Why would I ask such a question? Why would it even be in question? What does it have to do with freedom? To understand these questions, we have to understand the following questions as well as their answers: What is agency? What happens when we support the government’s attempt to take it away from others? What is compulsion? What happens to us when we support the government’s attempt to use it on others?
Moses Chapter 4 states that because Satan “sought to destroy the agency of man”, he was cast out of Heaven. What did Satan want to force us to do? The scriptures say Satan wanted to force us back to Heaven. This brings up the question, “What is wrong with going back to Heaven?” Nothing. The Book of Moses teaches that our exaltation is our Father in Heaven’s entire purpose. (Moses 1:39) Clearly it is the “how” not the “what” that really matters.
Satan and his followers were cast out of the Father’s presence for attempting to compel us to do his will. In Doctrine and Covenants 121:37 we learn what our consequence is for following the same path:
(W)hen we undertake to… exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men… behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
These scriptures instruct us that when we try to compel anyone to do something, when they themselves have not violated the rights of others, we are literally following Satan’s plan, are rejecting the law of God, and the sacrifice of those that came before us and most importantly, we lose our priesthood.
The scriptures are clear that whenever we venture to compel another to do something, we must be sure that we are acting in righteousness, and not (in a metaphorical way) forcing our brothers and sisters back to Heaven.
This applies to every aspect of our lives, from parenting, to martial relationships, Church callings, and even to our actions in relation to government; any aspect that we can use our position of authority to compel another.
Doctrine and Covenants 134:1 states that the Father,
“holds [us] accountable for [our] acts in relation to [government], both in making laws and administering them”
Verse 2 teaches that to remain in peace, we must ensure that our agent, the government, protects (notice it does not say provide) the life, conscience and property of all within its area of jurisdiction. Not only must it protect our right to our property, but it says it must protect our right to control our property.
To protect those basic God given rights, we learn from scripture that- “all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld.” (D&C134:3). Therefore, if I am not violating your life, your conscience, or your property, how can you feel justified in violating mine? Obedience to this basic principle is a necessity for peaceful government. God says he will hold us accountable for such actions.
Regarding government, the Lord Himself said He gave us the US Constitution,
“That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.” (D&C 101:78)
He gave us the Constitution as a tool that He will hold us accountable towards in regards to its heavenly appointed purpose of protecting the agency of our fellow man. And according to Doctrine and Covenants 98:7, to use the Constitution in any other way is evil. When we use government to compel others to “do good”, no matter how “good” it is, we are putting our Priesthood authority at risk.
Some take this to mean that to obey this principle is to neglect our holy mandate to provide for the poor and needy. Nothing is further from the truth. While it is true that we all have an obligation to be a good neighbor, to take good care of the stewardship the Lord has given us, to care for others, etc., if I am compelled to do those things, that portion of my existence is a waste. I did not have the opportunity to act, but was acted upon and therefore cannot be accountable for those sins of neglecting my neighbor or blessed for that “good” that was done on their behalf. Those that seek to compel others to do good actually follow a plan they rejected before they were born.
Another way we put our Priesthood at risk is through government education. Education is essential to our progression, and has always been a commandment from our Father in Heaven. However, we have been warned about the elements of compulsion used in its implementation. President Brigham Young said,
“I am opposed to free education as much as I am opposed to taking away property from one man and giving it to another… Would I encourage free schools by taxation? No!” –General Conference 1877
John Taylor was even clearer on the matter when he said this about sending our children to government schools,
“I very much question men and women’s getting into the Celestial kingdom of God who have no more knowledge about principles of life and salvation than to go and tamper with the sacred offspring, the principle of life which God entrusted to your care.” –General Conference 1878
Remember, it was Lucifer that wanted us all to return to our Father in Heaven (clearly a good goal, in line with the will of the Father). However, he wanted to use compulsion to do it. Would God be a just god if our consequence was any different than Lucifer’s for the same action here on earth?
