I intend to speak bluntly. We are living in a period of grave danger. It is fitting that we meet in Philadelphia, the scene of one of history’s most illustrious moments. One hundred ninetytwo years ago, September 17, 1787, thirty-nine men affixed their signatures to a document that formed a government which institutionalized safeguards to protect the freedom of its citizens. Few today appreciate the significance of this American Revolution which indeed, was a revolution for the rights of mankind everywhere.

What happened on that occasion distinguishing this revolution in the annals of time, is that men determined they, the people, were sovereign under God. The Declaration of Independence affirmed the doctrine that man’s most basic rights of life, liberty and property were unalienable. That affirmation rejected the political ideology of the centuries that such rights were subject to a sovereign’s benevolence or whim.

Too few appreciate the fact that we live in one of history’s most exceptional moments, a time of unprecedented freedom. Freedom, as the western world knows it, has been experienced by only a small fraction of the human family at any time. The stark reality of this fact led two distinguished University of Rochester professors to publish this statement during America’s Bicentennial:

Humanity has survived in various states of tyranny for thousands of years. One might even say this is the natural state ofaffairs for man. Future historians may look back and see the period 1776 to 1976 as a brief 200 year accident in the history of man in which real freedom existed for all…

Pause for a moment and ponder our legacy of freedom. Few nations enjoy the freedom to speak, freedom to own or participate in ownership of property and business, freedom to worship, freedom to print, freedom to travel at home or abroad, freedom even to censure public officials, freedom to have the privacy we desire, and freedom of private enterprise, though this latter freedom is greatly threatened by a mentality toward collectivism in recent decades.

But those freedoms are the heritage of the western world!

Today this freedom is being threatened by another revolution, a recurrence of the barbaric practice of political propaganda, human subjugation, and even mass genocide. That system of slavery, Marxism, has imprisoned the bodies and minds of over one billion of the earth’s inhabitants. Consider the contradiction of its ideology -

It proclaims peace, yet leaves in its wake the groans of the dying and the misery of the human family.

It predicts paradise on earth, but has left a trail of carnage, bloodshed, oppression, and depopulated nations -a desolate wilderness. If Communism is paradise, why have half a million Vietnamese fled from paradise?

It promises equality of privileges, but stands in contempt of the human rights of men everywhere.

Equality comes only in death and millions who have coveted Communist equality have prematurely achieved that end. Dictatorship, despotism, and demagoguery are hallmarks of its institutional soul.

George F. Will, a noted columnist, recently wrote that even the French philosophers who, after reading Solzhenitsyn, concluded (better late than never) that the “Gulag is the essence, not an accident, of Communism.”

Yet so many in the West, supposedly enlightened to Communism’s grand design for world domination, accommodate themselves to it, grant apologies for its “excesses,” capitulate to its demands, and permit the free world to become encircled by its tentacles.

Recently the President of the United States congratulated the nation on having overcome its “inordinate fear of Communism.” Perhaps he is right in one sense: there is a complacency toward Communism. But I agree with Andrew Knight, editor of The Economist of London, that the influence of the United States has been diminished in recent years because there is a lack of perception of the problem. (U.S. News and World Report, October IS, 1979, p. 77.)

I ask: Is it inordinate fear of Communism to censure its record of almost total suppression of individual rights, a fact hardly mentioned by an administration whose hallmark was to be for “human rights” of men everywhere?

Is it inordinate fear of Communism to acknowledge 60 million political prisoners in the gulag?

Is it inordinate fear of Communism to recognize the fiendish butchery of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia where perhaps over 2 million died? This is a fact that almost escaped notice in the western press.

Is it inordinate fear of Communism to distrust the Kremlin’s claim that its military build-up is only defensive?

The struggle for freedom is more momentous than a decade ago, yet the conventional wisdom says, “You must learn to live with Communism and give up your ideas of national sovereignty.” Tell that to the millions – yes, the scores of millions – who have met death or imprisonment under the tyranny of Communism! Such would be the death knell of freedom and all we hold dear.

