The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Artticles of Faith: A Series of Lectures on the Principal Doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ fd Latter Day Saints by James E. Talmage.

1. Pagan Ignorance Concerning the Resurrection.—In connection with the statement that human knowledge of the resurrection is based on revelation, the following is of interest:—"Whatever heathen philosophers may have guessed as to the immortality of the soul, even admitting that this was really the result of their own speculations, and not at all due to the relics of tradition, it is certain that they never reached so far as the doctrine of a bodily resurrection. Pliny, when enumerating the things which it was not even in the power of God to do, specified these two—the endowment of mortals with an eternal existence, and the recalling of the departed from the grave (ii, c, vii). A similar opinion is enunciated by Æschylus in the 'Eumenides' (647, 648). The utmost to which they attained in their ethical speculations was a conception of the possible continuance of life, in some new forms and conditions, beyond the grave; but this was all. A resurrection in the scripture sense of the word they never imagined."—Cassell's Bible Dictionary, p. 936.

2. General Belief in a Resurrection.—"This great event of the future, like the doctrine of the resurrection of Christ, is so entirely a cardinal truth, that there never has been a time in which it has not been an article of the Christian creed, the only difference between the ancient creeds and our own, being that the latter has the phrase 'resurrection of the body' whereas the former invariably uses the form 'resurrection of the flesh.' The reason for the ancient mode of expression is stated by Jerome to be, that since there are spiritual bodies, some might readily accept a resurrection of the body in that sense, who would deny the actual resurrection of the flesh."—Cassell's Bible Dictionary, p. 935.

3. The Sadducees, when mentioned in the New Testament, are usually represented as being in opposition to the Pharisees, the two classes constituting the most influential of the sects existing among the Jews at the time of Christ. The two differed on many fundamental matters of belief and practice, including pre-existence of spirits; the reality of spiritual punishment and future retribution for sin; the necessity of self-denial in individual life; the immortality of the soul; and the resurrection from the dead; in all of which the Pharisees stood for the affirmative, while the Sadducees denied. Josephus says:—"The doctrine of the Sadducees is that the soul and body perish together; the law is all that they are concerned to observe" (Ant. xviii, 1, 4). The sect consisted mainly of members of the aristocracy. Special mention of the Sadducees here is suggested by their determined opposition to the doctrine of the resurrection, which they sought to assail by arrogant assumption or to belittle by ridicule. Cassell's Bible Dictionary gives place to the following:—"The Sadducees are never mentioned in John's Gospel. The only occasion on which they are spoken of in the Gospels of Mark and Luke is that referred to also by St. Matthew, on which they attempted to ridicule the doctrine of the resurrection, by asking our Lord's opinion as to whose wife a woman would be in the future world, who had been married to several in this world (Matt. xxii, 23-32; Mark xii, 18-27; Luke xx, 27-38). Their question proceeded on the assumption that the levirate law, as promulgated by Moses (Deut. xxv, 5-6), implied that the Jewish law-giver had no resurrection of the dead in view. Our Lord's answer explained the difficulty, affirmed the resurrection of the dead, and asserted the existence of angels, which the Sadducees also denied (Matt. xxii, 30; Mark xii, 25; Luke xx, 35, 36; compare with Acts xxiii, 8). He also quoted the divine announcement,—'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob' (Exod. iii, 6, 15, 16), and founded thereon by inference an argument not only for immortality, but also for the resurrection. The words quoted must have been regarded by our Lord as implying that the patriarchs, as parties to the covenant, were still in a state of conscious relation to God."

4. Heathen in the First Resurrection.—The statement that the heathen dead will have place in the first resurrection is sustained by the word of scripture, and by a consideration of the principles of true justice according to which humanity is to be judged. Man will be accounted blameless or guilty, according to his deeds as interpreted in the light of the law under which he is required to live. It is inconsistent with our conception of a just God, to believe Him capable of inflicting condemnation upon any one for noncompliance with a requirement of which the person had no knowledge. Nevertheless, the laws of the Church will not be suspended even in the case of those who have sinned in darkness and ignorance; but it is reasonable to believe that the plan of redemption will afford such benighted ones an opportunity of learning the laws of God; and surely, as fast as they so learn, will obedience be required on pain of the penalty. Note the following passages in addition to the citations in the text:

"And if there was no law given if men sinned, what could justice do, or mercy either; for they would have no claim upon the creature?"—Alma xlii, 21.

