“A Threatened Union of Church and State” American Sentinel 12, 42, pp. 658, 659.

TO the Mormons in Utah President Woodruff of their hierarchy has proclaimed: “Unite in your temple work and unite in your politics.” And the newspapers are calling this a “threatened union of church and state in Utah.

Yes, that is what it is. But that is nothing new, nor is it peculiar to Utah. For years the same thing has been threatened, and in the same way, by the professed Protestant churches of the whole country, and with respect to the politics of the nation.

In 1893 these churches throughout the whole country united in their politics and showered Congress with their united pledge “never to vote for, nor support in any way, for any office or position of trust,” any member of Congress who refused to vote at that particular time as they dictated.

We said all the time that this work of these churches threatened a union of church and state. This was so plain that all could see it; yet the press generally, for some reason, would not denounce it as such. But as soon as the Mormons propose the same thing, only in the little State of Utah, it is heralded over the country as a threatened union of church and state. This is right: but why be so partial? It is no worse in the Mormon Church than it is in the professed Protestant churches of the whole country.

The Christian Endeavorers, the Christian Citizenship Leagues, the Law and Order Leagues, and a number of other organizations, have for some time been making prominent this very matter of uniting in their politics. Why is not this noted as a threatened union of church and state? For that is exactly what it is.

The Mormon Church proposes to unite in their politics, in order that they can have the will of their church combination respected and carried into effect by the State of Utah. All these other church combinations did the same thing in 1892 and 1893, and they are doing it yet, [659] in order to have the will of their church combination carried into effect by the national government.

The Mormon proposition is to make in Utah a State religion: the proposition of these other church combinations is to make a national religion. They are alike in principle, but the latter is as much worse in practice as the nation is greater than the State of Utah.

Yes, that Mormon proposition does threaten a union of church and state, and as such it should be opposed. By the propositions of these professed Protestant churches and other religious combinations threaten precisely the same thing. Let this be opposed also. And let this be watched the more closely and opposed the more strongly, as it means mischief on a larger scale than the other. Let there be no respect of persons nor churches in any “threatened union of church and state.”

Share this: