Born, Bred and Involved Therein-The Effeminate Mind

 

• The Revelations of Jesus Christ: http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?isbn=0-595-28287-3 
• "But we ask, does it remain for a people who never had faith enough to call down one scrap of revelation from heaven, and for all they have now are indebted to the faith of another people...does it remain for them to say how much God has spoken and how much He has not spoken?"  Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Two 1834-37 Pg.60
•  Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Six 1843-44 Pg.365
     When a man goes about prophesying, and commands men to obey his teachings, he must either be a true or false prophet. 
•  Our website: http://www.artbulla.com
•  "All men are liars who say they are of the true Church without the revelations of Jesus Christ and the Priesthood of Melchizedek, which is after the order of the Son of God."  Joseph Smith; TPJS p. 376
• "He that can mark the power of Omnipotence, inscribed upon the heavens, can also see God's own handwriting in the sacred volume: and he who reads it oftenest will like it best, and he who is acquainted with it, will know the hand wherever he can see it...." (T.P.J.S., p. 56)

·         10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. (New Testament | Galatians 1:10 - 12)

---

From: Art Bulla [mailto:art@artbulla.com]
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 11:15 AM
To: 'Zionredemption@Yahoogroups.com'
Subject: Born, Bred and Involved Therein-The Effeminate Mind

"Born Bred and Involved Therein-The Effeminate Mind" hosted by Art Bulla on #BlogTalkRadio http://tobtr.com/s/1290495

 

 25 I (Solomon) applied mine heart to know, and to search, and to seek out wisdom, and the reason [of things], and to know the wickedness of folly, even of foolishness [and] madness:
 26 And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart [is] snares and nets, [and] her hands [as] bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her.

   (Eccl  7:25-26)

 

 It would have been impossible that the Christian nations, with the Bible in their hands, could have remained to this day servants of servants, and slaves to sin, continually deceiving and being deceived, even by the devil, like Eve of old; had they not been possessed of the effeminate mind like Eve.  We are placed by our laws (Roman Civil Code) under the law of the woman. 

 

72% of the nations of the earth practice polygamy.  Only the European and US ("horn more stout than its fellows", Dan 7) do not."  Except for parenthetical element, Bob Guccioni.

Original Air Date: October 14, 2010

Born Bred and Involved Therein-The Effeminate Mind

Roman Law dictates 8 husbands for one female. The law of God, eight females for one male. We have lost the original excellency and dignity of the masculine mine because of this inbreeding, causing an imbecility of mind, form whence arises sin. The Christian nations (matriarchal) with the Bible in their hands, could not have been the servants and slaves of sin, had not they possessed the effeminate mind like Eve (Adam was not deceived, saith the Lord). The law: 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. (1 Tim 2:12-14) " For the private families are nunneries of mind: and the evils of a bad government here cannot be calculated. Many sons in their teens are roving about the land like the wild ass's colt, unbridled: these oft times become associates and partners, with pick-pockets, thieves and robbers. Many husbands, are induced by the unnatural and intolerable nature of female tyranny and usurpation, to even abandon their families to the mercy of a heartless world. Such unnatural crimes never did exist under the ancient law of God. All law or government of a woman over a man, except it be the law of kindness, is an usurpation of power destructive of the order, peace, and well being of society." Joseph, my Joseph. "Again: Rom. 7. 2. For a woman that hath a husband is bound by the law to her husband, as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. But in no place in the holy book do we read that a man is bound by the law of his wife, as long as his wife liveth. Such an idea and law would be, and is subversive of all righteous government; and it [113] disorganizes the whole system of truth. A man cannot be lawfully placed under the law of his wife, for he is the head." Joseph, my Joseph!

