A Short Way with the Reorganizers

A SHORT WAY WITH THE REORGANIZERS. BY FREDERIC CLIFT, M. D.

The following article is written with a view to the discouragement of street-corner discussions with elders or members of the Reorganized church. If left severely alone, they,by their misstate-

ments of known facts, soon lose the confidence of their listeners. Apparently their chief aim is to provoke controversy, and thus force some one in the crowd to protest, thereby furnishing food for further vituperation and misstatement. Occasionally, where matters have become tangled up, it seems necessary to expose the insincerity of the claims made; and on such rare occasions as these, or when discussing reorganization in. the family circle, the following may be of service to those called upon to represent the gospel of Jesus Christ as reavealed in these latter-days. It is sug-

gested that in meeting attacks from this source, we should not allow the discussion to cover too much ground. It is impossible to

properly discuss such a subject as succession to the presidency in one, two, or a number of hours, and for this reason we should refuse to be led into argument thereon, under inappropriate conditions. On the other hand, when the "reorganized" elder has tangled himself up in obvious misstatements, a question, to which the answer is practically a simple yes or no, will often suffice to bring the meeting to a close. It may be truly said that the Reorganizers, while asserting that they accept the great truths taught by the Prophet Joseph Smith, are, like Esau, selling their birthright for a mess of pottage, in order to secure favor with the sectarian world, e. g. their rejection of temple ordinances for the dead. It was not polygamy that led Marks, Briggs and Gurley, the founders of the Reorganized church, to wander around Missouri,

122 , IMPROVEMENT ERA.

Illinois, and other states, seeking some one to lead them in their secession from the Church of God; nor was it ignorance which led them to throw themselves into the arms of the admitted apostates Strang, Page, William Smith, Lyman Wight and others, who rebelled against the quorum of the Twelve Apostles, ignoring or forgetting the statement of the prophet — "Where I am not there is no First Presidency over the Twelve." (Church History, vol. II,

p. 374.) On the death of the Prophet Joseph, this quorum — having been so designated by revelation —became the presiding authority in the Church, and were so sustained by the vote of the people. But these men, rejected by both Church and people, did like Micah, of Mount Ephraim, who made an ephod* and teraphim,f and consecrated one of his sons who became his priest. Micah, however, recognizing that this home-made priest had no authority, found a young man who was of the priestly tribe of Levi, and induced him to become his priest, saying, "Dwell with me, and be unto me a father, and a priest, and I will give thee ten shekels of silver by the year, and a suit of apparel, and thy victuals. * * * and Micah consecrated the Levite, and the young man became his priest/' This is probably the first recorded instance in which a priest received a stated payment for his services. Micah was a schismatic, and today, those who leave the Church of God are found to have paid preachers, who "teach for hire, and "divine for money." We find the reasons for Micah's action in Judges xvii: 6: "In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes." So with Marks, Briggs, and others. The Prophet Joseph having been brutally murdered, we find these men, instead of recognizing God's authority in the next presiding — body^-the quorum of the Twelve doing "every man that which was right in his own eyes." They became apostates, some were excommunicated, while others, by their own schismatic acts, cut themselves off from the Church. History repeats itself. We read in Numbers 16: 3, that Korah, Dathan and Abiram "gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said nuto them: "Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congre-

• Ephod: a part of the high priest's dress. t Teraphim: small images used as household gods.

A SHORT WAY WITH THE RE0RGAN1ZERS. 123

gation are holy, every one of them— and the Lord is among them —wherefore, then, lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the Lord?" So in the history of the Church of these latter- days, we find these self-styled Reorganizers rebelling against the Lord's anointed. The history of Marks, Strang and others, is interesting, but the details of their apostasy and their efforts to found churches, which eventually culminated in their inducing young Joseph Smith to become their priest — like Micah's young Levite — are too intricate for street-corner debate. The elders of the Reorganized church appear to live on contention. Their manner of attacking the true followers of Christ tends to gather around them an element in full accord with them in one particular — abuse of the "Mormon" people. Hence, they always have in their street gatherings the rough anti- "Mormon' element who laugh and applaud whenever an attack is made on the Latter-day Saints; and the more vindictive the attack, the greater the applause from this class. Our young men who stop to listen, as a rule, are of the class who have not studied the subject under discussion, and are therefore unfamiliar with the questions at issue. But having the true spirit of the gospel, it grates upon

their nerves to hear their parents, and those whom they love and respect, abused and vilified, as they have been from time to time. — Hence they are led, in their zeal but without knowledge to ask — questions when opportunity is granted. The result is that instead of receiving an answer, the man in charge of the meeting ridicules the questioner, and, if it is a question that he cannot answer, it

is most successfully evaded; if he can, it is done in such a way that the questioner's ignorance is made manifest. Like any other bunco game, the advantage is all on the side of the sharper who poses as an elder of light. A person may ask no end of questions, but if they are of a nature to upset the claims of the Reorganizers, they will never be answered; and all that could be done would never force a correct answer to an honest question. These same "elders" will not discuss in private with any one who can successfully meet them. As soon as they learn that a person is prepared for them, their visits cease. They are after the bluster, strife and prominence that comes to them from public discussions

