Wikipedia

Blood atonement

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by COGDEN (talk | contribs) at 00:48, 7 June 2007 (→Blood atonement doctrine during the Brigham Young administration). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

In Mormonism, blood atonement is a controversial doctrine regarding capital punishment first taught in the mid-1850s by the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) during the Mormon Reformation. According to the doctrine, there are certain sins to which the atonement of Jesus does not apply, and the highest degree of salvation requires that the sinner "have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins". There is no direct evidence that the LDS Church ever officially practiced the doctrine, even when Utah was under largely theocratic control. However, some of Brigham Young's early critics suggested that his public support of this and related doctrines was responsible for inciting LDS Church members to kill several early Mormon apostates, dissenters, and critics.

Though controversial, the LDS Church taught the doctrine well into the 20th century, within the context of government-sanctioned capital punishment, and it was responsible for laws in the state of Utah requiring execution by firing squad rather than hanging. Although the LDS Church repudiated the doctrine in 1978, it still has adherents within the church, and within Mormon fundamentalism, a branch of Mormonism not affiliated with the LDS Church that follows closely the teachings of Brigham Young. The blood atonement doctrine is often confused with other blood-related doctrines in Mormonism, such as the "blood oaths" and the Oath of Vengeance that were once part of the LDS Church's Endowment ceremony prior to their removal in the 20th century.

Historical and doctrinal background

The doctrine of blood atonement is not found in Mormon scripture, which has nothing to say about whether or not the shedding of one's blood may atone for one's sins. However, in common with most of Christianity, Mormon doctrine teaches that the sacrifice of Jesus is an infinite atonement for the sins of humanity, and that nobody other than Jesus can shed their blood for the sins of another (Alma 34:11-17). The idea that one may pay for one's own sins through capital punishment was an inference based on several elements of Mormon doctrine, including a generally favorable view toward capital punishment, the idea that spilled blood "cries out" for retribution, the idea that the shedding of blood is the preferred form of execution for crimes of bloodshed, the concept that repentance requires restitution, and the doctrine that people who break the "New and Everlasting Covenant" (Celestial marriage) would be "destroyed in the flesh" and be punished until they received their exaltation at the Last Judgment (an interpretation of D&C 132).

Capital punishment in Mormon scripture and ritual

Religious justification for capital punishment is not unique to Mormonism (Gardner 1979, p. 10). Like the Bible, the Book of Mormon, published in 1830 and is canonized by the faith, has passages that speak favorably about capital punishment. The book described a theocratic government with a law that "if a man murdered he should die" (Alma 42:19; see also 2 Nephi 9:35; Alma 27:6-9). Nevertheless, the Book of Mormon did not always require capital punishment, and never indicated that capital punishment was a requirement to atone for sins. The Book of Mormon provided an example where God (and the government) forgave "many murders" after repentance, "through the merits of [God's] Son" (Alma 24:10). The book also stated that murderers could avoid an "awful hell" if they "repent and withdraw [their] murderous purposes." (Alma 54:7).

An important precursor to the blood atonement doctrine is the idea that spilled blood "cries out" for retribution, an idea that finds several examples in Mormon scripture. In the Bible, for example, the blood of Abel ascended to the ears of God after he was killed by Cain (Genesis 4:10). In the Book of Mormon, the "blood of a righteous man" (Gideon) was said to "come upon" the theocratic leader Alma "for vengeance" against the murderer (Nehor) (Alma 1:13). Mormon scripture also refers to the "cry" of the blood of the saints ascending from the ground up to the ears of God as a testimony against those who killed them (2 Ne. 26: 3; D&C 88:6). After the death of Joseph Smith, Jr., Brigham Young added an Oath of Vengeance to the Nauvoo Endowment ritual. Participants in the ritual made an oath to pray that God would "avenge the blood of the prophets on this nation" (Buerger 2002, p. 134). "The prophets" were Joseph and Hyrum Smith, and "this nation" was the United States (Buerger 2002, p. 134). (This oath was removed from the ceremony during the 1920s (Buerger 2002, pp. 139–40).)

Historically, Mormon ritual provided an example in which capital punishment is contemplated, though not necessarily required, for violation of historical blood oaths in the Endowment ritual. The blood oaths in the ceremony related to protecting the ritual's secrecy. Participants made an oath that rather than ever revealing the secret gestures of the ceremony, they would rather have: "my throat...be cut from ear to ear, and my tongue torn out by its roots"; "our breasts...be torn open, our hearts and vitals torn out and given to the birds of the air and the beasts of the field"; "your body...be cut asunder and all your bowels gush out" showing an entire refusal to accept the promises made in the washing and anointing ordinances (Buerger 2002, p. 141). These were changed to a reference to "different ways in which life may be taken" (Buerger 2002, p. 141). The entire "penalty" portion of the ceremony was removed by the LDS Church in 1990, and during its lifetime, there is no documented instance in which a person has been killed for violating the oaths of secrecy.