                                CHAPTER XVIII
                            ON THE LAW OF MARRIAGE

 "Yet once again I shake not the earth only, but also heaven.  And this word yet once again signifies the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made; that those things which cannot be shaken may remain."  (Heb. 12:26, 27, Hag. 2:6,7)

 I now enter upon an important matter which I would gladly have omitted; did not the restitution of the law of God require that we should clearly understand it.  If we were doomed of necessity to continue involved in sin, it could not be a reproach; whatever else the consequences might be.  But sin is a reproach to any people.  A reproach to our understanding.  Yet we practice it.  This proves that an astonishing frailty, exists in our minds.  But our sin is not the cause of this frailty, for it is manifest that this frailty is the cause of our sin.  Whence then arises this frailty, or imbecility of mind?  I answer, that I have applied myself to seek and search out wisdom; and the reason of things:  and to know the cause of madness and foolishness.  And I find that more bitter than death is the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and whose hands are bonds (Solomon).  And thus are we involved in Adam's chains, and all the penalties and pains, of slavery's growth.  But what should we understand by Adam's chains?  Answer, [112] Adam was enslaved by the woman, not by the serpent in the first instance, as we are taught by the word; Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.  She gave unto man and he did eat.  Therefore said Paul, I suffer not a woman to teach or to usurp authority over the man, but to be in subjection.  Her law and government over a man, we are thus taught by the Holy Spirit, is an usurpation of power.  But Adam was enslaved by the woman, and so are we.  It is the nature of an unnatural and unlawful bondage to degrade the mind, bred and born and involved therein.  Hence we have lost the original dignity, nobleness, and excellency of the masculine mind; and have, as it respects the sex of our minds become effeminate.  That such is the character of our mind, is evident from the fact that we are constantly deceived by the devil like Eve of old.  It would have been impossible that the Christian nations, with the Bible in their hands, could have remained to this day servants of servants, and slaves to sin, continually deceiving and being deceived, even by the devil, like Eve of old; had they not been possessed of the effeminate mind like Eve.  We are placed by our laws under the law of the woman.  The word of God, saith, for the wife is bound by the law, as long as her husband liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will (take notice not to "marry" but to "be married" to whom she will), only in the Lord (I Cor. 7:39).  This text shows what is meant by her being under the law of her husband; that is, she is not at liberty to be married to another, while she has a lawful husband yet living.  And if a man is bound to his wife in the same manner, then is he under her the law of his wife.  Again: Rom. 7. 2.  For a woman that hath a husband is bound by the law to her husband, as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.  But in no place in the holy book do we read that a man is bound by the law of his wife, as long as his wife liveth.  Such an idea and law would be, and is subversive of all righteous government; and it [113] disorganizes the whole system of truth.  A man cannot be lawfully placed under the law of his wife, for he is the head.  The seat of the mind by which beings are governed is in the head.  The government of the wife is therefore placed in the husband by law of God; for he is the head.  I suffer not a woman, saith the Lord, to teach, or to usurp authority over the man, but to be in subjection.  How then can a man be righteously placed under the law of a woman.  The word of God here expressly declares that such authority is an usurpation of power.  Neither can the woman herself, nor the human family prosper, when the woman takes a station for which she was not created.  For Adam was first formed, then Eve, the man is therefore nearer the fountain than the woman; as Christ is before the man.  Therefore as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in all things (Eph. 5:24).  And it is written, let the wife see that she reverence her husband for God is not the author of confusion, but of peace.  A man ought not to be brought under the law of a woman in any wise.  But by our law he is in ten thousand instances completely enslaved to an imperious woman whereby confusion and not peace rages in society at its very root.  And the principle that performs this wicked work, is recognized, and admitted by all, and therefore operates upon all, and disorganizes the universal mind of man throughout Christendom; it being begotten and bred in this disorganizing ruin.  The evil consequences resulting from the imperfection of our laws upon this subject, are many and destructive to this whole nation, and as Satan gained the ascendancy over man, by the submission of the man to the woman; so he must be expelled by exalting man, to his original authority and dignity, and by forming our laws exactly according to the divine pattern; or reign forever.  This only can restore order, good family government, and peace.  Multitudes of families are now in confusion, and wretchedly governed.  This is a great evil.

