X
BUSINESS, LABOR, POLITICS
1.
Active participation of the Latter-day Saints church in business affairs has been a thing difficult for many people to understand. It is a perfectly natural outgrowth of Mormon culture, and when the basic ideals of Mormonism are grasped, it seems as normal as breathing.
The churhc has never failed to furnish its own accumulated capital for enterprises that would provide more employment for the faithful and, if possible, return an honest dollar or two in profit to the church treasury. Likewise, it has served as a central rallying agency to aid its members to organize and conduct business institutions in such a manner as to better aid themselves.
Many of the higher officials of the church have risen to their present eminence via a route on which they found themselvs handling business affairs of the church.
Zion's Cooperative Mercantile Institution owned by the church, was the first modern department store in the world. It was flourishing in Salt Lake City long before the merchant princes of Chicago and New York had gotten around to establishing their emporiums. Today the church owns outright a number of thriving modern enterprises and has its funds invested in stocks of others, as well. A big life insurance company, two of Salt Lake City's banks, the Hotel Utah, several office buildings, a daily newspaper, a powerful radio station, a book publishing firm - such are the typical church investments. The employees of all these institutions are mostly Mormons, as the principle reason for the church's engaging in business is to provide jobs and outlets for the talents of its members.
Generally speaking, income from investments goes toward payment of what salaries the church officials get, leaving the accumulation of tithes for aid to the poor and for the direct advancement of the church itself.
Higher officials of the Mormon church are members of the boards of directors of several corporations of national scope, including the Union Pacific railroad.
Development of the sugar beet industry in the mountain states is a typical example of why and how the Mormon church engages in business. A review of its course, perhaps, can serve well to illustrate the motives, methods and results of the church's participation in business. Fred G. Taylor has written an absorbing account of how the Mormons went about building a new industry and a new culture on the basis of income from it. This book is entitled "A Saga of Sugar." I would recommend reading it.
The churhc has never failed to furnish its own accumulated capital for enterprises that would provide more employment for the faithful and, if possible, return an honest dollar or two in profit to the church treasury. Likewise, it has served as a central rallying agency to aid its members to organize and conduct business institutions in such a manner as to better aid themselves.
Many of the higher officials of the church have risen to their present eminence via a route on which they found themselvs handling business affairs of the church.
Zion's Cooperative Mercantile Institution owned by the church, was the first modern department store in the world. It was flourishing in Salt Lake City long before the merchant princes of Chicago and New York had gotten around to establishing their emporiums. Today the church owns outright a number of thriving modern enterprises and has its funds invested in stocks of others, as well. A big life insurance company, two of Salt Lake City's banks, the Hotel Utah, several office buildings, a daily newspaper, a powerful radio station, a book publishing firm - such are the typical church investments. The employees of all these institutions are mostly Mormons, as the principle reason for the church's engaging in business is to provide jobs and outlets for the talents of its members.
Generally speaking, income from investments goes toward payment of what salaries the church officials get, leaving the accumulation of tithes for aid to the poor and for the direct advancement of the church itself.
Higher officials of the Mormon church are members of the boards of directors of several corporations of national scope, including the Union Pacific railroad.
Development of the sugar beet industry in the mountain states is a typical example of why and how the Mormon church engages in business. A review of its course, perhaps, can serve well to illustrate the motives, methods and results of the church's participation in business. Fred G. Taylor has written an absorbing account of how the Mormons went about building a new industry and a new culture on the basis of income from it. This book is entitled "A Saga of Sugar." I would recommend reading it.
2.
Soon after the Mormons had become settled in the Salt Lake valley, Brigham Young sent missionaries to other parts of the world to seek out industries that could be adapted to needs and resources of the new community, so as to assist it in becoming self-sustaining as soon as possible.
John Taylor, then one of the twelve apostles who later was to become third president of the church, was one of these. He went to France to make a study of the sugar beet refining processes that had been developed there as a result of the Napoleonic wars.
Typically, Taylor combined preaching and converting with business. He went overseas penniless, but before he returned, he had organized a company and secured about $60,000 in cash to finance a sugar beet factory in Deseret. The name of the firm was the Deseret Manufacturing company. Taylor formed it in England. Those who put up the money were new converts to the faith. Three kicked in $5,000 each, and another came along to the tune of $45,000. Yes, John Taylor was an eloquent preacher of Mormonism, and well worthy of succeeding Brigham Young as president of the church!
Machinery, built in Liverpool to specifications obtained from factories on the European continent, was loaded into a ship and started on the long journey to Salt Lake City.
Taylor's pilgrims and crated factory machinery landed at New Orleans. They went up the Mississippi and Missouri rivers by boat to Fort Leavenworth, where they would have to begin the arduous cross-country trek.
Outfitting an expedition to convoy such a great amount of stuff across the plains was like organizing an army. Taylor made skilful [sic] use of the leadership abilities of his converts. One, a former shipbuilder, was set to building wagosn and another to scouring the countryside to buy oxen that would be motive power for the trip. After months of preparation, it was found that the wagons were too light for transporting the heavy machinery, and broke down. It was necessary to buy more wagons. Because the funds of the company now were exhausted, Taylor had to purchase these on credit.
The caravan set out in midsummer, 1852 from Fort Leavenworth. Five months later, battered, bruised, starving, the outfit arrived in Salt Lake City.
The company set up its machinery for a trial run, which was a flop. Creditors were getting rough, so it was decided to sell out to settle with them.
That is where the church stepped in. It has been in the sugar business, somehow or other, ever since then. The church took over the machinery of the defunct company, and also its obligations. Although they were freed from their indebtedness, those who had organized the firm and brought the machinery half way around the world were left penniless by the venture. They settled down in Zion, howver, and most of them later became prominent in Utah history.
At much expense, the church established a sugar mill at Sugar House, near Salt Lake City (and now a suburban area of the metropolis). It was not a success, and the church finally had to abandon the idea, using the machinery for other purposes to which some of it was adaptable.
Several leaders in the community, however, kept plugging at the idea of producing sugar in Deseret, spending many thousands of dollars in promoting and experimenting with sorghum cane factories.
Against the advice of all his conferees in the church, President Wilford Woodruff again forcibly injected the church into the beet sugar business in 1890. Experimental work in other parts of the country had by that time demonstrated the feasibility of sugar beet production, and although a depression of great magnitude was hitting the country, President Woodruff determined to go ahead with the building of a factory at Lehi, Utah, in order to make the sugar that was so badly needed in the mountain states, and to provide employment for many more people there. Sugar often had sold at $2.00 per pound in Utah, and there was little of it, as well as money with which to buy it.
The church itself bought a huge hunk of stock in the firm, and pledged its credit for the raising of much more money. Heber J. Grant, who was then a young man, was active under the direction of President Woodruff in raising finances for the enterprise. Despite all baleful predictions, the plant became a success, and President Woodruff lived to see his dream realized - there was plenty of good sugar in Zion.
That was the beginning of what today is the Utah-Idaho Sugar company. Some of the general authorities always have been officials or directors of the sugar firm, which is understandable, considering the holdings that the church has in the business. The church president usually has also been president of the sugar company. At the present time, J. Reuben Clark, a member of the first presidency, and Albert E. Bowen, one of the council of twelve apostles, are members of the company's executive committee, while George Albert Smith, head of the church, is president of the sugar corporation.