Joseph Smith's views on capital punishment

Joseph Smith, Jr., the founder of the Latter Day Saint movement, is not known to have taught the blood atonement doctrine. Smith was, however, a strong proponent of capital punishment, and favored execution methods that involved the shedding of blood. He once stated that he opposed hanging as a method of execution, "instead of blood for blood according to the law of heaven" (Roberts 1902, p. 435). In a March 4 1843 debate with church leader George A. Smith, who argued against capital punishment, Smith said that if he ever had the opportunity to enact a death penalty law, he "was opposed to hanging" the convict; rather, he would "shoot him, or cut off his head, spill his blood on the ground, and let the smoke thereof ascend up to God" (Roberts 1909, p. 296). In the church's April 6 1843 general conference, Smith said he would "wring a thief's neck off if I can find him. if I cannot bring him to justice any other way."[1] Sidney Rigdon, Smith's counselor in the First Presidency, also supported capital punishment involving the spilling of blood, stating, "There are men standing in your midst that you cant do anything with them but cut their throat & bury them".[2] On the other hand, Smith was willing to tolerate the presence of men "as corrupt as the devil himself" in Nauvoo, Illinois, who "had been guilty of murder and robbery", in the chance that they might "come to the waters of baptism through repentance, and redeem a part of their allotted time" (Roberts 1932).

Teachings on capital punishment in the early Brigham Young administration

Brigham Young, Smith's successor in the LDS Church, initially held views on capital punishment similar to those of Smith. On January 27 1845, he spoke approvingly of Smith's toleration of "corrupt men" in Nauvoo who were guilty of murder and robbery, on the chance that they might repent and be baptized (Roberts 1932). On the other hand, on February 25 1846, after the Saints had left Nauvoo, Young threatened adherents who had stole wagon cover strings and rail timber with having their throats cut "when they get out of the settlements where his orders could be executed" (Roberts 1932, p. 597). Later that year, Young gave orders that "when a man is found to be a thief,...cut his throat & thro' him in the River".[3] Young also stated that decapitation of repeated sinners "is the law of God & it shall be executed".[4] There are no documented instances, however, of such a sentence being carried out on the Mormon Trail.

Doctrine that restitution is required for repentance

During the Mormon Reformation in Utah, Willard Richards and George A. Smith taught that one condition for repentance was "restitution", which required the restoration, to the extent possible, of that which was taken or destroyed by sin.[citation needed]

Being "destroyed in the flesh" for violation of Celestial marriage covenants

The most immediate precursor to the blood atonement doctrine stems from a controversial section of Mormon scripture dictated by Smith in 1843 commanding the practice of plural marriage (D&C 132). This revelation stated that once a man and a woman enter the "New and Everlasting Covenant" (a Celestial marriage), and it is "sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise" (which Smith later taught was accomplished through the second anointing ritual), that they are guaranteed to become gods in the afterlife no matter what sins or blasphemies they commit, so long as they "commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood", and they do not commit the unpardonable sin of "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost". If a sealed person shed innocent blood, they would suffer the fate of David, who was redeemed, but fell short of his exaltation, and did not become a god (D&C 132:39). If a sealed person committed the unpardonable sin, they would become a son of Perdition. According to early Mormon teachings, the unpardonable sin consisted of entering the New and Everlasting Covenant, and then falling away to become an "apostate".

However, if a sealed and anointed person broke their covenants to any extent short of murder or the unpardonable sin, they would still gain their exaltation and become gods and goddesses in the afterlife, but would be "destroyed in the flesh, and shall be delivered unto the buffetings of Satan unto the day of redemption" (D&C 132:26). The revelation did not, however, specify the mechanism by which such people would be "destroyed in the flesh", and did not it indicate whether that "redemption" would be the result of the sinner's own blood or the atonement of Jesus.

Blood atonement doctrine during the Brigham Young administration

Jedediah M. Grant is credited with the first recorded teachings on the blood atonement in 1854. Grant, a firebrand preacher, rose to the First Presidency after the death of Willard Richards in 1854 and became the main force behind the Mormon Reformation (Campbell 1988, ch. 11). His teachings in 1854 related to "covenant breakers", people who had broken their covenants made in the Endowment or Celestial marriage. At a meeting in the Salt Lake Tabernacle on March 12, 1854, Grant asked, "What disposition ought the people ot God to make of covenant breakers?" In answer to his question, he stated that they should be put to death (Grant 1854, p. 2). However, he lamented on the difficulty in applying this in a secular democracy, stating, "I wish we were in a situation favorable to our doing that which is justifiable before God, without any contaminating influences of Gentile amalgamation, laws, and traditions" (Grant 1854, p. 2). Arguing for a purer theocracy, he stated that it is the right of the church "to kill a sinner to save him, when he commits those crimes that can only be atoned for by shedding his blood.... We would not kill a man, of course, unless we killed him to save him" (Grant 1854, p. 2).

By 1856, Brigham Young was also preaching a form of blood atonement against covenant-breakers. On March 16 1856, Young stated that if "you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God."[5] Young said that if you violate the covenants you make in the temple, "The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it" (Young 1956a, pp. 243–249). Young indicated that "and under such circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands" (Young 1956a, pp. 243–249).

At a meeting on September 21 1856 attended by both Young and Grant, Grant stated that there were a great many covenant-breaking members in the church "who have committed sins that cannot be forgiven through baptism". [6] These people, Grant said, "need to have their bloodshed, for water will not do, their sins are too deep a dye"[7] Therefore, Grant advised these people volunteer to have a committee appointed by the First Presidency to select a place and "shed their blood".[8] Brigham Young spoke in agreement, stating:

"There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins, and the smoking incense would atone for their sins".[9]

Indeed, Young claimed that men had actually come to him and offered their blood to atone for their sins.[10] For these sins, which Young did not specify, the shedding of blood is "the only condition for which they can obtain forgiveness", or to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course."[11] The atonement of Jesus, Young said, was for "sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit."[12]

