. We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject any more than any other subject.”

    “I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a café where white people sit. He isn’t just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. From this and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not. be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that, we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that they used to say about sin, “First we pity, then endure, then embrace.””

    “Is there any reason to think that the same principle of rewards and punishments did not apply to us and our deeds in the pre-existent world as will apply hereafter? Is there reason then why the type of birth we receive in this life is not a reflection of our worthiness or lack of it in the pre-existent life? We must accept the justice of God. He is fair to all. He is not a respector of persons. He will meet to us according to what we deserve. With that in mind, we can account in no other way for the birth of some of the children of God in darkest Africa, or in flood-ridden China, or among the starving hordes of India, while some of the rest of us are born in the United States? We cannot escape the conclusion that because of performance in our pre-existence some of us are born as Chinese, some as Japanese, some as Indians, some as Negroes, some as Americans, some as Latter-day Saints. There are rewards and punishments, fully in harmony with His established policy in dealing with sinners and saints, regarding all according to their deeds.”

    “Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation. When He permitted the banishment of Hagar and Ishmael again He indulged in segregation. In the case of Jacob and Esau, He engaged in segregation. When He preserved His people Israel in Egypt for 400 years, He engaged in an act of segregation, and when He brought them up out of Egypt and gave them their own land, He engaged in an act of segregation. We speak of the miracle of the preservation of the Jews as a separate people over all these years. It was nothing more or less than an act in segregation. I’m sure the Lord had His hand in it because the Jews still have a great mission to perform. In placing a curse on Laman and Lemuel, He engaged in segregation. When He placed the mark upon Cain, He engaged in segregation. When he told Enoch not to preach the gospel to the descendants of Cain who were black, the Lord engaged in segregation. When He cursed the descendants of Cain as to the Priesthood, He engaged in segregation. When He forbade intermarriages as He does in Deuteronomy, Chapter 7, He established segregation.”

    “Who placed the Negroes originally in darkest Africa? Was it some man, or was it God? And when He placed them there, He segregated them.”

    “The Lord segregated the people both as to blood and place of residence, at least in the bases of the Lamanites and the Negroes we have the definite word of the Lord himself that He placed a dark skin upon then: as a curse — as a sign to all others. He forbade inter-marriage with them under threat of extension of the curse (2 Nephi 5:21) And He certainly segregated the descendants of Cain when He cursed the Negro as to the Priesthood, and drew an absolute line. You may even say He dropped an iron curtain there. The Negro was cursed as to the Priesthood, and therefore, was cursed as to the blessings of the Priesthood. Certainly God made a segregation there.”

    “Think of the Negro, cursed as to the Priesthood. Are we prejudiced, against him? Unjustly, sometimes we’re accused of having such a prejudice. But what does the mercy of God have for him? This Negro, who in the pre-existence life lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in the lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa – if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the Celestial Kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get a Celestial resurrection. He will get a place in the celestial glory. He will not go then even with the honorable men of the earth to the Terrestrial glory, nor with the ones spoken of as being without law.”

    “Well, what about the removal of the curse? We know what the Lord has said in the Book of Mormon in regard to the Lamanites – they shall become a white and delightsome people. I know of no scripture having to do with the removal of the curse from the Negro.”

    “Now what is our policy in regard to intermarriage? As to the Negro, of course, there is only one possible answer. We must not intermarry with the Negro.”

    “If there is one drop of Negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isn’t any argument, therefore, as to inter marriage with the Negro, is there? There are 50 million Negroes in the United States. If they were to achieve complete absorption with the white race, think what that would do. With 50 million Negroes inter-married with us, where would the priesthood be? who could hold it, in all America? Think what that would do to the work of the Church!”

    “I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world, but let them enjoy these things among themselves. I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation? It reminds me of the scripture on marriage, “what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Only here we have the reverse of he thing–what God hath separated, let not man bring together again.”

     

    References

    References
    1 Apostle Mark E. Petersen address given at The Convention of Teachers of Religion On The College Level, Provo, Utah August 27, 1954. Race Problems As They Affect The Church – https://archive.org/details/RaceProblemsAsTheyAffectTheChurchMarkEPetersen
  • Lord’s Segregation

    Lord’s Segregation

    Excerpts from a 1954 Address by Apostle Mark E. Petersen, ‘Race Problems As They Affect The Church’: 1

    “It is a good thing to understand exactly what the Negro has in mind on this subject, I’ll be talking about other races besides Negroes, of course, but it is the Negro question which pinpoints it, so I would like to talk first of all about the Negro and his civil rights. We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject any more than any other subject.”

