Further Offices (than Church)
Listening to "Further Offices" hosted by Art Bulla on #BlogTalkRadio http://tobtr.com/s/1373147
Original Air Date: November 21, 2010
Further Offices
2 For behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, that ye have received a commandment for a law unto my church, through him whom I have appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations from my hand (Joseph Smith). 3 And this ye shall know assuredly--that there is none other appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations until he be taken, IF HE ABIDE IN ME.(D&C 43:2-3) The Church did not. "Since the council (of Fifty) was considered as the nucleus of God's future government on earth, it was also termed the "Council of the Kingdom." This name may have originated from an unpublished revelation to Joseph Smith on the subject of the political aspects of the Kingdom of God. By this name, it stated, ye shall be known: "The Kingdom of God and His laws, with the keys and powers thereof and judgment in the hands of his servants." When viewed in this light, the term Kingdom of God had a broader meaning than is usually applied to it when it is used to denote the Church of God. Brigham Young explained by first referring to the various organizations that make up the Church and then stating: This is what we are in the habit of calling the Kingdom of God. BUT THERE ARE FURTHER ORGANIZATIONS. The Prophet gave a full and complete organization of this kingdom the spring before he was killed. . . . The Kingdom of God will protect every person, every sect and all people upon the face of the whole earth in their legal rights; I shall not tell you the names of the members of this kingdom, neither shall I read to you its constitution, but the constitution was given by revelation. The day will come when it will be organized in strength and power. This council alluded to is the municipal department of the Kingdom of God set up on the earth, from which all law emanates, for the rule, government and control of all nations, kingdoms, and tongues and people under the whole heavens..." (Hyrum L. Andrus, Joseph Smith and World Government, p.4-5)
From Hyrum L. Andrus' Joseph Smith and World Government, Chapter I:
The Kingdom of God
A MIGHTY vision filled the mind of Joseph Smith, the Mormon Prophet: "I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world," he emphatically declared. "It will not be by sword or gun that this kingdom will roll on; the power of truth is such that all nations will be under the necessity of obeying the gospel."
Joseph Smith did not limit his concept of the Gospel program to the religious sphere of life. To him, it extended into the area of the social, where it pointed out correct doctrine an philosophy relative to such matters as education, recreation, and marriage; it gave to the world a divine system of economics, known as the Law of Consecration and Stewardship; and, finally, it gave promise of a political law that would emanate from the Priesthood, to govern the world in righteousness. So important was the latter program that the Prophet argued that the establishment of Zion's political program "is the only thing that can bring about the 'restitution of all things spoken of by all the holy Prophets since the world was'-'the dispensation of the fulness of times, when God shall gather together all things in one'" In anticipation of this future era, he wrote to Henry Clay: "I long for a day of righteousness, when 'He whose right it is to reign shall judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth'; and I pray God, who hath given our Fathers a promise of a perfect government in the last days, to purify the hearts of the people and hasten the welcome day."
It is an assumption within Mormon thought that Joseph Smith was privileged to lay the foundation of the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times mentioned above, in which the expected restoration of all things must eventually be brought about. By this own reasoning, then, the Prophet would not have completed his mission in life had he confined himself to the realm of the religious-had he not given by revelation the basic political principles and philosophy of the millennial government for which he sought.
On March 11, 1844, Joseph Smith organized a body of men as the nucleus of the new government. During the period of its existence, this political group was referred to by several names. At the time of its organization and immediately thereafter, the Prophet spoke of it as a "Special Council." Later, he termed it the "General Council"; and after his death this appellation was reduced to the "Council."
A popular name used to designate this body of men was the "Council of Fifty." This name is derived from the number of men composing the initial organization during the lifetime of Joseph Smith. George Miller, a prominent bishop in the Church at that time, noted that "up to the number of fifty three" men were given membership in the group. Miller's testimony is partially supported by Brigham Young, who said: "The Council was composed of about fifty members." Benjamin F. Johnson, another member of the group, although not as specific as Miller, later wrote that the Council "at times would exceed fifty in number." It should be noted that available sources nowhere indicate that this body was to be specifically made up of fifty men. There is some evidence that Brigham Young added considerably to its number. This being true, the name Council of Fifty could be somewhat misleading.
Since the council was considered as the nucleus of God's future government on earth, it was also termed the "Council of the Kingdom." This name may have originated from an unpublished revelation to Joseph Smith on the subject of the political aspects of the Kingdom of God. By this name, it stated, ye shall be known: "The Kingdom of God and His laws, with the keys and powers thereof and judgment in the hands of his servants." When viewed in this light, the term Kingdom of God had a broader meaning than is usually applied to it when it is used to denote the Church of God. Brigham Young explained by first referring to the various organizations that make up the Church and then stating:
This is what we are in the habit of calling the Kingdom of God. But there are further organizations. The Prophet gave a full and complete organization of this kingdom the spring before he was killed. . . . The Kingdom of God will protect every person, every sect and all people upon the face of the whole earth in their legal rights; I shall not tell you the names of the members of this kingdom, neither shall I read to you its constitution, but the constitution was given by revelation. The day will come when it will be organized in strength and power.
Another member of this body made a similar explanation. To quote:
This council alluded to is the municipal department of the Kingdom of God set up on the earth, from which all law emanates, for the rule, government and control of all nations, kingdoms, and tongues and people under the whole heavens, but not to control the Priesthood, but to council, deliberate and plan for the general good and upbuilding of the Kingdom of God on the earth.
From the above statements it can be seen that the term Kingdom of God had reference to the complete program to be administered eventually by the powers of the priesthood. That program envisioned the development of both a Church and a State. Said John Taylor:
Was the kingdom that the Prophets talked about, that should be set up in the latter times, going to be a Church? Yes. And a state? Yes, it was going to be both Church and State. . . .
The foundation of the Kingdom of God rests in the priesthood. Joseph Smith explained that the Kingdom of God had been on the earth "whenever there has been a righteous man on earth unto whom God revealed His word and gave power and authority to administer in His name, and where there is a priest of God-a minister who has power and authority from God to administer in the ordinances of the gospel and officiate in the priesthood of God." As the basis of the kingdom of God, the priesthood was considered as having two functionaries to administer its law and carry out its program in the earth. The first of these organizations is the Church. As an instrument of the priesthood, it is dependent upon the priesthood for its power to officiate in the religious sphere of life. The second organizational tool of the priesthood is the Government of God, which functions in the political sphere of society.
As an instrument of the priesthood, the Church was to play an important role in producing the Government of God. Said Brigham Young:
The Church of Jesus Christ will produce this government, and cause it to grow and spread, and it will be a shield round about the Church. And under the influence and power of the Kingdom of God, the Church of God will rest secure and dwell in safety, without taking the trouble of governing and controlling the whole earth. The Kingdom of God will do this, it will control the kingdoms of the world.
Were the Church to fulfil its responsibility in establishing the Government of God all things would then be under the jurisdiction of the priesthood. Said John Taylor on this subject:
When the will of God is done on earth as it is in heaven, the priesthood will be the only legitimate ruling power under the whole heavens; for every other power and influence will be subject to it. When the millennium . . . is introduced all potentates, powers, and authorities-every man, woman, and child will be in subjection to the Kingdom of God; they will be under the power and dominion of the priesthood of God; then the will of God will be done on the earth as it is done in heaven.
Since the Church was to play an important role in establishing the Government of God on the earth, the organization of the Church has been considered as the beginning of the latter organization. Orson Pratt viewed matters in this light, and in 1872 declared:
Forty-two years ago, on the 6th day of April, the Prophet Joseph Smith was commanded by the Lord Almighty to organize the Kingdom of God on the earth for the last time-to set up and make a beginning-to form the nucleus of a Government that never should be destroyed from the earth, or, in other words, that should stand forever. . . . There is now organized on the earth a Government which never will be broken as former Governments have been. This will stand forever. It began very small-only six members were organized in this Government on Tuesday the 6th day of April, 1830. . . .