[114] For the private families are nunneries of mind:  and the evils of a bad government here cannot be calculated.  Many sons in their teens are roving about the land like the wild ass's colt, unbridled: these oft times become associates and partners, with pick-pockets, thieves and robbers.  Many husbands, are induced by the unnatural and intolerable nature of female tyranny and usurpation, to even abandon their families to the mercy of a heartless world.  Such unnatural crimes never did exist under the ancient law of God.  All law or government of a woman over a man, except it be the law of kindness, is an usurpation of power destructive of the order, peace, and well being of society.  These evils are indeed the most ruinous in their results, of any that exist among us, and cannot be remedied by our laws.  But it is obvious that some effectual power should exist to annihilate the possibility of such a prolific ruin, at the very fountain-head of human life.  A recognition and common consent, to the existence of the cause of those untold evils, operating on and in our minds from infancy; is such an unnatural shackle to the dignity and original excellency of the mind of man; that although we may personally some of us be happily married; yet the obnoxious principle bears upon the whole body of manly intellect forever.  This ruinous, disorganizing, debasing principle cannot be eradicated but by the strong arm of the law.  Our ladies have long possessed a power, which the very nature of things, the nature of women, and the law of God utterly forbid; it must and does produce misery, vanity, confusion, and sorrow both to them and us.  You have placed the husband under the law of the wife as long as the wife lives; and at the same time placed the wife under the law of the husband as long as the husband lives! what an absurdity! what an attempt to an impossibility!! what a confusion!  There is no head here, or there is a double headed monster, with two different set of brains that pull different ways!  How many such glaring absurdities are found in the prevailing principles of religion and ethics!  As it is written.  They have [115] spoken frauds swearing falsely in making a covenant (that is the marriage covenant).  Thus judgment springeth up as hemlock in the furrows of the field (Hos. 10:4).  Then did the scriptures say, that mystery Babylon was the mother of harlots, and abominations of the earth.  These are the sources of our ruin and misery, and the very root of the poison.  From thence springeth up the poison hemlock in society.  This is the seed.

