Dr. John M. Reiner on Mormonism

.

Vol. I. MAY, ibgS. No. 7.

DR. JOHN M, REINER ON MORMONISM,

A great many people in Utah will remember the visit of Dr. John M. Reiner to Salt Lake City some time in January last. While visiting friends in the state the Doctor's atten- tion was attracted by the boldness of the claims of "Mormon- ism, " and he prolonged his visit somewhat over the time he had intended to stay, in order that he might investigate the doctrines of the, to him, strange faith of the saints. He was successful in obtaining interviews with a number of the general authorities of the church and other leading brethren, and paid some atten- tion, we believe, to the literature of the subject. During his' stay among us he was accorded the privilege of addressing the saints in the Tabernacle, at one of the regular Sunday afternoon services in Salt Lake City. His remarks on that occasion were published in the Deseret Evening News, and it is for this reason that we say his visit here will be remem- bered by very many of the people of Utah. Since his return to the east the Doctor seems not to have lost his interest in the subject he investigated while in Utah. Indeed he not only seems to have retained his own interest in the subject, but to have aroused in others an interest in the same great theme, as will appear from the following communication ad- dressed to one of the editors of the Era, under date of March i6th:

36

" —

My Dear SiR:-r- A number of gentlemen in New York were recently addressed by Dr. John M. Reiner, on "Mormonism," and this has brought forth consider- able discussion and many questions on our part. In answer to some of these questions the Doctor has sent to me the enclosed letter, and he makes such extraordinary statements and startling explanations that we are interested to know how near he comes to your view of the matter, and whether you advo- cate what he says. If you know the Doctor you know that he is to the point, positive and is

prepared with proofs to substantiate any assertions he may make. We should like, if you see no objection, to have you print his letter to us, and comment on the same from a "Mormon" standpoint, so that we may have the "Mormon" answer to the questions, which you see from his answer were asked the Doctor. * * * of course, you understand, that my permission to publish this article is not to be construed as advocating the statements therein made, or that I think the same unanswerable. We have not at present gone beyond the letter, nor do we intend to until we get your views on the subject; we simply say, "Here is what the Doctor says, what have you got to say ? The Doctor's personal letter to me, and which I enclose, must serve for the present as my introduction to you. I should be pleased to hear from you. Yours very truly,

P. S. —Inasmuch as we meet weekly for discussion of this and other subjects, and expect letters from the Doctor in answer to our inquires, will you publish these on the same conditions as the enclosed, should we send the same to you?

In answering the above the editor of the Era, to whom it was addressed, placed himself at the service of the gentlemen to aid them in their investigation of the faith of the Latter-day Saints, and promised to publish the letters of Doctor Reiner to them with such comments as the statements of the Doctor might seem to demand, or warrant.

DOCTOR REINER'S LETTER. March 12th, 1898, Elizabeth, New Jersey. Gentlemen and friends: I have read with pleasure your letter informing me of

your resolution "To examine more thoroughly the claims of the sect known as Mormons." Such an undertaking, in this age of religious indifference, is indeed a laudable one. If you will kindly bear in mind that you are dealing with a young

DR. JOHN M. REINER ON MORMONlSM. 467

and undeveloped organization, reared in prosaic sourround- ings and under difficult circumstances: and if you will use her- meunutical judgment upon the lines I have indicated, you cannot fail to derive some benefit and pleasure from such an investigation. Under the present circumstances when other and more pressing matters demand my immediate attention, I am un- able to make new engagements and hence must decline your invitation with thanks, to meet you twice a week for the pur- pose indicated, but I shall most cheerfully correspond with you and answer such questions as you may submit to me from time to time. I however beg you to regard my utterances as

my own, as I have no authority to speak in any capacity for the Mormon Church. Personally I do not doubt for a min- ute, that my exegesis is the correct one, and the only one that will make Mormonism appear in its proper light when brought under review by gentlemen of your capacity and learning. And now to the main points. The sincerity of the Mor- mons does not seem to me to be the proper subject for dis- cussion, it certainly is not scientific. I, however, take this opportunity to declare that it is my honest conviction, based upon a close observation, that the leaders of the people be- longing to that communion are certainly sincere and God-fear- ing men. The subject of polygamy should, in my judgment, be left out of your investigation. In a manifesto dated the twenty- fourth day of September, i8go. President Woodruff solemnly declared that he stood ready to abide by the laws of the land, and prohibited the priesthood of the church, of which he is the head, to solemnize any more plural marriages after the date of that manifesto. That declaration, I think, should be sufficient to make us hold our peace even here in the east. Inasmuch as you press that subject upon me, I shall make the following remarks upon it. Your question as to whether polygamy can be justified "from a biblical standpoint" lacks imprecision. "From a bib- lical standpoint" according to whose interpretation? Those of you gentlemen who are members of the Church of Rome can discard this question by saying: ^'Roma locuta, causa

finita est." And those belonging to any other denomination have no infallible rule in such matters, and hence are not in the position to successfully combat the doctrine of polygamy from a biblical standpoint. Have you ever attempted to answer to yourselves satis- factorily the question, why the world has endured the open, shameless, and most wicked advocacy of polygamy by the reformers of the sixteenth century, while we are ready to pour out our wrath upon the Mormon Church for the same reason? The latter has advocated that principle openly and manfully, and readily underwent the most bitter persecution for it. In comparison to the utterances and acts of the reformers, the Mormons indeed deserve to be called saints. The teachings of Luther in relation to chastity were so startling and shocking, even to his contemporaries, that his own bosom friend declares that in the whole of Christendom no one has ever dealt with such sacred and serious things in such a profane and beastly manner as did the great reformer. The life, and letters, and poems, of Beza are of such a nature that no sensitive Christian mind can peruse them without feeling the atmosphere of a pest hospital. No such accusa- tions can truthfully be charged against the Mormons even by their worst enemies. In the year 1523, Luther writes to the German nobility in relation to celibacy as follows: ''Again I say if it should happen that one, two, hundred, thousand or more councils should decree that the clergy may marry, * * *