As Howard W. Hunter said,
“If you deprive a man of his right to fail in the righteous use of his property, you also deprive him of his right to succeed. If you remove from a man his right to ‘go to hell,’ you likewise remove his free agency to go to heaven.” Howard W. Hunter, BYU, 8 March, 1966
So how do we “get” people to do what is right? What about lazy parents that won’t ensure their children are educated or greedy people that will not help those in need?
In Doctrine and Covenants Section 121, after learning some of the ways in how to lose our Priesthood authority, we learn the Lord’s way to help each other do what is right; the Lord said we are to do it,
“(O)nly by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile…” (D&C 121:41–42)
When we use compulsion or direct our agents, the government, to use compulsion and unrighteous dominion, we put our Priesthood authority at risk. With all of the earthly laws and statutes that use this principle of the evil one, there are clearly those amongst us that have put this authority at risk, and have possibly lost it because of their actions in these areas. Do you support laws that compel your neighbors in an unrighteous way? If so, it would be beneficial to ask yourself, “Have I lost my Priesthood?”, and if so, “What can I do to get it back?”
For a more in-depth explanation of these principles, I highly recommend reading H. Verlan Andersen’s classic “Many Are Called But Few Are Chosen”, which was recommended in the April 1972 General Conference for all members to read by then Elder Ezra Taft Benson.
Well said.
The Book of Mormon makes a great point about a period in time when the Nephites having judges to rule, instead of kings. This demands that each and every citizen become responsible for their actions, and preserving their freedoms within their government. That way, the people could never blame anyone else but themselves for their own downfall. And that’s the tendency of most people—looking for someone ELSE to blame, other than themselves. So begets a whole crop of politicians who promise to make life all better by taking away personal responsibility, and putting it on the government’s shoulders.
When the people permit kings and dictators to be solely responsible for a nations actions, ruin follows. In the 1930′s-40′s, the Japanese emperor, considered a deity by his people, permitted Tojo’s cabinet to engage in a ruinous war with the US. The Japanese citizens meekly followed their Emperor’s lead, because they were raised to obey without question someone who took the place of God for their Eternal salvation–a false messiah.
I can’t find the reference, but I once read a quote by Adolf Hitler were he told the German people that they would be absolved of all guilt of ANY actions they took in pursuit of establishing the Third Reich, because he, Hitler, would bear ALL the responsibility personally–In essence, becoming a Dark messiah who gave absolution to evil deeds done in his name.
If it is wrong for general citizens to do evil at the request or order of government then why are soldiers allowed to follow evil orders. Didn’t Pres. Hinckley say that soldiers would not be held accountable for following evil orders? After WWII, the defense of “I was just following orders” didn’t hold up in court. So why would soldiers get a free pass to follow orders to do atrocities today?
The War in Heaven continues to be fought here on earth. The fight has always been over the agency of man. Agency is vital to salvation. Without it we cannot have a fulness of joy. As Priesthood holders we must extend our influence to all. Freedom is at stake at this late hour. We must safeguard it at all costs. May God help us to preserve our liberties.
I couldn’t agree more with your comment, this is my first time finding this site but i have gotten a lot of flack in Priesthood meeting when i bring stuff up like that. I say this is the perpetuation of the fight against Lucifer here on earth and that WE perpetuate his plan when we try to force our neighbors or to do what is right. I got into a huge argument when I said that if you support laws that force others to do what is right then you are perpetuating Satan’s plan. Of course i prefaced it by saying as long as those rights do not infringe upon others rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. P.S. I love this site
Great article Bryan.
It’s a good article, reminds me of “Many Are Called But Few Are Chosen” by H. Verlan Andersen. That book expanded my understanding of the principles of Freedom and the scriptures in D&C 121… “Amen to the authority and priesthood of that man” (or woman) who exercises unrighteous dominion.
Definitely worth the read, and consideration, both the article and the book.
It is gratifying to see that someone else has noticed these truths relative to D&C 121.
Many members of the Church in Utah, at least, have ignored or even fought against the inspired counsel of those they supposedly sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators.
