Mormons’ View of Christopher Columbus

That We May be RedeemedColumbus Appeared in Spirit to Wilford Woodruff

In August 1877, Wilford Woodruff, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, was the first president of the recently dedicated St. George Temple of the LDS Church. He reported that one day, the spirits of the founding fathers of the United States of America and other prominent men, and possibly women as well, appeared to him and asked for temple ordinances to be performed in their behalf:

“The spirits of the dead gathered around me, wanting to know why we did not redeem them. Said they, “You have had the use of the Endowment House for a number of years, and yet nothing has ever been done for us. We laid the foundation of the government you now enjoy, and we never apostatized from it, but we remained true to it and were faithful to God.” . . . They waited on me for two days and two nights. I thought it very singular, that notwithstanding so much work had been done, and yet nothing had been done for them . . . I straightway went into the baptismal font and called upon brother McCallister [J. D. T. McCallister, first counselor in the temple presidency] to baptize me for the signers of the Declaration of Independence, and fifty other eminent men, making one hundred in all, including John Wesley, Columbus, and others.” (Wilford Woodruff, in Journal of Discourses, 19:229. Also see Benson, Ezra Taft This Nation Shall Endure, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1977, 22.)

Columbus–A Man among the Gentiles

Portrait of Christopher ColumbusWhile it is interesting to note is that Christopher Columbus was among these “eminent men,” for Latter-day Saints, this is no surprise given the mention of him in the Book of Mormon. Mormons believe that Christopher Columbus is mentioned, though not by name, in the Book of Mormon when the ancient American prophet Nephi sees in vision the discovery and colonizing of America.

“And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land” (1 Nephi 13:12).

James E. Talmage, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the early 1900s, said this in his seminal book, Jesus the Christ, regarding Columbus:

“Unto Nephi, son of Lehi, was shown the future of his people, including the degeneracy of a branch thereof, afterward known as Lamanites and in modern times as American Indians. The coming of a man from among the Gentiles, across the deep waters, was revealed in such plainness as to positively identify that man with Columbus; and the coming of other Gentiles to this land, out of captivity, is equally explicit. … The establishment of a great Gentile nation on the American continent, the subjugation of the Lamanites or Indians, the war between the newly established nation and Great Britain, or “their mother Gentiles,” and the victorious outcome of that struggle for independence, are set forth with equal clearness in the same chapter.”

Elder Mark E. Petersen, another apostle of the Quorum of the Twelve, also confirmed that that man among the Gentiles is Columbus.

When Columbus went to King Ferdinand, he said, “I came to Your Majesty as the emissary of the Holy Ghost.” When he stood before the clergy of San Esteban, he insisted to them that he must be regarded as a man inspired. Columbus’s own son, Fernando, in a biography of his father, quotes the discoverer as saying on one occasion, “God gave me the faith and afterward the courage so that I was quite willing to undertake the journey.” And the last will and testament of Christopher Columbus includes this expression: “In the name of the Most Holy Trinity, who inspired me with the idea and afterward made perfectly clear to me that I could navigate and go to the Indies from Spain by traversing the ocean westward” (Wasserman, Columbus, pp. 46, 61). Columbus was inspired, and Nephi looked upon him and beheld him coming to the Western Hemisphere” (Elder Mark E. Petersen – The Great Prologue, BYU Speeches, Sep. 29, 1974).

Finally, Gordon B. Hinckley, 15th president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, confirmed this about Christopher Columbus:

“The entire world is celebrating this month the five hundredth anniversary of the discovery of America by Christopher Columbus. Admiral Samuel Eliot Morison, his biographer, says, “This night of October 11–12 [1492] was one big with destiny for the human race, the most momentous ever experienced aboard any ship in any sea.” (Admiral of the Ocean Sea: A Life of Christopher Columbus, Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1942, p. 223.)

“In my private commemoration of this event, I have read and reread one important and prophetic verse from the Book of Mormon [1 Ne. 13:12], and also a very long biography of Christopher Columbus. …We interpret that [verse] to refer to Columbus. It is interesting to note that the Spirit of God wrought upon him. After reading that long biography, a Pulitzer winner of forty years ago, titled Admiral of the Ocean Sea—I have no doubt that Christopher Columbus was a man of faith, as well as a man of indomitable determination” (Building Your Tabernacle – Gordon B. Hinckley – October 1992).

Christopher Columbus Vicariously Ordained a High Priest

President Ezra Taft Benson,  13th president of the Church, said that not only was Christopher Columbus among the eminent men who appeared to Wilford Woodruff, but Columbus was one of only four men ever known to be vicariously ordained to the Melchizedek Priesthood office of High Priest.

“The temple work for the fifty-six signers of the Declaration of Independence and other Founding Fathers has been done. All these appeared to Wilford Woodruff when he was president of the St. George Temple. President George Washington was ordained a high priest at that time. You will also be interested to know that, according to Wilford Woodruff’s journal, John Wesley, Benjamin Franklin, and Christopher Columbus were also ordained high priests at that time. When one casts doubt about the character of these noble sons of God, I believe he or she will have to answer to the God of heaven for it.” (Benson, Ezra Taft This Nation Shall Endure, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1977, 22.)