    “I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a café where white people sit. He isn’t just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. From this and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not. be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that, we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that they used to say about sin, “First we pity, then endure, then embrace.””

    “Is there any reason to think that the same principle of rewards and punishments did not apply to us and our deeds in the pre-existent world as will apply hereafter? Is there reason then why the type of birth we receive in this life is not a reflection of our worthiness or lack of it in the pre-existent life? We must accept the justice of God. He is fair to all. He is not a respector of persons. He will meet to us according to what we deserve. With that in mind, we can account in no other way for the birth of some of the children of God in darkest Africa, or in flood-ridden China, or among the starving hordes of India, while some of the rest of us are born in the United States? We cannot escape the conclusion that because of performance in our pre-existence some of us are born as Chinese, some as Japanese, some as Indians, some as Negroes, some as Americans, some as Latter-day Saints. There are rewards and punishments, fully in harmony with His established policy in dealing with sinners and saints, regarding all according to their deeds.”

    “Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation. When He permitted the banishment of Hagar and Ishmael again He indulged in segregation. In the case of Jacob and Esau, He engaged in segregation. When He preserved His people Israel in Egypt for 400 years, He engaged in an act of segregation, and when He brought them up out of Egypt and gave them their own land, He engaged in an act of segregation. We speak of the miracle of the preservation of the Jews as a separate people over all these years. It was nothing more or less than an act in segregation. I’m sure the Lord had His hand in it because the Jews still have a great mission to perform. In placing a curse on Laman and Lemuel, He engaged in segregation. When He placed the mark upon Cain, He engaged in segregation. When he told Enoch not to preach the gospel to the descendants of Cain who were black, the Lord engaged in segregation. When He cursed the descendants of Cain as to the Priesthood, He engaged in segregation. When He forbade intermarriages as He does in Deuteronomy, Chapter 7, He established segregation.”

    “Who placed the Negroes originally in darkest Africa? Was it some man, or was it God? And when He placed them there, He segregated them.”

    “The Lord segregated the people both as to blood and place of residence, at least in the bases of the Lamanites and the Negroes we have the definite word of the Lord himself that He placed a dark skin upon then: as a curse — as a sign to all others. He forbade inter-marriage with them under threat of extension of the curse (2 Nephi 5:21) And He certainly segregated the descendants of Cain when He cursed the Negro as to the Priesthood, and drew an absolute line. You may even say He dropped an iron curtain there. The Negro was cursed as to the Priesthood, and therefore, was cursed as to the blessings of the Priesthood. Certainly God made a segregation there.”

    “Think of the Negro, cursed as to the Priesthood. Are we prejudiced, against him? Unjustly, sometimes we’re accused of having such a prejudice. But what does the mercy of God have for him? This Negro, who in the pre-existence life lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in the lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa – if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the Celestial Kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get a Celestial resurrection. He will get a place in the celestial glory. He will not go then even with the honorable men of the earth to the Terrestrial glory, nor with the ones spoken of as being without law.”

    “Well, what about the removal of the curse? We know what the Lord has said in the Book of Mormon in regard to the Lamanites – they shall become a white and delightsome people. I know of no scripture having to do with the removal of the curse from the Negro.”

    “Now what is our policy in regard to intermarriage? As to the Negro, of course, there is only one possible answer. We must not intermarry with the Negro.”

    “If there is one drop of Negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isn’t any argument, therefore, as to inter marriage with the Negro, is there? There are 50 million Negroes in the United States. If they were to achieve complete absorption with the white race, think what that would do. With 50 million Negroes inter-married with us, where would the priesthood be? who could hold it, in all America? Think what that would do to the work of the Church!”

    “I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world, but let them enjoy these things among themselves. I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation? It reminds me of the scripture on marriage, “what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Only here we have the reverse of he thing–what God hath separated, let not man bring together again.”

     

    References

    References
    1 Apostle Mark E. Petersen address given at The Convention of Teachers of Religion On The College Level, Provo, Utah August 27, 1954. Race Problems As They Affect The Church – https://archive.org/details/RaceProblemsAsTheyAffectTheChurchMarkEPetersen
  • Become White

    Become White

    Excerpts from a 1954 Address by Apostle Mark E. Petersen, ‘Race Problems As They Affect The Church’: 1

    “It is a good thing to understand exactly what the Negro has in mind on this subject, I’ll be talking about other races besides Negroes, of course, but it is the Negro question which pinpoints it, so I would like to talk first of all about the Negro and his civil rights. We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject any more than any other subject.”

