OCR Text |
Show THE FALLACY INVOLVED. It has been something of a mystery to know on what grounds the Mormon church npologlsts defend, even to their own mind?, the assumption by the church lender" of control of politics In this State. So far as known, some evasive, eva-sive, and half-hearted denials that they have- sn done, constitute the case In their bebnlf. But of that assumption and control there Is no sort of real doubt. Tt Is so evident, nnd hss been so evident, persistent per-sistent nnd so constant that there can be no question whatever about 1U- The fact being clear, then, on what ground Is it Justified? Possibly wc may have an Inkling of the defense, by taking note of an objection objec-tion to the American party which 13 filed by Mr A. S. Anderson of Eureka, TIntIc, In these words: "I am opposed lo the American party, nnd think It Is unamerlcan and undemocratic, Its chief object being lo deprive certain citizens of their rights of citizenship, because of their religious positions, thereby Imposing Impos-ing a religious test contrary to the Constitution Con-stitution of our State and of the United States." Mr. Anderson, In so stating the case, Is laboring under a singular delusion of mind. In making reference to the deprivation of "certain citizens of their rights of citizenship because of their religious re-ligious position," he evidently refers to the demand that high ecccleslastlcs of the Mormon church shall keep out of politics. But this Is something which the common com-mon sense of the American people has arrived at as the best for nil, and as applying ap-plying to every Eect and to all eccle-slasts eccle-slasts of every denomination. The intrusion in-trusion of the bishops of the Catholic, the Episcopal, or the Methodist churches into politics Is something unhenrd of, and any disposition on the part of such ecclesiastic to take part in the politics of lIs parishioners would be checked without ruth or delay. Why Is the rule not a good one also for the Mormon ecclesiastics? ec-clesiastics? But aside altogether from the argument argu-ment of propriety and general usage, there is a special rule in tho Mormon church against the participation of high cccleslasts In politics. This was adopted adopt-ed at the general conference of the church on April C, 1806, and was the church response to the Democratic protest pro-test of the year before against church Interference In the election. ( There is, then, nt infringement upon any Constitutional right or personal privilege in asking that the Mormon high churchmen keep out of politics. It is what Is dignified and proper In their station, and besides, It Is what they have definitely and positively engaged to do. and a course in whiHi Mm rni their church binds them. But back of air that Is the fact that it Is even more obnoxious for a Mormon church leader to take part In politics than for a hJgh official of any other church to do so, for the reason that none of the other church dignitaries claims lo be the very mouthpiece of God; none Is "sustained" as a "prophet, seer, and revelator," while the Mormon church dignitary Is. Under that condition, when a Mormon apostle or president takes part In politics, poli-tics, ho takes part as a mouthpiece of the Lord; he gels the consent of his quorum In what he does, and this Is a confirmation of the heavenly mission. It follows necessarily that this commits the whole church, for the church cannot fall to be on tho Lord's side. It Is plain, further, that the church cannot be on both sides In any campaign, as to any candidate; It must be a unit, or one side or the other would be found opposing the Lord. Take the present campaign, for example. exam-ple. Apostle Smoot, by the consent and harmony of his quorum, using the church machinery to carry out his campaign, cam-paign, fully committed the church' to brother Cutler for Governor; in fact, created and forced his candidacy. As to that there can, therefore, be no contention; con-tention; It is the Lord's will, and those who oppose It are in contumacy, and liable lia-ble to fall Into condemnation. But, though brother Howell entered heartily Into this work of the Lord in behalf of the one chosen by the revela-tors revela-tors and by revelation to be Governor, there was no revelation that Howell was to be chosen as the next Representative In Congress from Utah. In fact, there seems to be a revelation now that he Is not the Lord's choice for this mission, and that Judge Powers Is. Elder Roberts Rob-erts Is the "mouth," apparently, through which this revelation comes, and he took occasion to proclaim this choice In his speech at Lehl on Wednesday evening. ' Mr. Anderson will thus see not only tiat the general 'rule against high eccle-siata eccle-siata taking part In politics Is good for a general rule everywhere, but that it is a rule which is absolutely Indispensable Indispensa-ble in Utah; not only so. but that the church itself, recognizing the stern necessity ne-cessity of The case here, has made its declared rule conform to the requirements require-ments of our local case. In fact, it Is the only rule possible if we would have any freedom from church absolutism In politics, or public affairs, or in school matters, in Utah. |