The Lord Opened My Mind

Now let’s take a closer look at Christopher Columbus’ life and events and the things he is known to have said and done which provide evidence as to why the eminent figure of history has been so honored by Mormon prophets and members. In chapter 1 of Christopher Columbus –  A Man among Gentiles, author Clark B. Hinckley says,

“Columbus himself knew exactly why he was compelled, against all odds, to do what he did. He described his motivation in these remarkable words: ‘With a hand that could be felt, the Lord opened my mind to the fact that it would be possible to sail and he opened my will to desire to accomplish the project . . . This was the fire that burned within me . . . Who can doubt that this fire was not merely mine, but also of the Holy Spirit . . . urging me to press forward?’ (West and Kling, Libro, 105.) The story of Columbus is, among many other things, a story of the fulfillment of prophecy. More than two thousand years passed from the time that simple prophecy was recorded by Nephi in the wilderness of Arabia until the fulfillment of that prophecy with Columbus’s successful voyage of discovery. And without access to Nephi’s prophecy, Columbus himself described its perfect and exact fulfillment.”

Columbus further stated about the years he spent getting approval and financing to make the voyage across the Atlantic: “I spent seven years here in your royal court discussing this subject with the leading persons in all the learned arts, and their conclusion was that all was in vain. That was the end, and they gave it up. But afterwards it all turned out just as our redeemer Jesus Christ had said, and as he had spoken earlier by the mouth of his holy prophets” (West and Kling, Libro, 107).

Near Mutiny Almost Terminated the Voyage before His Discovery

Christopher Columbus on Santa Maria in 1492On August 3, 1492, Columbus departed from Spain with three ships: the Santa María, captained by Columbus, and two smaller vessels, the Pinta and the Niña. Columbus first sailed to the Canary  Islands, where he restocked provisions and made repairs to his ships. The three ships then departed on September 6th for what turned out to be a five-week voyage across the ocean, though they weren’t without drama before they reached their destination on October 12, 1492. This is what Hinckley reports in Chapter 6 of his book:

“On 9 October, when the winds were light and the ships were traveling at only about 2 knots, the Pinzón brothers came aboard the Santa María, where they ‘held a more or less stormy conference with Columbus in his cabin, demanded that the search for land be abandoned, and that advantage be taken of the southerly breeze to start home.’ Morison concludes that Columbus convinced his captains to carry on for three more days and that the captains returned to their respective ships. On the morning of 10 October the wind picked up and the ships sped along at 7 knots. The renewed easterly winds fueled fears among the crew that a return voyage would be impossible, and the men confronted Columbus ‘with one voice’ demanding that he turn back. (Morison, Admiral of the Ocean Sea, 220–21.) This was where the enterprise came the closest to failure.”

“…One can hardly blame the sailors for their concerns nor consider them cowardly for their desire to turn around and head home. They had experienced two false landfalls, they had been in open ocean at least twice as long as any previous expedition, and by every reasonable measure they were beyond where they had been told they would find land. They had passed the 65th meridian and were north of Puerto Rico. If one looks at a map today and blocks out the Americas—unknown to Columbus and his crew—one might begin to sense the growing despair, even fear, felt by the crew. Morison characterized the attempted mutiny with these observations: ‘It was . . . the inevitable conflict between a man of one great, compelling idea and those who did not share it in anything like the same degree . . . Their issue with their commander was the eternal one between imagination and doubt, between the spirit that creates and the spirit that denies.’ (Morison, Admiral of the Ocean Sea, 215.) Columbus was unwavering, and his vision prevailed.”

Guardian Angel of America

Landing of ColumbusOrson Hyde said that the Book of Mormon prophet Moroni “calmed the troubled elements” during Columbus’ voyage, he might well have been referring to those events of October 9-10, 1492. Orson Hyde was called as one of the original members of the Twelve Apostles by the Prophet Joseph Smith in the early days of the restoration of gospel of Jesus Christ. He gave a patriotic talk about America in Salt Lake City on July 4, 1854 in which he referred to Moroni as the “guardian angel of America.” Elder Hyde said, “That same angel of God that appeared to Joseph Smith presides over the destiny of the United States of America.” Elder Hyde said that Moroni was in the camp with George Washington and helped when he had trouble. He said that same angel was with Christopher Columbus and gave him deep impressions and dreams and visions respecting the new world. He said that the Angel Moroni was with Columbus on the stormy deep and he guided his frail vessel to the desired haven, and he calmed the troubled elements. (see The Angel Moroni by Elder Glen L. Rudd, BYU–Idaho Devotional – March 11, 2003)

Comfort from a Celestial Voice

During Columbus’ fourth voyage to the Americas, he and his crew encountered terrible storms and became shipwrecked on the island of Jamaica. Their ship would never sail again, they had no way off the island, his men were having skirmishes with the native inhabitants, and Columbus was bed-stricken, suffering with a high fever. Under these circumstances, on 6 April 1503, Columbus had one of the seminal experiences of his life:

“I was completely alone outside on this dangerous coast in a high fever and a state of great exhaustion. All hope of escape was dead. I struggled up to the highest point of the ship, weeping and calling in a trembling voice to your Highnesses’ Lord of Hosts in every direction for comfort, but there was no reply. Exhausted and groaning, I fell as if asleep and heard a very compassionate voice saying:

‘O fool, slow to believe and serve thy God, the God of all! What more did he do for Moses or David his servant than he has done for thee? Since thou wast born, ever has He had thee in His watchful care. When He saw thee at an age that pleased Him, He caused thy name to sound marvelously in the land. The Indies, which were so rich a part of the world, He gave thee for thine own; thou hast divided them as it pleased thee, and He enabled thee to do this. Of the barriers of the Ocean Sea, which were closed with such mighty chains, He gave thee the key; and thou wast obeyed in many lands, and among Christians thou hast gained an honorable fame. What did He do more for the people of Israel when He brought them out of Egypt? Or for David, who from a shepherd He made to be King of Judea? Turn thyself to Him, and know now thine error; His mercy is infinite; thine old age shall not prevent thee from achieving all great things; He has many inheritances very great. Abraham was over a hundred years old when he begat Isaac, and Sarah was not a young girl. Thou criest for help, doubting. Answer, who has afflicted thee so greatly and so often, God or the world? The privileges, letters and promises that God gives are all fully kept, and after receiving service his favors increase and He grants his servants paradise. I have spoken of that which thy Creator has done for thee and does for all men. Now in part He shows thee the reward for the anguish and danger which thou hast endured in the service of others.’

“I heard all of this as if I were only partially conscious, and I had no answer to give to words so true, but could only weep for my errors. He, whoever he was who spoke to me, ended by saying: “Fear not; have trust; all these tribulations are written upon marble and are not without cause.”( Varela and Gil, Textos, 491–92)

A Divinely Chosen Person

The Book of Prophecies (in Spanish, El Libro de las Profecías) is a compilation of writing and revelations written by Christopher Columbus towards the end of his life. In Delno West’s introduction to the English translation of the book, he summarizes Columbus’ character and motives:

“Christopher Columbus looked upon himself as a man of destiny who had been given a charismatic gift to understand Scripture, navigation, maps, winds, tides, astronomy, cosmography, mathematics and related sciences. His understanding of his mission, or enterprise, was drawn from the Bible or proved by the Bible, and he knew that he was opening up new lands rich with gold and other valuables. He believed himself a chosen person working for the good of all Christendom in opening up the rest of the world to the gospel message. He knew that he would be misunderstood and maligned, but he accepted that as the lot of a divinely chosen person” (Libro de las profecias, p. 105. Raccolta, pt. I, vol. ii, p. 79. Also see Columbus and the Hand of God by De Lamar Jensen, Emeritus professor of history at BYU, Ensign Magazine, October 1992).

A Man Alone with God

Samuel Eliot Morison, author of Admiral of the Ocean Sea, said this of Columbus.

“For he was not, like a Washington, a Cromwell or a Bolivar, an instrument chosen by multitudes to express their wills and lead a cause; Columbus was a Man with a Mission. . . . He was Man alone with God against human stupidity and depravity, against greedy conquistadors, cowardly seamen, even against nature and the sea. Always with God, though. . . . Men may doubt this, but there can be no doubt that the faith of Columbus was genuine and sincere, and that his frequent communion with forces unseen was a vital element in his achievement.” (Samuel Eliot Morison, Admiral of the Ocean Sea (Boston: Little, Brown, 1942), 46—47.)

Columbus and Revelation

LDS Church scholar Hugh Nibley wrote about Christopher Columbus in chapter 2 of his book, The Prophetic Book of Mormon. Said Nibley:

“[Columbus’] contemporary and friend, Las Casas, in an oft-quoted passage says he was as certain of finding what he said he would as if he had it already locked up in his trunk. Las Casas tells how “from all sides and in many ways did God give Columbus motives and causes that he should not doubt to undertake so great a deed,” and that “God seemed to move him on by constant pushes.” (Bartolome de las Casas, Historia de las Indias (Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Economica, 1951), 27—34.) Everything else in Columbus’ life is subservient to the carrying out of that one mission. The aim and purpose of all his work and suffering was what happened at 2 A.M. on the morning of October 12, 1492, and must not be judged by what happened after (it was “the wrath of God upon the seed of my brethren,” says Nephi), or by any other quirks or misadventures. In retrospect we see that this is so—but Columbus himself always knew it was: God had chosen him to do this one great deed.

“… Sailing into a perfect blank on the map, Columbus infallibly did the right thing: “He did not make a single false move in the entire voyage!” says the geographer Professor Nunn. He maintains that Columbus must have been the discoverer of the Trade and prevailing Westerly Winds since it was only by taking fullest advantage of both that his journey was possible—yet his subsequent voyages show that Columbus knew nothing about the wind system. (See George E. Nunn, The Geographical Conceptions of Columbus, New York: American Geographical Society, 1924.) This was not Columbus’ doing. Neither was the flight of birds that appeared just in time to keep the ships from turning back, nor the sudden rising of the sea that at another time inspired the expedition to continue. Call it what you will, Columbus was convinced he was being helped.

