Deseret News | Reader comments: Parley P. Pratt and America's patriotic betrayal

Reader comments
Pratt and patriotic betrayal

Jackson County | 9:41 a.m. July 3, 2009

Orson Pratt on Jackson County, "God promised in the year 1832 that we should,before the generation then living had passed away,return and build up the city of Zion in Jackson County." J.O.D. Vol 13, page 362, May,1870

Rick | 9:48 a.m. July 3, 2009

I kinda know how Parley Pratt feels after last years Presidential election. I sure don't have any loyalty to the Republican Party anymore after being treated like a second class citizen. The Republican Party's treatment of Mitt and of LDS in general was horrible.

Re; Rick | 10:04 a.m. July 3, 2009

Your not the only one: Joseph Smith"...and I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel,unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committted by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will be not so much as a potsherd left...." (DHC vol. 5 pg 394)

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 10:27 a.m. July 3, 2009

How is it any differnt then what UTAH state government treats the non practice members in this year of 2009?

Shawn | 10:28 a.m. July 3, 2009

Boyd K. Packer's talk in October 2008 conference discussed the 2 year anniversary of the saints arriving in the Salt Lake valley. They had a celebration and chose for the theme, patriotism.

Your statement that "In time, and over generations, the Saints were able to forgive the United States its trespasses..."

I'm sure that to a degree that is correct, but Pres. Packer goes into great detail of the preparations and patriotism of those early saints on that 24 July 1849.

I think that your story leaves the impression that many, if not most, had lost faith with the government. Of course they had been given every reason to, but the celebration in 1849 was genuine. I think that many, if not most, attributed the failings to be with men elected rather than the constitution that these men had sworn to uphold.

I think that they still had a love for the country, the constitution, and the stars and stripes. They had known first hand what it meant to be deprived of the liberties that they were finally enjoying in the land of Deseret.

SFC RET DENNIS | 12:36 p.m. July 3, 2009

Anonymous 10:27 I got new for you te Governmet in Utah is not all LDS and I have been told that their is less LDS in Utah then non-LDS don' know if thats true but it could be close. There is enuf non-LDS to put up a good fight in the government to provde thngs you wont. Just remember that the laws of Utah were set up my members long a go and non-members came to Utah knowing what the laws were so don't complan.

Anonymous | 1:11 p.m. July 3, 2009

Mormonism was born in the Second Awakening. Joseph Smith came from the part of New York were many new American religions got their converts. The Second Awakening was rooted in the soil of Manifest Destiny.

This sounds funny to us today but these Americans lived in a time were murder indigenous populations was considered cleaning Satan from the land. Preachers told their congregations that rain would follow the low westward.

You had books by authors like Spaulding, who tried to explain Native Americans in a biblical context. It's this what the BOM attempted to accomplish?

This was a time in America where the historical distribution of horse species or barley was unknown. Reading texts from this era quantify how much more we know about science.

There were no tribes of Jews, only Canaanites.

Henry Drummond | 1:33 p.m. July 3, 2009

In early Utah the 4th of July was always celebrated but when the Mormons used the term "American" they usually used it to refer to someone else. Mormons felt that the constitution was broad enough to embrace their economic, political, and social philosophy even though they were all routinely rejected by Congress, Presidents, and the Courts. It really wasn't until the progressive era of Teddy Roosevelt who intervened on the side of the Mormons during the Reed Smoot Hearings that Mormons began to think of themselves as being part of the American system rather than victims of it.

RE: SFC Ret Dennis | 1:36 p.m. July 3, 2009

you can't see the forest through the tree' There were two false prophecies: Pratt at (9:41 and Joseph Smith at 10:04)Check em out.

re: commentator at 1:36 p.m. | 3:56 p.m. July 3, 2009

The Orson Pratt statement regarding the prophecy is incomplete. The promise was hinged on the faithfulness of the LDS members at the time, just like Zion's Camp was. At the time, there was widespread apostasy happening in Kirtland, which followed the members down to Missouri. Secret combinations like the Danites started popping up, and people were finding fault with Joseph Smith and with the church itself. Members started selling church land in Jackson County in direct opposition to a commandment from God. The Kirtland temple was overtaken by a splinter group who refused entry to the faithful members of the church. Apostles and other general authorities weren't immune, and usually, those who turned against the church became extremely bitter and went to to the local governments to whip up hatred against the Mormons. It was a rough time for the church and its members, and while many of them tried their hardest to fulfill their duties, many didn't. The Lord rescinded that promise because of the unfaithfulness of the church body as a whole, which is the subject of D&C 105.

I'll have to reply to the other prophecy in another comment.

re: 1:36 p.m., part 2 | 4:04 p.m. July 3, 2009

If you're even vaguely familiar with the way the Lord refers to time in the scriptures (all of them, the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the D&C, and the PoGP), He will usually state that something will happen "in a short time" or "within a few years," when in reality, He's referring to decades or even centuries. He referred to the time of the last days as "but a short time," and it's nearly 200 years later. When you're talking all of eternity, a few centuries here and there don't really count as a long time.