Brigham Young has already been quoted as stating that the constitution of the Government of God was given to Joseph Smith through revelation. Evidently that revelation clarified the principles upon which the new government was to rest, and how it was to be associated with the Church in the full program of the Kingdom of God. President Young and others referred on more than one occasion to the latter question, stating that the political organ "grows out of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but it is not the Church," The separate nature of the two organizations implied in his statement is amply attested; for instance, it has already been noted that, while the political kingdom had been established for governmental purposes, it was not to control the priesthood.
When the nucleus of the Government of God was first organized by the Prophet, Brigham Young reported that it had as members "several" men who "were not members of the Church." This fact of itself would indicate that the political organ was not to be identical with the Church. That this was right and proper Brigham Young explained:
. . . A man may be a legislator in that body which will issue laws to sustain the inhabitants of the earth in their individual rights and still not belong to the Church of Jesus Christ at all. And further though a man may not even believe in any religion it would be perfectly right, when necessary, to give him the privilege of holding a seat among that body which will make laws to govern all the nations of the earth and control those who make no profession of religion at all; for that body would be governed, controlled and dictated to acknowledge others in those rights which they wish to enjoy themselves.
Among others who understood Joseph Smith's views on this subject and expressed them from time to time was George Q. Cannon, who said:
We are asked, Is the Church of God, and the Kingdom of God the same organization? and we are informed that some of the brethren hold that they are separate.
This is the correct view to take. The Kingdom of God is a separate organization from the Church of God. There may be men acting as officers in the Kingdom of God who will not be members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. On this point the Prophet Joseph gave particular instructions before his death, and gave an example, which he asked the younger elders who were present to always remember. It was to the effect that men might be chosen to officiate as members of the Kingdom of God who had no standing in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Kingdom of God when established will not be for the protection of the Church of Jesus Christ alone, but for the protection of all men, whatever their religious views or opinions may be. Under its rule, no one will be permitted to overstep the proper bounds or to interfere with the rights of others.
This concept of separation of Church and State was also emphasized when, following the death of Joseph Smith, George Miller and Alex Badlam wanted "to call together the Council of Fifty and organize the Church." In reply, "They were told that the Council of Fifty was not a Church organization, but was composed of members irrespective of their religious faith and organized for the purpose of consulting on the best manner of obtaining redress of grievances from our enemies, and to devise means to find and locate in some place where we could live in peace; and that the organization of the Church belonged to the Priesthood alone."
It should further be noted that, even though Joseph Smith and the Quorum of the Twelve were members of the General Council, those who were members, said Benjamin F. Johnson, did not include "all of the constituted authorities of the Church, for Presidents [Sidney] Rigdon, [William] Law or [William] Marks, the High Council, or presidents of quorums were not members of that council." The Council of Fifty was not merely a body of the leading authorities in the Church. Rigdon and Law were Joseph's Counselors in the First Presidency of the Church, and Marks was then president of the Nauvoo Stake.
According to Benjamin F. Johnson, the Prophet's "last charge" to the Quorum of the Twelve was made at a meeting of the General Council. At that time Joseph Smith indicated that the Church and the political kingdom were two separate bodies. Said Johnson of the Prophet:
. . . He stood before that association of his select friends, including all of the Twelve, and with great feeling and animation he graphically reviewed his life of persecution, labor and sacrifice for the church and the Kingdom of God, both of which he declared were now organized upon the earth, the burden of which had become too great for him longer to carry, that he was weary and tired with the weight he had so long borne, and he then said, with great vehemence: "And in the name of the Lord, I now shake from my shoulders the responsibility of bearing off the Kingdom of God to all the world, and here and now I place that responsibility, with all the keys, powers and privileges pertaining thereto, upon the shoulders of you the Twelve Apostles, in connection with this council; and if you will accept this, to do it, God shall bless you mightily and shall open your way; and if you do it not you will be damned.
Though the Church and the political government were held to be separate bodies, the fact that the latter was considered as growing "out of the Church" implies some sort of union between the two organizations. On the subject a prominent Mormon scholar wrote that "the Church must be regarded as part" of the political organization; "an essential indeed, for it is the germ from which the kingdom is to be developed, and the very heart of the organization." John Taylor also explained:
We talk sometimes about the church of God, and why? We talk about the Kingdom of God [i.e., the envisioned system with worldwide political authority], and why? Because, before there could be a kingdom of God, there must be a church of God, and hence the first principles of the gospel were needed to be preached to all nations, as they were formerly when the Lord Jesus Christ and others made their appearance on the earth. And why so? Because of the impossibility of introducing the law of God among a people who would not be subject to and be guided by the spirit of revelation. Hence the world have generally made great mistakes upon these points. They have started various projects to try to unite and cement the people together without God; but they could not do it. Fourierism, communism-another branch of the same thing-and many other principles of the same kind have been introduced to try and cement the human family together. And then we have had peace societies, based upon the same principles. But all these things have failed, and they will fail, because, however philanthropic, humanitarian, benevolent, or cosmopolitan our ideas, it is impossible to produce a true and correct union without the Spirit of the living God and the Spirit can only be imparted through the ordinances of the gospel. Hence Jesus told his disciples to go and preach the gospel to every creature. . . . It was by this cementing, uniting spirit, that true sympathetic, fraternal relations could be introduced and enjoyed.
A study of Mormon thought in light of the above church and state relationship indicates that several factors were held to be important in bringing about the development of the political kingdom, as it was to grow out of the Church. First, the Church was not accepted as merely a religious body, but as a society with a socio-religious and economic program similar to the ancient Zion of Enoch where the people were said to be of "one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness," and had "no poor among them." To develop such a system of brotherhood and union, the cementing faith and uniting powers of the gospel were held to be important. Individual faith sufficiently strong to release the power of God's Spirit into the lives of the people was accepted as the initial step in developing the necessary union. Repentance was necessary to reconcile the individual to God, that he might be at peace with his neighbor. Baptism, with its holy covenant to serve both God and men, was important to dedicate the people to brotherhood. And, finally, reception of spiritual light and truth through the gift of the Holy Ghost, as bestowed upon each individual through the powers of a living priesthood, was accepted as a vital key in developing each person toward a knowledge of all truth and the realization of full and mature brotherly union.
Thus united through the assistance of religious and spiritual forces, the society of Zion was expected to develop the new social and economic principles revealed through Joseph Smith. The successful achievement of this task may be said to be the second preliminary factor in developing the Church to the point where the political program of the kingdom might be developed. In achieving this goal, the society of Zion was expected to become "independent of every incumbrance beneath the celestial kingdom, by bonds and covenants of mutual friendship and mutual love." A revelation to Joseph Smith stated the need for Zion to attain such a condition of independence, that she might properly fulfil her political responsibilities. After speaking of the economic principles of the system, it said:
Behold, this is the preparation wherewith I prepare you, and the foundation, and the ensample which I give unto you whereby you may accomplish the commandments which are given you;
That through my providence, notwithstanding the tribulation which shall descend upon you, that the church may stand independent above all other creatures beneath the celestial world;
That you may come up unto the crown prepared for you and be made rulers over many kingdoms.
Thus united as a body of free men, the society of Zion was to become a standard of correct social organization. Centered at the focal point of interest in the newly developed world order, the Saints could, by the force of example, command the attention of all men, urging them to emulate the example that Zion set. Mormon literature is filled with statements to the effect that one day the wise and learned of the earth will come to Zion to learn of her ways that they might walk in her paths. One of the crying needs of the world is for such a standard as the Prophet envisioned to be developed fully and recognized by all men for its ability to cope with the social and economic problems of society without turning to the state and socializing its functions. The use of Zion's covenant system as such a standard must be recognized as a paramount feature in Joseph Smith's concept of a new world government based upon an unsocialized theory of government.
Finally, by developing the society of Zion as above indicated, there would be a stable and united body capable of initiating the political program of the kingdom on a theocratic basis. God could then dictate, through revelation, the affairs of His kingdom on earth. Only by a sufficient number of people acquiring a knowledge of the necessary spiritual truths and applying them in their lives could the Government of God be established upon the proper basis, under a true relationship with God.