"Wherefore he has given a law; and where there is no law given, there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment, there is no condemnation; and where there is no condemnation, the mercies of the Holy One of Israel have claim upon them, because of the atonement; for they are delivered by the power of him."—II Nephi ix, 25.

"And moreover, I say unto you, that the time shall come, when the knowledge of a Savior shall spread throughout every nation, kindred, tongue, and people. And behold, when that time cometh, none shall be found blameless before God, except it be little children, only through repentance and faith on the name of the Lord God Omnipotent."—Mos. iii, 20-21. See also Helaman xv, 14-15.

5. The Intermediate State of the Soul; Paradise.—The condition of the spirits of men between death and the resurrection is a subject of great interest, and one concerning which much dispute has arisen. The scriptures prove, that at the time of man's final judgment he will stand before the bar of God, clothed in his resurrected body, and this, irrespective of his condition of purity or guilt. While awaiting the time of their coming forth, disembodied spirits exist in an intermediate state, of happiness and rest or of suffering and suspense, according to their works in mortality. The prophet Alma said:—"Now concerning the state of the soul between death and the resurrection. Behold, it has been made known unto me, by an angel, that the spirits of all men, as soon as they are departed from this mortal body; yea, the spirits of all men, whether they be good or evil, are taken home to that God who gave them life. And then shall it come to pass that the spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness, which is called paradise; a state of rest; a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their troubles and from all care, and sorrow, etc. And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of the wicked, yea, who are evil; for behold, they have no part nor portion of the Spirit of the Lord; for behold, they chose evil works rather than good; therefore the spirit of the devil did enter into them, and take possession of their house; and these shall be cast out into outer darkness; there shall be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth; and this because of their own iniquity; being led captive by the will of the devil. Now this is the state of the souls of the wicked; yea, in darkness, and a state of awful, fearful looking, for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them; thus they remain in this state, as well as the righteous in paradise until the time of their resurrection."—Alma xl, 11-14.

Reference to paradise, as a place prepared for righteous spirits while awaiting the resurrection, is made also by the first Nephi (II Nephi ix, 13), by a later prophet of the same name (IV Nephi 14), and by Moroni (Moroni x, 34). New Testament mention supports the same (Luke xxiii, 43; II Cor. xii, 4; Rev. ii, 7). Paradise, then, is not the place of final glory; for such the thief who died with Christ was assuredly not prepared, yet we cannot doubt the fulfillment of our Lord's promise that the penitent malefactor should be with Him in paradise that day; and, moreover, the declaration of the risen Savior to Mary Magdalene, three days later, that He had not at that time ascended to His Father, is proof of His having spent the intermediate time in paradise.

The word "paradise," by its derivation through the Greek from the Persian, signifies a pleasure ground.

LECTURE XXII.

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND TOLERATION.

Article 11.—We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

1. Man's Right to Freedom in Worship.—The Latter-day Saints proclaim their unqualified allegiance to the principles of religious liberty and religious toleration. Freedom to worship Almighty God as the conscience may dictate, they claim as one of the inherent and inalienable rights of humanity. The inspired framers of our charter of national independence proclaimed to the world, as a self-evident truth, that the common birthright of humanity gives to every man a claim to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Happiness is foreign, liberty but a name, and life a disappointment to him who is denied the freedom to worship as he may desire. No person possessing a regard for Deity and a sense of duty toward that power Divine, can be happy if he be restricted in the performance of the highest duty of his existence. Could one be happy, though he were housed in a palace, surrounded with all material comforts and provided with every facility for intellectual enjoyment, if he were cut off from communion with the being whom he loved the most? To the man who has learned to know his Divine Father, freedom of worship is preferable even to life.

