| OCR Text |
Show LKtlAL TO LK RATION OF MOll-ilON'S. MOll-ilON'S. It id no part of tho duly of an ordi- aiy Auioricaa citizen to become tho apologist of anything distinctively Mormon in order to justify his opinion that Mormoniam bIicuU ba (reely tolerated. The epecul viewi of the sect may be more or le.-s commend able. The ritea, ceremonies and secret doinga more or leea reaBonablc. 1 It may teem to the majority of the peoply eimpty absurd and presumably presum-ably a bubtsrfoge of grodsneed to make polygamy a religious dogma and duty. All tlm and much more may bo true, and yet it would remiiin a prinio, civil duty to extend toleration freely to Morraouium as a religion and beeauae it ia a religion. It might pctfaibly be the dictate of far-3ighted eellhlmesa lor any religionist to come to the rcBCue of the principles of universal toleration in such a. o.iee : and crisis as the present. There may be ulterior wisdom in doing to othera as we would be done by. And contrariwise, con-trariwise, it may be bad for any sect to aid iu crushing out any other aect, beeauae it might have to take its own bitter medicine hereafter. Tbe magnificent mag-nificent inolusiveneii of tho American doctrine of toleration is the verdant shadow f the great tree under which all may repose aalely. It creates and epreada around and over us all a cosmopolitan glory. It recognizes the complete brotherhood and equality of man ag man, and herein is precisely the identity of it with the gospel itself. With no thorough critical examination examina-tion of Mormonism in order to ascertain ascer-tain and balance its claims, it is enough for the present writer to know that it is a religion as understood under-stood and practioed by its adherents. llm possible, however, that a profound pro-found and ingeniously wrought scheme of phyaico-religioua philosophy philo-sophy may lie at ltd baaid. Speculation Specula-tion on the mystery and miracle of life may may have bEcn made the spring of ita workiot;. i"hysioloRi8ts will generally admit that tbere ia a startling, silencing myutery in the origin of individual beings. Wo thinking man can well help saying, "1 am fearfully and wonderfully made, aid that my soul knoweth right well." Supposo then, that in the view of this roverend mystery of personal being, and impressed with the conviction that we are not aod cannot be far from the plaetio creative crea-tive power itself, we should adopt the old-time admonition and say, "The place where thou standest is holy ground.' In other words, "marriage is celestial." I knew nothing directly di-rectly of the philosophy ot Mormonism. Mormon-ism. But I do know that Roman Catholicism makes murriage a sacrament, sacra-ment, and that English Catholicism Catholi-cism celebrates the rite of matrimony with the sacrament of tho bodv and blood of Christ. Still a little further: As originally the word skepticism bad a good meaning and was used not so much to Bignify absolute doubt as curelul critical search for truth, it may be allowed possible that the oriental doctrine of pre-esistence has more than poetio truth. "Emanation" might possibly seem to lie at the foundation of even such a fragmentary sentence as that of Milton: "Millions of creatures walk the earth unseen, both when wo wake and when we sleep." At ail events this is not far from the scripture scrip-ture doctrine of angels, and angelio ministration. But to people generally there can be no assumed connection between organized being and spiritual spiri-tual pre-existence. No fanciful theory on the subject may become to us positive truth. Skepticism mles wherever accredited revelation JoeB not shed light. And yet ttiia skepticism skepti-cism need not he boldly irreverent or llippantly dogmatic il. Aa there would be no natural without a stiper-nalural stiper-nalural it is not uureaEonable to call even the natural divine. To me the natural is tbe most divine of all things, if .it ia not egotistical to say it. And this is what St. Paul aaeertd. and clinches the affirmation with a quotation from a naturalistic heathen: "He is not far from every one of us; for in Him we live acd move and have our being," As certain of your own poets have said: "We are His oILpring." Take this in its proper inclusive meaning, banish metaphor irom if, and make it a literal utter-auce utter-auce of meie pure truth, then we are standing again immediately on holy gruund. and may well putcITtbG ehotis Irom our feet. Marriage must be physiologically considered a divitie thing call it "celestial" or sacra mental when ycu epo;ik of it, or use St. Paul's most profound terra "mystery," as beusta it lordescribiug what is at once most reil, most epiritunl, and moat divine. "In the imn;:a of God created he man; male and female created he them." This is the Bible doctrine of humanity, indulging and giving meaning mean-ing to everything socially and re ligiously important. This relative creation and union of the seses is what St. Paul pronounces "a great mystery." And correspondingly with withering rebuke of tho abuso of the seiual rthition. Hia view of marriage is that it is at fhe lowest lilt-rally and truly "celeBtiai." But it will be said St. Paul ment lhat hi3 inspired description should apply to monogamy the uniou of I one man and one woman as was the rule in paradise while man walked with God in innocence. This is the received doctrine in our land, and u good, true, diviue doctrine- the old order oi EuYn renewed and reinforced by our Savior, and explained by P;iul. All thia ia to be admitted. Y&1 bow is it now practically? Can one go on? Shall I be pardoned for tuggeatiug that people have almost forgot that eveD monogamous marriage is at all divine? One would not, caunctgo on descriptively. Of one's country and dear fellow-couutrymen how shall it be even BUggeeted that the moral, the spiritual glory is in a measure gone? But the pUin ques tion, however-very practical uiiii very plain ia between debased monogamy mon-ogamy and "celretial m ir ri -, " tecbnicaliy so called; betw-:i n what would .4tnre with unfeigned atjuiah-ment atjuiah-ment should you speak of it as in the remotest degree "ctle-itul" or ('ivine, and that which wraps itself round a.id round with the iitna and with the term. And this denotes a life struggle strug-gle between tremendous power?. Let no man or woman think lightly of it. If monogamy has a mission, it muai be because it is consciously divine; and it will necessarily assert its spirituality or sink back inglorioualy and let the struggle ba between "celestial marriage" and tbe brute union of the eeiea. Tradition of ita wiJe European sway for cen turies will count for nothing il moncgimy shall remain content to occupy the low 6eneual j.I me. It' .t cannot viodicatejits profound divine character its competitive siiugIe will be iynoroioijtisiy weak and futile. "S-mditied lust" under the n;itne of cell ctul marriage may be biii; im1 wn:t shall bo said of "unsuuclitud lus'." ULder the naaio and u:se ot single marriage? Undoubtedly, therefore, there-fore, either pAity may hurl epithetd '')(:l:shiy at the other. But iu fhit:j 1 1 i, nt too presuming, my most rejpuct- j iu! npp.;al to monogamists would be: Idiicttiieepiiitu.il diviue giory dc-j p:ir led? Has not "thefinegold bacomc ! dim?" (J ENTILE. |