I am a witness to nations and people deprived of their freedom. I was there. I watched the great Iron Curtain drop around nations which formerly had prized their freedom good people. I was aghast as they were written off by the stroke of a pen. I saw Poland abandoned by nations with a heritage of freedom – the United States and Great Britain.

I was in Warsaw in June of 1946. I shared a room with seven other men in the Polonia Hotel, the only hotel even partially intact in the great city of Warsaw. The United States Ambassador, Bliss Lane, had his office in part of the building. He was so saddened that he resigned and wrote the book, I Saw Poland Betrayed. which detailed the failure of the United States and England to keep their promise that the Poles would have a free election after the war.

I was saddened when the United States refused to help at the time of the Hungarian revolution – when Freedom Fighters with bare hands and stones resisted bullets, tanks, and artillery. I confess I was ashamed at the response of my country. Freedom did not die that day (October 23, 1956) for Hungary alone. Hope died for many in other captive nations and has only recently been somewhat revived by courageous men willing to speak out against oppression.

As the Cabinet member assigned to agriculture, there seemed to be little I could do. But I knew we must respond in some way. I urged the President to make a strong, vigorous denunciation of the brutality of the Soviet Union in Hungary. I was asked to draft such a statement which was later released on Human Rights Day. Here is a portion of that statement:

The recent orgy of brutality in Hungary has moved free people everywhere to reactions of horror and revulsion. Our hearts are filled with sorrow. Our deepest sympathy goes out to the courageous, liberty loving people of Hungary.

The Hungarian Massacre repudiates and negates almost every article in the Declaration of Human Rights.

It denies that men are born free and equal in dignity and rights, and that all should act in the spirit of brotherhood. It denies the human right to life, liberty, and security of person.

It denies the principles that no one shall be subjected to torture, or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.

It denies that all are equal before the law and entitled to its equal protection.

It denies the right to fair and public hearings by an independent and impartial tribunal.

It denies the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

It denies the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

It denies the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.

It denies that no one shall be held in slavery or servitude.

It denies that the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.

It denies the right to leave one’s country or to seek in other countries asylum from persecution.

That these human rights have been so flagrantly repudiated is cause for mourning, national and worldwide.

…Once again the tree of liberty has been watered by the blood of martyrs. The courage and sacrifices of the brave Hungarian people have written anew in crimson the sentiment attributed to Patrick Henry nearly two centuries ago (“Give me liberty or give me death.”)

On this Human Rights Day, it is for each one of us to recognize anew that we are brothers in our Father’s house, and each is truly his brother’s keeper. We cannot shed that responsibility, nor do we want to. Let us resolve on this day that the world shall never forget what tyranny has done in Hungary.

Yes, I have stood face to face with tyranny. I was host to Mr. Nikita Khrushchev for a half-day when he visited the United States. I am not proud of this. I stated my reservation to the President and I still feel it was a mistake to invite this godless despot, dedicated to our destruction, as a state visitor.

Since that day, I have witnessed the Soviet Union spread its abominable ideology throughout the world. Every stratagem is used – trade, war, revolution, violence, hate, and immorality – to accomplish its ends. Since 1939, Europe lost three countries and parts of five others. In Asia, Outer Mongolia, North Korea, Vietnam and Laos are Communist dominated. In Africa, Russia controls Angola and has a military foothold in other countries. In the Mideast, Moscow influences Syria, Iraq, and South Yemen. In Latin America, she has a satellite in Cuba, which in turn exports the Marxist revolution in Africa and Central America.

I sadly confess that I cannot understand how the United States of America can maintain diplomatic relations with a nation determined to bring about our destruction.

I did not believe I would ever see the day when my own nation would be signatory to legitimatizing the Soviet conrol over the so-called captive nations of Eastern Europe but I have. The Helsinki accords were to “open up” the closed Russian society and countries under Soviet domination. There was to be greater freedom of thought, religion, travel, and “human contacts.”

Today we must conclude that the “Spirit of Helsinki” is nothing more than a diplomatic triumph for the Soviet Union, and a solidifying of their domination over the captive nations.