The company now operates eleven sugar factories at Gunnison, Spanish Fork, West Jordan, and Garland in Utah; Blackfoot, Shelley, Idaho Falls, Sugar City, In [sic] Idaho; Toppenish, Wash.; Chinook, Mont., and Belle Fourche, South Dakota. Factories are valued at about $9,768,000. Since it began operation, the company has distributed more than $166,000,000 to farmers who have produced sugar beets. Its total earnings for a fifty-three year period ended in 1943 were given at $30,400,000. Investment of stockholders stood at an average annual level of $13,000,000 for the same period. The percent of income that has been paid in dividends on investments has averaged 3.18 annually. Total assets of the firm, given in early 1943, were $28,590,888.99.
By placing its faith in sugar beets, as well as God, the church performed an invaluable service to the west and to the nation. The beet crop was the source of cash income so badly needed for trade with the rest of the world. The economy of the mountain states has been stabilized by it, and it has opened many new sources of revenue, such as feeding of livestock, transportation, and candy manufacture.
It is estimated that each acre of sugar beets grown produces about $35 in revenue to the railroads of the United States in hauling beets to the factory, hauling beet pulp to farmers, industrial molasses to its destination, and sugar to markets.
The beet crop was the answer to the scientific agriculturalist's dream. It was the cultivated row crop that most perfectly fitted into crop rotation schemes necessary in the mountain states, where corn, cotton, tobacco and other cash tilled crops could not thrive.
Phenomenal growth of the lamb-feeding and sheep industries as a parallel to development of beet-sugar manufacture has been an excellent result, since beet pulp and molasses furnish great quantities of cheap feeds for winter feeding-out of stock that has ranged all summer.
In pioneering the making of sugar from beets, and in bolstering the industry in its blackest moments, the church has met all the requirements of investing its money where it will do the most good for its members and for its community.
The entire economy built around the sugar beet - the schools, churches, good roads, libraries, thriving communities all has been threatened many times by political action in tampering with tariffs and prices to the detriment of the beet-grower. The late Senator Reed Smoot spent much of his lifetime in Washington fighting the battles of his farmer, feeder, and factory friends in the beet country.
John Taylor, then one of the twelve apostles who later was to become third president of the church, was one of these. He went to France to make a study of the sugar beet refining processes that had been developed there as a result of the Napoleonic wars.
Typically, Taylor combined preaching and converting with business. He went overseas penniless, but before he returned, he had organized a company and secured about $60,000 in cash to finance a sugar beet factory in Deseret. The name of the firm was the Deseret Manufacturing company. Taylor formed it in England. Those who put up the money were new converts to the faith. Three kicked in $5,000 each, and another came along to the tune of $45,000. Yes, John Taylor was an eloquent preacher of Mormonism, and well worthy of succeeding Brigham Young as president of the church!
Machinery, built in Liverpool to specifications obtained from factories on the European continent, was loaded into a ship and started on the long journey to Salt Lake City.
Taylor's pilgrims and crated factory machinery landed at New Orleans. They went up the Mississippi and Missouri rivers by boat to Fort Leavenworth, where they would have to begin the arduous cross-country trek.
Outfitting an expedition to convoy such a great amount of stuff across the plains was like organizing an army. Taylor made skilful [sic] use of the leadership abilities of his converts. One, a former shipbuilder, was set to building wagosn and another to scouring the countryside to buy oxen that would be motive power for the trip. After months of preparation, it was found that the wagons were too light for transporting the heavy machinery, and broke down. It was necessary to buy more wagons. Because the funds of the company now were exhausted, Taylor had to purchase these on credit.
The caravan set out in midsummer, 1852 from Fort Leavenworth. Five months later, battered, bruised, starving, the outfit arrived in Salt Lake City.
The company set up its machinery for a trial run, which was a flop. Creditors were getting rough, so it was decided to sell out to settle with them.
That is where the church stepped in. It has been in the sugar business, somehow or other, ever since then. The church took over the machinery of the defunct company, and also its obligations. Although they were freed from their indebtedness, those who had organized the firm and brought the machinery half way around the world were left penniless by the venture. They settled down in Zion, howver, and most of them later became prominent in Utah history.
At much expense, the church established a sugar mill at Sugar House, near Salt Lake City (and now a suburban area of the metropolis). It was not a success, and the church finally had to abandon the idea, using the machinery for other purposes to which some of it was adaptable.
Several leaders in the community, however, kept plugging at the idea of producing sugar in Deseret, spending many thousands of dollars in promoting and experimenting with sorghum cane factories.
Against the advice of all his conferees in the church, President Wilford Woodruff again forcibly injected the church into the beet sugar business in 1890. Experimental work in other parts of the country had by that time demonstrated the feasibility of sugar beet production, and although a depression of great magnitude was hitting the country, President Woodruff determined to go ahead with the building of a factory at Lehi, Utah, in order to make the sugar that was so badly needed in the mountain states, and to provide employment for many more people there. Sugar often had sold at $2.00 per pound in Utah, and there was little of it, as well as money with which to buy it.
The church itself bought a huge hunk of stock in the firm, and pledged its credit for the raising of much more money. Heber J. Grant, who was then a young man, was active under the direction of President Woodruff in raising finances for the enterprise. Despite all baleful predictions, the plant became a success, and President Woodruff lived to see his dream realized - there was plenty of good sugar in Zion.
That was the beginning of what today is the Utah-Idaho Sugar company. Some of the general authorities always have been officials or directors of the sugar firm, which is understandable, considering the holdings that the church has in the business. The church president usually has also been president of the sugar company. At the present time, J. Reuben Clark, a member of the first presidency, and Albert E. Bowen, one of the council of twelve apostles, are members of the company's executive committee, while George Albert Smith, head of the church, is president of the sugar corporation.
The company now operates eleven sugar factories at Gunnison, Spanish Fork, West Jordan, and Garland in Utah; Blackfoot, Shelley, Idaho Falls, Sugar City, In [sic] Idaho; Toppenish, Wash.; Chinook, Mont., and Belle Fourche, South Dakota. Factories are valued at about $9,768,000. Since it began operation, the company has distributed more than $166,000,000 to farmers who have produced sugar beets. Its total earnings for a fifty-three year period ended in 1943 were given at $30,400,000. Investment of stockholders stood at an average annual level of $13,000,000 for the same period. The percent of income that has been paid in dividends on investments has averaged 3.18 annually. Total assets of the firm, given in early 1943, were $28,590,888.99.
By placing its faith in sugar beets, as well as God, the church performed an invaluable service to the west and to the nation. The beet crop was the source of cash income so badly needed for trade with the rest of the world. The economy of the mountain states has been stabilized by it, and it has opened many new sources of revenue, such as feeding of livestock, transportation, and candy manufacture.
It is estimated that each acre of sugar beets grown produces about $35 in revenue to the railroads of the United States in hauling beets to the factory, hauling beet pulp to farmers, industrial molasses to its destination, and sugar to markets.
The beet crop was the answer to the scientific agriculturalist's dream. It was the cultivated row crop that most perfectly fitted into crop rotation schemes necessary in the mountain states, where corn, cotton, tobacco and other cash tilled crops could not thrive.
Phenomenal growth of the lamb-feeding and sheep industries as a parallel to development of beet-sugar manufacture has been an excellent result, since beet pulp and molasses furnish great quantities of cheap feeds for winter feeding-out of stock that has ranged all summer.
In pioneering the making of sugar from beets, and in bolstering the industry in its blackest moments, the church has met all the requirements of investing its money where it will do the most good for its members and for its community.