“Finally a day came when he was forced to give the whole fleet his solemn word that he would turn back within two days if land was not discovered—and on the morning of the second day land was discovered. About eight or nine hours before the discovery, at sunset on October 11, Columbus gave a strange and sudden order for a marked change of course. ‘Why he did this, nobody explained,’ writes Professor Morison, a very sober historian and a nautical expert. (Morison, Admiral of the Ocean Sea, 223.) But he assures us that if he had not done it, the great discovery of October 12, 1492, would have been a tragic discovery of deadly reefs that lay but a short distance dead ahead of the little fleet on its original course….’No man alive,’ says Morison, speaking as a mariner, ‘limited to the instruments and means at Columbus’s disposal, could obtain anything near the accuracy of his results.’ (Morison, Admiral of the Ocean Sea, 195.)

Columbus and the Hand of God

“I could sense [God’s] hand upon me,” wrote Columbus, “so that it became clear to me that it was feasible to navigate from here to the Indies, and he gave me the will to do it” (Raccolta, pt. I, vol. ii, p. 79.). Regarding Columbus’ feeling of guidance by the hand of God, professor of history at BYU De Lamar Jensen said:

“Perhaps nothing irked his contemporaries more than Columbus’s frank assertion that he was divinely chosen. ‘God made me the messenger of the new heaven and the new earth, of which He spoke in the Apocalypse of St. John after having spoken of it by the mouth of Isaiah,’ Columbus wrote to a friend and confidant of the queen, ‘and he showed me where to find it.’ (Columbus to Doña Juana de la Torre, Raccolta di documenti e studi pubblicati della R. Commissione Colombiana, pt. I, vol. ii; I Scriti di Cristoforo Colombo, ed. Cesare de Lollis (Rome: 1894), p. 66.)

“…Columbus was convinced that the key to his enterprise was the spiritual gifts given him by the Lord: ‘He bestowed the arts of seamanship upon me in abundance, and has given me what was necessary from [astronomy], geometry, and arithmetic; and has given me adequate inventiveness in my soul.’ Columbus was certain that God provided these gifts to be used in His service, ‘encouraging me to go forward, and without ceasing they inflame me with a sense of great urgency.’ (Ibid., p. 79. also see Columbus and the Hand of God By De Lamar Jensen, Emeritus professor of history at BYU, Ensign Magazine, October 1992)

God Gave Me the Spirit and Intelligence for It

From chapter 18 of Clark B. Hinckley’s book, he summarizes Christopher Columbus’ life this way:

“Finally, what emerges from Columbus’s words as we have them in his letters, journals, and other documents is a man of deep and abiding faith. His piety was not a hollow set of daily rituals or outward appearances; his faith in God was the foundation of all he did, it was the driver of his life, and it sustained him through disappointment, rejection, and deep discouragement. He was ‘longsuffering in the challenges and adversity that always beset him, which were incredible and infinite, always with great faith in the divine Providence’ (Las Casas, Historia, 1:44). His faith begat hope that enabled him to do what others deemed impossible. He prayed with faith and received answers through faith: ‘I prayed to the most merciful Lord concerning my desire, and he gave me the spirit and the intelligence for it’ (West and Kling, Libro, 105).”

How to Vote: Gospel Principles for Choosing Political Candidates

In anticipation of the upcoming presidential election in the United States, I have asked many people why they support their candidate of choice. I was curious how my own decision making process aligned, or not, with other people’s. Reasons varied, of course, but generally focused around job qualifications and policy stances. Very few people, thought, cited principles, their own or the candidates, when telling be about their decision making process on who to vote for.

The primary and overriding character trait I am looking for from a political official is honesty and integrity. I don’t care how smart, how politically savvy, how well spoken, and how talented an individual is, if I cannot trust that they’ll always act with integrity, then I don’t want them in a leadership position. I would gladly vote for a less qualified, less capable candidate who is honest over a more qualified and capable candidate that I cannot trust.

principles, not people, causes, not candidates, maxwellBut those are my opinions, and this line of thought got me thinking about the eternal gospel principles behind the decision of who to vote for. And I wondered what The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches regarding how to vote, as the Church itself remains politically neutral and will not tell you who to vote for, candidates or political parties. As Elder Neal A. Maxwell, said:

“Discipleship includes good citizenship. In this connection, if you are a careful student of the statements of the modern prophets, you will have noticed that with rare exceptions—especially when the First Presidency has spoken out—the concerns expressed have been over moral issues, not issues between political parties. The declarations are about principles, not people; and causes, not candidates” (A More Determined Discipleship, 10 October 1978).

Here’s what I found from the Church on how to vote, or as I’m calling it, gospel principles for choosing political candidates.

What the Scriptures Say about Who to Vote For

honest men should be sought“And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land; And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil. I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free. Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn. Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil” (D&C 98:5-10).

What Modern Prophets Say about How to Vote

upright and good and aspirational leaders - ChristoffersonWhen I was listening to LDS General Conference in April of this year, I was struck by something Elder D. Todd Christofferson said about his father, a politician. I wonder if he was subtlety giving us criteria by which we should select candidates to vote for. He said his father, a city councilman, was “upright and good and an aspirational example.” Here’s the full quote in context:

“I myself was blessed with an exemplary father. I recall that when I was a boy of about 12, my father became a candidate for the city council in our rather small community. He did not mount an extensive election campaign—all I remember was that Dad had my brothers and me distribute copies of a flyer door to door, urging people to vote for Paul Christofferson. There were a number of adults that I handed a flyer to who remarked that Paul was a good and honest man and that they would have no problem voting for him. My young boy heart swelled with pride in my father. It gave me confidence and a desire to follow in his footsteps. He was not perfect—no one is—but he was upright and good and an aspirational example for a son” (from his talk entitled Fathers).

