Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: April 05, 2012 05:20PM

It's not surprising that Mormons howl in protest--screaming "SACRED!" at the top of their latter-day lungs--when honest efforts are made to examine the history of their secret, violence-laden Mormon temple oaths and rituals.

One of the more notorious ones in this regard was the infamous “Oath of Vengeance,” which Mormons swore against the United States government.

Into the first two decades of the 20th century, faithful, temple-attending Mormons, secretly took this Oath of Vengeance. The U.S. Senate considered it a serious enough threat to convene hearings on this Mormon temple vow and other matters related to the LDS church.

Below are some pertinent historical details regarding this Oath of Vengeance that Mormons are not inclined to talk about in openly:

“Following Joseph Smith's martyrdom [actually, Smith, armed with a pistol, was shot to death in a jailhouse gunfight after being place behind bars for ordering the destruction of a newspaper press], Brigham Young [Smith's successor] introduced an oath in the [Mormon temple] endowment which required members [of the church] to swear vengeance 'upon this nation.' It became the subject of a United States Senate investigation.

“Reed Smoot was a Mormon Apostle who had been elected a Senator from Utah. In 1903 a protest was filed in the United States Senate to have [the] Hon. Smoot removed from office, on the grounds that he had taken this treasonous oath in the endowment ritual.

"The complete record of this episode was published in 'U.S. Senate Document 486 (59th Congress, 1st Session) Proceedings Before the Committee on Privileges and Elections of the United States Senate in the Matter of the Protests Against the Right of Hon. Reed Smoot, a Senator from the State of Utah, to hold his Seat,' 4 vols.[+1 vol. index] (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1906).”

When questioned about it under oath during U.S. Senate hearings, Smoot refused to divulge this secret Mormon temple Oath of Vengeance. (for a “New York Times” account of Smoot's cover-up in this regard, see: “Smoot Would Not Tell of Endowment Secrets,” in “New York Times," 23 January 1905, at: http://1857massacre.com/MMM/PDF/Smoot_01-23-1905_NYTimes.pdf ; and “Oath of Vengeance,” at: http://1857massacre.com/MMM/oath_of_vengeance.htm;)


This secret Mormon temple ritual's multi-generational Oath of Vengeance against the U.S. government was worded as follows:

“You and each of you do covenant and promise that you will pray and never cease to pray to Almighty God to avenge the blood of the prophets upon this nation, and that you will teach the same to your children and to your children's children unto the third and fourth generation.”

(“Oath of Vengeance,” at: http://www.lds-mormon.com/veilworker/oathvenge.shtml)


With word leaking out of its existence, the Mormon church eventually removed this Oath of Vengeance was from its secret temple rituals.

Below is an overall history of this vow of vengeance and retribution against their own government, as temple-attending Mormons promised to obey it:

“One of the oaths which was formerly taken in the temple ritual was the source of so much trouble that the Mormon leaders finally removed it entirely from the ceremony. This oath was printed in 'Temple Mormonism,' pa. 21, as follows: 'You and each of you do solemnly promise and vow that you will pray, and never cease to pray, and never cease to importune high heaven to avenge the blood of the prophets on this nation, and that you will teach this to your children and your children's children unto the third and fourth generation.'\

“A great deal of testimony has been given concerning this oath, and although all of the witnesses did not agree as to its exact wording, there can be little doubt that such an oath was administered to the Mormon people after Joseph Smith's death. John D. Lee related that the following occurred after Joseph Smith's death:

“' . . . Brigham raised his hand and said, 'I swear by the eternal Heavens that I have unsheathed my sword, and I will never return it until the blood of the Prophet Joseph and Hyrum, and those who were slain in Missouri, is avenged. This whole nation is guilty of shedding their blood, by assenting to the deed, and holding its peace.' .. . . Furthermore, every one who had passed through their endowments, in the Temple, were placed under the most sacred obligations to avenge the blood of the Prophet, whenever an opportunity offered, and to teach their children to do the same, thus making the entire Mormon people sworn and avowed enemies of the American nation ('The Confessions of John D. Lee,' p. 160).

“Some Mormon apologists have maintained that there was no 'Oath of Vengeance' in the temple ceremony, but the 'Daily Journal of Abraham H. Cannon' makes it very plain that there was such an oath. Under the date of December 6, 1889, Apostle Cannon recorded the following in his diary:

“'About 4:30 p.m. this meeting adjourned and was followed by a meeting of Presidents Woodruff, Cannon and Smith and Bros. Lyman and Grant. . . . In speaking of the recent examination before Judge Anderson Father said that he understood when he had his endowments in Nauvoo that he took an oath against the murderers of the Prophet Joseph as well as other prophets, and if he had ever met any of those who had taken a hand in that massacre he would undoubtedly have attempted to avenge the blood of the martyrs.' ('Daily Journal of Abraham H. Cannon,' December 6, 1889, pp. 205-06).