The entire economy built around the sugar beet - the schools, churches, good roads, libraries, thriving communities all has been threatened many times by political action in tampering with tariffs and prices to the detriment of the beet-grower. The late Senator Reed Smoot spent much of his lifetime in Washington fighting the battles of his farmer, feeder, and factory friends in the beet country.
* * * * *
The view of the church in the matter of engaging in business has been publicly stated by J. Reuben Clark, counselor to the president of the church. It follows:
"Not always has the purpose of participating by the Church in financial and industrial operations been understood. Sometimes a criticism has come that the Church was seeking to dominate and control the financial or industrial operations of certain areas, particularly in the State of Utah. The activities of the Church in these matters have never been motivated by such a purpose. The investments of the Church, and they have been relatively small, have been made with two purposes in mind.
"The first was that of helpfulness to the community or communities where the institutions were located. The thought was to assist in building up the community that more of comfort and prosperity, and resultantly, more of culture and spirituality might come to members of the area so that all the people might be profited, but more particularly, of course, the members of the Church.
"The other purpose was, and this grows out of the first purpose, that there might be more of stability in the financial and industrial operations of the communities where the investments of the Church were located and in the adjacent areas.
"The Church has always recognized that its mission was primarily to spread the restored Gospel of Christ and to bring to those who embraced the Gospel as much of spiritual development as possible, accompanied by such material comfort as it was possible to secure. Unless an investment was believed to serve these ends, it was not made.
"In its investments the Church has never been motivaed by the mere desire of making money. It has, of course, not wished to make investments which were not profitable, though on occasions it has furnished funds to assist enterprises which never could be profitable from a money point of view but which did lend assistance to the welfare of those who resided in the affected communities, again primarily to members of the Church.
"Whenever any Church investment ceases in the opinion of the leaders of the Church to serve these purposes, the Church will retire from such an investment because it has abundant opportunity to place its funds in enerprises where those purposes will be served."
The Church is financed by payment of tithes.
"Not always has the purpose of participating by the Church in financial and industrial operations been understood. Sometimes a criticism has come that the Church was seeking to dominate and control the financial or industrial operations of certain areas, particularly in the State of Utah. The activities of the Church in these matters have never been motivated by such a purpose. The investments of the Church, and they have been relatively small, have been made with two purposes in mind.
"The first was that of helpfulness to the community or communities where the institutions were located. The thought was to assist in building up the community that more of comfort and prosperity, and resultantly, more of culture and spirituality might come to members of the area so that all the people might be profited, but more particularly, of course, the members of the Church.
"The other purpose was, and this grows out of the first purpose, that there might be more of stability in the financial and industrial operations of the communities where the investments of the Church were located and in the adjacent areas.
"The Church has always recognized that its mission was primarily to spread the restored Gospel of Christ and to bring to those who embraced the Gospel as much of spiritual development as possible, accompanied by such material comfort as it was possible to secure. Unless an investment was believed to serve these ends, it was not made.
"In its investments the Church has never been motivaed by the mere desire of making money. It has, of course, not wished to make investments which were not profitable, though on occasions it has furnished funds to assist enterprises which never could be profitable from a money point of view but which did lend assistance to the welfare of those who resided in the affected communities, again primarily to members of the Church.
"Whenever any Church investment ceases in the opinion of the leaders of the Church to serve these purposes, the Church will retire from such an investment because it has abundant opportunity to place its funds in enerprises where those purposes will be served."
The Church is financed by payment of tithes.
3.
Tithing with the Mormons, however, is something much more than a measure of raising revenue.
They feel that some especial value is to be gained by their payment of their money for the support of the church in that particular manner.
The Mormons received the law of tithing through a revelation to Joseph Smith in 1838. The wording of the statute, as recorded in the book of Doctrine and Covenants, makes it clear that each member of the church is to pay one-tenth of his increase annually to the church, and that this shall be a law unto them forever.
Non-payment of tithes creates the inability to participate in benefits of the church on earth, or in attainment of the final goal of perfection which is the ultimate aim of Mormonism.
Successful operation of the welfare plan has brought an increased sense of spirituality throughout the church, and with this has come a strengthened interest in payment of tithes and other church obligations.
There are two purposes in tithing, of almost equal importance. One, of course, is the raising of funds with which to succor the poor and maintain the other functions of the church. The other purpose is the spiritual effect that is gained by the donor.
It is one of the fundamental principles of Mormonism that selfishness, avarice, viciousness and covetousness shall be purged from the characters of all men. Tithing is looked upon as the means which God has given them for attaining this goal. They hold that no man can pay his tithes regularly, with the feeling of steady contribution to the welfare of the entire group, and still be wholly avaricious, selfish or covetous.
Tithing is a means of continuous participation in the activities of the church, and in the work of God as carried forward by the priesthood. The church does not recognize the possibility that a person, by one lump sum purchase or by donation, may discharge all his obligation to God or to the church at one time. It is the steady purifying, improving benefit from regular donation of tithes that is sought as much as the money.
Tithing is not a new method of supporting churches. It was current in the day of Abraham. Other groups and sects today attempt collection of tithes, but none has achieved the success of the Mormons. Mormons teach, and their experience bears them out, that to give a tithe is to receive a blessing which is actual, real, physical. No Mormon who tithes regularly is ever poor. About 99 percent of them are high above average in wealth, and many of them can even be classed as quite wealthy. Their belief in the returns from tithing is literal. No dollars and cents value can be placed upon the worth to character achieved by this process. Some idea of its great extent and strength can be obtained by an observation of the works of these people.
Tithing has been interpreted by most officers of the church to mean the giving of one-tenth of the abilities of each individual to the Lord, and not merely one-tenth of whatever money might come into his hands. This has made it possible for persons with little money to make relatively large contributions to the church in the form of labor, services, talent, skills and missionary effort.
In fact, throughout Mormondom, money is forced to occupy its place as a medium of exchange, and not that of an end in itself in any undertaking.
In the April conference reports of 1900, the official view of the church was again stated. It served to explain rather fully the basis of belief in tithing.
"The law of tithing is a test by which the people as individuals shall be proved. Any man who fails to observe this principle shall be known as a man who is indifferent to the welfare of Zion, who neglects his duty as a member of the Church, and who does nothing toward the accomplishment of the temporal advancement of the Kingdom of God. He contributes nothing toward spreading the gospel to the nations of the earth, and he neglects to do that which would entitle him to receive the blessings and ordinances of the gospel."
If a Mormon falls into distress and has been a faithful tither, no matter how big or how little his means or income have been, he has an actual, contractual claim with the church for his succor. If one in distress has not been faithful in this and other matters of duty, he has no claim. Any assistance rendered him would be on the basis of charity at the discretion of his bishop.
Mormons hold that if all give ten percent of their gain annually, a residue will be created that will care for all, through good times and bad, and also provide for the advancement of the Lord's work, the erection of temples and other buildings, and the evolving needs of a growing civilization. Their experiences have shown that this is sound economics and excellent social insurance.
From the spiritual side of their contentions, they have ample proof, also. In 1899 the church was in a desperate financial situation. Tithing, spiritual strength and cohesiveness had fallen to a low ebb. The church had been disincorporated and placed in the hands of an unfriendly receiver. It was at this time that President Lorenzo Snow, said to be one of the most spiritual of all officers in the history of the church, pronounced that he had received a revelation that the answer to their difficulties was faithful observance of the law of tithing. This he announced at a large gathering of the Saints at Nephi, and it was promulgated throughout the church. The effect was immediate and startling. There was a tremendous rebirth of strength. The church rapidly recovered and has never fallen to so low an ebb again.