John Taylor, the third President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said this in 1855: “We believe that all legislative assemblies should confine themselves to constitutional principles; and that all such laws should be implicitly obeyed by every American . . . .We believe that legislators ought to be chosen on account of their intelligence, honor, integrity, and virtue, and not because they belong to some particular party clique. We believe that the high party strife, logrolling, wirepulling, and political juggling, and spoliation, are a disgrace to any politician, that they are beneath the dignity of an American, and disgraceful and humiliating, alike to the people and statesmen of this great republic” (John Taylor, 1855, Gospel Kingdom, p. 310). This quote was found on TheMoralLiberal.com, among other online sources.

Another guideline was given by President David O. McKay in his October 1962 General Conference talk entitled, The Gospel and the Individual:

“In these days of uncertainty and unrest, liberty-loving people’s greatest responsibility and paramount duty is to preserve and proclaim the freedom of the individual, his relationship to Deity, and the necessity of obedience to the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Only thus will mankind find peace and happiness. We find ourselves now immersed in a great political campaign in America for the purpose of selecting candidates for office in local, state, and national positions. We urge you as citizens to participate in this great democratic process in accordance with your honest political convictions. However, above all else, strive to support good and conscientious candidates of either party who are aware of the great dangers inherent in communism, and who are truly dedicated to the Constitution in the tradition of our rounding fathers. They should also pledge their sincere fealty to our way of liberty—a liberty which aims at the preservation of both personal and property rights. Study the issues, analyze the candidates on these grounds, and then exercise your franchise as free men and women. Never be found guilty of exchanging your birthright for a mess of pottage (Gen. 25:30-34)!”

Civic Standards for the Faithful Saints

As I have studied this subject, I found a great talk by Ezra Taft Benson from the April 1972 General Conference called Civic Standards for the Faithful Saints. In it, he said, “The First Presidency …gave us the guideline a few years ago of supporting political candidates ‘who are truly dedicated to the Constitution in the tradition of our Founding Fathers.’” He went on to list what he called the “four great civic standards for the faithful Saints.” They are:

  1. “First, the Constitution ordained by God through wise men.”
  2. “Second, the scriptures, particularly the Book of Mormon.”
  3. “Third, the inspired counsel of the prophets, especially the living president.”
  4. “Fourth, the guidance of the Holy Spirit.”

Stand Up for Freedom No Matter What the Cost

Finally, here is another quote I really like from Ezra Taft Benson. I put it last because I’m not certain of the accuracy of the source. I only found it one a single website called inspiredconstitution.org. According to the site, this is a statement from Ezra Taft Benson as quoted by Jerreld L. Newquist in his book, Prophets, Principles and National Survival.

“There are some people who hesitate to get into this fight for freedom because it’s controversial, or they’re not sure if we’re going to win. These people have two blind spots. First, they fail to realize that life’s decisions should be based on principles—not on Gallup polls. There were men at Valley Forge who weren’t sure how the Revolution would end, but they were in a much better position to save their own souls and their country than those timid men whose major concern was deciding which side was going to win, or how to avoid controversy. After all, the basic purpose of life is to prove ourselves—not to be with the majority when it’s wrong. We must discharge responsibilities not only to our church, home and profession, but also to our country. Otherwise, we do not merit the full blessings of a kind Providence. There are people tonight all over the world who in their own courageous and sometimes quiet way are working for freedom. In many cases we will never know until the next life all they sacrificed for liberty. These patriots are receiving heaven’s applause for the role they are playing, and in the long run that applause will be louder and longer than any they could receive in this world.

This leads me to the second blind spot of those who hesitate to get into the fight. And that is their failure to realize that we will win in the long run, and for keeps, and that they pass up great blessings by not getting into the battle now when the odds are against us and the rewards are greatest. The only questions, before the final victory, are, first, “What stand will each of us take in this struggle?”; and second, “How much tragedy can be avoided by doing something now?” Time is on the side of truth—and truth is eternal. Those who are fighting against freedom may feel confident now, but they are short-sighted. This is still God’s world. The forces of evil, working through some mortals, have made a mess of a good part of it. But, it is still God’s world. In due time when each of us has had a chance to prove ourselves—including whether or not we are going to stand up for freedom—then God will interject himself and the final and eternal victory shall be for free agency. And then shall those people on the sidelines, and those who took the wrong but temporarily popular course, lament their decisions. To the patriots I say this: Take that long eternal look. Stand up for freedom, no matter what the cost. It can save your soul—and maybe your country. (Ezra Taft Benson, 9/23/63)”

Conclusion

I want to help save the country by casting my vote for someone who will strengthen our nation. But as President Benson said, I am most concerned about the salvation of my soul and that can only be done by staying on the Lord’s side and following his counsel as received through His Spirit, the scriptures, and the modern prophets. That counsel tells me that I should not select candidates for political office based on party affiliation or the way the polls tell me other people are voting. Therefore,  I will cast my vote based on principles, mine and the candidates. I will seek out and vote for the candidate who, in my evaluation, has demonstrated wisdom and competence, who loves freedom and goodness, and who, most importantly, has honesty and integrity.