 There is a great evil that lies in our law of divorcement.  This law in our country is imperfect in principle.  That it is imperfect is evident from the changes it is frequently undergoing and from the fact, that it is now different in different states.  How can it be that a divine law should be imperfect and changeable?  Does not this prove at once my countrymen, and countrywomen, that you are not married, neither are you divorced according to the law of God?  We must return in this particular to the standard, to the law of God which is a perfect law upon this important subject.  Who I ask has a right to make a law of marriage but God? much less to alter or change it.  The marriage law is admitted by all to be a divine law.  It is therefore spiritual in its nature, as indeed are all the laws of God, who is himself a spirit, and therefore obligatory on the spirit or mind as well as on the body.  Let us now examine the law of Christ upon this matter (Matt. 5:32).  But I say unto you that whosoever shall put away his wife saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery:  and whosoever marrieth her that is put away committeth adultery.  Here we learn the only true and lawful cause of divorcement.  It is the fornication of the wife against her husband.  But surely this is not what is commonly called fornication literally, or of the body; for this offence a married woman cannot commit.  Fornication, as it is generally understood, is the lewdness of unmarried persons.  But you will say that in this case you have always understood it to mean the same thing as adultery.  But what propriety is there in thus understanding it, when Christ [116] here teaches that the body of a married woman must first be prostituted, or joined to another, or again married, and the former marriage bed defiled before adultery is committed?  Fornication cannot defile the marriage bed.  The nature of marriage is such, that it cannot be perfected until the bodies are actually joined, hence saith Christ, for this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and cleave unto his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh.  Paul perfectly illustrates this thing when he saith, shall I take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot?  God forbid.  Hence it is clear that Christ teaches that the body of a married woman must be first prostituted before adultery is committed; and that a man has a right to put away his wife for fornication only, and she is then free.  But if a man should put away his wife for the crime of adultery; would the man who should afterwards marry her, or the woman either, be less guilty of adultery by that marriage, than if the woman had not been before guilty of that crime?  Can one crime clear a person from the same crime afterwards?  Observe, Christ does not call fornication a crime in a married woman; neither is it a crime in a married woman; but a justifiable cause for putting her away.  It does not read--if a man put away his wife except it be for the crime of adultery.  But it reads, if a man put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication; he thereby causeth her to commit adultery by a second marriage.  Now it is evident the cause why a man might put away his wife, could not be the consequence of putting her away without the existence of that cause.  The one is fornication, the other adultery.  The truth is this; the spiritual law of marriage is binding upon both the body and mind of the wife equally.  The prostitution of the body after marriage constitutes adultery; but the alienation of the mind or affections constitutes fornication in a married woman.  The sexual cohabitation of unmarried persons is not adultery but fornication.  Because although their minds may be united in the closest ties of affections and love; yet she is not given in marriage by the [117] marriage covenant.  Therefore it is fornication.  But after the body and mind are both obligated by the marriage covenant; if the mind of the wife which was equally bound with the body to obey, and to be in subjection in all things, by the spiritual nature of that covenant, becomes alienated from her husband, she commits fornication against her husband; because the mind of the wife was bound to yield obedience and submission to her husband in all things as well as the body, by the spiritual nature of that covenant.  In this latter case the mind of the married woman is prostituted; in the former, that is of the unmarried woman, the body was prostituted; in either case it is fornication and, in the case of the married woman, the only proper and legal cause of divorce.  And the wife can commit fornication against her husband in no other possible way.  For if she prostitutes her body after marriage, it is adultery.  There is a spiritual fornication as well as a spiritual adultery.  When a woman apostatizes in spirit from her husband, she then commits fornication against the spiritual law of marriage, and in no other way can a married woman commit fornication.  If she prostitutes her body, it is adultery.  There is also a spiritual adultery as well as adultery of the body, which may be committed by the man.  If a man looks on another man's wife and lusts after her; he has committed adultery already in his heart.  If he carries his unlawful desires into effect, it is adultery of the body.  Adultery signifies, simply, the act which adulterates, legally, that which defiles the marriage bed, but fornication can be committed without defiling the marriage bed; in fact, it cannot defile the marriage in any case whatever.  They are entirely two different things.  It is impossible to understand this word fornication to mean adultery in this case, because Christ makes the most clear, and positive distinction; and expressly declares that fornication is the only lawful cause for which a man may put away his wife; and that adultery is the consequence of putting her away without the existence of that cause.  You might as well suppose that he meant covetousness, by the [118] word fornication, as to suppose that he meant adultery.  There is not so great a distinction between covetousness and fornication as there is between adultery and fornication.  But a misunderstanding of this important point is the root of this great evil.  Again, adultery by the law of God, was punishable by death.  This would have been a divorce, with a lasting witness.  With our eyes upon the law of God we can by no means admit the common and erroneous understanding of this matter.  Some may have supposed no doubt that Christ, in the case of the woman who was accused before him of adultery, softened, or entirely disannulled this law.  If he entirely disannulled this law, then there is no law against adultery; for he did not enact a substitute; and no gentile legislature, has a right to meddle with the law of Jehovah.  