Show EVERY WORD OF GOD ESSENTIAL MR josepn joserh SMI SMITH cli cil of lamoni iowa continues to labor through the columns of the weekly herald of that ahat place of which he Is editor to prove that there is nothing essential to the church churchea except that which was given to it as doctrine at its first org organization or at any rate any later than 1833 1835 when the first edition of the doctrine and covenants was accepted we have shown the fal fai fallacy lacy of his arguments more than once but will refer to the subject again because he repeats his sophistry and aud endeavors once more to create a conflict between the utterances of the DESERET NEWS and those of an apostle of the church we quote from the lamoni lamont herald of feb apostle george teasdale of the utah mormons cormons Mor mons in a discourse delivered deliver edin in the assembly hall salt lake city utah january 1884 as published in DE DESERET SERET NEWS said 1 I bear my solemn testimony that plural marriage la is as true as any principle that has been revealed from the heavens I 1 bear my testimony that it is a necessity and that the church of christ in its fullness never exsted without it how any man endowed with any sharpness or common sense can bear so foolish a testimony as the above Is a curio curlo curious wa thing fa apostle george Q cannon of the utan church says that plural marriage was not nol an essential doctrine of mormonism at the beginning no nor r is it now dele delegate ate john T N caine 1 1 ne also a leading mormon from salt lake says it is not essential charles charies VV penrose editor of the DESERET NEWS also states that the church existed without polygamy ll 11 or plural marriage the words imputed to apostle geo Q cannon and to hon jonn jolin T caine are garbled and incorrectly stated mr smith does not give his authority for them and we pronounce them misrepresentations of the sentiments and expressions used by those gentlemen the quotation notation purporting to be from the aseret deseret NEWS we stand by whether correctly given or not ala aia and challenge eom comparison parison between it and tile the remarks ol of brother george teasdale he says plural marriage is a I 1 I 1 necessity we said as quoted the church existed without polygamy now what Is the inference simply that at one time the doctrine of plural marriage was not taught in the church but that now it Is we have to repeat our complaint p faint of mr smiths unfairness and quibbling in controversy when pretending to quote from tile the NEWS why did he not state our position justly he not go on with the quotation and cite these words although our plural wife system has become an essential part pard of our faith it is not and has not been the corner stone of the church lie he knows as well as he knows anything that the position of the DESERET NEWS on this question is that the church of christ is progressive that in the language of his mar tureh byred father we believe all that god has revealed all that ile he does now reveal and that lidwill he will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the kingdom of goa and that everything thus revealed becomes an essential part of the doctrine of the church but unfairness and disingenuousness are marked features of all mr smiths controversial ef fusions against the church in utah we ve will now notice the argument he advances he takes the ground that because the church existed for several years ears without the promulgation of the doctrine of plural marriage that doer doctrine cannot now be essential to it and he makes many quotations from the book of mormon and the doctrine and covenants with the object of establishing tab lishing that position one or two of these vili suffice 41 and again I 1 say unto you ye must rep repent eilt elit and aud be baptized in my name and b become come as a little child or ye can in no wise enter the kingdom 0 of je G god od verily verily I 1 say unto you this Is my mv doctrine and whoso choso buil deth upon this buil bull deth upon cyrocki my rock and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them and whoso choso shall declare more or less than this and establish it if hs as my doctrine the same cometh of evil nephi 5 59 9 behold this is my doctrine who and cometh unto me the same is my church whosoever de chareth more or less than this the same is not of me but is against me therefore he be is not of my church 1 13 of C sec 10 37 par 16 do these passages support theider the idea that no doctrine revealed to the church after 1830 or 1835 can become an essential part of its creed if god bound himself not to make known anything new to the church after those dates what then would become of the article of faith which we have quoted above as coming from the prophet joseph and shiell mr smith ot of lamoni lamont pretends to adopt as part of his own creed if a man comes to god as a little child I 1 will he not receive all that the lord makes known to his church will he not try to live by every word that proc edeth out of the mouth of god and if any man deac teaches hes less than this does it not come of evil and does not mr fr smith teach less than ithan this in the article now under consideration but we will quote also from the doc trin and covenants a revelation to joseph smith under date of april 6 1830 the day the church was organized behold there shall be a record kept among you and in it thou be called aseer a beer seer a translator a prophet an apostle ol of djesus christ an elder of the church through the will of god the father and the grace of your lord jesus christ 4 wherefore meaning the church thou give heed unto all his words word s and commandments which he shall shail I 1 give unto you as he receive th them walking in all holiness before me etc on the theory laid down by mr smith nothing is essential to the chure church I 1 except that spoken of apeci cally in the quotations made by him which we reproduce and which are a sample of all the rest what follows why that the doctrine of the laying on of hands for the gift gif t of the holy ghost and for the healing of the sick and for ordaining to the priesthood and for patriarch ial blessings be being in more than this are not the doctrine of christ that is the logical consequence of his argument how is it then that he accepts that doctrine as part of his creed there is nothing in all the quotations he makes which relates to ordinations the quorums of the priesthood the law of tithing the doctrine of consecration the gathering of the saints and of the house of israel the resurrection of the dead and a great number of principles M and covenants introduced by joseph the prophet as the seer and revelator to the church and under mr smiths theory he must reject them because not specifically named in the paragraphs quoted as containing the f ulness ot of the gospel does he not know that if the holy ghost is given to the church that it is to guide into all truth 11 and that every principle of truth newly newly revealed is just as essential as any truth previously revealed does not he book of covenants teem with promises of fresh actions of principle until not only all ali former things that had been lost should be made known but things kept hidden from the f foundation ot of the world should be disclosed has he not read in the revelation given through his father as late as 1811 lil that the lord said in relation to the temple to be built in nauvoo for I 1 deign to reveal unto my ch church things which have been kept hid from before the foundation of the wol woi world ad things that pertain to the dispensation pensa tion of the f ulness of timm tiff times mes ies now does mr smith mean to say that all this when revealed will be nonessential we feel almost ashamed to take up space in answering such chil chii childishness d Is ish ness the question at issue now is not the lightf rightfulness ulness of plural marriage remember but anything revealed to the church after a certain date we care not what it may be if it is new can be essential to the church mr smith seems to think that because a doctrine plural marriage for instance was not originally part of the church doctrine it cannot be essential now ile he might just as well say that because the body of a man contains substance which was not in his body when a child the new material cannot be essential essential to his existence and perfection we take the ground that whatever doctrines or principles or covenants or p powers 0 ers god reveals to the chu church r h through the head appointed of him to receive such things when received become essential parts of the creed of the church and therefore they are a necessity plural marriage was once not taught to the church but it is taught now it was revealed through the head of the church has been received by the body has become part of the established faith falth and isnow is now an essential for the simple reason that there thero a ole oie no non essentials in ane gospel and church of christ whatever there may be in the churches and creeds of men this is our position and it is in accord with the teachings of the apostles who have been referred to with the whisperings of the holy spirit and with the revelations of god laid down in the sacred books |