| OCR Text |
Show 1)1:. NKWMAN'. ''he (jUesiion for consideration is : "Does the Bible function Polygamy?" and it is of the uuho-h importance that the discussion be proceeded with immediately. im-mediately. He had desired nine hours .to discuss thia great question, but by mutual tieement it had been reduced to three. Evury word of the question was emphatic. The "Bible." the sacred sa-cred word of God. that comes to .w uuih-r the authority of a ph-nary inspiration inspi-ration I no hunter whin, has been me of the original uianueripr:--, wo stilJ have the ori;-in;d in the Sept'daginc and iu the Grc-.k and llebnw ciTnisLaion-i. Therefore the point sought to be made is a m-re bagatelle. If the pretended revelation rev-elation said to have been received by Jo-sephSmith Jo-sephSmith had been desi royedbyEmma Smith, would it have burned any the less warmly in the breast of Mr. Joseph Jo-seph Smith? No; and the Bible is true, though every manuscript had been given to the winds. The Bible must be understood as having been given in human language to human beings, yet all that is written in it is neither approved of God, nor given for imitation. The Bible must be read as we would read Xenophon, Zoroaster or Herodotus, but when we read the Bible we know it is truth ; and it should be read according as it is given, whether poetry, prophecy cir history. The poetry of the Bible is intended to convey a grand thought. The inspired in-spired writers were impartial in recording re-cording biographical history. They did not always stop to point out the errors of those uhose history they were giving to tho world. The Bible is composed of tho Old Testatneut and the New. In the New Testament Jesus confirms the old. He shows that a man is not only an adulterer who marries a second woman but who looks upon her with lust. The question ques-tion is not whether the Latter-day Saints have a revelation commanding polygamy; but the great question is does that grand old book sanction polygamy. Now we eouie to ano.her word : Does the Bible "sanction" polygamy? By the word sanction we mean "command," "com-mand," consequently written law or its equivalent. Therefore toleration, cus torn, nor even providential blesnings given for ulterior purposes is riot sanction. sanc-tion. The divine approbation, plainly expressed, is the only sanction. This is the ense in which we take the term sanction in the question before us Next: Does the Bible tanct'on "polygamy?" "po-lygamy?" Not, did the Bible in an-cieut an-cieut times sanction polygamy; but does it now sanction and approve it Just as the question is, not did the Constitution sanction slavery, but docs it now sanction it. And. supposing we can prove that the Bible does not now sanction polygamy, we have sustained sus-tained the negative. Polygamy means a mu having more wives than one. or a woman having hav-ing more hu.-.b.;iid.s than one. The pi adieu of women having more husbands than one, is u raied polyand ry. But the word to Le u.-td is riot polygamy, but polyginy. But it reemtd to him thai if a man has the right to have more wives thau one, a woman lias the right to have move husbands thau one. Sensation. This question involve? two systems of marruige ; what is commonly called polygamy, and monogamy ; a man with more than one wife, and a man with one w.fo. The question to be decided de-cided is which i the authorized system of marriage, lie referred to some of the prominent features of monogamy the design, as made manifest in the garden of Eden ; companionship, procreation pro-creation and prevention. Ere Eve breathe-l the balmy atmosphere of Eden, God .-aid it was not good for man to be alone; bat no companion could be found for man among the lower creation; and a special act of creation brought this companion to man, taken from the rib of Adam. She was not made from his head, lest she should rule over him: nor from his foot, lest he should trample on her; but from his side that she might be near him. The next object of marriage was procreation. pro-creation. In the Ark were four men and four women. If God had designed to saneiiou polygamy why was there not in the Ark a dozen wives for Noah and for each of his sons. This hist iry shows that God repeated his great design. de-sign. The next ol jeel of marriage is the prevention of promi-cous intercourse. inter-course. Passing from the question uf design, he said marriage was two-fold. It was a state aud not an act. It was not mere sexual