The Latter-day Saint concept of a theocratic government was said to have little relationship to many theocracies of the past. Brigham Young explained as follows:
What do the world understand theocracy to be? A poor, rotten government of man, that would say, without the shadow of provocation or just cause, "Cut that man's head off; put that one on the racl, arrest another, and retain him in unlawful and unjust dress while you plunder his property and pollute his wife and daughters; massacre here and there." The Lord Almighty does nothing of that kind, neither does any man who is controlled by his Spirit.
The theocratic government organized by Joseph Smith was held to be a perfect instrument. Said Orson Pratt of the newly organized political organ:
There is a nucleus of a government, formed since that of the United States, which is perfect in its nature. It is perfect, having emanated from a Being who is perfect.
Brigham Young shared such views. Zion's theocratic government, he stated, "is the only true form of government on the earth." As a theocracy, the Government of God, he explained on another occasion, "will be controlled upon the same basis, in part, as that of the Government of the United States; and it will govern and protect in their rights the various classes of men, irrespective of their different modes of worship."
The implied relationship between the concept of government under the Constitution of the United States and the concept of government under the Kingdom of God is a matter of interest and importance. In the field of political thought, the Latter-day Saints maintain that the United States Constitution was divinely inspired; and, as John Taylor once stated, it "was the entering wedge for the introduction of a new era, and in it were introduced principles for the birth and organization of a new world." The establishment of the Constitution of the United States was also looked upon as a preparatory development necessary to the later establishment of the Kingdom of God. Without it there could not have existed "sufficient liberty of conscience," said Brigham Young, to establish the Saints and develop the latter program.
But the Constitution of the United States was looked upon as more than a preparatory development, guaranteeing the necessary freedom to establish God's kingdom on the earth. It was, said Orson Pratt, "a stepping stone to a form of government infinitely greater and more perfect-a government founded upon Divine laws, and officers appointed by the God of heaven." On another occasion, Pratt combined the ideas in the above statements in the following explanation:
. . . The Lord had a hand in framing [the] . . . Constitution. Why did not the Lord, at the time, introduce a perfect government-a theocracy? It was simply because the people were not prepared for it. . . . They were far from being prepared for the government of God, which is a government of union.
But will the government of the United States continue forever? No, it is not sufficiently perfect; and, notwithstanding it has been sanctioned by the Lord at a time when it was suited to the circumstances of the people, yet the day will come . . . when the United States government, and all others, will be uprooted, and the kingdoms of this world will be united in one, and the kingdom of our God will govern the whole earth. . . .
The nucleus of such a government is formed, and its laws have emanated from the throne of God. . . .
It was for this purpose, then, that a republic was organized upon this continent, to prepare the way for a kingdom which shall have dominion over all the earth to the ends thereof.
It was with the concept of the Kingdom of God and its program of peace in mind that Pratt exclaimed:
O America! how art thou favored above all lands! O happy Republic, how exalted above all nations! Within thee is the Kingdom of God! Thou wast chosen to prepare its way! It must increase, but thou shalt decrease! Thou didst lift up thy voice and cry to the nations, Behold here are liberty and freedom for all; but that which came after thee shall thoroughly purge the floor, and restore everlasting peace and liberty to the whole earth.
The new government was not to be founded upon principles adverse to the Constitution of the United States. Instead, it was to be founded in those principles and further perfect the means by which they might be extended to the peoples of the earth. Said Orson Pratt:
. . . All the great and glorious principles incorporated in this great republic will be incorporated in the kingdom of God and be preserved. I mean the principles of civil and religious liberty, especially, and all other good principles that are contained in that great instrument framed by our forefathers will be incorporated in the kingdom of God; and only in this manner can all that is good in this and in foreign governments be preserved.
It was Joseph Smith's contention, Benjamin F. Johnson reported, that all people would one day "learn war no more" by "adopting the God-given Constitution of the United States as a Paladium [sic] of Liberty and Equal Rights." "When the day comes in which the Kingdom of God will bear rule," Brigham Young also explained, "the flag of the United States will proudly flutter unsullied on the flag staff of liberty and equal rights, without a spot to sully its fair surface; the glorious flag our fathers have bequeathed to us will then be unfurled to the breeze by those who have power to hoist it aloft and defend its sanctity."
To establish the Kingdom of God in its political power, the Constitution of the United States was to be brought into association with Zion's socio-religious and economic society in such a way as to grant the appropriate priesthood councils in Zion the power to nominate men to political office, followed by a vote of approval or disapproval by the people over whom the officers were to have political jurisdiction. John Taylor explained:
The proper mode of government is this-God first speaks, and then the people have their action. It is for them to say whether they will have his dictation or not. They are free: they are independent under God. The government of God is not a species of priestcraft . . . where one man dictates and everybody obeys without having a voice in it. We have our voice and agency, and act with the most perfect freedom; still we believe there is a correct order-some wisdom and knowledge somewhere that is superior to ours: that wisdom and knowledge proceeds from God through the medium of the Holy Priesthood. We be-lieve that no man or set of men, of their own wisdom and by their own talents, are capable of governing the human family aright.
These are our opinions. We believe that it requires the same wisdom that governs the planetary system, that produces seed time and harvest, day and night, that organized our system, and that implanted intelligence in finite man-that it needs the same intelligence to govern men and promote their happiness upon the earth that it does to control and keep in order the heavenly bodies; and we believe that that cannot be found with man independently.
Since the Church, with its priesthood authority, was the body out of which the political organ was to be developed, and, since the priesthood was thereafter to have power to name men to political office, with the consent of the people, the Government of God could be said to grow out of the Church. But following the appointment of men to political office there was then to be a constitutional separation of powers between Zion and the political government. In this way the Church and the State were to be separate bodies; for example, in our present Federal government the judicial branch, in a sense, grows out of the executive branch, in that its officers have their origin as judges in the nomination of the President. But following such nominations and a vote of consent by the Senate, federal judges become separate and independent officers, subject only to the covenants and by-laws which govern their actions in office. So also with Zion and her political government: the latter was pictured as growing out of the former body, but thereafter there was to be a constitutional separation of powers between the two organizations. In other respects, government as upheld by the Kingdom of God would very much resemble government under the United States Constitution. Said Brigham Young:
But few, if any, understand what a theocratic government is. In every sense of the word, it is a republican government, and differs but little in form from our National, State, and Territorial Governments; but its subjects will recognize the will and dictation of the Almighty. . . .
The Constitution and laws of the United States resemble a theocracy more closely than any government now on earth. . . . Even now the form of the Government of the United States differs but little from the Kingdom of God.
A republican form of government reposes authority in the people who give their consent to be governed by representatives acting in their behalf and according to their best interests. The Government of God was to be founded upon this basic principle of republicanism. In addition, it was to recognize the ruling power of God. But since Mormon philosophy positively asserts that it is God's work and glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man, even the authority of God was to serve the best interests of the people. Thus, the Prophet's concept of theocracy, while adding a desirable element of righteous authority, was held to be republican in spirit. Brigham Young spoke of the new government as the only true government on earth, "that possesses all the true principles of republicanism." Since the Government of God was to be largely based upon the voice of the people, President Young also spoke of it as a "true democratic theocracy." In short, he declared that if the new government were set up the people would "find it a Republican Democratic Government."
The development of the Government of God on a theocratic basis would naturally eliminate the role of political parties as instruments for installing men in government office. Orson Pratt made this point clear in declaring, "There will be no party politicians." On another occasion he spoke of carrying out the principles of the Constitution, "according to the order of union and oneness which prevails among the people of God."
Excluding the church and state relationship conceived by Joseph Smith, however, it should be noted that such a concept of government as he held is similar to, if not almost identical with, the ideal sought by the Founding Fathers of the United States Constitution. They, too, envisioned a stable and united government that excluded political parties from affairs of government. The Fathers did not intend that political parties should be associated with government under the Constitution. In fact, they purposely devised the machinery of government to minimize the influence of parties in government operations. Thus, Madison introduced the argument of his famous Federalist, No. 10, where he discussed the subject, by stating: "Among the numerous advantages promised by a well-constructed Union, none deserve to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction [i.e., parties]."