The Crucible of Doubt

The Crucible of Doubt coverI wasn’t sure what to expect when I picked up and began reading The Crucible of Doubt by Terryl Givens and Fiona Givens. I assumed it was addressed to members of the Church of Jesus Christ who were having doubts in their testimony of the restored gospel, which really isn’t me. But I also assumed it would give advice to faithful Mormons on how to help those who are struggling with doubts. The book had good reviews, so I thought I’d give it a whirl.

As it turns out, I really liked the book. It addressed some difficult subjects, such as contradictions in the scriptures and mistakes made by men we hold as present-day prophets of God. I found the book to be educational and faith promoting. It discussed gospel subjects from a perspective infrequently seen in the church, one that is very comforting to me or anyone who is on a quest for greater faith.

Here are some of my favorite quotes from the book The Crucible of Doubt:

Chapter 5: On Prophecy and Prophets: The Perils of Hero Worship

“[True prophets] have steadfastly refused to be the keepers of an individual’s conscience. Brigham Young protested the perils of slavish obedience and submission: “I do not wish any Latter-day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be satisfied with anything I do, unless the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied. I wish them to know for themselves and understand for themselves.”(Brigham Young, Complete Discourses, ed. Richard S. Van Wagoner (Salt Lake City: Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2009), 2:1008.)

“Elsewhere [Brigham Young] reaffirmed: “I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful that they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwa[r]t the purposes of God. . . . Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not.” (Young, Complete Discourses, 4:1941.)

“[Brigham Young’s] beloved younger colleague, the colorful J. Golden Kimball, reminded his audience that “There are not enough Apostles in the Church to prevent us from thinking, and they are not disposed to do so; but some people fancy that because we have the Presidency and Apostles of the Church that they will do the thinking for us. There are men and women so mentally lazy that they hardly think for themselves. To think calls for effort, which makes some men tired and wearies their souls. No man or woman can remain in this Church on borrowed light.”(J. Golden Kimball, in Conference Report, April 1904, 97.)

“However, in 1945, a Church magazine urged upon its readers the exact opposite, that “When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done.” Many are familiar with that expression; fewer are aware that when President George Albert Smith learned of it, he immediately and indignantly repudiated the statement. “Even to imply that members of the Church are not to do their own thinking,” he wrote, “is grossly to misrepresent the true ideal of the Church.” (The offensive statement was published in The Improvement Era, June 1945. Smith responded in a letter to J. Raymond Cope, a Unitarian leader who expressed concern. Dialogue 19.1 (Spring 1986): 35–39.) Regrettably, this myth persists in the minds of many Latter-day Saints, even as leaders disavow infallibility and urge upon members personal responsibility.”

“Whatever spiritual intimations he received of God’s mind and will, however powerful the fonts of inspiration at which he drank, Joseph had to transmit eternal things into the idiom of common English. And that, he found, was no easy task. As he complained to a friend, “Oh Lord God, deliver us from this prison, . . . of a crooked, broken, scattered and imperfect language.”(To William W. Phelps, 27 November 1832, in Dean C. Jessee, ed., Personal Writings of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2002), 287.) And so he related both the epiphanies of celestial brilliance and the merest glimmers of heavenly truth to ready scribes. And then he reworked the language—and enlisted other respected associates to the task of refining and remolding the wording—in an effort to depict more accurately the Divine mind and the truths the Spirit communicated as “pure intelligence flowing unto” him.(Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook, eds., The Words of Joseph Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Orem, Utah: Grandin, 1994), 5.)”

“Outside of Joseph’s scriptural production, his words ranged from wise and inspired to simple opinion—with his audience, then as now, seldom attuned to the differences. Joseph himself complained that “he did not enjoy the right vouchsafed to every American citizen—that of free speech. He said that when he ventured to give his private opinion” about various subjects, they ended up “being given out as the word of the Lord because they came from him.”(Jessee W. Crosby, in Hyrum L. Andrus and Helen Mae Andrus, They Knew the Prophet: Personal Accounts from over 100 People Who Knew Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1974), 140.) When not speaking with prophetic authority, in other words, he claimed no authority at all—which is why his pronouncements on subjects from Lehi’s New World landfall to the prospects of the Kirtland Bank were as liable to error as other men’s. Mormon leaders—like the great souls of other religious traditions—are never assured an unvarying inspiration when they speak or write.”