2. What is Worship?—The derivation of the term suggests an answer. It comes to us as the lineal descendant of a pair of Anglo-Saxon words (weorth, meaning worthy, and scipe, the old form of ship, signifying condition or state), and conveys the thought of worthy-ship. The worship of which one is capable depends upon his comprehension of the worthiness characterizing the object of his reverence. Man's capacity for worship is a measure of his comprehension of God. The fuller the acquaintance, the closer the communion between the worshiper and his Deity, the more thorough and sincere will be his homage. When we say of one, in figurative speech, that he is a worshiper of the good, the beautiful, the true, we affirm that he possesses a deeper and a more complete conception of worth in the object of his adoration, than has another whose perception does not lead him to reverence those ennobling qualities.

3. Man, then, will worship God according to his conception of the Divine attributes and powers; and this conception approaches the correct one in proportion to the spiritual light that has come to him. True worship cannot exist where there is no reverence or love for the object. This reverence may be ill-founded; the adoration may be a species of idolatry; the object may be in fact unworthy; yet of the devotee it must be said that he worships if his conscience clothe the idol with the attribute of worthy-ship. We have spoken of "true worship;" the expression is a pleonasm. Worship, as has been affirmed, is the heart-felt adoration that is rendered as a result of a sincere conception of worthiness on the part of the object; any manifestation of reverence prompted by a conviction inferior to this is but a counterfeit of worship. Call such "false worship" if you choose, but let it be remembered that worship is necessarily true, the word requires no adjective to extend its meaning, nor to attest its genuineness. Worship is not a matter of form, any more than is prayer. It consists not in posture nor in gesture, in ritual nor in creed. Worship most profound may be rendered with none of the artificial accessories of ritualistic service; for altar, the stone in the desert may serve; the peaks of the everlasting hills are temple spires; the vault of heaven is of all the grandest cathedral dome.

4. Man is at heart an inferior pattern of that which he worships. The savage, who knows no triumph greater than that of bloody victory over his enemy, who regards prowess and physical strength as the most desirable qualities of his race, and who looks upon revenge and vindictiveness as the sweetest gratifications of life, will assuredly ascribe such attributes to his deity; and will offer his profoundest reverence in sacrifices of blood. All the revolting practices of idolatry are traceable to perverted and fiendish conceptions of human excellence, and these are reflected in the hideous creations of man-made, devil-inspired deities. On the other hand, the man whose enlightened soul has received the impress of love, pure and undefiled, will ascribe to his God the attributes of gentleness and affection, and will say in his heart, "God is love." He alone who has acquired a proper understanding of the glory and responsibility of parenthood, can intelligently use the Son's title of invocation, "Our Father." Knowledge, therefore, is essential to worship; man cannot adequately serve God in ignorance; and the greater his knowledge of the Divine personality, the fuller, truer, will be his adoration; he may learn to know the Father, and the Son who was sent; and such knowledge is man's guarantee to eternal life.

5. Worship is the voluntary homage of the soul. Under compulsion, or for the hypocritical purposes of effect, one may insincerely perform all the outward ceremonies of an established style of adoration; he may voice words of prescribed prayers; his lips may profess a creed; yet his effort is but a mockery of worship, and its indulgence a sin. Our Father desires no reluctant homage nor unwilling praise. Formalism in worship is acceptable only so far as it is accompanied by an intelligent devoutness; and it is of use only as an aid to the spiritual devotion which leads to communion with Deity. The spoken prayer is but empty sound if it be anything less than an index to the volume of the soul's righteous desire. Communications addressed to the throne of Grace must bear the stamp of sincerity if they are to reach their high destination. The most acceptable form of worship is that which rests on an unreserved compliance with the laws of God as the worshiper has learned their purport.