The goal sought by the Founding Fathers was to establish a stable government that, again to quote the Father of the Constitution, could protect "the diversity in the faculties of man" (that is, man's freedom and his right to different interests) as its first object, regulate the "various and interfering interests" arising from such freedom and diversity by allowing "justice . . . to hold the balance between them," and finally, do all this without government itself being controlled or unduly influenced by a given party or group of parties. "To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of . . . faction," he declared, "and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed." A person, Madison concluded, "will not fail . . . to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it [i.e., party spirit and its influence]."
The Founding Fathers, said E. E. Schattschneider, held "a legalistic concept of government incompatible with a satisfactory system of party government." By so organizing government as they did, he continued, "it was hoped that the parties would lose and exhaust themselves in futile attempts to fight their way through the labyrinthine framework of the government, much as an attacking army is expected to spend itself against the defensive works of a fortress." This was to hold true in the case of majority as well as minority parties and interests.
"The Fathers," as Harry Elmer Barnes pointed out, "are conventionally held . . . to have been above party." But while some have considered them politically naive for espousing the ideal of government uncontrolled by parties, a deeper insight into their intentions reveals a view of political economy that lesser minds have failed to grasp. The truth of the situation is that "later generations have departed from what seems to have been their original intentions."
To achieve a stable government that could secure the rights of the individual, administer justice, and preserve itself against the influence of self-interested and aspiring groups, several devices were to be operative. First, "a republic . . . promises the cure for which we are seeking," said Madison, while discussing the subject of how best to control the element of faction in a free society without "destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence." The "delegation of government," he explained, would "refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial consideration." In this process of refining and enlarging the public views, a given representative must weigh the validity of the claims and interests of each element he represents with impartial justice.
The vertical separation of power between the federal, state, and local levels of government also aids in controlling the influence of political parties. Then, too, by organizing several states into a Federal Union, Madison argued, "you take in a greater variety of parties and interests," making "it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens" or the ability "to act in unison with each other" in achieving such ambitions. The separation of power horizontally between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches on both the state and the federal levels of government also provides a means of preserving government against the power of organized party interest. An organized party might gain control of one branch of government, but seldom all three branches on both the state and federal levels. In short, "in the extent and proper structure of the Union," as Madison concluded, "we behold a republican remedy for the disease most incident to republican government."
In light of the ideal of government espoused by the Fathers, party spirit was to be abhorred. "Let me . . . warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party, generally," President Washington emphatically declared in his Farewell Address. He then continued:
This Spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its roots in the strongest passions of the human mind.-It exists under different shapes in all Governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy. . . .
In governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged.-From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose,-and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it.-A fire not to be quenched; it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into flame, instead of warming, it should consume.
It was held that the Kingdom of God would restore the true concept of government as envisioned by the Founding Fathers in 1787. George Q. Cannon, for example, argued that in that future day when the Latter-day Saints uphold "Constitutional government upon this continent," they will restore "the government to its primitive conditions, when all the political parties shall have fallen into chaos." Thus, Joseph Smith and his associates came closer to being the true successors of the Founding Fathers, in their original inspired concept of the Constitution, than any other body of American thinkers. It was that concept, fully developed in its guarantee of human freedom, that the Prophet held would one day be developed by the priesthood as God's program of government for the world.
According to Joseph Smith, the Constitution was devised by God from the beginning to be a document of universal application. God did not intend it to be limited in its power and guarantee of liberty to America. The idea expressed in two revelation is that the Constitution "belongs to all mankind "that every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency" which I [the Lord] have given unto him." George Q. Cannon expressed this view while discusses Joseph Smith's thought on the subject. To quote:
When he [God] establishes his kingdom it will protect all in their equal rights; I as a Latter-day Saint, will not have power to trample on my fellow-man who may not be orthodox in my opinion, because I am a Latter-day Saint; nor will my fellow-man to whom I am heterodox, have the power to trample upon me. Does not that look right? That is the kind of kingdom we have to contend for; that is the kind of kingdom we have to establish, and it is already provided for in the Constitution given unto us by God, and through the glorious labors of the fathers who laid the foundation of this government, who were inspired and raised [up] by our Almighty Father for this express purpose. there is no liberty that a human being can desire, neither is there a right that can be exercised properly, that we do not have under the Constitution of our land. It needs no amendment about it; it is broad enough, if interpreted in its true spirit, to cover the individual, the continent, and the entire globe and furnish freedom for all.
It was held that in some future day the Kingdom of God would have two great centers of world government the City of Zion on our Western continent, and Jerusalem. Of the governmental position of the former center, Orson Pratt wrote:
The law for the government of all nations will go forth from Zion, the same as the laws for the government of the United States now go forth from Washington. Zion will be the seat of government, and her officers will be far more respected, and have far more influence, than those of any government upon the earth; all nations will yield the most perfect obedience to their commands and counsels.
Jerusalem, though not so prominent in matters of government, was also to be established as a center of political law for the eastern hemisphere. At a "great council of God in Jerusalem," Heber C. Kimball quoted the Prophet as stating, there would "be a uniting of the two divisions of God's government."
As a world government based upon the United States Constitution, the government of God was to be a federal system that would include all nations of the earth, allowing each nationality and race the right to possess its own customs, religions, and cultural patterns. Each component unit, however, would be required to maintain a republican form of government. There would be power in the central organ to enforce this provision.
Organizationally, there will be as "many officers and branches to that government" as there were in the government of the United States, Brigham Young explained. "There will be such helps, governments, etc., as the people require in their several capacities and circumstances." The government of God would have "every office, law and ordinance necessary for the managing of those who are unruly, or who transgress its laws, and to govern those who desire to do right, but can not quite walk to the line." Said President Young on another occasion:
We shall be under the necessity of having courts organized, unless all are in the Lord and all walk in his way; if that were the case, I do not know that we should want any sheriff, marshal, constables, magistrates, jurors, Judges or governors, because the word of the Lord would govern and control every person; but until that time arrives we shall want officers, so that we will be prepared to reckon with the transgressors, and we shall have transgressors in building this kingdom, for it will be some time you before all are in the Lord.
The Saints had their own views on such particulars as the length of one's tenure in office and the remuneration he should receive. On the matter of tenure, Brigham young declared that a clause limiting a president to two terms should not be found in the Constitution of the United States, nor in the constitution made by this on any other people." Instead emphasis should be placed upon finding the best man for the responsibility. "And when we get a President that answers our wishes to occupy the executive change he said "There let him sit to the day of his death and pray that he may live as long as Methuselah" The same rule should hold true for other officers. Whenever we have good officers strive to retain them, and to fill up vacancies with good there he none who would let the nation sink for a can of oysters and a lewd woman." "Such is the Kingdom of God, in comparison" to established practices under the current system, he pointed out, while discussing the subject at another time. "When the best man is elected President, let him select the best men he can find for his counsellors or cabinet; and let all the officers within the province of the Chief Magistrate to appoint be selected upon the same principle to officiate wisely in different parts of the nation."
When it came to the renumeration of officers in government, Joseph Smith set a fair example that emphasizes the basic Latter-day Saint view on the subject. It is reported that in serving as a councilman for the city of Nauvoo from February, 1841 to the middle of May, 1843 he received less than twenty-five dollars in all. Even while serving as mayor his income from all sources hardly gave him enough to live comfortably. Dedication to service was to be the ruling criterion. Excessive wages, it was argued, open the way to demagogy. Said Brigham Young on the correct policy to follow:
Let the people see to it that they get righteous men to be their leaders, who will labour with their hands and administer to their own necessities, sit in judgment, legislate, and govern in righteousness; and officers that are filled with peace; and see to it that every man that goes forth among the people as a travelling officer is full of the fear of the Lord, and would rather do right at a sacrifice than do wrong for a reward.