Chapter 6: On Delegation and Discipleship: The Ring of Pharaoh

“[Austin] Farrer’s effort to balance God’s divine purposes with the imperfection of His human instruments suggests one way Mormons might think about faith-wrenching practices (polygamy), missteps and errors (Adam-God), and teachings that the Church has abandoned but not fully explained (the priesthood ban). Practices, in other words, that challenge and try one’s faith; teachings whose status as eternal truth is either disconcerting, questionable, or now denied. Here is what Farrer said: “Facts are not determined by authority. Authority can make law to be law; authority cannot make facts to be facts.” (Austin Farrer, “Infallibility and Historical Tradition,” in The Truth-Seeking Heart, ed. Ann Loades and Robert MacSwain (Norwich: Canterbury Press, 2006), 83.) Or, as Henry Eyring once quoted his father as saying, “in this church you don’t have to believe anything that isn’t true.” (From Henry J. Eyring, Mormon Scientist: The Life and Faith of Henry Eyring (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2007), 4)”

“If a bishop makes a decision without inspiration, are we bound to sustain the decision? The story is told of a Church official who returned from installing a new stake presidency. “Dad, do you Brethren feel confident when you call a man as the stake president that he is the Lord’s man?” the official’s son asked upon his father’s return home. “No, not always,” he replied. “But once we call him, he becomes the Lord’s man.”(Personal conversation reported to authors by Robert L. Millet.) The answer disconcerts initially. Is this not hubris, to expect God’s sanction for a decision made in error? Perhaps. It is also possible that the reply reveals the only understanding of delegation that is viable. If God honored only those decisions made in perfect accord with His perfect wisdom, then His purposes would require leaders who were utterly incapable of misconstruing His intention, who never missed hearing the still small voice, who were unerringly and unfailingly a perfect conduit for heaven’s inspiration. And it would render the principle of delegation inoperative.”

Chapter 7: Mormons and Monopolies: Holy Persons “Ye Know Not Of”

“In words that should shame those moderns who believe the medieval church was a spiritual wasteland, President John Taylor paid tribute to those holy ones of the past, counterparts of the holy ones Joseph was alerted to in his own day: “There were men in those dark ages who could commune with God, and who, by the power of faith, could draw aside the curtain of eternity and gaze upon the invisible world. . . . There were men who could gaze upon the face of God, have the ministering of angels, and unfold the future destinies of the world. If those were dark ages I pray God to give me a little darkness.” (John Taylor, in Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. (Liverpool, England: Franklin D. Richards and Samuel W. Richards, 1851–86; repr. Salt Lake City, 1974), 16:197–98.)

“Brigham Young could be similarly generous in his conception of who would be found elect in the end: “I never passed John Wesley’s church in London without stopping to look at it. Was he a good man? Yes; I suppose him to have been, by all accounts, as good as ever walked on this earth, according to his knowledge. Has he obtained a rest? Yes, and greater than ever entered into his mind to expect; and so have thousands of others of the various religious denominations.” (Brigham Young, Complete Discourses, ed. Richard S. Van Wagoner (Salt Lake City: Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2009), 3:1480.)

Chapter 8: Spirituality and Self-Sufficiency: Find Your Watering Place

“If there is a perceived need, the Church is there with a solution. Perhaps, one leader has chastened, at a cost: “In recent years we might be compared to a team of doctors issuing prescriptions to cure or to immunize our members against spiritual diseases. Each time some moral or spiritual ailment was diagnosed, we have rushed to the pharmacy to concoct another remedy, encapsulate it as a program and send it out with pages of directions for use. . . . Over medication, over-programming is a critically serious problem.” (Boyd K. Packer, “Let Them Govern Themselves,” address given 30 March 1990,)

“Mere months after the organization of the Church, Joseph was told that this, the last work of the Lord, was to be created “first temporal[ly], and secondly spiritual[ly].”(D&C 29:32) One way to read this is as a reminder that the formal, institutional parameters of the New Jerusalem are easy to put in place. The organizational structure, the blueprints for temples and plats for Zion came readily enough. Forging a people sufficiently sanctified to constitute the people of Zion is another matter entirely. According to the sequence alluded to by the revelation above, we would expect the spiritual qualities of Church members to lag behind the temporal templates—the buildings and programs—within which we work out our salvation.”

“In Salt Lake’s old Thirteenth Ward, Bishop Edwin D. Woolley frequently found himself at odds with President Brigham Young. On a certain occasion, as they ended one such fractious encounter, Young had a final parting remark: “Now, Bishop Woolley, I guess you will go off and apostatize.” To which the bishop rejoined, “If this were your church, President Young, I would be tempted to do so. But this is just as much my church as it is yours, and why should I apostatize from my own church?”(Leonard J. Arrington and Davis Bitton, Saints without Halos (Salt Lake City: Signature, 1981), 61.) That sense of ownership, or, better, of full and equal membership in the body of Christ, was Bishop Woolley’s salvation. He wisely realized, as not all do, that forsaking the Church out of hurt or frustration would be as unprofitable as any other form of misdirected energy.”

“We have all bemoaned the traffic congestion at rush hour, or the heavily populated mountain path where we had hoped to find solitude. We forget that from the perspective of the other travelers—and from any objective point of view—we are the problem we bewail. We are part of the gawking crowds at the overlook, we are an impediment to other anxious shoppers in the checkout line, we are the head and shoulders blocking a perfect view from the moviegoer behind us. Just as we are a part of the Mormon culture we lament. If we allow ourselves to be co-opted by practices or attitudes we deplore, we share in the collective guilt. The pressure to conform to what we see as a dominant cultural orthodoxy is often more imagined than real. A silent majority may be more receptive than we realize to our own yearnings for greater authenticity, honesty, originality, and individualism. Brigham Young was. “I am not a stereotyped Latter-day Saint,” he said, “and do not believe in the doctrine. . . . Away with stereotyped ‘Mormons’!” (Brigham Young, Complete Discourses, ed. Richard S. Van Wagoner (Salt Lake City: Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2009), 3:1668.)