Jedediah Grant died in late 1856, leading to the gradual dissipation of the Mormon Reformation (Campbell 1988), but Brigham Young continued to teach the doctrine of blood atonement. On February 8, 1857, Young warned the people that institution of the "celestial law" requiring mandatory blood atonement was "nigh at hand", and that under this law, covenant breakers guilty of adultery would be "hewn down" (Young 1857, p. 219). But in this case, he said, "if this people will sin no more, but faithfully live their religion, their sins will be forgiven them without taking life" (Young 1857, p. 219). Young re-emphasized the blood atonement doctrine, however, stating that if a person "overtaken in a gross fault" truly understood that "by having his blood shed he will atone for that sin, and be saved and exalted with the Gods", he would voluntarily ask to have his blood shed so he could gain his exaltation (Young 1857, p. 219). He framed blood atonement as an act of selfless love, and asked the congregation, "Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood?" (Young 1857, p. 219). As to "apostates", who according to early Mormon doctrine would become sons of Perdition and for whom "there is no chance whatever for exaltation", Young indicated that "if their blood had been spilled, it would have been better for them" (Young 1857, p. 220). Young stated, "The wickedness and ignorance of the nations forbid this principle's being in full force, but the time will come when the law of God will be in full force"; as a matter of love, however, he said, "if [your neighbor] needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it" (Young 1857, p. 220).

LDS General Authority B.H. Roberts responded to Young’s statements, stating:

“The doctrine of "blood atonement," then, is based upon the scriptural laws considered in the foregoing paragraphs. The only point at which complaint may be justly laid in the teaching of the "Reformation" period is in the unfortunate implication that the Church of the Latter-day Saints, or individuals in that church, may execute this law of retribution. Fortunately, however, the suggestions seemingly made in the overzealous words of some of these leading elders were never acted upon. The church never incorporated them into her polity. Indeed, it would have been a violation of divine instruction given in the New Dispensation had the church attempted to establish such procedure. As early as 1831 the law of the Lord was given to the church as follows: "And now, behold, I speak unto the church: Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come.”[13]

Mountain Meadows massacre

The concept of "blood atonement" was claimed to have played a role in the the Mountain Meadows massacre. The massacre was a mass killing of Arkansas emigrants by Mormon militia that occurred on Friday, September 11, 1857. There are conflicting accounts of the Paiute Indian Tribe participating in the massacre, claims the Paiute Indian Tribe has publicly denied based on forensic evidence and their oral traditions related to the event. The massacre was led by John D. Lee, who was later executed for his role in the killings. This extreme interpretation of what was perceived to be doctrine is said to have "led to one of the greatest tragedies in the history of the Church" as an "example of blood literalism."[14]

Rumors of "Danites" practicing "blood atonement"

The remarks of Young and other church leaders led to speculation that the doctrine of "blood atonement" had been put into practice. Many of these rumors were centered around a group called the Danites. The Danites were a fraternal organization founded by Latter Day Saints in June of 1838, at Far West in Caldwell County, Missouri. The Danites operated as a vigilante group and took a central role in the events of the Mormon War. Joseph Smith eventually condemned the organization, and its leader, Sampson Avard was excommunicated from the church. Although the organization ceased to formally exist in Missouri, rumors of its continued existence as a "secret society" continued to surface over the years. Any Mormon militarism or unexplained murder was attributed to the mysterious "Danites," who were said to practice "blood atonement." Brigham Young commented on these rumors in a sermon given on April 7, 1867:

Is there war in our religion? No; neither war nor bloodshed. Yet our enemies cry out "bloodshed," and "oh, what dreadful men these Mormons are, and those Danites! how they slay and kill!" Such is all nonsense and folly in the extreme. The wicked slay the wicked, and they will lay it on the Saints.[15]

Thomas Coleman murder

An example used by some to illustrate the alleged practice blood atonement is the 1866 murder of the former-slave, Thomas Coleman (or Colburn), who was in good standing as a member of the LDS Church. As Mormon historian D. Michael Quinn has documented, Coleman was apparently secretly courting a white Mormon woman, contrary to both territorial law and Mormon doctrine at the time.[citation needed] At one of their clandestine meetings behind the old Arsenal (on what is now Capitol Hill in Salt Lake) on December 11, Coleman was discovered by "friends" of the woman. The group of vigilantes hit Coleman with a large rock. Using his own bowie knife, his attackers slit his throat so deeply from ear to ear that he was nearly decapitated, as well as slicing open his right breast, in what some believe was a mimicry of penalties illustrated in the temple ritual. Not all of Coleman's wounds correlated with the temple ritual, however, since he was also castrated. A pre-penciled placard was then pinned to his corpse stating, "NOTICE TO ALL NIGGERS - TAKE WARNING - LEAVE WHITE WOMEN ALONE." Even though it was the middle of winter, a grave was dug and Coleman's body disposed of in less than three hours after its discovery. Less than twelve hours after that, Judge Elias Smith, first cousin of Joseph Smith, appointed George Stringham (a Mormon ruffian and vigilante with ties to Porter Rockwell, Jason Luce, and William Hickman) as the foreman of the Coroner's Jury; they briefly met and summarily dismissed the case as committed by person or persons unknown to the jury, abruptly ending all official enquiry into the bizarre murder.[16]

It has been suggested that the ritualistic elements involved in the execution of Coleman’s murder may have been in response to a public sermon made three years earlier by Brigham Young on March 3, 1863. In this sermon, Young states, “I am a human being, and I have the care of human beings. I wish to save life, and have no desire to destroy life. If I had my wish, I should entirely stop the shedding of human blood.”[17] Following this statement, however, Young makes a statement regarding interracial relations in which he continues, "Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." Young continues his sermon by condemning whites for their abuse of slaves with the proclamation, “for their abuse of that race, the whites will be cursed, unless they repent.”[18]