Throughout all Mormon holy books, and L.D.S. interpretations of the Bible, there is found the implicit belief that first call on all income from tithing is for the succor of the poor and suffering. Everything else is secondary. The treasury reserves of the church today stand ready and available for this purpose, after other means, such as the cooperative efforts of the welfare plan, and fast offerings, have been exhausted.
Money realized from tithes is not used for any purpose that can be attained by means of donated labor or services, or created from the use fo them. This gives rise to the spectacle of some of the most brilliant men in America in the act of working for a comparative pittance in advancing the cause of the church when, in most cases, they have given up salaried or business positions paying three to thirty times as much, to accept their calls to sacred duty.
They feel that some especial value is to be gained by their payment of their money for the support of the church in that particular manner.
The Mormons received the law of tithing through a revelation to Joseph Smith in 1838. The wording of the statute, as recorded in the book of Doctrine and Covenants, makes it clear that each member of the church is to pay one-tenth of his increase annually to the church, and that this shall be a law unto them forever.
Non-payment of tithes creates the inability to participate in benefits of the church on earth, or in attainment of the final goal of perfection which is the ultimate aim of Mormonism.
Successful operation of the welfare plan has brought an increased sense of spirituality throughout the church, and with this has come a strengthened interest in payment of tithes and other church obligations.
There are two purposes in tithing, of almost equal importance. One, of course, is the raising of funds with which to succor the poor and maintain the other functions of the church. The other purpose is the spiritual effect that is gained by the donor.
It is one of the fundamental principles of Mormonism that selfishness, avarice, viciousness and covetousness shall be purged from the characters of all men. Tithing is looked upon as the means which God has given them for attaining this goal. They hold that no man can pay his tithes regularly, with the feeling of steady contribution to the welfare of the entire group, and still be wholly avaricious, selfish or covetous.
Tithing is a means of continuous participation in the activities of the church, and in the work of God as carried forward by the priesthood. The church does not recognize the possibility that a person, by one lump sum purchase or by donation, may discharge all his obligation to God or to the church at one time. It is the steady purifying, improving benefit from regular donation of tithes that is sought as much as the money.
Tithing is not a new method of supporting churches. It was current in the day of Abraham. Other groups and sects today attempt collection of tithes, but none has achieved the success of the Mormons. Mormons teach, and their experience bears them out, that to give a tithe is to receive a blessing which is actual, real, physical. No Mormon who tithes regularly is ever poor. About 99 percent of them are high above average in wealth, and many of them can even be classed as quite wealthy. Their belief in the returns from tithing is literal. No dollars and cents value can be placed upon the worth to character achieved by this process. Some idea of its great extent and strength can be obtained by an observation of the works of these people.
Tithing has been interpreted by most officers of the church to mean the giving of one-tenth of the abilities of each individual to the Lord, and not merely one-tenth of whatever money might come into his hands. This has made it possible for persons with little money to make relatively large contributions to the church in the form of labor, services, talent, skills and missionary effort.
In fact, throughout Mormondom, money is forced to occupy its place as a medium of exchange, and not that of an end in itself in any undertaking.
In the April conference reports of 1900, the official view of the church was again stated. It served to explain rather fully the basis of belief in tithing.
"The law of tithing is a test by which the people as individuals shall be proved. Any man who fails to observe this principle shall be known as a man who is indifferent to the welfare of Zion, who neglects his duty as a member of the Church, and who does nothing toward the accomplishment of the temporal advancement of the Kingdom of God. He contributes nothing toward spreading the gospel to the nations of the earth, and he neglects to do that which would entitle him to receive the blessings and ordinances of the gospel."
If a Mormon falls into distress and has been a faithful tither, no matter how big or how little his means or income have been, he has an actual, contractual claim with the church for his succor. If one in distress has not been faithful in this and other matters of duty, he has no claim. Any assistance rendered him would be on the basis of charity at the discretion of his bishop.
Mormons hold that if all give ten percent of their gain annually, a residue will be created that will care for all, through good times and bad, and also provide for the advancement of the Lord's work, the erection of temples and other buildings, and the evolving needs of a growing civilization. Their experiences have shown that this is sound economics and excellent social insurance.
From the spiritual side of their contentions, they have ample proof, also. In 1899 the church was in a desperate financial situation. Tithing, spiritual strength and cohesiveness had fallen to a low ebb. The church had been disincorporated and placed in the hands of an unfriendly receiver. It was at this time that President Lorenzo Snow, said to be one of the most spiritual of all officers in the history of the church, pronounced that he had received a revelation that the answer to their difficulties was faithful observance of the law of tithing. This he announced at a large gathering of the Saints at Nephi, and it was promulgated throughout the church. The effect was immediate and startling. There was a tremendous rebirth of strength. The church rapidly recovered and has never fallen to so low an ebb again.
Throughout all Mormon holy books, and L.D.S. interpretations of the Bible, there is found the implicit belief that first call on all income from tithing is for the succor of the poor and suffering. Everything else is secondary. The treasury reserves of the church today stand ready and available for this purpose, after other means, such as the cooperative efforts of the welfare plan, and fast offerings, have been exhausted.
Money realized from tithes is not used for any purpose that can be attained by means of donated labor or services, or created from the use fo them. This gives rise to the spectacle of some of the most brilliant men in America in the act of working for a comparative pittance in advancing the cause of the church when, in most cases, they have given up salaried or business positions paying three to thirty times as much, to accept their calls to sacred duty.
4.
An organization as powerful as the Latter-day Saints church, and any employer of so many people in such a wide variety of enterprises, quite naturally, is called upon to abide by some definite policy in regard to organized labor.
The Mormon church at many points expresses itself quite forcefully in support of the right of any human being to begin, maintain and profit from an honest business at any location he desires and where circumstances justify his doing so. And the church will vigorously defend this right of the individual - especially if he is one of the Saints - against any coercive power that threatens it, whether that power be organized labor or business operators combined in the restraint of trade.
It is evident that the Mormon church does not oppose organized labor, as such. It is equally clear, however, that the fundamental belief of Mormons in orderly progress makes them look askance at any group which seeks to attain its ends by means of disruptive social action.
The industries, businesses and other commercial establishments owned by the church are not unionized. In fact, every Mormon who works in a church-owned enterprise, in a large measure, can be said to be self-employed. As a member of the church he is, in the final analysis, a stockholder of the business, regardless of how many boards of directors, spiritual leaders or trustees might stand between him and the actual management.
This basic feeling of part-ownership in the tangible economic institutions of his society makes the Mormon look upon labor unions, as far as he is concerned, as organizations that are entirely unnecessary within his own church-dominated economy.
But many Mormons also live outside the influence of that economy.
The most recent authoritative statement of Mormon policy in regard to organized labor was contained in a speech made before the October, 1946 general conference of the church in Salt Lake City tabernacle by one of the apostles, Albert E. Bowen. Elder Bowen is known as a very able attorney. He prefaced his statement of labor views with a review of the evolution of our legal processes from earlier, more incomplete stages, including the barbarous practice of a wronged person or his kinsmen seeking revenge in blood without benefit of a stabilized system of law in which the state could enforce justice and maintain public order.
I present the remainder of his speech verbatim, as the most accurate and truthful means at my disposal for conveying the accepted Mormon attitude toward labor. It follows.
The Mormon church at many points expresses itself quite forcefully in support of the right of any human being to begin, maintain and profit from an honest business at any location he desires and where circumstances justify his doing so. And the church will vigorously defend this right of the individual - especially if he is one of the Saints - against any coercive power that threatens it, whether that power be organized labor or business operators combined in the restraint of trade.