then I would rather trust to the grace of God for him who would keep one, two, three pro and overlook it, than that he should marry according and in obedience to the decree of the council." What do you, gentlemen, think would have happened if Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and their success- ors would have dared to promulgate such doctrines? For much less than that they had their houses burned and their property taken away, and their families exposed to starvation and danger in mid-winter. Luther's high conception of matrimony is thus expressed by him: "The husband may drive away his spouse, God cares not, * * * let Vashti go and take an Esther, as did the

DR. JOHN M REINER ON MORMONISM. 469

King of Ahasuerus." In a letter written by Luther to Spal- atin whom he encourages to enter the matrimonial heaven, he writes, "I do not wish that you should be surprised that I, who am reputed to be such a lover, am as yet unmarried." "However, if you look for an example, behold here is a good one for you. For three wives at one time did I have, all of whom I loved intensely and lost two of them. The third one, which I now hold in my left arm, may also be snatched away from me at any time." Carlstadt, Luther's disciple, also advocated the practice of polygamy. Upon hearing of it Luther wrote to Chancellor Bruecks, "I, indeed, must confess that I cannot forbid when one takes many wives, for it does not contradict the scrip- tures." There, gentlemen, is your "biblical standpoint." Beza, another of the "instruments of God," writes: "Evidently God has so created and moulded certain men that polygamy for them is either advisable, or, to avoid sin, absolutely nec- essary." History indeed tells us of many who under the teachings of the reformers came to the conclusion, that they were so "moulded" as to make the practice of polygamy for them im- perative. Such individuals were not men in ordinary walks of life, but rulers and noblemen who adopted Luther's new gospel, and were sufficiently influential with Luther and Melanchton to receive their approval. One of these noble- men was the Landgraf Philip Von Hessen. This disciple of the new faith declared to Luther and his coadjutor Melanch- ton, that in order to avoid sin he must have another wife. It goes without saying that he received the desired "dispensa- tion" from Luther to marry another wife in the life-time of his first wife,under the condition that he keep it a secret, not be- cause it was against the law of God, but for fear that the common people might follow his example. Hear what Luther says himself on that subject: "It was to us painful enough at the time, but inasmuch as we could not prevent it we wished to spare the conscience as much as possible." "I understood and hoped that he (the Landgraf) would secretly take some honest lass and would sustain se- cret marital relations with her in some quiet home." To

.

47i IBPR VEMENT ERA Philip himself, he writes, "In matters of matrimony the laws of Moses are not revoked or contradicted by the gospel." In his Table Talks,he declares, "That se^et polygamy of prin- ces and noblemen is legal before God, and is not unlike the relation of the patriarchs to their concubines." The secret second marriage of Philip Von Hassen soon became public rumor and was a source of annoyance to the reformers. Luther was bold as usual and advised "that the best is to deny the whole fact, and not to touch upon the legal aspect of the question at all;" for he well knew that polygamy at that time was a capital crime. But the Dake Henry of Braun- schweig was not satisfied with a mere denial, and he soon pub- lished a pamphlet exposing the whole scandal. In it the Duke desires to know upon what right, civil or divine, or upon what scriptural utterances the Landgraf was permitted to be the husband of two wives. Some of his court theologians published a reply which is worthy a place here and will interest you in your investigations. They first attempt to treat the whole thing as a mere idle rumor without foundation, but they say, "supposing such polygamous marriage was really and publically solemnized, and supposing that the Landgraf of Hessen intended to sanction polygamy generally by the enactment of a new law in favor of it, even then it will help decrease the evil of fornication and adultery * * *which exists in the land, and is habit- ual among the Germans. Relative to your question by what right or custom or by what utterance of holy scriptures can Landgraf excuse his double marriage, it is found in the fifth Book of Moses, and in the twenty-first chapter, where it is provided how a husband of many wives should act toward the children of all of them in relation to property. Likewise you have the example of holy men. For were not Abraham, David, Joas, and many others holy before their God? It was there- fore not wise for you to quote the Old Testament. But if you speak of the New Testament, we would remind you of the saying of St. Paul that a bishop should be the husband of but one wife, and will ask you, if at the time of the Apostles it was not customary to have concubines, why then does the Apostle forbid the bishop having more than one wife?"

.

DR. JOHN M. REINER ON MORMONISM. 471

I cannot forbear saying now and here, that the quotation

from St. Paul above mentioned is a malicious mistranslation, as you may satisfy yourself by an examination of the Greek texts. Now, gentlemen, in the light of the historical facts herein stated, beg to remind you that in 1883 the whole of Protes- I

tant Christendom celebrated the four hundredth anniversary of the birth of Luther, and a scheme was well under way to erect a monument to his memory in the City of Washington, like the one in the City of Worms. On the other hand we are all of us ready to march upon the wicked City of Salt Lake and to exterminate the godless Mormons on account of po- lygamy. I say again that in comparison with the lecherous libertines of the sixteenth century, Brigham Young and his followers deserve indeed to be called saints. As to the other "most crudely and unlearnedly stated dogmas of the Mormons," which you mention in your letter, I must beg leave to reply at a more convenient time. It is long past midnight, and I still dwell in the tabernacle of the flesh.

With due regard and good wishes to your undertaking, I am, gentlemen and friends. Yours very sincerely, John M. Reiner.