With regard to Coleman's murder, LDS apologetics point out that the practice of "blood atonement" is said to apply to endowed Mormons who apostatized. Coleman was a member in good standing and was not endowed, suggesting that his death may have actually been the result of racism.[19]

Other murders

One of the examples cited by critics of the church is a set of murders in Springville, Utah of individuals who, according to historical documents and court records, were "very questionable characters." Judge Elias Smith stated in regard to the case: "We have carefully examined all the evidence furnished by a remarkably accurate stenographic reporter, and can only conclude that evidence before the court goes to show' that Durfee, Potter and two of the Parrishes got into a row about matters best, if not only, known to themselves, and for that Potter and two Parrishes were killed." -- Records published in the Deseret News, April 6th, 1859.

Association of “blood atonement” with sins other than apostasy

Although “blood atonement” is supposedly associated specifically with the shedding of blood of apostates, critics of Mormonism sometimes associate “blood atonement” with a much wider variety of sins such as thievery and adultery.[20] These claims are based upon certain statements of early church leaders, usually taken from the Journal of Discourses.[21] One example is a comment made by Brigham Young regarding thievery given during a sermon on May 8, 1853. Young states,

"If you want to know what to do with a thief that you may find stealing, I say kill him on the spot, and never suffer him to commit another iniquity. That is what I expect I shall do, though never, in the days of my life, have I hurt a man with the palm of my hand. I never have hurt any person any other way except with this unruly member, my tongue."[22]

The following quote made by Heber C. Kimball in 1857 is sometimes used by critics to suggest that “blood atonement” was to be applied to apostates who break their covenants:

I have not a doubt but there will be hundreds who will leave us and go away to our enemies. I wish they would go this fall: it might relieve us from much trouble; for if men turn traitors to God and His servants, their blood will surely be shed, or else they will be damned, and that too according to their covenants.[23]

On March 16, 1856 Brigham Young gave a sermon in which he stated that one needed to be "careful lest in judging you will be judged." A portion of this sermon has been used to suggest that Young advocated that "blood atonement" should be applied to adulterers. The quote in its full context is:

You say, "That man ought to die for transgressing the law of God." Let me suppose a case. Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God. I would at once do so in such a case; and under such circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands. But you who trifle with your covenants, be careful lest in judging you will be judged. Every man and women has got to have clean hands and a pure heart, to execute judgment, else they had better let the matter alone. Again, suppose the parties are not caught in their iniquity, and it passes along unnoticed, shall I have compassion on them? Yes, I will have compassion on them, for transgressions of the nature already named, or for those of any other description. If the Lord so order it that they are not caught in the act of their iniquity, it is pretty good proof that He is willing for them to live; and I say let them live and suffer in the flesh for their sins, for they will have it to do.[24]

Adultery: "Let me suppose a case. Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them. You would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God. I would at once do so in such a case, and under such circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands" (Brigham Young, JOD 3:247). Covenant Breaking: "I say, there are men and women that I would advise to got to the Presidency immediately, and ask him to appoint a committee to attend to their case; and then let a place be selected, and let that committee shed their blood. We have those amongst us that are full of all manner of abominations, those who need to have their bloodshed, for water will not do, their sins are too deep a dye ... I believe that there are a great many; and if they are covenant breakers we need a place designated, where we can shed their blood ... Brethren and sisters, we want you to repent and forsake your sins. And you who have committed sins that cannot be forgiven through baptism, let your blood be shed, and let the smoke ascend, that the incense thereof may come up before God as an atonement for your sins, and that the sinners in Zion may be afraid" (Jedediah M. Grant, JOD 4:49-51).

Grant would later be quoted in the Deseret News, as saying, "We would not kill a man, of course, unless we killed him to save him..."(7/27/1854).

Heber C. Kimball stated, "If men turn traitors to God and His servants, their blood will surely be shed, or else they will be damned, and that too according to their covenants" (JOD 4:375). The phrase "according to their covenants" refers Mormon Temple Covenants.

The doctrine after Brigham Young

Repudiation of allegations of the practice by the LDS church in 1889

The practice of “blood atonement” was formally denied and repudiated by the church in a statement issued in 1889:

MANIFESTO OF THE PRESIDENCY AND APOSTLES "SALT LAKE CITY, Dec. 12th, 1889. To Whom It May Concern: In consequence of gross misrepresentations of the doctrines, aims and practices of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly called the 'Mormon' church, which have been promulgated for years, and have recently been revived for political purposes and to prevent all aliens, otherwise qualified, who are members of the 'Mormon' church from acquiring citizenship, we deem it proper on behalf of said church to publicly deny these calumnies and enter our protest against them. We solemnly make the following declarations, viz.: That this church views the shedding of human blood with the utmost abhorrence. That we regard the killing of a human being, except in conformity with the civil law, as a capital crime, which should be punished by shedding the blood of the criminal after a public trial before a legally constituted court of the land. We denounce as entirely untrue the allegation which has been made, that our church favors or believes in the killing of persons who leave the church or apostatize from its doctrines. We would view a punishment of this character for such an act with the utmost horror; it is abhorrent to us and is in direct opposition to the fundamental principles of our creed. The revelations of God to this church make death the penalty of capital crime, and require that offenders against life and property shall be delivered up and tried by the laws of the land.’’ We declare that no bishop's or other court in this church claims or exercises civil or judicial functions, or the right to supersede, annul or modify a judgment of any civil court. Such courts, while established to regulate Christian conduct, are purely ecclesiastical, and their punitive powers go no further than the suspension or excommunication of members from church fellowship. [Signed]: WILFORD WOODRUFF, GEORGE Q. CANNON, JOSEPH F. SMITH, Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. LORENZO SNOW, FRANKLIN D. RICHARDS, BRIGHAM YOUNG, MOSES THATCHER, FRANCIS M. LYMAN, JOHN HENRY SMITH, GEORGE TEASDALE, HEBER J. GRANT, JOHN W. TAYLOR, M. W. MERRILL, A. H. LUND, ABRAHAM H. CANNON, Members of the Council of the Apostles. JOHN W. YOUNG, DANIEL H. WELLS, Counselors.[25]