What would be the result, if this course was adopted by the people of the United States? It would destroy the golden prospects of those who were seeking for gain alone, and men would be sought for, in the nation, state, or territory, who were for the people, and would seek earnestly for their welfare, benefit and salvation. We want men to rule the nation who care more for and love better the nation's welfare than gold and silver, fame, or popularity.
Brigham Young was speaking from experience when he dealt with this subject. The theocratic procedure of Zion's system better facilitates carrying out such a policy as he suggested. Conscientious men very often abhor the strife and strain of party politics, and thus avoid seeking for political office.
To establish the Kingdom of God in its political authority would require a major concession on the part of non-Latter-day Saints: that of granting the appropriate priesthood councils in Zion the power to name men to governmental office, with the consent of the people. On the other hand, there were certain benefits the non-Latter-day Saint could expect to receive from accepting such a proposition. First, it would make possible the development of a world government in such a way as to promote brotherly union and avoid many of the difficulties associated wit
Joseph Smith did not limit his concept of the Gospel program to the religious sphere of life. To him, it extended into the area of the social, where it pointed out correct doctrine an philosophy relative to such matters as education, recreation, and marriage; it gave to the world a divine system of economics, known as the Law of Consecration and Stewardship; and, finally, it gave promise of a political law that would emanate from the Priesthood, to govern the world in righteousness. So important was the latter program that the Prophet argued that the establishment of Zion's political program "is the only thing that can bring about the 'restitution of all things spoken of by all the holy Prophets since the world was'-'the dispensation of the fulness of times, when God shall gather together all things in one'" In anticipation of this future era, he wrote to Henry Clay: "I long for a day of righteousness, when 'He whose right it is to reign shall judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth'; and I pray God, who hath given our Fathers a promise of a perfect government in the last days, to purify the hearts of the people and hasten the welcome day."
It is an assumption within Mormon thought that Joseph Smith was privileged to lay the foundation of the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times mentioned above, in which the expected restoration of all things must eventually be brought about. By this own reasoning, then, the Prophet would not have completed his mission in life had he confined himself to the realm of the religious-had he not given by revelation the basic political principles and philosophy of the millennial government for which he sought.
On March 11, 1844, Joseph Smith organized a body of men as the nucleus of the new government. During the period of its existence, this political group was referred to by several names. At the time of its organization and immediately thereafter, the Prophet spoke of it as a "Special Council." Later, he termed it the "General Council"; and after his death this appellation was reduced to the "Council."
A popular name used to designate this body of men was the "Council of Fifty." This name is derived from the number of men composing the initial organization during the lifetime of Joseph Smith. George Miller, a prominent bishop in the Church at that time, noted that "up to the number of fifty three" men were given membership in the group. Miller's testimony is partially supported by Brigham Young, who said: "The Council was composed of about fifty members." Benjamin F. Johnson, another member of the group, although not as specific as Miller, later wrote that the Council "at times would exceed fifty in number." It should be noted that available sources nowhere indicate that this body was to be specifically made up of fifty men. There is some evidence that Brigham Young added considerably to its number. This being true, the name Council of Fifty could be somewhat misleading.
Since the council was considered as the nucleus of God's future government on earth, it was also termed the "Council of the Kingdom." This name may have originated from an unpublished revelation to Joseph Smith on the subject of the political aspects of the Kingdom of God. By this name, it stated, ye shall be known: "The Kingdom of God and His laws, with the keys and powers thereof and judgment in the hands of his servants." When viewed in this light, the term Kingdom of God had a broader meaning than is usually applied to it when it is used to denote the Church of God. Brigham Young explained by first referring to the various organizations that make up the Church and then stating:
This is what we are in the habit of calling the Kingdom of God. But there are further organizations. The Prophet gave a full and complete organization of this kingdom the spring before he was killed. . . . The Kingdom of God will protect every person, every sect and all people upon the face of the whole earth in their legal rights; I shall not tell you the names of the members of this kingdom, neither shall I read to you its constitution, but the constitution was given by revelation. The day will come when it will be organized in strength and power.
Another member of this body made a similar explanation. To quote:
This council alluded to is the municipal department of the Kingdom of God set up on the earth, from which all law emanates, for the rule, government and control of all nations, kingdoms, and tongues and people under the whole heavens, but not to control the Priesthood, but to council, deliberate and plan for the general good and upbuilding of the Kingdom of God on the earth.
From the above statements it can be seen that the term Kingdom of God had reference to the complete program to be administered eventually by the powers of the priesthood. That program envisioned the development of both a Church and a State. Said John Taylor:
Was the kingdom that the Prophets talked about, that should be set up in the latter times, going to be a Church? Yes. And a state? Yes, it was going to be both Church and State. . . .
The foundation of the Kingdom of God rests in the priesthood. Joseph Smith explained that the Kingdom of God had been on the earth "whenever there has been a righteous man on earth unto whom God revealed His word and gave power and authority to administer in His name, and where there is a priest of God-a minister who has power and authority from God to administer in the ordinances of the gospel and officiate in the priesthood of God." As the basis of the kingdom of God, the priesthood was considered as having two functionaries to administer its law and carry out its program in the earth. The first of these organizations is the Church. As an instrument of the priesthood, it is dependent upon the priesthood for its power to officiate in the religious sphere of life. The second organizational tool of the priesthood is the Government of God, which functions in the political sphere of society.
As an instrument of the priesthood, the Church was to play an important role in producing the Government of God. Said Brigham Young:
The Church of Jesus Christ will produce this government, and cause it to grow and spread, and it will be a shield round about the Church. And under the influence and power of the Kingdom of God, the Church of God will rest secure and dwell in safety, without taking the trouble of governing and controlling the whole earth. The Kingdom of God will do this, it will control the kingdoms of the world.
Were the Church to fulfil its responsibility in establishing the Government of God all things would then be under the jurisdiction of the priesthood. Said John Taylor on this subject:
When the will of God is done on earth as it is in heaven, the priesthood will be the only legitimate ruling power under the whole heavens; for every other power and influence will be subject to it. When the millennium . . . is introduced all potentates, powers, and authorities-every man, woman, and child will be in subjection to the Kingdom of God; they will be under the power and dominion of the priesthood of God; then the will of God will be done on the earth as it is done in heaven.
Since the Church was to play an important role in establishing the Government of God on the earth, the organization of the Church has been considered as the beginning of the latter organization. Orson Pratt viewed matters in this light, and in 1872 declared:
Forty-two years ago, on the 6th day of April, the Prophet Joseph Smith was commanded by the Lord Almighty to organize the Kingdom of God on the earth for the last time-to set up and make a beginning-to form the nucleus of a Government that never should be destroyed from the earth, or, in other words, that should stand forever. . . . There is now organized on the earth a Government which never will be broken as former Governments have been. This will stand forever. It began very small-only six members were organized in this Government on Tuesday the 6th day of April, 1830. . . .
Brigham Young has already been quoted as stating that the constitution of the Government of God was given to Joseph Smith through revelation. Evidently that revelation clarified the principles upon which the new government was to rest, and how it was to be associated with the Church in the full program of the Kingdom of God. President Young and others referred on more than one occasion to the latter question, stating that the political organ "grows out of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but it is not the Church," The separate nature of the two organizations implied in his statement is amply attested; for instance, it has already been noted that, while the political kingdom had been established for governmental purposes, it was not to control the priesthood.
When the nucleus of the Government of God was first organized by the Prophet, Brigham Young reported that it had as members "several" men who "were not members of the Church." This fact of itself would indicate that the political organ was not to be identical with the Church. That this was right and proper Brigham Young explained:
. . . A man may be a legislator in that body which will issue laws to sustain the inhabitants of the earth in their individual rights and still not belong to the Church of Jesus Christ at all. And further though a man may not even believe in any religion it would be perfectly right, when necessary, to give him the privilege of holding a seat among that body which will make laws to govern all the nations of the earth and control those who make no profession of religion at all; for that body would be governed, controlled and dictated to acknowledge others in those rights which they wish to enjoy themselves.