But the above idea is, no doubt, an incorrect understanding of the matter.  We should recollect the office in which Christ acted.  The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ (John 1:17).  Christ did not act in the capacity of a legislator, but an illustrator of the law, a teacher, a servant.  It was incompatible with his mission to even act as a judge in legal matters.  Hence he would condemn no sinner.  It was not consistent that he, who came to redeem sinners from the condemning power of the law with his own blood; should condemn them by the law.  The Jews knew this to be his profession; hence they brought the woman before him, thinking to entrap him in this case.  But with what wisdom he frustrated their design, is manifest.  Stone her, said he, I do not teach the violation of the law; but let him who has not violated, cast the first stone.  None but the Son of God, situated as he was, could have escaped from this trap.  You recollect the young man who applied to him to settle the division of the inheritance between him and his brother.  But Christ refused to interfere in the matter at all.  Said he--Who made me a ruler and judge over you?  Had he proceeded to pass sentence upon sinners, it would have forever put out the candle of the Lord in our minds; and we could not [119] have come to the knowledge of the truth, the glorious redemption that is in Christ Jesus by the means which God hath appointed.  Therefore he condemned no man, neither did he condemn the woman, but told her to go in peace, and sin no more.  If he had repealed the law which stood against her; such an act of which she was accused, would henceforth have been no sin.  But God has ordained a proper power to execute wrath upon the transgressor:  upon him that doeth evil.  And this power the true teacher never crippled in the least.  Did he make void the law in any particular?  No verily.  He established the sacred authority of the law, by submitting to it himself in all things in his own name, and in the name of the everlasting God; the unchangeable Jehovah, the author of the law.  But you have made it void by your ignorance and traditions.  We should recollect that the marriage relation is clearly illustrated to us by the relation that exists between Christ and his Church.  When the church ceases to obey Christ, and to love him, they then commit fornication against him, and thus is the term used when speaking of a bride, throughout the scriptures.  When the church rebels against her lawful husband and master Jesus Christ, and will not submit to him in all things; she then commits fornication against him and this is the plain sense of the matter.  So in the case of the wife, when she refuses to submit cheerfully to her husband in all things; (a broad commandment this, but limited by reason and love only,) when she ceases to reverence her husband, to be submissive to him; trusting in her husband and believing in him, then she commits fornication against the law of marriage, and against him; even as the false church has against Christ.  And in no other possible way can she commit this act, and it then becomes the right of her husband, to write her a bill of divorcement according to the strict letter of the law of God given by Moses:  and to put her away unless she repent.  A right understanding of this matter, and a correct law properly executed, would restore this nation to peace and order; and man to his true dignity, au-[120]thority and government of the earthly creation.  It would soon rectify the domestic circle, and establish a proper head over the families of the earth, and be the means of driving Satan; together with the knowledge and restitution of the whole penal law of God, and the glorious and everlasting gospel; yes, of driving Satan from the human mind and, setting a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more until his time.  And by no means can the heart of the fathers be turned to their children, and the heart of the children be turned to their fathers.  The spirit of God and Christ will then return to deliver us from all evil, and to guide the mind of happy and exalted man into all truth.  Length of days, peace and blessings foretold shall be ours.  Man shall then cease committing fornication against his head and husband Jesus Christ.  For the head of the woman is the man, and the head of the man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God.  It is the disorganization and disobedience of these eternal laws of order, and of God, that has ruined us.  A schism in the body.  Gentlemen, the ladies laugh at your pretended authority.  They, many of them, hiss at the idea of your being the lords of the creation.  Even in the public prints they have styled you the "would--be lords", etc.  Nothing is further from the minds of our wives in general, than the idea of submitting to their husbands in all things, and of reverencing their husbands.  They will boldly ridicule the idea of calling them sincerely in their hearts lords and masters.  But God has positively required this of them (see 1 Pet. 3:6), even as Sarah of old, that excellent woman, having now no parallel on earth, and under existing circumstances our wives can never become the daughters of Sarah in the spirit, or enjoy the inheritance with her in a glorious immortality.  Alas! the ruin is unbounded even to them.  But gentlemen Legislators, it now devolves upon you to open the gates of glory and blessedness; both for time and eternity, to a ruined world.  Alter your imperfect, and wicked law of divorcement; make it according to the law of God, and the ladies will laugh at you no more.  They will [121] soon reform, and nothing in this world will they esteem higher than your affections.  They will respect your authority sincerely; and you will command their kindest attention everywhere.  Then will you love your wives indeed, for they will be worthy.  And then will the health of the daughters of my people be recovered.  Then shall come to pass what is spoken by Isaiah, the prophet (4:2-4).  When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning.  It might be under our circumstances requisite, to compel the husband who thought of putting away his wife, to go before the magistrate, and there affirm the fact, that he was about to divorce his wife; stating under oath the true cause, or causes; such as willful disobedience to his reasonable commands, disrespectful language; a refusal to submit to him in all reasonable things; and make it the duty of the magistrate to record the oath and testimony thus given.  The magistrate exercising no other judgment or supervision in the case, than that the evidence did prove that the true cause, or causes did exist as described by the law, and that no abuse or battery, had been offered by the husband against the wife; and that persuasion had been used kindly and gently, and space given her to repent, and she repented not.  