Accusation by R. C. Evans

In 1920, Richard C. Evans, a former member of the first presidency of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who eventually left that church, wrote a book called ‘’Forty Years in the Mormon Church: Why I Left It’’. Evans accuses both the Reorganized church and the Utah based LDS church of advocating “blood atonement” and associates the alleged practice with the “Danites.” In response to denials by both churches that the practice had ever been implemented, Evans wrote:

Thus we have the President of the Reorganized Church and son of Joseph Smith admitting, as well as apologizing for the rash statements of his father and other leaders in the old church, and then we have Joseph F. Smith of the Utah church using about the same argument to excuse the language and murderous conduct of the Danites in Utah. All we care to say is reply to both of these descendants of the original prophet and organizer of the Danite Band is, that when the leading members and officers of the church for many years teach and practice, by threats and murders, ascribed to the Danite Band, then we believe the public is justified in denouncing such language and conduct, and affirming it to be the doctrine of the church.[26]

Response by Joseph Fielding Smith

Responding to Evans’s accusations regarding the alleged implementation of the practice of “blood atonement”, Joseph Fielding Smith restated the doctrine, but denied that it had ever been practiced by the church, claiming that any such accusation was a “damnable falsehood.” Smith wrote,

Through the atonement of Christ all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel…Man may commit certain grievous sins - according to his light and knowledge -that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ. If then he would be saved he must make sacrifice of his own life to atone - so far as the power lies - for that sin, for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail…But that the Church practices “Blood Atonement” on apostates or any others, which is preached by ministers of the ‘Reorganization’ is a damnable falsehood for which the accusers must answer. [27]

Statements in the late twentieth century

Like several doctrines formulated by Brigham Young (see, e.g., Adam-God theory), the blood atonement doctrine has been widely criticized by Latter Day Saints. However, the doctrine has been addressed by modern leaders in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As late as 1970, the church's First Presidency authorized a church publication that interpreted D&C 132:26 (Joseph Smith's written revelation authorizing plural marriage in 1843) as saying that even after repentance, "some sins may call for a most dreadful punishment even then—the destruction in the flesh and being turned over to the buffetings of Satan until the day of redemption. This punishment is most severe."[28]

In 1954, Church historian and later President Joseph Fielding Smith taught the following about blood atonement:

Man may commit certain grievous sins—according to his light and knowledge—that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ. If then he would be saved, he must make sacrifice of his Own life to atone—so far as in his power lies—for that sin, for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail.... Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their own blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf.[29]

In addition, the late Apostle Bruce R. McConkie agreed with Brigham Young and Joseph Fielding Smith that "under certain circumstances there are some serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men must then have their own blood shed to atone for their sins."[30]

McConkie's repudiation of the need to practice the doctrine

In 1978, Bruce R. McConkie, acting under the direction of Spencer W. Kimball and the First Presidency, repudiated the blood atonement doctrine:

You note that I and President Joseph Fielding Smith and some of our early church leaders have said and written about this doctrine and you asked if the doctrine of blood atonement is an official doctrine of the Church today. If by blood atonement is meant the atoning sacrifice of Christ, the answer is Yes. If by blood atonement is meant the shedding of the blood of men to atone in some way for their own sins, the answer is No. We do not believe that it is necessary for men in this day to shed their own blood to receive a remission of sins. This is said with a full awareness of what I and others have written and said on this subject in times past.[31]

Blood atonement in a theocracy

In McConkie's letter, he suggested that the doctrine could, in fact, be valid, but only in a pure theocracy. He stated:

There simply is no such thing among us as a doctrine of blood atonement that grants a remission of sins or confers any other benefit upon a person because his own blood is shed for sins. Let me say categorically and unequivocally that this doctrine can only operate in a day when there is no separation of Church and State and when the power to take life is vested in the ruling theocracy as was the case in the day of Moses.[32]

Regarding "blood atonement" in a theocracy, the Encyclopedia of Mormonism states:

Several early Church leaders, most notably Brigham Young, taught that in a complete theocracy the Lord could require the voluntary shedding of a murderer's blood-presumably by capital punishment-as part of the process of Atonement for such grievous sin. This was referred to as "blood Atonement." Since such a theocracy has not been operative in modern times, the practical effect of the idea was its use as a rhetorical device to heighten the awareness of Latter-day Saints of the seriousness of murder and other major sins. This view is not a doctrine of the Church and has never been practiced by the Church at any time.[33]

Relation to capital punishment in Utah

Joseph Fielding Smith stated:

[T]he founders of Utah incorporated in the laws of the Territory provisions for the capital punishment of those who wil[l]fully shed the blood of their fellow men. This law, which is now the law of the State, granted unto the condemned murderer the privilege of choosing for himself whether he die by hanging, or whether he be shot, and thus have his blood shed in harmony with the law of God; and thus atone, so far as it is in his power to atone, for the death of his victim. Almost without exception the condemned party chooses the latter death. This is by authority of the law of the land, not that of the Church.[34]

