OCR Text |
Show CHRISTIANITY AND POLITICS. From Collier's Weekly the Deseret News copies the following: "It will be conceded that every man's first duty is to God; it will also be conceded, and with strong emphasis, that a Christian's first duty is to God. It then follows, as a matter of course, that it is his duty to carry his Christian code of morals to the polls and vote them. Whenever he shall do that, he will not find himself voting for an unclean un-clean man, a dishonest man. Whenever a Chris-tian Chris-tian votes, he votes against God or for Him, and he knows this quite well. God is an issue in every election; He is a candidate in the person of every clean candidate on every ticket; His purity and His approval are there, to be voted for or voted against, and no fealty to party can absolve His servant from his higher and more exacting fealty to Him; He takes precedence of party; duty to Him is above every claim of party." While the underlying thought in the mind of the writer of the above was correct, he did not express himself very clearly. What he doubtless meant was that where two candidates, one clean and the other unclean, are pitted against each other, no other great principle being at issue, it is the duty of the voter to cast his ballot for the man whose private and public life is spotless. But it does not require any religious belief for a man to do that. His patriotism and his solicitude solici-tude for the welfare of the community or country is enpugh to decide his ballot. But suppose the pure man favors what the voter believes would, if carried out, destroy free government, and his opponent believes in the exact reverse; that behind be-hind the two candidates are great parties believing believ-ing as the candidates do, what would then be the voter's duty? We cite that to make clear the fact that often candidates are but figureheads ; that the voter often votes merely for the principle behind be-hind the candidate. But the News picks up the paragraph copied from Collier's, and by indirection tries to make it read or mean good Later Day Saint doctrine, and of the extract and its author says : . Probably, if he were before a congressional committee of investigation for any purpose, he would be strongly condemned for declaring that "every man's first duty is to God," and his state- ment that this "will be conceded" would certainly cer-tainly be disputed. And yet we are of the opinion that his reasoning would be found very difficult to overturn, particularly by any legislator or lawyer law-yer who professed to be a Christian. Still, his utterances are worthy of consideration, considera-tion, for they bring humanity face to face with Deity, and with the great question raised many centuries ago and decided in the affirmative by the actions of prophets and apostles, recorded in holy writ, whether ''We ought to obey God rather than man." There should be nothing in human law that will conflict with divine law. Both should be in harmony, and religion and citizenship should go hand in hand in the life and conduct of earth's inhabitants. Admit all that, and where does it leave the News? Does it hold out that voters should measure mea-sure the moral status of candidates and vote for the one who stands for what is highest and noblest? Or has its teachings for half a century in effect been that the ordinary man, no matter how richly he may be endowed mentally, or how devout his life may have been, really does not know how to cast a "free" American ballo't until he gets word from headquarters? That, if the word comes to him that he should vote for a man whose whole life has been covered with shame and sin, it is not for him to judge, but that his duty is to shut his eyes and vote as directed? Has not its whole struggle been to restore to the world under a different form, the ancient merciless rule that prevailed as the world was emerging from barbarism and conscienceless priests, working on the ignorance and superstitious supersti-tious fears of a densely ignorant populace, ruled and robbed them without mercy? Is this not true, notwithstanding the fact that every such attempt has ended, if not in the destruction of the nation attempting it, then in the ignorance, degradation and squalor of the people. Is it not performing its perfect work in Utah? B The Saints were all poor when they came here, were they not? It is but fifty-eight years since the first ones came, but is it not true that 200 of them here, in Ogden and Provo, have more avail-B avail-B able money and property than 200,000 of their B dupes on the outside? Is this God's plan, or are I they blasphemers who say that it is? I The News talks about the "union of church JB and state." The News believes in no such thing, jfl Its belief and practice both point directly to the plan to make the state subserviant in all things to H the church, and by the church it means the few H self-appointed high priests who assume the right H to rule this people. The assumption is backed by H no authority in the N or Old Testament, and nothing on earth is clearer than the fact that if H the founders of this commercial and political mall ma-ll chine, called a creed here, had wanted to devise H something to rule and rob a credulous people H they could not have evolved a more successful H plan than the one they did devise. H A Christian always carries his religion to the B polls; it sways his acts in politics and business B everywhere. But it does not debase his manhood and cause him, against his judgment, his con-Hj con-Hj science and all his manly instincts, to vote for a man whom he knows is vile or incompetent be- cause he has been told to by one who claims the B right to thus debase him. B The News, when it discusses the duties of B citizenship, talks through an ecclesiastical hat. |