Website review: Remembering the Wives of Joseph Smith

Our family has a tradition to celebrate the prophet Joseph Smith’s birthday on Dec. 23rd of each year.  A friend recently commented that they did not feel there is much to celebrate about Joseph Smith based on many of the things they have read about him lately. We inquired what this was about and they answered that it was about Joseph’s plural wives and other information they had read on a website called Remembering the Wives of Joseph Smith, wivesofjosephsmith.org.

I decided to check out the website. The friend thought it was a credible website, so I wanted to see for myself. While I’m no historian or Mormon Church history expert, I have read a lot of Church history, including a significant amount on difficult subjects like polygamy. As I perused the websites, here are some of the red flags I saw:

Red Flag #1: The Site Author Remains Anonymous

There is no indication of who runs the wivesofjosephsmith.org website.  There’s no about us section or copyright notice. This causes me to wonder, why are they hiding who they are? Even when site visitors have emailed the author and asked who is the sponsor of this website, they still did not answer (see http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/Who.htm ). All the author will state is that “I am a lifelong member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” And when asked if he or she is a member in good standing, the author says “Personally, it has been difficult for me to be comfortable with many of the events surrounding early polygamy – and I suppose this has distanced me somewhat at church.”

Red Flag #2: Bias Comes through in Prejudicial Language

Though the author of the site claims to be simply presenting the unbiased information, he or she lets their true feelings come through often by their comments, conclusions, and by the information they choose and choose not to reveal. The author’s bias is loud and clear when he/she says “My greatest hope in this regard is that one day the LDS church will no longer defend Joseph Smith’s involvement in polygamy as appropriate.”

On their FAQ page, http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/FAQ.htm, the use of quotes shows their skepticism regarding Joseph’s revelation on plural marriage. The author further comes to the conclusion that the church phased out the practice due to intense pressure from the government, not because of revelation from God, again showing prejudice. While it is true there was intense pressure from the government, it was ultimately revelation to the prophet that ended the practice of plural marriage and the sites makes no mention of that.

Red Flag #3: Leaving Out Important Background Information

The author of the site quotes Oliver Cowdery, in reference to Joseph’s first plural wife, Fanny Alger, calling it “a dirty, nasty, filthy affair.” What the author leaves out is a lot of important background to this quote. Oliver’s falling out with Joseph and the Church had largely to do with polygamy. When Oliver found out about Joseph taking an additional wife, he accused Joseph of adultery. Ultimately, Oliver Cowdery who was excommunicated and it was under these circumstances that the quote from Oliver comes.

Red Flag #4: Leaving a False Impression

On this page, http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/Praise.htm, the site author quotes material that is clearly out to make Joseph Smith look like a sex crazed maniac, preying on any woman, no matter how young, who stayed in the same home as him. The author wants to leave the impression that polygamy was simply about Joseph satisfying his manly urges. I don’t believe that’s true of Joseph Smith, and I don’t believe there is evidence that Joseph was that kind of man. There’s no evidence of him bragging of his sexual exploits, as you would expect if he really were a sex-crazed maniac. There’s nothing in Joseph’s language or in the record of his associates to support that conclusion. Joseph’s eye was single to the glory of God, and an honest study of his words and deeds shows that.

The purposeful leaving of a false impression reminds me of Elder Neil L. Andersen’s talk on Joseph Smith in the October 2014 General Conference in which he talks about a misleading photograph taken of Elder Russell M. Nelson. “The picture was true, the caption was true, but the truth was used to promote a false impression.”

Red Flag #5: Pinning Statements on Others

Even thought he author remains anonymous, he or she still feels compelled to pin statements the he or she clearly agrees with, on other people. On this page, http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/Why.htm, the author of the site does not take responsibility for the statements below, pinning them instead on “an increasing number of LDS church members,” but it’s clear these are the author’s feelings:

  • “Joseph Smith’s behavior seems inappropriate or manipulative – perhaps even abusive.”
  • “All this seems foreign to the God they worship and the principles they honor and love.”
  • “They hope for the day when the LDS church will no longer defend Joseph Smith’s behavior in polygamy as appropriate.”
  • “I just want you to know that I don’t think this was appropriate, or of God.”

Again, there is nothing unbiased or objective about these statements. Whether these statements are the author’s or someone else’s, they are jumping to conclusions that are contrary to the teachings of LDS Church leaders.

Conclusion

It is clear that the author of that website feels that Joseph’s practicing of plural marriage was manipulative, inappropriate, and not of God, and he or she is trying to persuade others to draw the same conclusion. The author quotes select information, fills in the blanks with conjecture, and implies conclusions that are subjective.

While I have read much of the same historical material as the author of that website, I have come to much different conclusions. I see Joseph Smith as a man and a prophet of God. He was a good man, but not a perfect man. He made mistakes, but he was faithful to the end in his calling as a prophet of God. While some people choose to attack Joseph Smith, I am going to continue to do my best to defend Joseph Smith, honor him as the great prophet of our dispensation, and testify of the wonderful truths and blessings he brought forth as an instrument in the hands of God.