In addition, in his first edition of the book Mormon Doctrine, McConkie opined that because blood atonement requires the "spilling of blood upon the ground", execution by firing squad was superior to execution by hanging, which would not suffice to create a blood atonement. At the request of church president Spencer W. Kimball, this statement was deleted from McConkie's second edition of the book. Regarding this, McConkie commented:

As far as I can see there is no difference between a firing squad, an electric chair, a gas chamber, or hanging. Death is death and I would interpret the shedding of man's blood in legal executions as a figurative expression which means the taking of life. There seems to me to be no present significance as to whether an execution is by a firing squad or in some other way. I, of course, deleted my article on "hanging" from the Second Edition of Mormon Doctrine because of the reasoning here mentioned.[35]

This doctrine was seen by some commentators as one of the reasons why Utah was one of the last three U.S. states to continue the practice of execution by firing squad.[citation needed] This was discontinued on March 15, 2004. While the decision for this law was being made, the Church was consulted and stated that they had nothing against the discontinuation of this practice.

In an interesting contradiction, author Sally Denton in her book American Massacre, states that execution by firing squad was not considered a valid method for performing “blood atonement,” claiming instead that “beheading was the preferred method.” Denton recounts the execution of John D. Lee for his role in the Mountain Meadows massacre. When offered a choice of execution by hanging, firing squad or beheading, Denton claims that Lee’s “choice of execution by firing squad sent a clear signal to the faithful that he rejected a spiritual need to atone for any sins.”[36]

Practice of "blood atonement" by fundamentalist groups

In modern times, the concept of "blood atonement" has been used by a number of fundamentalist splinter groups as an excuse to justify murdering those who disagree with their leaders or attempt to leave their church. These groups all claim to follow the "original" teachings of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, and claim that the LDS church has strayed from the proper path by banning these practices.[37] This practice is attributed to a tendency toward extreme "literalism" in the interpretation of early doctrines.[38]

Warren Jeffs and the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

Warren Jeffs, leader of the LDS splinter-group Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS), a polygamous sect based in Arizona and Utah, USA, has allegedly indicated his desire to implement the doctrine in his church. Former FLDS member Robert Richter reported to the Phoenix New Times that Jeffs repeatedly alluded in his sermons to blood atonement for serious sins such as murder and adultery. Richter also claims that he was asked to design a thermostat for a high temperature furnace that would be capable of destroying DNA evidence if such "atonements" were to take place.[39]

Ervil LeBaron and the Church of the Lamb of God

Ervil LeBaron, the leader and prophet of the Church of the Lamb of God, initiated a series of killings which ultimately resulted in his being sentenced to life in prison. Before his death in prison, LeBaron wrote a document which he called The Book of the New Covenants. This document listed a number of people who had been disloyal and "deserved to die." Copies of this list fell into the hands of LeBaron's followers, who proceeded to administer what they called "blood atonement" to the individuals listed.[40]

One of LeBaron's daughters, Lillian, relates an account of some of these killings in the film The God Makers II. Chynoweth relates the account of the murder of her husband, her brother-in-law and his 8-year-old daughter by her half brothers on the 27th of June, the 144th anniversary of the death of Joseph Smith Jr.. She states that their names were “on the list to be atoned for” because her father believed that they were “traitors to God’s cause.” Not explicitly named in the film, the list that Chynoweth referred to was called ‘’The Book of the New Covenants’’, and was written by Ervil LeBaron before his death in prison. The document contained a list of individuals that LeBaron believed deserved to die. Upon receipt of the list by several of his sons, they proceeded to administer this punishment.[41] At the end of Chynoweth’s interview, she states that if anything happens to her that the “Mormon” church will be responsible. Immediately following this statement, the film states that shortly after the interview, Lillian was found dead in her home of a gunshot wound. Depressed and aware that she was on the list and that other members of the Church of the Lamb of God were still looking for her, Chynoweth committed suicide.[42]

References to "blood atonement" in modern works

A number of modern authors refer to "blood atonement," usually in association with "Danites." These references often appear in works critical of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and rumors of "Danites" practicing some form of "blood atonement" often plays a significant role in these accounts.

In her book Leaving the Saints, Martha Beck postulates the existence of a "Danite" band "disposing" of people who opposed Brigham Young:

Brigham Young formalized and anointed these assassins as the Danites, whose mission included espionage, suppression of information, and quietly, permanently disposing of people who threatened the Mormon prophet or the Latter-day Saint organization. Again, not many Mormons know this detail of Church history, but every now and then, Utah papers record murders with uniquely Mormon flavoring (death by temple-sanctioned methods, for example), and the word that goes out on the Latter-day grapevine is Danite.[43]

Sally Denton, in her book American Massacre, claims that the Danites and "blood atonement" had a prominent role in 19th century Utah society. Denton attributes the creation of the Danites to Joseph Smith as his “secret group of loyalists” and suggests that they became “one of the most legendarily feared bands in frontier America.” According to Denton, this “consecrated, clandestine unit of divinely inspired assassins” introduced “the ritualized form of murder called blood atonement-providing the victim with eternal salvation by slitting his throat.”[44] Denton claims that “blood atonement” was one of the doctrines which Mormons held “most sacred” and that “[t]hose who dared to flee Zion were hunted down and killed.” [45] Denton implies that large numbers of such “atonements” occurred during the Mormon reformation of 1856, although “none of the crimes were ever reported in the Deseret News," and that the “bloody regime…ended with [Jedediah] Grant’s sudden death, on December 1, 1856.” [46]