intercouie, but a state to run parallel with the life of the mairied pair, unless sundered by onecimu -adultery. There are obligation in marriage which distinguish monogamy from polygamy. There is choice - the fact of' one choosing another. When he cione to thu census, lie said, he w ould pine that there was not a sn-peilluity sn-peilluity of marriageable women in the woild. If every uem is. to hr.vc his own wile, and every Woman her ovn husband, this mutter of choice is most important. God has surrounded mar-rit'go mar-rit'go with lnii'.iiuiei.t.s as high as heaven ; and at long as marriage is held rjicied the .,!.) of hell cannot prevail against it. There i., it s innocence; inno-cence; the bed uudcfiled, which in honorable in all. Look at the s.'iw'tiou ot'dbiiie and human law whieb pioted-1 linuria,'. Consider the natural de ire of man for woman, and the n.Hiu.d d .siie of woman for man. f'ul e, man without a wife is ou'yh ill'i' man; v.hile n woimui without with-out a hu'.b.iiid i" only half u woman. It taken the union of one mail with the : (eiuer quality and of olio Woman with the holier ;,iaeei i,,, j;,ri a perfect type of luaniagc, le) endorsed by God's law, Ilk dfewiih'd to run tho parallel between the two system.-. A man may love three or more friend", children, brothers or sisters; but God has so arranged ar-ranged the law of affinities between man aud woman that a third person destroys the companionship. The speaker drew a poetio picture of a monogamic mo-nogamic husband returning to his wife and bis family; and then drew the opposite op-posite picture of that man not returning return-ing to her, but going to one, two, three, a dozen or thirty others. He did not care whether females or males preponderated in polygamic nations. I he tendency of polygamy, according to some authorities, was to make all the children males ; according to others, oth-ers, to make them all females ; but in either ease, make polygamy universal ami in a hundred vars t lie earth would b'' depopulated and a howling wilderness. wilder-ness. The man is the head, the high p:iest of the family; but while he is endowed with authority a? his right, protection is equally a right of woman. The figure fig-ure of the ivy and the oak wai introduced intro-duced ; with the point that what the ivy is to thu oak the woman is to the man ; and the speaker enquired how it was possible, under polygamy for the rights of woman to be preserved. Man's authority is extended over a greater number than God's law allows; but woman'3 protection is destroyed'; mutual affection and reciprocity are destroyed. And in view of the distribution distri-bution of worldly goods in this lile, it seemed to him that a poor man could afford af-ford to keep but one family. Kings may-have may-have harems, but it is impossible for tho poor man to provide for more than om wife; aud if God has given this law he has not been impartial. It if ibr nabobs and kings, not for the peas-ani; peas-ani; yet God is ajust God, and all are alike before him. The two systems of marriage are antagonistic, and after healing the righto of marriage, it was for ihe congregation to decide. He would sift the scripture passages quoted by his opponent to the bottom ; he was only sorry his opponent had not taken one passage of scripture and followed it to its utmost limits ; when such was done he would follow the entire en-tire argument. On the text "Where brethren dwell together," ho said his oppoutnt nad wandered back to the autedeluvians, though what connection there was between be-tween them he could not see. He would no there too. The first polygamist polyga-mist was Latuech, and he also was a murdeicr. He affirmed that Lauicch's murderous act grw out of polygamy. Cain wae a murderer before he married at all. Cain was a deist, who did not believe he had any sius to answer lor ; aud his offering was not acceptable be-foie be-foie G d. He was wroth aud his pride belched forth, and he slew his brother. The murder had no connection connec-tion with marriage ; but the murder of the first polygamist was a result of poly po-ly c a my. The first marriage iu the garden of L'dcn was the great model for all subsequent sub-sequent marriages. He thought li is. opponent shou.d leli why (rod did not make more than one woman for one man; aud iaid God had made tme man uud one woman, and for this lea-ou shall a man ' leave lather and mother aud cleave unto his wile, aud the twain shall be one flesh.1' |