If Joseph Smith had given an exact date, or even a year, for the time when this prophecy was to be fulfilled, you might have a point. But a prophecy that has yet to be fulfilled is not the same thing as a false prophecy. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't. From the context of that prophecy, it seems to be referring to the time of the Second Coming. In case you hadn't noticed, that time hasn't arrived yet. Be patient.

re: Anonymous 10:27 | 4:26 p.m. July 3, 2009

You picked a bad year to make that comment considering this is the year private club laws were abolished.

Unless, of course, you were referring to the Common Ground Initiative. Then your comment is valid and warranted.

RE: Commentator 3:56 | 5:19 p.m. July 3, 2009

Not rescinded:..."Why God cannot lie. He will fulfill all his promises. He has spoken it must come to pass. Orson Pratt,JOD vo l13 p362 May,5,1870

"Latter Day Saints expect to return to Jackson county and to build a Temple before the generation that was living forty-years ago has all passed away.
Well then,the time must pretty near when we shall begin that work. Oson pratt JOD Vol17 p 111 Jun 14,1874

Re part 2 4:04 | 5:51 p.m. July 3, 2009

"second coming be patient" The Jackson Prophecy had nothing to do with the Second Coming"because Joseph Smith DHC Vol 2 p 182 Feb 14 ,1835 "God had commanded it and it was made known to him by a vision and by the Holy Ghost........go forth to prune the vinyard for the last time,or the coming of the Lord,which was night-even fifty-six years should wind up the scene." end time prophecy made in 1835 =56 years= 1891. 2nd of many false prophesy's

Anonymous | 7:10 p.m. July 3, 2009

I feel that Mormons were persecuted, but in many cases they also were doing things that led to their persecution, Joseph Smith ordered the Nauvoo Expositor press to be destroyed when the paper outed his practice of polygamy. He could have destroyed the papers, but when he destroyed property he crossed the line. People weren't comfortable with the polygamy issue. Even when it was outlawed some members continued the practice. For that reason Senator Smoot was not seated in the Senate for s period of time. I don't know about others, but I for one would be very concerned if my new neighbor showed up with a gaggle of wives and several offspring. It is something to consider.

To RE: Commentator 3:56 | 8:53 p.m. July 3, 2009

No, the Lord doesn't rescind His promises, but He does sometimes give requirements that need to be fulfilled first, and if we don't fulfill them, He does not need to uphold His end of the bargain.

"I, the Lord, am bound when ye do what I say; but when ye do not what I say, ye have no promise." - D&C 82:10

The condition of the timing was removed after the members at the time didn't fulfill the requirements the Lord placed on the promise. The original poster was right in one thing, D&C 105 does indeed specifically say that. The promise that Zion will be reclaimed still stands, but the promise that it would happen before the last members of that generation should pass away does not. The members at that time didn't uphold their end of that particular bargain, so that particular promise was withdrawn.

As for the other, I don't have the DHC on hand to check the quote, but there may well have been requirements on that one, too. Since you neglected to list them on the first prophecy, you may be doing it again on this one.

kansas mormon | 6:23 a.m. July 4, 2009

People are over looking a few things when trying to claim Jospeh Smith made false prophesies. First is what they are quoting the direct words as spoken by Joseph Smith? Most often no. They are infact what another person remembered Joseph as having said. Even in todays world of tv we see all the time that it is reported by persons b, c, d, and E that person a said something only to go back and listen to person a and find that that is not what was said. This is the case with the Jackson County "prophesy". We have what the Pratts remember Joseph as having said many years earlier not what Joseph said. Likewise with the 56 year prophesy. It is another person telling us years later what he remembers Joseph Smith saying. So we then must look at what Joseph did say. He did say it WOULD NOT happen before then and that he did not know when it would happen. This was in responce to groups like the Millerites who had picked not only years but days. As for the government statement the Wigs were in power you now can not find a potshard of them.

RE: 3:56 Prophecy vs | 8:16 a.m. July 4, 2009

Covenants are an agreements between God and man,like the Adamic and Davidic covenants(D&C 82:10)and are conditional. Prophecy: inspired foretelling of events and must not be changed by man Rev 22:18,19 and fulfillment is unconditional Ezek 12:25-28. or it is false.

Re: Kansas Mormon | 9:19 a.m. July 4, 2009

By your Mormon Logic we cannot trust history at all,So when we read the DHC or JOD and BOM,we should take it with a grain of salt.

njp | 3:43 p.m. July 4, 2009

Re:RE.......You're wasting your time trying to explain, but I must say it was a really excellent try. Joseph Smith would have given you a high five for the effort. So here's a high five from me!!

ME A BIG GOSSIP- TOO | 11:20 p.m. July 4, 2009

Sounds like a lotta HOOPLA!

kansas mormon | 7:35 a.m. July 5, 2009

I never said we should not look at history I said we should look at the sources. For example the supposed 56 year prophesy. The people who are quoted for this prophsey were not present when Joseph supposedly gave the prophesy. So they recieved it 3rd, 4th or 5th hand. We must then say well is there something writen by Joseph (or one of his scribes) that covers it? Yes there is, lets look at it "I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his face. I believe the coming of the son of Man will not be any sooner than that time". When we look at what Joseph actualy said it becomes very clear that he was not saying what people have tried to claim that the second comming would hapen in 56 years but that it would not happen any sooner than that. People look at others interpritation of what he said and not what he actualy said. This is very dnagerous but as I pointed out it happens even today with tv.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.