Notes

  1. ^ first manuscript version, minutes of general conference, LDS Archives. See Quinn 1997, p. 531, n.140.
  2. ^ April 6 1844 statement compiled on April 24 1844 by Thomas Bullock, LDS Archives. See Quinn 1997, p. 531, n.140.
  3. ^ Diary of Thomas Bullock, 13 December 1846
  4. ^ Diary of Willard Richards, Dec. 20, 1846; Watson, Manuscript History of Brigham Young, 1846-1847, p. 480.
  5. ^ Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses Vol. 3, p. 243-249.
  6. ^ Grant 1856, pp. 51.
  7. ^ Grant 1856, pp. 49.
  8. ^ Grant 1856, pp. 51.
  9. ^ Young 1856, p. 53 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFYoung1856 (help).
  10. ^ Young 1856, p. 53 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFYoung1856 (help).
  11. ^ Young 1856, p. 53 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFYoung1856 (help)
  12. ^ Young 1856, p. 53 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFYoung1856 (help)
  13. ^ Roberts, Brigham H. "Blood Atonement". Retrieved 2007-03-08.
  14. ^ Cummings 1982, p. 96
  15. ^ Young 1867, p. 30
  16. ^ Quinn, Extensions of Power, p. 256 and Daily Union Vedette, 15 December 1866.
  17. ^ Young 1863, p. 108
  18. ^ Young 1863, p. 110 Young also declares that he is “neither an abolitionist nor a pro-slavery man” but that if he had to choose, he would “be against the pro-slavery side of the question.”
  19. ^ "Blood Atonement". Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research.
  20. ^ Parker Parker states: "It is a common practice for anti-Mormon critics to search through the sermons of early leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and pull out quotes that are shocking or disturbing to the more genteel sensibilities of Latter-day Saints. This is typically done without giving context for the quoted material."
  21. ^ McKeever
  22. ^ Young 1853, p. 108
  23. ^ Kimball, p. 375
  24. ^ Young 1856b, p. 247
  25. ^ Roberts, Brigham H. "Blood Atonement". Retrieved 2007-03-08.
  26. ^ Evans 1920, pp. 105–6
  27. ^ Smith 1954, p. 135-6
  28. ^ LDS Church (1970), The Doctrine and Covenants Containing Revelations Given to Joseph Smith, Jr., the Prophet With an Introduction and Historical and Exegetical Notes, Revised Edition, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, p. 829.
  29. ^ Smith 1954, pp. 133–138
  30. ^ Mormon Doctrine at 92
  31. ^ McConkie 1978
  32. ^ McConkie 1978
  33. ^ Snow, Lowell M. Blood Atonement. Retrieved 2007-03-08. {{cite book}}: |journal= ignored (help)
  34. ^ Smith 1954, p. 136
  35. ^ McConkie 1978
  36. ^ Denton 2003, p. 230
  37. ^ In the film The God Makers II a man identified as "Art, Polygamist, Mormon Fundamentalist Prophet and Leader," promotes the doctrine of "blood atonement" and states that he is "trying to get the Mormons into the original doctrine that Brigham and Joseph had it set on."
  38. ^ Cummings 1982, p. 96 “[M]any of Joseph Smith’s followers have to outdo the Prophet himself in the pursuit of literalism, a trend which has led to many doctrinal distortions and ecclesiastical abuses."
  39. ^ Dougherty, John (November 10, 2005). "Wanted: Armed and Dangerous". Retrieved 2007-03-08. Dougherty states: ”There is a credible report that Jeffs wants to begin practicing a 19th-century Mormon doctrine calling for the ritualistic human sacrifice of "apostates" who dissent from his rules.”
  40. ^ Krakauer 2003, p. 266-267
  41. ^ Krakauer 2003, p. 266-67
  42. ^ The Los Angeles Times (September 20, 1992) listed her death as ‘suicide’. It should be noted that in The God Makers II, Lillian LeBaron Chynoweth refers to the "Mormon Church" as being responsible for the killings. The film does not make clear that the "Mormon Church" referred to by Chynoweth is actually the "Church of the Lamb of God." The film also makes no mention the suicide and instead infers that Chynoweth was killed.
  43. ^ Beck 2005, p. 190 LDS scholars note a contradiction between the existence of a "Latter-day grapevine" that is aware of "Danites" and the statement that "not many Mormons know this detail of Church history"
  44. ^ Denton 2003, p. 16
  45. ^ Denton 2003, p. 70, 106
  46. ^ Denton 2003, p. 106

