About Truth and Religion (pt.2) by M.H. DeYoung

ABOUT TRUTH

and

Part II Pagination of Part I, ended with page 211, continues in Part II

TOPICAL GUIDE About TRUTH and RELIGION Part II (Section 212.2) ‘Divine Rights’: Catholic and Mormon acquaintances A Comparative analysis . . .: ---The Pope's 1993 visit to Denver: ---Counselors Control LDS Assets: Brahminism vs. Swinburn’s Poetry B. Russell on truth note about ‘war on terrorism’ Fascism, communism, democracy: philosophies of ‘divine right’-based theocracy, is fascist Materialist corporate entities also are fascist in nature causal mechanism defined sovereignty defined Allen Wheelis Mr. McLoughlin’s testimonial the (Danite) life-oath and “blood atonement” Peggy Fletcher Stack about Reed C. Durham Antinomianism two especially compelling concerns Cowdrey, Davis, and Scales’ account Tolstoy’s observed fundamental falseness W. L. Cowdrey, H. A. Davis, and D. R Scales Dogma changed original meaning of St. John’s text Another great victory for democracy Political challenges to constitutional rights agitate ENDNOTES

214 215 215 227 248 248 250 255 257 257 260 288 299 300 321 321 326 330 331 339 352 384 395 408 417

214

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Essence: < Latin essen (to be), essentis, essentia, (sum) Heidegger asks, why essence instead of nothing? : why human faculties of thought: Shakespear’s ‘to be’ or not ‘to be’? Heidegger also observed that without thought-based essence, there is nothing! Human sovereign essence is liberty and free-agency. But life’s substance presents myriad temporal paradoxes, that challenge, thwart, or deny essential teleological purposes, as Oliver Wendell Holmes reminded humanity of in this celebrated thought:

There is that glorious epicurean paradox . . . : ‘give us the luxuries of life, and we will dispense with its necessaries.’ [Life’s essence (necessities) that false belief of material acquaintance conflates, is prone to dispense the necessaries] Causal mechanism’s economic paradoxes, which are unitary materialist in nature, favor some by tyrannizing others. And tyranny, not redressed, has too often festered into terrorism forms. Parrington wrote this about G. W. Curtis: 3

Discovering in the principle of liberty, the cardinal [i.e., necessary] principles of American democracy, G. W. Curtis was disposed to accept a wide application of laissez faire, yet when it opened the door to extortion he was willing to curb an antisocial individualism.

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances 215 [Is extortion a tyrannous antecedent of terrorism?] Comparative acquaintances of Divine Right’-based doctrine Catholic and Mormon authorities: ---The Pope's 1993 visit to Denver, as reviewed on This Week with David Brinkley ---Article, Documents Show Counselors Control LDS Assets, in a St. George, Utah newspaper (article on p 227). These August 15, 1993 media events, appertain to convenient contemporary religious acquaintances, on which Christian truth and falsity is based. These acquaintances are contrasted with Rhode Island Colonial Leader, Roger Williams’ (1603-1683) inconvenient (but necessary principle-based), reasoned truth, which he called ‘social usage,’ which truth provided a rational foundation to early American forms of mutual insurance, and causally starkly differs from the post constitutional American System of Political Economy’s mechanismbased [i.e., materialist determinism (Whigs in administrative control, installed this materialist economic system.)], from which profit-based insurance in the US has proliferated, the essential ‘social usage’-based foundation of ‘Social Security’ contrasts starkly with the economic causal mechanism-based determinism as administered by government’s politics-based “American System” to paternally give great economic advantage to privatized material-based businesses, the causal dogma of which, dismissed essential teleology-based causality that is rational rather than mechanism-based, i.e., paradoxical. (The causal mechanism-based foundation of this post constitutional Political Economy introduced insidious determinism, i.e., dogmacalled mechanism, the economic determinism of which favored business over consumers’ economy. ) Discussing political social issues, as abortion, sexual orientation, less that equal sovereignty of women and race differences, . . . , the David Brinkley show featured a sociologist Catholic clergyman, whose candid answers to questions prompted these soulsearching questions:

216

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

---Are you really a clergyman? ---Are you in good-standing with your Church? The sociologist-clergyman answered:

Yes! I am a practicing clergy member in ‘good standing’ with the Catholic Church’s doctrine! This clearly heterodox answer, however, is afield from Catholic orthodoxy: i.e., it is more responsive to ‘in the trenches’ of human passionate acquaintance-based proclivities. Curiously, however, he said nothing about the condemnation of ‘sins,’ or sinners,’ about which the Pope had expressed great concern. While pondering this, in my memory of contemporary moralist William Bennett’s view of Transcendent Morality, whose ‘positivist mechanist’ politics clearly embraced the Catholic faith, while also, recollecting Plato’s divide of the noumenal (i.e., intellectual), and the phenomenal aspects intrinsic of the material temporal reality, I interpreted that the Pontiff had spoken about Transcendent Morality whereas the sociologistclergyman spoke with active compassion about the struggles embroiling life's more sordid, temporal scene, i.e., phenomenal realities in contemporary, sometimes desperate society. The Pontiff had presented strategy regarding Christ's teachings for each of us to reach for, to personally make Christ’s truths a part of our lives: as Saint Anselm’s proof of God’s existence requires a reason-based axiomatic ontological faith, then in consistently reason-based, living ‘in the light of LOGOS’ (in God’s ontologism). Paul’s experience appertains: if we believe Paul’s diabolical statement in Romans 7: 15, about influences of the flesh on things spiritual, from which personal denial of ‘sins of the flesh’ as commonly akin to Paul’s lament: that which I do I allow not, for to preserve others’ trust in us: we excuse or deny natural visceral influences of ‘the flesh,’ which had resulted in myriad personal concupiscent acts, i.e., we commonly live lies, which until abated by self mastery, beg for repentance-based understanding: [Romans 7:23] But I see another law in my [temporal body’s]

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

217

members waring against the law of my mind and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. Death by stoning was the ultimate social penalty from Moses’ time of life, whereas, Christ advocated a self judicious accounting: ‘judge not for to be not judged.’ When religiously we either subscribe Moses or Christ’s sin redeeming advocacy, an irrational contradiction embroils the justification: antinomy: the opposition to a law or part of a law to another, 4 is intrinsic of either, as St Paul had observed about the natural irrational conflict between the human mind (the spiritual center) and body (the material visceral emotion-based center). Was it not because the US Constitution relieved civil penalties regarding the ridged religious Old Testament-based judgements, as, in fact, the Constitution displaced the civil practices of religious doctrine? Salvation then became a practical matter of Christ’s saving ‘grace?’: Antinomianism became popular with the US Constitution’s ratification: “the constitutional ‘firewall’ between church and state” provided civil freedom from religious punishment and thraldom. Fawn Brodie wrote this about Lucy Smith, Joseph Smith’s mother: 5

This was the universal logic of dissent, a conviction shared by thousands of New Englanders in this period. Lucy had a vigorous though unschooled mind, and her belief was simply the core of Antinomianism. Fawn Brodie’s reference to the core of Antinomianism was a casual matter of fact back then. And, Mormon historians commonly have not contemplated the Antinomianism’s religious significance. J. L. Brooke, however, as an associate professor in the Department of History at Tufts University who’s early life was lived in New England, became interested in the Joseph Smith saga when reading newspaper accounts of Mark Hoffman’s fraud and deception in Mormon Lore:6

Though the Hoffman letters were forged, they were rooted in documented behavior; Joseph Smith was indeed deeply involved

218

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

in the popular magic of treasure-divining in the 1820s, the decade when he claimed to have discovered golden plates buried in the earth and translated them into the ‘Book of Mormon.’ J. L. Brooke provided a detailed reference to antinomianism’s connection with Mormonism: 7 i.e., Brooke documented the mystical occultist linkage to antinomianism in Mormon cosmology: 8

The Mormon cosmology constructed by Joseph Smith was as optimistic as Renaissance hermeticism and shared with it a startling number of common themes. As he was gathering his church in Fayette, New York, in December, 1830, Smith announced that he had been given “the keys of the mystery of those things which had been sealed, even things which were from the foundation of the world.” 9 The revelation of these “mysteries of the kingdom” commenced with Smith’s revision of Genesis in the months following: in February 1832 he reproduced the three heavens of the Cabala and hermeticism in the three Mormon heavens, the telestial, terrestrial, and celestial kingdoms. 10 Both hermeticism and Mormonism celebrate the mutuality of spiritual and material worlds, precreated intelligences, free will, a divine Adam, a fortunate, sinless Fall, and the symbolism and religious efficacy of marriage and sexuality. And, as in hermeticism, Adam, “the father of all, prince of all, that ancient of days,” 11 would occupy a central position in the Mormon cosmology. [Clearly, Hermes Trismegistus’ Hermeticism had influenced Puritan, Freemasonry and also Mormon doctrine (Brigham Young’s Adam-God doctrine, for instance).] While the focus of Brooke’s research and commentary is not on Hermeticism-Christian doctrinal cultural influences, it was in fact New England’s Hermeticism-Christian cultural influence, which Brooke documented in Mormon Cosmology, which collaboration, in fact, was

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

219

affected by principal contributors as Sidney Rigdon, William Morgan, and others. All objective historians of Mormonism, therefore, must contemplate at least to investigate Hermeticism, as Brooke’s references to Hermeticism indicate.12 Index overlaps of Hermeticism with antinomianism pinpoint potential focal origins of this common cultural influence in New England. Comparative beliefs, as related to Smith’s Mormon cosmology As regards “the Fall”: – Mormons’ believe “a sinless Fall” had occurred (Adam and Eve became mortal by ingesting an Apple from the tree of life, of which they were forewarned not to do: i.e., mortality resulted from a free will-based act):13

Fall of Adam. The process by which mankind became mortal on the earth. The event is recorded in Gen. 2, 3,4; and Moses 3,4. Before the fall, Adam and Eve had physical bodies but no blood. There was no sin, no death, and no children among any of the earthly creations. With the eating of the “forbidden fruit,” Adam and Eve became mortal, sin entered, blood formed in their bodies, and death became a part of life. -- Catholics, with most Christian reformations, believe Adam and Eve’s “Fall” resulted from carnal sin, which was then symbolized by “eating the apple”: [Which belief perpetually irritates as an example of Russell’s acquaintance-based dualism, i.e., as an irrational belief, from which human procreation is a genetically designed instinctive existential sinful purpose in temporal life, which acts result in sexual knowledge, which St. Paul had probably referred to as “another law in my (temporal body’s) members waring against the law of my mind and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members)]. St. John’s First Epistle, however, expands and clarifies Paul’s reference to include human acts, which as instinctively are concupiscent. Neither religious belief-based-doctrine can be

220

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

reconciled to recurring science-based evidences of human life’s origin: i.e., belief-based dualism remains as rationally problematical? However, The Song of Moses (Deut. 32), clearly infers that science provides the only inferential knowledge of God’s natural designs, which orthodox religious belief-based dualism perpetually ignores. About religious authenticity Catholics believe St. Peter, was the original Catholic Pontiff, which Christ had personally appointed to interpret naturally essential truths. The Mormon dogmatic faith in Joseph Smith, believe that Christ directly appointed Joseph Smith to restore the naturally essential truths of organic Mormon doctrine. Both are dualism-based beliefs:

Whatever we are acquainted with must be something: we may draw wrong inference from our acquaintance, but the acquaintance itself cannot be deceptive. Thus, there is no dualism as regards acquaintance. But as regards knowledge of truths, there is dualism. We may believe what is false as well as what is true.14 Bertrand Russell About a divine Adam Catholics, Christians generally, believe the Bible account of Creation: Gen. 2, 3,4: Adam sinned and thereby became the temporal origin of sin and death: Adam is divine only in God’s selection of him to father of human creation, as told in the Bible. Mormon doctrine reveres Adam, not only as the first human father, but also as God: Brigham Young steadfastly pronounced doctrine that Adam was the only God with whom humans had anything to do. Historians generally ignored the debate in Mormonism, in which doctrine shifted from Adam-God onto Christ’s atonement. John L. Brooke maybe uniquely, however, wrote this about the Young-Pratt debate: 15

. . . Brigham Young’s mind in the summer of 1853, . . . was what he considered the “bogus” of competing doctrine on the “mysteries.” In his closing remarks he spoke mockingly of

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

221

having “had a kind of confab” with “Professor Orson Pratt,” who was arguing the “folly” that there was “such a thing as empty space . . . where God is not.” 16 This was the opening salvo in a conflict over the nature of divinity that would carry through the 1850s. On the one side stood Orson Pratt, who was becoming the most important intellectual in Mormonism; on the other stood Brigham Young, the senior of the Twelve Apostles and the heir to Joseph Smith’s prophethood. They were known respectively as “the gauge of philosophy” and “the Lion of the Lord” and they proposed sharply differing doctrines of divinity, which would constitute the final hermetic theology among the Mormons. 17 Orson Pratt’s hermeticism was distant, muffled by his immersion in nineteenth-century science, but still unmistakable. In August 1852 Pratt had stayed within the bounds of Mormon orthodoxy when he was given the assignment to preach the first public lecture on plural marriage. 18 But over the next year, writing for “The Seer,” a Mormon missionary publication put out in Washington, D.C.,Pratt refined earlier writings into a theory of divinity infusing matter. Building on Smith’s doctrine that “all spirit is matter” and echoing Andrew Michael Ramsay, mediated by Scottish Common Sense, Mesmerism, [Brooke wrote: “During the 1780s, hints and rumors about Mesmer’s theories of universal fluid and animal magnetism appeared in newspaper accounts and traveler’s reports, though both Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin, then in Paris, attempted to ensure that Mesmerism did not corrupt the new Republic. It was not until the 1830s that Mesmerism became widely and reasonably fully known in America.” (Brooke’s note 20 cited several authors about the “birth of psychology” and “Pseudo-science.”)] and theories of electrical current, Pratt

222

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

argued that the Holy Spirit was “a diffused fluid simultaneously inhabiting every particle of matter, God was not a specific being but a bundle of platonic attributes: The Unity, Eternity, and Omnipresence of God, consisting in the oneness, eternity of the attributes, such as “the fulness of truth,” light, love, wisdom, & knowledge, dwelling in countless numbers of tabernacles in numberless worlds; and the oneness of the One God besides whom there is non other before Him neither shall there be any after Him. 19 These ideas influenced his brother, Parley, whose “Key to the Science of Theology,” published in 1855, described the Holy Spirit as a “spiritual fluid” communicating among all the particles of matter and mind in the universe. 20 Though it evolved from Smith’s revelation, Pratt’s thesis of an absolute intelligence inhabiting matter as a holy fluid challenged the Mormon image of God as a specific and concrete being of matter – and the promise that the faithful would eventually become such beings. His interpretation of an absolute God also undermined the Mormon doctrine of precreated spirits coequal with God. Casting doubt on the idea of a continuing progression into divinity, his vision was shaped by scientific efforts to view the world as a steady state and by traditional Christian views of divinity. Fawn Brodie questioned the history of Joseph Smith’s first vision that, if true, was held secret for many years: Brodie wrote: 21

Moreover, Joseph’s first autobiographical sketch of 1834,which we have already noted, contained no whisper of an event that, it it had happened, would have been the most soul-shattering experience of his whole youth. The description of the vision was

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

223

first published by Orson Pratt in his Remarkable Visions in 1840, twenty years after it was supposed to have occurred. . . . But no one in this long period even intimated that he had heard the story of the two gods. At least, no such intimation has survived in print or manuscript. Brooke confirmed Brodie on this: 22

Smith wrote his first descriptions of early visionary experiences in his 1832 manuscript history of his life. He wrote that between the ages of twelve and fifteen (1817 and 1820) he “pondered many things in my heart concerning the situation of the world” and came to the position that his father espoused: “by searching the scriptures I found that mankind did not come unto the Lord but that they had apostatised [sic] from the true and living faith.” This conclusion was confirmed in a dream or vision: “in the 16th year of my age a pillar of light above the brightness of the sun at noon day” filled him with “the spirit of god” and told him that “the world lieth in sin.” 23 This was the controversial First Vision, which stands as the primal authority for the Mormon dispensation. What is certain is that Joseph Jr. Followed his fathers path, interpreting his dreams as admonitions to avoid the organized denominations. It is also certain that his vision was not taken very seriously by the other members of his family, because his mother and three of her children remained in good standing with the Presbyterians through 1828. 24 About the Young - Pratt debate, Brooke documented the Adam-God dogma, which was fundamental Mormon cultist belief, in which polygamy and other darker hermetic tenets, as divining and counterfeiting, also was uncommonly practiced. Brooke wrote this about the post Adam-God-Mormonism, which was forced to comply

224

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

with U.S. constitutional requirements for Utah Statehood, i.e., suspended the practice of polygamy while sustaining the doctrine.25

While a rising movement of “neo-orthodox” or “redemptionist” Mormons presses for further movement toward Christianity, a countervailing force of “fundamentalists” rejects the transformation of the last century, claiming to be the true Mormonism, complete with polygamy, the Adam-God doctrine, separate kingdom-building, and suggestions of magical practice. Quite simply, Mormon fundamentalists seek to restore the structure of purity and danger [i.e., of hermeticism] that the church left behind after the reformation of the 1850s. Brodie’s Antinomianism appears as belief in Christ’s atoning grace that saves believers from a myriad of concupiscence, i.e., sins of the flesh, which St. Paul had observed are the celebrated indigenous result of temporal life, in which a mutuality of “a waring human body” is exalted as an affirmed principle above rational civil principlebased consciousness. The cited Sociologist’s Catholic message about surviving in the natural visceral determined trenches of temporal life was a circumstance which applied also to the Smith’s desperate economic circumstance. The great inequity of this reality involves the unequal economic opportunities, as lawfully were granted only to some? : and the granted economic gifts are then considered an earned right rather than a privilege or happenstance? The Sociologist emphasized that a compassionate understanding of such sordid realities of temporal life was not at odds with the Pope's strict indictment of ‘sins.’ Transcendent Morality wasn’t mentioned while this Catholic Church’s essential purpose was confirmed:

to provide as clearly as possible the pure moral teachings of Christ through the story and the rituals of Catholicism. (Reasonable people might ask if Catholicism’s first principle is Christ or the dogmatic symbolism of Catholic rituals? About the organic Catholicism’s practical plan, the Sociologist added this:

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

225

Organizational laws and rituals can and do change without affecting the Church's primary object to provide the teachings and ministry of Christ. These spontaneous questions about longstanding issues were asked: ---why have women not been ordained to the clergy? (Answer) The Church does not have this authority! ---When the Church ordained non Jewish clergymen, where did this authority come from? Why is this different? No Catholic response was given to this question. Of great significance to me was the disclosure that the Catholic Church had abandoned its practice of excommunication. ‘The new policy,’ the Sociologist said, ‘is to allow everyone, who desires, into membership.’ This religious organic policy (to admix ‘bad apples’ with ‘good,’ so to speak) surprised me (Is Christ’s admonition to forgive, applied here?). And, still, this policy does not transcend a unitary temporal nomos, as temporal ‘positivism,’ for instance, to temporally live in physis-based purity: whereas Joseph Smith’s admixed temporal-spiritual Mormonism, by some mystical noumenal-phenomenal belief-based hermetic alchemy, is quite literally claimed to restore and represent Christ’s restored kingdom in the temporal material human existence (Both Mormon and Catholic religions are based on this unitary materialist belief, in which both have failed Christ’s admonitions, and both, therefore, are as faulty as Hegel’s intensive research effort to find a unitary resolve to the admixture of the human spirit and body, only achieving to define dialectical materialism, on which Lenin’s Communism was based?). Christ’s passivism shows in his admonishment to Peter:26

Put up thy sword into the sheath. And, about Christ’s response to Pilate, about His Kingdom:27

My Kingdom is not of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. [Both Catholics and Mormons’ have

226

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

endeavored to retrofit their organic definitions to fit Christ’s Kingdom? ; however, when has Christ’s Kingdom ever existed temporally? ; and, why has it not?] During this trial, Peter openly denied his allegiances to Christ, as Christ predicted he would “until the cock had crowed.” In Peter’s denial, based on life’s instinctive material nature, which God created to react to eminent danger, which caused Peter to be unfaithful, even as Paul’s “that which I do I allow not,” which temporal sin St. Paul had noted was responsive to the instinctive law of his body. This does not mean that God’s creation is imperfect or that mankind cannot improve in faith-based (no dualism) knowledge and virtue. It simply means that temporal life is necessarily diabolical, which necessity has a critical part in gaining temporal truth-based knowledge, which empirically, of ontological rational exploration, when faithful, opens vistas of temporal human logos to the purer reasonable forms of truth where ‘pure thought’ and ‘pure reason’ of LOGOS exist. Plato’s ‘opinion’ is at the base of paradoxical temporal belief where theocratic organic religions, including the organic LDS (Mormon) Church, also fails to exemplify a ‘true’ belief in Christ’s ‘kingdom,’ which kingdom, Christ declared, was ‘not from hence.’ Dogmatic ‘Belief’ in any temporal theocratic organization, however it may be called, which intentionally, or not, emphasizes a mechanized hierarchical (i.e., a unitary materialist) organic authority (As Calvin had designed) to represent Gods Purpose either with or rather than just living in accord with Christ’s commandments, conflates each church member’s noumenal focus, which confuses Christ’s ‘sin’ fulfilling commandments while ignoring Christ’s necessary redemption. Science advanced rapidly during the twentieth century, the last quarter of which provided to humanity digital technology, which we enjoy while mostly failing to understand how or why it works. Basically, digital signifies a mathematical technology, i.e., the two most fundamental numbers (1 and 0), which relate to perceptive

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

227

images involving sight and sound. Number one (1) is cardinal in that it is fundamentally intrinsic of every counting number, which symbolizes substance or materiality; the number zero fundamentally represents an emptiness of substantial meaning, i.e., symbolically represents essence rather than substance : other than its necessity, i.e., its systemic need to be complete. What fundamentally these two digits represent, therefore, is cardinally represented substance (which all counting numbers represent), as admixed with an equally potent essence (which zero represents). And what science found in the common contrast of these two digits is fundamental to all digital technology (real images), and the capability to instantaneously transfer these images of reality. This digital duality is common to both the substance and essence of life. The point emphasized is this: without this rational dual commonality of substance and essence, Digital Technology cannot exist. Similarly, all conflations of essence, i.e., unitary materiality resulting, as often applied irrationally to all aspects of human life, results in myriad excesses of concupiscent sins, which St. Paul had noted. ‘Documents Show Counselors Control LDS Assets’ The article in the August 15, 1993 St. George, Utah paper, surprised me. It furnished information that confirmed my reasoning about organic religious authorities, and that the LDS Church was neither special nor different. These facts confirmed that organic entities are not a reasonable surrogate of Christ. At best, they are no more than what Abraham Lincoln had observed of our constitutional republican form of government: i.e., OF THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, and BY THE PEOPLE. Therefore, the greatest reasonable question is this: when, if ever, are religious organs OF THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, and BY THE PEOPLE? Sans naturally inherent intelligence, religious organs must always depend on dogmatic adherence, i.e., cannot reasonably lay claim to noumenal intelligence.28

Noumenon n. 1. (in Kantian philosophy) something that seems

228

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

real, but cannot be truly understood, although people have some intuitive idea of it, as God or the soul. 2. A thing in itself; something that remains of an object of thought after all the categories of understanding, such as space, time, etc., have been removed from it. Phenomenon n. 1. a fact. Lightening is an electrical phenomenon. Fever and inflammation are phenomena of disease. [Organic religion is phenomenal, not noumenal.] Therefore, all temporal organizations are forms of phenomena, which cannot intelligently be celebrated as representing noumenal principles of religious truths, which Christ had taught by his words and his example: they cannot effect Christ’s noumenal purpose to sponsor salvation of the eternal human soul -- which intelligent reasoning capability is naturally temporally inherent of a human soul. The phenomenal physical self, i.e., all natural temporal substance is abandoned when the human soul naturally departs from temporal life and the natural substance naturally returns to whence it came. Leaving resurrection alone, Christ’s noumenal purpose is for humans to retain transcendently reasoned knowledge of temporal experience in each ‘virtuous’ person having ‘walked in the light of Christ’ (virtuous transcendence is attainable, only by seeking after ‘goodness,’ in the sense that Plato had observed). All is about God’s truth that only rationally, i.e., noumenally, is ever involved. This is recalled: All truth involves individual transcendence in the respect that individuals must reach beyond their material selves until a specific truth is fathomed to become a part of the individual's noumenal entourage of mind called knowledge. This thought agrees with Plato, I believe. About the grades of this truth, Charles H. Monson, Jr. offered this on Plato’s assessment of the human temporal condition:29

Pay careful attention to the various parts of [Plato’s] divided

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

229

line and notice how they are exemplified in [his] allegory. Plato believes reality consists of two aspects, that which is visible and that which is intelligible, and that the latter is the more important. This excerpt from Plato’s ‘Divided Line and the Allegory of the Cave’ confirm fundamental natural laws which Plato had observed:30

Whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of God appears last of all [reminding one of Kant’s description of noumenon], and is seen.only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light, and the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally either in public or private life must have his eye fixed. Both Theocratic organs, Catholic and Mormon (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), claim their organizations are ordained of God (like King Hammurabi had claimed his ‘divine right’ and as Lodewick Allison observed, each belief claims to uniquely represent God’s surrogate authority). The Catholics believe Christ authorized their organization through apostle Peter’s authority (whose name in Greek is like petra, a rock). Mormons discount this Catholic claim because scripture referred to revelation as ‘ the rock’ rather than to Peter, and keeping with this, they claim Christ is their authority by way of direct instructions given in visions to Joseph Smith, which had restored Priesthood and Church as had always existed with Christ as the Creator of all temporal life (polygamy, with temple building and worship are, however, clearly manmade dogmatic doctrines 31 extraneous to Christ’s commandments and mission). Then, as was disclosed in the Aug. 15 article, the LDS Church (its corporate membership organ) had been separated from The Corporation of the

230

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

President (the corporate entity legally chartered to conduct all legal and financial Church deontologies): the faith-based dogmatic oaths and rites of members were separated from the organic economic deontologies and mechanisms. In the sense of Goethe, speaking to Eckermann, which organic entity do the LDS leaders’ now serve most? And, by following lockstep politically with the Church’s leaders, which organic entity does the membership serve the most? : which represents Christ? Can Christ’s truth ever be represented organically? This asks whether Christ’s truth ever endures in the conflated embroilments of organic unitary materialism? Or, is Russell’s logic about positive belief in materialism, more truthful: 32

If we imagine a world of mere matter, there would be no room for falsehood in such a world, and although it would contain what may be called “facts,” it would not contain any truths, in the sense in which truths are things of the same kind as falsehoods. In fact, truth and falsehood are properties of beliefs and statements; hence a world of mere matter, since it would contain no beliefs or statements, would also contain no truth or falsehood. Regarding truth about Christ’s purposes (teleology), a constant a priori emphasis on Pure Love is critical. Christ’s critical truth is this: To Love God and not some but all humans (even tyrants). This excerpt about Christ’s pure truth is from section 209.2: The word Truth, the modern translation, isn’t often used in the Old Testament. The etymologically complex Troth better suits Old Testament meaning. Moses had revealed God as troth’s source: 33 able men, such as fear God, men of ‘troth,’ hating covetousness [When ‘troth,’ became translated as ‘truth,’ were essential complex meanings of faithfulness, fidelity, loyalty and promise lost?] . . . Be thou for the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

231

the causes unto God: And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do. Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of ‘troth’, hating [concupiscent?] covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and of tens. When truth evolved from ‘troth,’ or ‘the troth,’ clearly necessary meanings of faithfulness, fidelity, loyalty and promise were dogmatically shed along the way? These predicate adjectives have cardinal essentiality, i.e., necessary principle-based meaning. They describe eternal (rationally consistent) attributes of human nature which provide “necessary” foundations to “pure truth.” The phrase, Be thou for the people to God-ward, instructed Moses to focus on the essential sources of God’s troth with humankind, i.e., put a focus on “necessities” of faithfulness, fidelity, and loyalty [as the word mer re (emerere) defined in Part I and expanded in the following comments], in all cultural matters involving truth, morality, law, and order. After having pondered ontologism in results of abiding faithful reason, my subconsciousness apparently remained active during sleep. (My subconscious thoughts continued to pursue Plato’s Divided Line as F. A. Wolf had portrayed: The word mer re came so forcefully to mind in a dream that the following day I pursued its meaning. That mer re was an essential principle to be respected if not pursued in life, came forcefully to my mind while dreaming? However, mer re was not listed as a separate word, which suggested that my dream had been nothing more than an illusion. Then, quite surprisingly I found its meaning listed under emeritus: emeritus was the past participle of mer re ; meaning in Latin: ‘honorable

service to the end.’ Because physis and nomos explains mer re’s intended

232

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

meanings (like noumenal and phenomenal) are intrinsic of Plato’s Divided Line, this excerpt continues followings Plato: PLATO’S DIVIDED LINE ‘PHYSIS’ - - COSMIC: ‘Eternal Good’ Descending order of truth GOD’S LOGOS 34 PURE KNOWLEDGE (The predicate of God’s LOGOS is PURE LOVE: Faithfulness, fidelity, loyalty, promise: Jehovah’s Covenant. Lao-tse said this is Sinderesis,35 i.e., God is impartially constant) INTELLIGIBLE REALM FORMS: A B

knowledge ---

pure thought reason

Does the human cogito join ‘NOMOS’ to ‘PHYSIS,’ values of logos to the values of LOGOS (Ontologism)? ‘NOMOS’ WORLD: ONTOLOGICAL ‘temporal’ HUMAN logos: ontologism [Human logos is naturally corrupted by material aspects and by upbraiding dogma with a material focus. PURE LOVE is corrupted by visceral emotion, by such as love-hate-greed] VISIBLE REALM FORMS: C

Opinion --

belief

illusion

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

233

Therefore, the prescriptive fiducial values of mer re are synonymous with the values of troth as explained in Old Testament terms. And these values are those ascribed to God, the Creator’s LOGOS, which biblical translators attributed as ‘a God of truth,’ having faithfulness, fidelity, loyalty, and promise, which predicates variously describe these predicate values in intelligent logos, whether of God or man. With mer re meaning in Latin, ‘honorable service to the end,’ ‘true’ meanings of conservatism and liberalism are thereby given a value-based context: About the nature of Americans’ public interest, Ron Chernow cited the clash between Alexander Hamilton’s orthodox political conservatism and Thomas Jefferson’s heterodox political liberalism, which political conservative orthodoxy then had branded as radicalism: 36 . . . their clash inside George Washington’s first Cabinet proved so fierce that it would spawn the two party system in America. Philosophically, this public interest clash is as old as life. M. Heidegger, reasoning of causal sources, called the liberal side, rationalism, and the conservative side, irrationalism. Which, about justice, Grolier Encyclopedia gave this account of rationalism (physis) and irrationalism (nomos):

Like Western philosophy in general, philosophy of law in particular first emerged in ancient Greece. In the 5th century BC the Sophists and Socrates, along with his followers, took up the question of the nature of law. Both recognized a distinction between things that exist by nature (physis) and those that exist by human-made convention (nomos). The Sophists, however, tended to place law in the latter category, whereas Socrates put it in the former, as did Plato and Aristotle. [Plato viewed only reason as rational truth, as opinion consistently failed to qualify as

234

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

reason] Teleology vs. Deontological Mechanism are paradoxical causal theories of this temporal causal clash: Teleology is both temporal and eternal. And, while both are critically important to democracy, progress only advances when logical reason prevails. [End of Insert about rationalism (physis) and irrationalism (nomos)] Because in the temporal walks of life, in ‘opinionated’ belief as founded in dogma, the necessity to engage logical ‘reason,’ is usually distrusted and often is considered offensive to the irrational orthodoxy, important differences between faith and belief rest undisturbed in the roots of necessity’s definition: in root meanings as ‘trust,’ ‘sincerity,’ and ‘faithfulness,’ which roots understandably are defined differently in deontology than in teleology. The human eternal soul (essence) and the body’s temporal (substance) of life naturally embroil paradoxical thoughts and actions, which paradoxes are exacerbated by the causal deontological duty-based divergence from life’s purpose, i.e., teleology. World Book Encyclopedia refers one to causal ‘mechanist’ meaning for defining the contrast of deontology with teleology: because deontology became cultural mechanist orthodoxy intrinsic of causal mechanism, therefore, conservative culture expediently found advantages with a lack of moral goals or purposes. Pursuing this cultural orthodox definition further, World Book’s reference was B. Spinoza (1632-1677). 37 [Spinoza] accepted Rene Descartes idea that the universe is

divided into mind and matter. But he saw as Descartes did not, that if mind and matter are separate substances, they cannot interact. Spinoza decided that they are “attributes” of one substance, God. God, being infinite, has many attributes, but mind and matter are the only two that human minds can know. And, for this truthful logic, mechanist orthodoxy forced Spinoza to leave his Amsterdam home. And, unitary materialist orthodoxy in the

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

235

U.S., which nature is mechanist, politically installed The American System of Political Economy, sans legislation, the logically fallacious principle of which is causal mechanism, i.e., causal determinism. Regarding Mormonism, Spinoza’s view of mind and matter, also embroiled a longstanding doctrinal contest between Brigham Young and Orson Pratt: Pratt held that God was in everything; Brigham Young asserted the Adam-God theory [that the pure androgynous (having the physical characteristics of both sexes) Adam was the manifestation of divine immortality]. Pratt’s reasoning eventually prevailed: the LDS Church abandoned the Adam-God theory, at the time John Taylor became the Mormon President, (In conversation with a former Mormon polygamous offshoot member, I mentioned that following Brigham Young’s Presidency, the Adam-God theory had been abandoned as LDS Church doctrine: to which this former member retorted: “I believe the Adam-God theory, Don’t you?”) The LDS Church doctrine only then abandoned the androgynous Adam for an unwavering doctrinal faith in Christ’s atonement, even while temple rites of eternal marriage and spiritual wifery still remained aligned with the occult’s alchemical marriage, [J. L. Brooke cited other occultist groups (Ranters and Munster Anabaptists) that also practiced spiritual wifery 38 )] : In 1852, Young asserted this as LDS doctrine:39

236

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

In Deuteronomy 32, Moses described God’s voice as the natural posits of inferred ‘pure truth’ (i.e., God’s LOGOS, as naturally demonstrated, is the pure example that Moses gave).

a God of ‘troth’ [faithfulness, fidelity, loyalty, and promise] and without iniquity, just and right is he 1 - Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. 2 - 3 - My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distill as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass: Because I will publish the name of the Lord: ascribe ye greatness unto our God. 4 - He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of ‘troth’ and without iniquity, just and right is he. Nature is available to everyone -- is not restricted to Oligarches or the clergy: God’s natural inferences are for all who will observe and reason deliberately (in what has become known as the Scientific Method) about axiomatic principles and causality. (Great men of science as Einstein, for instance, believed in an axiomatic Creator but conformed to no organic religion) Biblical accounts of truth connote the broadest meanings of the former word troth. This pure truth is about the ethereal aspects of the human soul and human cognition that allows humans to accurately assimilate knowledge: the means of this inferential capability are axiomatic and can be known only in a holistic sense (as the inferential number B can only be known in the context of a circle). Kant had discussed this inferential quandary with Hume: Pojman’s review of their correspondence included this:41

Are there innate ideas, as the rationalists contend, or are our minds completely blank at birth and need experience to write upon them?