I did not believe I would ever see the day when we would accede to the expulsion of liberty and freedom-loving Taiwan from the United Nations on conditions of granting full participative membership to atheistic Red China – but I have!

I did not expect to see the day when we would ever grant the diplomatic, military and political concessions to Marxist leaders – but I have!

Nor did I ever think we would see the time when the United States would permit a Soviet brigade 90 miles off its shoreline in clear violation of the Monroe Doctrine – but I have!

The Soviet Union is not interested in the freedom and the human rights of all nations. Does the mention of these countries inspire confidence in the Soviets: Mozambique, Ethiopia, South Yemen, Rhodesia, Afghanistan, Cambodia? Everyone of these countries is a symbol of Communist aggression and the contempt of the Soviet Union for the free world and the rights of men everywhere. No one with the interest of freedom for all men will really say that the “detente” process has brought about a relaxation of tension, or has contributed toward the betterment of the world in general.

Now I sincerely believe that the United States and the West have an interest in and obligation to make friends of leaders of free nations. I do not believe that we are obligated, in the interest of peace, to barter away national sovereignty, nor to export technology to a nation that has as its declared purpose the subjugation of free men of all nations. It is a matter of record that the Soviet Union has violated almost every agreement made with the United States.

How has the Soviet Union gained a stranglehold on one-third of the world’s population? Alexander Solzhenitsyn answers: “It was because of a process on the part of Americans which has been in progress for more than 30 years of short-sighted concessions, a process of giving up and giving up, in hope that at some point the wolf will have eaten enough.” His appeal to American leaders is to “stop the senseless process of endless concessions to aggressors, these clever legal arguments for why we should make one concession after another give up more and more and more.” (U.s. News and World Report, July 14, 1975.)

Then in one of the most humiliating requests ever made to leaders of free nations, Solzhenitsyn implored: “When they bury us … please do not send them the shovels … or the latest earthmoving equipment.” (Warning to the West, p. 84.)

How much more humiliation must the West endure before our spine stiffens?

It is a fact that the West has built and sustained a faltering Soviet economy. Were it not for our help, Russia could not feed its own people.

There are many things that the West must do to strengthen its position to effectively retard the onward march of Marxism. Politically, economically and militarily, we stand vulnerable. I am a strong advocate for political, economic and military strength, but these alone, I think, are not the ultimate answer to our problem.

The greatest resource against Communism is spiritual.

There are only two possible sources of man’s rights. Rights are either God-given as part of the divine plan or they are granted by government as part of a political plan. If we accept the premise that human rights are granted by government, then we must be willing to accept the corollary that they can be denied by government. I, for one, shall never accept that premise. As the French political economist, Frederick Bastiat, said,

Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, 1850, p. 6.)

It is my sober conviction that no people can long maintain freedom unless their political institutions are founded in a faith in a Supreme Being and belief in the existence of moral law. This is the foundation of Western civilization. When men reject the premise that God is the source of law, they countenance a political system based on human law. Man thus becomes his own god, and the state the benefactor of privileges. May I illustrate the consequences of these two separate premises.

When you accept the premise that the source of law and man’s rights come from a Supreme Being, you at once recognize the sanctity of the individual, his right to free expression, his right to possession of private property. The dictum that a man’s home is his castle originated in divine law. Since man was created to be free, the only logical form of government is self-government; for acceptance of ruler imposed authority is an implicit repudiation of one’s rights to free expression and ultimate liberty.

The most fundamental unit of self-government is the family, with father and mother instilling fundamental principles and skills in their children. This is the rock foundation of society, and a man’s success will never be greater than what he attains with his own family. Institutions of government were initially established to protect man’s freedom. A repudiation of our heritage is to accept – as so many Western Democracies have accepted – the supremacy of the State over the individual and family, which is the essence of Marxism.

Under self-government, when the civil government and its agencies lose their servant-role, you may know that we have slipped from our spiritual moorings.

What man thinks about God will ultimately decide what he will think, believe and accept about everything else. This is why both reason and religious conviction lead me to accept the divine origin of man’s rights.