References

  1. Beck, Martha (2005), Leaving the Saints, New York: Crown Publishers, ISBN 0-609-60991-2.
  2. Buerger, David John (2002), The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship (2nd ed.), Salt Lake City: Signature Books, ISBN 1560851767.
  3. Campbell, Eugene E. (1988), Establishing Zion: The Mormon Church in the American West, 1847–1869, Salt Lake City: Signature Books.
  4. Cummings, Richard J (1982), "Quintessential Mormonism: Literal-mindedness as a Way of Life", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 15 (4).
  5. Denton, Sally (2003), American Massacre: The Tragedy at Mountain Meadows, September 1857, London: Secker & Warburg, ISBN 0436276011.
  6. Evans, Richard C (1920), Forty Years in the Mormon Church: Why I Left It, Self published.
  7. Gardner, Martin R (Spring 1979), "Mormonism and Capital Punishment: A Doctrinal Perspective, Past and Present", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 12 (1){{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  8. Grant, Jedediah M. (March 12, 1854), "Discourse", Deseret News, vol. 4, no. 20 (published July 27 1854), pp. 1–2 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= and |publication-date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  9. Grant, Jedediah M. (September 21 1856), "Rebuking Iniquity", in Watt, G.D. (ed.), Journal of Discourses by Brigham Young, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, His Two Counsellors, and the Twelve Apostles, vol. 4, Liverpool: S.W. Richards (published 1857), pp. 49–51 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= and |year= / |date= mismatch (help).
  10. Kimball, Heber C. (August 16 1857), "Limits of Forebearance-Apostates-Economy-Giving Endowments", in Watt, G.D. (ed.), Journal of Discourses by Brigham Young, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, His Two Counsellors, and the Twelve Apostles, vol. 4, Liverpool: S.W. Richards (published 1857), pp. 374–76 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  11. Krakauer, Jon (2003), Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith, Doubleday, ISBN 0-385-50951-0.
  12. Lambert, Neal E.; Cracroft, Richard H. (March 1972), "Through Gentile Eyes: A Hundred Years of the Mormon in Fiction", New Era, Salt Lake City, Utah: LDS Church{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  13. May, Dean L (1987), Utah: A People's History, Salt Lake City, Utah: Bonneville Books, ISBN 0-87480-284-9.
  14. McConkie, Bruce R (1966), Mormon Doctrine (2 ed.), Salt Lake City{{citation}}: CS1 maint: ___location missing publisher (link).
  15. McConkie, Bruce R (October 18, 1978), Letter from Bruce R. McConkie to Thomas B. McAffee{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  16. McKeever, Bill, Blood Atonement - If It Was Never Taught, Why Do So Many Mormons Believe It?, Mormonism Research Ministry, retrieved 2007-03-12.
  17. Parker, Mike, Did Brigham Young Say that He Would Kill an Adulterous Wife with a Javelin?, Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR).
  18. Penrose, Charles W. Penrose (1884), Blood Atonement, As Taught by Leading Elders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City{{citation}}: CS1 maint: ___location missing publisher (link).
  19. Quinn, D. Michael (1997), The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power, Salt Lake City: Signature Books, ISBN 1-56085-060-4.
  20. Roberts, B. H., ed. (1902), History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, vol. 1, Salt Lake City: Deseret News.
  21. Roberts, B. H., ed. (1909), History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, vol. 5, Salt Lake City: Deseret News.
  22. Roberts, B. H., ed. (1932), History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, vol. 7, Salt Lake City: Deseret News.
  23. Smith, Joseph Fielding (1954), McConkie, Bruce R. (ed.), Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft.
  24. Snow, Lowell M (1992), "Blood Atonement", Encyclopedia of Mormonism, MacMillan.
  25. Smith, Joseph Fielding (1957), "The Doctrine of Blood Atonement", Answers to Gospel Questions, Salt Lake City: 180–91.
  26. Smith, Joseph (May 1971), "The King Follett Sermon", Ensign, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  27. Young, Brigham (May 8, 1853), "President B. Young's Journey South—Indian Difficulties—Walker—Watching and Prayer—Thieves and Their Desserts—Eastern Intelligence—Financial State of the Church—Gaining Knowledge, etc.", in Watt, G.D. (ed.), Journal of Discourses by Brigham Young, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, His Two Counsellors, the Twelve Apostles, and Others, vol. 1, Liverpool: F.D. & S.W. Richards (published 1854), pp. 103–120 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  28. Young, Brigham (March 16, 1856), "Instructions to the Bishops—Men Judged According to their Knowledge—Organization of the Spirit and Body—Thought and Labor to be Blended Together", in Watt, G.D. (ed.), Journal of Discourses by Brigham Young, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, His Two Counsellors, the Twelve Apostles, and Others, vol. 3, Liverpool: Orson Pratt (published 1856), pp. 243–49 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  29. Young, Brigham (September 21, 1856), "The People of God Disciplined by Trials—Atonement by the Shedding of Blood—Our Heavenly Father—A Privilege Given to all the Married Sisters in Utah", in Watt, G.D. (ed.), Journal of Discourses by Brigham Young, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, His Two Counsellors, and the Twelve Apostles, vol. 4, Liverpool: S.W. Richards (published 1857), pp. 51–63 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  30. Young, Brigham (February 8, 1857), "To Know God is Eternal Life—God the Father of Our Spirits and Bodies—Things Created Spiritually First—Atonement by the Shedding of Blood", in Watt, G.D. (ed.), Journal of Discourses by Brigham Young, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, His Two Counsellors, and the Twelve Apostles, vol. 4, Liverpool: S.W. Richards (published 1857), pp. 215–21 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  31. Young, Brigham (March 8, 1863), "The Persecutions of the Saints—Their Loyalty to the Constitution—The Mormon Battalion—The Laws of God Relative to the African Race", in Watt, G.D.; Long, J.V. (eds.), Journal of Discourses Delivered by President Brigham Young, His Two Counsellors, and the Twelve Apostles, and Others, vol. 10, Liverpool: Daniel H. Wells (published 1865), pp. 104–111 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  32. Young, Brigham (April 7, 1867), "The Word of Wisdom—Degeneracy—Wickedness in the United States—How to Prolong Life", in Watt, G.D.; Sloan, E.L.; Evans, D.W. (eds.), Journal of Discourses by Brigham Young, His Two Counsellors, and the Twelve Apostles, vol. 12, Liverpool: Albert Carrington (published 1869), pp. 117–123 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blood_atonement&oldid=136490371"