It is evident that the Mormon church does not oppose organized labor, as such. It is equally clear, however, that the fundamental belief of Mormons in orderly progress makes them look askance at any group which seeks to attain its ends by means of disruptive social action.
The industries, businesses and other commercial establishments owned by the church are not unionized. In fact, every Mormon who works in a church-owned enterprise, in a large measure, can be said to be self-employed. As a member of the church he is, in the final analysis, a stockholder of the business, regardless of how many boards of directors, spiritual leaders or trustees might stand between him and the actual management.
This basic feeling of part-ownership in the tangible economic institutions of his society makes the Mormon look upon labor unions, as far as he is concerned, as organizations that are entirely unnecessary within his own church-dominated economy.
But many Mormons also live outside the influence of that economy.
The most recent authoritative statement of Mormon policy in regard to organized labor was contained in a speech made before the October, 1946 general conference of the church in Salt Lake City tabernacle by one of the apostles, Albert E. Bowen. Elder Bowen is known as a very able attorney. He prefaced his statement of labor views with a review of the evolution of our legal processes from earlier, more incomplete stages, including the barbarous practice of a wronged person or his kinsmen seeking revenge in blood without benefit of a stabilized system of law in which the state could enforce justice and maintain public order.
I present the remainder of his speech verbatim, as the most accurate and truthful means at my disposal for conveying the accepted Mormon attitude toward labor. It follows.
* * * * *
"I have presumed to present this sketchy background for the express purpose of drawing a parallel between that and the barbaric methods we now employ in our handling of industrial disputes. I have no hesitancy in saying that the strike is a totally uncivilized way of dealing with them. Strikes arise out of disagreements. Sometimes the dispute is between the employer and his employees; sometimes the employer has nothing to do with it, but it is between two different organized groups of employees, each claiming the right to negotiate with the employer. Sometimes workers are compelled to go on strike when they have no grievance at all and would prefer to go on working, but are compelled to walk off the job by the orders of the organization to which they belong. Sometimes they are voluntary members of such organizations, but often they are forced into membership against their will by violence or threats of violence. Often they are coerced into membership because otherwise they will not be permitted to work at all or to earn their daily bread.
"Employees claim that they have long suffered injustices and are now balancing accounts, while employers assert that the demands of the workers are unreasonable and impossible of granting. Obviously, neither party to the dispute is in a condition to make an unbiased appraisal of the merits of these conflicting positions.
"I am not here trying to fix the blame or to say who is in the right or to what extent. But I do say that such a siuation breeds lawlessness, eventuates in anarchy, and will destroy any government or society that does not find an effective way of dealing with it.
"There is no more excuse for permitting those with an industrial complaint, real or fancied, sincerely entertained or shammed, to cover up a sinister purpose, to take into their own hands the redressing of their own grievances, than there is for permitting any private individual to take upon himself the satisfaction of his own wrongs of whatsoever nature without regard to the good order and welfare of the whole society.
"There is no more justification for permitting an organized group to stop a farmer carrying his own produce, the fruits of his own toil, to market and tip over and break his truck and destroy his foodstuffs unless he will take on and pay another driver whom he neither wants nor needs, than there is for permitting a man whose son has been killed, perhaps in a brawl, to go out and without investigation kill the perpetrator of the death.
"There is no greater right in an organized body to obstruct public streets or to throw picket lines in front of entrances to places of work and hold others out by violence, intimidation, threat, and injury than there is in any person whose property has been stolen to retrieve it by force of arms, killing or maiming if need be in the process.
"Neither does it help the cause any to say, even though true, that workers have in the past suffered gross wrongs. An evil is never cured by transferring the power to perpetrate it from one set of hands over into the hands of those on the opposite side. Wrong is just as sinister and just as fatal to orderly living when perpetrated by one side to a controversy as if perpetrated by the other. Former wrongs are not righted by the commission of new ones by the other party.
"Our method of handling these industrial disputes belongs to the age of barbarism and is a national disgrace. So long as we tolerate law defiance, disorder, private usurpation of the right to redress wrongs, we have no right to be castigating other nations for their delinquencies or to assume the role of instructor to them. If we cannot maintain domestic order, how may we hope to achieve international order, or to have persuasive influence in establishing it?
"The crying need of this age is for men of stature and character in the seats of power - men who have the intelligence to discern the right and the courage to pursue it without regard to personal consequences to themselves or their ambitions, men who will not succumb to the lure of expediency, but who dare to stand on principle though they stand alone. There are too many favor-currying little men sloshing around in positions requiring big men of unwavering integrity to fill them.
"Why should great cities be thrown into darkness and their citizens exposed to the marauder because two contending parties choose to be belligerent? Why should water shipping and land transportation be stopped and whole innocent populations be reduced to hunger and cold and privation because two private parties, or perhaps only one of them, sets up its imperious will regardless of the good of the law-abiding public?
"If laws are needed to define the rights, privileges, and obliga- tions of the respective contenders, let such laws be passed, but let them be fair, impartial, and unbiased laws. You will never cure the evil with laws that shackle one of the disputants while leaving the other to roam at large with unrestrained license to do evil. If tribunals be needed to administer and enforce the laws, let them be impartially constituted, not packed with personnel so biased that their decision may with certainty be predicted before the cause is heard. And when a judgment has been rendered by a duly constituted tribunal, let that body not be dissolved and its judgment vacated under pressure and another tribunal set up to render the kind of decision the dissatisfied party wants. That practice only brings the whole system into disrepute and the government itself into contempt.
"The authority of law must be preserved, orderly procedure maintained, the rights of the unoffending but suffering public made secure regardless of the wishes of the contending parties or the pressures they may bring to bear.
"Another reason for the appropriateness of this discussion here is that the whole future of freedom of religion is at stake. There is war between the concept of a free people under a free government and totalitarian government with its inevitable stifling of individual freedom. That warfare involves religion. If the insufferable and inexcusable condition now prevailing is not corrected, then free government will give way to some form of totalitarianism, whether the despotism of one man or of a class or group or even of the state will not much matter. And totalitarianism must always destroy religious liberty. Free government as we have known it, what commonly is spoken of as our democracy, is foundationed in the great spiritual principle of the supreme importance of the individual and the divine derivation of the human soul. This concept finds its highest political exposition in the Declaration of Independence which proclaims in words of fire that men at birth, by the creative's decree that gave them being - from the mere circumstance that they are men - are God-endowed with certain rights which are 'unalienable' and which of right and by force of our basic law are inviolable and which no power on earth, not even the government itself, may properly infringe. Among these inalienable and inviolable rights are the right to life and to liberty. The right of man to liberty - to be free - is thus made coordinate with the right to life itself. The history of human struggle loudly proclaims that life without liberty is intolerable. For a fulness, the two must go together. These conceptions incorporated in the immortal Declaration are the product of more than a century and a half of the teachings of the Christian religion out of which they must draw their nourishment. If this wellspring is suffered to dry up, then individual freedom will wither and die."
"Employees claim that they have long suffered injustices and are now balancing accounts, while employers assert that the demands of the workers are unreasonable and impossible of granting. Obviously, neither party to the dispute is in a condition to make an unbiased appraisal of the merits of these conflicting positions.
"I am not here trying to fix the blame or to say who is in the right or to what extent. But I do say that such a siuation breeds lawlessness, eventuates in anarchy, and will destroy any government or society that does not find an effective way of dealing with it.
