RLDS Church History Search

Chapter Context

RLDS History Context Results


Source: Church History Vol. 3 Chapter 34 Page: 673 (~1872)

Read Previous Page / Next Page
673 indorse; but some of the uses to which the church press was put we cannot do otherwise than deprecate, we cannot indorse, much less defend them.

"There is a page written in the history of the church that we have always regarded as a sad one; and as the circumstances of its occurring have a sort of connection with the subject now being considered, we write of it here. The grounds upon which it was deemed advisable to employ the press as an agent in the dissemination of the tenets of the church were, the rapidity with which copies of important and useful information could be created; the facility of retaining the landmarks of doctrine and teaching, and the freedom guaranteed to the press by the law of the land, and the peculiar political organization of our country.

"At what time the church turned its face upon these considerations, more particularly the last one, we are not advised; but of the fact there seems to be clear evidence, that not content with the exhibition of lawless and legal violence illegally used, which had sent the presses from Ohio and Missouri, the church did give a practical denial to the doctrine of the freedom of the press by the destruction of the office of the Nauvoo Expositor, a newspaper published and to be issued ostensibly for the exposure of iniquity in the church.

"We wish to be properly understood upon this matter, and for this reason, that it has been charged upon the writer of this article that he was 'hand in glove' with the murderers of Joseph and Hyrum Smith; and one of the chief reasons why this statement of complicity with murderers has been made, is the fact, that he has declared it to be his opinion that the destruction of the presses and types of the Expositor was an 'unwise, impolitic, and illegal measure.' We have no reason to love those who took the lives of men held to answer to the bar of justice whom the law would have released; nor do we see how that the expression of an honestly held opinion, formed after years of trial, forced upon us as consequences partially due to that act, can rightfully subject us to so grave a charge.

(page 673)

Read Previous Page / Next Page