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

237

Kant began as a rationalist but on reading Hume was struck with the cogency of his argument. Hume “woke me from my dogmatic slumbers,” Kant wrote, and he henceforth accepted the idea that all our knowledge begins with [inferential] experience. But Kant thought that Hume had made an invalid inference in concluding that all our knowledge arises from experience. Kant sought to demonstrate that the rationalist had an invaluable insight [i.e., about “necessities” of ‘pure truth’]. . . that there is something determinate in the mind that causes us to know what we know [what Kant called synthetic apriori]. . .. Kant’s concern signaled a warning to humanity about their departures from pure truth; Kant’s warning commonly is ignored, particularly by mechanists, whose view is conflated by their dogmatic belief. The orthodox conservative ignorance, which dogmatically is popular, favored Auguste Comte’s positivism. In dogmatic positivism, human ignorance is indictable for having eschewed God’s always refreshing deliberately inferential natural voice of “pure truth,” preferring dogmatic religious ritual symbolism to rule deliberate inferentially logical contemplation. While the religious reformation of Christianity was arduous, it simply replaced dogma with more dogma: it failed to refresh culture with “pure truth.” For instance, Economic determinism (i.e., causal mechanism), which is a form of mercantilist dogma founded on conservative materialist theories and mechanisms, was implicitly sponsored by Calvin’s class structured religious hierarchy to emulate historical pre-Christianity, in which occultist laden rituals and Judaic code penalties were preferred to Christ’s atonement, which admonished love and forgiving. Joseph Smith had reestablished Mormonism with spooks and spirits, from which G. P Brockway claimed humanity was liberated: 42

We find mankind liberated from spooks and spirits, from lords and priests, by becoming mechanized. Once the universe was

238

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

running like a clock, there was nothing for it but to fit us to a wheel in the works -- perhaps a greater thing than a cog, but mechanical nevertheless. For us to be fit for this function, psychology had to subject us to mechanical controls. Or, as J. W. Miller said, we had first to lose our souls, then our minds; and finally, with the behaviorists, consciousness. Economic man is a prime example of this remarkable servomechanism. About mental blinds dogma imposes onto human deliberate reason, Robert Frost gave this answer to what is the purpose of life? 43 :

“What is the purpose of life,” the TV commentator asked? Frost paused a moment, then responded, “The purpose of life is ethereal’s pursuit of the material -- it must always go deeper into the material and materialism gets in the way.” [i.e, dogma identified as mechanist unitary materialism gets in the way!] Nature has neither endowed organic corporations with intelligence, nor with feelings or instinct (The Supreme Court, however, decided that corporations were ”fictitious persons” for to apply constitutional rights-based Amendments.) Until corporations are endowed with inalienable human capabilities, organic entities possess no naturally valid rational claim to representing Jesus Christ’s Gospel. Instead, temporal organic hierarchies are exclusively human designed to serve the manmade deontological temporal gods which Ludowich Allison observed as man’s upbraiding conscious act resulting from the gift of an inalienable freewill was this: 44

Man is given free will and his first conscious act is to use it to make himself into God. (His second act, when caught, is to blame somebody else.) For instance, theocratic leaders seem always to commit Moses’ sin, for which Moses was punished. Upbraiding or upstaging God by tautologically denying God’s antecedence, or by consequential authorities affirmed as an antecedent, in replacement of God,

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

239

represents an abhorrent sin against God.45 Wisdom is given liberally, but God regards His unprejudiced authorities, which are categorical, as exclusive principle to rationally be respected by living in the light of truth with no dualism. Brotherhood and Sisterhood Christian Convents during the dark ages of feudal potentates and their empires, had preserved critically necessary noumenal aspects of Christ’s Gospel. And because of Islam’s clannish Ayatollah-based strongholds, Moslems have perpetuated the ‘dark ages.’ The Crusades failed to implant Western brand Christianity, and our war on terrorism is unlikely to dissuade Islam’s feudal ways? Anyway, because this war protects expansions of exploitative corporate economic interests in the name of US citizens’ security, corporate economic exploitation is a real and rival political reason that is implicit to continuing this ill named war. The Mormon (LDS) Church increasingly is confronted with issues causing turmoil in the older and larger Western Catholicism. However, LDS officials (Officers of the Mormon Corporation of the President) administer the affairs of the LDS Church's corporate constitutional sovereignty, i.e., as an ‘absolutely ideal’ theocratic organ in which LDS the faithful members have restricted inalienable sovereign rights. Members must faithfully demonstrate their belief that the LDS Church, which includes The Corporation of the President, is commissioned of God and led by God. In reasonable fact, however, the organic LDS Church’s feudal, autocratic order holds that members must either follow their leaders, or they commit sin. Particularly when God fails to lead, the theocracy, as believed or not, is in fact, a dogmatic fraud (leaders then are rationally shown as fraudulent stand-ins for God, as Allison had observed). And, the theocracy, as administered in God’s name, is in fact a fascism form. Typically, Mormon leaders are concerned with preserving the Church-authorities as sustained and demonstrated by universal member faith as ‘the affirmed as true’ belief, based on thirteen prescribed Articles of Faith, which are committed to memory at an

240

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

early age. Fawn Brodie wrote this about this key LDS principle: 46 ` During the Nauvoo years [Which years followed many formative organic years of Mormonism.] . . . Joseph found time not only to

write the history of his church, but also to bring Mormon theology to its full flowering. His teachings were now rarely presented as revelations; they were either introduced in sermons or imparted secretly . . . He spent considerable time working out a simplified and lucid creed. This took the form of thirteen “articles of faith,” which became the functional basis of Mormonism. . . . Except for the reference to the Book of Mormon and the doctrine of continuous revelation, there was little in this creed to which a Bible-reading Christian could object, but simple because there was so little in it that was at all new. Actually it was only the first rung in the ladder of Mormon theology. It ignored the Order of Enoch, which had figured so prominently in the Church’s early history, because Joseph was done with it forever. It did not mention the doctrine of plurality of Gods, which was one of the pillars of the new philosophy. And it did not even hint at the new and rapidly developing temple ritual. Kirtland, Ohio is where the early Mormon years transpired (The Mormon Church was established on April 6, 1830):47

Three men were appointed to accompany Cowdery on his Indian mission. One was impetuous twenty-three year old Parley Pratt, who had been a convert only three weeks. He was a former Campbellite . . . he steered the party to Mentor, Ohio, where lived the preacher who had converted Pratt to Campbellism. This was Sidney Rigdon. . . . Three months before, he had quarreled with Campbell over the question of reestablishing the ancient communism of the primitive Christian

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

241

church. Clearly the most fanatical and literal-minded of the Disciples of Christ (Campbellism), Rigdon had so zealously espoused the principle of holding things in common that he had set up a small communistic colony in Kirtland . . . But Campbell had fought Rigdon bitterly on the subject. After an open break in the conference of August 1830, Rigdon left “chafed and chagrined” and never met with the Disciples in a general meeting afterward. In less than three weeks after the Mormons arrived [Oct. 1830] not only Rigdon but the whole of his communistic colony in Kirtland had been Baptized (i.e., became Mormons). Rigdon clearly originated the Mormon Order of Enoch, in Kirtland, Ohio: its economic failure [in 1837] caused a general uprising, causing Mormons to leave Ohio. The nucleus, to Mormonism’s origins included Smith (Cardinal witness, Seer, and translator), Cowdery (Cardinal witness and principal scribe), and Rigdon (Cardinal witness, a pastor with a communist following, and alleged holder of an unpublished script awaiting translation). J. L. Brooke’s wrote this: 48

In 1832 and 1833 Smith had announced revelations that radically challenged orthodox Christian doctrines of Creation and salvation. Matter and spirit had existed from eternity; they had not been created ‘ex nihilo’ by an omnipotent God. The Mormon faithful would inhabit a celestial kingdom; the priesthood, endowed with powers of sealing on earth, would rule as gods in this heaven. 49 The following is Brooke’s note to ‘The Mysteries defined’: 50

Smith’s theology went far beyond the universalism of the revolutionary sects to announce an invisible world structured by . . . the pre-creation existence of eternal spirits, and their material nature. Much of this doctrine must be ascribed to a

242

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

personal predisposition toward a hermetic interpretation of the “mysteries.” The culture of treasure divining in which Smith was immersed in the 1820s, grafted onto his parents inclination toward witchcraft fears and visionary experiences and reinforced by a popular knowledge of Masonic “secrets,” provided the solid groundwork for the development of such a theology. . . . Various contemporary theological dictionaries contained capsule summaries of doctrines of materialism and preexistence, for example, noting connections with ‘the Cabala.’ 51 Robert Paul has shown the similarities between the material pantheon of heavenly spheres and the progression of spiritual intelligences described in the theological astronomies of Thomas Chalmers and Thomas Dick and the cosmic orders that appear in Smith’s Book of Moses and the Book of Abraham. [Brooke’s documented his references.] Existentialism, as Soren Kierkegaard, whose reasoned thoughts, for instance, perceive purposes (teleology) rather than duties (deontology), which purposes transcend the deontology-based orthodox steps of religious hierarchal achievements, were considered sinners by an orthodoxy for transcending Mormon dutiful morality. The Mormon deontology perceives the Church membership sanctification by prosecuting perceived sinners’ ‘for their own good’ as moral duty: the intent is to sanctify the Saints by a procedural ‘hardened love,’ which purges sin, as in the analogy of ‘culling the bad apples from the barrel’: conventional deontological wisdom is to preserve the ‘pure’ by an arbitrary and partial culling process. In truth, however, the sanctification’s ill effects abundantly show in the results: few excommunicated sinners return to membership? One that surely did not return was Fawn M. Brodie, the author of No Man Knows My history. Her sin and the explanation for her excommunication were in results of her diligence and dedication in finding and disclosing fact-

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

243

based historical truth about the Mormon Prophet’s life and doctrine: her book was roundly declared as lies by the duty-bound LDS orthodoxy! However, while, her account of factual evidence was credible, some facts were either dismissed or missed. (For instance, George Downer’s trial and evidences that “suggests Joseph Sr. had been ‘seduced’ by a counterfeiting gang, briefly succumbing to the temptation of easy money,” Fawn Brodie rejected this evidence: J. L. Brooke did not.) However, as Brodie’s book is now vindicated by other historians’ accounts, still a sensitive LDS Church’s apparent sanctification intent to preserve belief-based Mormon doctrine, appears to have transcended Christ’s Gospel of forgiveness: Brodie’s excommunication has never been considered worthy of review. ---Should one be caught in a contentious circumstance of insubordination to the LDS Church authority, as attested and affirmed by belief, which claims transcendent authority from God for its acts (not practicing the sect-like authoritative dogma to faithfully follow the leaders’ council), or of transgressing the dutiful moral code (paying tithing, living the word of wisdom, attendance to meetings and assignments, and ‘partaking the sacrament’ and testimony bearing, etc.) sanctification is considered appropriate as meted by a Church Court of local priesthood leaders [Whom, however, as St. Paul confessed to the Romans (and St. John elaborated in his First Epistle), is as naturally prone to committing sins of ‘the flesh’ or expressing ‘opinion-based half truth,’ as routinely self dismissed but considered another’s sin, as Plato found naturally was a constant in his Visible Realm of cultural Orthodox truth?]. LDS Church priesthood-courtbased, judgements can (often intentionally do) devastate a ‘sinners’ social standing and church membership [Culturally, as those who became adjudged by New England’s Calvinist Puritans (as in Mrs. Anne Hutchinson experience) were victims, of which Joseph Smith’s heritage in Vermont was a witness and surely was, therefore, aware]. ---LDS members are, of course, as naturally humanly disposed as Catholics: statistics dealing with amoral concupiscent sin, crime and

244

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

such, has verified this fact: A comparative 1997 statistical study indicated that Salt Lake City was high on the list of cities, of like size, with most per capita crime. Official LDS authorities can be expected to preserve the “Latter-day Saint” image, of its members: either living in accordance with the inculcated transcendent morality of duty-based materialism-sect-based follow-the-leader, or they are prone for sanctioning. The Church’s dogmatic cultist administration, when sins of espousing deviant opinions increase, the cultist LDS hierarchy can be expected to protect the LDS cultism by sanctification: after culling the sinners, the abiding sanctified ‘saints’ might either be shocked or muted. " J. L. Brooke documented this evaluation: 52

The events of the autumn of 1993 clearly indicate that the [LDS] church hierarchy will not tolerate dissident view tinged with the hermetic [doctrine intrinsic to Freemasonry] tradition. After excommunicating the right-wing survivalist fringe in 1992, the hierarchy in 1993 turned against a range of liberal dissenters. Among those excommunicated were Maxine Hanks, D. Michael Quinn, and Paul Toscano, each . . .in some way advanced a hermetic interpretation of Mormon cosmology, most centrally the hermetic thesis of a dual gendered divinity. 53 Because of the temporal nature and circumstance of all humanity and particularly, as the statistical crime facts show for Salt Lake City, instead of a crime free sanctified ‘necessary reason-based truth’ (no opposites), the LDS Church’s sanctified member image is no more

Rocky Mountain Magazine, January/February 1980, recounted Utah’s Butch Cassidy (Robert LeRoy Parker) gang, concluding that LDS sect-based Danite Blood Atonement doctrine, was causally linked to the crimes. Blood Atonement doctrine was officially dismissed in a Dec. 12, 1889 Manifesto.

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

245

than an ‘illusion’ perpetuated by cultist symbolic Hermeticism. Instead, the saintly LDS Church image, as the Pope's advocacy, is something to strive for more than any temporal reality of any time and place. Procedures to sanctify the flock’s image must be tempered by the factual results, i.e., is the Church flock’s ‘sainthood’ improved by a measurable purity, which Christ’s Gospel exemplified? : Are those sanctified saints demonstrably set free from their nature-based concupiscent “sins of the flesh?” : and about the sanctified sinners, who in a supposed greater cognizance of their inherent concupiscent sins, for which the hierarchy had arraigned them, do they better mind their rancor of others’ sins by exhorting them, as Christ had exemplified, to go forth and sin no more! Officially, about the ‘latter day saint’ image, the LDS Church leaders expect a temporal practicing of transcendent morality, which Paul recognized transcended his temporal body. LDS Church officials assert that faithful members should, can, and do live according to the Church’s transcendent doctrine, which Officially is Priesthood (Priesthood is dogma, which holds that God’s divine-right-based authority is commensurately bestowed hierarchically by sacred rites, as bestowed to each priesthood holder, for to act in God’s name.) administered through an ordained Brotherhood: this asserted sanctified member image is supposed preserved by the priesthood hierarchy’s meted discipline (in the sense that chance has meted each one of us a measure of happiness 54): abiding the expected transcendent code is, however, onerous and at times impossible, however, most sanctified Priesthood members, at least, appear to abide in the expected meted transcendence: i.e., attending to their meetings and duties so to appear faithful, even while, on weekdays their transcended ‘suit of sainthood’ is usually exchanged for hyper material-based exploitive pursuits of profitable business, which statistically has been observed for representing Salt Lake City, as the US fraud capital. The meted Priesthood social image fronts the commonly accepted materialism-

246

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

based concupiscence: statistics, for instance, is surely no better than that of the Catholic' and other church memberships (My insurance business-based experience in the East and Midwest US, involved several close Catholic associates. Their conduct impressed me even with their concupiscent mettle and thorns in the mix with commonly strict personal religion-based ethical strategic values: In my opinion, they are as Christian as Mormons are, after Paul, who also sincerely aspire to live according to Christ’s strategic transcendent morality, but in the temporal meanwhile, simply live the best that they can, repairing their consciences and rededicating their strategic values by attending private strictly confidential confessions. (Christ’s condemnation of the Pharisees is just as applicable to all concupiscent humans in temporal life’s setting.) An inherent antinomianism is a critical temporal aspect of Christian redemption, as also a constant endeavor of ‘good works’ is temporally necessary. J. L. Brooke provided this comment about the Mormon hermetic dualism, which as acquaintance-based dualism has merit in situations of a paradox: 55 Once again the dualism of purity and danger [intrinsic of hermetic belief] has emerged among the Mormons.

James Coates has recently suggested that it is not improper to ask whether there is something unique about Mormonism that creates a deadly fringe element along with a main body of admirable family-loving, civilminded church goers. Is revelation something that, like alcohol, most people can handle without trouble, but which can drive certain vulnerable souls to wretched and dangerous excess? 56 What LDS doctrinal purity, as administered by the Church hierarchy, is unclear or misguided, from which, the above cultural effect was observed? : The recorded doctrinal debate between Brigham Young and Orson Pratt, was about this cultist Church Image, i.e., the whom and what attributes of faithful belief? Is it those believing the occultist

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

247

hermetic doctrine involving Brigham Young’s Adam-God, or those believing Orson Pratt’s reasoned conclusion of a fluid spiritually omnipresent God. Coates observed this LDS doctrinal duality: civilminded faithful members, alongside a deadly reasoned fringe element, of which Brooke’s above cited evidence of fundamental hermetic dogmatic symbolic doctrine, was intrinsic of Brigham Young’s Adam-God doctrine, which generally was believed by the “faithful.” And, because Brigham Young’s doctrine represents fundamental conservative Mormon orthodoxy, and Orson Pratt’s reasoning represented LDS liberal heterodoxy (the deadly fringe element), which incidently since Brigham Young’s Presidency, represents a doctrinal belief-based membership’s willing trade of Hermetic doctrinal fundamentalism for a purer Christian Gospel-based faith. This doctrinal dualism continues to present a belief-based paradox, which the LDS Church should resolve (Fundamentalist Mormon offshoots not only believe the cultist Adam-God doctrine, they practice it. The sanctified membership of the LDS Church believes the revelation involving polygamy is “pure doctrine,” however, does not practice polygamy. This disjunct between belief and practice perpetuates a paradox with orthodox doctrine on one side and reasoned faith-based practice on the other.) , which problem is similar to that which had confronted Brahmin culture? : a dogmatically devoted Brahmin culture concluded this solution, which eerily is similar to the official hierarchical LDS Church’s dogmatic approach: the great business of life is to . . . erect . . . barriers against the intrusion of the unpleasant. Mormonism’s analogous dogmatic resolution is, therefore, this:

The great business of the Official hierarchical Mormonism is to erect barriers against the intrusion of the unpleasant reasoning-based liberal fringe. However, truthful it may be.

248

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

249

Christian purity vs.Swinburn’s poetry in Brahmin culture James Russell Lowell’s Brahmin culture provided an example of the elitist dogmatic material-based ‘positivism,’ as devoutly, religiously practiced: Charles Swinburne’s poetry represented a vulgar heterodoxy, of continental realism, which is appurtenant to any search for reason-based truth? : which materialist belief, ‘positivism’ or ‘vulgarity‘, is the more virtuous, is questionable, as acquaintance with truth in either cannot be isolated from falsity? About such irrationality, Bertrand Russell wrote this: 57

sense in which truths are things of the same kind as falsehoods. In fact, truth and falsehood are properties of beliefs and statements; hence a world of mere matter, since it would contain no beliefs or statements, would also contain no truth or falsehood.

Our knowledge of truths, unlike our knowledge of things, has an opposite, namely ‘error.’ So far as things are concerned, we may know them or not know them, but there is no positive state of mind which can be described as erroneous knowledge of things, so long, at any rate, as we confine ourselves to knowledge by acquaintance. Whatever we are acquainted with must be something: we may draw wrong inference from our acquaintance, but the acquaintance itself cannot be deceptive. Thus, there is no dualism as regards acquaintance. But as regards knowledge of truths, there is dualism. We may believe what is false as well as what is true. . . . Since erroneous beliefs are often held just as strongly as true beliefs, it becomes a difficult question how they are to be distinguished from true beliefs. How are we to know, in a given case, that our belief is not erroneous? This is a question of the very greatest difficulty, to which no completely satisfactory answer is possible.

In almost the last year of his life he spent weeks rereading Rousseau, and was satisfied to dismiss him with the comment, “a monstrous liar, but always the first dupe of his own lie” (Letters, Vol. II, p 424). ‘Leaves of Grass’ he dismissed as affected, not original. He was shocked at Swinburne’s ‘Adamite’ heresy -‘When a man begins to lust after the Muse instead of loving her, he may be sure that it is never the Muse that he embraces’ (ibid., Vol. I, p 377). . . . And as late as 1886 he wrote, ‘I am a conservative (warranted to wash) and keep on the safe side - with God as against evolution.’ Naturally so provocative a doctrine as economic determinism [i.e., mechanism-based causality60] never showed its face in his study; . . . Even the home bred Knight-erant, Henry George, did not greatly interest him. . . . The political principles that he discovered in the smoke of his professor’s pipe were equally naive. He took himself seriously as a guide and mentor in matters political. He was fond of talking about the “noble science of politics”; yet he never took the trouble to ground himself in the elements of the subject. He had scarcely read the primer of political theory. Burke was probably the only political writer whoever made any impression on his mind. Of American constitutional history he was as ignorant as a politician, and when in Civil War days he began

Russell stands out for his logical criticism of common definitions of truth: particularly when dealing with fact-based ‘contingent truth,’ as for instance, asserted, based on ‘unitary materialism’ or ‘positivism.’58

If we imagine a world of mere matter, there would be no room for falsehood in such a world, and although it would contain what may be called ‘facts,’ it would not contain any truths, in the

Vernon Louis Parrington wrote the following about James Russell Lowell’s belief-based ‘positivism,’ which is compatible with the LDS Church’s dogmatic hierarchical ‘contemporary conservatism.’ 59

250

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

to scratch the field of politics, he only uncovered certain old Federalist prejudices that lay hidden under his later accumulations. These historical conservative thoughts led me to this heterodox conclusion about waging ‘war on terrorism.’ (Because our war on terrorism resulted from Islamist organic opposition to our dogmatic capitalist “positivism,” our war, like that of the Crusades, has an underlying spiritual aspect that is conflated by orthodoxy rather than a material disjunct. Our capitalist war, embroils a paradox-based confusion involving truth and falsity, which neither language nor logic can resolve: There exists no rational basis, therefore, nothing to gain!) V. L. Parrington had described how Brahmin culture viewed Swinburne, which view might mirror the LDS view of sin: 61

It was the romanticism of Brahmin culture, with all Falstaffian vulgarity deleted, and every smutch of the natural man bleached out in the pure sunshine of manners. It was Victorianism of a more maidenly purity than the English strain, so carefully filtered by passing through the close Puritan mesh that the smallest impurities were removed. The first of literary commandments was the commandment of reticence. Literature was conceived of as belonging to the library and the drawing-room, and it must observe the drawing-room amenities. Only a vulgarian would lug a spade there. Any venture into realism was likely to prove libidinous (lewd), and sure to be common. Certainly Margaret Fuller had overstepped the bounds of decency with her remarks about women of the streets. The Adamite School was the vulgar expression of the natural man, and Continental realism French and Russian - was only bringing the gutter into the library. . . . The case for the true church of literature, as against the Adamite and other heresies, was admirably stated by Lowell:“I have not seen Swinburne’s new volume - but a poem or

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

251

two from it which I have seen shocked me, and I am not squeamish. . . . Why should a man by choice go down to live in his cellar, instead of mounting to those fair upper chambers which look towards the sunrise of that Easter which shall greet the resurrection of the soul from the body of this death? Virginibus puerisque(for maidens and boys)? To be sure! let no man write a line that he would not have his daughter read. . . . But I have outlived many heresies, and shall outlive this new Adamite one of Swinburne. The true church of poetry is founded on a rock, and I have no fear that these smutchy backdoors of hell shall prevail against her.” (Letters, Vol. I, p.377) Earlier, Parrington also said this about Lowell’s Brahmin culture:62

The discussion of the New England mind hitherto has kept pretty much to the outskirts of Boston, to Concord and Roxbury and undistinguished precincts; it has not penetrated the Back Bay where dwelt the authentic representatives of Brahminism, nor has it concerned itself greatly with Cambridge that was a lesser Back Bay. Nevertheless there were other ideals than those of ‘transcendentalism’ and social reform in the New England of the renaissance -- ideals of culture, of scholarship, of ‘belles lettres’ to which the Brahmin mind contributed, and which after the subsidence of the ferment came to dominate genteel New England and for a generation largely influenced American letters. To the revolutionary aspirations of the forties the Back Bay contributed little. [In this, a connection of revolution to Brahminism’s conservatism was recorded.] Brahmin Boston might turn Unitarian with Channing, but it was at heart neither French romantic not German Idealist; it desired rather culture for its own sake, and scholarship it regarded as the handmaid of culture. It hoped of course that righteousness and the will of God

252

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

should ultimately prevail in human affairs, but it was not exigent in its demands. Occasion and means it willingly left to God, anticipating that the walls of Jericho must fall of their own weakness. It is surprising how little the greater issues of the time ruffled the serenity of the Brahmin mind, and how uncritical were its judgments on such issues as came under its review. Divided between state Street and the Back Bay, its life ran a smoothly agreeable course with no hint of potential antagonisms between exploitation and culture. It followed so strictly the injunction, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth, that the two were almost total strangers to each other. Like Edith Wharton’s contemporary Knickerbockers, the Brahmins conceived the great business of life to be the erection of barriers against the intrusion of the unpleasant. They took it ill when those barriers were assaulted by rude militants, and when indisputable Brahmins -- men like Edmund Quincy and Wendell Phillips -- took part in the assault, the Back Bay regarded them as more than a little queer. Lowell’s devotion to Brahmin culture (the great business of life to . . . erect . . . barriers against the intrusion of the unpleasant) undoubtedly was Swinburne poetry’s rebellious target (In our nation’s contemporary culture, of war on terrorism, Swinburne’s rebellion might easily have been called a terrorism threat). Lowell’s exclusive focus on ‘proper’ text and style demonstrated his dogmatic affinity to ‘lust’ for the ‘Muse,’ rather than to unconditionally ‘love’ her. [Then, analogously progressively replace ‘lust’ with ‘concupiscence’ (‘greed’), human passion, then moves past ‘eroticism’ to ‘disdain’ or ‘hate,’ and the inward turned conservative resulting cultural value exposes LDS sanctification, just as Brahminism, for what it, in fact, is.] And, while Swinburne’s depraved lifestyle maybe represented as pure love more than Lowell’s had, his observation about the subjective spectrum of

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

253

love clearly is the more critically truthful”: When a man begins to lust after the Muse instead of loving her, he may be sure that it is never the Muse that he embraces.” To Lowell, lust was an improper subject for literary consideration. Particularly he believed such smutchy words represented thoughts from the basement of life and were, therefore, unfit for maiden ladies and boys to read. That Lowell’s dogmatism for “proper text and style” closed his mind to perceptions of essential spiritual reality, which correspondingly defines reasoned pure truth with no opposites, which in the falseness of Lowell’s belief he supposed that he represented pure truth, left him unawares. His own passionate prejudice was therefore more analogous to lusting for the cultural Muse of the upper chambers of life, than loving her. And, while unawares of his dogmatic subjectivity, we may be eventually surprised that it never was the Muse that he embraced. Definitions of truth do not hinge on factual qualities of the object, the objective reality. Instead, ‘trueness’ hinges on the accuracy of human’s perception of the object. In this, it has often been said that love is blind, as it forgives flaws, untrueness, intrinsic of the object. So, even in love there is responsibility to accurately perceive objects accurately, for love to represent truth with no opposites. Flaws must be perceived as they are, and with Pure Love being naturally objective, one's selfish, exploitative and forgiving inclinations are important to Pure Love as critical observation is to deliberate reasoning: subjective inclinations of belief or faith are either transcended, or Pure Love does not exist. And only in Pure Love is Pure Truth perceived. Pure Love dwells in the objective realm, i.e., is perceptive love that is exclusively outward-turned onto the object’s trueness. Pure love, untiringly seeks to understand its object:63

In the degree in which I have been privileged to know the intimate secrets of hearts, I ever more realize how great a part is played in the lives of men and women by some little concealed germ of abnormality. For the most part they are occupied in the task of

254

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

stifling and crushing those germs, treating them like weeds in their gardens. There is another and better way, even though more difficult and more perilous. Instead of trying to suppress the weeds that can never be killed, they may be cultivated into useful or beautiful flowers. For it is impossible to conceive any impulse in a human heart which cannot be transformed into Truth or into Beauty or into Love. Havelock Ellis While Swinburne represented ‘the basement’ - in the instance, of secrets of hearts, i.e., human abnormalities, and Lowell the ‘upper chambers,’ Swinburne’s observation about ‘lust’, i.e., a concupiscence form, supplanted for ‘love’ is what Plato’s Visible Realm of belief and opinion is categorically about. And, Plato’s Intelligent Realm of reason, in which naturally antecedent principles are of logical necessity, is where pure love and pure truth are. Lowell’s emotion is concupiscent prejudice that affects his opinion and in this prejudiced pride of life, is of the world that St. John observed would expire. And, this was Swinburne’s reasonable resultant observation: 64

When a man begins to lust after the Muse instead of loving her, he may be sure that it is never the Muse that he embraces. Equally, each LDS act of excommunication, which is done to preserve the LDS’ image, a form of lust, neither is done in love nor in truth. Those, who administer the LDS Church’s sanctification discipline, supplant the fundamental organic LDS hierarchical prejudice ( i.e., lust) in what they believe is organic love (whichever love, or truth of organic conservatism has no natural capability to know). If the conservative perspective of LDS leaders were to change to embrace a true love-based hierarchy, the emphasis of the church’ image would then be turned onto the ways and means of improving the temporal conditions and concerns of the individual sinners’ uniqueness, as Havelock Ellis had expressed. Until then, the LDS church will never embrace the Muse of faith (in any sense of the sinner member’s soul), whether targeted for sanctification or not. R. Niebuhr’s following

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

255

thought strategically describes the complex reality and inevitable resulting conflict:

the faulty strategy of idealists who have too many illusions when they face too many realists who have too little conscience. Purer Truth in this instance, sides with Niebuhr's ‘realists.’ Niebur’s ‘idealists’ (who, generally are the absolute believers of dogma) also are the empiricists of Plato’s Visible Realm of belief and opinion. Because of the conservative idealism’s materialist ‘positive’ belief, which they put their absolute trust in, they conventionally brand the rational ‘realists’ of Plato’s Realm of reasoned knowledge, as flipping and flopping on issues, as for instance, blaming science (which is ‘reason-based’ reality in the temporal setting, must always remain as reasoned theory that constantly is open for revision) as fallacy. Putting Plato’s Realm of Reason into political perspective, a state’s organic philosophic definitions are recalled: Since dogma is designed and politics contrives to officially assert the pseudo philosophical tautological fallacy as society’s axiomatic principles, it behooves those who seek reason-based truth to understand clearly and logically ‘true’ axiomatic principles inherent to the philosophic organization or government. 65

Fascism, communism, and democracy, are each based on a philosophic position. [While the Mormonism in Kirtland, Ohio was described by Fawn Brodie as communism (an ‘Absolute idealism’ organic form), Brodie observed that Brigham Young’s Mormonism, as “rigorous suzerainty,” also was an ‘Absolute idealism’ form.] [While feudal government forms are purely fascist, unitary materialist communism, socialism, and capitalism, when politically playing within a Rational Empiricism, definition, even while dogmatically lacking logical rationality, therefore, would fit more with the Absolute Idealism definition, persist to claim that they represent Rational Empiricism while masquerading their logical irrationality as

256

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

rationality, which logically it clearly is not.] Fascism is based on ‘Absolute idealism’

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

257

fact, fascist! : ‘divine right’-based theocracy, is fascist: start 66

‘Absolute idealism,’ on which fascism is based, stresses the existence of one ‘absolute reality,’ a being or element that is complete in itself and does not depend on anything outside itself. It asserts that there is a principle of authority expressing the will of the absolute. As a political philosophy, ‘absolute idealism’ considers the ‘state,’ or the national government, as the absolute, according to this philosophy, everything in society is a part of the state and subservient to it. From these doctrines follow dictatorship by an absolute ruler, rejection of parliamentary procedures, and submission of the individual to the state. World Book Dictionary (1965), p 716 defines fascism:

1) A strongly nationalistic movement in favor of government control of industry and labor and opposed to radical socialism and communism. 2) Any system of government in which property is privately owned but all industry and labor are regulated by a strong national government, while all opposition is rigorously suppressed. 3) The doctrines, principles, or methods of such a government or movement. Only in the dogmatic materialist acquisitive sense of purpose, which deontology is designed to achieve conquest and exploitation, is the social mechanism-based Absolute Idealism effective with gaining profit.

Definition (3) is important! When a political ‘movement’ espousing fascist doctrines, principles, or methods, as when the political economy is controlled by that political ‘movement,’ including all those of the organic social makeup, then that organization intends conquest and exploitation, and it then is, in

with theocratic-based organic authority, as grounded in materialism, then consider that God is displaced by the dogmatic ‘divine right’ based belief) , and the doctrines, principles, or methods of fascism’s definition is then clearly evident. Materialist corporate entities are fascist: when a Corporation’s deontological focal duty is to gain ‘profits,’ that corporation clearly has espoused the fascist “Absolute Idealism” definition, i.e., the corporation’s deontology is absolutely limited to materialist unitary materialism, which in Russell’s logical view has conflated the acquaintance-based difference of truth and falsehood: 67

‘Dialectical materialism,’ the basis of communism, asserts that only material things are real. It believes that human nature, human beings, and society as a whole are products of the economic system. This philosophy states that all change occurs through a struggle of opposing forces in society, and comes to a climax by revolution. Accordingly, communism opposes religion because of its spiritual nature. It wishes to destroy the present capitalistic economic system, and to develop a new type of man and a new type of economic and social system.

258

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Communism is defined by World Book Dictionary (1965) p. 402:

(1) A philosophy or system, deriving from Marxism, advocating state ownership of land and property, postulating class conflict, and seeking the overthrow of noncommunist societies in behalf of the proletariat. [Russian style ‘Nihilism’, i.e., the common rejection of authority, must be factored into the materialist pseudo philosophic foundation of communism, which in the USSR officially came to be, which also was partial to belief in the Hindu God, ‘Siva,’ the Destroyer; both beliefs, nihilism and the god Siva, the destroyer, should be considered in the foundation of the these unitary materialism-based definitions. (A key factor of this definition, which is common to communism and capitalism, is absolute belief in a unitary or conflated form of materialism, which belief made officially has obviated the need to evaluate the loss of logic as Russell had cited.)]

(2) A political, social, and economic system in which the state, governed by an elite party, controls production, labor and distribution, and largely, the social and cultural life and thought of the people. (3) A social order in which property is held in common by the community or the state; communalism. Communism and socialism are systems of social organization under which the means of production and distribution of goods are transferred from private hands to the government. The classic difference between the two systems lies in the different means they take to establish themselves: communism emphasizes the impracticability of replacing the existing social order by any means other than armed force or outside intervention; the advocates of socialism seek to establish it by peaceful means, by legislation rather than force. Note that a government is always social organization-based. Both

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

259

communism and socialism, hold property in common and control means of production and distribution of goods. Government, however, always is an insurance form because of its social organization, and always is the insurer of last resort in all catastrophic events because private insurance is never fully capable to spread the property losses onto the private insurance systems’ social bases. Rational Empiricism, the basis of democracy ‘Rational Empiricism,’ the philosophic basis of democracy,

believes that the world is both material and spiritual [i.e., civic dualism]. It holds that change and progress occur by applying reason to experience, and human nature can be changed and improved by experience. On the basis of these principles, democracy stresses discussion and the use of reason as a way of arriving at conclusions. It emphasizes the importance of tolerance and freedom in developing intelligent, loyal citizens. ‘Democracy’ is defined [World Book Dictionary (1965) p 528]:

1) a government that is run by the people who live under it. 2) a country, state, or community having such a government. 3) The common people, distinguished from the privileged class, or their political power. 4) The treatment of others as one’s equals. --To which philosophical “social organization” does pure “socialism” fit? : “Absolute Idealism,” or “Rational Empiricism?” : traditional materialist conservatives have claimed absolutely to hate “socialism!” And, this passionate “property-rights-based” belief was the fundamental conservative political consideration brought to our unique national republic of representative social economic organization, i.e., Whigs, when the representative political administrative authority, officially installed economic mechanism-based causal determinism, which economic determinism affected all in government’s social base.

260

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Parrington wrote: 69

. . . that the second [absolutist philosophy] came to dominate the thinking of the mercantile, capitalistic America and took form in Hamiltonian Federalism. Unfortunately this logical alignment of diverse economic groups was obscured by the needs of practical politics, and in passing through the explosive Jacksonian revolution both philosophies underwent subtle changes. Jacksonianism imposed upon America the ideal of democracy to which all must thereafter do lip service, but it lost its realistic basis in a Physiocratic economics and wandered in a fog of political equalitarianism; and the Whiggery that issued from Federalism turned to the work of converting the democratic state into the servant of property interests. [The Supreme Court has remained federalist imbued.] Alexander Hamilton and Federalists, which followed Hamilton, asserted the following principle social economic belief: They have argued prescriptively and positively mercantilism-based doctrine: 70

A commercial people understands that a government that serves the interests of men of property, serves the interests of all, for if capital will not invest how shall labor find employment? To which Whigs added the causal-determinism, i.e., dogmatic causal mechanism, which officially and falsely, became installed as an absolute social economic organic principle. This section 205 excerpt defined the dogma to which economic causal mechanism referred:

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) concluded that only matter exists (as the Encyclopedia 71 stated), therefore, Hobbes had asserted that unitary materialist causal mechanism was a fundamental of Leviathan (published in 1651): which like dogmatic belief in a ‘flat earth, ‘mechanism’ is also unitary materialism-based belief. Mechanism, i.e., ‘the universe behaves like a big machine,’ 72

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

261

is pragmatically deduced orthodox conservative causal belief, which because consequential, i.e., isn’t an antecedent necessity and, therefore, fails as logically reasoned necessary principle? So, to which philosophical social organic definition, “Absolute Idealism,” or “Rational Empiricism,” is this conservative passion or hate intended? Because capitalists and fascists, as well as communists and socialists, each when reasonably socially restrained, are political integrals of the civic dualism, wether or not they agree with spiritual and material basis of“Rational Empiricism” (i.e., Republicans are prone to materialist belief, and Democrats are prone to rational beliefs) which politically underpin our unique American constitutionally “Rational Empiricism”-based experiment: this resulting complex civic dualism has this philosophical social organic definition, provides a starting point from which rational and irrational departure is certain:

Communism and socialism are systems of social organization under which the means of production and distribution of goods are transferred from private hands to the government. --Idealistic mechanist conservative materialism has dogma as principle and, therefore, is not rational. Russell’s philosophic contemplation of materialist belief declared it nonsensical nothingness rather than truth: Russell’s logic, again, is this:73

262

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

dogmatic absolutes since all things’ material will pass away. From this it is clear that whatever the conservative passion or hate is, it conveniently and falsely intends to absolutely politically impose its nihilistically materialist “idealism,” onto the U. S. Constitutionally chosen “Rational Empiricism?” : Roger William’s “social usage,” however, which is the foundational social organic element to all social organization, provided this rational reparation to the economic paradoxes experienced in our constitutionally rationally democratic “Rational Empiricism”-based constitutional social organic state: The naturally complex human will as disposed in material belief to dogmatized idealism from which to make constitutional laws and organize corporate mechanisms which are then legally licensed to operate as “fictitious persons” in competition with human individuals. We might call this deterministic unitary materialism, however, more importantly a rational human will also considers the fundamental ‘social usage’ availability (Which, as Roger Williams had observed, is the arch basis of the “Rational Empiricism”-based social organic form, in which Mutual Insurance, the parent of all ‘for profit’ insurance, also resulted from ‘social usage,’ which uniquely had originated in American democratic philosophy, and has nothing to do with forms of philosophical socialism). Social Security and Medicare are pure ‘social usage’-based insurance, the independent funding of which is administered by government, however, does not economically draw any financing from tax-based government administration. [Because Social Security’s Funding is a separate tax basis, called SS contributions. And President Reagan had, in 1984, installed a surplus contribution’s tax, which continues, and government has routinely spent this surplus contributions, as its general revenue, the government, therefore, has amassed an IOU to the Social Security Fund that soon will reach $10 trillion. It is, therefore, preposterous to consider Social Security as financially endangered or bankrupt.] Parrington wrote: 74

The state, then, is society working consciously through experience

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

263

and reason, to secure for the individual citizen the largest measure of freedom and well-being. . . . But if sovereignty inheres in the majority will [or in corporate -- secular or religious -- materialist organic Leviathan forms], what securities remain for individual and minority rights? What fields lie apart from the inquisition of the majority, and by what agencies shall the engrossing of power be thwarted? The replies to such questions, so fundamental to every democratic program, he discovers in a variety of principles; to the former in an adaptation of the spirit of medieval society that restricted political functions by ‘social usage,’ and to the latter by the application of local home rule, the initiative and the referendum, and the recall. His creative conception was an adaptation of . . . corporation, of a group of persons voluntarily joining for specific purposes under the law. Questions about the conservative-liberal politically complex civil duality that apparently must continually be redressed, are these: (1) Is the fundamental nature of our constitutional government based on Roger Williams “social usage?” Is government itself the ultimate insurance form? : i.e., government is the organic insurer of last resort? [The list of government insurance forms continually expands since private insurance is incapable to underwrite and cover catastrophic events: FEMA was a government program installed to recompense individual losses in case of catastrophic events, Flood insurance is another example, as Crop-Hail is also.] Is human health science, for instance, a unitary materialist commodity to which profit-based mercantilism is the deduced mechanist application? Or, ultimately do not for profit insurance forms of government provide the better fit? If health care is considered a civic human right instead of a consumer

264

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

good, government is the only answer! (2) Are the licensed Corporations of each state’s government, particularly those operating as private insurers, also fundamentally licensed “social usage”-based organic organizations? In all catastrophic instances, which private licensed insurer is independently capable to serve as the insurer of last resort? So far, none has proved to be so capable! (3) When officially the sovereignty of “we the people” are politically replaced by the financially dominant corporate political influence, does this social political shift eventually convert “Rational Empiricism” into “Absolute Idealism?” (4) Are government’s economic deficits a negative form of “social usage?” Do these socialized deficits represent a socialism form? : In the context of conservative claims that government’s social insurance forms qualify as “socialism,” do not the $ ten Trillion and growing federal deficits, which essentially resulted under conservative administrations since 1980, represent the source of this negative “socialism?” After all, we have come to recognize either this ultimate nature of exploitative capitalism, or a big surprise is ensured, as regards this truism about exploitation:

We routinely privatize profits and socialize debt and deficits! The LDS Church hierarchy, sometimes covertly, has reacted to and restricted social damage to its belief-based ideal reputation. ‘Realist’ historians as Fawn Brodie, for instance, are specific targets for the LDS doctrinal ‘damage control’: the LDS hierarchy has vigorously assailed both the message and messenger. This hierarchy is like any enterprising materialist absolutist idealism, which acts as Brahminism: the great business of life is to . . . erect . . . barriers against the intrusion of the unpleasant. And, while the LDS’ corporate businesses are also philosophical absolute idealism forms, the belief-based ‘divine right’-based LDS

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

265

hierarchy restrains God’s “free flowing” essential freely given ontologism so to cardinally remain as the hierarchy’s own:75

If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. Differences between faith-based wisdom, and belief, are important in the aspect that wisdom differs from knowledge. By asserting an Absolute Idealism-organic form as a philosophical principle, as LDS members absolute fundamental belief or absolutist ‘fascist’ hierarchical organic order does, St James’ above cited “free flowing” essential ontologism of God is thereby restricted ,i.e., conflated: When essential organic purposes, i.e., teleology, is conflated by a unitarily materialism-based duty-based ideology, i.e., deontology, whether to gain material ‘profit’ or deliver God’s wisdom, the ideology conflates God to a materialist form, and God’s “free flowing” will and order is compromised. Truly, ‘fascism’ or fundamental LDS hierarchical Hermeticism satisfies God’s free flowing will and order! * * While a ‘corporate soul’ has a long history, as respects organic religious entities, corporations, which are licensed by civil authority to practice exploitative economic enterprise, has, a post U.S. Constitution legal history, which Constitution, Mormonism mostly ignored the inalienable human rights aspects, until 1896, and Utah statehood. Recently, as J. L. Brooke had reported, an LDS sanctification targets were certain intellectual activists that sympathized with civil rights of Gays and Women, which intellectuals had advocated changes in discriminatory LDS organic doctrine and policies: 76

The events of the autumn of 1993 clearly indicate that the [LDS] church hierarchy will not tolerate dissident view tinged with the hermetic tradition. After excommunicating the right-wing survivalist fringe in 1992, the hierarchy in 1993 turned against a range of liberal dissenters. Among those excommunicated were