6. Religious Intolerance.—The Church holds, that the right to worship according to the dictates of conscience has been conferred upon man by an authority higher than any of earth; and that, in consequence, no worldly power can justly interfere with its exercise. The Latter-day Saints accept as inspired the constitutional provision, by which religious liberty within our own nation is professedly guarded, that no law shall ever be made "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"[1189] and they confidently believe that, with the spread of enlightenment throughout the world, a similar guarantee will be acquired by every nation. Intolerance has been the greatest hindrance to true progress in every period of time; yet under the sable cloak of perverted zeal for religion, nations while boasting of their civilization, and professed ministers of the gospel of Christ, have stained the pages of the world's history with the record of such unholy deeds of persecution as to make the heavens weep. In this respect, so-called Christianity ought to bow its head in shame before the record of even pagan toleration. Rome, while arrogantly, though none the less effectively, posing as the mistress of the world, granted to her vanquished subjects the rights of free worship, requiring of them only that they refrain from molesting others or one another in the exercise of such freedom.

7. But as soon as the gospel of Christ was established upon the earth, its devout adherents immediately, and its more pretentious though less sincere devotees of a later day, came to regard themselves as of such sanctity and excellence that all who believed and professed not as did they, were wholly unworthy of consideration. Nay, even long prior to the advent of the Teacher of Love, Israel, knowing the covenant of Divine favor under which they had flourished, counted themselves sure of an exalted station, and looked upon all who were not of the chosen seed as unworthy. Christ, in His ministry among the Jews, saw with compassionate sorrow the spiritual and intellectual bondage of the times, and declared unto them the saving word, saying, "The truth shall make you free." At this, those self-righteous children of the covenant became angry, and boastfully answered, "We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man; how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?" Then the Master reproved them for their bigotry:—"I know that ye are Abraham's seed, but ye seek to kill me, because my word has no place in you."[1190]

8. There is little cause for wonder in the fact that the early Christians, zealous for the new faith unto which they had been baptized, and newly converted from idolatrous practices and pagan superstitions, should consider themselves superior to the rest of humanity still sitting in darkness and ignorance. Even John, now known as the Apostle of Love, but surnamed by the Christ, he and his brother James, Boanerges, or Sons of Thunder,[1191] was intolerant and resentful toward those who followed not his path; and more than once he had to be rebuked by his Master. Note this incident:—"And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us; and we forbade him because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part. For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward."[1192] And again, while traveling with their Lord through Samaria, the apostles James and John were incensed at the Samaritans' neglect shown toward the Master; and they craved permission to call fire from heaven to consume the unbelievers, but their revengeful desire was promptly rebuked by the Lord, who said, "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them."[1193]

9. Intolerance is Unscriptural.—The teachings of our Lord breathe the spirit of forbearance and love even to enemies. He tolerated, though he could not approve, the practices of the heathen in their idolatry, the Samaritans with their mongrel and unorthodox customs of worship, the luxury-loving Sadducees, and the law-bound Pharisees. Hatred was not countenanced even toward foes. His instructions were:—"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."[1194] The Twelve were commanded to salute with their blessing every house at which they applied for hospitality. True, if the people rejected them and their message, retribution was to follow; but this visitation of cursing was to be reserved as a Divine prerogative for the judgment day. In His Parable of the Tares, Christ taught the same lesson of forbearance; the hasty servants wanted to pluck out the weeds straightway, but they were forbidden lest they root up the wheat also; and were assured that a separation would be effected in the time of harvest.[1195]

10. In spite of the prevailing spirit of toleration and love which pervades the teachings of the Savior and His apostles, attempts have been made to draw from the scriptures justification for intolerance and persecution.[1196] Paul's stinging words, addressed to the Galatians, have been given a meaning wholly foreign to the spirit which prompted them. Warning the Saints of false teachers, he said:—"As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."[1197] With such an utterance, self-styled ministers of Christ, who, if the whole truth were considered, are perhaps preaching doctrines foreign to the apostolic precepts, seek to justify their sectarian hatred and unchristian cruelty; forgetting that vengeance and recompense belong to the Lord.[1198]

11. The intent of John's words of counsel to the Elect Lady has been perverted, and his teachings have been made a cover of refuge for persecutors and bigots. Warning her of the ministers of Antichrist who were industriously disseminating their heresies, the apostle wrote:—"If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God-speed: for he that biddeth him God-speed is partaker of his evil deeds."[1199] By no rightful interpretation can these words be made to sanction intolerance, persecution, and hatred.