"There is no more excuse for permitting those with an industrial complaint, real or fancied, sincerely entertained or shammed, to cover up a sinister purpose, to take into their own hands the redressing of their own grievances, than there is for permitting any private individual to take upon himself the satisfaction of his own wrongs of whatsoever nature without regard to the good order and welfare of the whole society.
"There is no more justification for permitting an organized group to stop a farmer carrying his own produce, the fruits of his own toil, to market and tip over and break his truck and destroy his foodstuffs unless he will take on and pay another driver whom he neither wants nor needs, than there is for permitting a man whose son has been killed, perhaps in a brawl, to go out and without investigation kill the perpetrator of the death.
"There is no greater right in an organized body to obstruct public streets or to throw picket lines in front of entrances to places of work and hold others out by violence, intimidation, threat, and injury than there is in any person whose property has been stolen to retrieve it by force of arms, killing or maiming if need be in the process.
"Neither does it help the cause any to say, even though true, that workers have in the past suffered gross wrongs. An evil is never cured by transferring the power to perpetrate it from one set of hands over into the hands of those on the opposite side. Wrong is just as sinister and just as fatal to orderly living when perpetrated by one side to a controversy as if perpetrated by the other. Former wrongs are not righted by the commission of new ones by the other party.
"Our method of handling these industrial disputes belongs to the age of barbarism and is a national disgrace. So long as we tolerate law defiance, disorder, private usurpation of the right to redress wrongs, we have no right to be castigating other nations for their delinquencies or to assume the role of instructor to them. If we cannot maintain domestic order, how may we hope to achieve international order, or to have persuasive influence in establishing it?
"The crying need of this age is for men of stature and character in the seats of power - men who have the intelligence to discern the right and the courage to pursue it without regard to personal consequences to themselves or their ambitions, men who will not succumb to the lure of expediency, but who dare to stand on principle though they stand alone. There are too many favor-currying little men sloshing around in positions requiring big men of unwavering integrity to fill them.
"Why should great cities be thrown into darkness and their citizens exposed to the marauder because two contending parties choose to be belligerent? Why should water shipping and land transportation be stopped and whole innocent populations be reduced to hunger and cold and privation because two private parties, or perhaps only one of them, sets up its imperious will regardless of the good of the law-abiding public?
"If laws are needed to define the rights, privileges, and obliga- tions of the respective contenders, let such laws be passed, but let them be fair, impartial, and unbiased laws. You will never cure the evil with laws that shackle one of the disputants while leaving the other to roam at large with unrestrained license to do evil. If tribunals be needed to administer and enforce the laws, let them be impartially constituted, not packed with personnel so biased that their decision may with certainty be predicted before the cause is heard. And when a judgment has been rendered by a duly constituted tribunal, let that body not be dissolved and its judgment vacated under pressure and another tribunal set up to render the kind of decision the dissatisfied party wants. That practice only brings the whole system into disrepute and the government itself into contempt.
"The authority of law must be preserved, orderly procedure maintained, the rights of the unoffending but suffering public made secure regardless of the wishes of the contending parties or the pressures they may bring to bear.
"Another reason for the appropriateness of this discussion here is that the whole future of freedom of religion is at stake. There is war between the concept of a free people under a free government and totalitarian government with its inevitable stifling of individual freedom. That warfare involves religion. If the insufferable and inexcusable condition now prevailing is not corrected, then free government will give way to some form of totalitarianism, whether the despotism of one man or of a class or group or even of the state will not much matter. And totalitarianism must always destroy religious liberty. Free government as we have known it, what commonly is spoken of as our democracy, is foundationed in the great spiritual principle of the supreme importance of the individual and the divine derivation of the human soul. This concept finds its highest political exposition in the Declaration of Independence which proclaims in words of fire that men at birth, by the creative's decree that gave them being - from the mere circumstance that they are men - are God-endowed with certain rights which are 'unalienable' and which of right and by force of our basic law are inviolable and which no power on earth, not even the government itself, may properly infringe. Among these inalienable and inviolable rights are the right to life and to liberty. The right of man to liberty - to be free - is thus made coordinate with the right to life itself. The history of human struggle loudly proclaims that life without liberty is intolerable. For a fulness, the two must go together. These conceptions incorporated in the immortal Declaration are the product of more than a century and a half of the teachings of the Christian religion out of which they must draw their nourishment. If this wellspring is suffered to dry up, then individual freedom will wither and die."
5.
Measured by what could normally be expected of so large a body of people who possess a common philosophy, the political achievements of the Mormons have been disappointing.
When he thinks in terms of political ecology, the average American is likely to put his finger upon the map at the point occupied by Salt Lake City and say, "Now, of course, there's the Mormon vote - according to the political distribution of population, we can expect them to carry Utah certainly, have a fifty-fifty chance in Idaho, and a rather strong influence in Montana, Arizona, Nevada eastern Washington and southern California."
But there are several reasons why the commonly recognized basic principles of political ecology do not at the present time apply to Mormons. These reasons are inherent in Mormonism itself and give Mormons a feeling toward politics that differs radically from the usual American mental pattern on this subject.
The philosophy of the Mormons has taken them completely out of the main channel of American political evolution, which largely has grown upon a basic Anglo-Saxon concept of social organization, as modified by the assimilation of a sizeable segment of Roman, or civil law culture. The mores of Mormon culture are neither Anglo-Saxon nor Roman, although they have absorbed some of the values of each. Mormon mores, also possess many of the qualities of the ancient Hebrew law and culture. Mormons themselves do not fully grasp the idea that they are actually living under a political system that has evolved to a higher level than that of any country in which Mormons reside.
This leads to conflicts that have dangerous implications for the peace of mind of individual Mormons today, and for the entire future of the Mormon culture, as well.
The general ineffectiveness of the Mormon organization when it tackles the every-day problems of politics that arise in its contacts with city, state and national governments is no reflection upon the church itself. A giant in Lilliput can be ingloriously defeated by little men who have only a fraction of his power and stature, simply because he cannot effectively focus his resources against them. If a political organization, or any organized society, suffers a continual series of petty setbacks, however, it loses collective confidence in itself, and also begins to lose support from the weaker members around the edges. Prolonged movement in this direction makes possible bigger splits, down the middle.
In its anxiety to maintain smooth relationships with the cities, states and nations in which it is located, the Mormon church has temporarily surrendered many political prerogatives that it must regain and strengthen, if it is ever to become the world-wide force which was envisioned by the prophet Joseph Smith.
Mormonism itself has a better political structure than Mohammedanism, which built a great empire. The Mohammedan empire fell from its height because it was built upon a political conception of conquest and tribute, with a servant caste permanently supporting a ruling caste, and no provision for the orderly advancement from one caste to the other. The Mormon organization already has within itself the fundamental principle that corrects the great mistake made by the Mohammedans. Mormons have no caste system. There are only two kinds of people in the world - Mormons and non-Mormons. The Mormons seek to expand their numbers into a full fellowship that includes everyone, with equal rights, privileges and duties for all. The Mohammedans, on the other hand made their phenomenal rise to power by setting up a certain Semitic blood strain, known generally as the Arabs, as the elect of Allah, chosen to conquer, dominate and heavily tax great bodies of population that had no chance of ever rising to an equality with the class of the elect.
The reader will find, in this connection, that "The Arabs, a Short History," by Philip K. Hitti will be very interesting reading. It sheds light upon a part of history that, unfortunately, is largely neglected in our national educational system.