266

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Maxine Hanks, D. Michael Quinn, and Paul Toscano, each of whom in some way advanced a hermetic interpretation of Mormon cosmology, most centrally the hermetic thesis of a dual gendered divinity. 77 These realists, as Fawn Brodie had done, had exercised their constitutional sovereign right of “free speech.” The LDS hierarchy’s organic reaction perceived a threat to the LDS Church members’ belief, then bundled together persons and their divergent purposeful constitutional rights, to apply Church sanctification. This sanctification application, reported by J. L. Brooke, was neither common nor usual. Did the LDS organic hierarchy intend to exploit a cultural prejudice regarding gay lifestyles? Associating women’s constitutional inalienable rights’ along with inalienable rights of gays,’ equally tainted by a religious cultural prejudice, therefore, deserving of the same sanctification, did the organic Church hierarchy deliberately act to appease an entrenched cultural prejudice rather than change the Church’s organic belief? If so, did this organic application of sanctification, ‘mask an inculcated pernicious fundamental prejudice?’: Was this organic sanctification based on a ‘true’ ‘love of Christ,’ or as rational inference suggests, on exploiting an inculcated culture?! Despite its usual practice to not publicize sanctifications, this broad and general sanctification was openly publicized. In the resulting uproar, the Mormon Prophet’s grandson publicly declared his Church membership resignation. Now, years’ later, the cultural waves of this official action have settled. And LDS sanctifications continue! Fawn M. Brodie’s brother, then an LDS Stake Officer, when honoring his sister-in-law (my older sister), at a viewing of her remains prior to burial, in personal conversation with me, confirmed that Fawn Brodie had been seriously honest and brilliant, particularly in her chosen profession as a Historian; her truthful pursuit was about facts and their inference; she had no original intend to damage the LDS Church or its members, he said. Was truth more important to her than

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

267

her church membership? Her Book’s title, No Man Knows my History, was excerpted from Joseph Smith’s public address made on April 7, 1844 to an audience of ten thousand. Months later, Joseph Smith, in Carthage jail, was mobbed and assassinated. 78

“You don’t know me; you never knew my heart. No man knows my history. I cannot tell it; I shall never undertake it. I don’t blame anyone for not believing my history. If I had not experienced what I have, I could not have believed it myself.” Since that moment of candor at least three-score writers have taken up the gauntlet. Many have abused him; some have defied him; a few tried their hands at clinical diagnosis. All have insisted, either directly or by implication, that they knew his story. But the results have been fantastically dissimilar. In official Mormon biographies he has been made a prophet of greater stature than Moses. Nineteenth-century preachers made him a lecherous rogue; and twentieth-century chronicles have been bemused with what they diagnosed as paranoiac delusions. The reason for these disparate opinions is by no means lack of biographical data, for Joseph Smith dared to found a new religion in the age of printing. When he said “thus saith the Lord!” the words were copied down by secretaries and congealed forever into print. There are few men, however, who have written so much and told so little about themselves. To search in his six-volume autobiography for the inner springs of his character is to come away baffled. The reason is partly that he dictated all of it to secretaries as the official history of his church (note that if it is Smith’s church, it cannot be “the Church of Jesus”). His story is the antithesis of a confession. . . . Wherever Joseph Smith went, he roused a storm, and from

268

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

his earliest years country newspapers gave him liberal publicity. Copies of these newspapers, some of which antedate all the early Mormon histories, have fortunately been preserved. During his short, tumultuous career Joseph was hauled into court more than a score of times, on charges varying from disturbing the peace to treason. Many of the court records are also extant. Thus, it is not that documents are lacking: it is rather that they are fiercely contradictory, and - even more important - that they are scattered from Vermont to California. The task of assembling these documents -- of sifting first hand account from third-hand plagiarism, of fitting Mormon and non-Mormon narratives into a mosaic that makes credible history, absorbing all the while the long-forgotten realities of religion and politics between 1805 and 1844 -- is not a dull one. It is exciting and enlightening to see a religion born. And Joseph’s was no mere dissenting sect. It was a real religious creation, one intended to be to Christianity as Christianity was to Judaism: that is a reform and a consummation. . . . The source of his power lay not in his doctrine but in his person, and the rare quality of his genius was due not to his reason but his imagination. He was a mythmaker of prodigious talent. And after a hundred years the myths he created are still an energizing force in the lives of a million followers . The moving power of Mormonism was a fable - one that few converts stopped to question, for its meaning seemed profound and it inspiration was contagious. [In Mormonism’s third millennium now, more than ten million members embrace it.] The organic LDS hierarchy excommunicated Brodie for publishing her history of Joseph Smith, the key human prophet of Mormonism’s claim to authority first of Adam, then Jesus Christ’s Gospel. Patrick Henry’s

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

269

great words spoken to Virginia’s Second Convention, are on her side?:

I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me [the] liberty [to tell the truth]; or give me death. Or Alexander Hamilton's defense of Freedom of The Press:

The loss of liberty to a generous mind is worse than death. And, John Adams’ words on liberty and knowledge are significant:79

Let us dare to think, speak and write . . . Let every sluice of knowledge be opened and set a-flowing. For the documented factual evidences provided, Fawn Brodie’s truth is more stalwart because it is reasoned, than Joseph Smith’s, or his organic hierarchy’s cohorts after him, whose claimed religious belief accorded far more with Plato’s Realm of opinion-based truths, which embroil in paradoxical opposites. However, Joseph Smith’s organic hierarchy’s LDS belief-based success has excelled in its comparatively short existence. As compared with Moses’ (Num. 20), Smith’s also, as all others invoking God’s sacred authority for their acts, must trustfully tread, or God’s invoked natural consequences are assured: God, to which St. John gave the proper name LOGOS , will not be disparaged, upstaged or trifled with. About religious faith (i.e., ontological belief in God), Smith, a temporal human, is no more important than another, however, in truthful instances, Smith’s message is critically important, as human intelligence and St. John’s testimony (I John 2:16) are critical. And, now as ten million Mormon ‘believers’ will tell you that their faith-based testimony is in Christ’s message and purpose (not the Book of Mormon over Bible, but a congruous testimony). In this, Mormonism’s religious value, as evolved, is unexcelled. Change that occurred in Utah essentially is responsible for the LDS doctrinal evolution, still it will not discard the outworn baggage: as this April 26 article in The Salt Lake Tribune makes clear:

Order bars dad from discussing polygamy By Brooke Adams

Rocky Ridge

A Utah father is fighting an order that

270

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

bars him from sharing his fundamentalist Mormon views with his children – or even taking them to this small town he now calls home, where most residents hold a religious belief in polygamy that a judge deemed “harmful.” Joseph Compton doesn’t like the label “Fundamentalist Mormon.” Instead, he prefers to describe himself as believing in “the gospel as Joseph Smith originally wrote it,” which includes the religious tenet of plural marriage. But that belief has put him outside the law, 4th District Judge Donald J. Eyre said in a ruling last fall that gove Kathleen Compton temprrary custody of the couple’s four children. Eyre ordered Joseph Compton, 49 to not “discuss polygamy or plural marriage with the minor children, allow the children to be in close proximity to those [other than himself] who practice polygamy or plural marriage or who aid or abet those who do.” ... [Because the LDS Church perpetuates belief in polygamy, as Joseph Smith’s prophesy, while no longer practicing it, does the LDS Church aid or abet those who practice polygamy? When will the hermetic-based LDS doctrine be discarded outright?] Again, about civil dualism

well as what is true .80

Bertrand Russell While this philosophical dualism arises from temporal acquaintances, in which intrinsic falseness is distinguishable with a reasoned effort, the dualism of Mormonism cited by historians, as Brodie, Brooke, and

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

271

others, is about the hermetic fundamentalism of absolute belief, which restricted the temporal civil acquaintance to what Plato had described as his Realm of Belief and Opinion: truth in this Realm is never clearly distinguished from the dualism of falsehoods. The mystical hermetic duality in Freemasonry, as in Mormonism also, for instance, implicated overlapping occultism, the believed mystical secrets of which are intrinsic of Civil “tranquility” or “goodness” depending on Plato’s Realm of belief or opinion, however, also embroils a perpetual paradox: either abide in the believed paradoxical dogma or transcend belief’s Realm to knowledge-based truth, as founded on deliberate reason. Orthodoxy has often made the acts of transcending dogmatic falsehoods a sin deserving severe civil punishment (Socrates and Christ’s fate, for instance)! Brodie described Masonry and Mormonism’s occultism: 81

The Masons, annoyed at rumors of corruption of the Masonic ritual in the Mormon lodges (which now numbered five, three in Nauvoo and two in Iowa) and furious at Joseph’s refusal to send the lodge records to Springfield for inspection, were determined to revoke the dispensations and declare all the Mormon lodges clandestine. [see the footnote following the next paragraph] The antiMormons were passing resolutions calling for Joseph’s extradition and hoping for provocation from Nauvoo that would furnish an excuse for action. [Brodie’s note: This was done in the 1844 meeting of the Grand Lodge. See Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Freemasons, Illinois, from its organization in 1840 to 1850 Inclusive (Freeport, Illinois, 1893).]

But Joseph’s worst peril, as he understood perfectly, was ripening within his own kingdom. “My life is more in danger from some little dough-head of a fool in this city than from all my numerous and inveterate enemies abroad,” he declared, “I am exposed to far greater danger from traitors among ourselves than from enemies without . . . I can live as Caesar might have lived,

272

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

were it not for a right-hand Brutus. . . . we have a Judas in our midst!” [Dec. 29, 1843, History of the Church, Vol. VI, p.152.] Brodie described the belief-based civil dualism that turned ugly in Nauvoo and the casualties of belief that resulted. This dualisms’ belief-based cause was centered in John C. Bennett, the most recently deposed Nauvoo Mayor? Would Smith’s LDS Church survive this ugly result? Would individual cognition-based truth, or blind dogmatic belief, decide this belief-based outcome? Would the LDS faithful plod on, essentially in blind dogmatic belief (“none so blind as those who will not see”)? Brodie wrote about the official reaction of Illinois:82

When Thomas Ford [Illinois Governor] learned of the burning of the ‘Expositor,’ he went directly to Carthage for an investigation, determined to call out the militia if, necessary to bring the offenders to justice. He was appalled to discover the militia already assembling under the orders of the local constables and openly preparing for an attack on Nauvoo. After an interview with the Laws [William Law was the excommunicated publisher of the Expositor], Fosters, and Higbees, who it may be assumed, told him the worst, Ford wrote to the prophet demanding that he and everyone else implicated in the destruction of the ‘Expositor’ submit immediately to the Carthage constable and come to that city for trial. Brodie also described the LDS civil belief-based dualism in Nauvoo, in which the Expositor’s printing press and copies were destroyed: 83

The rift between William Law and the prophet thus began in the fundamental divergence of economic attitudes. The final break in their friendship, however, came from a question, not of finance, but of fidelity. With sorrow and suspicion Law watched Joseph ever enlarging his circle of [spiritual polygamous] wives. Then the prophet tried to approach Law’s own wife, Jane. [Verified by Narrative of the Adventures and Experiences of Joseph H. Jackson, pp

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

273

21-2.]

In a violent session with his leader, Law called for a reformation and an end to the debauchery that was corrupting the church. Joseph argued, pleaded, and quoted the Old Testament, to no avail. Law threatened that unless Joseph went before the High Council, confessed his sins, and promised repentance, he would expose his seductions before the whole world. “Ill be damned before I do,” Law later quoted Joseph as saying. “If I admitted to the charges you would heap upon me, it would prove the overthrow of the Church! “Is not that inevitable already?” law demanded! “Then we can all go to Hell together and convert it into a heaven by casting the Devil out! Hell is by no means the place this world of fools suppose it to be, but on the contrary, it is quite an agreeable place.” Outraged by the prophets banter, Law turned on his heel saying bitterly: “You can enjoy it then, but as for me, I will serve the Lord, our God!” This was the beginning of Law’s apostasy, but for some months an open break was avoided, Like so many other disaffected members, Law believed Joseph to be not a false but a fallen prophet, led into iniquity by the teachings of John C. Bennett and his own hot passions. He clung to Joseph’s earliest revelations – to the original purity of the gospel message which had made him a convert – and hoped that something would bring the prophet to his senses. The 1843 election [held December 29, 1843 at a Mormon Masonic Lodge ] had given the Saints their first inkling that Law was in disfavor, and when Joseph denounced the Judas in Nauvoo, many of them guessed whom he was accusing. Law was

274

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

privately told that the Destroying Angels [Mrmon fundamentalist Ervil LeBaron, as a Destroying Angel, administered a secreted sacred elimination, also called Blood Atonement.] had orders to put him out

of the way, and though Joseph elaborately denied the story before a city council, Law was not wholly reassured. [ee History of the Church, Vol. VI, pp 162-5] together with his brother Wilson he began to gravitate into the camp of other disgruntled Mormons. [Dr. Robert D.] Foster told [his] story to a little knot of disaffected Mormons gathered together in a corner grocery store – the Laws, the Higbees, the ne’er-do-well Joseph H. Jackson, and several others. It was the signal for a complete confession. One by one the men cast off reserve and unburdened their souls. Chauncey Higbee vowed that some of the leading elders had as many as ten or twelve wives apiece, and described how they recorded the names of all the women they wished to marry in a large book, called the Book of the Law of the Lord, kept at the home of Hyrum Smith. After the names were inscribed, he said, the book was sealed, and the seals were broken in the presence of the unsuspecting women, who were thereby convinced the doctrine was true and that they must submit. . . . Two of the men who had listened to these stories scurried off to the prophet. At once he ordered them to write down everything in complete detail, including Foster’s account of the attempted seduction of his wife, and on April 17 he published these sworn testimonies in the Nauvoo Neighbor. [See the statements of M. G. Eaton and A. B. Williams, Nauvoo Neighbor, Vol. 1, No. 51. These were reprinted in Times and Seasons, Vol. V (May 15, 1844), p 541]. . . .

Foster’s trial was set for April 20, 1844. But when it was learned that he had marshaled forty-one witnesses and intended

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

275

to turn the trial into and indictment of the prophet, a council met secretly in advance and excommunicated him also with William, Wilson, and Jane Law. The schism thus created in Nauvoo was small but dangerous. Although they were pariahs within the city, the apostates did not leave. It was not alone their business holdings that kept them there, Willaim Law had courage, tenacity, and a strange, misguided idealism. Although he was surrounded chiefly by men who believed Joseph to be a base impostor, he clung to the hope that he could effect a reformation in the church. To this end he set us a church of his own, with himself as president, following faithfully the organization of the main body. . . . His desperate desire to reform the church made him far more formidable than if he had set out to damn the prophet and all his works. Unlike John C. Bennett, he was willing to glove his mailed fist. And more important, he and foster had enough money to buy a printing press. The reform church was to have a mouthpiece six weeks after it was born, in a newspaper styled the “Nauvoo Expositor.” While they were waiting for the press to arrive, the apostates started a three-pronged attack on Joseph through the courts. Francis Higbee sued him for five thousand dollars on a charge of slander; William Law succeeded in getting a grand jury in Carthage to issue a bill of indictment against him for adultery and polygamy; and Jackson and Foster got a similar indictment for false swearing. [See history of the Church, Vol. VI, pp 403, 405]. ... Francis Higbee’s assault on the prophet was countered with a campaign of defamation the like of which Nauvoo had not seen since the expulsion of Bennett. Joseph charged Higbee with

276

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

perjury, seduction, and adultery, giving details that the staid “Times and Seasons” admitted “were too indelicate for the public eye and ear.” . . . Chauncey Higbee was attacked with the same violent invective in the “Nauvoo Neighbor” of May 29, when the editor ransacked the secret files of testimony collected in the Bennett scandal and published the old affidavits of three women whom Higbee had seduced with the promise of marriage under the spiritual-wife code. So the mud flew back and forth. . . . Had John C. Bennett been editor of the “Nauvoo Expositor” instead of William Law and Sylvester Emmons, it would have been a lurid sheet. But Law was no cheap scandalmonger and had a profound pity for the plural wives in Nauvoo. He vowed that nothing “carnal” should creep into the “Expositor,” and the first issue, which appeared on June 7, 1844, was therefore – considering the facts at the editor’s disposal – an extraordinarily restrained document. . . . When the prophet read the “Expositor” through, he knew that he was facing the gravest crisis of his life. The paper had put him on trial before his whole people. Perhaps if Joseph had faced them with the truth and had gone to the platform in the unfinished temple and read the revelation on plural marriage to his church with his old magnificent assurance, he might have stripped the apostates of their chief weapon and freed his loyal followers from a burden of secrecy, evasion, and lying hat was rapidly becoming intolerable. Had he bared his plans for going west, he could have given them pope and a challenge. But he had no courage for it. In spite of the elaborate metaphysics he had created to justify polygamy, in spite of all the Old Testament prophets who had lived it and the success of his

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

277

own experimentation, the crisis found him soft-willed. He was empty of conviction when he needed it most. . . . Only one theme persisted in all his agitation – a conviction that the “Expositor” must be throttled. But here again he was betrayed by his utter incapacity for dealing skillfully with opposition, a weakness that his political and legal success in Nauvoo had served only to intensify. He had become an autocrat who could think only in terms of suppression. Calling together the city council, he ordered a trial, not of the apostates, but of the “Expositor” itself. It was a strange, high-handed proceeding. There was no jury, no lawyers, no witnesses for the defense. The councilors stood up, one after another, and accused the editors of seduction, pandering, counterfeiting, and thievery. The prophet went so far as to say that the apostate Joseph H. Jackson had been proved a murderer before the city council. Then he went on to add one more to his list of denials of polygamy by declaring that the revelation on polygamy referred to in the “Expositor” was in answer to a question concerning things which transpired in former days, “and had no reference to the present time.” [The Nauvoo Neighbor, June 19, 1844 printed these proceedings of the city council. The words uttered by Joseph that I put in quotes were omitted from the History of the church when the proceedings were reprinted.] (Vol. VI, p. 441) The city council now

declared that the press was libelous and must be destroyed. Joseph issued a proclamation declaring it a civic nuisance; a portion of the Legion marched to the office, wrecked the press, pied the type, and burned every issue of the hated paper that could be found. . . . [This ] was a greater breach of political and legal discipline than the anti-Morons could have hoped for,

278

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Joseph could not have done better for his enemies, since he had at last given them a fighting moral issue. . . . Mounting the reviewing stand, his blue and buff uniform blazoned with gilt buttons and epaulets, he stood proudly before his men, betraying nothing of the tumult and anxiety racking him within. . . . “Will you stand by me to the death?” The thousands arrayed beneath him, stiff and serious in their well dressed ranks, shout in unison a thunderous “Aye!” Related social dualism of Freemasonry in Mormonism John L. Brooke gave this account of the common occultism: 84

Just as the landscape of Ontario County and Joseph’s idealized coming of age were immortalized in the “book of Mormon,” so too were a pair of dramas involving hermetic culture that unfolded during Joseph’s final years in his father’s household. If the smiths saw in Freemasonry a means to knowledge that would lead to the restoration of divine mysteries, their faith would have been undermined by a wrenching schism in the ranks of New York Freemasonry in the early 1820s, with implications of worldly corruption only reinforced by the murder of William Morgan in 1826 and the furor over a judicial conspiracy in the year following. And, immersed in the world of treasure-divining, the Smiths in the early 1820s would once again brush against the threat of counterfeiting they had encountered in Vermont. When viewed against these contemporary hermetic dramas and the light of Masonic mythology, the conflict [dualism] between good and evil that occupies so much of the “Book of Mormon” can be read in terms of a contest between hermetic purity and danger, [dualism] between diviners and counterfeiters, and between pure,

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

279

“primitive” Freemasons and corrupt, “spurious” Freemasons. I have suggested that divining and counterfeiting were symbolic yet opposed elements in a common popular hermetic culture rooted variously in sectarian magic, the high occult, and common crime. Divining cults offered a quick way to wealth for those who feared the “witchcraft” of counterfeiting. More formally and explicitly the foundation myths of Freemasonry, as they were being popularized in the 1820s, offered a similar dyadic model of hermetic purity and danger. Before we can look at the contemporary hermetic dramas and their implications for the composition of the “Book of Mormon,” we need to look briefly at these foundation myths. This version of Masonic mythology embedded the tale of [the Prophet] Enoch burying engraved texts of the mysteries in an arched vault, to be discovered by Solomon, in a long history of dyadic segmentation and declension. At the heart of all Masonic mythology lay the divine Adam in the Garden of Eden, “in direct communication with God and the angels” and in “ a state of perfection.” With the Fall, Adam lost his divine immorality, but he retained “a perfect recollection of that speculative science which is now termed Masonry,” the central principle of which “was to preserve alive in men’s minds the true knowledge of God.” From Adam’s sons Seth and Cain descended two races of men, good and evil, carrying pure and spurious versions of Masonic knowledge. Nor unlike Smith’s Nephits in the “Book of Mormon,” the virtuous Sethites suffered declension and merged with the Cainites, mixing together pure and spurious Masonry. The pure Masonic tradition was preserved from the Flood by Enoch, who buried the mysteries in his arched vault before being bodily taken up to

280

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

heaven, and by Noah, who alone with his family was saved from the Flood. But once again there was declension and schism, and Noah’s son Ham became the new progenitor of spurious, Cainite Masonry, which became even more deeply entrenched after the dispersion at the Tower of Babel. A debased tradition of pure Masonry was passed down from Noah to Solomon, to be revitalized with the discovery of Enoch’s buried plates in the arched vault. Following Solomon, pure, “primitive” Masonry was a secret tradition, theoretically transmitted through the medieval guilds, whereas the spurious tradition survived as the pagan mysteries. Masonic orders founded in eighteenth-century France and Germany developed various versions of this theme of schism and transmission, creating a profusion of conflicting rites and degrees, each order in some way promising to be the true source of an “antediluvian” purity. 85 In the 1820s the outlines of this struggle were available in “The Antiquities of Freemasonry,” published in London in 1823 by Georg Oliver, an Anglican minister and noted Masonic authority. . . . There is very good evidence that the two-seed tradition, specifically in its Masonic manifestation, played a significant role in Joseph Smith’s later thinking. Just as he identifies himself with his heroic figure Mormon, who buried the plates in the Hill Cumorah before the slaughter of the Nephites, Smith announced in 1832 that he himself was the prophet Enoch. (Finding the plates, of course, also made him a latter-day Solomon.) When he wrote his version of Genesis, his Book of Moses, starting in the summer of 1830, he added passages to the biblical text in which Adam’s “pure and undefiled” language and “Priesthood” were passed to Seth and his progeny, and Enoch was shown “the seed

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

281

of Adam” and “the seed of Cain.” 86 His revelations restoring the biblical priesthood of the Melchizedek in the early 1830s included similar passages on the passing of the priesthood from Adam through Enoch to Solomon down a long line of patriarchs, as Masonic mythology proposed. 87 And in the eyes of his family and his closest followers, Smith’s endowment rituals of 1842-43, the foundation of a new Mormonism promising a progression into godhood for the faithful, signaled the restoration of the hermetic promise of a pure Gnostic Freemasonry. Lost to the world since the days of Adam, Enoch, and Solomon, the pure tradition had been restored by the heroic treasure hunting of Joseph the Prophet. “FOLLOW-THE-LEADER” A single-minded “follow-the-leader” dogmatic faith in the Official LDS priesthood hierarchy, which originated with Joseph Smith, the original Mormon Prophet’s revelations, in which the above described occultism became dogmatized, then befell to appointed Prophets Brigham Young, 1844-1880 (“Adam-God” belief) , John Taylor, 1880-1887 (“AdamGod belief had been replaced by Orson Pratt’s fluid omnipresent God” ), Wilford Woodruff, 1888 -1897 (“The Manifesto” which annulled the practice of polygamy but not the revealed doctrine), Lorenzo Snow, 1898-1901 (“Tithing” was reinstalled), Joseph F. Smith, 1901-18 [The LDS Church History of Joseph Fielding Smith and the more comprehensive History of B. H. Roberts did not record the contemporary Church History that included the succeeding appointed Prophets.], Heber J. Grant, 1918-45, Joseph fielding Smith, David O. McKay, Spencer W. Kimball, Ezra Taft Benson, . . . continues the prevailing orthodox occultism of LDS Mormon doctrine. And Fawn Brodie, whose maiden name was McKay, lived and believed the occultism but also reasoned deliberately. Then ill, with imminent

282

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

death, Brodie requested her brother, attending her, a faithfully active LDS priesthood bearer, for his priesthood blessing. He, in Christ like love, obliged, which prompted my recall of this seminal thought:

It is the uniqueness of individuals, as they are encouraged to develop responsibly, into which the beautiful ethereal flowers of life and nations [or LDS Church membership] bloom. The American heritage is pure ETHEREAL-GOLD. The unalienable qualities of individuals are priceless; not compatible with anything that we produce, particularly on a production line [in a corporation or an organic religion as the LDS Mormon hierarchy]. Mine, from ‘Civitas,’ an Appendix to section 205 Eventually, Fawn Brodie’s honesty when recording facts in the history of Joseph Smith eventually will be recognized as having blessed her family, her Church, and society. Regarding this, Richard Lyman Bushman’s recent book, Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling, elaborated on Brodie while confirming her recorded facts. He wrote this: 88

Around the turn of the nineteenth century, a few students of Mormonism . . . offered a new explanation of the Book of Mormon’s composition. They did not so much refute Spalding as supply(ing?) an alternate theory in the spirit of Alexander Campbell. The book these authors hypothesized, showed signs of Joseph Smith’s psychology and culture, and so must be his work. In 1945, Fawn Brodie, whose biography was acknowledged by non-Mormon scholars as the premier study of Joseph Smith, explicitly rebutted the Spalding theory, noting chronological inconsistencies, dubious testimonies, and the absence of evidence for a link to Rigdon. Brodie turned instead to the analysis of Riley and, before him, Campbell (who was named with the Mormon Students that were omitted from the opening sentence of this quote). . . . Interest in the Spalding

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

283

theory revived in 1977 when handwriting experts speculated that Spalding’s writing appeared in the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon, but on further consideration the experts backed off, and the theory assumed the status of an historical artifact without credibility among serious scholars. Curiously critical to this on-going occultims and its truthful conclusion is this fact: neither Bushman, nor Brodie, referred to books, written by Wayne L. Cowdry, Howard A. Davis and Donald R. Scales, or John L. Brooke. Brodie could not have made this reference since these books weren’t available before 1977. But, why didn’t Bushman make this reference? And, why didn’t Bushman list Walter Martin, author of Kingdom of the Cults, as a source for information on Spalding’s connection to the Book of Mormon? Almost thirty years had passed since fresh research-based commentary was copyrighted. Therefore, if it was available on the literature market, Bushman, the LDS biased historian that he is, it seems, was surely aware of it? And, if it wasn’t available, why was it not? Anyway, this snippet was taken from W. L. Cowdry, H. A. Davis and D. R. Scales book:89

W. Martin’s conviction has been publicly stated in all of his books that deal with Mormonism (see especially ‘The Kingdom of Cults’), and it was his conviction that first aroused our interest in the Spalding/Rigdon thesis and solidified our determinism to find the missing pieces of the whole picture. Through hard and tedious work we have uncovered the information presented in the preceding six chapters of this book and in the appendixes. In the early part of 1976 we still did not have any idea as to the possible location or even the survival of all or part of Spalding’s original manuscript. We had obtained copies of Spalding’s known handwriting from Oberlin College, Ohio, where a collection of his materials rests, but we did not

284

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

know where to look for the missing manuscript itself. We knew from our background research that we had uncovered more testimony linking Spalding, Rigdon, Smith, and Smith’s manuscript than had ever before been gathered in one place, and we knew that this constituted more than enough evidence to prove clearly that Spalding’s second novel was the original source of the Book of Mormon. . . . Critics of the Spalding/Rigdon thesis often asserted these same sentiments, even though they were not necessarily Mormons having a preconceived faith in The Book of Mormon. Fawn M. Brodie, who wrote the well known biography of Joseph Smith, “No Man Knows My History,” dismissed the entire wealth of testimony which we and others have presented by saying of some of the affidavits presented to her: “It may be noted that although five out of the eight had heard of Spaulding (sp) only once, there was a surprising uniformity in the details they remembered after twenty-two years. Six recalled the names’ Nephi, Lamanite, etc. six held that the manuscript described the Indians as decedents of the lost tribes; four mentioned that the great wars caused the erection of the Indian mounds; and four noted the ancient scriptural style. The very tightness with which Hurlbut here was implementing his theory rouses an immediate suspicion that he did a little judicious prompting.” But Brodie has committed a common logical fallacy. To her there is no way in which any affidavits concerning the Spalding theory can be acceptable. If the testimonies agree with each other, this must have been “the result of collusion,” but if the testimonies were not to agree with each other, there would be no case at all!

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

285

But eyewitnesses and testimonies, coupled with research into the movements of Spalding, Rigdon, and Smith, are not the only sources of evidence on which we base our conclusion. . . . Brodie’s book is an example of the opinion of some of these critics who reject the Spalding evidence. From the time of Brodie to Bushman, additional factual evidence confirms that the Spalding documents are more than a myth, which for nefarious reasons or negligence was lost or buried, that they were novels written in old biblical style about Indian mounds and wars, and contained strange names, as Nephi, Lamanite, etc., which names’ Brodie dismissed as more probably originating with Joseph Smith than Spalding. However, this old truism applies: one cannot simply wish the oak back into the tree! Before Smith, Spalding wrote about Indians with unique names and places that then magically appeared in the Book of Mormon. On this fact, the conservative organic Mormon position is indefensible:90

No matter how many affidavits were produced, or how much circumstantial evidence was brought forward, the Mormon Church’s response was that they would not believe the Spalding/Rigdon evidence unless Spalding’s manuscript was produced in his own handwriting, paralleling The Book of Mormon exactly. So we searched for this evidence. . . . One of us, Wayne Cowdrey, is a former Mormon descended from Smith’s scribe, Oliver Cowdrey. Wayne Cowdrey was told by the Mormon Church that there is not one single parallel between the surviving Spalding work and the Book of Mormon. . . . But Cowdrey’s study revealed to him that there were not just a few parallels between these two works, but scores of parallels! . . . and he presented some of these parallels at his (LDS sactification-based) “trial of excommunication.” . . .

286

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

If we could actually find part of Spalding’s second novel in his own handwriting, and if it were strikingly similar to the Book of Mormon, this would constitute additional proof that the Book of Mormon came from Solomon Spalding’s Manuscript Found. This proof has now been supplied: “we have actually found twelve pages of the original Book of Mormon rendered in Solomon Spalding’s own handwriting.” Howard Davis, who was the first of us to discover this startling new evidence, relates what happened to him in his research: In 1974 I began what was actually an aspiration of mine since 1964, to initiate a probe into the authorship of the Book of Mormon. In early January of 1975, Cowdrey and Scales joined me in this important endeavor. We frequently visited libraries and sent letters of inquiry to various areas of the United States. We later obtained from Mrs. Cowles, the Senior Cataloger at Oberlin College in Oberlin, Ohio, a photocopy of a deed in Spalding’s handwriting, a business paper fragment in the same hand, and two unfinished letters of his. . . . The Mormon Church had previously refused our request for microfilm of the Manuscript Story, saying they were not “authorized“ to do so. We later obtained a complete copy of this first novel (which is not the Manuscript Found). I studied these specimens and handwriting analysis for many months. . . . In early February of 1976, I was ill, home from work, but still studying. I absentmindedly picked up a research book on Mormonism and flipped it open at random. On one page in the lower left column, I spotted a photograph of an old manuscript. As

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

287

soon as I looked at it, the thought flashed through my mind, “What is Spalding’s handwriting doing here?” Then I read the caption: it turned out to be a picture of a section of of the original transcribed copy of “The Book of Mormon,” now housed in the vault of the history office in Mormon headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah. I quickly contacted the Mormon Church and asked for copies of the portion of The Book of Mormon I was interested in, but was told that no copies would be made. I contacted some people I felt could help me, and they provided me with enough copies . . . for us to examine. What Davis had discovered was a portion of the original “Book of Mormon” known by the Mormon Church as the “unidentified scribe” section. . . . Our studies have revealed Spalding to be that scribe. . . . This group of twelve pages begins at I Nephi 4: 20-37 and ends with I Nephi 11: 32-12:8. As to my copy of Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon authored by W. L. Cowdry, H. A. Davis and D. R. Scales Happenstance is how and why this book was given to me. An Associate knew my faith was Mormon persuaded by a perspective of former LDS missionary service, i.e., was critically minded, interested in religious truth. The front window display at a prominent Chicago bookstore had caught her eye so to cause pause then purchase the book: “I thought you would be interested in this,” the giver explained when handing the book to me, the CEO of a national insurance statistical association domiciled in Chicago. My personal spare time, then, was little to none, however the Cowdrey name grabbed my attention, and I took time to glean the book’s content. Aware that the LDS Church vigorously protected its public image and message, I requested that a few more copies be purchased and took money from my wallet for this

288

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

289

purpose. The next day, however, without excuse or explanation, all books had simply vanished: as if the display and books never existed. (This happenstance is elaborated on further on.)

person, group, or nation having supreme control or dominion.

Increasingly, organic corporate entities usurp liberty and freedoms of their individual employees, which the Constitution protects, as well exploits resources and consumers. Civic licensing of ‘Absolute idealism’-based ‘fictitious person’ corporate entities, were rationalized to economically serve the corporate owners’ pecuniary interest. This excerpt from another section provides this explanation:

Humans are, therefore, naturally endowed sovereigns in life.

Parrington called Corporate mechanisms and the Whig scheme “an ingenious scheme to ‘milk the cow’ and distribute the ‘milk’ to those who superintended the ‘milking.’” Kurt Vonnegut observed this mechanist effect in these words: 91

What can be said to our young people, now that psychopathic personalities, which is to say persons without consciences, without senses of pity or shame, have taken all the money in the treasuries of our government and corporations, and made it all their own? A perpetual existence maybe affords to ‘fictitious person’ corporate entities and with commensurate debts to society the greatest economic paternalism: the usurpation of natural birthrights and sovereignties. As Barnum, of circus fame, had expressed, “new suckers are born each day!” And, the titillations of those purchasing the “show,” or “product” are momentarily gratified. About authority usurpations by each branch of government’s constitutionally divided authorities, former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor recently registered a similar alarm and concern. Anyway, myriad usurpations of human sovereignty are the intent registered here, which add to my sentiments regarding the LDS Church’s asserted organic authority and ‘damage control.’ The dictionary definition of sovereignty is this: 92

Entities of supreme authority, power or value depict sovereignty.

The quintessence of American constitutional sovereignty is intrinsic of the inalienable entitlements that nature has bestowed to each human being; are entitlements that are inalienable because nature is inalienable; supreme because nature is supreme [And this inalienable human sovereignty, despite the fact that “usufruct” (World Book Dictionary, 1965, p. 2152, defined usufruct as “the legal right to use another’s property and enjoy advantages of it without injuring or destroying it.” ) has been corralled by legal fences, as is intrinsic of nature, applies equally to the millions of undocumented emigres in our nation: they are as much the natural sovereigns of their lives as we of owned organic substance in the US are of our lives and property (Whether born here or not, naturalized citizenship is no more than recognition that nature has the most important role in our temporal citizenship.)]. And, nature did not discriminate to make any individual, group or race more supreme than another, as power aspiring ‘white rabbits of our materialistmechanist wonderland,’ who aspire for legal organic authorities and power, which conventionally irrationally they assert as their owned ‘divinely empowered right.’ And, by this false claim, they upstage God’s natural antecedence! All temporal materialities are God’s, not man’s! Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), of conservative, i.e., ‘unitary materialist’ (conservative, i.e., illiberal 93 ) empirical philosophy, whose theory falsely deductively made ‘divine rights’ and other materialist dogmas of standing orthodox authority antecedently the basis of leviathan-based economic ‘determinism.’ However, Craig Thomas recorded this following rational statement, as Hobbes’ had written it: 94

290

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Nature hath made men so equall, in the faculties of body, and mind; as that though there bee found one man sometimes manifestly stronger in body, or of quicker mind then another; yet when all is reconed together, the difference between man, and man, is not so considerable, as that one man can claim to himselfe any benefit, to which another may not pretend, as well as he. [As for temporal reality, however, the natural human genetic code, has been established; that which is not repairable is 99.9 percent; one tenth of the 1percent (a portion less than one in a thousand) is repairable, and this minuscule portion is maybe still too much natural responsibility for a mechanism-based (i.e., official legally determined) acquisitive, concupiscent human race?] Colonials claimed inalienable natural rights, which Thomas Jefferson stated in the Declaration of Independence, as then asserted to the colonial oppressor, England’s King. 95

In Congress, July 4, 1776. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When . . . it becomes necessary . . . to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them . We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. This Self-evident, natural antecedently necessary truth, won for Americans their independence from the King. And consequently, the consented suffrage of resident generations, first ratified the U.S. Constitution, then protects a leveled inalienable human US sovereignty. This self-evident natural sovereignty necessarily endowed

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

291

privilege, responsibility, and human rights, as inextricably leveled constitutional freedoms! John Locke’s philosophy, about naturally endowed supreme personal value-based rights, supported the American independence movement. Rationalists then called John Locke (1632-1704) the intellectual ruler of the Eighteenth Century.96 While Cicero’s natural law had clearly influenced Locke, however, he reasoned so as not to draw from the controverted natural law controversy to explain his philosophy. Locke’s logical appeal sidestepped the unitary materialism, positivismbased dogma spun by mostly conservative orthodox contentions. He confronted the conventional assumptions of rank and authority directly, i.e., the dogmatized organic superiority-inferiority relationships among members of society appealed to each individual’s sovereign capability to reason. Leaving natural laws apart and uncontested, Locke, in experience-based reasoning alone, defined the essential quintessence of individual responsible equality, i.e., the democratically "leveled" sovereignty for which Colonial America aspired. And, with Locke’s explication commonly held, the Constitutional Convention, as covertly commissioned by the Commonwealths’ authorities, reluctantly, had no logical recourse other than to recommend leveled constitutional ‘democratic-sovereignty’ as the essential foundation to the new American nation’s Constitutions purposes: the Convention adopted “leveled” sovereignty as the governing strategy (i.e., the Strategic Plan) for the United States of America: then, as with England’s logicbased unit of money (the sovereign), the American nation’s sovereignty was quantified by tallying the collective value of the consented sovereign votes: The Convention proposed this leveled dynamic individual democratic-sovereignty as the physis-based foundation to first the Constitution’s authorization, then to those elected to effect the constitution-based actions, i.e., the naturally endowed leveled sovereign right that we mature citizens each claim as our individual ‘antecedent value’-based leveled inalienable human US sovereignty, which

292

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

constantly requires a dynamic and responsible individual sovereign duty-based authorization, which is best exercised by thinking logically and reasonably, then candidly acting with measured restraint and responsibility. This exercise of responsible reason provides the constantly renewable constitutional Strategic Plan’s reparation, i.e., each fresh dynamic sovereign citizen generation both quantifies and qualifies by their vote the nation’s ordinally consented constitutional sovereignty. However, the constitutional reparation, called responsible freedom, also requires of each individual (and political factions) outward-turned (objective) perspectives regarding all human aspects that are common to the whole of society. [Undocumented emigres are inherently of society, but constitutionally without eligibility to consent their natural sovereign unit of value to constitutional suffrage. To affirm that an undocumented member of society is illegal, irrationally demeans inalienable sovereign value inherent as much in the undocumented individual as in naturalized citizens. Worse, by asserting resident antecedence as the qualification for individual sovereignty value, shows that prejudice rather than reason is the foundation of the assertion. Pan-Americanism is policy, which recognizes the commonality of ideals among the countries of the Americas. The Monroe Doctrine was at the forefront of effective PanAmericanism.] Each individual, whether naturalized or not, is naturally accountable to each other for the liberty and freedom, which they themselves claim as their natural own: Craig Thomas wrote this about Locke’s philosophy-based human rights: 97

[Locke] assert[ed physis-based natural law] in the contemporary,' to 'claim' that it is true by the admission of any individual that his or her requirements of liberty and freedom must be admitted to others, 'unless' the form of political society under which they live is unjust. [Is society now just or unjust?] Our individual responsibility is knowledge-based, ethical responsibility

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

293

that, when benignly neglected, allows power aspiring idealists, of ‘positivist’, i.e., materialist property rights persuasion, to nullify the leveled democratic-sovereignty of some, for benefits mechanistically gained from the nullifications: in benign sovereign neglect we abdicate inalienable leveled individual sovereign rights to those armed with orthodox legalized dogmas and economically accumulated hoarded capital, as they, in the political orthodoxy, influence the consented organic economically mechanist government to favor them instead of those whose leveled sovereign rights were forgotten by the politics. * * Unless President Clinton used his Line-item Veto Authority, there were more than seventy items in the Balanced Budget Legislation of 1997 which would mechanistically reward special interests. This is what I heard on “This Week” August 3, 1997: George Will -- The only reason that the line-item veto exists is that those who sued to have it outlawed did not have “legal standing” with the Court. If the President uses this authority, they will then have “legal standing” and their suit will make this law unconstitutional. (Eventually, this, in fact, did happen to the Line-item Veto Authority). George Stephanopoulos -- Amway gave $5 million to the Republican Party in the last four years. In committee negotiations at midnight, without any vote from the House or the Senate, Amway got a $200 million tax break which represents a revenue taxpayer return to Amway for politically contributing to the Republican Party. Linda Douglass -- The Tobacco Industry received a tax break to offset the tax increase on cigarettes, and money they legally will have to pay for medical expenses caused by smoking. The taxpayers, therefore, will repay these costs as a consideration for political contributions the Tobacco Industry made to the Republicans. George Will -- These examples could not happen if a flat tax were adopted. (Civic responsibility in a flat tax-based situation, however, aborts the necessary strategy, of leveled sovereign rights?)