This would be precisely the law of Christ on the subject, and in essence the very way he hath proceeded with his own rebellious bride.  Then let the husband write her a bill of divorcement, and put her away, and she may then go, and be married to another man; the bill which should also be a matter of record, signifying a freedom from her former husband.  Thus does the law of God declare, and the explanation given by Christ clearly signifies the same thing.  Because he makes this exception, saying, if a man put away his wife save for the cause of fornication, by an after-marriage she commits adultery, and he that marries her committeth adultery.  If the word fornication, here used by Christ, means adultery; and a woman is put [122] away for that crime; it would follow that she is thereby free, and that by an after-marriage she would not commit adultery; neither would the man that married her commit adultery.  But if she is put away innocently, without committing adultery; then an after-marriage is adultery.  Thus it is necessary, according to such a definition of the world fornication, that the woman should commit adultery in the first place; in order to protect her from that crime by an after-marriage.  This is absurd for any rational being to believe.  That Christ did not mean adultery by the word fornication is therefore absolutely decided, beyond the possibility of error, for the following irrefutable reasons, if no other did exist. 1st--Because it is impossible that the crime of adultery committed by a wife, should be the means of exonerating her from the same offence afterwards.  Because the crime of adultery was, by the law of God, punished with death, and with no other penalty; and Christ has declared that he in no case made void the law of God, although the truth which came by Christ is that he has redeemed the spirits of men from the condemning power of the law, with his own blood; as we have before abundantly proven; glory and honor be to his name, yet the natural earthly man is under the law and liable to its penalties in the flesh; and by right ought so to be.  These are great hailstones of truth that cannot be resisted:  beating with destructive violence upon the very foundation of mystery Babylon; and I am persuaded as we advance in the investigation of these things, that the storm will thicken.  But you may inquire if the husband becomes alienated towards his wife, while she remains sincerely attached to him; has he not a right to put her away?  No, by no means.  He shall not drive his affectionate and faithful wife from him, while she remains pure in heart and sincerely attached to him.  This is that putting away which the Lord hates, which he hath forbidden, and in which he has not set the example.  This was the principal reason why the disciples, being bred Jews, thought it was not good to marry.  Moses, for the hardness of their [123] hearts, suffered them to do this, for some fancied uncleanness, or personal dislike on the part of the husband (See Deut. 24:1).  But from the beginning it was not so, and there is a legal reason, which is that a man shall not take advantage of his own wrong.  But more especially the cruelty of the act forbids it.  But if a woman be alienated in her heart, the case is different.  There is then a serious reason why she must be put away.  Children begotten and born of an alienated woman, are born of fornication in the spirit or mind.  This is a great injury to the minds of such children.  It injures their intellectual powers and disposition of mind.  Hence we have often observed that children born of young women in an unmarried state, the production of an illicit love, are often the most bright and active, and possessed of greater natural gifts than many other children.  God, who knows the nature of his own work, has therefore forbidden the propagating our species form an alienated woman.  But in the case of the affectionate girl, saith Paul, there is no sin, let them marry, and so saith the law of God expressly.  But a bastard, that is, a child born of fornication, or of an alienated woman, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation.  Here we are taught that the injury is so great as to disqualify them from becoming saints to the tenth generation!  What do you think of this, my countrymen?  How many bastards have we in these states completely disqualified from entering into the congregation of the Lord, to the tenth generation?  It is evident that minds or souls are propagated by natural generation as well as bodies.  No marvel that wise men are so rare in Christendom.  And that they have read the scriptures for ages, without understanding the plainest facts.  And have consequently constituted so many jarring sects, from the same authority, all in confusion like the builders of Babel.  The woman is the producer, and while she remains pure, truly attached in spirit to her husband, her children are pure, and born in honor, but not otherwise.  An idea from this root is alluded to by Paul, where he saith--The hus-[124]band is sanctified by the believing wife; and the wife is sanctified by the believing husband, or it is fornication.  She must be pleased to live with him, as saith the apostle, else he must put her away.  But there is a sanctifying power in the belief and knowledge of Christ taught in this book; which is indeed the balm of Gilead to the children of suffering humanity, and if it be not received by this nation at this time, wo, wo be to them.  Cannot a man put away his wife for the crime of adultery?  Answer--this crime was punished by the law of God with death, it is therefore absurd to talk of divorce in such a case.  There is no act that can be named under heaven for which a man can lawfully put away his wife, save for the cause of fornication.  But if the husband commit fornication, shall not the wife be entitled to a bill against him?  Impossible.  Did Christ say a woman shall not put away her husband saving for the cause of fornication?  Here is a wrong idea in your head; an idea of a woman divorcing her husband.  How can she do this for any offence?  The man is not under the law of marriage to his wife.  But the wife is bound by the law of her husband as long as her husband liveth.  A divorced man is a creature nowhere recognized in the scriptures, or in the law of God.  Where did you ever read in the law of God, or in the holy book, such a false idea? or the least allusion to the righteousness of such a thing on any account whatever?  How can property put away its owner?  The Bible must become as absurd, and as foolish as the gentiles themselves; and its whole phraseology entirely changed to make it read according to our perverted ideas and laws upon this subject.