    “I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a café where white people sit. He isn’t just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. From this and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not. be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that, we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that they used to say about sin, “First we pity, then endure, then embrace.””

    “Is there any reason to think that the same principle of rewards and punishments did not apply to us and our deeds in the pre-existent world as will apply hereafter? Is there reason then why the type of birth we receive in this life is not a reflection of our worthiness or lack of it in the pre-existent life? We must accept the justice of God. He is fair to all. He is not a respector of persons. He will meet to us according to what we deserve. With that in mind, we can account in no other way for the birth of some of the children of God in darkest Africa, or in flood-ridden China, or among the starving hordes of India, while some of the rest of us are born in the United States? We cannot escape the conclusion that because of performance in our pre-existence some of us are born as Chinese, some as Japanese, some as Indians, some as Negroes, some as Americans, some as Latter-day Saints. There are rewards and punishments, fully in harmony with His established policy in dealing with sinners and saints, regarding all according to their deeds.”

    “Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation. When He permitted the banishment of Hagar and Ishmael again He indulged in segregation. In the case of Jacob and Esau, He engaged in segregation. When He preserved His people Israel in Egypt for 400 years, He engaged in an act of segregation, and when He brought them up out of Egypt and gave them their own land, He engaged in an act of segregation. We speak of the miracle of the preservation of the Jews as a separate people over all these years. It was nothing more or less than an act in segregation. I’m sure the Lord had His hand in it because the Jews still have a great mission to perform. In placing a curse on Laman and Lemuel, He engaged in segregation. When He placed the mark upon Cain, He engaged in segregation. When he told Enoch not to preach the gospel to the descendants of Cain who were black, the Lord engaged in segregation. When He cursed the descendants of Cain as to the Priesthood, He engaged in segregation. When He forbade intermarriages as He does in Deuteronomy, Chapter 7, He established segregation.”

    “Who placed the Negroes originally in darkest Africa? Was it some man, or was it God? And when He placed them there, He segregated them.”

    “The Lord segregated the people both as to blood and place of residence, at least in the bases of the Lamanites and the Negroes we have the definite word of the Lord himself that He placed a dark skin upon then: as a curse — as a sign to all others. He forbade inter-marriage with them under threat of extension of the curse (2 Nephi 5:21) And He certainly segregated the descendants of Cain when He cursed the Negro as to the Priesthood, and drew an absolute line. You may even say He dropped an iron curtain there. The Negro was cursed as to the Priesthood, and therefore, was cursed as to the blessings of the Priesthood. Certainly God made a segregation there.”

    “Think of the Negro, cursed as to the Priesthood. Are we prejudiced, against him? Unjustly, sometimes we’re accused of having such a prejudice. But what does the mercy of God have for him? This Negro, who in the pre-existence life lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in the lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa – if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the Celestial Kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get a Celestial resurrection. He will get a place in the celestial glory. He will not go then even with the honorable men of the earth to the Terrestrial glory, nor with the ones spoken of as being without law.”

    “Well, what about the removal of the curse? We know what the Lord has said in the Book of Mormon in regard to the Lamanites – they shall become a white and delightsome people. I know of no scripture having to do with the removal of the curse from the Negro.”

    “Now what is our policy in regard to intermarriage? As to the Negro, of course, there is only one possible answer. We must not intermarry with the Negro.”

    “If there is one drop of Negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isn’t any argument, therefore, as to inter marriage with the Negro, is there? There are 50 million Negroes in the United States. If they were to achieve complete absorption with the white race, think what that would do. With 50 million Negroes inter-married with us, where would the priesthood be? who could hold it, in all America? Think what that would do to the work of the Church!”

    “I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world, but let them enjoy these things among themselves. I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation? It reminds me of the scripture on marriage, “what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Only here we have the reverse of he thing–what God hath separated, let not man bring together again.”

     

    References

    References
    1 Apostle Mark E. Petersen address given at The Convention of Teachers of Religion On The College Level, Provo, Utah August 27, 1954. Race Problems As They Affect The Church – https://archive.org/details/RaceProblemsAsTheyAffectTheChurchMarkEPetersen