As most educated people in western civilization know, the Roman Catholic church maintained political domination of the known world for a long time. The Roman church lost that domination because of a weakness in its social and and [sic] political philosophy - it sought to define the limits of human thought, and to forbid intellectual exploration in fields not specifically approved by the church. It sets itself up as the sole mediator between man and God, and between man and knowledge. To say that the Roman church has ever fully conquered this structural weakness would be a mistake of fact, and to say that there is any sound hope of its ever permanently overcoming the fault would be a mistake of judgment.
In their principle of eternal progression through the cultivation of intelligence and the acquisition of knowledge - all knowledge - the Mormons from their beginning avoided the weakness that stopped the growth of the Roman church as a world political power. The Latter-day Saints church has a political potential much greater than the power ever wielded by the Roman church.
Today, we are witnessing the decline of Protestantism. The great political weakness of Protestantism is that it was never able to present a constructive over-all program of philosophy or authoritative plan of life. It essentially was always an anti-movement, born in resentment at spiritual, intellectual, economic and political suppression. Its one unifying force was hatred of great wrongs. It fought to bring men out of slavery. Hatred is not the strongest of the bonds that hold human beings together in common endeavor. It serves well enough for a campaign, or a war, or even a social era, but it cannot hold for centuries. With the abolition of actual physical slavery of men in civilized nations, Protestantism had accomplished its one great program for humanity. The fires of its holy hatred began to cool. Without a complete philosophy, minus a full, progressive way of life, and not blessed with a fully developed organization, Protestantism began to fall to pieces. For the past half century it has been sketchily held together only by the force of outstanding personalities here and there. The more outstanding these personalities have been, the greater has been their tendency to split the movement into sects and segments. Protestantism has never held forth an all-absorbing organization into which the weight of all personalities could be fused for the common good.
By having a well-nigh perfect organization, and by proclaiming a complete way of life, based not upon hatred of specific wrongs, but on love of intelligence and knowledge (synonymous with progress through all eternity) the Mormons also have avoided the political weakness of Protestantism.
However, the Mormons do share a fatal political illness with the ancient Jews. Lest we forget it - the Hebrews formerly were a powerful nation, ruled politically, temporally and spiritually by a patriarchal order that took its guidance (more or less) from God. The Lord's guidance was effective in the reign of righteous rulers; and the prophets groaned at other times. Essentially, the Hebrews were ruled or guided by the priesthood, which received continuing revelations from God, very much as the Mormons of today are ruled. Their history followed an interesting development cycle:
a. Whenever especially brilliant or gifted men rose up in the spirit of the Lord, they established new high marks in cultural advancement;
b. When the great majority of mediocre leaders plodded along from generation to generation without the breadth of vision to lift their people out on an upward course, they followed precedent established by the earlier brilliant leaders, and therefore kept from going backward;
c. When a thoroughly bad leader came along, the accumulation of his excesses forced a revolt and a set of social circumstances in which it was possible for a new righteous leader to rise and re-affirm the approved Jewish way of life, so that the cycle of social and political change could begin all over again.
Viewed from the centuries, it appears that the Jews were never able to solidify their cultural progress into a self-perpetuating political form. Their revolts and upheavals often took them backward, to ideals established by earlier prophets, rather than forward on the total evolutionary value of their cumulative social experience.
This, too, was caused by a structural and political weakness. The precedents of law, administration, revelation were carefully written in a system of politico-religious-historical records, which Gentiles hazily comprehend as the Talmud, or Talmudic law. This system became too cumbersome. Grains of truth of universal application were too deeply imbedded to be found and applied without endless wranglings among scholars and lawyers of comparatively equal rank.
The Mormon church can avoid the same mistake. What it needs is the certain provision that a combination Blackstone, Moses and St. Paul will be commissioned every hundred years or so to completely re-codify the law of the church to include all intervening revelations, principles of judgment, all historical precedents and all organizational progress that have happened in the century since the last previous codification. The work of this man ought not to be a compilation, but an inspired authorship that can sum up in a few hundred words a concise account of all principles that can be used for guidance, and can point the way for future expansion. Unless it makes some such provision in its basic political structure, Mormonism is doomed to the same repetitive cycles that have kept Judaism from being the one and only world power.
When he thinks in terms of political ecology, the average American is likely to put his finger upon the map at the point occupied by Salt Lake City and say, "Now, of course, there's the Mormon vote - according to the political distribution of population, we can expect them to carry Utah certainly, have a fifty-fifty chance in Idaho, and a rather strong influence in Montana, Arizona, Nevada eastern Washington and southern California."
But there are several reasons why the commonly recognized basic principles of political ecology do not at the present time apply to Mormons. These reasons are inherent in Mormonism itself and give Mormons a feeling toward politics that differs radically from the usual American mental pattern on this subject.
The philosophy of the Mormons has taken them completely out of the main channel of American political evolution, which largely has grown upon a basic Anglo-Saxon concept of social organization, as modified by the assimilation of a sizeable segment of Roman, or civil law culture. The mores of Mormon culture are neither Anglo-Saxon nor Roman, although they have absorbed some of the values of each. Mormon mores, also possess many of the qualities of the ancient Hebrew law and culture. Mormons themselves do not fully grasp the idea that they are actually living under a political system that has evolved to a higher level than that of any country in which Mormons reside.
This leads to conflicts that have dangerous implications for the peace of mind of individual Mormons today, and for the entire future of the Mormon culture, as well.
The general ineffectiveness of the Mormon organization when it tackles the every-day problems of politics that arise in its contacts with city, state and national governments is no reflection upon the church itself. A giant in Lilliput can be ingloriously defeated by little men who have only a fraction of his power and stature, simply because he cannot effectively focus his resources against them. If a political organization, or any organized society, suffers a continual series of petty setbacks, however, it loses collective confidence in itself, and also begins to lose support from the weaker members around the edges. Prolonged movement in this direction makes possible bigger splits, down the middle.
In its anxiety to maintain smooth relationships with the cities, states and nations in which it is located, the Mormon church has temporarily surrendered many political prerogatives that it must regain and strengthen, if it is ever to become the world-wide force which was envisioned by the prophet Joseph Smith.
Mormonism itself has a better political structure than Mohammedanism, which built a great empire. The Mohammedan empire fell from its height because it was built upon a political conception of conquest and tribute, with a servant caste permanently supporting a ruling caste, and no provision for the orderly advancement from one caste to the other. The Mormon organization already has within itself the fundamental principle that corrects the great mistake made by the Mohammedans. Mormons have no caste system. There are only two kinds of people in the world - Mormons and non-Mormons. The Mormons seek to expand their numbers into a full fellowship that includes everyone, with equal rights, privileges and duties for all. The Mohammedans, on the other hand made their phenomenal rise to power by setting up a certain Semitic blood strain, known generally as the Arabs, as the elect of Allah, chosen to conquer, dominate and heavily tax great bodies of population that had no chance of ever rising to an equality with the class of the elect.
The reader will find, in this connection, that "The Arabs, a Short History," by Philip K. Hitti will be very interesting reading. It sheds light upon a part of history that, unfortunately, is largely neglected in our national educational system.
As most educated people in western civilization know, the Roman Catholic church maintained political domination of the known world for a long time. The Roman church lost that domination because of a weakness in its social and and [sic] political philosophy - it sought to define the limits of human thought, and to forbid intellectual exploration in fields not specifically approved by the church. It sets itself up as the sole mediator between man and God, and between man and knowledge. To say that the Roman church has ever fully conquered this structural weakness would be a mistake of fact, and to say that there is any sound hope of its ever permanently overcoming the fault would be a mistake of judgment.