Among others who understood Joseph Smith's views on this subject and expressed them from time to time was George Q. Cannon, who said:
We are asked, Is the Church of God, and the Kingdom of God the same organization? and we are informed that some of the brethren hold that they are separate.
This is the correct view to take. The Kingdom of God is a separate organization from the Church of God. There may be men acting as officers in the Kingdom of God who will not be members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. On this point the Prophet Joseph gave particular instructions before his death, and gave an example, which he asked the younger elders who were present to always remember. It was to the effect that men might be chosen to officiate as members of the Kingdom of God who had no standing in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Kingdom of God when established will not be for the protection of the Church of Jesus Christ alone, but for the protection of all men, whatever their religious views or opinions may be. Under its rule, no one will be permitted to overstep the proper bounds or to interfere with the rights of others.
This concept of separation of Church and State was also emphasized when, following the death of Joseph Smith, George Miller and Alex Badlam wanted "to call together the Council of Fifty and organize the Church." In reply, "They were told that the Council of Fifty was not a Church organization, but was composed of members irrespective of their religious faith and organized for the purpose of consulting on the best manner of obtaining redress of grievances from our enemies, and to devise means to find and locate in some place where we could live in peace; and that the organization of the Church belonged to the Priesthood alone."
It should further be noted that, even though Joseph Smith and the Quorum of the Twelve were members of the General Council, those who were members, said Benjamin F. Johnson, did not include "all of the constituted authorities of the Church, for Presidents [Sidney] Rigdon, [William] Law or [William] Marks, the High Council, or presidents of quorums were not members of that council." The Council of Fifty was not merely a body of the leading authorities in the Church. Rigdon and Law were Joseph's Counselors in the First Presidency of the Church, and Marks was then president of the Nauvoo Stake.
According to Benjamin F. Johnson, the Prophet's "last charge" to the Quorum of the Twelve was made at a meeting of the General Council. At that time Joseph Smith indicated that the Church and the political kingdom were two separate bodies. Said Johnson of the Prophet:
. . . He stood before that association of his select friends, including all of the Twelve, and with great feeling and animation he graphically reviewed his life of persecution, labor and sacrifice for the church and the Kingdom of God, both of which he declared were now organized upon the earth, the burden of which had become too great for him longer to carry, that he was weary and tired with the weight he had so long borne, and he then said, with great vehemence: "And in the name of the Lord, I now shake from my shoulders the responsibility of bearing off the Kingdom of God to all the world, and here and now I place that responsibility, with all the keys, powers and privileges pertaining thereto, upon the shoulders of you the Twelve Apostles, in connection with this council; and if you will accept this, to do it, God shall bless you mightily and shall open your way; and if you do it not you will be damned.
Though the Church and the political government were held to be separate bodies, the fact that the latter was considered as growing "out of the Church" implies some sort of union between the two organizations. On the subject a prominent Mormon scholar wrote that "the Church must be regarded as part" of the political organization; "an essential indeed, for it is the germ from which the kingdom is to be developed, and the very heart of the organization." John Taylor also explained:
We talk sometimes about the church of God, and why? We talk about the Kingdom of God [i.e., the envisioned system with worldwide political authority], and why? Because, before there could be a kingdom of God, there must be a church of God, and hence the first principles of the gospel were needed to be preached to all nations, as they were formerly when the Lord Jesus Christ and others made their appearance on the earth. And why so? Because of the impossibility of introducing the law of God among a people who would not be subject to and be guided by the spirit of revelation. Hence the world have generally made great mistakes upon these points. They have started various projects to try to unite and cement the people together without God; but they could not do it. Fourierism, communism-another branch of the same thing-and many other principles of the same kind have been introduced to try and cement the human family together. And then we have had peace societies, based upon the same principles. But all these things have failed, and they will fail, because, however philanthropic, humanitarian, benevolent, or cosmopolitan our ideas, it is impossible to produce a true and correct union without the Spirit of the living God and the Spirit can only be imparted through the ordinances of the gospel. Hence Jesus told his disciples to go and preach the gospel to every creature. . . . It was by this cementing, uniting spirit, that true sympathetic, fraternal relations could be introduced and enjoyed.
A study of Mormon thought in light of the above church and state relationship indicates that several factors were held to be important in bringing about the development of the political kingdom, as it was to grow out of the Church. First, the Church was not accepted as merely a religious body, but as a society with a socio-religious and economic program similar to the ancient Zion of Enoch where the people were said to be of "one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness," and had "no poor among them." To develop such a system of brotherhood and union, the cementing faith and uniting powers of the gospel were held to be important. Individual faith sufficiently strong to release the power of God's Spirit into the lives of the people was accepted as the initial step in developing the necessary union. Repentance was necessary to reconcile the individual to God, that he might be at peace with his neighbor. Baptism, with its holy covenant to serve both God and men, was important to dedicate the people to brotherhood. And, finally, reception of spiritual light and truth through the gift of the Holy Ghost, as bestowed upon each individual through the powers of a living priesthood, was accepted as a vital key in developing each person toward a knowledge of all truth and the realization of full and mature brotherly union.
Thus united through the assistance of religious and spiritual forces, the society of Zion was expected to develop the new social and economic principles revealed through Joseph Smith. The successful achievement of this task may be said to be the second preliminary factor in developing the Church to the point where the political program of the kingdom might be developed. In achieving this goal, the society of Zion was expected to become "independent of every incumbrance beneath the celestial kingdom, by bonds and covenants of mutual friendship and mutual love." A revelation to Joseph Smith stated the need for Zion to attain such a condition of independence, that she might properly fulfil her political responsibilities. After speaking of the economic principles of the system, it said:
Behold, this is the preparation wherewith I prepare you, and the foundation, and the ensample which I give unto you whereby you may accomplish the commandments which are given you;
That through my providence, notwithstanding the tribulation which shall descend upon you, that the church may stand independent above all other creatures beneath the celestial world;
That you may come up unto the crown prepared for you and be made rulers over many kingdoms.
Thus united as a body of free men, the society of Zion was to become a standard of correct social organization. Centered at the focal point of interest in the newly developed world order, the Saints could, by the force of example, command the attention of all men, urging them to emulate the example that Zion set. Mormon literature is filled with statements to the effect that one day the wise and learned of the earth will come to Zion to learn of her ways that they might walk in her paths. One of the crying needs of the world is for such a standard as the Prophet envisioned to be developed fully and recognized by all men for its ability to cope with the social and economic problems of society without turning to the state and socializing its functions. The use of Zion's covenant system as such a standard must be recognized as a paramount feature in Joseph Smith's concept of a new world government based upon an unsocialized theory of government.
Finally, by developing the society of Zion as above indicated, there would be a stable and united body capable of initiating the political program of the kingdom on a theocratic basis. God could then dictate, through revelation, the affairs of His kingdom on earth. Only by a sufficient number of people acquiring a knowledge of the necessary spiritual truths and applying them in their lives could the Government of God be established upon the proper basis, under a true relationship with God.
The Latter-day Saint concept of a theocratic government was said to have little relationship to many theocracies of the past. Brigham Young explained as follows:
What do the world understand theocracy to be? A poor, rotten government of man, that would say, without the shadow of provocation or just cause, "Cut that man's head off; put that one on the racl, arrest another, and retain him in unlawful and unjust dress while you plunder his property and pollute his wife and daughters; massacre here and there." The Lord Almighty does nothing of that kind, neither does any man who is controlled by his Spirit.
The theocratic government organized by Joseph Smith was held to be a perfect instrument. Said Orson Pratt of the newly organized political organ:
There is a nucleus of a government, formed since that of the United States, which is perfect in its nature. It is perfect, having emanated from a Being who is perfect.
Brigham Young shared such views. Zion's theocratic government, he stated, "is the only true form of government on the earth." As a theocracy, the Government of God, he explained on another occasion, "will be controlled upon the same basis, in part, as that of the Government of the United States; and it will govern and protect in their rights the various classes of men, irrespective of their different modes of worship."