“Apostle Cannon went on to relate that [eventual Mormon church president] Joseph F. Smith was about to murder a man with his pocket knife if he even expressed approval of Joseph Smith's death.

“The Oath of Vengeance probably had a great deal to do with the massacre at Mountain Meadows, in which about 120 men, women, and children were killed, and other murders which were committed in early Utah (see 'Mormonism—Shadow or Reality?' pp. 493-515, 545-59).

“Just after the turn of the century the Mormon leaders found themselves in serious trouble because of the oath of vengeance. They were questioned at great length concerning this oath in the 'Reed Smoot Case.' The Oath of Vengeance remained in the temple ceremony, however, even after the 'Reed Smoot Case' was printed . . . . It must have been removed sometime between then and 1937, because in a lecture delivered on February 28, 1937, Francis M. Darter complained that 'The Law and prayer of Retribution, or divine judgment, against those who persecute the Saints, has been entirely removed from Temple services. . . . The reason why it was taken out, says one Apostle, was because it was offensive to the young people.' ('Celestial Marriage,' p. 60).

“. . . [T]he oaths taken in the temple were originally very crude. . . . [O]ne example here [From the Smoot hearings]—i.e., the testimony of J. H. Wallis, Sr., who had been through the temple about 20 times:

“MR. WALLIS: ' . . . [A]nother vow was what we used to call the "oath of vengeance.' . . .

“MR. TAYLER: 'Stand up, if it will help you, and give us the words, if you can.'

“MR. WALLIS (standing up): 'That you and each of you do promise and vow that you will never cease to importune high heaven to avenge the blood of the prophets upon the nations of the earth or the inhabitants of the earth.' ('The Reed Smoot Case,' vol. 2, pp. 77-79).

“The next day Mr. Wallis corrected his testimony concerning the oath of vengeance:

“MR. WALLIS: 'In repeating the obligation of vengeance I find I made a mistake; I was wrong. It should have been 'upon this nation.' I had it 'upon the inhabitants of the earth.' It was a mistake on my part. (ibid., pp. 148-49).

(“Temple Work,” at: http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changech22b.htm#532)


Rest assured, you will not hear Mitt Romney speaking publicly about any of this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2012 05:21PM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Uncle Dale ( )
Date: April 05, 2012 05:45PM

steve benson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> how constitutional was the Mormon secret temple
>"Oath of Vengeance"? . . .

Just about as constitutional as were the secret
Endowment House oaths, on avenging the blood of
Joe and Hyrum Smith upon the people of Illinois.

"Long shall his blood which was shed by assassins..."

...

Just about as constitutional as the First Presidency's
Message of July 4, 1838, delivered at Far West.

Just about as constitutional as the Church's setting
David Whitmer apart and ordaining him Secretary of War.

Just about as constitutional as Joe organizing an armed
para-military expedition, and crossing state lines, to
threaten violence upon the Gentiles of Jackson and
Clay counties, Missouri, in the summer of 1834.

Just about as constitutional as Brigham Young declaring
martial law in Utah Territory in 1857, and forbidding the
passage of outsiders (U.S. troops, the Fanchers, etc.)
through his domain.

Just about as constitutional as the Quorum of Fifty
appointing secret USA ambassadors to foreign countries.

Just about as constitutional as Brigham running appointed
federal judges out of Utah Territory prior to 1858.

Need I continue?

UD

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: 3X ( )
Date: April 05, 2012 05:49PM

Big on the Constitution?

I am regularly confronted by LDS bloggers who opine, "If people only knew how much Mormons _love_ the Constitution."

UhHuh ...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: ambivalent exmo ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 08:01PM

Exactly. As long as they are stomping all over the "sinners" rights, its all good. But threaten the mo bubble, and all kinds of crazy hell breaks loose.
Mormons: "We love the constitution. God himself inspired it "
Me: "Rigghhht."

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: cludgie ( )
Date: April 06, 2012 12:58AM

I've often tried to make your point about the oath, but they look at me stupidly.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lila ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 11:02AM

Steve you would do well to really pass thisinformation around. I have lived in Utah most of my life and these people have A VERY DARK SIDE to their culture and religious practices. You might want to also refer to the Gun and Amunition Sales, being the highest in the nation, back in 2008, or 2009. The American people had better wake up and smell the coffee'. It is brewing !

Lila

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: androidandy ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 12:09PM

Hard to believe a very close friend's father very likely did this in 1927 Utah.

Ugh...

Glad I'm out of the Mormon cult.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Leah ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 12:17PM

Steve, a much simpler question would be -

How can Romney become U.S. president when he aleady swore an oath in a Mormon temple to build up the Mormon Kingdom?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: rationalguy ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 12:35PM

I remember there used to be a hymn that mentioned something about the State of Illinois" and not in a good way. Is it still in the hymn book?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: xyz ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 01:14PM

Nowadays they sing this:

Praise to his memory, he died as a martyr;
Honored and blest be his ever great name!
Long shall his blood, which was shed by assassins,
Plead unto heaven while the earth lauds his fame.