The antithesis to this belief is represented by atheistic Marxism. There the State is supreme; man exists to serve the State. Inexorable moral laws are regarded as mythical. Since the State is the source of law, the State is god. The State, therefore, can control one’s family, education, religion, economics, property, and, yes, his very life. The individual is regarded, at best, as an economic resource. Once his usefulness is fulfilled, his life becomes expendable.

Atheism and agnosticism have consequences. When man refuses to recognize God as the source of his rights, he abrogates his right to denounce the State. The State may decide to expropriate his property, or capriciously determine to take his life. How can one take a stand against evil unless he recognizes a source of law higher than man? On what moral grounds can he object? It is a truism that “Men will either be governed by God, or ruled by tyrants.” (William Penn.)

The Communists recognize, even if some in the West do not, that the spiritual foundation is the essence of our strength. This is why they will use any device, resort to any method, expend any resource to discredit and repudiate the moral foundations of Western society. “Under present conditions,” they say, “religion appears to be the main opponent … and, consequently, an atheistic education must be prominent as a constituent part in developing a communist world outlook.” (U.A. Karpovsky, “The Cause of Religious Survival and the Means for its Elimination,” Voprosy Fi/osofli [Problems of Philosophy], No.4, Moscow, April 1964.)

With the trend in the free world moving away from self government to dependence on the state, is there not evidence that the Marxists are successful in developing a communist world outlook?

I ask you delegates to this Freedoms Conference: If we do not accept the existence of a Supreme Being; that God is the source of moral law, what more do we have to offer than Marx? On what basis can we morally resist tyranny?

I say to you with all the fervor of my soul that God intended men to be free. Rebellion against tyranny is a righteous cause. It is an enormous evil for any man to be enslaved to any system contrary to his own will. For that reason men, 200 years ago, pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.

No nation which has kept the commandments of God has ever perished, but I say to you that once freedom is lost, only blood – human blood – will win it back.

Freedom is an eternal, God-given principle. There is no genuine happiness without freedom, nor is there any security or peace without freedom. After traveling in practically all of the free countries of the world and several times behind the Iron Curtain, I say that Marxism is the greatest evil in this world and the greatest threat to all we hold dear.

Of all sad things in the world, the saddest is to see a people who have once known liberty and freedom and then lost it.

I have seen the unquenchable yearning of the human heart for liberty on two unforgettable occasions. These experiences are indelibly etched on the memory of my soul.

I saw this yearning spirit in the faces of many European people, in the aftermath of World War II. It fell my lot, as a Church leader, to be among the first to go into war-torn European countries and distribute food, clothing, and bedding to the suffering members of the Church and others. I saw first-hand entire nations prostrate, flat on their backs economically. I looked into the face of hunger – the pale, the thin, the many dressed in rags, and some barefooted. I saw the refugees, the poor unwanted souls who were driven from their homes to destinations unknown. They came with all their possessions on their backs. I visited some of their homes, shacks where as many as twenty-two people were living in one room – four complete families. I saw some fortunate to get hold of an American magazine and pore over its pages and wonder if what they saw could possibly be true. I saw the struggles on every hand to get to America or England, some legal and others illegal, all in an effort to enjoy freedom and liberty. These were a people who had once known a measure of freedom, but had let it slip away.

The second unforgettable experience was when I was in Russia in 1959. We had been touring seven European countries as a part of the objective of the government of the United States to develop world markets and create good will.

Mr. Khrushchev and Mr. Matskevich, the Minister of Agriculture, had promised me that I would be able to visit a Christian Church in Russia. During our stay there, the guides did everything possible to prevent this. Finally, on the way to the airport, before leaving Moscow, I insisted that we go to a Christian Church which I had located. It was only a few minutes out of the way. Reluctantly, we were taken to the church. Our guides had told us that the churches were empty, that no one attended church any more, that religion was the opiate of the people, and that the people had risen above religion.

We arrived at a Baptist Church and found it full to overflowing. We learned that they were holding three services on Sunday and two on weekdays to accommodate the desires of the people. I looked into the faces of the people. Most were middle-aged and older. As the ten members of the America press were being ushered to pews, which were vacated for our unexpected visit, people reached out and grasped for our hands to touch us. They were in misery and yet a light shone through their eyes. Like frightened children they gripped our hands.