The implied relationship between the concept of government under the Constitution of the United States and the concept of government under the Kingdom of God is a matter of interest and importance. In the field of political thought, the Latter-day Saints maintain that the United States Constitution was divinely inspired; and, as John Taylor once stated, it "was the entering wedge for the introduction of a new era, and in it were introduced principles for the birth and organization of a new world." The establishment of the Constitution of the United States was also looked upon as a preparatory development necessary to the later establishment of the Kingdom of God. Without it there could not have existed "sufficient liberty of conscience," said Brigham Young, to establish the Saints and develop the latter program.
But the Constitution of the United States was looked upon as more than a preparatory development, guaranteeing the necessary freedom to establish God's kingdom on the earth. It was, said Orson Pratt, "a stepping stone to a form of government infinitely greater and more perfect-a government founded upon Divine laws, and officers appointed by the God of heaven." On another occasion, Pratt combined the ideas in the above statements in the following explanation:
. . . The Lord had a hand in framing [the] . . . Constitution. Why did not the Lord, at the time, introduce a perfect government-a theocracy? It was simply because the people were not prepared for it. . . . They were far from being prepared for the government of God, which is a government of union.
But will the government of the United States continue forever? No, it is not sufficiently perfect; and, notwithstanding it has been sanctioned by the Lord at a time when it was suited to the circumstances of the people, yet the day will come . . . when the United States government, and all others, will be uprooted, and the kingdoms of this world will be united in one, and the kingdom of our God will govern the whole earth. . . .
The nucleus of such a government is formed, and its laws have emanated from the throne of God. . . .
It was for this purpose, then, that a republic was organized upon this continent, to prepare the way for a kingdom which shall have dominion over all the earth to the ends thereof.
It was with the concept of the Kingdom of God and its program of peace in mind that Pratt exclaimed:
O America! how art thou favored above all lands! O happy Republic, how exalted above all nations! Within thee is the Kingdom of God! Thou wast chosen to prepare its way! It must increase, but thou shalt decrease! Thou didst lift up thy voice and cry to the nations, Behold here are liberty and freedom for all; but that which came after thee shall thoroughly purge the floor, and restore everlasting peace and liberty to the whole earth.
The new government was not to be founded upon principles adverse to the Constitution of the United States. Instead, it was to be founded in those principles and further perfect the means by which they might be extended to the peoples of the earth. Said Orson Pratt:
. . . All the great and glorious principles incorporated in this great republic will be incorporated in the kingdom of God and be preserved. I mean the principles of civil and religious liberty, especially, and all other good principles that are contained in that great instrument framed by our forefathers will be incorporated in the kingdom of God; and only in this manner can all that is good in this and in foreign governments be preserved.
It was Joseph Smith's contention, Benjamin F. Johnson reported, that all people would one day "learn war no more" by "adopting the God-given Constitution of the United States as a Paladium [sic] of Liberty and Equal Rights." "When the day comes in which the Kingdom of God will bear rule," Brigham Young also explained, "the flag of the United States will proudly flutter unsullied on the flag staff of liberty and equal rights, without a spot to sully its fair surface; the glorious flag our fathers have bequeathed to us will then be unfurled to the breeze by those who have power to hoist it aloft and defend its sanctity."
To establish the Kingdom of God in its political power, the Constitution of the United States was to be brought into association with Zion's socio-religious and economic society in such a way as to grant the appropriate priesthood councils in Zion the power to nominate men to political office, followed by a vote of approval or disapproval by the people over whom the officers were to have political jurisdiction. John Taylor explained:
The proper mode of government is this-God first speaks, and then the people have their action. It is for them to say whether they will have his dictation or not. They are free: they are independent under God. The government of God is not a species of priestcraft . . . where one man dictates and everybody obeys without having a voice in it. We have our voice and agency, and act with the most perfect freedom; still we believe there is a correct order-some wisdom and knowledge somewhere that is superior to ours: that wisdom and knowledge proceeds from God through the medium of the Holy Priesthood. We be-lieve that no man or set of men, of their own wisdom and by their own talents, are capable of governing the human family aright.
These are our opinions. We believe that it requires the same wisdom that governs the planetary system, that produces seed time and harvest, day and night, that organized our system, and that implanted intelligence in finite man-that it needs the same intelligence to govern men and promote their happiness upon the earth that it does to control and keep in order the heavenly bodies; and we believe that that cannot be found with man independently.
Since the Church, with its priesthood authority, was the body out of which the political organ was to be developed, and, since the priesthood was thereafter to have power to name men to political office, with the consent of the people, the Government of God could be said to grow out of the Church. But following the appointment of men to political office there was then to be a constitutional separation of powers between Zion and the political government. In this way the Church and the State were to be separate bodies; for example, in our present Federal government the judicial branch, in a sense, grows out of the executive branch, in that its officers have their origin as judges in the nomination of the President. But following such nominations and a vote of consent by the Senate, federal judges become separate and independent officers, subject only to the covenants and by-laws which govern their actions in office. So also with Zion and her political government: the latter was pictured as growing out of the former body, but thereafter there was to be a constitutional separation of powers between the two organizations. In other respects, government as upheld by the Kingdom of God would very much resemble government under the United States Constitution. Said Brigham Young:
But few, if any, understand what a theocratic government is. In every sense of the word, it is a republican government, and differs but little in form from our National, State, and Territorial Governments; but its subjects will recognize the will and dictation of the Almighty. . . .
The Constitution and laws of the United States resemble a theocracy more closely than any government now on earth. . . . Even now the form of the Government of the United States differs but little from the Kingdom of God.
A republican form of government reposes authority in the people who give their consent to be governed by representatives acting in their behalf and according to their best interests. The Government of God was to be founded upon this basic principle of republicanism. In addition, it was to recognize the ruling power of God. But since Mormon philosophy positively asserts that it is God's work and glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man, even the authority of God was to serve the best interests of the people. Thus, the Prophet's concept of theocracy, while adding a desirable element of righteous authority, was held to be republican in spirit. Brigham Young spoke of the new government as the only true government on earth, "that possesses all the true principles of republicanism." Since the Government of God was to be largely based upon the voice of the people, President Young also spoke of it as a "true democratic theocracy." In short, he declared that if the new government were set up the people would "find it a Republican Democratic Government."
The development of the Government of God on a theocratic basis would naturally eliminate the role of political parties as instruments for installing men in government office. Orson Pratt made this point clear in declaring, "There will be no party politicians." On another occasion he spoke of carrying out the principles of the Constitution, "according to the order of union and oneness which prevails among the people of God."
Excluding the church and state relationship conceived by Joseph Smith, however, it should be noted that such a concept of government as he held is similar to, if not almost identical with, the ideal sought by the Founding Fathers of the United States Constitution. They, too, envisioned a stable and united government that excluded political parties from affairs of government. The Fathers did not intend that political parties should be associated with government under the Constitution. In fact, they purposely devised the machinery of government to minimize the influence of parties in government operations. Thus, Madison introduced the argument of his famous Federalist, No. 10, where he discussed the subject, by stating: "Among the numerous advantages promised by a well-constructed Union, none deserve to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction [i.e., parties]."
The goal sought by the Founding Fathers was to establish a stable government that, again to quote the Father of the Constitution, could protect "the diversity in the faculties of man" (that is, man's freedom and his right to different interests) as its first object, regulate the "various and interfering interests" arising from such freedom and diversity by allowing "justice . . . to hold the balance between them," and finally, do all this without government itself being controlled or unduly influenced by a given party or group of parties. "To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of . . . faction," he declared, "and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed." A person, Madison concluded, "will not fail . . . to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it [i.e., party spirit and its influence]."
The Founding Fathers, said E. E. Schattschneider, held "a legalistic concept of government incompatible with a satisfactory system of party government." By so organizing government as they did, he continued, "it was hoped that the parties would lose and exhaust themselves in futile attempts to fight their way through the labyrinthine framework of the government, much as an attacking army is expected to spend itself against the defensive works of a fortress." This was to hold true in the case of majority as well as minority parties and interests.