But the last line used to be this:

STAIN ILLINOIS, while the earth lauds his fame.

The cult changed the words in 1927, in accordance with its so-called "good neighbor" policy, obviously another attempt at rewriting their own reality, because everyone knows what bad neighbors Mormons make...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Glo ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 03:06PM

Should the U.S.Constitution be turned over to a cult like Mormonism???

We all know what Mormonism does to their own rank-and-file members, do we need the whole country afflicted???

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: . ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 10:59AM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Carthage Grey ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 07:42PM

Thanks for the info., Steve. My parents were married in October 1937 and I, knowing of this oath of vengence, always wondered if they had taken it. Of course, that is something I wouldn't have ever asked them in person and it appears from your info. that they probably wouldn't have done so.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 08:32PM

Carthage--- what an appropriate nick. I am busy writing again.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Carthage Grey ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 12:36AM

Thanks. I chose that name because I have slain JS and his pernicious influence in my life. Free at last . . .

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 10:18AM

My affinity for your nick has a far different meaning. My g'g'grandfather was a member of the Warsaw Riflemen. I refuse to judge Joseph. He was a product of his environment. Think on it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: xyz ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 10:25AM

Do you think that should give him a pass for his criminal behavior?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 11:01AM

Absolutely not. The justice system should be focused on rehabilitation, not merely punishment. And I do not believe in capital punishment, although sometimes that is the only option available, given the context of the times.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: lucky ( )
Date: October 04, 2012 09:09PM

actually, I have a certain amount of disgust with the U.S.A. over this. Considering all the outrageous things that Brigham Young said about the U.S. and the things like MMM that transpired in Utah, the Utah MORmON problem certainly warranted a good old General Sherman march through Georgia kind of treatment to clean things out in MORmON Zion Utah, Brig Young should have been hung on temple square, and the invitation for the same treatment extended to any others that insisted on being MORmONS about things, but the U.S. government was too much of a bunch of gutless wimps do that.

Then after the two faced MORmON POS changed their tune at least openly/publicly because they decided they wanted U.S. statehood for Utah, the U.S. patched things up with the MORmONS to the extent that they actually allowed Brigham Young's son to go to Westpoint Military Academy,when it would have been far more fitting to hang the fucking MORmON bastard.

Sometimes the U.S, acted like real MORmONS too.

I wont even start on the theme of how MORmONS constantly piss on the U.S. constitution while claiming to revere it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: exdrymo ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 01:32AM

Dang Steve you rock!

You restore my love for Arizona.

Whenever I get too fed up with Jan Brewer, I think

"Clang, Clang Clang went Katy's roller skates..."

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Anonymous User ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 05:56AM

Steve, you mean 'American Mormons' right?

All the Mormons I know don't give a rats ass about the US constitution.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: alx71ut ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 08:12AM

Steve, the purpose of the US Constitution in the LDS mindset was to establish a government on earth where the Lord could have his true church restored. Thus anything you might say to cast doubt on the LDS church being loyal to the Constitution will not make a dent with TBM's. If Romney wins then when he takes an oath to uphold and defend a document whose purpose he believes is to make the world safe for his church then he'll probably feel no reservations or conflicts at all with his temple oaths.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: forbiddencokedrinker ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 09:04AM

No, no, no Steve, they are big on the U.S. Constitution as a sacred document. You forget that Mormons revere their sacred documents, they just don't pay much attention to what is written in any of them.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Puli ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 12:13PM

I had heard of a couple of TBM's who thought the Civil War was God's retribution on The US for Joseph's death. Has anyone else heard of such an idea? Does it have any roots from Mormon prophets or apostles?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: GNPE ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 12:39PM

there were More Practical problems with the U.S. 'Civil War' for Utah:

1. Which side to support? SOUTH: Slavery posed as 'States Rights', or NORTH: emancipation of blacks?

with the Constitution being 'Divine'.... No Winners!


2. The "Utah War" was just past in people's minds. Probably, BY realized that if he sent Mormon Soldiers to the CW, a LOT of them wouldn't come home, Many would be crippled... How would that Help/Be of Value to the ppl in Utah?
Answer: None.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: ddt ( )
Date: September 09, 2013 08:53PM

Wow, where did you learn history?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: GNPE ( )
Date: October 05, 2012 01:02PM

I haven't ever seen a comprehensive essay giving the Totality of the Constitution / Religion interface.

Mormons, like others, use it as a shield to their weird beliefs/practices, but that's only part of the picture: e.g. it Doesn't exempt them from practical laws such as Zoning, etc.

I'm sure someone credible has written such a treatise, but I don't have time or interest for a long piece as that would have to be to be through... back to England, religious 'persecution' emmigration, etc.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lostmypassword ( )
Date: September 09, 2013 09:40PM

Perhaps due to the 'third and fourth generation' clause this oath will 'time out?'

:)

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed. Please start another thread and continue the conversation.