12. The apostle's true meaning has been set forth with clearness and force by a renowned Christian writer of the present day, who, after deploring the "narrow intolerance of an ignorant dogmatism," says:—"The Apostle of Love would have belied all that is best in his own teaching if he had consciously given an absolution, nay, an incentive, to furious intolerance.... Meanwhile, this incidental expression of St. John's brief letter will not lend itself to these gross perversions. What St. John really says and really means, is something wholly different. False teachers were rife, who, professing to be Christians, robbed the nature of Christ of all which gave its efficacy to the atonement, and its significance to the incarnation. These teachers, like other Christian missionaries, traveled from city to city; and, in the absence of public inns, were received into the houses of Christian converts. The Christian lady to whom St. John writes is warned, that if she offers her hospitality to these dangerous emissaries, who were subverting the central truth of Christianity, she is expressing a public sanction of them; and by doing this, and offering them her best wishes, she is taking a direct share in the harm they do. This is common sense, nor is there anything uncharitable in it. No one is bound to help forward the dissemination of teaching what he regards as erroneous respecting the most essential doctrines of his own faith. Still less would it have been right to do this in the days when Christian communities were so small and weak. But, to interpret this as it has in all ages been practically interpreted—to pervert it into a sort of command to exaggerate the minor variations between religious opinions, and to persecute those whose views differ from our own—to make our own opinions the conclusive test of heresy, and to say with Cornelius-a-Lapide, that this verse reprobates 'all conversations, all intercourse, all dealings with heretics'—is to interpret scripture by the glare of partisanship and spiritual self-satisfaction, not to read it under the light of holy love."[1200]

13. Toleration is not Acceptance.—The human frailty of running to extremes in thought and action finds few more glaring examples than are presented in man's dealings with his fellows on matters religious. On the one hand, he is prone to regard the faith of others as not merely inferior to his own, but as utterly unworthy of his respect; or, on the other, he brings himself to believe that all sects are equally justified in their professions and practices, and that therefore there is no distinctively true order of religion. It is in no wise inconsistent for Latter-day Saints to boldly proclaim the conviction, that their own Church is the accepted one, the only one entitled to the designation "Church of Jesus Christ," and the sole earthly repository of the eternal priesthood in the present age; and yet to willingly accord kind treatment and a recognition of sincerity of purpose to every soul or sect honestly professing Christ, or merely showing a respect for truth, and manifesting a sincere desire to walk according to the light received. My allegiance to the Church of my choice is based on a conviction of the validity and genuineness of its high claim to distinction, as the one and only Church possessing a God-given charter of authority; nevertheless, I count the sects as sincere until they demonstrate that they are otherwise, and am prepared to defend them in their rights.

14. Joseph Smith, the first prophet of the last dispensation, while reproving certain of his brethren for intolerance toward the cherished beliefs of other men, taught that even idolaters ought to be protected in their worship; that, while it would be the strict duty of any Christian to direct his efforts toward enlightening such benighted minds, he would not be justified in forcibly depriving even the heathen of their rights of adoration. In the pure eyes of God, idolatry is one of the most heinous of sins; yet He is tolerant of those who, knowing Him not, yield to their inherited instinct for worship by rendering homage even to stocks and stones. Deadly as is the sin of idolatrous worship on the part of him to whom light has come, it may represent in the savage the sincerest reverence of which he is capable. And, as set forth in a preceding lecture,[1201] the voice of the Eternal One has declared that the heathen who have known no law shall have part in the first resurrection.

15. What justification can man find for intolerance toward his fellow, when God, who is grieved over every sin, manifests so marked a forbearance? The free agency of the human soul is sacred to Deity.

NOTES.

LECTURE XXII.

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND TOLERATION.