Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1897-01-08

|
tical working, 1t will result In Church
| domination, etc. The first class men
TONED above, Of whom l take 1t from
the tone OF your letter you are one,
fatty refuse to believe the w0ru OF the
twenty-lour men whose signatures nre
attached to the document, who cou.
stitute the general authorities OF the
| Church. To that class these men
the authorities OF the Church--are
designing knave, bent on ely
| game at politics, or Oul-2ng-
out liars and scOundrels; or the
greater part OF them arc weak.
ling fools, the mere puppets OF One
or two dominating minds that are
scheDling, ambitious, tellseekipg
scoundrels. Tnere no escaping this
conclusion for those who persist In
saying that the manifesto means poll
ties, when the authorities OF the
Church positively affirm that II wac
intended alone for the regulation and
preservation of order in the Church.
For some unbeIievers among us to take
that position, would not, Of COURSE, be
very surprising; but what do you
think, Brother -, of members OF
the Church who take that poslti0nr
How long can they retain the fellow
ship OF the Saints, or their standing IN
the Church,
To the second claes, who say that the
practical workings OF the regulation
will be to bring to pass Church inter
ference Ia politics, L would say that
they should Ds willing to accord some
honesty to the gentlemen who promul-
gated what they assert is Church
regulation merely, and wait until 1t is
demonstrated that in Its operations
1t interferes with the political
rights and liberties OF the citi-
zens. Meantime, let me say that
you and others may continue to say
that this "maDiiesto" means politics,
that IL, that II IL u device by which high
Churcn officials mean to control the
politics of the State; but 1 know that
1t was anu is meant to be n Church
regulation for the good order OF the
Church alone, and intended to estab-
fish proper understanding among the
ofiicers oil the Church and to correct
wrong impressions that had obtained
concerning tho attitude OF high
Church officials to politics. Men In
the future may continue to assert that
this announced rule OF the Church
means politics, as explained Ia the
foregoing, but that Will not alter its
character any more than calling truth
falsehood will make 1t so.
VII.
SETTLEMENT OF THE QUESTION Dy
THE "vINDIoATION" OF MOSES
THATCHER.
You express the opinion that 1t
is almost impossible to settle this
question brought up by the "mani.
este" and Involving, as you
suppose, the principle OF common con-
sent, within the Church. AS matter
of fact there Is no such Issue to settle,
The principle OF common consent as
factor OF Church government has not
been violated. The rule of conduct in
question, after being formulated by the
general Church authorities, and pro.
posed TO the members OF the Church,
was accepted by them, they gave their
assent to 1t, and IL 10 regularly estab.
lished as rule OF the Church by the
announcement of the law to the people
and their acceptance OF 1t. Is 1t your
idea that common consent means
unanimous consent? Ii SO, you are
wrong. Government by Unanimous
consent Is cut OF the question, utterly
impraoticable. There ia no Issue that
can arise In the Church but what can
be settled within the Church. To 70
outside the Church to settle any diffi.
Guilty that has arisen within the
Church means war upon the Church.
an utter lack OF confidence In the 10.
sIiiuIion which you and / believe
God has founded / pray you no
longer entertain that thought.
Your proposition for tne settlement
OF the supposed difficulty is a novel
one, viz, the election OF Moses
Thatcher to the U nited States Senate,
which event, you say, "would be
accepted by the seli-sufflcle leader
whose personal ambition 10 become
the dictator OF the Church is widely
beloved, as a warning Of Iron the
people, that although their voice lie
now impotent In the councils OF the
Church, in the affairs OF the States It
is OmDipotent."
was extremely sorry when | read
that remark, anu L wondered what
cloud OF darkness could possibly have
come over your MIND; and In charity
L must think you wrote that passage
without thought. pass ever the IN
Justice syon do the II member of the
First Presidency to whom you refer,
and come directly TO the Consideration
of your proposed settlement OF the sun
posed difficulty, by the election OF
Brother Moses Thatcher to the Senate,
You complain OF the NEWS having
said that his election to the US. Senate
by the coming Utah Legislature would
be an "insult" to the Church; whereas
In your Judgment his election would
be settlement OF the questions that
have arisen through the "manifesto. ,,
and thnt"the great body OF the Church
would feel honored rather than insult.
eu at sueh happy coneummalion.'
Let US see; The general Church
authorities formulated a rule to be- FOL.
lowed by the leading Church oflicials
In respect to politics, which obtained
the approval Of all the general author.
tiles OF the Church, except one OF the
Apostles, who was absent on mission.
ana another Apostle who refuses to
accept IL because, as he alleges, pnd |
mat In the lace OF the protest OF his |
brethren TO the contrary, 1t is intended |
TO be and VIII resultin the domination |
OF politics in the State by the Church, |
anu is, in fact, the forging OF chains |
Tor the enslavement OF the people.
THE aforesaid Apostle refused IN |
sign II, but 1t went before the general |
Conference OF The Church ana was
upheld by the common consent of Tn.
Chhfch then assembled; and the
who refused to sign the docu.
ment embodying the rule is not pre.
senleu before the conference for