294

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

William Grider summarized the passive effectiveness of American sovereignty in his recent book, Who will tell the People. And he illuminated the “why” and “how” of sovereignty usurpations: 98

Americans have never achieved the full reality in their history or even agreed completely on democracy's meaning. The democratic idea has always been most powerful in America as an unfulfilled vision of what the country might someday become -- a society advancing imperfectly toward self-realization. Grider warned this: 99

American democracy is in much deeper trouble than most people wish to acknowledge. . . . What exists behind the formal shell is a systemic breakdown of the shared civic values we call democracy. All aspects of life must embroil the issues of our material world: material aspects surely embroiled the ‘great debate,’ as Parrington called the debate about the Constitution and leveled individual sovereignty. Concerning civic values, i.e., the ethereal status of American democracy and before laying blame for the high cost of ineffective government, each citizen maybe should consult Parrington’s following statement about Benjamin Franklin: 100

He sat in the Constitutional Convention as one of the few democrats, and although he was unable to make headway against the aristocratic majority, he was quite unconvinced by their rhetoric. . . . when he heard eloquent young lawyers argue that a single-chamber legislature, responsive to a democratic electorate, must lead to mob legislation, and that good government required a carefully calculated system of checks and balances, he remarked: It appears to me . . . like putting one horse before the cart and the other behind it, and whipping them both.

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

295

If the horses are of equal strength, the wheels of the cart, like the wheels of government, will stand still; and if the horses are strong enough the cart will be torn to pieces.101 . . . [Wasn’t this also retired Supreme Court Justice O’Connor’s lament, as recently was in the news?] Both his economic principles and his views on government have been condemned by Federalist critics as tainted with populism. They both sprang from the same root of agrarian democracy. Whether Franklin or his critics more adequately represented the larger interests of eighteenth-century America is beside the present question; it is enough to note that all such criticism is leveled primarily at Franklin’s democratic philosophy as a thing in itself undesirable, if not dangerous. Franklin may often have been wrong, but he was never arrogant, never dogmatic. He was too wise and too generous for that. In the midst of prosperity he never forgot the unprosperous. All his life his sympathy went out to whoever suffered in person or fortune from the injustice of society: to the debtor who found himself pinched by the shrinking supply of currency; to the black slave who suffered the most elementary of wrongs; to impressed seamen; to the weak and wretched of earth. He was part of that emerging humanitarian movement which, during the last half of the eighteenth century, was creating a new sense of social responsibility. In fact, ‘social responsibility’ and ‘democratic sovereignty’ is the grist of continuing political debate in America as well in the world. Hamilton argued prescriptively (positively, unitary materialismbased), the mercantilist doctrine of causal-determinism: 102

A commercial people understands that a government that serves the interests of men of property, serves the interests of all, for if

296

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

capital will not invest how shall labor find employment? ---Does Hamilton base his prescription exclusively on mercantilist doctrine which Hobbesian unitary materialism is about? ---- In this, does he disregard the leveled human will’s causal nature, i.e., humanity’s noetic-states that Christ referred to when he said: man doth not live by bread only? 103 Is the ethereal (nonmaterial) noetic noumenal Provence, the exclusive Provence of everlasting truth: of knowledge and justice? , And, the Provence of human tranquility? , Or, is it mechanisms’ dogmatic Provence of unitary materialist causality: , which E. Kant found antecedent synthetic a priori exceptions to? ---Does Hamilton’s prescription found American politicalconservatism? And, is the necessity of this prescription fallaciously based on ‘divine rights’ dogmatic belief? Is conservatism of Christ? ---Does Hamilton prescriptively ignore Immanuel Kant’s ‘synthetic a priori’, i.e., false reasoning about deterministic unitary materialism (which Kant’s philosophical dilemma is about)? ---What dogmatic doctrine, theory or law, exists to assure that men of property must (will) invest in ways that labor is assured of gainful employment (Economists, Veblen, Heilbroner, Schumperter, . . . , voiced economic concern about this beneficial civic requirement)? While officially the Constitutional Convention neither adopted nor rejected Hamilton’s conservative prescription, dogmatized deterministic unitary materialism eventually became the nation’s dominant influence of legislation and administration (the new nation’s Operating Plan, was called The American System of Political Economy). While our Operating Plan presently is based on the absolute dogma of unitary materialism (it is, therefore, nomos-based) the political flux in America is dynamic and flexible, capable at time of orthodox failure, to collectively adapt to the liberal consented flux of human sovereignty. This human will is naturally complex: disposed to generate dogmatized doctrines and mechanisms of deterministic unitary

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

297

materialism but more importantly it also looks to ‘social usage’ (which is not socialism), as Roger Williams had observed: Mutual Insurance, the parent of all ‘for profit’ US insurance, resulted from Williams’ ‘social usage,’ which is uniquely of American philosophy and is democratic.104 ). V. L. Parrington wrote this:

The state, then, is society working consciously through experience and reason, to secure for the individual citizen the largest measure of freedom and well-being. . . . But if sovereignty inheres in the majority will [or in corporate -- secular or religious -- organic Leviathans], what securities remain for individual and minority rights? What fields lie apart from the inquisition of the majority, and by what agencies shall the engrossing of power be thwarted? The replies to such questions, so fundamental to every democratic program, he discovers in a variety of principles; to the former in an adaptation of the spirit of medieval society that restricted political functions by ‘social usage,’ and to the latter by the application of local home rule, the initiative and the referendum, and the recall. His creative conception was an adaptation of . . . corporation, of a group of persons voluntarily joining for specific purposes under the law. The Operating Plan for the United States is politics about economics. It embroils the influences of mind with emotion, values with passions, human will with material essence, . . . Rationalizations are inevitable and Aristotle’s spectrum of virtue is, therefore, necessary. Virtue is, as defined by Aristotle, the middle of the vices: the mean of excess and deficiency. At the extreme of excess, controlling materialities and their deterministic values is an inevitable cause of collective, collusive rationalization. Adam Smith warned that monopoly posed the greatest threat to the universal benefits of his nature-based ‘market system’ that

298

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

299

he carefully explicated as he found, was the natural economic revolution. While his observations about economic revolution are universally, evident, positivist idealists quite deliberately have not subscribed to Adam Smith’s warning about monopoly in any form.

as ‘fictitious legal individuals,’ they represent the greatest illegal alien threat to nullifying domestic individual cardinal sovereignty. They represent Leviathan entities, mini-nations, that make their own rules we might say, with which humans individually cannot compete.

While the Strategic Plan is based on ethics (giving of self in the sense of acting together to secure common values), the Operating Plan is based on individually taking and securing what we want as our own property. The difference between giving and taking is, of course, diabolical. While strategic constitutional freedom is each individual’s responsibility, about preserving an individual’s self evident inalienable property, operationally speaking, we expect selfishness and we want absolute organized protection to our ownership, contracts, and such. Often inalienable strategic rights are confused with our absolute wants involving property ownership (‘positive’ contracts, titles and deeds). In this, our nomos-based wants often qualify as extreme vices on the spectrum of Aristotle’s virtue: and they also intend to legally nullify others’ physis-based sovereignty. Our wants (which exemplify lust instead of love) often abuse Natural Law while they violate no manmade constitutional law. Therefore, we need to be clear about definition and purpose. Christ may have said it best: man doth not live by bread only. About political economy, we especially need clear and balanced reason when enacting laws that define the government’s administrations, with its agents, codifications and regulations. Particularly, as we officially consider adopting or licensing forms of mercantilism, for instance, we should consider the ‘fictitious legal person’ corporate unnaturalness, that state agencies of government have licensed to act as corporate ‘fictitious human entities.’ Nature’s God did not create them and there is no Natural Law or inherence of inalienable rights. Still, with manmade lawful impunity, corporations engage in competitive and collusive forms of neo-mercantilism. We should not only recognize this, we should be concerned that large multinational corporations are today, larger than our nation was and that

Nature endowed individuals with sovereignty over their own lives and human-made organizations can, therefore, legitimately only possess organic sovereignty to the extent that the individual members of it gave their consent to it: this is equally true for religion. Sovereignty, like politics, is also an inward-turned aspect of man's nature. And, thoughts of Allen Wheelis apply here: the role of sovereignty with corporations should not be overlooked or allowed to be taken for granted. Wheelis wrote this:105

WHEN MEN LIVE each on his own, morality does not exist. Such men have freedom without limit, but the enjoyment of that freedom is slight; for each must be on guard against all others, and each must scrounge alone for food and shelter. It appears advantageous for all, therefore, if each surrenders a bit of freedom in exchange for group solidarity. So each gives up his right to murder, to steal, to deceive. Now all are less free but more safe. Without fear they live together, secure against predators, hunt more successfully in a group, build better shelters. The rights that were surrendered are not lost, but passed upward. The group comes into being by collecting the surrendered rights of its constituent individuals. The group itself surrenders nothing, is subject to no rule, is free to use its aggregate force for such acts of murder, of stealing, of deceiving, as it may see fit. And it does often see fit. The members of the group have become moral; the group is now the predator. The restraints consequent to surrendered individual freedoms

300

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

constitute the stuff of morality. The aggregate power of the surrendered rights is exercised not by all acting in concert but by rulers. We hope that the freedoms we have surrendered will be exercised by our rulers for the benefit of all. Such is rarely the case. . . . The autonomy we retain as individuals constitutes a limit to the degree to which the state may command our compliance. . When shared beliefs are firm, the collective wields great power, its constituents correspondingly less. When shared beliefs are destroyed, the collective loses power. AT THE TOP of the hierarchy of social organization is the realm of sovereignty, where there are no rules. Here the hypocrisy is extreme; . . . Hypocrisy is of man, not God: the supreme intelligence, which St. John called LOGOS, surely represents pure consistency (Loa-Tse called this consistency Sinderesis), which can always be expected to not ‘throw out the baby with dirty bathwater’: Faith in the message of Jesus will surely be ontologically rewarded whether of Catholicism, Mormonism or any other Christian faiths, despite materialist dirty organic bath water. News to me on 8/15/’93 was the disclosure that the Catholic Church “kicked out its organic walls” to allow all in who want in. Maybe public reactions to situations, as Mr. Emmet McLoughlin’s testimony about indoctrinated dogmatic beliefs, influenced this new ‘openness’ policy? At the Church and State Convention, Convention Hall, Washington, D.C., January 21, 1954, Mr. McLoughlin gave this testimonial. Important are his experiences with false ‘divine right’based authorities and canonized doctrines, which sponsor tyrannies. The McLouglin story reminded me of Martin Luther’s Reformation experience. Back then, Catholic authority was inclusive of civil authority; ‘Vogelvrij’ (free as a bird) was the penalty Catholic-

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

301

civil authority adjudged appropriate to Martin Luther: He was free to be hunted and his life taken without civil penalty or consequence. That McLoughlin’s story became available to me without any effort or search of my own, is another tale of happenstance-based personal fortuity: while editing thoughts about faith, my wife was sifting through old personal papers and contemplated to discard this account. Why she had saved it, she could only say that maybe someone at the government offices, where she worked, had given her copy of McLoughlin’s presentation. But, why the coincidence? Why right at the moment, as my thoughts were focused on Catholic authorities, why was this forty-five-year-old testimonial provided in happenstance fashion to me? The document’s antiquity piqued my interest more than its title. Reading it was the greater surprise! McLoughlin’s experience and reasoning supported my thesis about the faith-based foundation of all rational truth: the Catholic clergy had faithfully protected rational truth’s foundations throughout the ‘Dark Age’ centuries of rational darkness and oppression. Legions of rational critical thinkers confirm the spiritual nature of ontologism with Christ’s abiding presence after breaking from their dogma-based beliefs. St. John’s testimony to the faithful, written in Greek, about the ‘AIONIAN’ (eternal) life: ‘walk in the light of God’ : 106

this is the TESTIMONY, that God has given to us aionian life, and THIS LIFE is in his son. He who has the son, has the life. Emmett McLoughlin’s Presentation

‘From Priest to Citizen’ We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness in this world, against the spiritual wickedness in high places. Eph. 6:10,12

302

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

It is not unusual for people to change their religious affiliations. It is not unusual for ministers of Protestant denominations to give up the ministry and become farmers, or bricklayers, or salesmen. But it is considered very unusual for Roman Catholic priests to leave the priesthood. One third of the class with which I was ordained have deserted the hierarchy; I know ten priests who have quit St. Maryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Church in Phoenix where I lived for fourteen years. I personally know approximately one-hundred ex-Roman Catholic priests. The number of priests quitting the priesthood is kept as secret as possible. According to the best estimates I could find, at least 30 percent of all Roman priests leave Rome. There are 45,000 priests in the United States. If my experience holds true, more than 10,000 of them will leave the Catholic priesthood. Most ex-priests, because of fear of persecution, fear of their own families and fear of starvation, slip into large cities and deliberately . . . attempt to start their lives anew. You hear only vague rumors of them, or if they appear in a Protestant pulpit they are denounced by local catholic clergy and laity for being either fake priests or liars. No one can accuse me of being a fake Roman priest. I was a priest in Phoenix, Arizona, from 1934 to 1948. I heard the confession of thousands of Phoenix Catholics. I baptized hundreds of them and I buried many of them. I cannot be accused of being a liar because the experience that led to my break with Rome took place openly in Phoenix. The story was in the newspapers and on the radio and the correspondence and documents involved are in a safety deposit box in the Valley National Bank.

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

303

I do not wish to rantingly denounce Roman Catholicism. I wish only briefly to tell how I was indoctrinated in a Catholic seminary; how I broke with the Catholic Church and its priesthood; what I found out when I got out of it; what the Catholic Church did to me in the process and what warning that might give you as a danger to your freedom and that of the America we all love. Free Americans, such as you are, have no conception of the indoctrination, the walling in, the mental inbreeding that takes place in the training of a Catholic priest. The courses last twelve years. I began in St. Anthony Seminary in Santa Barbara, California, in 1922, and finished when I was sent to Phoenix in 1934. Upon a boyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s entrance to a seminary there begins twelve years of the most thorough and effective intellectual indoctrination that the world has ever known.â&#x20AC;&#x2122; It begins gently, with a blending of the legitimate pleasures of boyhood, the stimulus of competition in studies and the pageantry of the forms of ancient religion unseen in the ordinary parish church. It ends twelve years later with a rigidity of mental barriers, of intellectual processes, of medieval superstitions and religious concepts as archaic as those of the Buddhist monks upon the isolated, frozen mountains of Tibet. Subtly we were indoctrinated in Catholicism to the exclusion of all other thinking. Attendance at mass was daily and compulsory. So were morning and evening community prayers. All textbooks, even in high school courses, were written by Catholic authors. No daily papers were permitted, nor were conCatholic magazines. Radios for the use of Junior Seminarians

304

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

were forbidden. The priests (and all the teachers were priests) were permitted a radio in their supervised recreation hall. We were not permitted to enter that hall. We were allowed to hear Notre Dame play U.S.C. by means of a speaker placed in the window and beamed to us outside. Of course, on the morning of such games we all prayed at mass that God would vindicate the Faith through the Victory of Notre Dame. During these years of seclusion from American life the indoctrination in the “Spirit” of the Catholic church becomes so intense that I alone was a normal Christian, privileged to commune with God, the American way of life was a pagan, sinful thing, a rebirth of the Roman Empire and destined to the same disgraceful doom in the ashes of future history. I came to believe that the American government is to be tolerated though wrong; tolerated because it gives unlimited freedom to the Catholic Church; wrong because it gives freedom to other churches. I came to believe that the ideal form of government is the one in which I was living in my seclusion of spirit; the day when the Papacy made kings and the power to govern came from God to the King through his “representative,” the Pope. My boyhood concept of civics, of the rights of man to the processes of law and of government through the consent of the governed faded away under the constant repetition of the teachings of Thomas Aquinas and the moral theologians. The constitution of America and the laws of its states dimmed into the trivialities in comparison with the all powerful Code of Canon Law of the Roman Catholic church. In all truth, I became a citizen of the church, living, by accident, in the United States. The most important aspect of this prolonged

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

305

indoctrination is the identification of the Roman church with God and the identification of all church superiors with the Roman church and therefore with God. I had to learn to crush the lists of the flesh by fasting, self denial and even physical torture. . . . But we were not unhappy. After years of seclusion and indoctrination, we knew no other world. We were unaware of our indoctrination of fear. We thought it was love. We were constantly told so. We had come to accept celibacy as supernatural -- not unnatural. The simple pleasures granted us, permission to talk to each other at times, an occasional picnic, a glass of wine on special feasts, satisfied souls that had not only become childlike, but even childish. We belonged to what we firmly believed to be the only enduring organization in the world -- the Roman Catholic church, and through it we belonged to God. It is my firm belief that every young man of the thirteen of us, kneeling before the Archbishop Cantwell on ordination day in June 1933 was so thoroughly indoctrinated in his belief in the Roman Catholic church that we sincerely believed that his was the greatest privilege given to mortal men, that nothing else mattered, not friends, not relatives, not country -- only the culmination “Thou art a priest forever, according to the Order of Melchizedek” -- ”another Christ.” I was a Catholic Priest in Phoenix for fourteen years. During that time I had a part not only in the strictly churchly duties of saying mass, hearing confessions, performing baptisms, marriages and the other church functions but also I had some part in the civic and social life of Phoenix. I helped in the development of the public housing program, the Arizona State

306

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Board of Health, and the building and operation of Memorial Hospital. My break with Rome was a gradual thing. It began not with the realization that Roman doctrines were false but with feeling that Roman morals were wrong. It took me ten years to make the decision. It would take hours to go into details but briefly I became thoroughly disillusioned with (1) the lack of charity within the church and institutions especially in sisters’ hospitals; (2) the lack of consistency between the church’s teachings and practice, especially in inter-racialism; (3) the unnaturalness and harmfulness of Catholic teachings on the celibacy of the clergy and birth-control among the laity; and (4) the church’s greed for money. The natural question that would occur to an independent American Protestant is: if you had lost faith or confidence in your church why wait ten years to leave it? The answer is fear. The hold of the Roman Catholic hierarchy upon its clergy is not the bond of love nor of loyalty nor of religion. It is the almost unbreakable chain of fear. Fear of hell; fear of family; fear of the public; and fear of destitution, deprivation, and insecurity. I firmly believe that in place of the 30 percent of the clergy who actually leave the priesthood, 75 percent would do so if it were not for the fear that is constantly instilled into them. Most priests, torn between the intellectual realization that they have been betrayed by the Hierarchy and the fear of family reaction, hesitate and live on through barren years in the priesthood. I, like every priest, was taught through the years that anyone who takes his hand from the plow and looks back will not only be cursed by God but will be rejected by the public. Catholics would despise

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

307

me as a traitor. Non-Catholics would sneer at me as one who had violated his solemn promises and therefore as one who cannot be trusted with responsibility or even the most menial job. Examples are pointed out of priests who have strayed, who have starved, and who have groveled back to the hierarchy, sick, drunken, broken in spirit, begging to do penance for the sake of clothes on their backs and food in their bellies. The ex-priests who are successful are never mentioned. If it had not been for our hospital, I might still be in the Roman Catholic Church leading a life of misery and frustration. Memorial Hospital, or St. Monica’s, was founded on two principles, both contrary to the Catholic Sisters’ Hospitals. The first was that it is possible to train together as nurses, girls of all races. Her doctrine of the “Mystical Body of Christ” welds all people into a physical unity. The Catholic Church does not have the “nerve” to practice this teaching. Most Catholic nursing schools will not accept girls of all races. The second principle is that it is possible to give emergency care to everybody and still survive. Sisters’ hospitals as a rule will not do this. The Arizona Board of Nurse Examiners with a nun as its president refused to approve our school until we sued them and forced approval. Our students have come from all races and all sections of the country. They live together, study together, and work together. There has never been an interracial argument in the nine years of the school’s existence. Our nursing graduates, of all races have been accepted in hospitals everywhere. The international pattern is not confined to the Negro girl -- the senior posting machine operator of our business office. She is

308

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

now its state president. Three graduates of Howard University are among the three hundred doctors on our medical staff and one of them trained with us as a medical resident. The interracial aspects of our hospital were so successful that they accented the shameful hypocrisy of the Catholic St. Joseph’s hospital in Phoenix that under the Sisters of Mercy would hire a Negro only as a flunky. Our policy of rendering emergency care to every accident case before asking financial questions became so well known that ambulance drivers and law enforcement officers brought the injured to us from the very doorsteps of the city’s other hospitals -- and they still do. We have cared for 150,000 emergency cases -- 75,000 of them free of charge. And our doors are still open. It was inevitable that the nun and the hierarchy should squirm under the double thorns of racial equality and free medical care. They began accusing me of many things. They said I did not pray enough, I was not on time to meals, I did not have enough respect for nuns. They contended that running a hospital was a material thing, unbecoming a priest. They demanded that I give it up and be prepared to obey an order to leave Phoenix. The Franciscan provincial superior demanded particularly that I stop our care of the injured, the maimed and the sick. “Let them die on the street,” he told me. “They are the responsibility of the city of Phoenix, not of the Roman Catholic church.” The night that conversation took place I finally made up my mind. I woild not leave Phoenix or our hospital. Instead I would leave the priesthood and the Catholic church. I did so December 1, 1943.

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

309

Roman Catholics accused me, as they do every ex-priest, of having deserted God. Actually reaching that decision and carrying it out brought me closer to God than I had ever been before. I had merely shed the idolatrous and moneymaking trappings that the hierarchy had built around the concept of God and of religion. I read the Bible more than I ever had before. Roman Catholicism pushes God so far into heaven with his infiniteness, his omnipresence, his omniscience that Catholics can’t reach Him. They are content with the saints and Mary and the sacred heart of Jesus. But Jesus himself was not distant and God was not distant. “The Kingdom of God is within you.” God could be reached only through men. “For all the law is fulfilled in one word. Even in this (categorical imperative); ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.’ And what you have done to one of these my least brethren, ye have done it to me.” And with this closer contract with God came a sudden appreciation of Protestantism. I had been taught that nonCatholics were not only largely to be consigned to hell in the next world, but that on earth they were constantly disagreeing, dividing, disintegrating, and were united only on one point -opposition to Roman Catholicism. I came to the realization that the differences of non-Catholics though doctrinal, are superficial and nonessential. Their unity is greater than their divergency. Whether Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, or Unitarians, they agree on two common principles. The first is the personal, private, independent interpretation of the Bible. The second flows from their intimacy with Jesus which the Bible provides -- that thing called “fellowship,” and intelligent, helpful

310

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

love of all men -- a love of neighbor which is not maudlin, but a concern for him and understanding, a respect and a desire and effort for his physical, moral, religious, and intellectual development. That “fellowship” among Protestants is something that Roman Catholics simply do not understand. To me American democracy with its material, intellectual, and cultural accomplishments and its human and humanitarian preeminence is the ultimate blossoming of these two principles. It is impossible for me to portray in a few words the America that I discovered when I broke out of the physical and mental prison of Roman Catholicism. It is difficult for me to express my personal appraisal of American democracy without perhaps appearing to the critical intellectual mind to be maudlin and sentimental. I am sentimental about it. Before leaving Romanism I scorned the displaced Pole or German or Yugoslav who, when granted American citizenship, passionately clutched the American flag, kissed it, and openly wept. But I do not scorn him now. I feel just as passionate. Now I know what he left and what he has received. For the tyranny of totalitarianism is not confined to political states, and the emotional appreciation of America is not reserved only to those who reject a nationality to become its citizens. Now I was an adult, examining for the first time, the nation that was my own and marveling, not only at its physical makeup and resources, but at its moral, intellectual, and spiritual resources. I was consumed with an insatiable curiosity that wanted to know everything about everything. I read almanacs. And vacations and weekends I drove to small towns and asked

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

311

questions in cotton camps, country churches, and cross road bars. America -- its greatness, its resources, its love -- became my heritage also. But, my friends, that heritage will surely be destroyed and that great love will die unless the principles of freedom of the Bible, freedom of thought, freedom of worship, freedom of speech, are preserved. These freedoms are in real danger of being destroyed and that danger comes from within the country not from without. Let me tell you just a few of the attacks in the cold war that the Catholic church has waged against me in the five years since I exercised my American privilege of freedom of thought and freedom of worship and dared to leave the priesthood. I received more than ten thousand letters and I still receive them. A few were friendly and congratulatory but the bulk of them, even from bishops and priests, condemned me so severely and in many instances in such vile language that if they were opened by the postal authorities their writers could have been arrested for sending obscene matter through the mails. Some invoked the wrath of God, some wished me dead and some prayed that I would be stricken with an incurable disease. Malicious rumors were deliberately spread by the Catholic clergy. I was said to be spending all my time in taverns; I was being “kept” by four women of the Phoenix Country Club. God, they said, had punished me with heart trouble and paralysis. Outside of Arizona rumors were circulated that I had deserted my wife, lost my job, was doing penance and begging for readmission to the Roman Catholic church. The hierarchy, though Catholic members of the Board of Directors, tried to throw me out of the hospital I had built. While a priest I had been a leader to

312

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Catholics. Now I was untrustworthy, dishonest, and inefficient. I had foreseen this move and had been replacing Catholics with Protestants as Board members. When the Catholics could not rum be out of the hospital they tried to wreck the hospital and are still trying to do it. The clergy told their people to boycott it, which to a great extent they have unless they are so poor that the sisters will not take them in. Nuns in Phoenix schools told children of our nurses that I was a sinful man and that they should tell their mothers not to work for me. Catholic doctors tried to coax even non-Catholics away from our institution. Roman Catholicism will stoop to the lowest depths to crush its opposition. The hierarchy can no longer burn at the stake. But one of its devout subjects did try to choke me to death as a traitor to Rome. Another tried to kill my wife. A Catholic woman swore before a Catholic judge in San Mateo, California, that I was the father of her child. It was the charge of bastardy. The Catholic district attorney had the Catholic chief of police (O’Brien) call me and demand that I surrender for trial or be extradited. My wife and Phoenix friends had to sign affidavits that I was at home in Phoenix when the Catholic conspirators said I was near San Francisco. The record of this frame up is in the Phoenix police department. This opposition has continued up to the present time, the night I left Phoenix to begin this trip two members of the hospital Board of Trustees tried to force my dismissal on the ground that I was causing religious dissension in Phoenix by speaking in Protestant churches and by writing the book “Peoples Padre,” which the Beacon Press will release in March. The majority of that Board stood solidly behind me so the dissatisfied members

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

313

resigned. A few days later a Phoenix resident wired the Beacon Press suggesting that the publication of my book be dropped. Yesterday, I received a condemning letter from an anonymous priest here in Washington. This afternoon, hours before this speech was released, the Knights of Columbus issued a statement to the press calling me another Judas and a traitor to Christ. The Roman Catholic Church wants to make America Catholic. It does, the things that it has done to me will be the pattern of our land. To the extent that it is succeeding in spreading Catholic power our freedom is now being attacked and in some places destroyed. The Catholic church believes that it alone has the truth, that all of its teachings are true, that all men have an obligation of accepting the truth and therefore must accept the doctrines and practice its morals. It believes that all other religions are false and have no right to freedom or even existence. It teaches that Canon Law should be respected and observed in all countries including the United States. The Catholic bishops of America in the third council of Baltimore issued this statement: “It is obvious in countries like our own where from rudimentary beginnings our organization is only gradually advancing towards perfection the full application of these (Roman Catholic) laws is impracticable; but in proportion as they become practicable, it is our desire not less than that of the Holy See (Sea?), that they should go into effect.” We would not object if the Catholic hierarchy tried to force its laws and its beliefs on non-Catholic Americans. That is what it is trying to do. That is what in many respects it is succeeding. There is no need tonight for me to tell you of the

314

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

encroachments of the Catholic Hierarchy on our freedoms through control of school boards in many cities, through lobbies in Congress and State legislatures, through the influence of the index of Forbidden books on our libraries, through the Catholic code of Medical Ethics in Sisters Hospitals, through Catholic laws on marriage, through threats of and the actual imposition of boycotts on the nations newspapers, radios, magazines, and theaters. You as friends and members of Protestants and other Americans United are well aware of all these violations of Americanism. Yours is our country’s most effective organization in resisting this creeping foreign paralysis. About a month ago I had lunch with a judge of one of our local Arizona Superior Courts. We were discussing the Catholic code of hospital ethics and Catholic restrictions of marriage. He had been interested in a young man whose marriage was ruined by the war. The boy was in love with a Catholic girl. Her church forbade the marriage. The judge touched the heart of the Catholic problem: “When an old man sitting in Rome can tell my friend’s son in Arizona that he can’t marry the girl he loves or can condemn another friend to death by stopping an operation that would save her life -- then why should we worry about the tyranny of communism? ; America has already surrendered to the tyranny of Rome.” Yes the threat of Roman Catholic power is seriously great -- fortunately the power of American freedom is still greater. This has been proven by my successful open break from the Catholic priesthood and by the fact that, in spite of everything the hierarchy has done or threatened, I have been able to continue to live in the same city as an accepted citizen and have been backed

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

315

up by the twenty members of the Board of Trustees of Memorial Hospital in my administration of that institution. I would like to summarize those experiences in the words of the epilogue of the “People’s padre” -- the book I have written on my story and which will be released on March 22. Five years have passed since the eventful evening when I stood in the rectory of St. Mary’s Church in Phoenix and offered farewell to my fellow Franciscan priests. They have been the happiest years of my life-year of struggle, of work, of relaxation, and of love in an unbelievable happy marriage. Many sincere Roman Catholics are perturbed about their church. It is their birthright and they want to be proud of it. But secretly of among their close friends, they deplore its financial rapacity, its political alliances, its archaic moral doctrines which they either ignore of permit to ruin their lives and their marriages. They continue to hope that it will change, that it may become more charitable, less aggressive, and more realistic in faith and morals. I have shown that thousands of priests and millions of the laity, realizing the futility of a change for the better, have done and the only thing they could do. They have regretfully taken their hands from the plow and have looked back. I have pictured the tyranny of fear that binds Catholic priests to their religious post long after they have become disillusioned and yearn for the freedom and normal life of America. I have tried also to show the miasmic medieval, mental blanket which the hierarch has spread over Roman Catholics who blindly follow them, stifling their freedom of thought, of worship, and in medical-commercial aspects, freedom of action and of life

316

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

itself. I contend that this foreign thing is far more subtle, far less forthright but just as inimical to the American concept of life as Communism itself. It is the indirect cause of the techniques of, indoctrination and mental tyranny which the Kremlin has used so successfully. Its hierarchical and Spanish inquisitions with but a change of centuries, of weapons and of inquisitors, are being continued today in Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Russia. For my own personal self, putting the thoughts of recent years on paper has proven a mental catharsis. Looking back, my years in the priesthood and in the seminary seem like time spent in a dungeon, a prison whose floor was the burning seething fire of hell, whose walls and roof were made of the stones of mental rigidity, and whose air was not light and free but heavy and foul with the musty stagnation of medieval ism. The past five years have been those of a free man, a man restored to his birthright of American liberties which in his 41 years of life under the American flag, he had never been permitted to enjoy. It became almost a childlike pleasure to shop in a grocery store, to help plan a meal, to have a home, to paint a window, to sleep late Sunday, to plant a shrub in one’s own yard, to choose one’s clothes without restriction, to entertain friends without consulting a superior, and to love and to be loved. I am an American again, not a foreign subject on American soil. I can work and struggle with the healthy hardships of competitive business. I can love America and without asking a bishop or a provincial I can enjoy her mountains and streams, her

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

317

noisy cities and quiet prairies, and especially the sea, nature’s own symbol of freedom. I can also love God and continue with freedom in the service of my fellow man. For that freedom is now my heritage also. It is the freedom of America, the freedom that I, too, with all free men must guard. Like Thomas Jefferson, I “have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny of the mind of man.” Emmett McLoughlin Alongside Emmett McLoughlin’s testimony about Catholicism, the LDS church’s ‘damage control’ is similar: This news account of B. H. Roberts’ unpublished document, The Truth, The Way, The Light, written before 1927 by Roberts when he was the LDS Church Historian: When Roberts acted to publish his testimony, the LDS Church officially claimed ownership rights to his document: 107

Sixty years after his death, B. H. Roberts’ long suppressed treatise on Mormon Theology soon may be published -- and the Mormon Church wants to be the one to give permission. But there's a duel between the church and independent scholar Stan Larson for the copyright. . . . To Larson, the copyright means one thing -- [the LDS Church] doesn't want Roberts’ writings widely available without an institutional stamp on the editing and interpretation. No matter who wins, the book's publication will recall the fierce debate that followed its 1928 submission to the faith's Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who ultimately quashed it because they could not agree on the validity of some of Roberts’ theories. Roberts chief critic was Joseph Fielding Smith, who [40 years later] was to become church president. Roberts decided to publish the work himself but couldn't

318

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

raise the money before his death in 1933. Before Smith became Church President, Hugh B. Brown, a Roberts admirer and first counselor to then-President David O. McKay, feared Smith might destroy the manuscript upon assuming the presidency, said Brown's grandson, Edwin B. Firmage. [Another clip about Ed Firmage ends this anthology] Brown copied the work and gave it to Firmage, a law professor at the University of Utah. (Who in 2006 is retired and in ill health) The legal crux is whether the church owns the manuscript. [The corporate LDS Church, with its financial legal existence, ultimately appears to hold a legal advantage in this matter.] Questions and interpretations abound. ---Assuming the organic LDS church [Legally, the LDS Church operates as a corporation, i.e., is a ‘fictitious person’ with no naturally independent inalienable human capability to reason, but legally was granted economic license, which often legally commandeers the intellectual property of humans in its employ.] legally owns the manuscript, will the official action of its leaders decide that B.H. Robert's manuscript will not be published? History points this way! The date of this writing is July 28, 1997. Until now, ‘no news’ about the fate of this document has been made public. Inquiries have provided no answers. And anyway, no great outcry from members shows that the LDS public is essentially careless in this matter. The LDS practice of disfellowshiping or excommunicating members continues as a normal practice of Church sanctification. Even a Church Apostle, who took issue with his fellow quorum members, was recently excommunicated: Apostles had ‘filled-in’ for the 90+ yearold Prophet (Ezra T.Benson) during his frequent absences, preaching that the near inactive feebleminded Prophet totally was in control of the

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

319

Church’s leadership. Apostles, he claimed publically, denied the truth regarding the Prophet’s incapabilities. And, while secular charges were never brought against this fellow dissenting Apostle, a common form of character assassination was followed: sexual indiscretions had caused the excommunication, was the explanation given from the pulpit. Facts can never confirm truth or falsity since Church records are sealed! In instances of excommunication, truth’s confirming evidence is shunted onto those excommunicated, who then are bereft of organic position and a public forum from which to present credence to the evidence. Belief’s doctrinal favor, remains with the organic Church’s official story, as explained or denied? Antiquity then obscures all acquaintances’ evidence of truth or falsity: the legal organic Church ever abides? As in 2006, for instance, Professor Firmage, now older, in ill health, has retired from his U of U teaching position, and faces his mortality, while the legal perpetual organic LDS Church retains a perpetual organic sway? If a theocratic-organic connection to God ever existed, as Joseph Smith claimed and as the LDS faithful believe, surely this connection is damaged when the LDS Church’s prophet ages naturally to disable him: whatever divine connection between God and Prophet had been, it suffers disconnection by the Prophet’s natural aging. And, priesthood subordinates, who acclaim that the aged Prophet is still fully connected to Deity, are logically faced with perpetuating either the image of divine connection, as believed, which tautologically is irrational, or admitting truthfully that the connection, at times, fails to exist: which authority-based dilemma absolutely occurred when Joseph Smith was assassinated. They, when admitting this authority default, must by truthful inference also conclude that an exclusive claim to a ‘Devine-right’-based connection to God’s revealed counsel didn’t exist? [That faith based ontologism always exists, at God’s pleasure, is not at issue here.] Ontological belief-based testimonies that Mormonism is Christ’s only true Church, hinges on the belief-based doctrine that a

320

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

divinely appointed living Prophet is divinely connected authoritatively to God so to act in God’s stead, however, all factual instances of temporal disconnection, clearly rationally show that this doctrine-based belief is often, at least, false. And because the reality shocked the doctrinal belief, the priesthood hierarchy’s subordinate leaders then found it necessary to rationalize the divine connected authority claim, which officially expanded the LDS ‘divine-right’-based authority doctrine to include all Apostles, as the LDS Church’s official “prophets and revelators.” This rationalization, however, confirms, as St. Peter observed, that God’s ontologism-faith-based connectivity is equally available to all. Although, natural temporal disruptions of this LDS claim to divine authority have passed as if “divine Authority” had the relative significance of a piece of drift wood on a river flow, massive membership exoduses from the LDS Church have not occurred in results of the myriad clear temporal disconnects to God’s authority, excepting when Joseph Smith, incarcerated, was killed by a mob. The membership exoduses’ following Joseph Smith’s death is repletely related to Fundamentalism-based belief in“divine authority.” For instance, Ervil LeBaron claimed ‘divine-right’-based authority to lead a polygamous Mormon splinter group away from the LDS Church: Ervil, was one of many, who claimed that ‘divine right’-based authority was directly passed on to him by way of LDS Priesthood bearing ancestors,’ as Joseph Smith in formal blessing-based revelations had bestowed (Analogously, Ervil’s ‘divine right’-based authority, as claimed, is what originally Joseph Smith had claimed, and the LDS Church’s faithful routinely believe and testify to): particularly, however, Ervil claimed his divine appointment was the Danite’ “destroying angels” authorities, which Ervil’s faithful followers literally administered as he commanded: executing the “blood atonement”-based ‘cleansing of his particular polygamous flock’ of its detractors. [About this ‘black hearted authority,’ Brodie wrote ( p

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

321

315): Twelve of the most ruthless Danites had been set apart as Destroying Angels, whose business it was to spy out the prophet’s enemies and assassinate them . . ..] Coincidental to Ervil LeBaron’s murderous Danite-based cleansing, the LDS Church’s official reaction is noteworthy: the LDS Church wisely and quietly then removed the Danite, (blood atonement) life-oath, which symbolically was routinely taken by LDS Temple attendees? Surely, if this temple ordinance originated by a command of God, then that command had an eternal nature? The (Danite) life-oath’s enforcement, as Joseph Smith had revised and symbolically instituted as a temple ordinance, is surely irrational as a divine command from God. Instead, because of need, the Blood atoning life-oath inferentially was instituted to preserve secrecy, as was practiced by the fraternal order of Freemasonry. Smith, was a Mason, and Smith’s brother headed the Mormons’ Masonic Order in Nauvoo.108 Brooke documented Joseph Smith’s preMormon ties to the martyred William Morgan, confirming that Joseph Smith was informed of Freemasonry’s enforced Blood atonement-based secrets, to which his casual claims to Christian practice and authority belied. 109

Zina Huntington Jacobs, one of Joseph’s wives, said in later years in a public address: ‘I am the widow of a master mason, who, when leaping from the window of Carthage jail, pierced with bullets, made the masonic sign of distress. Peggy Fletcher Stack wrote this article carried in the Salt Lake Tribune on Jan. 14, 2006. In part, it was about a 1974 speech by Reed C. Durham, at the University of Utah: ---“The speech was so controversial that Durham’s

superiors in the LDS Educational System forced him to issue a public apology.” ---“The speech was never published but was surreptitiously taped and has floated around on the Internet for years.” ---“Everybody wants to obsess over supposed similarities in

322

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

ritual, . . ., but that’s just one aspect. Everything about Joseph and his family was tied into Masonic legends.” ---“The Mormon connection: Smith’s father, Joseph Smith Sr. joined a Masonic lodge when the family moved to Palmyra, N.Y., in 1816. Later, Smith’s brother Hyrum also joined. From them, Smith heard the story of a lost sacred word that was engraved upon a triangular plate of pure gold. The word was the name of God. [Was the proper Greek name LOGOS, which St. John had assigned to God’s intelligence, engraved on this plate?]