Far too many have voted for candidates for public office who have voted for legislation that infringes or destroyss our agency. Do these willfully ignorant or rebellious members still hold the Holy Priesthood?
Bryan, Interesting timing as I felt inspired to mention some of these things in elders quorum on the 11th. I don’t know that I articulated it as well. I would also add Mathew 7 to the article. Communism and socialism are polar opposites of Christs plan of happiness. Can we enter the Celestial kingdom while supporting such ” evil fruit”? We can give priesthood blessings and “cast out devils” but if we are supporting that which brings forth evil fruit……
Mathew 22
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
When H V Anderson did a survey many years ago over 70% of BYU students were Communist supporters. I wonder what the results would be today?
We have a more large portion of members that partake of the modern day Gadianton spoils or support its legislation.
Am I wrong?
Timely and important, Bryan. The results of turning the back on the principle of agency as addressed in gov’t are: The Lord will cleanse the church; the importance of being one with Christ will supercede one’s fealty to the corporation; there will probably be a division in the church.
May I recommend Denver Snuffer’s blog for latter-day subject scripture study. His other articles are wonderful as well. Check out ‘Broken Souls’.
Thanks Bryan. Keep writing. Dinah
I second your recommendation for others to read Denver Snuffer’s blog, though people may also want to consider reading his books in order to better understand why he says some of the things he says.
Thank you for this great article. Too many in public office loose their principles when they are pressured & threatened by the all too powerful National Republican Party or the National Democrat Party. I have great respect for Ron Paul, Rep. from Texas that has had the courage to withstand the pressure from the National Parties and remain strong for freedom, liberty and the Constitution of our founding fathers. As our elected representatives ridicule and make fun of “The Tea Party” people and those like Ron Paul that are true and faithful to the Constitution, I think of those in the spacious building mocking, ridiculing and making fun of those holding onto the iron and partaking of the fruit from the tree of life. Even many elected in the church have compromised their principles in order to get elected or be re-elcted because of the pressure from the two national parties.
Hear, hear.. for Ron Paul a really bad example of LDS senator is Harry Reid.
I think this view all too simplified, and incorrect. #1 It is not necessarily true that Satan was going to force everyone back to heaven. All you need to do to remove ones agency is to remove their self reliance (or independences in the spehere in which you are created). I have found nowhere in scripture where is said that Satan was going to force everyone to heaven. He said he would save them all. And God talked about Satan destroying the agency of man, which can mean something totally different from compulsion. There are several ways to do that; lower the standards so everyone can pass; leave them ignorant about what they can do about salvation. Without sufficient knowlege, one cannot be accountable, which means you are not an agent unto yourself. Read D&C 93 and 104. Perhaps Satan was going to force, but, all the scriptures would still pertain if he didn’ t but merely made them reliant upon him in such a way that they had insufficient accountability. I think the evangelicals doctrine has shown that. All you need to do is confess Jesus, and you will be saved. Lessened accountability for your actions. #2 President Grant said that the greatest blessing to mankind, both financially and spiritually, was the Prohibition Ammendment. The prophet at the time of the repeal of Prohibition was extremely disappointed in the Mormons who provided the last state necessary for repeal. So what do your simple libertarian views say about contradicting a sitting prophet of God. I even see well-known libertarian Mormons teaching that we should legalize drugs #3. We were told for several decades last centurty to work to get pornography banned. #4 I think we all know how the church stands on the issue of gay marriage. #5. We had a sitting prophet of God tell is in general conference that we needed to make communism treasonable. or we would be letting the secret combinations get above us. How would that square with the strict libertarians view of freedom of assembly? I could go on and on with this. We have a right as a society to get together and decide what is good for us. For there really is no such thing as a sin in private that has no effect on society. And God will judge our ripeness for destruction by what we allow and permit and consider good. So is it possible that you are misinterpreting the circumstances for “compulsion”, and allowing moral agency. How do you square what we have been taught with your interpretations of these scriptures you quote. How about in Moses time. All those people who weren’t on the Lord’s side were killed by those who were. Is that implementing “Satan’s Plan”. It would be according to what I see libertarians coming forth with their all or nothing thinking on liberty. I think your vision of things is headed toward anarchy. There has to be a balance between personal liberties and the good of society. I think you strike the balance in the wrong place, a bit to the left. I believe a little false doctrine is creeping in among us, and I call on everyone to study for yourselves. It was prophesied that false doctrine would creep in among us. Could this be one?