124 IMPROVEMENT ERA

of the street-order kind, knowing that the questioner is, aside

from asking the questions, entirely gagged. If your question is not answered, and you remind them of it, they will ask you to keep still, that it is not your meeting, and that is all the satisfaction

you get out of it. There are innumerable reasons why our young men should not discuss with them, in this way. Those who are capable of doing so, will see to it that, if debate is necessary, the conditions of the discussion are such that these disputers and slanderers of our people are kept to the appointed subject matter. Our young men should not forget that they are dealing with those who are paid to devote their whole time to the work, and that our Lord and pattern withdrew himself on one occasion from those who desired contention. Instead, therefore, of allowing the Reorganizes to lead us into a discussion of abstruse or disputable subjects, let us get down to first principles. Did Marks, Briggs and Gurley, the founders of the reorganized schism, associate with Strang, Page, William Smith, Lyman Wight, and other notorious apostates, and assist one or more of them in their attempts to found schismatic churches? If so, did they not cut themselves off from the body of the

Church? Excommunication is not the only way in which a church member loses his fellowship. We do not read that Judas Iscariot was cut off from the Church or his quorum. He, by his acts, brought about his own cutting off. The Reorganizers assert that the quorum of Twelve, with Brigham Young, usurped authority, and did that which was evil. If so, the Doctrine and Covenants, sec, 107, sets forth the course to be followed by those making charges against their brethren. The whole section should be read, but the following verses have a specific bearing on the acts of these men:

27. And every decision made by either of these quorums must be by the unanimous voice of the same. * * *

32. And in case that any decision of these quorums is made in unrighteousness, it may be brought before a general assembly of the several quorums, which constitute the spiritual authorities of the Church, otherwise there can be no appeal from their decision.

A SHORT WAY WITH THE REORGANIZERS. 125

8L There is not any person belonging to the Church, who is exempt from this council of the Church. 82. And inasmuch as a president of the High Priesthood shall transgress, he shall be had in remembrance before the common council of the Church, who shall be assisted by twelve counselors of the High Priesthood. 83. And their decision upon his head shall be an end of controversy concerning him. 84. Thus none shall be exempted from the justice and laws of God, that all things may be done in order, and in solemnity before him, according to truth and righteousness.

Did Marks, Briggs, or Gurley bring Brigham Young or other members of the quorum of Twelve before the common council of the Church to be tried for their alleged offenses? If not, why not? This is God's way of dealing with controversy; very different from the street-corner plan of the Reorganization. Their argument that the quorum of Twelve, and the whole priesthood except themselves, were in transgression does not hold water in the face of God's plan for the settlement of such questions. These men, claiming to be reorganizers of the Church of God, instead of prosecuting and sustaining their charges, in accordance with God's plan, did like Korah, Dathan and Abiram of old, saying, in substance, to the quorum of Twelve: "Ye take too much upon you." Their answer, that of the second-rate lawyer, is a tu quoque, why did not you "Brighamites" bring young Joseph before the Church courts? It is sufficient that young Joseph did not set himself up as a leader of the Reorganized until 1860. He was quiescent for some fifteen years, and during that time drifted away and became disassociated from the Church, and by his own acts ceased to have any standing in it. Again, the Lord, speaking of the Church, calls it "my Church." The question arises, by what name is "my Church" known? God's own revelation answers it once for all. Doctrine and Covenants, sec. 115: 4, "For thus shall my Church be called in the last days, even the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- day Saints." Where does the word "Reorganized" come in? The title page of the Reorganized edition of the Doctrine and Covenants states that the revelations therein presented have been carefully

126 IMPROVEMENT ERA.

selected— possibly like the selected writings included in the Bible, at the Council of Carthage. We are not surprised, therefore, to find that the Reorganizers have omitted to select this revelation giv-

ing the name of"my Church" in these last days. It is, however, re- own Church history, and ferred to in the early editions of their acknowledged by their own historian, Heman C. Smith, as a revelation. But how many of the lay members of the Reorganization are aware of this revelation? By its omission from their copy of the Doctrine and Covenants, we are justified in assuming that the Reorganizers seek to cover up the evidence of their apostasy and their man-made name. A direct question, therefore, regarding the name of "my Church" in the last days, and a statement of the facts will invariably cause the Reorganized elder to have a very important engagement elsewhere. Probably he will even forget to hand out his favorite tract on polygamy. Again, in I Kings, 22: 17, we find the Prophet Micah declaring: "As the Lord liveth, what the Lord saith unto me, that will I speak;" and in this dispensation, in a letter to Orson Spencer, July 23, 1848, the Prophet Brigham Young declared, "The Lord's will is my will, all the time; as he dictates, so will I perform. If he

don't guide the ship, we'llgo down in the whirlpool." These men spoke by the authority of God. There was no quibbling or modification of language, to suit the views of the men to whom they spoke. How different to the statement made by the Reorganized prophet, at Los Angeles, on the 21st of July, 1901, Young Joseph there declared to the people, assembled at a camp meeting: "In 1860, I took charge of the work. I told the people I came before them by some power not of myself. / pledged myself to preach no doctrine not approved by them. * * * I

stand today, after forty years, and renew that pledge." In the face of this declaration, can a Reorganized elder truthfully assert that he does not preach the doctrine of men? His leader and prophet says he will only preach such doctrines as they, the people, may dictate. Vox populi has indeed become Vox Dei, so far as this sect is concerned, and the Reorganization confesses itself, through young Joseph, to be a man-made, and man-controlled church. After admissions, such as must follow questions on these