It makes sense that Smith would go searching for such treasure in the large American burial grounds near his home, (says Literski, author of the forthcoming book, ‘Method Infinite: Freemasonry and the Mormon Restoration.’).” . . . By the 1840s, many Mormon leaders in Nauvoo, including Smith and apostles Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball, became Masons and organized a lodge there under the auspices of the Grand Lodge of Illinois. It wasn’t long before nearly every male member of the church in the area had joined. At the same time, Smith introduced LDS temple rituals that included secret handshakes, signs and symbols like the all-seeing eye, the compass and square . . . and the sun, moon and stars that eched Masonry. Soon though, other Masons felt that the Mormons were dominating the fraternity. In 1842, the Nauvoo Lodge was suspended. Many Mormons believed that Masons contributed to the murder of their prophet. Antagonisms built up between the two groups. In Utah in 1860, Masonic lodges were established but they prohibited Mormons from joining. At the same time, (Brigham) Young forbade Mormons from joining and refused to allow Masons to

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

323

hold priesthood leadership positions in the Church, Literski says. It wasn’t until 1984 that LDS President Spencer W. Kimball removed the prohibition against Latter-day Saints becoming Freemasons. Later that year, the Grand Lodge of Utah removed its own ban on Mormon membership . . .. Even in Smith’s day, there were Masons who believed the legends were historical truth and saw Freemasonry as a deeply spiritual, mystical quest. Other, more sophisticated members, discounted the old stories, wanting to refocus it along the lines of a charitable and benevolent institution. The Smiths were about as far into mysticism as you can get, Literski says. “Joseph was rebuilding Solomon’s temple with all the legendary baggage that came along with that.” Seeing the relationship between the two groups forces Mormons like Literski to revise his ideas about how God interacts with a prophet. “You cannot understand what is going on in Joseph’s mind unless you can know what he is seeing, hearing, feeling and touching,” he says. “That gives me a stronger position of faith than would this idea that revelation is ex nihilo [from nothing, nothing is made]. Joseph was not a puppet.” [And neither was Moses: (see Deut. 32): Solomon was of O.T. times, i.e., lived before Homer and Greek culture, around 800 BC.] R. L. Bushman confirmed this in an endnote: 110 This Primer on Freemasonry was provided by the editor following Peggy Fletcher Stack’s article:

The exact origins of Freemasonry are unknown. The legend that is re-enacted ritually says the fraternal organization was founded by the workmen who built King Solomon’s Temple as described in the Bible. A key figure is “Hiram out of Tyre,” described as

324

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

“a widow’s son of the tribe of Naphtali . . . filled with wisdom.” Most Masons believe this is allegory, not history. Scholars speculate Freemasonry has connections with Greek and Roman mysteries, which were rites of entering their religions and kept secret upon penalty of death, but Masonry’s real beginnings were in the 14th century (and therefore not related either to Solomon or Christ’s Gospel). At the time, stonemasons and architects traveled across Europe building cathedrals. The medieval guild, a combination of trade union and regulated monopoly, had the responsibility of inducting trainees and preserving trade secrets: this was the origin of Masonic passwords and secret handgrips. According to some Masons, trade unions also helped the clergy transmit biblical stories to an illiterate populace. The stonemasons were responsible for the story of the building of Solomon’s Temple, and eventually they worked it into their lodge ceremonies. It wasn’t until 1717, with the establishment of the first Grand Lodge, that freemasonry shifted from being an obscure, relatively private, institution into the public eye. Source: University of Virginia Brodie wrote about the Danite oath in some detail: Practically every member of the Legion, [John C. Bennett]

continued, had taken the Danite oath, swearing to defend (with their life if necessary) the prophet whether right or wrong. Twelve of the most ruthless Danites had been set apart as Destroying Angels, whose business it was to spy out the prophets enemies and assassinate them at midnight, garbed in white robes, and wearing a wide red sash about their waists. .

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

325

Joseph’s affections, he continued, ranged from the handsome gentile whore who lived down by the steamboat landing up through the scale of Nauvoo society to fiery, vivacious Nancy Rigdon. Even married women were not immune to Joseph’s importunities. About John C. Bennett’s veracity, Sarah Pratt, wife of Orson Pratt, furnished this sworn statement on March 31, 1886:

Salt Lake City This certifies that I was well acquainted with the Mormon Leaders and Church in general, and know that the principle statements in John C. Bennett’s book on Mormonism are true. Sarah M. Pratt A. B. D [Surname not legible], witness The social war that erupted abruptly in Nauvoo, Brodie said, started by organic power differences between Bennett and Smith. Sarah Pratt, a source of Bennett’s information, was easily traced, often called upon.111

There was Sarah Pratt, wife of the apostle Orson Pratt, then on a mission to England. Bennett said that he knew her well, having boarded at her house for some months, and he described her as ‘one of the most elegant, graceful, amiable and accomplished women in the place.’ Mrs. Pratt, he said, told him the full details of Joseph’s conversation with her. After the appropriate preliminaries, the prophet said: ‘Sister Pratt, the Lord has given you to me as one of my ‘spiritual wives.’ I have the blessing of Jacob granted me as God granted holy men of old; and as I have long looked upon you with favor, and as earnest desire of connubial bliss, I hope you will not repulse me.’ Sarah is supposed to have replied in the following dignified language: ‘Am I called upon to break the marriage

326

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

covenant, and prove recreant to my lawful husband? I never will. My sex shall not be disgraced, nor my honor sullied. I care not for the blessings of Jacob, and I believe in no such revelations, neither will I consent, under any circumstances whatever. I have a good husband, and that is enough for me.’ Joseph then threatened her, Bennett said, for he was fearful lest she spread the story. ‘If you tell, I will ruin your reputation; remember that. . . . ‘ [W. Wyl . . . in Mormon Portraits, quoted her as mentioning Joseph’s ‘dastardly attempt on me.’ And there was serious trouble between the prophet and Orson Pratt after his return from England. Mrs. Pratt was subjected to an intensive smear campaign, and the couple nearly left the church.] Turmoil exploding about her, and with her husband, Orson, told about Smith’s extra connubial advances, Brodie continued: 112

Bennett had fully expected the Pratts and Rigdon to follow him out of the Church, but in both instances he was disappointed. Pratt, who had some time since returned from England to teach mathematics at the University of Nauvoo, wandered about Nauvoo like a man bereft of sense, proclaiming the innocence of his wife to every passer-by. . . One morning he disappeared, and the whole of Nauvoo went out in search of him, for he was generally liked and admired. He was finally discovered miles below the town, sitting hatless on the bank of the Mississippi. Shorn of his apostleship, suspicious of friend and enemy alike, and tormented by doubts of Sarah’s own denials, he had come very near suicide. Antinomianism Freedom granted to religion to protect a diversity of belief, which had separated religion from constitutional civil authority, caused Antinomianism to spread throughout the American Colonies,

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

327

particularly New England. 113

Antinomian n, a member of any of several Christian sects denying the necessity of moral law in view of the fact that salvation is freely bestowed by grace. [< Medieval Latin ‘Antinomi’ name of the sect (< Greek ‘anti’ against ‘nomos’ law)] [Puritans’ Calvinist laws practiced strict penalties for sexual expressions outside marriage. While Mosaic laws addressed violations of the Ten Commandments, culturally, women were taught to submit to the men’s sexual advances, however, when caught in adultery, were stoned to death; Joseph’s Antinomianism maybe prompted Bushman to contend that Joseph’s revealed Mormonism had departed from Calvinism?] Joseph Smith was circumspect, if not careless about religious belief; his mother was a strong sponsor of antinomianism-based belief 114 : in a word, Joseph was a mystic. The Pratt’s religious belief, however, displayed firm moral foundation to religion, as to marriage, as a sacred troth. About Joseph’s mother, Lucy Mack Smith, Brodie wrote this: 115

‘Lucy had a vigorous though unschooled mind, and her belief was simply the core of Antinomianism -- the inner life is a law unto itself; freedom and integrity of religious experience must at all costs be preserved.’ Joseph revealed his willfully amoral belief in this letter addressed to beautiful Nancy Rigdon, the wife of Sidney Rigdon, who at the home of Mrs. Orson Hyde rebuffed Joseph’s extra connubial proposal. 116

“Happiness is the object and design of our existence; and will be the end thereof, if we pursue the path that leads to it; and this path is virtue, uprightness, and faithfulness, holiness, and keeping all the commandments of God, but we cannot keep all the commandments without first knowing them . . . Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we cannot see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire. If we seek the kingdom of God, all good things

328

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

will be added. So with Solomon: first he asked wisdom and God gave it to him, and with it every desire of his heart; even things which might be considered abominable to all who understand the order of Heaven only in part, which in reality were right because God sanctioned by special revelation.” [Suggesting that God is the source of divine right-based amorality] This letter was perhaps the first forthright [and clearly

false] argument for polygamy that Joseph ever put to paper. [Nancy gave the letter to Francis Higbee, who turned it over to Bennett, who in turn published it in his ’History of the Saints, pp 243-5’] About King Solomon, Joseph Smith cherry picked his belief to fancy his analogous sexual desires, and his reading about Solomon, ignored this part about Solomon’s ultimate downfall:117

Unfortunately for Solomon, the very greatness of his success and prosperity led to his undoing. His unlimited power led to unlimited pride and self-indulgence. He filled his harem with . . . wives and concubines. He indulged their religious preferences by building pagan shrines. (The Hebrew Empire fell apart) John C Bennett lived in Nauvoo for only two years when the Belief-based war between scandle and virtue raged. Brodie wrote:118

Embedded in Joseph’s character was the commonplace Yankee mixture of piety and avarice. But his seed he developed to a special flowering. The true mystic is preoccupied with things of the spirit, and in so far as he concerns himself with worldly affairs he denies his calling. But in Joseph’s revelations lessons on the nature of God and guidance for the operation of a boarding house sit side by side [Joseph failed to respect the Constitutional separation of Church and State. The Mormonism which followed him has perpetuated this temporal flaw.]-- like Hyperion

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

329

and the Satyr -- enthroned in equal majesty. [‘Whenever I see a pretty woman,’ he once confided, ”I have to pray for grace.” ] About Bennett, Brodie wrote: 119

It was an evil day in the summer of 1840 . . . That Joseph baptized into the church Dr. John Cook Bennett. He had been an instructor in ‘midwifery’ in an obscure Ohio college, and was now secretary of the Illinois Medical Society and quartermaster general of the Illinois militia. He was thirty-five -- the same age as the prophet. . . . The winning of the Nauvoo charters was Joseph’s first great political victory, and it made him feel immeasurably obligated to Bennett. It is therefore not surprising that when ugly rumors of the man’s debauchery and profligacy caught up with him in Nauvoo Joseph hastily dismissed them. When Hyrum learned on a trip east that Bennett had deserted a wife and two children and had been expelled from the Masonic lodge for unprincipled conduct, he wrote it to Joseph, but the prophet filed the letter in his drawer. Less than one year after his coming to Nauvoo, Bennett had become ‘assistant president’ of the [Mormon] church. . . . Bennett assumed all [Sidney Rigdon’s] duties. In addition, Bennett became mayor of the city, chancellor of the University of Nauvoo, and brigadier-general of the Nauvoo Legion, second in command to Joseph. Bennett was Joseph’s most intimate friend and counselor for a year and a half. Although during this period Nauvoo was fast becoming the most notorious city in Illinois, outwardly it was a model of propriety. By claiming ‘divine right’-based authority with ‘spiritual wiving’

330

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Joseph assumed personal antecedent divine authorities above the cardinal inalienable individual human right-based authorities, which, when creating humans, LOGOS had naturally genetically endowed to each individual human. In claiming his personal favor or exception with treating others, Joseph Smith made God (i.e., LOGOS) a liar. Each mature individual, as naturally determined, has inalienable “divine right”-based authority and responsibility as regards both their individual eternal soul and temporal body. And, while God abides with those who ‘walk in his light,’ surely, God neither meddles with individually endowed-inalienable authorities nor respects one more than another: Joseph’s claim that God’s authorized his proposal for connubial favors from Sarah Pratt, and the many others, according to St. John, this claim made God a liar (I John 1). And, about inalienable personal rights of Sarah and others, he clearly proposed to violate their constitutional First Amendment rights. And in constitutional matters, Joseph Smith’s church failed to lead the LDS flock in a manner to qualify for statehood in Utah, but reluctantly obeyed its members’ wish for statehood: The practice of polygamy was abandoned with the granting of Utah’s constitutional statehood! This exchange, polygamy for statehood, afforded a great blessing to the organic LDS Church that also then became acknowledged as a revelation. Pondering the acquaintance-based truth about Joseph Smith’s history, as in later years he recorded it, in light of fresh evidence, is confronted by especially compelling fact-based concerns, inferring that the believed “acquaintance-based truth” has dualism. ---The origin of the Book of Mormon is one concern regarding Solomon Spalding’s unpublished manuscript and the factual evidence of Sidney Rigdon’s connection, with obtaining it. 120 ---Another concern, is the ‘morals war’ that raged in Nauvoo: John C. Bennett’s key role embroils this immorality. Rigdon, then Bennett had served Smith, as Smith’s second in command. (Comments on this concern follow comments on

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

331

the first concern mentioned above) R. L. Bushman’s account of Rigdon begins in 1830 when in northeastern Ohio Mormon missionaries converted Rigdon. Fawn Brodie’s account also begins with Rigdon’s conversion to Mormonism. Cowdrey, Davis, and Scales’ account 121 , however, begins far earlier than 1830: recording his birth in Library, PA., 1793; telling of his migration to city life in Pittsburgh, 1812-16; and about his close friend J. H. Lambdin who worked as a printer at R. and J. Patterson’s print shop where Solomon Spalding had brought his manuscript and left it there. That Rigdon was ordained in 1818-19 as the minister of the First Baptist Church of Pittsburgh; and that Rigdon, had showed Spalding’s manuscript to Dr. Winter; and that the Baptists excommunicated Rigdon on October 11, 1823 for teaching irregular doctrine (Had Spalding’s manuscript influenced his irregular teachings?). From the Baptists, Rigdon moved to the Disciples of Christ (Campbellites) and preached for them until shortly before he converted to Mormonism in 1830. With the fresh charges and facts deliberated, The Book of Mormon, its origin and translation, embroils plagiarization by a cabal, Sidney Rigdon, Joseph Smith, and others, which over time must also include those of awareness of the true facts and suppressed them from public access. S. Spalding’s daughter, Mrs. McKinstry, wrote: 122

Mr. (Solomon) Spalding told me that at Pittsburg he became acquainted with the Rev. Robert Patterson who, then in advanced life, was keeping a bookstore with a publishing department attached. He had prepared a copy of his manuscript for the printer and left it with Mr. Patterson for examination. About its publication they had frequent conversation. Mr P. thought favorable of the printing, but his manager of the publishing department -- a Mr. Engles or English -- had doubts about its being remunerative and thought the author should either deposit some money to pay the expenses, or, at least, give security for their

332

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

payment. . . . The manuscript was laid aside in the office for further consultation. . . . Mr. Spalding told me that while at Pittsburg he frequently met a young man named Sidney Rigdon at Mr Patterson’s bookstore and printing office, and concluded that he was at least an occasional employee. He was said to be a good English and Latin scholar and was studying Hebrew and Greek with a view to a professorship in some college. He had read some parts of the manuscript and expressed the opinion that it would sell readily. . . . Mr. S. Wrote to Mr. P. that if the document was not already in the hands of the printer he wished it to be sent to him in order that he might amend it by the addition of a chapter on the discovery of valuable relics in a mound recently opened near Conneaut. In reply Mr. P. wrote him the manuscript could not then be found . . .. This excited Mr. Spalding’s suspicions that Rigdon had taken it home. . . . Mr. Spalding had removed his family to Amity and had rented a Hotel there (1814). 123

Did Rigdon and Smith meet, as Mormon sources say, after Rigdon’s “conversion” in 1830? Or were they intimate acquaintances long before that time? What evidence do we have for declaring that Rigdon took Spalding’s manuscript to Smith and that their collaboration (with others) produced in 1830 “The Book of Mormon” as it was first published? The following chart outlines the events detailed in this chapter which link S. Rigdon with J. Smith. RIGDON/SMITH CHRONOLOGY 1823-30 Rigdon is evangelist for Disciples of Christ. 1827 (Feb.) Rigdon’s official itinerary (o.i.) Shows a gap which continues through April of 1827. 1827 (Mar.) During this same gap, Lorenzo Saunders saw Smith

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

333

and Rigdon together near Smith’s home. 1827 (Jn.) Gap in o.i.: Mrs. Eaton’s testimony places Smith and Rigdon together. 1827 (oct.) Gap in o.i.: Lorenzo Saunders’ testimony again places Smith and Rigdon together. 1828 (Jn.) Gap in Rigdon’s o.i.: Smith records that 116 pages of the Book of Mormon is missing (Doctrine and Covenants, section 3) Pomeroy Tucker’s testimony declares that Rigdon visited Smith at the time the pages were missing. 1828 (Aug.) Gap in Rigdon’s o.i.: For the third time, Lorenzo Saunders places Smith and Rigdon together. 1829 (Jn-Jul) Gap in Rigdon’s o.i.:David Whitmer (founding Mormon) testifies that Smith and Rigdon were together. 1829 (Nov/Dec) Lorenzo Saunders again saw Smith and Rigdon together. 1830 (Apr/Jn) Gap in Rigdon’s o.i.: Mr. Pearne testifies that he often saw Smith and Rigdon together. 1830 (Aug/Nov): gap in Rigdon’s o.i.: Lorenzo Saunders heard Rigdon preach on Mormonism in the summer of 1830. Mrs. S. F. Anderick saw Smith and Rigdon together several times “during warm weather.” (Doctrine and Covenants 32-33) commands missionaries to “go west” in October, where they find and “convert” Rigdon. 1830 (Nov.) On the fourteenth. Rigdon is Baptized into the Mormon Church by Oliver Cowdery. The distance between Rigdon’s home in Ohio and Joseph’s

334

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

in New York was about 250 miles and could be traveled by horseback in five or six days. A gap in Rigdon’s itinerary of even one month would allow ample opportunity for him to have conferred with Smith. An interesting conjecture concerning the coincidence of Rigdon’s activities and Smith’s “revelations” concerns the actual production of the manuscript. If Rigdon had actually taken Spalding’s manuscript from Patterson’s print shop, surely Silas Engles, foreman of the shop, would have known of Spalding’s suspicions concerning Rigdon. Perhaps Engles even knew that Rigdon possessed the story. If Rigdon desired to publish Spalding’s ‘Manuscript Found’ as his own work . . ., he would certainly do all within his power to see that no one discovered the fraud. For example, he would be much more likely to publish the manuscript after Engles had died. It is mere coincidence that Engles died in July of 1827 and that Smith recorded a “revelation” in September of that year, declaring that it was ‘now’ permissible to uncover, translate, and publish the golden plates. . . .

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

335

early years of Mormonism. Fawn Brodie wrote this: 125

During the Nauvoo years . . . Joseph found time not only to write the history of his church, but also to bring Mormon theology to its full flowering. His teachings were now rarely presented as revelations; they were either introduced in sermons or imparted secretly . . . He spent considerable time working out a simplified and lucid creed. This took the form of thirteen “articles of faith,” which became the functional basis of Mormonism. . . . Except for the reference to the Book of Mormon and the doctrine of continuous revelation, there was little in this creed to which a Bible-reading Christian could object, but simple because there was so little in it that was at all new. Actually it was only the first rung in the ladder of Mormon theology. It ignored the Order of Enoch, which had figured so prominently in the Church’s early history, because Joseph was done with it forever. [Joseph wrote in his journal on September 245, 1843: “I preached on the stand about one hour on the 2nd Chapter of Acts, designing to show the folly of common stock. In Nauvoo everyone is steward over his own” (History of the Church, Vol.VI, p 37)] It did not mention the doctrine of plurality of

Legal affidavits to the above facts are also included in this chapter.

Gods, which was one of the pillars of the new philosophy. And it did not even hint at the new and rapidly developing temple ritual.

The united order Bushman wrote this about Rigdon’s communist notions:124

Bushman also wrote this: 126

Issac Morley, a member of Rigdon’s congregation, organized a communitarian system of property under which Morley shared property with eleven famlies called “the family,” . . . The group persisted from February 1830 until Joseph and Emma arrived the next year. Clearly, Rigdon’s Campbellite faith came with communist notions of “A United Order,” which also marked the dark and maybe best forgotten

Alexander Campbell’s followers, calling themselves Reformed Baptists, sought to strip away everything added since the age of the Apostles. Campbell’s fellow reformer, Walter Scott, reduced the Gospel to five simple points: faith, repentance, baptism by immersion, remission of sins, and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Claiming to establish “the scriptural order of the gospel,” the Reformed Baptists made hundreds of converts. Sidney Rigdon, who

336

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

337

taught doctrines close to Campbell’s, built up a congregation of fifty members in Mentor, the township directly north of Kirtland, and another fifty in Kirtland itself. . . . Campbell was unsympathetic to the visionaries’ desire for stronger spiritual food. He could not understand Sidney Rigdon’s search for something more. In late October 1830, on the eve of the Mormons’ arrival, Rigdon “had often been unable to sleep, walking and praying for more light and comfort in his “religion.” The next month, he led a parade of believers into Joseph Smith’s fold. Campbellites were appalled that people would blindly accept revelations on so little evidence.

and put in charge of more than a hundred converts.

Bushman’s account fits the scenario presented previously by Cowdrey, Davis and Scales, as excerpted here:

Whether or not Rigdon first approached Joseph before his conversion, Joseph instantly installed Rigdon as a partner in the work of developing Mormonism. Rigdon, however, had not been discrete about having possession of Spalding’s document. He selectively had shown Spalding’s document to others and random visitors reported to have found him reading the document at home. This sworn affidavit of K. A. E. Bell was neither included by Bushman nor Brodie: 127

1830 (Aug/Nov): gap in Rigdon’s o.i.: Lorenzo Saunders heard Rigdon preach on Mormonism in the summer of 1830. Mrs. S. F. Anderick saw Smith and Rigdon together several times “during warm weather.” (Doctrine and Covenants 32-33) commands missionaries to “go west” in October, where they find and “convert” Rigdon. 1830 (Nov.) On the fourteenth. Rigdon is Baptized into the Mormon Church by Oliver Cowdery. Bushman wrote this about Rigdon’s conversion:

Rigdon was baptized within ten days after the four New York missionaries arrived in Mentor on October 28, 1830, and though the majority of his congregation withdrew its support, a few families in Kirtland followed his lead. Before the four missionaries left near the end of November, Rigdon, Isaac Morley, Lyman Wight, and John Murdock were ordained elders

Then, Bushman wrote about Rigdon’s visit with Joseph Smith:

In the fall of 1830, while the New York missionaries preached in Ohio, and on through December when the newly converted Sidney Rigdon and Edward Partridge came to visit, Joseph translated (the Bible) while Emma, Oliver Cowdrey, John Whitmer, or Rigdon took down the dictation. This work inaugurated the much larger project of revising the whole Bible. By the end of the year, Joseph had completed the first five chapters of Genesis, enlarging eight pages of the Bible into twenty-one of what became the Book of Moses.

Jo Smith’s brother Hyrum’s wife was a cousin of Mrs. Bell. Esek Rosa, an accountant, several times told me that Rigdon had told the people in [Ohio] that he was going to Pittsburgh but went to Rochester instead. Esek said he was visiting in Rochester, was invited to enter a building nearby and hear a very smart man preach. When he entered the room, he found Elder Sidney Rigdon preaching Mormonism. This occurred several months before Mormonism was preached in Ohio. Brodie mentioned and dismissed Abel Chase and Lorenzo Saunders; Bushman only mentioned Abel Chase regarding Jo’s “peep stone.” Neither had mentioned J. H. Gilbert, who Wyl had mentioned. Each was an acquaintance of Smith’s and had provided a legal affidavit stating

338

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

339

that Rigdon knew Smith years before Rigdon’s conversion to Mormonism. Saunders gave this sworn statement:128 --He lived within one mile of Joseph Smith at the time said

acquaintance-based falseness, as Tolstoy observed, preserves fundamental belief-based falseness, which belies commonly worn human prejudice to deliberately preserve untruths into antiquity: 129

Joseph Smith claimed that he found the “tablets” on which the “Book of Mormon” was revealed. That I went to the “Hill Comorah” on the Sunday following the date that Joseph claimed he found the plates, it being three miles from my home, and I tried to find the place were the ground had been broken by being dug up, but was unable to find any place where the ground had been disturbed. --That in March of 1827, on or about the 15th of said month I went to the home of Joseph Smith . . . I was met at the door by Harrison Smith, Jo’s brother. That . . . there were five men engaged in talking, four of whom I knew . . .. I inquired of Harrison Smith who the stranger was? He informed me his name was Sidney Rigdon . . .. That I saw Oliver Cowdery writing, I suppose the “Book of Mormon” with books and manuscript laying on the table before him; that I went to school to said Oliver Cowdery and knew him well. That in 1830, I heard Sidney Rigdon preach a sermon on Mormonism. . . .

While often the acorn is wished back into the tree, one might ignore but cannot truthfully, factually deny the acorn’s existence: in similar regard, it is as untruthful to ignore or deny that Spalding’s manuscript existed, or that Rigdon was acquainted with it, or with Rev. Robert Patterson’s bookstore where Spalding deposited his manuscript for publication. Still, Brodie can be excused for lacking factual information that was unavailable to her. Contemporary authors as Bushman, however, cannot be excused similarly, unless, fresh ‘true’ damaging factual information was preempted, sequestered, withheld, or destroyed, which collaboratively happens in cabalism secrecy in willfully practiced Oaths, as enforced by blood atonement. And, this deliberate aspect of

Mormonism’s Kirtland bank failure was as common as the myriad bank failures produced by New York’s Loco-Foco politics:130

Loco-Foco was a nickname given in 1835 to the radical faction of the New York Democratic Party. In October, 1835, New York Democrats held a meeting in Tammany Hall. The radical Democrats spoke against favoritism in banking laws. They wanted to form an organization to fight that kind of organization. The conservative party members were not strong enough to stop the proposal. They turned out the lights and left the hall. Members of the radical faction used phosphorus friction matches, newly invented and called “loco-focos,” to rekindle the lights, and continued the meeting. The Democratic press immediately named the reform Democrats “loco-focos.” US President Andrew Jackson’s political democratic fight, against wildcatting over the U.S. national bank, had a popular foundation.131

Jackson properly interpreted his re-election as public approval of his bank policy. He ordered Secretary of the Treasury Louis McLane to remove the government’s deposits from the Bank of the United States and place them in state banks. Both McLane and his successor, William J. Duane had been appointed even though

340

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Jackson knew that he opposed the presidents bank policy. . . . Jackson named Roger B Taney to the office. Taney carried out the order. In 1834, however, the Senate rejected Jackson’s nomination of Taney. This was the first time a Cabinet nominee had been rejected. The withdrawal of the government’s funds reduced the powers of the national bank. In 1836, it became the Bank of the United States of Pennsylvania. The dispute over the Bank of the United States occurred during a period of heavy speculation in land, the opening of the West, and increased foreign trade. The government was receiving more money from tariffs and the sale of public land than it was spending. On Jan. 8, 1835, Jackson paid off the final installment of the national debt. He was the only President ever to do so. Congress provided that any surplus above $5,000,000 should be divided among the states in 1837 as a loan. But the panic of 1837 struck before the money could be distributed to the states. The prospect of more money in circulation had encouraged speculation. Many states spent recklessly on huge public construction programs, such as roads and canals. Hundreds of “wildcat banks” issued their own money. By 1836, most banks had only 1 gold dollar in reserve for every 10 or 12 paper dollars in circulation. As a result, the value of money dropped steadily. Inflation became so serious that Jackson hastened to act before the boom crumbled. On July 11, 1836, he issued his “Specie Circular.” It directed government agents to accept only gold and silver in payment for public lands. This order shocked the West, because speculators there had been buying land with “cheap” paper money. The circular helped end

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

341

speculation in land. The inflation of money, overexpansion of business, and overinvestment in public improvements brought on a panic that struck shortly before Jackson left office. Jackson’s successor, Martin Van Buren, faced a depression about two months after he became President. Brodie’s comments about the Kirtland bank are factually true: bank failures were common, but, the Kirtland bank also was illegal:132

From its beginning the bank had been operating illegally (without a charter). A state law fixed the penalty for such an offense at a thousand dollars and guaranteed informers a share of the fine. It was inevitable that one of the prophet’s enemies should set the law upon him, and on February 8 a writ was sworn out by Samuel D. Rounds. When the court convened on March 24, Joseph’s lawyers tried to prove that the statute had not been in force at the time of the bank’s organization, but they lost the case. ... May brought disaster to the whole country. Within a single month 800 banks containing $120,000,000 in deposits suspended operations. The panic of 1837 had arrived, and the nation gone loco over land settled down to its day of retribution. What shows up in the Kirtland bank’s illegal organization, parallels the organic Smith-Rigdon cabal that modified Spalding’s manuscript and named the rewrite “The Book of Mormon”: Rigdon at the top (as the Kirtland bank’s president and provider of Spalding’s manuscript), and Joseph Smith (as the bank’s cashier and Seer interpreter-Revelator).133

The bank was said to have been established by a revelation from God, and rumor skipped through the town that the prophet had predicted that like Aaron’s rod it would swallow up all other banks “and grow and flourish, and spread from the rivers to the ends of the earth, and survive when all others should be laid in ruins.”

342

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Brodie wrote: “The bank established in November 1836 was expected to solve the problem of debts by the beguiling ly simple expedient of stamping out new notes.” And, she wrote this about Loco Foco: 134

Actually only one new bank was allowed incorporation in the (1837) legislative session. The hard-money wing of the Democratic Party -- the Locofocos -- had gained control and was determined to stop the increase of wildcat banks. Surely, Joseph Smith was not a fiscal conservative since he engaged in “wildcat banking,” however illegally, entailing risks that could not fit with prudence required of a fiscal conservative. Despite Smith’s revelations claiming the “United Order,” as “polygamy,” would “grow and flourish,” they, in fact, were ponzi-like schemes, that exploited economic and moral value, and were therefore, destined to devastate many. Bushman wrote:135

When the effects of the 1837 panic and the subsequent depression spread, any chance of Kirtland and its bank prospering was destroyed. Far from flourishing as their prophet had foretold, the Saints were caught in a downward spiral of personal losses and narrowing opportunities. Widespread apostasy resulted. The volatility in prices, the pressure to collect debts, the implication of bad faith were too much for some of the sturdiest believers. The Stalwarts Parley and Orson Pratt faltered for a few months. David Patten, a leading Apostle, raised so many insulting questions Joseph “slapped him in the face & kicked him out of the yard.” Joseph’s counselor Fredrick G. Williams was alienated and removed from office. One of the Prophet’s favorites, his clerk Warren Parrish, tried to depose him. Heber C. Kimball claimed that by June 1837 not twenty men in Kirtland believed Joseph was a prophet. 136 ... In the worst of these times, Joseph kept the support of hundreds and probably thousands of loyal followers. Apostasy was

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

343

rife, but the Church was not near collapse. As leaders defected, men of equal ability rose to take their places. By 1837, Mormonism had developed such momentum the loss of a few highplaced men could not slow it down. . . . While Joseph was fending off critics in Kirtland, the Missouri Church leaders were building a Zion in Far West. Elsewhere, the traveling elders were gathering converts faster than Joseph’s opponents could make apostates. 137 “Polygamy,” when strictly regulated by Brigham Young’s suzerainty (by the strict feudal order), for instance, appeared to be successful, then because the LDS membership preferred Utah’s statehood, to an inevitable war with the federal government, the practice of polygamy officially was discontinued. Ultimately, Smith’s prophecies failed because human rights, inherent of Utah’s Constitution, as required by the US Constitution, were more desired than adherence to the organic LDS Church doctrine of “polygamy,” i.e., LDS “suzerainty ”: Mormon Saints preferred the direct faith in the LOGOS of God, as protected in individual constitutional inalienable rights, than in Joseph Smith’s revelation-based doctrine of polygamy. Smith probably excused his habitual promiscuity because he believed in an antinomianism-based personal absolution: first noted by his close associates was his affair with Nancy Johnson in 1832, then Fannie Alger in 1835, which then fully bloomed into involving more than forty “spiritual wives” during John C. Bennett’s membership, through which Joseph Smith’s added practical medical knowledge of abortion to cover his concupiscent habit: 138

Joseph was no hair-shirt prophet. He believed in the good life, with moderate self-indulgence in food and drink, occasional sport, and good entertainment. And that he succeeded in enjoying himself to the hilt detracted not at all from the semi-deification with which his own people enshrouded him. Any protests of impropriety dissolved before his personal charm. ‘Man is that he might have

344

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

joy’ had been one of his first significant pronouncements in the Book of Mormon, and from that belief he had never deviated. He was gregarious, expansive, and genuinely fond of people. And it is no accident that his theology in the end discarded all traces’ of Calvinism and became an ingenuous blend of supernaturalism and materialism [i.e., was alchemy-based unitary materialism], which promised in heaven a continuation of all earthly pleasures -work, wealth[B , rsoedxi,eadnodcupmoewneterd. Smith’s forty nine connubial partners.] ---Another concern, is the morals ‘war’ that raged in Nauvoo: embroiling John C. Bennett’s key role. Both Rigdon and Bennett had served Smith, as second in command. Brodie also mentioned this resulting Nauvoo reality: 139

After the expulsion of John C. Bennett, the blame for the fatherless children arriving in the city was laid at his door. But while he was still in power, suspicion fell on every man who was seen out after curfew. The number of first wives who knew about polygamy was then extremely small, and the remainder were seething with suspicion and furiously angry at what seemed to be the appalling moral laxity in Nauvoo. John L. Brooke, an associate professor in the Department of History at Tufts University, was interested in Mormonism because New England’s cultural influences that had supported Joseph Smith’s doctrinal cosmology, also had influenced Brooke’s youthful years: 140

Mormon society was structured by hierarchies of race and sex. ‘The Book or Mormon’ made the white race morally superior to the red, and the Book of Abraham subordinated blacks; polygamous celestial marriage was merely an amplification of Mormon patriarchy subordinating women. These hierarchies of white or red and black and male over female were fused in an ancient theory of sexual ‘generation’ in the popular advice manuals. This

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

345

configuration was also evident in Smith’s revelation of 1831, where he announced that Mormon men would “in time” take wives among the Indians, “that their posterity may become white, delightsome, and just.” 141 Bound up in a sexual theory of ‘eternal progression’ shaped by hermetic alchemy, parallel hierarchies of race and sex played a critical role in Smith’s divine order and millennial plan. Such hermetic thoughts about sexuality and marriage may have shaped Smith’s move into spiritual wifery. Smith’s initial revelation on plural marriage is said to have come in 1831, as he was “translating“ chapters of the Old Testament. But reputedly, he and Martin Harris had claimed in the summer of 1830 that “adultry was no crime” [antinomianism?]; Smith was accused of attempting to seduce a local girl that summer in Harmony. Sometime in 1831 and again in 1834, Smith supposedly told a very young Mary Elizabeth Rollins that “she was the first woman God commanded him to take as a plural wife.” In 1832 the Johnson brothers joined in the riot against Smith, apparently because he was involved with their sister Nancy Marilda Johnson. Both of these women eventually became Joseph’s plural wives. Among the non-Mormons in Ohio there were suspicions that the community of property dictated in the Law of Consecration included wives. In 1835 Smith took two steps that carried the seeds of the polygamous system. That summer, as he began attempting to decipher the Chandler papyruses, he had his first extramarital affair, with a servant girl named Fanny Alger, who subsequently was taken to be the first of Smith’s forty-odd plural wives. Caught in the act, literally, Smith had violent confrontations with Emma Hale Smith and Oliver Cowdery, who from that date became progressively disillusioned with his old friend. 142 . . . There were simultaneously implications of antinomianism

346

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

and state building in Smith’s marital behavior in 1835. Testimony dating from 1843 suggests that Smith saw himself subject to no human law. Accused of “licentous conduct” with women in several families, Smith was said to have declared that “he was God’s prophet . . . and that he could do whatever he chose to do, therefor, the Church had no right to call into question anything he did.” 143 The organic LDS church continues to emphasize Smith’s ingenuous blend of supernaturalism and materialism, which promises in heaven a continuation of all earthly pleasures, however, rather than excuse by antinomianism, the LDS Church now emphasizes that Salvation comes by ‘works’ besides ‘grace’: antinomianism’s stand alone belief-based doctrine is now denied. While changes in the revelation-based Mormon doctrine have slowly arrived by popular political pressures brought by Statehood and public awareness of the Bill of Rights’ amendments to the U.S. Constitution, however, because religion is specifically separated from constitutional intents and purposes, and hierarchical organic LDS. Church leaders have remained fundamentally conservative, LDS Church members’ constitutional human rights continue to suffer. About factual truth, Rigdon is more important and complicated than Bennett (both became LDS apostates). In particular, Rigdon is more important regarding allegations about Spalding’s documents? Brodie’s belief dismisses these allegations as false since factual evidence that Rigdon was acquainted with Smith before November 1830 was apparently unavailable to her. Evidence, which has surfaced on this subject since Brodie, has either officially been politically or legally quashed, or purchased by the LDS and secured by lock and key? Excommunications, when traced to individuals who exercised constitutional rights to express their thoughts are more than just a few. Many attest to social pressures, including implied threats of excommunication when writing or preaching about issues sensitive to the

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

347

LDS Church’ authorities. Controlling perceptive damage to the organic ‘Church’ image is as fresh today as it was in Nauvoo. However, this image control is analogous to Swinburne’s analysis (in this instance, representing the organic LDS Church instead of a member): ‘When a

man begins to lust after the Muse instead of loving her, he may be sure that it is never the Muse that he embraces.’ Swinburne’s observation about LDS Church leaders lusting for ‘the muse’ have become very sophisticated in their sanctification practice. ‘Damage control’ is now an expanding art which exclusively serves the Church’s hierarchical organ: representing Swinburne’s ‘Lust’ rather than ‘Christian Love’ which ever respects the sinner. [As the Da Vinci Code raises controversy over Catholicism’s mysticism, Mormonism also entails symbolism that can become as controversial.] With assets greater than $400 billion (as estimated in an August 15, 1993-news article) the organic LDS Church (The Corporation of the President) not only is the largest Utah corporation, it is a formidable influence in the U.S. (and the world, as well) where at this magnitude of legal fictitious person-based organic sovereignty the standard of official conduct must embroil economics as much if not more than religious ethics and truth. The following article about this appeared in the July 28, 1997 Las Vegas Review Journal:

TIME: Mormon Church very prosperous International expansion sought to boost membership Associated Press SALT LAKE CITY -- The Mormon Church is the most prosperous of American religions and is preparing to focus that considerable wealth on an unprecedented campaign of international expansion, according to a cover story in TIME Magazine on newsstands this week. TIME correspondents said they had unusual cooperation

348

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

from the hierarchy of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in researching the article, which gives what may be the most accurate financial snapshot of the church to date: a minimum of $30 billion in assets and annual gross income of $6 billion -- more than Utah’s entire state budget this year. According to the article entitled “Mormons Inc.: The Secret of America’s Most Prosperous Religion,” the church last year brought in $5.2 billion in tithings alone from its roughly 10 million members, who are asked to give 10 percent of their annual income. If the Mormon Church were a corporation [regarding financial matters, it is], that yearly revenue would “place it midway through the Fortune 500, a little below Union Carbide and the Paine Webber Group, but bigger than Nike. “And as long as corporate rankings are being bandied about, the church would make any list of the most admired: for straight dealing, company spirit, contributions to charity (even the non Mormon kind) and a fiscal probity among its powerful leaders that would satisfy any shareholder group, if there were one,” the magazine said. . . . “The Mormons could well emerge as the next great global tribe,” author Joel Kotkin told TIME. The church, the seventh largest in the U.S., is growing at a rate of 4.7 percent domestically and nearly double that abroad. . . . “There is no major church in the U.S. as active as the Latter-day Saints in economic life, not, per capita, as successful at it.” The success is attributed by TIME to a series of differences

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

349

between the operation of the Mormon Church and other faiths. Almost all churches rely on donations, but few demand a tithe of its members. And the LDS faith, leaning on leaders who most often are successful businessmen in their own right, invests large portions of its revenue in church-owned, for-profit concerns. The article, which delves into the church’s history and beliefs as well, says there are theological underpinnings to the church’s ecclesiastical entrepreneurism. It points out that, “of some 112 revelations received by the first prophet and president of the church, Joseph Smith, 88 explicitly address fiscal matters.” ... [Occultist Mormonism wishes its unitary materialist-spiritual acorn back into the temporal constitutional civil tree of its protected ecclesiastical constitutional separation]

“Our whole objective is to make bad men good and good men better,” church President Gordon Hinkley told TIME. Plato’s belief-based truth, which is not rational, is the acquaintancebased form of truth utilized by the LDS Church to spin about its ‘image’ and ‘sainthood,’ which rests on authoritative inculcation of doctrinal dogma, i.e., as Tolstoy observed, makes ‘illusions’ the believed truth of its members! Unquestionably: Those in charge of the organic LDS Church’s corporate hierarchy aggressively act to deny unfavorable publications from the eyes and ears of its members, ostensibly to preserve historical dogma inculcated about the organic church’s origins. However, finding truth is an individual dynamic sovereign responsibility, and when the LDS Church officially acts to deny a free exchange of thought, it acts to deny members their sovereign rights and responsibilities: the acts of leaders (as chosen by the priesthood hierarchy, i.e., without the overtly active consent of the members, i.e., grass roots up), whatever the purpose, does not accord with the nature and will of God, particularly as regards inalienable rights-based citizens of the US Constitution. And it might be

350

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

remembered that the Time article pointed to about 88 revelations relating to fiscal matters, as Brodie had observed and was excommunicated for expressing her rationally objective truths: with time and snippets of rational fact-based truth generally admitted, chances are good that Brodie’s book will be believed as rational ‘truth’ by Mormon members? This is recalled,144

and will of God.