 The wife is given to her husband, and is bound by the law of her husband, and the husband cannot legally be put under the law of his wife.  Unless you should thereby indeed fulfil literally; as in fact you have done, the saying of the Prophet Isaiah.  Children are the oppressors of my people, and women rule over them.  But if you have understood the true cause of [125] divorcement to be adultery; yet you have not formed your laws upon that principle altogether.  You have been compelled by your experience to deviate from it in several of the states.  What, although a woman is not known to be an adulteress; yet she may be a perfect devil to her husband, train him in the most imperious manner, despise him in her heart, abuse him before his children, drive him like a menial slave where she pleases; and he must tamely submit to the ungodly law of his wife, must hug the serpent to his bosom, and love her as he does his own body!  Impossible, and degrading to the nature of man.  It is altogether unlawful and ruinous to the families of the nation.  The means which your ungodly law puts into the hands of a proud termagant, and alienated woman of torturing her husband, and ruining all his affairs as well as his soul, and his children to the tenth generation, cannot be written on paper.  The evils that this nation now suffers by this erroneous law cannot be enumerated; neither shall we comprehend them until the law of God is restored, and true order and righteous government are established in the land.  Then will we discover the contrast, and not till then.  And the smoke of the torment of those who now bow to the beast, or false government, will ascend up for ever and ever.  That is, it will be discovered by the contrast, and the remembrance thereof remain forever.  Order and government must, and should exist, and God only knows where the power should be placed to effect it.  And he has placed it in the hands of the man.  And how is it possible that it ever should be effected, by placing two powers of equal force, in direct opposition to each other?  This power of the man over the woman does not consist in the right of abuse and corporal punishment, which does violence to the nature of the marriage relation; but in the true law of divorcement established by God himself for the purpose of righteous government and peace.  Neither has any legislature in Christendom the right to alter, amend, or change it in the least; only to appoint the means, and order the execution thereof.  For what God has [126] joined together let not man put asunder.  Bills of divorcement according to our laws of the gentiles are therefore unlawful.  They cannot by their acts separate lawfully what God has joined together; He has forbidden it.  And many are now living in fornication and adultery in the sight of God, for which they, and all those who thus cause the violation of the law of God must give an account to him, who is ready to judge the quick and the dead at his appearing, and in his kingdom.  The ceremony or covenant of marriage should be according to the law of God.  The officiating officer should say to the man:  do you hereby take this woman which you hold by the right hand to be your wedded wife according to the law of God?  He should answer--I do.  Then the officer should say to the woman--Do you hereby agree to become the wedded wife of this man which you hold by the right hand according to the law of God?  She should answer--I do.  Then the officer should say--according to the law of God I pronounce you husband and wife.