Thanks for those comments. Which doctrine are you saying may be false?
“There has to be a balance between personal liberties and the good of society.”
Why? Isn’t it quite possible that the best “good of society” is, in fact, the condition of the greates possible amount of personal liberty? Why are the two assumed to be opposed ideals between which some middle point must be found?
You’ve made some good points here which relate to some of the flaws in libertarianism, a philosophy of man which fails to recognize God and His laws.
“You’ve made some good points here which relate to some of the flaws in libertarianism, a philosophy of man which fails to recognize God and His laws.”
Libertarianism recognizes the agency of man to its fullest and logical extent. Man’s agency is a law of God. So how would a libertarian society solve the dilemma of having a public morality without it being coercively enforced by a central government? Through the proliferation of voluntary communities owning private property, each with their own type of covenant restricting or prohibiting what they see as harmful behaviors.
If a particular covenant is disagreeable to you, then you don’t have to live there or visit there. This currently is what occurs with individual homes. If your neighbor is a jerk, then you don’t have to visit there or spend the night. Likewise, you can forbid him from entering your residence.
In time we would see covenants that are drug-free (both religious and secular), pot-smoker communities, Renaissance re-enactment communities, Mormon-only communities headed by a prophet where the Word of Wisdom is enforced and gambling/prostitution/pornography are forbidden etc.
Every individual would have a choice of many different communities which reflected their personal morals. Each lifestyle community would compete for members. Folks would judge the tree by the fruit, and I suspect that communities embracing harmful behaviors would putrefy and fizzle out. Even if they didn’t, their pathology would remain contained, which is the next best thing.
#1 you all allege that it’s “not necessarily true that Satan was going to force everyone back to heaven.” First off in the scriptures it doesn’t say anything detailing Satan’s plan even in Abraham it just says there were two that said here am I send me, and he chose the first. You say that Satan’s plan said that he would save them all yet you indicate at the same time that somehow he wouldn’t use force to get them there, tell me how else would he accomplish this? Is there any other way other than force or taking away Agency to accomplish this? Now what is it to destroy the agency of man? Isn’t it to take away man’s choice? What is a world without choices? Don’t know about you but I call that being forced or compelled. Even if you lower the standards so everyone can “pass” this does not ensure that all will make it back, and it does not also insure that their agency is destroyed because even with less of a choice there would still be some choice, and we all know that not everyone would choose his way given the choice even if the bar were lowered. The part you said about leaving them ignorant I say that just because someone is ignorant doesn’t mean that they don’t have choices, they would still have life choices. Even if this means that you are not accountable does not mean that they would not have any accountability, all will pay a price even the ignorant, Yes Christ must cover the ignorant person’s sins but they must still choose his plan and him when presented with the truth at one time or another. You concede that your own argument that “he wouldn’t have necessarily compelled us” is a shaky argument but then you say that all the scriptures you used are still relevant. NEWSFLASH they are NOT still relevant, your premise was faulty. Even if the Evangelicals say all you need to do is confess Jesus, What does that have to do with real Truth? This is an example of Satan confusing the hearts of the children leading them away with a cunning tongue that has nothing to do with what he would have done. Still even more important there would have to be a choice to confess Jesus’ name. He would have to eliminate ALL Agency!