In their principle of eternal progression through the cultivation of intelligence and the acquisition of knowledge - all knowledge - the Mormons from their beginning avoided the weakness that stopped the growth of the Roman church as a world political power. The Latter-day Saints church has a political potential much greater than the power ever wielded by the Roman church.
Today, we are witnessing the decline of Protestantism. The great political weakness of Protestantism is that it was never able to present a constructive over-all program of philosophy or authoritative plan of life. It essentially was always an anti-movement, born in resentment at spiritual, intellectual, economic and political suppression. Its one unifying force was hatred of great wrongs. It fought to bring men out of slavery. Hatred is not the strongest of the bonds that hold human beings together in common endeavor. It serves well enough for a campaign, or a war, or even a social era, but it cannot hold for centuries. With the abolition of actual physical slavery of men in civilized nations, Protestantism had accomplished its one great program for humanity. The fires of its holy hatred began to cool. Without a complete philosophy, minus a full, progressive way of life, and not blessed with a fully developed organization, Protestantism began to fall to pieces. For the past half century it has been sketchily held together only by the force of outstanding personalities here and there. The more outstanding these personalities have been, the greater has been their tendency to split the movement into sects and segments. Protestantism has never held forth an all-absorbing organization into which the weight of all personalities could be fused for the common good.
By having a well-nigh perfect organization, and by proclaiming a complete way of life, based not upon hatred of specific wrongs, but on love of intelligence and knowledge (synonymous with progress through all eternity) the Mormons also have avoided the political weakness of Protestantism.
However, the Mormons do share a fatal political illness with the ancient Jews. Lest we forget it - the Hebrews formerly were a powerful nation, ruled politically, temporally and spiritually by a patriarchal order that took its guidance (more or less) from God. The Lord's guidance was effective in the reign of righteous rulers; and the prophets groaned at other times. Essentially, the Hebrews were ruled or guided by the priesthood, which received continuing revelations from God, very much as the Mormons of today are ruled. Their history followed an interesting development cycle:
a. Whenever especially brilliant or gifted men rose up in the spirit of the Lord, they established new high marks in cultural advancement;
b. When the great majority of mediocre leaders plodded along from generation to generation without the breadth of vision to lift their people out on an upward course, they followed precedent established by the earlier brilliant leaders, and therefore kept from going backward;
c. When a thoroughly bad leader came along, the accumulation of his excesses forced a revolt and a set of social circumstances in which it was possible for a new righteous leader to rise and re-affirm the approved Jewish way of life, so that the cycle of social and political change could begin all over again.
Viewed from the centuries, it appears that the Jews were never able to solidify their cultural progress into a self-perpetuating political form. Their revolts and upheavals often took them backward, to ideals established by earlier prophets, rather than forward on the total evolutionary value of their cumulative social experience.
This, too, was caused by a structural and political weakness. The precedents of law, administration, revelation were carefully written in a system of politico-religious-historical records, which Gentiles hazily comprehend as the Talmud, or Talmudic law. This system became too cumbersome. Grains of truth of universal application were too deeply imbedded to be found and applied without endless wranglings among scholars and lawyers of comparatively equal rank.
The Mormon church can avoid the same mistake. What it needs is the certain provision that a combination Blackstone, Moses and St. Paul will be commissioned every hundred years or so to completely re-codify the law of the church to include all intervening revelations, principles of judgment, all historical precedents and all organizational progress that have happened in the century since the last previous codification. The work of this man ought not to be a compilation, but an inspired authorship that can sum up in a few hundred words a concise account of all principles that can be used for guidance, and can point the way for future expansion. Unless it makes some such provision in its basic political structure, Mormonism is doomed to the same repetitive cycles that have kept Judaism from being the one and only world power.
* * * * *
A person who has spent all his life in a Mormon community is poorly equipped to handle himself in the rough and tumble politics of the rest of America. This is as true among the humblest members of the church as among the highest.
The reason for this is the fact that since Brigham Young died the Mormons have produced no man who has had either the vision, ability, inclination, background or possibly even the courage to carry out a positive political program such as that which was envisioned by their prophet Joseph Smith, as well as by their second president.
The Mormons have been political appeasers so long that they have lost sight of the heritage and fulness of the program that their prophet gave them in this field. For seventy-five years the basic political policy of the church has been almost purely defensive. So much so, in fact, that a powerful defensive complex such as that which characterizes - and weakens - the followers of Judaism is in imminent danger of becoming crystallized into a permanent handicap to Mormon philosophy.
If Mormonism is not to surrender everthing that it has yet accomplished and subside into a mere sect that is propagated only through holding a portion of the new members born into it, if it is ever to recapture the ability to enthuse thousands of converts as it did for Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, Mormonism must again adopt a full, complete, positive political program aimed at the literal establishment of a Kingdom of God on earth.
It appears to me that the Mormon church is the only organization in the world that has a political structure strong enough, flexible enough and capable of expanding rapidly enough to provide the means of attaining and maintaining world peace. However, there are not enough leaders in power in the Mormon church who can envision such a program, or who are driven by the same sort of courage that Joseph and Brigham had. The present leaders of Mormonism are, for the most part, products of a hundred years of a full and satisfying philosophy that has fought and won most of its political battles to protect itself, but little else. They have had little or no training in aggressive, constructive politics.
It is apparent that this impetus to Mormonism must be brought in from the outside. The church must get itself a new Brigham Young who, coming into the faith after a protracted emotional struggle within himself, is able to set the souls of men aflame with a consuming passion to flock to the tops of the mountains and build God's kingdom.
As long as they sidestep the issue of constructive political action, the Mormon leaders are holding out to their followers only a part - a small part - of the grand scheme of life their prophet held out for them.
Next: Architecture
The reason for this is the fact that since Brigham Young died the Mormons have produced no man who has had either the vision, ability, inclination, background or possibly even the courage to carry out a positive political program such as that which was envisioned by their prophet Joseph Smith, as well as by their second president.
The Mormons have been political appeasers so long that they have lost sight of the heritage and fulness of the program that their prophet gave them in this field. For seventy-five years the basic political policy of the church has been almost purely defensive. So much so, in fact, that a powerful defensive complex such as that which characterizes - and weakens - the followers of Judaism is in imminent danger of becoming crystallized into a permanent handicap to Mormon philosophy.
If Mormonism is not to surrender everthing that it has yet accomplished and subside into a mere sect that is propagated only through holding a portion of the new members born into it, if it is ever to recapture the ability to enthuse thousands of converts as it did for Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, Mormonism must again adopt a full, complete, positive political program aimed at the literal establishment of a Kingdom of God on earth.
It appears to me that the Mormon church is the only organization in the world that has a political structure strong enough, flexible enough and capable of expanding rapidly enough to provide the means of attaining and maintaining world peace. However, there are not enough leaders in power in the Mormon church who can envision such a program, or who are driven by the same sort of courage that Joseph and Brigham had. The present leaders of Mormonism are, for the most part, products of a hundred years of a full and satisfying philosophy that has fought and won most of its political battles to protect itself, but little else. They have had little or no training in aggressive, constructive politics.
It is apparent that this impetus to Mormonism must be brought in from the outside. The church must get itself a new Brigham Young who, coming into the faith after a protracted emotional struggle within himself, is able to set the souls of men aflame with a consuming passion to flock to the tops of the mountains and build God's kingdom.
As long as they sidestep the issue of constructive political action, the Mormon leaders are holding out to their followers only a part - a small part - of the grand scheme of life their prophet held out for them.
Next: Architecture
