The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1907-06-22

for "the brethren a few years later.
The first number of The Seer was dated
January, 1858; the last was August,
1854. All that was published in the
numbers, including these dates and be-
tween, passed current among the Saints
for upwards of twelve years. No remon-
STRANGE was made against any of the
doctrines or theories set forth in The
Seer until 1865. In August, 1865. there
was published here an cxpurgation os
certain Of the doctrines which had been
advocated by Apostle Orson Pratt in
The Seer The pages, paragraphs and
sentences that were disapproved were
especially pointed out. IL appears from
this revision or expurgation, that The
Seer had been very thoroughly exam
ined for errors of doctrine and Of
speech, and only q comparatively few
points OF all the mass of material con
tanned in 1t were disapproved. These
arc specified distinctly by page and
by paragraph, so that there could be
no mistake. And as TO them, the au-
thOrities said: "They contain doctrines
which we cannot sustain and which we
have felt impressed to disown.' And
this direction is given to those who
have copies of The Seer: "'Whcre these
Objectionable works or parts of works
are bound in volumes or otherwise,
they should be cut out and DESTROYED
With proper care this can be done with
out much, if any, injury to the vol
umes.' Plainly implying that what re-
NAMED was 10 be kept and held as good
and approved doctrine. Directions for
this eXcision are Contained in the Des-
eret News of August %, 1865
Now, il is interesting to note That
the Ministerial Association did not
quote IN any part of their Review, any
of the doctrines, opinions or writings
that were thus disapproved. Elder Rob
erts knew this fact perfectly well when
he tried TO convince his hearers in the
Tabernacle that the ministers had quot
ed from work which had been dis
owned by the church. He knew also
that this work had never been dis
owned or disapproved as whole, but
only certain parts of it. And he knew
that no part thus disowned or disap,
proved had been quoted by the minis
ters whom he was attacking under pre-
tense that they were trying to saddle
upon the church certain doctrines and
opinions that had been repudiated. He
knew that the church had done nothing
of the kind as to those matters quoted
by the ministers.
Further than this, the ministers quot
ed largely from Elder Roberts him
self. in his writings and doctrinal de
fcnses and expositions. These he could
not very we'll disown, but in general
way he sought 10 free the church from
any Endorsement, official or otherwise,
of what he himself had said, that il
was inconvenient then and there TO
avow. AT the same time, he could not
shake off the fact that he himself had
uttered those things imputed to him by
the ministers, and quoted absolutely in
his own words The fact is that Elder
Roberts is the lineal intellectual de
scendant of Or5on Pratt, He repre-
sents in the church today precisely the
sort Of speculative doctrines and
in his day. And Elder Rob
erts's writings and opinions, simmercd
down, amount practically TO the same
thing that Orson Pratt wrote and
preached during his proselyting days.
But the dishonesty of Elder Roberts S
mind is manifest in the matter above
set forth. And that he was stood up
in the Tabernacle and made to disowu
the things that he himself thoroughly
believes, and to try to convince his |
hearers that things had been repudlated
which had not been rcpudlated, is one
Of the marvels among the many oil like |
cha racter TO be found constantly among !
Mormon speakers and writers
DROTECiTTON FOR SAFETY