Embedded in Joseph’s character was the commonplace Yankee mixture of piety and avarice. But his seed he developed to a special flowering. The true mystic is preoccupied with things of the spirit, and in so far as he concerns himself with worldly affairs he denies his calling. But in Joseph’s revelations lessons on the nature of God and guidance for the operation of a boarding house sit side by side -- like Hyperion and the Satyr -- enthroned in equal majesty.

individual.

Many thoughts, as the following, which Christ taught were expressed hundreds of years earlier by Western and Eastern philosophers.

Holiness is what is loved by all the gods. It is loved because it is holy, and not holy because it is loved. Plato ----

Various scripture has claimed that God is truth! Is truth a part of holiness? Is holiness a part of truth? Are they the same?

----

Does nature-endowed human sovereignty require holiness as a condition for perceiving God’s metaphysical (abstract) truth?

----

When LDS Church leaders violate holiness (pure truth), does the spirit of God withdraw its connective influence on them? Joseph Smith surely taught this principle (D&C 121:37): i.e., Amen to the authority of that man.

Truth, correspondence of one’s perception to metaphysical reality, is compatible with Samuel Lucas’ thought on holiness:145

The essence of true holiness consists in conformity to the nature

351 Lucas

Holiness-grace aspects of truth permeate the human emotion we call love with epistemological concerns we call truth and knowledge. S. Kierkegaard said this:146 [Truth that can be lived] is the highest truth available for an existing The inalienable truths of the Declaration of Independence surely fit Kierkegaard’s truth that can be lived, so, why do we allow materialistic passion and concupiscent politics to abort this truth? Rousseau said: 147

General, abstract truth is the most precious of all blessings; without it man is blind, it is the eye of reason. Baruch (Benedict) Spinoza also wrote about this form of pure truth (Without pure truth, and knowledge, all is ‘mechanist belief’):148

Perfect truth is possible only with knowledge, and in knowledge the whole essence of the thing operates on the soul and is joined essentially to it. Reasoned truth only exists as personal perceptive knowledge of specific reality. And, only when reasoning is based on inferences from true facts of reality, can pure truth be known. When some legally licensed organic fiction bottles and stores factual reality, allowing only its belief-based view of truth to exist, that organic fiction denies individual freedom to pure reason-based truth: organic fiction, thereby, closes the intelligencebased door, which leads to pure truths of LOGOS. About W. L. Cowdrey, H. A. Davis, and D. R Scales’ book: Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon. These authors documented substantial fact-based-evidence of Rigdon’s acquaintances with Joseph Smith prior to 1830; that Rigdon had discussed Spalding’s Manuscript Found with Smith, which Rigdon had extensively studied, edited and, thereby, enhanced. Had Rigdon ever

352

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

admitted these acquaintances with Smith, his illegal possession of Spalding’s manuscript would have been exposed. During the late 1970s a copy of Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon, about the Book of Mormon’s true origin, was a gift (given on condition that I would not disclose who the giver was). A substantial front window display of this book at a prominent Chicago book store was described to me. Following a brief scan of the book’s content, I commissioned an associate to purchase a few copies on the next day. Surprise! There was no display and no books were available for purchase. Without explanation and without any sales promotion since, this book simply vanished! And now, because I have read my copy of this book, I can say on the basis of reasoned truth, that I know and attest that this book, is factual evidence, which cannot now truthfully be denied. In retrospect, I regret my responsibilities, as CEO, had commanded my full attention then. Business concerns were then more important than my personal matters, which were simply put aside. In fact, now when writing this, I recall my hesitant personal resistance, even a tinge of guilt, that was inherent to my exploring facts which might cause my deliberate self to venture along this fact-based path, then write this about my deviant religious concerns. It was the excommunications of others that has spurred me on to provide this documented excerpt from Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon:

APPENDIX 1 The Book of Abraham On December 8, 1975, a well-respected and influential Mormon, Professor Dee Jay Nelson, resigned with his family from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. His resignation was not based on any emotional, subjective feeling on his part, but was instead the result of his learned conclusions from his study of the original “Book of Abraham,” a part of the sacred book “The Pearl of Great Price.”

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

353

The Book of Abraham was printed by the Mormon Church as a result of the supposed miraculous translation of some Egyptian papyri by Joseph Smith, Jr., of what he identified as writings by the Old Testament patriarch Abraham. For many years the original papyri with Smith’s notes written on them were lost, and were presumed by the Mormon Church to have been destroyed in a fire in Chicago. However, the papyri were eventually found in the Metropolitan Museum and given to the Mormon Church. The Mormons, through Hugh J. Nibley, asked Professor Nelson to translate the papyri, presumably hoping that his translation would support the divine authority of Joseph Smith as both prophet and translator. However, Professor Nelson discovered that an accurate translation of the materials showed them to be common burial papyri containing the Egyptian “Book of Breathings,” a condensed form of the earlier “Book of the Dead.” Not only did it have nothing to do with Abraham or Abraham’s religion, but it was of a much later date than Abraham’s time (about 1800 B. C.). This discovery, confirmed by several other Egyptologists, led Nelson to resign from the Mormon Church, since the church would not cooperate with Nelson’s desires to have this discovery published to the world. His conclusions (in letter form) are appended here . . . AN OPEN LETTER [from Professor Dee Jay Nelson, Lecturer, Egyptologist] Dear Elder [name is black lined out] Your letter of November 12th was received. I read it with great interest. It is typical of many I get . . . I commend you upon your missionary work. Regardless of personal religious convictions this is laudable. The only way for

354

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

man to truly serve God is to serve his fellow man. In this your efforts will stand you in good stead throughout life. You presume too much in your letter . . . a characteristic of those who speak before learning all the facts. The first of several examples is shown in your question, “why did you join the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the first place?” Why should you assume that I joined the Church at all? I was born a Mormon, which is the poorest reason I know for being a member of any church. Again you say that I am more impressed with wisdom than with religious truth. I fail to see the difference. I am a devoutly religious man. You need not doubt this. In fact, the best efforts you have ever made to substantiate Christianity and the divine mission of Christ is insignificant compared to my own. In 1958-59 I walked every foot of ground that Jesus walked in order to learn more about Him. My life was often at considerable risk when it was necessary for me to travel as a bedouin through Moslem territory forbidden to Christians. Years earlier I was a lay-scholar in what was then Palestine. I later expanded my knowledge as a student of Zakaria Ghoneim, Keeper of Antiquaries at Saqqara Egypt. I read nine ancient Middle and Far Eastern languages so you may assume that I have a good understanding of ancient history as well. This particularly includes Biblical history. I further take umbrage with the implication that wisdom and Godliness cannot coexist. Surely your letter conveys this idea without intention. I cannot believe you that foolish. Is it inconceivable to you that I could be in possession of better information on Mormon background than you? I suggest that the best way to examine a fish bowl is from the outside. The view from within is distorted at best. The only honest way to

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

355

evaluate any thesis is to step away from it and take the part of a critic. If it then meets all the measured tests you may comfortably embrace it with all your heart. I suggest, for instance, that you closely examine Joseph Smith’s character at its source as I have. Take a good look at his trial of 1826, in which he was convicted of fraud. You will find that the original trial clerk records still exist. Smith was, on this occasion, given full recourse to law and found guilty under fair examination. The L.D.S. Church Presidency asked me to translate the newly discovered Joseph Smith Papyri fragments. They did so with the knowledge that I was the most qualified member of the Church to do so. I promised that I would do it without editorializing and in exchange received a promise that the Church would publish the manuscript. All I did - aside from commenting upon the age and character of the papyrus (200 BC to 100 AD) and explain meanings - was convert the ancient Egyptian hieratic words to their English equivalents. It is not my fault that they did not say what Joseph Smith claimed they did. As I read the language with some ease there is no possibility that I could be mistaken. They are a remnant of a much damaged form of ancient pagan funerary text. One of them was a copy of the ‘Per em Hezzu’ (Book of the Dead) and the other a copy of a ’Shait en Sensen’ (Book of Breathings). That these were the same papyri used by Smith cannot be honestly denied because some of the fragments were glued to pieces of heavy paper with hand written notations on the back linking them to the “Prophet.” They also display the original counterparts of hieratic characters which had been copied by Smith (and or) his scribes into three hand written notebooks. These notebooks are still in existence, owned by the Church. I have photocopies of the pages. . . .

356

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Despite their promise, the Church fathers refused to publish my translation so, upon threats of excommunication, I procured private publication by Modern Microfilm Co., Salt Lake City. My excommunication was repeatedly ordered and withdrawn over the next several years. I remained in the Church only because I thought that a voice of an elder in the brotherhood would have more impact than otherwise. Also, I do not like to be threatened. In December 1975 the order again came so I sent my resignation. I was commanded to appear before a local Bishop’s court of examination. In a telephone conversation with the Stake President I agreed to come with one proviso. All I required is that a committee of one or more persons be sent to examine the massive documentation which I have collected to prove that the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price is untrue. I asked only one hour of the valuable time of such a committee. A letter to the Stake President with the same proposal was never answered. I promised a respectful reception to the committee. No representative was ever sent so I did not appear. The procedures of these excommunication “trials” are illegal under written regulations of the Church itself, which insists that it is governed by rules which do not conflict with the constitutional rights of citizens. Despite this, the “trials” do not offer the right of defense and rebuttal to the persons being examined. This is a clear infringement upon the constitutional privilege. Several friends, who dared to question L.D.S. teachings, have been subjected to gross miscarriages of justice in their excommunicational “trials.” Among these were devoutly Christian men like Dr. John Fitzgerald and Grant Heward. . . . This testimony verifies the truth of this statement:

the [LDS] Mormon Church aggressively acts to remove unfavorable

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

357

publications -This cannot be denied! It has been verified too often. In 1992, Chris Jorgensen wrote the following article for the Salt Lake Tribune:

Mormon’s End-of-World Talk Could End LDS Membership The end of the world has been good business for Ronald Garff. For nearly two years, the lifelong Mormon has made a living selling videotapes explaining his version of the time leading up to the Second Coming of Christ. “Now I have to make up my mind, “ he said. “Do I want to keep my church membership, or do I want to eat?” The question was forced on Mr. Garff by ecclesiastical leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when they told him that his interpretations were false doctrine. His spiritual advisers warned him to stop selling the tapes or he would face excommunication. “My hell, you’ll bankrupt me,” he told the church leaders. “I’m not speaking for the church. I never have.” The issue is just as financial as it is spiritual for Mr. Garff because he earns his living selling a series of videotapes called “Today through Armageddon.” In the tapes, Mr. Garff uses biblical and LDS scripture along with speeches from church leaders to suggest that the world will end sometime near April 6, 2000. . . . [I’m one that surely is glad that it didn’t!] Many of those facing church discipline say they are only following the warnings of church prophet Ezra Taft Benson, who before becoming president of the church was outspoken about politics, the Apocalypse and the Constitution. Many say that President Benson has been muzzled by other church authorities

358

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

who find his teachings out of style. Church officials won’t say how many members have been excommunicated. . . . Abraham Gileadi, a Mormon convert and Hebrew scholar, is also facing excommunication for his writings and lectures. His book “The Last Days” was pulled from the shelves and is no longer available in Mormon-owned book stores. The book was published by the church’s Deseret Book. . . . Joseph Strumph also will be losing a chunk of his income. He runs a small business selling, among other things, Mr. Garff’‘s video tapes. Once he sells the videos he has in stock, he said, he will be out of business. Mr. Stumph believes the church’s demands are unreasonable and against the constitutional right to free speech by the authors he sells. “I’m a total true-blue member of the church,” he said. “But I’m sure President Benson wouldn’t approve of this hanky-panky.” A classic and tragic example happened some years ago concerning what turned out to be bogus documents that a Church authority had purchased ostensibly for the Church's archives. While the seller was convicted of fraud, murder as well, and is still in prison for this, his successes with selling fraudulent documents to official LDS Church representatives, verified the truth of the above statement. And the price, which the Church paid, was indeed substantial: enough to cause, albeit in a sick mind, acts of intrigue and murder. (The Church's archives, incidently, are not open to the public, that is, in any real sense of openness: I anticipate that documents they consider as undesirable are at times destroyed, as all available copies of the book written by O. C. Tanner for the church’ seminary system, was destroyed.) However, as this example attests, many books have been written about the LDS Church. And, my purpose here has no intent or desire other than to be

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

359

truthful, which compels me. I need not write more about this, than to emphasize that most aspects of my life that I consider as ‘good’ relate to official teachings and experiences in Mormonism. The organic LDS church, if not the best, represents Jesus Christ’s gospel better than any I know of. Therefore, to harm any member’s faith in Christ, is not intended by me. Because my lifelong interests have been to find reason-based truth in mathematical science particularly, which transcends factual belief into logically reasoned consistent inference of reality, and faith-based knowledge in the reasonable, consistent outcomes, I no longer hold the belief-based illusion that LDS doctrine-based belief in Jesus Christ’s gospel can be based on an individually believed trueness of the Pearl of Great Price or the Book of Mormon, both spurious origins of which have been proved factually. However, ontologically, living faithfully in Christ’s teachings bears its own fruit: A companionship with God’s attendance is the reward, as St. John had promised. Not a trueness of books, who wrote them or how obtained, but the truth of living faithfully is critically important ontologically. The books of the Bible are the words of men no more or less than the words of the Pearl of Great Price or the Book of Mormon. The real test is whether or not the words ontologically are valid in my life: i.e., whether or not in, my faith, they are sanctified by God’s personal presence abides when read, and lived. Ontologically, God’s confirming presence is what is important: Joseph Smith or Sidney Rigdon’s personal life is irrelevant to me personally. John C. Bennett can be accurate in his personal assessments of Smith, and Rigdon, it appears to me, illegally possessed and modified Spalding’s manuscript, and Smith might belatedly have charismatically ‘told’ his fable of golden plates, as given to him by an Angel: Who is to say Smith’s angel of this fable was not Rigdon, who in collaboration with Smith and others, then represented the fable as a believable foundation to their quite uniquely believed product, ‘as true Christian faith’). Ontologically speaking, if this is what happened as W. L. Cowdrey, H.

360

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

A. Davis, and D. R Scales’ book’s evidence now shows, for faithful Mormon believers, God’s ontological providence has turned Smith and Rigdon’s ‘concupiscent’ product into ontological ‘good’: similarly as Adam Smith’s economic postulation of atomistic ‘greed,’ in the grand scheme of ‘market-based economies has provided for a general ‘good’ of society: providing virtue to capitalist economics? Virtue in both instances is found in God’s ontological confirmations and presence. But, why do the organic LDS Church’s leaders persist in presenting Joseph Smith to be God-like? A ready argument is that they must, for to justify their personal dogmatic claim to divine rightbased hierarchical authority. If, for instance, Joseph Smith’s claim is a fraud, then their claim to this ‘divine right-based’ authority also is a fraud. And in Plato’s reasoning, all that is ‘good’ of acquaintance-based belief and opinion is of God, but does not qualify as consistent essentially reasoned principle-based ‘good,’ i.e., has no contradiction. Smith’s acts are mysterious. In believed mystery, Smith was assured that humans would never reach beyond their belief to contest his claim to God’s authority. Anyway, a human’s salvation is not a matter of a book or church leaders’ trueness of authority, but rather is more a matter of personal faith, which emulates ‘the light of God.’ Ontologically speaking, the rewards of faith ‘to walk in the light of God’, of LOGOS, the Creator of all, are imperatively consistent and undiminished. Of interest in this regard is the following account of Joseph Smith’s claimed revelation about the section of translation which Martin Harris had lost:149

“The works and designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to nought. For God doth not walk in crooked paths. . . . Remember, remember, that it is not the work of God that is frustrated but the work of men. . . . Behold, thou art Joseph, and thou wast chosen to do the work of the Lord, but because of transgression, if thou art not aware thou wilt fall. . . . Nevertheless, my work shall go forth.” That from which Smith copied, dictated, translated, was not just an

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

361

appealing novel about the Mound people of the Northeastern U.S.150

In the speeches of the Nephite prophets one may find the religious conflicts that were splitting the churches in the 1820's. Alexander Campbell, founder of the Disciples of Christ, wrote in the first able review of the Book of Mormon: “this prophet Smith, through his stone spectacles, wrote on the plates of Nephi, in his Book of Mormon, every error and almost every truth discussed in New York for the last ten years. He decided all the great controversies: --infant baptism, ordination, the trinity, regeneration, repentance, justification, the fall of man, the atonement, transubstantiation, fasting, penance, church government, religious experience, the call to the ministry, the general resurrection, eternal punishment, who may baptize, and even the question of free masonry, republican government and the rights of man. . . .” [Joseph Smith’s product was all inclusive!] If Smith had Spalding’s document, as his reference, many of these points of argument were added by Smith, or Rigdon, or others involved in the translation. Truths found in The Book of Mormon is not all, therefore, a plagiarized copy of Spalding’s document. Still, despite this logic, evidence presented in Who really wrote the Book of Mormon, shows that Spalding’s handwriting was found as the author of the inserted portion of Nephi that Harris had lost. Davis discovered: 151

If we could actually find part of Spalding’s ‘second’ novel in his own handwriting, and if it were strikingly similar to ’The Book of Mormon,’ this would constitute additional proof that ‘The Book of Mormon’ came from Solomon Spalding’s ‘Manuscript Found.’ This proof has now been supplied : ‘We have actually found twelve pages of the original Book of Mormon rendered in Solomon Spalding’s own handwriting!’ Howard Davis, who was the first of us to discover this startling new evidence, relates what happened

362

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

to him in research: In 1974 I began what was actually an aspiration of mine since 1964, to initiate a probe into the authorship of ‘The Book of Mormon. In early January of 1975, Cowdrey and Scales joined me in the important endeavor. We frequently visited libraries and sent letters of inquiry to various areas of the United States. We later obtained from Mrs. Cowles, the Senior Cataloger at oberlin College in Oberlin, Ohio, a photocopy of a deed in Spalding’s handwriting, a business paper fragment in the same hand, and two unfinished letters of his. The college photographer then sent us twelve photographs of Spalding’s ‘Manuscript Story, in his handwriting, since the college possesses the original. The Mormon Church had previously refused our request for microfilm of the original ‘Manuscript Story,’ saying they were not “authorized” to do so. We later obtained a complete copy of this first novel. I studied these specimens and handwriting analysis for many months. I knew that as a science, the art of examining questioned handwriting was exact and, in competent and experienced hands, conclusive evidence. Although I was certainly no expert and knew that my observations could not prove anything, I also knew that my study of the science would greatly facilitate our basic research. In early February of 1976, I was ill, home from work, but still studying. I absent-mindedly picked up a research book on Mormonism and flipped it open at random. On one page, in a lower left column, I spotted a photograph of an old manuscript. As soon as I looked at it, the thought flashed through my mind, ‘What is Spalding’s handwriting doing here?’ Then I read the caption: it turned out to be a picture of a section from the original transcribed copy of ‘The Book of Mormon’ now housed in the vault

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

363

of the history office in Mormon headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah. I quickly contacted the Mormon Church and asked for copies of the portion of ‘The Book of Mormon’ I was interested in, but was told that no copies would be made. I contacted some people I felt could help me, and they provided me with enough copies of the questioned material for us to examine. This was the breakthrough we were waiting for -- almost three years of waiting. ... During 1923, the LDS Church became incorporated under the laws of the State of Utah. The Corporation of the President was the name given to this corporation and not much official has been disclosed about business conducted and holdings of this registered fictitious-legalperson entity, until recently had become speculated. Then, the church simply did not deny this outsider’s 1993 postulated analysis. While reflecting on things in my youth, I recalled an account by former Church President, Heber J. Grant of a time when worries of great personal debt were consuming his thoughts. By this account, President, Grant’s personal debts were paid by some means involving incorporation. The thought of magic with creating wealth caught my attention back then. The 1993-article corroborated my memory:

The Corporation of the President was created in 1923 by thenchurch President Heber J. Grant. Today, the corporation owns all church assets -- including a multibillion-dollar portfolio of financial and property holdings. [On which taxes are excused] As I try to reconcile my memory with this account with a memory that Church President Young’s heirs had received a $5million settlement from the LDS Church, I presume President Grant had obtained through corporate creation personal shares in the LDS Church’s financial and property holdings, as interests in which Grant himself had started and managed or maybe even a portion of the Church’s corporation of the

364

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

President. [The Salt Lake Tribune reported that a personal property record for the late 1800s had surfaced, showing that LDS Church leaders’ were repeatedly the owners.] Did he then cash in through selling some personal shares following an incorporation of one of these? His success, he told, was in answer to his and his wife's prayers: He told of receiving this directly revealed instruction from the Lord. The August 15, 1993-article interested me because it was appurtenant to my concerns with organic truth’s, as claimed; it validates and emphasizes my comments documented in previous research. And it disclosed that subordinate organic peers in the Church's corporate hierarchy, during 1989, had effectively removed the aged Prophet from his corporate responsibility because of age related infirmities and incapabilities. This necessary situation raised serious doubt among members that the LDS Prophet was actively functioning as the Church' Prophet, as these hierarchical subordinates routinely testified: emphasizing the illusory nature of the dogmatic officially conditioned mass belief to follow the church’s Prophet. In truth, reasonable persons when testifying that God exclusively communicates with the LDS Church’s Prophets, including Apostles, must admit that God communicates at will with all. The LDS Church has advocated that Christ, as God, directs the LDS members by communicating directly with LDS Church’s Prophet. However, at a regular gathering of church members after subordinate leaders had filled in for the unable Prophet, the following official message was given: God has spoken at will to all Apostles of the Church. With little added rationalization, God’s message, at will, is also personal regarding all human matters: God speaks at will to all! So, to not perpetuate a plausible falsehood of the LDS conditioned belief to follow the leader, this belief-based exclusive Church doctrine must now be stripped of its dogmatic divine-right basis, as, pragmatic truth, surely, as God’s confirmation to follow the leaders’ doctrine is now found wanting in the results of specific LDS pragmatic experience.

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

365

---Is believed truth dependent on commonly shared human perception, or does it dependent on semantics and carefully reasoned cogent communication? ---Of what value to society is reason-based cogent truth that cannot be told because (1) a commonly agreed blood oath, which when taken as required, represents a common dogmatic prejudice, (2) a common lac in education or (3) just simply public disinterest? Considering that the Social Security system implicates many similar realities involving cogent truth, constitutional democracy clearly charges each human with responsibilities to transcend their innate selves and political groups, to find truth and knowledge: still, as R. Hall and E. Cleaver had found: 152

Ignorance gives a sort of eternity to prejudice, and perpetuity to error. Robert Hall If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Eldredge Cleaver In greater part, this concerns the quintessential democratic responsibility to develop processes and skills with thinking correctly for ourselves. This challenge to society has never been so great as now: as our political economic society moves into the new age of global political economy. 153 154 ,

I wish every immigrant could know that Lincoln spent only one year in school under the tutelage of five different teachers, and that, that man still could be the author of the Gettysburg address. Dr. John H. Finley The main challenge of a truthful life is, therefore, not limited to classroom experiences.

He is to be educated not because he is to make shoes, nails, and

366

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

pins, but because he is a man.

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances Channing

I submit, as a citizen of our unique, constitutional democratic society, He is to be educated to fulfill his and society’s responsibilities to constitutional freedom (which infers that all religious and economic thraldom must be overcome.). John Adams‘ words are appropriate:155

Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right, from the frame of their nature, to knowledge, as their great Creator, who does nothing in vain, has given them understandings, and a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge; I mean, of the characters and conduct of their rulers. [As he referred later to "arbitrary kings and cruel priests," Adams included ecclesiastical rule in these thoughts] Rulers are no more than attorneys, agents, and

trustees, for the people; and if the cause, the interest and trust, is insidiously betrayed, or wantonly trifled away, the people have a right to revoke the authority that they themselves have deputed, and to constitute abler and better agents, attorneys, and trustees. ... Let us dare to read, think, speak and write. Richard Rorty talked of the soft realities of intangible noumenal objects, rather than material objects, when he wrote this:156

Humanists - philosophers, theologians, historians, literary critics have to worry about whether they are being scientific - whether they are entitled to think of their conclusions, no matter how carefully argued, as worthy of the term 'true.' Rorty clearly puts ‘trueness’ with science instead of with belief. The careful philosophy of scientific truth often seems unsuited for

367

dealing with an abstract object and, in results, many in society are now challenging all truth. Again, in Rorty's view:157

We need to stop thinking of science as the place where the mind confronts the world. [nomos should not challenge physis: Kant] I believe Rorty pointed to the philosophical theory of dualism (rather than believed unitary materialism) as a source of conflict between mind and matter whereas truth requires harmony that can only come from deliberate reason that is not paradoxical. In matters of politics (particularly with the Social Security System) and with matters of religion as well, we need pay particular attention to W. N. NewtonSmith's suggestion. Rorty, I believe, also admonishes the need for Newton-Smith’s proposal:158

Whether things work is relevant to determining what is true. * * Since ‘belief’ to ‘follow a Prophet’ fails naturally, the dogma of belief is, therefore, partly at least, plausibly false! This is, after all, the pragmatic theory for determining truth’s predicate ‘is true.’ For instance, Jesus Christ’s unique ideal form of truth has himself (his teachings) as the ‘is true’ object of his pure truth: 159

I am the way, the truth and the life, he said. No man cometh to the Father but by me. The value, the proof or reality of the object of Christ's pure truth, He advised, becomes personally evident in the pragmatism of living according to his teachings, the chief principle of which is this: 160

love the Lord thy God . . . and thy neighbor. It was about living this belief, with substantial evidence that churches fell short of practicing Christ’s teachings, that Transcendentalism philosophy sprang in the U.S. Christ's teachings, mostly represent his ideals to transcend nomos for to transcend our innately conservative concupiscent

368

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

and profligate selves. In fact Christ's utterance,161 surely has to do with this transcendence:

Whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it, both in the literal sense of faith in salvation, but also as regards the paradox of hedonism, which hedonistic paradox is this:162

the apparent contradiction arising from [commonly practiced] doctrine that pleasure is the only thing worth seeking and the fact that whenever one seeks pleasure, it is not found. Pleasure normally arises as an accompaniment of satisfaction of desire whenever one reaches one's goal. While pragmatically, for pleasure, fame, or desire, we might serve blindly by following “the LDS. Prophet,” but should not thereby discard Salvation’s pragmatic truth that is only attained by living Christ’s teachings, the chief principle of which is: 163

love the Lord thy God . . . and thy neighbor. The organic LDS Church's assertions of truth became far more complicated in 1923, when the Church organ was incorporated. A member must now choose his object of truth from this list of objects: ---(1) Christ’s teachings, which had fulfilled Jehovah, the Old Testament doctrine and commandments. (Christ’s simple, direct, commandments were personal ordinances never intended to duplicate Temple rites, as practiced by Solomon.) ---(2) the ecclesiastical organ of consenting members, or ---(3) the legal Corporation of the President. The strongest candidate to offer to each member pragmatic experiences in truth is, of course, Christ’s teachings. The other organic choices, which were conceived and chartered to perpetuate Christ’s gospel message, might be thought of as ancillary tools to inculcate Christ’s

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

369

teachings; will always be irritated by individual intelligent challenges?: i.e., only sustained as truth in each members pragmatic and personal experiences involving Christ's teachings. Conditioned beliefs, as to follow the leader, must surely eventually be framed in personal aspects of truth involving the gospel of love or be abandoned by knowledgeable lay members as not representing plausible truth. And, Pure truth cannot exist without its companion Pure Love, and therefore, organic claims of being directed by the Almighty must, I believe, above all else exude the benevolent love that represents the holiness of God:

Feed my sheep and --- as ye do unto the least of my brethren, ye do unto me must apply more to organic manners and actions than to the members? Because the LDS church’s open claim to exist under direct authority is unique and is now empirically tarnished, I expect its leaders will eventually confront the real dilemma about temporal truth’s causal duality of essence and matter and narrow their mind conditioning influence to an exclusive emphasis on the essential moral quality of life taught by the gospel and mission of Jesus Christ rather than to both overtly and covertly representing unitary materialist rights inherent of the organic Church, as represented by the Corporation of the President itself or the Church’s titular prophet as an express surrogate of Christ's voice, instruction or communication. When this essential fundamental aspect of truth becomes reconciled, members will enjoy the following pragmatic experience: the Church will dispel ancillary organizational, political, business, and the agendas of individuals with vested but misguided sovereign organic authorities that do not deliver the Church's singular intent and purpose to dedicate all service to the spiritual and temporal well-being of Christ's "flock." Christ's own words about “finding one’s life,” he intended to apply universally and particularly to Christian organizations, I believe:

He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

370

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Still, by this, Christ did not mean that by entering into thralldom (bondage) of organic rituals that this would provide the means of losing ones life for Christ’s sake. Instead, I believe, Christ referred to an intellectual essential commitment to the pure truths expressed and demonstrated by Christ's life and example: of a dedicated follow-through so that commitment effects everyday actions and lifestyles. As Baruch (Benedict) Spinoza wrote about this form of perfect truth, 164 the commitment becomes a part of each individual’s life. For accomplishing this in organic Mormonism, --

Perfect truth is possible only with knowledge, and in knowledge the whole essence of the thing operates on the soul and is joined essentially to it. Constitutional inalienable human freedoms are religiously preserved doctrine or the purest religious faith is a thralldom: 165 Slaves of drink and thralls of sleep. Shakespeare

I am ... made up of likings and dislikings -- the veriest thrall [enslavement] to sympathies, apathies, antipathies. Charles Lamb Humans naturally are free to express or publish their opinion, as they desire and expends personal effort to do so. Organizations, which are not naturally endowed with intelligent essence, cannot, without representing a consensus-based organic form of thralldom (enslavement), whether legal or not, deny any human, member or not, the natural inalienable sovereignty of personal convictions no matter how, when or why the convictions derive or are published. About the impure proclivities of such organic thralldom, the great Russian author Leo Tolstoy provided this transcendent sample of understanding and commitment to Christ: forsaking his title of nobility and his worldly possessions to live with and aid the poor and needy. In this Tolstoy followed Christ’s admonition to the “rich man.” ---As for organic mind conditioning or sanctification techniques,

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

371

Christ's teachings regarding "the least among his brethren" (not only consenting organic church members) will reign and ancillary organic objectives and actions will not deviate from this pure doctrinal message. Corporate norms established in and by organs of the Business Community will be abandoned for favoring the norms of Christ's teachings: he who would be the greatest, is the servant of all. ---LDS Church Apostles, who have, will, or do serve as corporate directors, whether of the LDS Church's business interests, or not, will not allow themselves to be sustained in any form of grandeur, whatever the wealth providing source of that grandeur, while poor individuals exist in homelessness or hunger. In a word, organizations that truly represent Christ’s teachings, will necessarily require that authoritative passes be taken on traditional notions of organic sovereignty and will be apolitical in fact in all secular organic and aped personal dealings: leaving all nonecclesiastical organic functions to lay sovereign individual humans, allowing without prejudice, doctrine, or instruction, such sovereign functions to determine the organic secular business by suffrage. [Organic sovereignty is consented, human sovereignty] One might astutely observe that in our materialist world and culture this pureness can not happen alongside believed conservatism that is prone to doctrinal unitary materialist thralldom, and so, only those of essential truth and freedom, will, indeed are able to observe the transcendent nature of Christ's teachings. Only they are capable to observe why, innate conservatism make it near impossible for organic Churches and Corporations to be surrogates for the pure truth that Christ taught. I'm particularly dismayed that the organic LDS Church has failed to recognize this paradoxical conflict, which capitalist (unitary materialists) minds routinely inculcate, and which academically economist Joseph Shumperter clearly understood and explained. Robert L. Heilbroner wrote about this atypically interesting economist and some US economic insights he had published in 1939: 166

Schumpeter's book interests us for quite another reason. It is that

372

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

capitalism, like any other social system, does not live by bread alone. It requires faith -- in its case, faith in the values and virtues of the civilization that capitalism produces and that in return reproduces capitalism. "And despite the success of the system, this faith was losing its mobilizing force." The fully developed vision of the future of capitalism does not emerge until 1942, when Schumpeter published "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy," a book that changed the way we think about the system. . . . He offers another view of the system -- one that stresses the "bourgeois" side of capitalism, not its insatiable and rapacious aspects. For Schumpeter this bourgeois component was the cultural expression of the rational, hedonist businessman whom he viewed as the very antithesis of the swashbuckling, glory-minded warrior. "The evolution of the bourgeois style of life," he writes, "could be easily -- and perhaps most tellingly -- described in terms of the genesis of the lounge suit," a remark worthy of Veblen. In Schumpeter's view, capitalism does not achieve its all-important thrust from its central figure, the bourgeois capitalist, but from an outsider, interloper--the upstart entrepreneur. . . . But now comes Schumpeter's contradiction: capitalism may be an "economic" success, but it is not a "sociological" success. This is because, as we have already seen, the economic base of capitalism creates its ideological superstructure . . . designed for men in lounge suits, not armor. In the end it is this capitalist frame of mind, this capitalist "mentality," that brings down the system: Capitalism creates a critical frame of mind which after having destroyed the moral authority of so many other institutions, in the end turns against its own; the bourgeois finds to its amazement that

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

373

the rationalist attitude does not stop at the credentials of kings and popes but goes on to attack private property and the whole scheme of bourgeois values. And so the great entrepreneurial adventure comes to an end, not because the working class has risen up or because the system has finally been unable to master a worsening succession of crises, but simply because the atmosphere has changed. Personality and force of character count for less; bureaucratic management for more. Innovation itself becomes institutionalized and reduced to routine. The bourgeois family, the great transmission belt of [materialist] capitalist values, becomes infected with the disease of rationalism. The bourgeois class loses faith in itself. Thus while things are going well at the surface, "there is a tendency toward another civilization that slowly works deep down below." As for John Locke's democratic sovereignty which influenced the U. S. Constitution with its Bill of Rights, society must enforce and maintain democracy in probity. Otherwise, our fate is destined to be that of the experiment at Athens as subordinated by the conservative unitary materialist administrations of the Roman Empire. We must, ourselves, critically appraise Schumpeter's thesis against the evidence that surely must have occurred since 1942 when he published his book. ---Has capitalism imploded to "turn against the bourgeois class itself?" ---Is the increasing trend for uprooting a business and moving it to a foreign country evidence that:

"the rationalist attitude does not stop at the credentials of kings and popes but goes on to attack private property and the whole scheme of bourgeois values?" ----

What happened to the private property of the wage-earners at the

374

----

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

original and now abandoned business locations? [Not many years ago 50 percent of the US GNP was provided by manufacturing, today only 12 percent is by manufacturing.] Are the reports of grand down scaling, as the report that Mobil Corp., some years ago now, will issue pink slips to 1500 employees, provide evidence to confirm Schumpeter's thesis? Is the so-called growth of the '80s -- restructuring, leveraged buyouts, high interest, and high unemployment of middle managers -- also evidence of this? And what about Lee Atwater's plea:

his most touching regret, . . . about the spirit of the Republican era he had worked to create: I don't know who will lead us through the '90s, but they must be made to speak to this spiritual vacuum at the heart of American Society, this tumor of the soul?" About this, William Greider Wrote:167

When Lee Atwater was dying in 1991, he undertook a selfaccounting and delivered a remarkable public report. "I committed myself to the Golden Rule," he wrote in Life magazine," . . . and that meant coming to terms with some less than virtuous acts in my life." Atwater apologized to old adversaries, including Michael Dukakis, whom he had injured with his harshly negative style of politics. He expressed gratitude to old enemies, including the Reverend Jesse Jackson, for the human comfort they extended in his hour of crisis. Atwater's most touching regret, however, was about the spirit of the Republican era he had worked to create. "My illness helped me to see that brotherhood," he wrote. "The '80s were about acquiring -- acquiring wealth, power, prestige. I know. I acquired more wealth, power, prestige than most. But you can acquire all you want and still feel empty. . . . "It took a deadly illness to put me eye to eye with that truth,

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

375

but it is a truth that the country, caught up in its ruthless ambitions and moral decay, can learn on a dime. I don't know who will lead us through the '90s, but they must be made to speak to this spiritual vacuum at the heart of American Society, this tumor of the soul." The organic LDS Church has no official position regarding the influence of legally licensed fictitious person corporations on American life. And they did, after all, utilize licensed corporations to advance their organic business interests and to command their unnatural organic measures of sovereign power and authority. The organic LDS Church has utilized the traditional sovereign powers of an oligarchical hierarchical and corporate organization to effect its claims of theistic authority. And in this, they practice an organic form of unitary materialism. The organic LDS church is surely not alone in this. Very interesting and news to me, at least, was disclosure that the Catholic Church had already "kicked out the walls" of its organization, so to speak, to allow all in, who want in, and that while Christâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s gospel and teachings are held inviolate and transcendent in our temporal world, all its organic boundaries are subjected to temporal laws and procedures: to the innately conservative human nature which continues to veto and contain even modest steps toward achieving real essential foundations to the ideals of Christ's Teachings. And, we must, it seems to me, follow the admonition of our forefathers who had the insights to establish the basis for freedom and knowledge. Thomas Jefferson was, apart from the natural freedoms established in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, very deliberate about religious liberty (which I interpret as double edged -- liberty to choose the organization, and liberty from religious thralldom). He proposed and guided the enactment of A BILL FOR ESTABLISHING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN VIRGINIA. The preamble to this bill is extremely significant to deliberate religious liberty. Jefferson enacted his religious freedom bill on the following reasoning:168

Well aware that the opinions and belief of men depend not on their

376

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

own will, but follow involuntarily the evidence proposed to their minds; that Almighty God hath created the mind free, and manifested his supreme will that free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of our body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was his almighty power to do, but to exalt it by its influence on reason alone; that the impious presumption of legislature and ruler, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others.. To this, one might take refuge in the great words of Patrick Henry as spoken to The Second Virginia Convention:

I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty; or give me death. Or Alexander Hamilton's defense of Freedom of The Press:

The loss of liberty to a generous mind is worse than death. [In this, Hamilton considered that liberty applied to essence instead of matter.] And, John Adamsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; words on liberty and knowledge are significant:169

Let us dare to think, speak and write . . . Let every sluice of knowledge be opened and set a-flowing. Fault lies not with those who openly and honestly express their thoughts. Free thought and expression must be encouraged for society to progress in knowledge. Motives of those who shunt by organic authority or power intellectual freedoms are particularly suspect in John Adams vein of thoughts on this:

Let the pulpit resound with the doctrines and sentiments of religious liberty. Let us hear the danger of thralldom . . . Let us see delineated before us the true map of man. Let us hear the dignity