#2 President Grant is not God, he was while the President of the Church God’s mouthpiece. There have been many instances where the Prophet’s of the Church have disagreed on issues, but unless a prophet prefaces his words with “Thus sayeth the Lord” it doesn’t hold the same weight. Also we know that Brigham Young spoke his mind, and not the Lord’s mind often, which is why there can be some confusion. For Example Brother Brigham if I’m not mistaken said that the Negroid man will never hold the priesthood. That obviously isn’t true as Joseph Smith ordained several and as we well know Blacks have been able to hold it since 1987 In theory it would be good if all humans didn’t drink Alcohol, just look at the effects of any sort of prohibition on any society. So what if he were disappointed that the saints were the last state necessary to repeal. What do you actually mean? is it that Utah was the last state to repeal the amendment? If Utah was the last state to repeal wouldn’t that mean that they were the last ones to get on board to overturn the amendment? Did President Grant really say that it was the “greatest blessing to mankind both financially and spiritually? Did he not mean by abiding by the principals of the word of wisdom that mankind would have great spiritual and financial blessings? As for Libertarian views being “Simple” You Sir should read what Joseph Smith had to say about Liberty. You should read what the Book of Mormon says about Liberty, study just for one hour on this and you will have a changed mind.
#3 I personally don’t remember anyone ever telling me as a lifelong LDS member of 33 years to ever work to get pornography banned. I do remember being told that it was evil wrong and I should never look at it, and that I should encourage others to not view its contents. I do realize however that I can not and should not force my idea of morality on others. I will compare your pornography discussion to Prostitution. It is a well known fact that in the Book of Mormon there were Harlots. I don’t ever remember anyone mentioning it was illegal.
#4 I have tried to find it but I haven’t heard it from any of the prophet’s or apostle’s mouths, that we as a church should help to legislate morals for gays. If anyone can help me find this It would be much appreciated. I think what they are saying is that Marriage is Holy and Sacred and that God defines it by a man and a woman. Not to mention the fact that no marriage outside of the Temple is real Marriage. When the State has the Authority to give permission in Marriage that is when marriage is not a marriage. Ask yourself this What gives the state the Authority to Marry people?
#5 Which Prophet said that Communism should be treated as a treasonable offense. Communism is hardly a secret combination, that is more like a well known control mechanism combination. The Federal Reserve is a better example of Secret Combination.
Sorry to say but you haven’t made one point that holds any water. How would that hold with a strict libertarian’s view of freedom of assembly. Well, first think about what the idea of communism connotes, force and control come to my mind first. Question, under communist rule do you have many liberties? Is there any real Agency? Does it remind you of Satan’s plan or Christ’s plan? The point is did whatever President of the Church say that, and if they did, do you think they really meant that it is treason or were they saying the idea of communism is a really bad thing. Libertarians are not misinterpreting the circumstances for “compulsion” and allowing moral agency. Libertarianism is Not one of those False doctrines that is “creeping in”. Liberty is a doctrine of the Church, it is the first principal of our beliefs it is what allows us to choose to believe in God as we choose. Also whoever said Anarchy was a bad thing, when with governments you have a huge propensity for corruption. Here are a couple definitions of Anarchy from Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary Anarchy – a: absence of government, b: a Utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government. c: : absence or denial of any authority or established order. Those don’t sound too bad compared with what we have now. I think a little false doctrine has crept in with you brother, and I hope you will study how Liberty and the gospel go hand in hand.
Well, in the scriptures it says the Gadianton’s would infiltrate our governments and our LDS church as well, so all this should be of no surprise to those who are aware of these scriptures. While we should be involved in spreading the truth and pointing out what we determine to be glaring examples of this happening we also need to be careful not to scare those who do not know these things or have never had anybody tell them. They are just concerned with trying to work out their salvation and coping with what life has dealt them. These are very scary times for these people, indeed all people for that matter. Our first concern should be to our fellow man and looking after those who are in need. Agency is what this war is all over and we should never try to tell anybody what to do except with our right to vote. We should try to inform but not compel. If we start to tell people that they will lose their Priesthood power if they don’t think like we do then how are we different from the people we are trying to warn them about. Loving the Lord and loving our fellow man is what we are supposed to be about and if we are not doing that with love in our hearts then we are in jeopardy as well. I agree with the article but I don’t agree with fear mongering.