"The Fathers," as Harry Elmer Barnes pointed out, "are conventionally held . . . to have been above party." But while some have considered them politically naive for espousing the ideal of government uncontrolled by parties, a deeper insight into their intentions reveals a view of political economy that lesser minds have failed to grasp. The truth of the situation is that "later generations have departed from what seems to have been their original intentions."
To achieve a stable government that could secure the rights of the individual, administer justice, and preserve itself against the influence of self-interested and aspiring groups, several devices were to be operative. First, "a republic . . . promises the cure for which we are seeking," said Madison, while discussing the subject of how best to control the element of faction in a free society without "destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence." The "delegation of government," he explained, would "refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial consideration." In this process of refining and enlarging the public views, a given representative must weigh the validity of the claims and interests of each element he represents with impartial justice.
The vertical separation of power between the federal, state, and local levels of government also aids in controlling the influence of political parties. Then, too, by organizing several states into a Federal Union, Madison argued, "you take in a greater variety of parties and interests," making "it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens" or the ability "to act in unison with each other" in achieving such ambitions. The separation of power horizontally between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches on both the state and the federal levels of government also provides a means of preserving government against the power of organized party interest. An organized party might gain control of one branch of government, but seldom all three branches on both the state and federal levels. In short, "in the extent and proper structure of the Union," as Madison concluded, "we behold a republican remedy for the disease most incident to republican government."
In light of the ideal of government espoused by the Fathers, party spirit was to be abhorred. "Let me . . . warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party, generally," President Washington emphatically declared in his Farewell Address. He then continued:
This Spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its roots in the strongest passions of the human mind.-It exists under different shapes in all Governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy. . . .
In governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged.-From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose,-and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it.-A fire not to be quenched; it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into flame, instead of warming, it should consume.
It was held that the Kingdom of God would restore the true concept of government as envisioned by the Founding Fathers in 1787. George Q. Cannon, for example, argued that in that future day when the Latter-day Saints uphold "Constitutional government upon this continent," they will restore "the government to its primitive conditions, when all the political parties shall have fallen into chaos." Thus, Joseph Smith and his associates came closer to being the true successors of the Founding Fathers, in their original inspired concept of the Constitution, than any other body of American thinkers. It was that concept, fully developed in its guarantee of human freedom, that the Prophet held would one day be developed by the priesthood as God's program of government for the world.
According to Joseph Smith, the Constitution was devised by God from the beginning to be a document of universal application. God did not intend it to be limited in its power and guarantee of liberty to America. The idea expressed in two revelation is that the Constitution "belongs to all mankind "that every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency" which I [the Lord] have given unto him." George Q. Cannon expressed this view while discusses Joseph Smith's thought on the subject. To quote:
When he [God] establishes his kingdom it will protect all in their equal rights; I as a Latter-day Saint, will not have power to trample on my fellow-man who may not be orthodox in my opinion, because I am a Latter-day Saint; nor will my fellow-man to whom I am heterodox, have the power to trample upon me. Does not that look right? That is the kind of kingdom we have to contend for; that is the kind of kingdom we have to establish, and it is already provided for in the Constitution given unto us by God, and through the glorious labors of the fathers who laid the foundation of this government, who were inspired and raised [up] by our Almighty Father for this express purpose. there is no liberty that a human being can desire, neither is there a right that can be exercised properly, that we do not have under the Constitution of our land. It needs no amendment about it; it is broad enough, if interpreted in its true spirit, to cover the individual, the continent, and the entire globe and furnish freedom for all.
It was held that in some future day the Kingdom of God would have two great centers of world government the City of Zion on our Western continent, and Jerusalem. Of the governmental position of the former center, Orson Pratt wrote:
The law for the government of all nations will go forth from Zion, the same as the laws for the government of the United States now go forth from Washington. Zion will be the seat of government, and her officers will be far more respected, and have far more influence, than those of any government upon the earth; all nations will yield the most perfect obedience to their commands and counsels.
Jerusalem, though not so prominent in matters of government, was also to be established as a center of political law for the eastern hemisphere. At a "great council of God in Jerusalem," Heber C. Kimball quoted the Prophet as stating, there would "be a uniting of the two divisions of God's government."
As a world government based upon the United States Constitution, the government of God was to be a federal system that would include all nations of the earth, allowing each nationality and race the right to possess its own customs, religions, and cultural patterns. Each component unit, however, would be required to maintain a republican form of government. There would be power in the central organ to enforce this provision.
Organizationally, there will be as "many officers and branches to that government" as there were in the government of the United States, Brigham Young explained. "There will be such helps, governments, etc., as the people require in their several capacities and circumstances." The government of God would have "every office, law and ordinance necessary for the managing of those who are unruly, or who transgress its laws, and to govern those who desire to do right, but can not quite walk to the line." Said President Young on another occasion:
We shall be under the necessity of having courts organized, unless all are in the Lord and all walk in his way; if that were the case, I do not know that we should want any sheriff, marshal, constables, magistrates, jurors, Judges or governors, because the word of the Lord would govern and control every person; but until that time arrives we shall want officers, so that we will be prepared to reckon with the transgressors, and we shall have transgressors in building this kingdom, for it will be some time you before all are in the Lord.
The Saints had their own views on such particulars as the length of one's tenure in office and the remuneration he should receive. On the matter of tenure, Brigham young declared that a clause limiting a president to two terms should not be found in the Constitution of the United States, nor in the constitution made by this on any other people." Instead emphasis should be placed upon finding the best man for the responsibility. "And when we get a President that answers our wishes to occupy the executive change he said "There let him sit to the day of his death and pray that he may live as long as Methuselah" The same rule should hold true for other officers. Whenever we have good officers strive to retain them, and to fill up vacancies with good there he none who would let the nation sink for a can of oysters and a lewd woman." "Such is the Kingdom of God, in comparison" to established practices under the current system, he pointed out, while discussing the subject at another time. "When the best man is elected President, let him select the best men he can find for his counsellors or cabinet; and let all the officers within the province of the Chief Magistrate to appoint be selected upon the same principle to officiate wisely in different parts of the nation."
When it came to the renumeration of officers in government, Joseph Smith set a fair example that emphasizes the basic Latter-day Saint view on the subject. It is reported that in serving as a councilman for the city of Nauvoo from February, 1841 to the middle of May, 1843 he received less than twenty-five dollars in all. Even while serving as mayor his income from all sources hardly gave him enough to live comfortably. Dedication to service was to be the ruling criterion. Excessive wages, it was argued, open the way to demagogy. Said Brigham Young on the correct policy to follow:
Let the people see to it that they get righteous men to be their leaders, who will labour with their hands and administer to their own necessities, sit in judgment, legislate, and govern in righteousness; and officers that are filled with peace; and see to it that every man that goes forth among the people as a travelling officer is full of the fear of the Lord, and would rather do right at a sacrifice than do wrong for a reward.
What would be the result, if this course was adopted by the people of the United States? It would destroy the golden prospects of those who were seeking for gain alone, and men would be sought for, in the nation, state, or territory, who were for the people, and would seek earnestly for their welfare, benefit and salvation. We want men to rule the nation who care more for and love better the nation's welfare than gold and silver, fame, or popularity.
Brigham Young was speaking from experience when he dealt with this subject. The theocratic procedure of Zion's system better facilitates carrying out such a policy as he suggested. Conscientious men very often abhor the strife and strain of party politics, and thus avoid seeking for political office.
To establish the Kingdom of God in its political authority would require a major concession on the part of non-Latter-day Saints: that of granting the appropriate priesthood councils in Zion the power to name men to governmental office, with the consent of the people. On the other hand, there were certain benefits the non-Latter-day Saint could expect to receive from accepting such a proposition. First, it would make possible the development of a world government in such a way as to promote brotherly union and avoid many of the difficulties associated wit
posted by Unknown at
9:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home