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

377

of his nature, and the noble rank he holds among the works of God -- that consenting to slavery is a sacrilegious breach of trust, as offensive in the sight of God as it is derogatory from our own honor or interest or happiness -- and that God Almighty has promulgated from heaven liberty, peace, and good will to man! Still, QUESTIONS linger: ---If dogma, based on rationalization (that represents inward-turned positivism, i.e., materiality), holds in check, that is, thwarts individual progress to achieve the transcendent ideals of Christianity (in truth to know and live in accord with Christâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s love), how can those who espouse the rationalization underpinning their actions with managing the organic LDS Church, to bolster secular business, claim their actions are purely Christian? ---Do they fool themselves? Are they wolves in clericsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; attire? If we are ever to solve our social problems with homelessness and poverty, can we depend upon the idealism of inward-turned positivism, which dogma-based strategy divides society for to gain and retain mantles of political power and thralldom? I refer to the following statement of Robert Hughes and the Republican Convention in 1992:170

Pat Buchanan, Bushe's recent conservative opponent, was called to the podium. He gave a speech so harsh and divisive that it might not have been out of place in the Reichstag in 1932. It contained nothing that Buchanan had not said a hundred times before: the same putrid stew of gay-bashing, thinly veiled racial prejudice, black Irish paranoia and authoritarian populism continued to bubble beneath the commonfellow surface. Two decades before, John Mitchell, as crooked an Attorney-General as America ever had, called this "positive polarization"; and Pat Buchanan, then a young speech writer for Richard Nixon, sent his President a memo on the uses of divide-and-conquer politics: "If we tear the country

378

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

in half, we can pick up the bigger half." This was entirely in the spirit of Buchanan's boyhood hero, Joe McCarthy. To divide a polity you must have scapegoats and hate-objects -- human caricatures that dramatize the difference between Them and Us. Hughes warns of this: 171

The fundamentalists' drive to annul the constitutional separation of Church and State, to spread theocracy on the land, must be resisted by anyone who cares about democracy [and liberty] in America. Lending credence to Hughes warning, Oliver North's victory to head the Republican ticket in a recent Senatorial race worried many republicans about the strength of religious fundamentalism from the extreme right. In this we should see the parallels of other world situations: all are founded in extreme vices in the sense of Aristotle's truth about ethics. We can probably anticipate ends as exhibited in South Africa's struggle out of apartheid. And we should look upon Bosnia as an example of this affliction. Indeed, vices of ethics appear everywhere tending to greater extremes in all factional politics. Our only hope rests in mass actualisation of truth and knowledge: in Mill's manner of men. And this is to ask what Walter T. Stace asked:172

that we become genuinely civilized beings and not merely sham civilized beings. I can best explain the difference, Stace explained, by a reminiscence. I remember a fellow student in my college days, an ardent Christian, who told me that if he did not believe in a future life, in heaven and hell, he would rape, murder, steal and be a drunkard. That is what I call being a sham civilized being [Mill's "manner of men" who choose or dare not to actualize their own transcendence into truth but instead are civilized through the faithful aping of religious tenets]. On the other hand, not only could a Huxley, a John Stuart Mill, a David Hume, live great and fine lives without any religion, but a great many others of us, quite

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

379

obscure persons, can at least live decent lives without it. To be genuinely civilized means to be able to walk straightly and to live honorably without the props and crutches of one or another of the childish dreams which so far have supported men. . . . Can he grasp the real world as it actually is . . . and still retain ideals, striving for great ends and noble achievements? If he can, all may yet be well. If he cannot, he will probably sink back into the savagery and brutality from which he came, taking a humble place among the lower animals. Bertrand Russell's Epilogue provides a fitting crescendo to this Postscript about truth and love. His thoughts apply to humans and their fictional legal organs.173

LOVE, KNOWLEDGE, AND PITY Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life: ---- the longing for love, ---- the search for knowledge, --- and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind. These passions, like great winds, have blown me hither and thither, in a wayward course, over a deep ocean of anguish, reaching to the very verge of despair [only his love of mathematics, he writes elsewhere, kept him from committing suicide]. . . . I have sought love. . . With equal passion, I have sought knowledge. I have wished to know the hearts of men. I have wished to know why the stars shine. And I have tried to apprehend the Pythagorean power by which number holds sway above the flux. A little of this, but not much, I have achieved. Love and knowledge, so far as they were possible, led upward toward the heavens. But always pity brought me back to earth. Echoes of cries of pain reverberate in my heart. Children in famine, victims tortured by oppressors, helpless old people a hated burden to their sons, and the whole world of loneliness,

380

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

poverty and pain make a mockery of what human life should be. I long to alleviate the evil, but cannot, and I too suffer. This has been my life. I have found it worth living, and would gladly live it again if the chance were offered me. Elsewhere, Russell describes how an event transformed him from being an Imperialist into a Pacifist. He wrote this:

I found myself filled with semi-mystical feelings about beauty, and with an intense interest in children and with a desire almost as profound as that of Buddha to find some philosophy which would make life endurable. . . Something of what I saw in that moment has remained always with me, 'causing' my attitude during the first war, my interest in children, my indifference to minor misfortunes and a certain emotional tone in all my human relations. Then, I believe, William Greider's concluding statements in his recent book finds application to that which I attempted to document:174

Despite the centuries of struggle and advance, democracy is still a radical proposition. "This is an unsanctioned idea," historian Lawrence Goodwyn observed, "but this is the democratic idea: that the people will participated in the process by which their lives are organized." New possibilities are opened for any society that takes that idea seriously. The oldest questions of human existence remain unanswered by modern societies, despite the gloss of technology and wealth. The complexities of modern life have ensnared people in new forms of subservience. Why do millions still starve when the world is awash in surplus food? How can the modern economic system be transformed so that growth and prosperity do not depend so centrally on waste and despoliation? What are the outlines of a democratic system in which workers and owners and communities

Catholic and Mormon authorities and acquaintances

381

would truly share a voice in organizing their own lives? None of these matters remains unresolved because of physical constraints. They are political questions, waiting on democratic answers. Americans should not suppose that they are the only people who need to ask such questions or are equipped to find the answers. While American democracy has decayed, people in the most unlikely nations have become the new inventors of democratic possibilities -- toppling the most rigid forms of power with the force of organized people. Their experiments, even their failures, have provided a tonic for small-d democrats everywhere in the world. They have restored, above all, honest language -- the capacity to speak about democracy with clarity and sincerity, as if the idea of self governing people is fresh and alive and still practical. They have further restored an understanding that, as Vaclav Havel said, democracy is the unfinished story of human aspirations. "Man must in some way come to his senses," Havel wrote from his prison cell. "He must extricate himself from this terrible involvement in both the obvious and hidden mechanisms of totality, from consumption to repression, from advertising to manipulation through television. He must rebel against his role as a helpless cog in the gigantic and enormous machinery hurling God knows where. He must discover again, within himself, a deeper sense of responsibility toward the world, which means responsibility toward something higher than himself." 175 The American Beacon helped to teach people everywhere to aspire to self education and to rebel against powerlessness. Now, it seems, the former students must reeducate Americans in the meaning of their own faith. Perhaps that is when the American movement will begin: when Americans find the courage to speak

382

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

honestly again in the language of democracy. Life is a continuum with protozoans. George Will observed this natural regenerating combination of matter in a continuum of life on ‘This Week’ July 1, ‘2000. He, with those he quoted, recognized the ontologism that inspired St. Anselm and Descartes (and of course, many others as Plato, particularly Christ and Kant). The spiritual aspect (the continuum part) attends deliberate reason. Invariably, it appears. Logic has led each of these to support human notions of this spiritual continuum as innately placed individual ontologism by the LOGOS of temporal creation. In mathematics, the circle represents a continuum, which requires the irrational number symbolized by the Greek letter B for to measure its circumference. Deliberate reason has confirmed my suspicion. Orthodox organizations, the antecedent assumption of which is ‘positive’ unitary materialist dogma, differs from individually held truths that are based on transcendent reason, commonly called ontologism that comprises a myriad of unempirical things, but surely dismisses ‘positive’ dogma taken as its antecedent axiom. Organic orthodoxy, while legally fictitious, fails to possess or respect the continuum of ontologism.176

Dogma changed original meaning

383

with LOGOS the axiom of Creation, is ours for the price of ‘walking in the light of LOGOS’ to enjoy while responding to His ‘ontololgism.’ Religion is personally confirmed faith lived as truth. However, in contrast, organic orthodoxy invariably is based on causal mechanisms laced with a spoils-system that rewards dedication to the fictitious organic hierarchy. Enterprise always takes over, as Eric Hoffer wrote:177

When a mass movement begins to attract people who are interested in their individual careers, it is a sign that it has passed its vigorous stage; that it is no longer engaged in molding a new world but in possessing and preserving the present. It ceases to be a movement and becomes an enterprise. By the third Century, AD, the remaining faithful Christians were adopted by Emperor Constantine. The Nicene Creed, about LOGOS, Christ, and the Holy Ghost (The Trinity), which declared that God and Christ, as God, are of one substance, 178 became Catholic dogma, as decided at the Necene Council in 325, AD. And this dogmatic influence appears as an antecedent (i.e., cardinal principle-based) assumption in the King James’ Bible, on which Western Christian Churches based their religion. About the Nicene Creed, as dogma imposed onto Biblical scripture contemporary to Christ, in fact was a deliberately fraudulent translation, as explained in the following: Dogma inserted translation changed St. John’s meaning An understanding the Greek word logos became known by me from mathematical foundations that are philosophy related rather than faithbased experience. Then, while inspecting John 1: 1, word for word in Diaglott, an original Greek translation, confirmed to me that St. John had selected the Greek word LOGOS meaning to properly name God, i.e., the temporal world’s Creator’s, intelligence, values, and powers, similarly as Jehovah properly named the OT Covenant, and Christ properly named the Savior. Jesus is recorded to have claimed he was, the Creator, Jehovah, and Christ. So what distinguishes God, the father, in all of

384

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

this? Being familiar with the Catholic dogma, which declared the three in one (i.e., the Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost) was one and the same, I pursued other Biblical references to ‘Word,’ in the King James Bible, to confirm that the Greek original consistently specified LOGOS (St. John’s name for God the Father’s intelligence and power). I John 5: 7-9 (King James translation) became my focus of curiosity:

‘For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.’ Comparing this text with the original Greek text ( Diaglott) startled me. The Greek original clearly recorded this simple direct statement :

‘For there are three which testify.’ The footnote explained St. John’s simple, direct original statement: 179

This text [referring to the inserted part of the King James translation] concerning the heavenly witness is not contained in any Greek manuscript which was written earlier than the fifth century. It is not cited by any of the ecclesiastical writers; nor by any of the early Latin fathers, even when the subjects upon which they treated would naturally have led them to appeal to its authority. It is therefore evidently spurious; and was first cited (though not as it now reads) by Virgilius Tapsansis, a Latin writer of no credit, in the latter end of the fifth century; but by whom forged, is of no great moment, as its design must be obvious to all. About the above heavenly witness, because LDS doctrine conformed to the original three separate Godhead entities, confirms that LDS doctrine uniquely conforms to St. John’s original account of Christ’s doctrine. Deliberate reason-based philosophy, which logic led to diverse mathematical systems, led me to appreciate the necessity of inferred axiomatic elements (i.e., essential principles that must remain as postulated assumptions until confirmed as necessary logically consistent integrals of the whole). And this scientific reality confirms the bibles statement of Faith which by ontologism is available to all:180

Dogma changed original meaning

385

If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. And, we have now seen, with digital technology, that mathematics is necessarily fundamental both to the empirical (i.e., tangible) and unempirical (i.e., intangible) aspects of temporal human life. As in factbased logic, inferred axioms invariably apply principally and fundamentally to all material elements and essence-based postulations. The axiomatic need for the noumenon God, the supreme intelligence, or LOGOS, is both plausible and necessary in this context. Particularly, if the Biblical paradigm is a reason-based axiomatic faith, which to be true, must be logically consistent in the whole of temporal being, the ontological test of the inherent human free will hinges upon unknown axioms (i.e., principles which are necessary) that must faithfully be assumed then confirmed. When unfaithfully rejected, as particularly and usually is rejected in positivist organic mechanisms, the temporal belief, because materialism-based rejects the axiomatic ontological tie to God’s ontologism. Unfeigned love of God, as based on axiomatic faith rather than temporal belief, provides this temporal test. The Greek example of ‘aionian Life’ was factually manifest to all humanity in the temporal life of Jesus Christ. The spiritual testimony communicated by scripture and by logos and ontologism to each human is that ‘aionian Life’ (whatever it is, was exemplified in Christ) was given to all humans on this condition: ‘he who has the son, has the life’ (If ye love me, keep

my commandments, the son advised). I expect, in St. John’s final comments, the ‘aionian Life’ is more than an existence throughout eternity: It requires consistent values in human logos which embrace Christ’s values of love to ‘overcome’ all visceral materialities (neutralize by reasoning out the acquaintance-based dualism of paradoxes, which necessarily implicate concupiscence) of the phenomenal temporal World. This ‘victory,’ while noumenal in nature, requires confirmation

386

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

by temporal action based on faith in an axiomatic LOGOS. God’s reward for this is found both ‘in temporal living’ and in ‘eternity.’ Two confirming remarks about this stood above the others: I John 4: 12 and I John 5: 10:

[Though] no one has seen God at any time, [yet] if we love each other, God dwells in us; and his LOVE has been perfected in us. [Does this describe the ‘aionian LIFE’?]

[He who believes into the SON of God, has the TESTIMONY in himself; He who does not believe God, has made him a Liar; Because he has not believed the TESTIMONY which GOD has testified concerning his son.] Taken together, God testifies to all about this by a means called ontologism freely given to the natural noumenal logos intrinsic of

each human soul, which logos reflects God’s LOGOS . This distinctive innate human intelligence is undeniable. But it is left to each human to find and cultivate by exercising faith as confirmed by consistent reasoned inferences (i.e., evidence)! As St. Paul observed,

faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen: Faith in this natural ontologism allows that cosmologies and ontologies of the metaphysics are fathomable as inferred by natural substantial experience along with reasoned consistent faith-based evidence. In this sustained intelligent endeavor, faith, which is essential, transcends factbased belief, which is temporal. Maybe about living the ‘aionian Life,’ an article by Steve Grant told of an unpublished manuscript written by Henry David Thoreau: ‘Wild Fruits.’181 The article is of worth in that it demonstrates Thoreau’s faithbased experiment. However, only excerpts of pertinence can be included here.

dogma changes the logical foundations of life

387

Bradley P. Dean, a Thoreau scholar . . . took on the formidable task . . . and now 137 years after Thoreau’s death, we have ‘Wild Fruits.’ It is a draft of a piece of Thoreau’s last great work, his ‘Kalendar’ of Concord, which apparently was to be a definitive natural history of his town. ‘Wild Fruits’ is something of an unripe berry, but not so green that we won’t have it. . . . Well then, is ‘Wild Fruits’ worth it? Yes. It is unfinished and unpolished, but it is genuine Thoreau, and the more we have, the better. It is at a minimum precise, descriptive nature writing. But it is more than that, too. In places, ‘Wild Fruits’ continues the message of ‘Walden,’ the message of living simply and well. Living well to Thoreau, remember, had nothing to do with how that phrase is understood today. He did not mean amassing possessions. ‘Let your life be wholly without an object, though it be only to ascertain the flavor of a cranberry,’ Thoreau writes in ‘Wild Fruits,’ ‘for it will not be only the quality of an insignificant berry that you have tasted, but the flavor of your life to that extent, and it will be such a sauce as no wealth can buy.’ Dogma was created to change the reasoned logical foundations of life. Ludowich Allison’s comment, made in his introduction to The Bible, arranged and edited by Ernest Sutherland Bates, is this: 182

That [King James] message reverberates . . . Man is given free will and his first conscious act is to use it to make himself into God. (His second act, when caught, is to blame somebody else.) . . .: the great covenant of God with Abraham is extended to Israel with Moses and then expanded to include the entire human race through Christ.

388

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

That message reverberates on many different levels throughout Western thought. It enables us to comprehend the mystery of life as a part of a larger story of sin and redemption. Man is given free will and his first conscious act is to use it to make himself into God. (His second act, when caught, is to blame somebody else.) This is the great Biblical motif that runs from Genesis and the Fall through the impieties and failures of Israel to the final consummation of the Old Testament in the New. It is the tension between man’s aspirations and man’s inadequacies, and it gives rise to the idea of hope. The Bible tells us man’s stories are more than fables, and his oldest myths are more than legends; they are intricately inlaid into the very foundation of the cosmos, and further-more, into a cosmology that plays itself out in the processes of each individual soul. In this, the Bible is the definitive epic of the West. King David had been dead two hundred years when the great Homeric verses of the ‘Iliad’ and the ‘Odyssey’ were first set down. The Biblical epic of which he is a central character was only halfway to completion. This epic moves us from Exodus to Job, from the tribal and collective experience to the individual, which in its singularity is universal in a way the narrowly tribal cannot be. And while this revelation is unfolding, another is moving parallel in the opposite direction: the great Covenant of God with Abraham is extended to Israel with Moses and then expanded to include the entire human race through Christ, so that we move from the individual through the tribe to the universal. The individual intelligent logos, not the organization (the only logos of which is by human consent), is most critically important in the eternal intents of creation: the organization is important but cannot with impunity eclipse or throttle the human logos. And Creator’s axiomatic

dogma changes the logical foundations of life

389

intelligence, what St. John called LOGOS, we each are naturally endowed with a modicum, an analogous intelligence (logos), as connected by ontologism to the eternal intelligent continuum (LOGOS). But while maybe clear in a whole sense, its particular mysteries will never become apparent to any particular temporal human. Deliberate analysis confirmed my suspicion; organic religious orthodoxy called Church, because it opposes or suppresses personally held reason-based truths which are based on transcendent faith, which is commonly defined as ontologism, is not of LOGOS’ continuum: this orthodox organic Church is founded on unitary materialist dogma.183

ontologism n. The doctrine that human beings have an intuitive knowledge of God and that this knowledge is the basis of all other knowledge. Ontological argument or proof, the contention that since our idea of God is that of a perfect being and since existence is part of perfection, our idea of God is an idea of a necessarily existent being. This argument, used by Anselm and Descartes, is repeated by Thomas Aquinas and most of the theologians. Without rational ontology-based knowledge, as Descartes’ “I think; therefore I am,” or St. Anselm’s “Faith first, then confirmation of logical reason-based truth by consistent empirical experience,” life is lived in Dark Age-based traditions and customs. St. John’s first epistle supplies testimony to life’s confirming processes: that we humans are not alone. Life’s continuum, with LOGOS the supreme antecedent axiom, is bequeathed for the price of ‘walking in the light of LOGOS and responding to faith-based reason: as Socrates had answered Crito: Socrates rejected Crito’s offer to help him escape, because, as Socrates responded, “I must follow where God leads.” True Religion, therefore, is personal transcendent faith in God, that eternal Axiom, i.e., in rationally consistent responses to experiences, i.e., in truth that is lived. Dr. Waldemere Read’s speech at a U of U Great Forums’ presentation on freedoms in Utah, was an admonition of truth that is

390

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

lived: We each, as a sovereign repository of the social will, are naturally represented in the constitutional American democratic state. However, we, the orthodox ‘ditto-heads’ representing materialist belief in dogma as ‘divine rights,’ ‘suppositious compact,’ ‘fictitious state,’ and ‘fictitious legal persons,’ dogmatically foster irrationally untrue doctrine of wealth and organic power. And, they of orthodoxy, often rule the social will and, by that, hoard the state’s collective sovereignty, in belief that as their wealth, is owned. This materialist orthodoxy is monarchically fascist rather than democratic, which requires rationality. The fundamental social problem of our democracy involves mind control that willingly embraces materialist belief alone. Potentially more unfortunate in scale than the fateful plight of Branch Dividians or members of Jonestown, the orthodox mind control of deterministic materialism-based dogma at times has captivated the US government with all its licensed private business agents -- as the practical instrument of society’s political economy -- to effect desired ends of affluence. We need to learn, as soon as possible before it is too late, the lesson that Professor Waldemere Read attempted to teach in 1962: . . . What I have hoped to emphasize is that the conditioning

process is a means of manipulation, an instrument of control. Moreover, the conditioning process is equally effective whether used unwittingly or with deliberate intent. The bearing of this principle upon our problem is simple. Individuals become members of society, not through reasoning, but by conditioning. Every institution, every family group for instance, and every church group is a conditioning agency. Through conditioning it recruits and controls its members. "In order that any society may function well, its members must acquire the kind of character which makes them want to act in the way they have to act as members of the society or a special class within it. They have to desire what objectively is necessary for them to do. Outer

dogma changes the logical foundations of life

391

force is replaced by inner compulsion, and by the particular kind of human energy which is channeled into character traits." 184 However, institutional control is like rain, or food; it's good up to a point; beyond that point it is deadening. Institutional control is good if the institution which provides it is open at the top; if the institution is closed, then the control is bad. That is, an institution may be such as to provide a ladder by which the individual may reach a launching pad from which he may transcend the very forms that lifted him; or, it may provide a ceiling which shields him, to be sure, but also limits him and uses him as one of the elements in the truss which holds it up. Institutions of the first sort liberate the human spirit; those of the latter kind imprison it. Bertrand Russell has written of the harm in educational systems which treat the individual child as a means to an end, not as an end in himself. "The teacher," he says, "should love the child better than his State or his Church." To so love the child is to want to liberate him. It is to refuse to treat him as mere plastic material to be molded to a common form; it is to cherish his individuality, his uniqueness, his independence of thought and belief, his potentials as a possible contributor to the growth and enrichment of the human spirit in the continuing progress of mankind. As features of . . . . uniform beliefs and teaching practices, certain methodological beliefs are noteworthy. These beliefs then [become tools of the institution] to reinforce uniformity. They become matters of attitude and function in the culture much like a governor functions in a locomotive or motor bus. They tend to insure that no discussion will get out of hand, that no heretic will run away with the argument, that the truth will always prevail. Three of these attitudinal or methodological beliefs are:

392

----

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

1) belief in the absolute certainty of the doctrine (the dogmatic attitude); ---2) belief in the wickedness of doubt; and ---3) belief in the authoritative hierarchy. All three of these beliefs are conditioned responses. No one of them can be justified as an aid to cognition [which is the only human faculty to allow one to garner truth and knowledge]. They all intend to block inquiry, or, rather, to transform inquiry into rationalization. . . . . A word or two about each. Dogmatism is inimical to freedom in thought. It denies the need of inquiry - save the inquiry of the learner; it denies the need for further research. In contrast with dogmatism, science became successful when it became tentative, skeptical, self-corrective. The scientific spirit is one willing to settle for probable as opposed to certain truth. But for the scientist, no settlement is final. He wants to be as assured as possible; and that induces a willingness to look again, to re-examine. Dogmatism in its very nature is unreadiness to re-examine. It trans mutes reason into [a rationalized search for the] "right reason"; right reason is that which comes up with the accepted answers. It has little in common with that reason of which Russell spoke when he said; "Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin, more even than death. Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habits; thought is anarchic and lawless, indifferent to authority, careless of the welltried wisdom of the ages. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. It sees man a feeble speck, surrounded by unfathomable depths of silence; yet it bears itself proudly, as unmoved as it were lord of the universe. Thought is great and swift and free, the light

dogma changes the logical foundations of life

393

of the world and the chief glory of man" [one might also note that often it obviously is not based in the “right reason” of which Cicero spoke]. Turning now to the adoration of faith and the distrust of doubt which characterizes . . . . [a ‘closed’ or ‘dogmatized’] culture, it will be well to remind ourselves of remarks of John Stuart Mill: ". . . . it is the opinions men entertain, and the feelings they cherish, respecting those who disown the beliefs they deem important which makes this country not a place of mental freedom." "No one can be a great thinker who does not recognize that as a thinker it is his first duty to follow his intellect to whatever conclusions it may lead." The free mind recognizes that the question of truth - the determination of truth - is prior to the obligation to believe. The insistence upon faith begs the question of truth. The . . . . [closed, dogmatized] culture penalizes the reluctant believer by holding him suspect as to character. Too frequently, it is assumed that an attitude of skepticism or of unbelief is a sign of moral turpitude and of spiritual rebellion. For too many, the idea that an unbeliever may be a good man is quite unthinkable. Perhaps nothing is more popular with . . . . [such as those who fostered dogmatized beliefs which led to the massacre at Mountain Meadow, Utah, or the followers of koresh, or Jones, or LeBaron] than the importance of deferring to the authorities in matters of judgment - not only with respect to doctrinal interpretation, the reading of the scriptures, but with respect to matters of policy and practice. Social wisdom is supposedly vested in the . . . . [authorities] - and deep moral insights. "When those who are in authority have decided, the thinking has been done." The virtue of deference to authority is thought to be one of the

394

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

strongest assurances of salvation. It is, however, an abnegation of individual responsibility in thought. When carried to extreme, it is the antithesis of freedom of mind. "If thou seest a man of understanding, get thee betimes unto him. And let thy foot wear the steps of his door. Yet accept no person against thine own soul. And let not reverence for any man cause thee to fall; But let the counsel of thine own heart stand: For there is none more faithful unto thee than it. For a man's mind is sometime want to bring him tidings, More than seven watchmen, that sit above in a high tower." --Ecclesiasticus Dogmatism, adoration of faith, and deference to authority; all three of these conditioned beliefs tend to solidify and perpetuate the uniformity of belief. In Jefferson is found the first great victory for democracy; In a word, the nature of this victory was humanitarian. Over the years since Jefferson, however, democracy’s meaning struggles to endure diverse postulations of idealism made by our temporal “Wonderland’s dogmatic materialist White Rabbits.” 185

Interpreted by the coonskin Jacksonian it meant political equalitarianism; by the slave economy it meant a Greek democracy; by the industrial economy it meant the right of exploitation. . . . [eventually] came to be interpreted as the right to use the government of the whole for the benefit of the few. . . . In this [quasi-dogmatic positivist] thinking two main forces are at hand: economics and psychology. In our economic realism we are returning to the spirit of the eighteenth century, and adapting the determinism that marked political thought from Harrington and John Adams to Webster and Calhoun; but we are equipped with a psychological knowledge that those earlier thinkers lacked. . . . Yet

Another great victory for democracy

395

not too hastily should we abandon our earlier faith: the eighteenthcentury conception of environment as a creative influence in determining character is a vital idea not yet adequately explored. . . . Jefferson was not as foolish as many of his disciples have been, and Jeffersonian democracy still offers hope. Education begins to fail -- except education to individualize and to summon forth the potential intelligence of the younger generation. Another great victory for democracy was achieved when the suffrage-voice of democratic sovereignty sustained President Clinton during his second term impeachment. Not President Clinton, but the individual electorate’s sovereignty won this great democratic victory. Without Clinton’s staying resolve, however, this victory could not have been achieved. Without democracy, its paradoxes and problems, absolutist authorities of some cockamamie ‘divine right’-based power mongering 186 , and idealist view of mechanism-based determinism always results: Democracy is the only rational organic alternative in which individual sovereignty-based ontologism and freedom is assured! In America, with God’s blessing and the Constitution, religious thralldom has lost some of its grips. However, theistic organizations (both of good and bad) are protected constitutionally and socially in all sorts of peculiar dogma-based ‘belief.’ Only open ontological-based dialogue can address the ‘good’ and distinguish it from the ‘bad.’ First Amendment constitutional rights should apply stringently to protect individuals from fictitious collective sovereignty, as bottled by employments in licensed corporate organizations, and memberships in organic religions. The Supreme Court rulings that treat the rights of ‘fictitious human’ corporate entities for being equal to humans should be reviewed to assure that individual Human Rights, particularly involving intellectual property, are protected and available for critical review and evaluation by the public. God’s sanction of American freedom and liberty, its sovereigntybased democracy, is ontologism based, i.e., is metaphysical and not material. The blessing is to each individual, that freedom and liberty is

396

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

a way of life, like democratic sovereignty, that must be cherished or lost. And as Thomas Jefferson told the nation in his first inaugural address, ontological-based freedom gives the most awesome strength to our security and defense capability (At the time, the military establishment did not exist). And that this democratic ontologism, which also blesses religion, must not be overlooked or abused. Martin Luther King prophesied in this regard when he said, ‘we shall overcome.’ Minorities will always fight for their inalienable Rights. And churches, as government, must accommodate them, or lose the sanction of God by way of sovereign people in membership: “Amen to that authority,” Joseph Smith would say. Ontologism, i.e., rational inference and deduction, are the means of language between LOGOS and logos. Moses told us this (Deut. 32). Philosophy resulted from God’s logical language-independent mode of communication: ontologism in which philosophers and scientists can and do find ‘necessary’ truth (They are in fact prophets). And, ‘necessary’ truth is always superior to belief-based truth, which, rather than being antecedently necessary, is ‘contingent,’ as Plato, then Locke, (many others since), had surmised.187

He that takes away reason to make way for revelation puts out the light of both, and does much the same as if he would persuade a man to put out his eyes the better to receive the remote light of an invisible star by a telescope. About ontologisms’ brilliance, Pascal credited faith.188

Reason can go only so far, he said, but faith has no limits. Differences in sentiments of Locke and Pascal embroils what St. James (1:5) called ‘upbraiding.’ All who ‘walk in the light of God,’ whether of science, religion, as an entrepreneur, leader or follower, . . . is a ‘church’ unto Christ and God abides there. However, when the object of faith is in leaders or dogma rather than Christ, God’s place of abiding there, is “upbraided.” Still, ontologism among the flock is there. Maybe Russell had Ramanujan’s story in mind when he uttered his epitaph that ‘numbers

Another great victory for democracy

397

hold sway above the flux.’ Turnbull told this:189

At the close of the century nothing could have seemed more desirable than the rise of a genius who could dispense with all these elaborations (the piling up of analytical armaments), and yet find something new to say. Very dramatically this took place in India, and the career of Spinivasa Ramanujan has marked a new epoch. Among all mathematicians of the East, the genius of Ramanujan appears to be supreme. He was born at Erude, a town not far from Madras, in 1887 and died in 1920. At school his extraordinary powers seem to have been recognized, but owing to weakness in English he failed to matriculate at the University of Madras. He therefore proceeded to work out mathematics for himself . . .. Notes that were logically unintelligible received immediate recognition in Cambridge as the work of a self-taught genius. . . . He attained a command of certain branches in analysis and the theory of numbers that placed him in the very front rank . . .. Silvester once took Huxley to task for thinking that ‘mathematics is the study which knows nothing of observation, nothing of experiment, nothing of induction, nothing of causation.’ Such a description completely misrepresents mathematics, which in its efforts unceasingly calls forth the highest efforts of imagination and invention. As for induction, there is no more wonderful instance of its use than that of Ramunujan. The ontology of mathematical development tells us that the source of intelligence is language-independent and religion-independent. Yet those who pursue mathematics are a ‘church of LOGOS,’ which, as much, or more, as religion, is ‘the truth.’ Mormon scripture tells that duty (deontology) of salvation is assured only when all humanity accepts Christ as their Redeemer, i.e., temporal ontologism inherently involves individual responsibility: where

398

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

God abides, His love of humanity must be exemplified by human deeds, more than admonition. Contrarily, Joseph Smith, the prophet’s ontologism-based responsibility, was replete with willful human desires and acts, i.e., concupiscence as much or more as morality: he surely was mortal, and therefore, he needs God’s grace and redemption, as in temporal life, all humans also do. Temporal organizations, to be ontologically compatible, must consent in all matters to its subscribing sovereign human members, or philosophically those organizations, in fact, represent the ‘absolute idealism’ organic definition. Individual ‘Rights,’ which are inalienably spiritual in nature, include leveled measures of ontologism and sovereignty. These inalienable human ‘rights’ require that all temporal organizations are philosophically constituted and, therefore, must conduct all organic affairs as philosophical ‘rational empiricism’ (which defines democracy): All organic authority is naturally philosophically democratic: i.e., bottom up, not top down. Because, reasonably, God is consistent, He must either dictate autocratic authority, as Joseph Smith claimed to be God’s prophet, or offer by general ontologism, His will to all. Not both! And since general rational ontologism is naturally evident, autocratic authority (of which the concept of a paternal priesthood is a part), is a manmade dogmatic example of Ludowich Allison’s comment, made in his introduction to The Bible, arranged and edited by Ernest Sutherland Bates: 190

That [King James] message reverberates . . . Man is given free will and his first conscious act is to use it to make himself into God. (His second act, when caught, is to blame somebody else.) Therefore, about ‘divine right’-based right from God’s intelligent noumenon (LOGOS), which ontologically is impartially made available to all, of consistently rational humanity, when Ludowich Allison wrote, ‘Man is given free will and his first conscious act is to use it to make himself into God,’ Allison referred to autocratic manmade organic hierarchies in which ‘divine right’-based authorities are at the ‘top,’ and

Another great victory for democracy

399

then ‘trickle down’ only to some. Following Joseph Smith’s assassination at Carthage, Brigham Young popularly led the largest group of faithful consenting Mormons to Western territories of the North American Continent. These Mormons became the primary reason that US Western states became a constitutional reality because of being populated. Young’s organic authorities were clearly consented by those sovereign Mormons, which followed him. And without this migration, the Western US parts would have remained unlawful and untamed for untold decades if not centuries: Take Mormonism from the culture of the West, and God’s ontologism would have had little to no influence there. And the US borders would be substantially different than now. The point is this: Brigham Young based his authority on consensual individual approval more than on Joseph’s regimented hierarchical priesthood, as based on hermetic divineright-based belief [this does not mean to change previous statements: “Polygamy,” for instance, appeared more successful when administered (i.e., regulated) by Brigham Young’s LDS suzerainty (feudal order), which also by a popular consent lost out to demanded constitutional requirements to qualify Utah for statehood.]. Over the years, the hierarchical Mormon priesthood rule was not unlike Calvinism, as based on Moses and Old Testament religious law. Still, the LDS membership flourished because Joseph Smith’s doctrine about Christ was believed and ontologically confirmed individually by soul searching prayerful contemplation. In this, LDS Church’s member-based vitality is ontologism-based. Continued following these news articles. The January 10, 2010 Salt Lake Tribune carried this article: Researcher: Brigham put LDS on path to success [New five-volume set (compiled by Richard Van Wagoner) explores all the sermons, statements of leader.] By PEGGY FLETCHER STACK (excerpts are these)

Brigham on Brigham --“I never went to school but 11 days of my life.”

400

Section 212

Another great victory for democracy

About Truth and Religion

-------

“I have never given counsel that is wrong.” “I am addicted to swearing.” “I have the habits of taking snuff and tea.” Van Wagner learned that despite Young’s lack of education, [Young] was well versed in the King James Bible, even memorizing significant portions. In his own words, Young was “a Bible student from my youth.” He noted that he never took “thought beforehand of what I should say” when delivering a speech, yet he cites hundreds of extensive biblical passages when doing so. Brigham’s facility with language and ability to address complex issues on the fly rank him among the most able preachers and as Utah’s governor, most talented politicians of the day – just as capable, I think, as any US president of his time. Readers can now assess Young for themselves, by searching the index on dozens of topics. They can find Young’s “ Adam is God doctrine,” or his statements about “black-hearted Republicans,” blood atonement, the Civil War (“providence of God”), East Temple (“whiskey street”), Mother Eve (a “Daughter of Adam”), (“all the Indians on this Continent ... are of Israel”), Jehovah (“God the Father”), Jesus (“Father Adam’s oldest son”), plural marriage (“has always been practiced [in the Celestial Kingdom] and always will be”), slavery (“divine institution”). Richard Van Wagoner has now confirmed this previously documented comment, as stated at the outset of part II: 191

Both hermeticism and Mormonism celebrate the mutuality of spiritual and material worlds, precreated intelligences, free will, a divine Adam, a fortunate, sinless Fall, and the symbolism and religious efficacy of marriage and sexuality. And, as in hermeticism, Adam, “the father of all, prince of all, that ancient of days,” 192 would occupy a central position in the Mormon

401

cosmology. [Clearly, Hermes Trismegistus’ doctrine called Hermeticism had influenced Puritan, Freemasonry and also Mormon culture (Brigham Young’s Adam-God doctrine, particularly).] And, related to Van Wagoner’s compiled research, this comment was in the Salt Lake paper on Jan 13:

Brigham’s behavior Richard Van Wagoner could do well to research his heroes beyond their speeches and writings (“Researcher: Brigham, more than Joseph, put Mormonism on path to success,” Tribune, Jan. 9), In his personal behavior, Brigham Young certainly behaved less gallantly than one would expect from a church leader. In her autobiography, Wife No. 19' Ann Eliza Young, nee webb, describes her “life in Mormon bondage” and being sexually assaulted by Brigham Young in a horse drawn carriage immediately following their marriage. Eliza also describes being blackmailed by Brigham into the marriage to ensure her brother’s economic survival. Perhaps Brigham’s statement in the news story . . . was literal, but his statement that “I never hurt any person” was obviously less than honest. Brian Hague Pat Bagley’s article “Slaves arrived in Utah with Brigham Young” 193 confirms Brian Hague’s comment. Babley wrote these excerpts:

Listed on the Brigham Young Monument on Temple Square are the members of the first pioneer company to enter the Salt Lake Valley in July 1847. Three of the names are set just a little apart from the others under the subhead : Colored Servants. These are Green Flake, Oscar Crosby and Hark Lay. ... Green Flake ... was baptized in April 1844, by John Brown, an elder but not the radical abolitionist of Bleeding Kansas fame.