 The idea of a woman taking a man to be her husband is not found in the word of God.  But the man marries the woman; and the woman is given in marriage.  She is therefore the property of the husband in marriage.  But the husband is not the property of the wife in any sense of the word.  It is not said even in the holy decalogue when Mount Sinai was all on fire; and trembled at the presence of Jehovah, in that solemn exhibition of the power and glory of God; in the holy decalogue, written with the finger of God himself, it is not said; thou shalt not covet they neighbor's husband, no verily, she has no such property.  But thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, his ox, nor his ass, nor anything thy neighbor possesses.  Here the wife is pronounced the husband's property, as much so as his manservant, his maidservant, his ox, or his horse.  Although she is a different kind of property, very precious, near and dear to him as his own body.  For she is the glory of a man, and if a [127] virtuous woman, her price is above rubies--a different kind of property, and held by a different tenure according to law, being bound to the husband, and she cannot be sold.  By the law a man had a right to buy and sell menservants and maidservants.  Yet if he took a maidservant to be a concubine; she was under the same law to her master as was his wife; but the master then could not sell her, after she had been thus taken:  but he could let her go out free, and she was then a free woman.  But the man is in no sense of the word the property of his wife.  How can property possess its owner?  How can the owner be put under the law and government of his property?  When God made the woman he gave her to the man; but he never gave the man to the woman.  Therefore the woman has no power to divorce the man.  How can property divorce its owner?  Think of these things, my countrymen, seriously.  For Zion shall be redeemed with judgment, and her converts with righteousness; and the destruction of the transgressors and the sinners shall be together; and they that forsake God shall be consumed (Isa. 1:27).  Thus you see, my countrymen, how the old harlot Rome, the old mother of harlots has committed fornication against Christ, and then has taught our wives to commit fornication against us with impunity, and has thus made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication (Rev. 18:3).  This, was in the first place most infamously and wickedly done by the priesthood, by the aid of the old dragon; that is Paganism.  The converts to professed Christianity having been brought up in Paganism, were by that means, that is by the power of their education and the fraud of the priests, deceived, as it is written.  The dragon gave the beast his power, and seat, and great authority (Rev. 13:2).  And they worshipped the dragon who gave power to the beast.  The authors, the Roman priesthood, knew better than this; hence they forbid their own class to marry at all--and under the pretense of sanctity.  O shame!  And their object was to degrade and enslave the world; while they preserved their own dignity and power by not com-[128]ing under the unnatural yoke of the woman.  For they well knew that putting the man under the woman, would degrade his mind and that of his posterity, in many cases wretchedly; and produce imbecility of mind, disorder and confusion therein, like intoxicating wine; and render them finally their passive slaves.  In the meantime, to justify their natural wants, the nunnery was invented, for they chose to degrade and prostitute their bodies rather than their minds.  No doubt the whole scheme of the priests was never carried into full prosecution, which part that failed was the manner of bringing forward successors to perpetuate their noble order.  But, poor souls, they must now bear their degradation forever.  There is no help for them now, as they vainly imagined, by the means of purgatory.  They turned the grace of God into lasciviousness, and their foolish minds became darkened.  But heaven smiles on us, and a glorious day is now opening.  The harvest has come, and in the time of the harvest will the Lord send forth his angels and gather his elect from the four winds; from under the whole heavens; and they shall bear rule over those wicked Priests forever.  In ancient times, under the law of God, the permission of a plurality of wives had a direct tendency to prevent the possibility of fornication in the wife.  For the law of divorcement, and all the law on the subject, sustained the lawful and independent power of the husband over the wife; and his dignity of character was thereby supported.  The interest, the hopes, the prospects of the wife, were all turned in the opposite direction by the law; where indeed her mind always should be.  Her main object was to win and retain the affections of her husband.  And there was no means more successful for this purpose, than to bear him many children, for reasons which will hereafter appear.  Hence wives were so grieved at the idea of barrenness.  The ruinous evil of a woman's being jealous of her husband, could not then exist under the law, and this evil is almost the only source of fornication in a wife.  This fruitful source of evil was not then in existence.  And the wife [129] was perfectly passive, submissive and non-resisting towards her husband.  The existence of fornication in a married woman, that destructive evil, even to her posterity, was then hardly possible.  It was not therefore defined or even mentioned in the law.  It was improper so to do:  as it would have had a tendency to create an unknown evil.

Posted via email from The Redemption of Zion