When in early 2008 the First Presidency requested a Utah state legislative committee to exercise “mercy” in addressing the issue of revoking certain benefits being given to illegals that Utah taxpayers were paying for, I think they were upholding continuation of the legalized plunder of Utah taxpayers in order to continue the benefits in question. Does anybody think the First Presidency was out of order in making this request? I can only surmise that the Lord approved that request.
Charity is our most important virtue. Charity is the pure love of Christ. Charity is a personal virtue and our giving of our charity should be personal. It is not the right of the federal government to take from you to give to me. Where is the charity when it is forced? Where in the U. S. Constitution does the government have that right to take from one to give to another? The government does not have that right under our constitution. It is just one more example of a corrupt government taking on powers that are not given to it under our God inspired constitution of our founding fathers. Charity is a marvelous personal virtue and all of us should enjoy the blessing of charity. It fails to be charity when it is forced by the federal government. It becomes an abuse of power.
I have watched (these last few years especially) how the government is taking away freedom from the people. I pray that will not be the case to the point where he found “not one” who was righteous in Sodom and Gamorah, Those of us who are determined to always do good must be even better, so that the Lord will not allow us to be destroyed. He has promised that as long as the people remain righteous, he will not destroy us. However, we see so much evil around us that I feel the necessity to work hard, be obedient to the commandments, and not allow ourselves to become taken in by those who have chosen the worldly ways we face every day. My advice to all who read this, please, please pay attention to what our Patriots are saying, and speak up. Please, please pay close attention to our Modern Prophets. As I understand it, the priesthood can be taken away by evil. It can also be restored through honest, true repentance.
Greetings,
The question is not have you lost your priesthood, but rather, did you ever have it?
Paul
Well said Ezra. Great quotes. I will add this article to my arsenal of reasons I have the political beliefs I do.
Thanks!
I am confused, it almost seems that parents that MUST send their children to public schools because they both work to ensure their family can make ends meet are being accused as being lazy because they do not homeschool. I am not against homeschooling, but there are people out there that are trained to teach children, and want to teach, well, let them teach. Yes, the church would help if needed in the shortcomings, but if by both my husband and I working we ensure that we are providing without constant assistance that we are accountable for our household, and not the church means sacrificing homeschooling then that is one sacrifice I am willing to make. Does it mean I rely solely on the teachers that teach, no, I do not. My son during summer gets lessons to ensure he is continually learning. Do I help him with his homework when he gets home, yes I do…does that mean I am lax because I do not stay at home and teach him myself on a constant basis???
No Jen, no one is saying you are lax or lazy. This article never accused anyone of being lax at all, or of anything for that matter. Homeschooling wasn’t mentioned either.
For more info on education I would like to add some more shameless self promotion and recommend you read this article on the subject for more principles to understand and then pray about and get revelation on how it applies or doesn’t apply to your family.
http://ldsliberty.org/a-hope-and-vision-for-the-youth-of-zion/
I hope we wont automatically take offense when we learn something new, but that we will stop and ask our Father in Heaven what is right and how we can best be obedient to Him, no matter what the answer is.
“all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same;” (D&C134:3).
Contrary to popular belief, law and government are different institutions and don’t necessarily go together. An early common law judge had no connection with government, and could not use police, troops, or prisons to enforce decisions. So, you ask, could a criminal simply walk away? Yes and no. If they refused to pay restitution to the victim, the judge would use a procedure called outlawry.
He’d say, “We will not force the law on you. You have decided to be outside the law, so be it. But since you don’t accept the responsibilities of the law, neither shall you have its protections. From now on your legal status will be no different from that of a rabbit or any other wild animal outside the law.” Then anyone could hunt him down and kill him just like a wild animal or take his things or enslave him. It was none of the courts business. The victim might even hire a bounty hunter to track the criminal down and sell him as a beast of burden to other individuals or corporations.
To understand how the above knowledge is reconciled with the scripture see:
http://ldsanarchy.wordpress.com/2007/11/14/is-anarchism-compatible-with-dc-134/