402

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Loaned to Young by his southern master, along with a mountain carriage and team, Green was to go ahead with the first company. It was in that wagon, with Green Flake at the reins, that Young entered the valley. A trickle of black people entered the state over the following years, both as freemen and in company with their masters. ... Slavery in Utah had the weight of law behind it. In 1852, the territorial legislature passed legislation that allowed ownership of human beings. Called “An Act in Relation to Service,” it detailed the rights and obligations of “master of mistress” to “servants of the African race.” After establishing fines for having sex with one’s slave, the act makes the master liable for feeding, sheltering and clothing his property. ... The sale of slaves ... (the 1860 Census lists 59 blacks in Utah, 29 of them slaves) is well documented. ... Then there is the account of Green Flake’s owner dying in an accident in Utah in 1850 and his widow giving Green to the church as a tithing payment. Green worked for Young and Heber Kimball for two years, then was granted his freedom. A dozen years later, the Civil War effectively nullified Utah’s official stand on slavery. It seems historically clear that an aculturated belief in an androgynous Adam has influenced Mormon acquaintances, which acquaintances were materialism based, i.e., false, rather than moralism based, i.e., true. This insert about this is repeated here: World Book Encyclopedia refers one to causal ‘mechanist’ meaning for defining the contrast of deontology with teleology: because deontology became cultural mechanist orthodoxy intrinsic of causal mechanism, therefore, conservative culture expediently found advantages with a lack of moral goals or purposes. Pursuing this

Another great victory for democracy

403

cultural orthodox definition further, World Book’s reference was B. Spinoza. 194 [Spinoza] accepted Rene Descartes idea that the universe is divided into mind and matter. But he saw as Descartes did not, that if mind and matter are separate substances, they cannot interact. Spinoza decided that they are “attributes” of one substance, God. God, being infinite, has many attributes, but mind and matter are the only two that human minds can know. And, for expressing this truthful logic, mechanist orthodoxy forced Spinoza to flee his Amsterdam home, or face prosecution. And, unitary materialist orthodoxy in the U.S., which nature is mechanist, politically installed The American System of Political Economy, sans legislation, the logically fallacious principle of which is causal mechanism, i.e., causal determinism. Regarding Mormonism, Spinoza’s view of mind and matter, also embroiled a longstanding doctrinal contest between Brigham Young and Orson Pratt: Pratt held that God was in everything; Brigham Young asserted the Adam-God theory [that the pure androgynous (having the physical characteristics of both sexes) Adam was the manifestation of divine immortality]. Pratt’s reasoning eventually prevailed: the LDS Church abandoned the Adam-God theory, at the time John Taylor became the Mormon President, [In a recent conversation with a former Mormon polygamous offshoot member, I mentioned that following Brigham Young’s Presidency, the Adam-God theory had been abandoned as LDS Church doctrine: to which this former member retorted: I believe the Adam-God theory, Don’t you?] The LDS Church doctrine only then abandoned the androgynous Adam for an unwavering doctrinal faith in Christ’s atonement, even while temple rites of eternal marriage and spiritual wifery still were aligned with the occult’s alchemical marriage, [J. L. Brooke cited other occultist groups (Ranters and Munster Anabaptists) that also practiced spiritual wifery 195)] : In 1852, Young asserted this as LDS doctrine:196

404

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a ‘celestial body, and brought Eve ‘one of his wives,’ with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, ‘the Archangel,’ the ANCIENT OF DAYS! About whom holy men have written and spoken - HE is ‘our’ FATHER ‘and our’ GOD, ‘and the only God with whom we have to do.’ 197 The paradoxical problems of dogmatic Mormon belief and politics, in Utah particularly, are culturally persuaded by a materialist mechanist false beliefs in an androgynous, i.e., divine Adam: Priesthood, in which women and slaves are property based religious objects, verifies fundamental dogmatic belief-based servitude, as the above facts show. An authoritative circumstance, similar to Joseph Smith’s, arose when Moses delivered God’s Commandments to the House of Israel. Moses’ father-in-law advised him how to instruct the Commandments’ particulars, to provide a grassroots administration of their meanings. 198

Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee: Be thou for the people to Godward, that thou mayest bring ‘the causes’ to God. [Acknowledging God as the Doer, in all matters involving God, is the only sure way that God is not superceded] Moses instead, aggrandized his stewardship from God, with an inherent authoritative claim: By this, Moses acted in an anteceding manner, i.e., replacing God’s authority, as if his own, as Allison had assessed. This account makes clear that all authority-based acclaim is jealously exclusively God’s. Moses also aggrandized his authority, when water was commanded to flow from a rock without God, the Doer all acclaim. When human teleological ‘causes’ embroiling ontology or sovereignty are interceded by dogma, doctrine, opinion, or other deontological belief, they fall short of being “causes brought to God.” In my view, Jesus Christ’s Gospel is ontologically, teleologically ‘true’: And, because God always acts axiomatically (as Plato answered when

Another great victory for democracy

405

asked, what does God do? “He geometricizes,” Plato’s answered, which analogously referred to axiom-based mathematics), i.e., by rational inferences rather than commands. ‘Command-based hierarchical organic deontological authorities,’ on which ‘profit’-based corporations are licensed by governments to deliberately exploit resources, and human employees are considered a resource or property, they intrude pervasively the human rights-based essential natural causes of God’s teleology. Teleology-based essential inferential causality was changed by politically affirmed economic causal dogma, called mechanism, which determinism, by affirmation made causal mechanism the antecedent of necessary naturally inferred causal teleology. About such spooks and spirits, G. P Brockway wrote this: 199

We find mankind liberated from spooks and spirits, from lords and priests, by becoming mechanized. Once the universe was running like a clock, there was nothing for it but to fit us to a wheel in the works -- perhaps a greater thing than a cog, but mechanical nevertheless. For us to be fit for this function, psychology had to subject us to mechanical controls. Or, as J. W. Miller said, we had first to lose our souls, then our minds; and finally, with the behaviorists, consciousness. Economic man is a prime example of this remarkable servomechanism. Politically, bringing ‘human right-based causes,’ to God, now fail because teleology-based necessary causal principles were anteceded by dogmatic causal economic determinism, called mechanism, which effectively supplanted necessary principle based constitutional rights, as interpreted by the Supreme Court: human property-based rights are now legally antecedently considered over natural sovereignty-based human rights, i.e., self-evident natural sovereignty endowed privilege, responsibility, and human rights, as inextricably leveled by constitutional freedoms, which Colonials demanded be added as a condition for the Constitution’s ratification! Now, ‘bringing ‘human right-based causes to God,’ requires

406

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

ministerial government service, as politically activated by a responsible pure love of mankind that in Christian belief is only found when government acts accordingly as Christ had demonstrated. However, in this, all civil authorities remain individually placed and ontologically confirmed, and legally were made secondary to mechanism-based economic rights by Supreme Court decisions: Dred Scott in 1857, State’s rights were largely set in resolutions concluded by the Civil War (The Constitution specifies only those powers that the Constitution did not grant to the national government.). And, corporate rights were decided by the Supreme Court in various decisions, which granted legal standing, as based of their judgement alone that corporations had rights as “fictitious persons.” So, what has transpired involves States that have unspecified (i.e., are not granted to the national government) legal rights, which clearly are secondary if not consequential to the specified Constitution-based legal rights, i.e., “federal government’s laws that are “necessary and proper” for carrying its specific powers into effect. 200 In the end, however, fictitious rights granted by state’s licensing authority to corporate entities have now superceded the natural human rights as specified in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights. All did simply by fictionbased Supreme Court decisions that antecede Congress and the Presidents functions and decisions. And, this might be the greatest aggrandizement of authorities, which God has reserved as his alone. In the axiomatic teleology of God, all temporal ‘authoritative commands’ are contrary to the natural teleologic necessities of LOGOS. And human choice to ‘believe’ or not ‘believe’ is an individual teleology-based purpose of life’s creation. Each ‘a priori’ insight, as believed, then acted on (i.e., lived it), as confirmed by a companionship with God, is a personal form of revelation. For instance, the ontological proof that Joseph Smith was a prophet, is each individual’s choice to first believe, then live, then enjoy God’s companionship. The LDS religion has for many years been the fastest growing religion. By definition, Christ’s Church is defined by those of ontologically confirmed belief in Christ’s life and teachings (and

Another great victory for democracy

407

is not limited to Mormons, (i.e., Christ’s example and admonition essentially are religion by itself, and organic authorities invariably put up barriers and fences on this purely essential religion ). Although scripturally based, hierarchical priesthood is manmade and administrative hierarchical authority (as first described by Moses with intent to regiment those followers wandering to the promised land). Organic authority derives not from a leaders’ sovereignty, but rather from the collective sovereign consent of the members. As Catholicism apparently has learned but remains largely unimplemented:

Organizational laws and rituals can and do change without affecting the Church's primary object to provide the teachings and ministry of Christ. Whether called priesthood, brotherhood, a blood oath, troth, or church, thralldom (bondage, slavery or servitude) always represent forms of power hungry tyranny. God’s ontologism, deontology, or teleology never sponsors thralldom! And since churches are keepers of human souls, they are as Roger Williams, Thomas Jefferson, . . . , and Christ’s apostle, doubting Thomas, reasoned [their kind of salvation (was based on knowledge rather than belief) -- . . . they were democratic, abandoning titles like bishop or deacon for a kind of commonwealth of individual inspiration. . . .: they are not trustworthy keepers of the secular authorities commonly coveted and often practiced by organic religion. The strict constitutional separation of religious authorities and those of state is not something to be trifled with. Organic churches, which fail to respect R. Williams Dictum, inevitably supplant God’s supreme antecedence with an organic fictitious self: Tautologically, they commit an egregious form of logical fallacy! 201

Every lawful Magistrate whether succeeding or elective, is not only the Minister of God, but the minister or servant of the people also (what people or nation soever they may be the world over), and that Minister or Magistrate goes beyond his commission who intermeddles with that which cannot be given him in commission

408

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

from the people.

Roger Williams [Officials in charge of any organic entity befits this sentiment] The gospel of Thomas particularly, was about Gnosticism’s proclivity for libertarian objectivity with liberalism and democracy: 202

Followers of the Gospel of Thomas The gnostics . . . felt that only a faction of humans were capable of their kind of salvation -- but among themselves they were democratic, abandoning titles like bishop or deacon for a kind of commonwealth of individual inspiration. . . . This irked critics who were building a church with the hierarchy and discipline to withstand Roman persecution. Political constitutional rights challenges agitate Ed Firmage was a constitutional Law professor of note when B. H. Roberts unpublished manuscript was entrusted to him for safe keeping. He is now retired and living alone, however, his opinion when given is still respected: Salt Lake Tribune, Jan. 14, 2010 carried this opinion about constitutional rights:

Hatch and Shurtleff My friends (really) Sen Orrin Hatch and Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff write well-reasoned, unimpeachable words in their article on the unconstitutionality of the health care reform bill before Congress (“Is health care reform bill unconstitutional? Opinion, Jan 2.) These attorneys understand states rights. Only one problem that I can see. There side in this debate lost the Civil War and, consequently, they missed the 13th and 14th Amendments that followed. Since that time human rights have a national base. We carry our human rights right on our mobile backsides. The commerce clause of the Constitution, as it has been uniformly interpreted since Gibbons v. Ogden, over a century ago,

Another great victory for democracy

409

saw that our great republic created a common market from sea to shining sea. (Check the advance sheets, brethren.) Ed Firmage The Tribune, on Jan. 19, 2010, carried this article, as excerpted here:

If Congress Oks bill, court fight not far behind Health care: Can the government require you to buy insurance? By MATT CANHAM Washington: Republicans, led by Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, are challenging the very constitutionality of the health reform bill, focusing on a requirement that every American buy insurance or face a fine. Hatch and other conservatives argue Congress has no right to tell people how to spend their money, while democrats say the policy would promote personal responsibility, spread risk and would help reduce costs. What is now political debate could turn into a full-blown courtroom drama . . . Sen. Hatch apparently ignores the history behind requiring auto liability insurance to be purchased in return for the civil privilege of a granted license to drive a vehicle? Have we not learned that the cost of liability, of one to another, is best equitably distributed by insurance that mandatorily is paid by all parties involved? This surely is settled reality, and Senators particularly, especially gained “privileged” in that they granted to themselves the best possible insurance as their benefit-based right, and yet in dogmatic political reluctance, Senators, as Sen Hatch, politically fight extending insurance to those, who for reasons of cost or medical condition cannot obtain insurance in the current private marketplace. The Jan. 29 Tribune carried this candid opinion:

About that GOP Plan I see that Sen.. Orrin Hatch is eager to return to health care reform (“Hatch calls for restart on health care reform,” Tribune, Jan 25) Pardon me for being skeptical. In early 1995, a few months after

410

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

the Republicans captured majorities in both houses of Congress, partly because they claimed to have a health care plan of their own, I wrote Hatch and asked when we might see that plan. His polite reply essentially said “soon.” After not seeing any plan from the Republicans, I wrote the senator again. I did not receive the courtesy of a reply. I wrote again. Again no reply. In fact, did anyone anywhere ever hear what became of the promised Republican health care plan that was touted in the 1994 elections? In the past 15 years we have learned that there was no Republican plan. So what’s new this time, Senator? Arthur Sutherland But, Congress is not the only source of objecting to health care insurance to all. The recent five to four Supreme Court’s decision, which allows corporate “fictitious person’s” to spend unlimited and freely to persuade political outcomes, in what the Court declared was free speech, has opened a political dimension, which tears badly at all post constitutional attempts to level human sovereignty. After the Civil War, the Supreme Court decided that fictitious organic entities also were entitled to civil rights and due process. This latest decision, however, antecedes human sovereign rights since organic corporate entities economically are, in fact, licensed warehouses for accumulating wealth that legally is private property, and therefore, are far greater, as the fictitious legal definition granted by the Supreme Court, despite that humans are naturally defined and therefore limited. This fiction-based decision, of the Supreme Court has encroached on the constitutional separation of powers and duties, by anteceding both the Congress and the Administration’s powers and duties. This opinion ran on Jan. 29:

The wealthy rule us Regarding the Supreme Court’s recent decision to allow corporations to spend unlimited money on political campaigns (“Supreme Court ruling could rain money on races.” Tribune Jan.

Another great victory for democracy

411

22): Thomas Jefferson’s nightmare has come true – the “aristocracy of wealth” now rules this country. Roland Kayser Checkout: Save democracy.net This from section 208 fits with this economic scenario: Many have raised concerns with corporations, Thomas C. Jorling’s officially denied, reluctant concern, stands out prominently in the particular light of the more recent acts of terrorism and near rioting. 203

With some reluctance, I have chosen to register independent views on . . . the exercise of power by large, often multinational corporations. Deep concern over accountability in the exercise of power, especially as it affects individuals, has been a hallmark of American society. In my view, the Commission (for a National Agenda for The Eighties) should have acknowledged, in the context of the [nineteen] eighties, the historic concern of Americans with the exercise of power. At the time of the framing of the Constitution, many provisions were adopted to constrain and make accountable an agent of power--the federal government. During the past 200 years, new aggregates of power have come into being, especially the large, multinational corporation. Brought into existence by state charter, these institutions were once constrained by limits on size and power, limits rapidly made obsolete by interstate competition. Justice Brandeis, in a descent in the 1932 case Liggett v. Lee, described the history concisely: 'Although they fully recognized the value of this instrumentality in commerce and industry, they commonly denied incorporation for business long after they had granted it for religious, educational, and charitable purposes. They denied it because of fear. Fear of encroachment upon the liberties and opportunities of the individual. Fear of the

412

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

subjection of labor to capital. Fear of monopoly. Fear that the absorption of capital by corporations, and their perpetual life, might bring evils similar to those which attended 'mortmain.' There was a sense of some insidious menace inherent to large corporations. So at first the corporate privilege was granted sparingly; and only when the grant seemed necessary in order to procure some specific benefit otherwise unobtainable. The removal by leading industrial states of the limitations upon the size and powers of business corporations appears to have been due, not to their conviction that maintenance of the restrictions was undesirable in itself, but to the conviction that it was futile to insist upon them; because local restriction would be circumvented by foreign (other states) incorporation. Indeed, local restriction seemed worse than futile; Lesser States eager for the revenue derived from traffic in charters, had removed safeguards from their own incorporation laws. 288 US 517, 548, 557. Nothing took the place of the limits -- limits designed to control power -- once imposed by states. Subsequently, the corporation has continued to grow, and it now is the source of the exercise of the greatest amount of power in national and global society. Simply put, the large business corporations, separately and collectively, wield the greatest quantum power in our society. Power with many dimensions: to shape the form of society, to alter the landscape, to distribute new chemicals, to provide or withhold food, to determine income differentials, to make us dependent upon technology. On and on we could go, but for purposes here it is sufficient to assert that the power once thought of as the exclusive provence of government -- to exercise power to control others -is now held and executed largely by large business corporations. Where government has such power, we establish measures

Another great victory for democracy

413

to protect the individual, but not so with the corporation. While government cannot deprive a life experience for the exercise of speech, a corporation can deny employment providing the paycheck essential for survival for such expression. Specific multinational corporations wield power beyond the boundaries of any national jurisdiction. In regulating this licensed corporate power, it is important to consider that the power of individual sovereignty, which according to Locke’s ‘Glorious Revolution’ is of creation, is the only legitimate source of all governing authority and license. Also, it is the only source of nature endowed sovereign responsibility for ethical behavior: Each sovereign individual either must respect the sovereignty of each other individual or, when they do not, individuals are socially penalized. However, because morality is not and cannot effectively be made into law, or adjudged, Society is often unjust, with life’s economic spoils going to the aggressors (more often now, the corporations). The contrast between rationalism (no dualism) and irrationalism (dualism) is clearly evident in US political results, as previously recognized, in the first instance as the rational political victory of democracy during Jefferson, Madison, Quincy Adams and Monroe’s administrations, then during Clinton and Obama’s, in the second instance. Considering Plato’s Realm of Reason in the political perspective of a state’s organic philosophic definition (p 255), along with dualism-based absolute idealists political decisions in contrast with the rational (no dualism) democratic decisions of Rational Empiricism, the results are clear. For instance Reagan’s “tear down that wall” was considered an expedient political victory, however thereafter, this dualism-based politics has supported the erection of a “wall” at our southern US border and supports Israel’s wall between them and Palestine. What Reagan did not consider was that his dualism-based idealist’s mechanist organic absolute philosophy compared more to the dualism-based materialist idealism of communism than to the intended

414

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

US Rational Empiricism. Pan Americanism presents another rational contrast to the dualism-based walls being erected at our borders. Pan Americanism Arizona, became the 48th US state on Feb. 14, 1912. The Hohokam people settled in the Gila River Valley by A.D. 300. 204 As to language, Aztec-Tanoan distinguishes the Hopi, Pima, Yuma, and Papago Indians of this region. 205 As early as 1776, Tucson became a Spanish garrison. Mexico declared its independence from Spain in 1821, and New Mexico (including what is now Arizona) became a province of Mexico. The US declared war on Mexico in 1846 (Many Mormon Pioneers on their migration west (the Mormon Battalion) answered the service call and diverted their migration to join the US forces. This war ended in the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848. The US took possession of New Mexico and Arizona, as far south as the Gila River. The Gadsdan Purchase of 1853 added the region south of the Gila River. 206 A brother-in-law, professor of Sociology at the U of U, Clarke Knowlton, was a trusted historical authority that testified frequently in court matters involving property owners in this region that had lost their deeded lands to those awarded this property by a US state. Lingering unsettled claims still fester in the minds of many Hispanics: Were Indians and Hispanics of this region at the time Statehood was granted, US citizens, despite no state provided documentation? When the US comprised mostly Eastern States and Western Territory purchased by President Jefferson in what was called the Louisiana Purchase, all American Countries were under siege by three leading absolute Monarchies of Europe (Russia, Austria and Prussia), the US under President Monroe, declared the Monroe Doctrine, which protected all independent North and South American Countries against all forced colonization attempts. This doctrine has prevailed since then. Based on the common ideals of North and South America, Pan Americanism was later adopted, the essence of which is equality exists

Another great victory for democracy

415

regarding internal and external affairs involving the citizens of these independent Countries. FDR’s “Good Neighbor Policy was based on these common ideals. The Monroe Doctrine along with winning the War of 1812 and the cancellation of $5,000,000 in American claims against Spain, was behind Florida becoming a US state in 1819. Following the Civil War, while the US wartime army was still strong, Napoleon III was forced to give up an attempt to set up a European Kingdom in Mexico. President Cleveland threatened to declare war to force Great Britain, in 1895, to agree to arbitrate their dispute with Venezuela. 207 And, had the US acted according to Manifest Destiny-based Whig politics, all of Mexico would have been added to US territory. 208 While US citizens mostly were legal emigres from Europe, a substantial and growing population of color had an equal if not greater claim to US citizenship, as based on occupancy prior to US wars and policy, and as descendants of these prior local residents. The no dualism aspect of acquaintance categorically infers God’s unchanging character, which while complex and multidimensional, is surely neither arbitrary nor malicious, as Einstein concluded. Moses had described the categorical imperative attributes of LOGOS, in predicate terms, as faithfulness, fidelity, loyalty and promise, which proper name St. John asserted appropriately to describe God: St John wrote in Greek. His first Epistle is about concupiscence related materialism:

If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. ... And the world passeth, away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God, abideth for ever. ... And this commandment have we from him. That he who loveth God love his brother also. St. John’s Religion, therefore, is living the categorical imperatives (i.e., no dualism), which Jesus had taught, and which heterodox reasoning individuals in other earlier religions had also advocated. Humans that reason deliberately, while in the world, are by choice not of orthodoxy. Heterodox rational humans still have needs that are dualism-based (i.e., their natural life’s situation is paradoxical). Local news recently was

416

Section 212

Another great victory for democracy

About Truth and Religion

about these cultural paradoxes: one headline quantified criminal fraud, as perpetrated by LDS members and others, on LDS members in Utah: under the guise of trusted brotherhood and safe investment management, more than a $ billion was wrested from trusting LDS members; Another headline was about Hispanic members’ appeal to the LDS Church for support regarding their concern of lawful eminent loss of equal treatment under civil law: Orthodox civil authorities were formulating ethnic class “separation” laws, which Hispanics considered as rights’ discrimination. The LDS Church had recently advocated a side in California’s (Prop. 8) marriage right’s issue, which action clearly denigrated the categorical claim of representing God’s dualism free authority (The LDS claim of “authority from God” is not valid in this instance at least). In instances that the LDS Church cannot lay claim to representing God’s dualism free categorical logos, which attributes are of human creation, upon which St. John commanded Humans categorically to Love both God and Man, this is individual responsibility and not the LDS Church’s. Tolstoy observed the “false” side of dualism-based human rights paradoxes: 209

I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven into the fabric of their lives. [Clearly, either side in a civil rights issue is a “false” categorically imperative choice.] Repentance, baptism, atonement, . . . are worthy belief-based religious acquaintances, however, temporal life’s learning processes which lead to transcending worldly concupiscence by faith-based reason, are rewarded by a knowledge of no dualism-based truth: Faith, as the evidence of unseen things, scientifically pursued, and proved, is rational Pure Truth, which is available to all humans, for the asking. Did Christ’s “parable of the rich man” indict concupiscence rather than riches, per se?

417

ENDNOTES 1 L. P. Pojman, PHILOSOPHY, The Quest for Truth (Wadsworth, 1989), 152

2 L. P. Pojman, PHILOSOPHY, The Quest for Truth (Wadsworth, 1989), 152

3 Parrington, Main Currents . . ., Vol. III (Harcourt, 1930) 152 4 New Dictionary of English language, 1925 edition, 40 5 F. Brodie, No Man Knows My History (1945, Alfred A. Knopf). 5 6 J. L. Brooke, The Refiners Fire (Cambridge University Press 1994), xiii 7 J. L. Brooke, The Refiner’s Fire, 12, 23, 26, 28, 50, 56, 117, 217, 225, 230, 234, 261, 262, 274, counterfeiter and 120

8 J. L. Brooke, 12 9 Brooke’s note 25: DC 35: 18 [The DC Commentary noted that this revelation was given to JS and Sidey Rigdon, at Harmony, Pa., Dec., 1830.]

10 Brooke’s note 26: DC 76-7: 50-117 [DC Commentary noted that this revelation was given to JS and Sidney Rigdon at Hiram, Ohip, Feb., 16, 1832: regarding DC 77, the DC Commentary noted that the revelation was given to JS at Hiram, Ohio, March, 1832.]

11 Brooke’s note 27: DC 27: 11 [The DC Commentary noted that this revelation was given to JS at Harmony, Pa., Aug., 1830.]

12 J. L. Brooke, The Refiners Fire, Hermeticism in early modern Europe, 4, 8-29, among puritans, 14, 36-8, among American perfectionists, 38-45, 53, 55, 58, and metal-working, 72-3, 77-8, and Freemasonry, 91-8 101-4, and money, 105-7 as purity or danger, 125-30, 145-6, 162-7, 178-83, 21718, and Mormonism, xiii,-xiv, xvi, 12-13, 28-9, 194-7, 199-208, 213-16, 246-61, 274-83, 299-305.

13 Fall of Adam, Bible Dictionary (from a Mormon publication of the Bible, 1979, which included scriptural references to the Pearl of Great Price’ revelations, translations, and narrations of Joseph Smith: Book of Moses, Book of Abraham, and Joseph Smith-History)

14 L. P. Pojman, PHILOSOPHY, The Quest for Truth (Wadsworth, 1989), 152

418

Section 212

Another great victory for democracy

About Truth and Religion

419

15 J. L. Brooke, 274

519.)

16 Brooke’s note 59: Young, Aug. 14, 1853, JD 1:276.

30 Rom. 23

17 Brooke’s note 60: England, Orson Pratt, 100

31 See J. L Brooke, The Refiner’s Fire, for these cultural influences on

18 Brooke’s note 61: England, Orson Pratt, 175-6; Orson Pratt, Aug. 29, 1852, JD 1:53-66.

19 Brooke’s note 62: Quotation from “The Seer” (Aug. 1853), 1:117, cited in Gary James Bergera, “The Orson Pratt – Brigham Young Controversies: Conflict within the Quorums, 1853-1868,” Dialogue 13 (Summer 1980), 11. See in general, Bergera, 9-11; and England, Orson Pratt, 197-9.

20 Brooke’s note 63: Parley P. Pratt, Key to the Science of Theology . . . (Liverpool, 1855), 97-107

Joseph Smith, Jr. (Hermes Trismegistus occultist influences: 10, 15, 16, 20, 29, 40, 206), (Hermeticism among American perfectionists: 38-45, 51, 55, 58; and metalworking: 72-3, 77-8; and Freemasonry: 91-8, 101-4; and money: 105-7), (antimomianism’s influences: 12, 23, 26, 28, 30, 36, 117, 217-18, 225, 230-1, 234, 261, 262, 274)

L. P. Pojman, PHILOSOPHY, The Quest for Truth (Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1989), 152

33 Exodus 18: 19 - 21 34

22 J. L. Brooke, 151

St. John gave the name LOGOS to God, the Creator (Vatican Manuscript in original Greek. John 1:1, translation to English called the Emphatic Diaglott).

23 Brooke’s note 7: “1832 History,” in Jessee, ed., The Papers of Joseph

35 Edited by C. H. Monson, Jr., LAO-TSE, Philosophy Religion and

Smith, 1:5-7; in Jessee, comp. And ed., The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, 4-6; and in Dean C. Jessee, “The early accounts of Joseph Smith’s First vision,” BYUS 9 (Spring 1969), 275-94.

Science (Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1963) 268.

21 F. M. Brodie, 24

24 Brooke’s note 6: The accounts of Joshua McKune and Michael Morse, published in 1879, state that Joseph Smith Jr. Himself considered joining the Methodist church in Harmony, Pennsylvania, in 1828, casting further doubt on the first Vision story. See Jerald Tanner and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? 4th ed. (Salt Lake City, 1982) 156-62a; and the discussion in Hill, “First Vision Controversy,” 37-44. See Jan shipps, “The Prophet Puzzle,” JMH 1 (1974), for an extended analysis of the debate over the First Vision.

25 J. L. Brooke, 297 26 St. John 18:11 27 St. John 18:36

36 R. Chernow, Time (July 5, 2004) 72 37 Encyclopedia, Vol. 17, 619 38 Brooke, 28 39 Brooke, 276 40 Brigham Young, JD 1:50 41 Philosophy, The Quest for Truth, L. P. Pojman, Wadswotht, 1989, p 135 42 Brockway, 4 43 This clip of Robert Frost, then age 86, was rerun on the December 21, 1997 TV presentation of Meet the Press.

44 The Bible (Simon & Schuster, 1993), xii, Arranged and edited by Ernest

28 World Book Dictionary (1965) 1324 & 1456

Sutherland Bates, with updated Scholarship and a New Introduction by Lodowick Allison

29 Edited by C. H. Monson, Jr., The Divided Line and the Allegory of the

45 Num. 20:12

Cave, Philosophy Religion and Science (Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1963) 161-167. (From Plato’s The Republic, 2nd ed., translated by Benjamin Jowett. New York: Oxford University Press, 1891, Books VI and VII, 510-

46 F. M. Brodie, 277 47 F. M. Brodie, 94

420

Section 212

Another great victory for democracy

About Truth and Religion

48 J. L. Brooke, 241

68 World Book Encyclopedia (Vol. 15) 348

49 Brooke’s note 19: see Chapter 8

69 Parrington, Vol. III, xxiii

50 J. L. Brooke, 205

70 Parrington, Vol. I, 299

51 Brooke’s note 83: see Harrell, “The development of the doctrine of

71 World Book Encyclopedia (Vol. 9) 241

Preexistence,” 76

72 Dictionary, 1203

52 J. L. Brooke, 305 53 Brooke’s note 81: “Mormons Penalize Dissident Members,” New York Times, Sept 19, 1993, P. 13; Johnson, “ As Mormon Church Grows, so Does Dissent from Feminists and Scholars.”

54 Dictionary, 1219 (Charlotte Bronte had noted that Chance has meted

421

L. P. Pojman, PHILOSOPHY, The Quest for Truth (Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1989), 152

74 Parrington, Vol. I, 70 75 James 1:5

you a measure of happiness.)

76 J. L. Brooke, 305

55 J. L. Brooke, 298

77 Brooke’s note 81: “Mormons Penalize Dissident Members,” New York

56 Brooke’s note 57: Coates, In Mormon Circles, 165. At this writing,

Times, Sept 19, 1993, P. 13; Johnson, “ As Mormon Church Grows, so Does Dissent from Feminists and Scholars.”

April 1993, it is apparent from the siege of the Branch Davidian sect in Waco, Texas, that the Mormons are not unique in this regard.

78 Brodie, vii-ix

57 Pojman, 152

79 edited by Diane Ravitch , p 7, 12, 18

58 Pojman, 152

80 L. P. Pojman, PHILOSOPHY, The Quest for Truth (Wadsworth, 1989),

59 V. L. Parrington, Main Currents in American Thought, Vol. II (Harcourt

152

Brace, 1930) 466

81 Brodie, 367

60 Dictionary (definition 6),1203: theory that everything in the universe is

82 Brodie, 382

produced and can be explained by mechanical or material forces.

83 Brodie, 369-72

61 Parrington, Vol. II, 436

84 J. L. Brooke, 164-66

62 Parrington, Vol. II, 435

85 Brooke’s note 52:George Oliver, The Antiquities of Freemasonry;

63 The New Dictionary of Thoughts, A Cyclopedia of Quotations,

65 World Book Encyclopedia (Vol. 15) 348

Comprising the Three Grand periods of Masonry from the Creation of the World to the dedication of King Solomon’s Temple (London, 1823), chapters 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 (quotations from pp 41-3) The theme of primitive and spurious Masonry is summarized in Mackey, An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, 2:584-5, 706-8.

66 World Book Encyclopedia (Vol. 15) 348

86 Brooke’s note 55: Moses 6:6-7, 7:22. The Book of Moses is a section

of The pearl of Great Price: A Selection from the Revelations, Translations, and Narrations of Joseph Smith, First Prophet, Seer, and Revelator of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Liverpool, England, 1851); all

(Standard Book Company, 1955) 153

64 I Jn. 2:15

L. P. Pojman, PHILOSOPHY, The Quest for Truth (Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1989), 152

422

Section 212

Another great victory for democracy

About Truth and Religion

423

citations are to the 1985 Salt Lake City edition. Compare with Genesis 4-5.

108 Brodie (footnote) 394 (Latter-Day Saints Biographical Encyclopedia,

87 Brooke’s note 56: DC 76:7, 84:5-19, 107:18. See below, Chapter 8.

Vol. I, p. 698)

88 R. L. Bushman, Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling (Alfred

109 J. L. Brooke, 4, 50, 158, 164, 168-70, 179, 232, 250, 263

A. Knopf, 2005) 91

110 R. L. Bushman, Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling (A. A. Knopf,

89 W. L. Cowdrey, H. A. Davis & D. R. Scales, Who Really Wrote the

2005) 450

Book of Mormon (Vision House, 1977) 152

111 Brodie, 316

90 Ibid, 153

112 Brodie, 319

91 K. Vonnegut, A man without a country (Seven Stories Press, 2005) 88

113 Dictionary, 89

92 World Book Encyclopedia Dictionary, 1965, 1862

114 Brodie, 5

93 C. Thomas, There to Here (Harper Perennial, 1991), 202 (Compared to

115 Brodie, 5 w. footnote (See John M. Mecklin: ‘The Story of American

the rational thoughts of ‘liberals’ as Descartes, Spinoza, Leibnitz, Kant . . . , Craig Thomas refers to Hobbes as ‘illiberal.’)

Dissent (New York, 1934) pp. 37, 123)

94 C. Thomas, There to Here, (Harper Perennial, 1991) 160

117 World Book Encyclopedia (1965) Vol. 17, 480

95 World Book Encyclopedia, 1965, Vol. 5, 66

118 Brodie, 263

96 Wolld Book Encyclopedia, Vol. 12, 369

119 Brodie, 266

97 Thomas, 82-85

120 The LDS Church denial written by B. H. Roberts, Church Historian,

98 W. Greider, Who will tell the People, (Simon and Schuster, 1992) 14-15

A Comprehensive History of The Church if Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1: 229

99 Greider, 11

121 W. L. Cowdrey, H. A. Davis, & D. R. Scales, Who Really Wrote the

100 Parrington, Vol. I, 177

Book of Mormon (Vision House, 1977) 91-93

101 Parrington’s note: Works of Thomas Paine, edited by M. D. Conway, Vol. IV, 465.

103 Matt. 4: 4

123 Cowdrey, Davis and Scales, 118-119

104 Parrington,Vol. I, 70 FEAR,

122 W. L. Cowdrey, H. A. Davis and D. R Scales, Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon, (Vision House, Santa Ana, California 92705, 1977) Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 77-85120, ISBN 0-88449-068-8, 82-83

102 Parrington, Vol. I, 299

105 A. Wheelis, THE PATH NOT TAKEN,

116 Brodie, 310

REFLECTIONS ON POWER and

(NORTON, 1990) 46-48

124 Bushman, 149 125 F. M. Brodie, 277

106 I Jn 5: 11 (Vatican manuscript translated from original Greek)

126 Bushman, 148-49

107 Church, LDS Scholar in Tug of War Over Manuscript, Peg McEntee

127 Cowdrey, Davis and Scales, 140-141

AP, The Salt Lake Tribune, September 11, 1993

128 Cowdrey, Davis and Scales, 130-131

424

Section 212

Another great victory for democracy

About Truth and Religion

425

129 J. Gleich, CHAOS-Making a new Science (Penguin) 38 [about tones

154 Cowdrey, Davis and Scales, 152

of calumny, also read A. Franken’s Lies and Lying Liars (Dutton, 2003) 132-]

155 edited by D. Ravitch, THE AMERICAN READER, WORDS THAT

130 Loco-Foco, World Book Encyclopedia, 1965, Vol. 12, 1965, 369

MOVED A NATION (Harper Collins, 1990) 12

156 edited by Lawson and Appignanesi, Dismantling Truth, R. Rorty,

131 Andrew Jackson, World Book Encyclopedia, 1965, Vol. 11, 11

Science as Solidarity

132 Brodie, 198

157 Lawson and Appignanesi, back cover

133 Brodie, 195

158 Lawson and Appignanesi, back cover

134 Brodie, 196

159 John 14:6

135 Bushman, 332

160 Matt 22: 37-38

136 Bushman’s note, 626

161 Matt 16:25

137 Bushman’s note, 626

162 L. P. Pojman, 474

138 Brodie, 294

163 Matt 22: 37-38

139 Brodie, 395 (taken from Oliver Olney, The Absurdities of Mormonism,

164 Pojman, 665

p 19)

165 Dictionary, 2035

140 J. L Brooke, The Refiners Fire (Cambridge Press 1994) 216-17

166 Robert L. Heilbroner, The Worldly Philosophers (Simon and Schuster,

141 Brooke’s note 25, on page 381

1986) 299-303

142 Brooke’s note 26, on page 381

167 Greider, 281

143 Brooke’s note 27, on page 381

168

144 Brodie, 263 145 The New Dictionary of thoughts, 258 146 L. P. Pojman, Philosophy (Wadsworth, 1989) 5

Thomas Jefferson, A BILL FOR ESTABLISHING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN VIRGINIA, as published in THE AMERICAN READER, edited by Diane Ravitch, Harper Collins, 1990, 23-24

169 edited by Diane Ravitch , p 7, 12, 18 170 R. Hughes, Culture of Complaint, The Fraying of America (Oxford

147 The New Dictionary of Thoughts, 662

Press, 1993) 44-45

148 The New Dictionary of Thoughts, 665

171 Hughes, 32

149 Brodie, 55

172 Pojman, There is meaning in Absurdity, PHILOSOPHY The Quest For

150 Brodie, 69

Truth (Wadsworth, 1989) 468-69

151 W. L. Cowdrey, H. A. Davis and D. R Scales, 167

173 Pojman, Reflections on Suffering, 468-69

152 Cowdrey, Davis and Scales, 274

174 Greider, 414

153 Cowdrey, Davis and Scales, 158

175 The statement is from Vaclav Havel, Disturbing the Peace, Alfred A Knopf, 1990

426

Section 212

About Truth and Religion

Another great victory for democracy

176 World Book Dictionary, 1965, 1353

198 Ex. 18: 13- 19

177 Eric Hoffer, The True Believer (As furnished by Shelby Steele in his

199 Brockway, 4

essay The New Sovereignty), Harpers Magazine, July, 1992

200 Encyclopedia, Vol. 17, 680

178 World Book Encyclopedia, Vol. 14, 318 179 Diaglott, 803 180 James 1:5 181 S. Grant (The Hartford Courant), Thoreau’s ‘Wild Fruits’ manuscript unripe yet satisfying,’ Lsa Vegas Review Journal, March 12, 2000

182 The Bible (Simon & Schuster, 1993), xii, Arranged and edited by Ernest Sutherland Bates, with updated Scholarship and a New Introduction by Lodowick Allison

183 World Book Dictionary, 1965, 1353 184 E. Fromm, in David Riesman’s The Lonely Crowd, 5 185 Parrington, Vol. III, xxiv

201 See V. L. Parrington, Main Currents in American Thought (Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1930) Vol. I, 62-75, Vol. II, 97, 327, 379, 399 [in Vol. III, p 121, for instance, Parrington notes that tautological fallacy replaced natural rights: (as one would expect of a Connecticut Federalist) Theodore Woolsey was renewing the fight against an infidel philosophy that with its doctrine of natural rights denied the authority of the godly to police society. In harmony with Lieber and Calhoun he rejected the romance doctrine of natural rights, and substituted a composite socialistic conception, that from John Winthrop and Roger Williams to Channing and Emerson had colored the Puritan thought of New England.]

202 David van Biema, Time (December 22, 2003), 60 203 Excerpted from An Additional View to the Report of the President's Commission for a National Agenda for the Eighties.

186 Dictionary, 1965, 1251

204 World Book Encyclopedia (1965), Vol. 1, 651

187 The New Dictionary of Thoughts, 529

205 Encyclopedia, Vol. 10, 136

188 World Book Encyclopedia, 1965, Vol.15, 166

206 Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, 651

189 H. W. Turnbull, 138-139

207 Encyclopedia, Vol. 13, 616-17

190 The Bible (Simon & Schuster, 1993), xii, Arranged and edited by

208 Encyclopedia, Vol. 13, 107

Ernest Sutherland Bates, with updated Scholarship and a New Introduction by Lodowick Allison

191 J. L. Brooke, 12 192 Brooke’s note 27: DC 27: 11 [The DC Commentary noted that this revelation was given to JS at Harmony, Pa., Aug., 1830.]

193 Salt Lake Tribune Feb. 21, 2010, B5 194 Encyclopedia, Vol. 17, 619 195 Brooke, 28 196 Brooke, 276 197 Brigham Young, JD 1:50

427

209 J. Gleich, CHAOS-Making a new Science (Penguin) 38 [about tones of calumny, also read A. Franken’s Lies and Lying Liars (Dutton, 2003) 132-]

100

200

CONTENTS of OUR FEDERAL SAVINGS PLAN and ETHEREAL-GOLD (the shaded titles) FOREWORD Quintessential Foundations (An Introduction) 101 Security: our Heritage 102 Insurance: our Heritage 103 Political Economy: the foundation of our Heritage (introduces 205) 104 Exercising Sovereignty: a responsibility of Heritage (introduces 208) 109 Truth’s Fiducial Gauges (introduces 209) Substantial Quintessence (Virtuous Knowledge) 201 Life’s enigma and the essential need for philosophy 202 Perceptions of reality and illusions 203 The requirements of self in finding truth 204 Politics for what it is 205 Political Economy 205 Appendix, Petitioning ‘Civitas’ 206 Liberal and Conservative 207 Our "Captains of Industry" 208 Sovereignty 209.1 Truth: The predicate value divisions of 209.2 Truth: The Fiducial Gauges of 210 Truth: Postscript about Organizations 211 Truth: Postscript about Emotion 212 Truth: Postscript about Faith 220 Truth: Postscript about Paradoxes 230 Truth: Postscript about Paradox and Mechanism 240 Truth: Postscript about Deontology without Teleology 250 Virtues of Social Security and Vices of organization

In 2000, wage-earners have a $2 trillion (+) stake in the Economy.

Teleologically, this $2 trillion stake (with interest) must be repaid before the top 20 percent of income earners (who did not contribute to SS) are given a revenue tax refund (top income earners got tax refunds, common wage-earners did not). ABOUT ETHEREAL-GOLD

“It is the uniqueness of individuals, as they are encouraged to develop responsibly, into which the beauties of nations bloom. The American heritage is ETHEREAL-GOLD. The unalienable qualities of individuals are not compatible with anything that we produce, particularly on production lines.” From Petitioning‘Civitas,’ the Appendix to 205 The American System of Political Economy is a mechanism that opposes teleology: It divides the economy and upsets the ethical flux in culture. Our Political Economy locks Americans of the REAL ECONOMY between Americans of the SURREAL ECONOMY and Americans of the NON ECONOMY. Tyrannous Determinism results to compromise the human rights bequeathed by the Constitution. --Are we losing our unique AMERICAN HERITAGE? ---

Do we allow Mechanism to gamble with Teleology?

Increased in 1967 to provide for Medicare, Congress increased Social Security contribution-taxes again in 1984 to fund OUR FEDERAL SAVINGS PLAN for SS (Then spent the money) and (as reported in NEWSWEEK, May 13, 1991, p. 35) "the centrists [in Congress] say the deficit-ridden government needs the money." All attempts to cut SS taxes have failed. Political Economy, however, now calls for general tax reductions. The Administration of 2001 anointed this political objective.