Later in the service, I was asked to address the congregation. I spoke to them about God and Jesus Christ, I encouraged them to be unafraid and to pray for peace. I spoke to them about the reality of a resurrection, that this life is only a part of eternity. In closing, I told them that truth would endure, that time was on the side of truth.

I don’t recall all I said, but I do remember being inspired by their rapt faces. As we were about to leave, the whole congregation spontaneously broke into a favorite hymn of my youth, “God Be With You Till We Meet Again.” As we walked down from the platform and the members of the press walked up the aisles, the congregation waved their handkerchiefs in farewell. It seemed all 1500 were waving as we left. Through it all, members of the American press witnessed the event with tear-dimmed eyes.

As we were leaving the church, a young lady Russian guide whispered to my wife, “I am a Christian, too.”

It has been my privilege to speak before many church groups in all parts of the world, but the impact of that experience is almost indescribable. I shall never forget that evening as long as I live. Seldom, have I felt the oneness of mankind and the unquenchable yearning of the human heart for freedom so keenly as at that moment.

Never will I forget this victory of spirit over tyranny, oppression, and ignorance. Never can I doubt the ultimate deliverance of the Russian people.

Today we are in a worldwide battle for the bodies and souls of men. It is a battle between two opposing systems freedom and slavery. The persistent efforts of God-respecting men will determine whether freedom is victorious in our time. A faithless generation will not be equal to the task. Is it not time for us to reevaluate our commitment to the principles which the Marxists fear the most?

I fully believe that we can turn things around if enough men and women in the Free World will have the determination, the morality, and the faith to do so.

Here in the West we hold in our hands the only hope of mankind; and it will be to our shame and disgrace before God and man if we allow that hope to wither and die. May God bless us to be equal to the task.

Humbly and gratefully I approach you today. Humble in the awesome task of speaking to you-grateful for the gospel and a prophet at our head. I concur in this great address on man and free agency given by the Lord’s mouthpiece. President McKay will go down in eternity as one of the great champions of free men.

Years ago my great-grandfather, while an investigator, attended a Mormon meeting during which a member had a quarrel over the Sacrament table with the branch president. When the service was over, Mrs. Benson turned to Ezra T. and asked him what he thought of the Mormons now. I’ll always be grateful for his answer. He said he thought the actions of its members in no way altered the truth of Mormonism. That conviction saved him from many a tragedy. Before joining the Church, Grandfather was moved by a marvelous prayer of Apostle John E. Page.

But later the young convert was greatly shocked by the same man whose actions reflected his gradual apostasy.

Ironically, when Elder Page eventually was excommunicated, Brigham Young selected the young convert to fill Elder Page’s place in the Quorum of the Twelve.

Six of the original Twelve Apostles selected by Joseph Smith were excommunicated. The Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon left the Church. Three of Joseph Smith’s Counselors fell-one even helped plot his death.

A natural question that might arise would be, that if the Lord knew in advance that these men would fall, as he undoubtedly did, why did he have his Prophet call them to such high office? The answer is; to fill the Lord’s purposes. For even the Master followed the will the will of the Father by selecting Judas. President George Q. Cannon suggests an explanation, too, when he states:

“Perhaps it is His own design that faults and weaknesses should appear in high places in order that His Saints may learn to trust in Him and not in any man or men.” (Millennial Star 53:658-659. February 15, 1891.)

And this would parallel Lehi’s warning; put not your “. . . trust in the arm of flesh. . . .” (2 Nephi 4:34.)

“The Church,” says President McKay, “is little, if at all, injured by persecution and calumnies from ignorant, misinformed, or malicious enemies.” (The Instructor, February 1956, p. 33.)

It is from within the Church that the greatest hindrance comes. And so, it seems, it has been. Now the question arises, will we stick with the kingdom and can we avoid being deceived? Certainly this is an important question, for the Lord has said that in the last days the devil will “rage in the hearts of . . . men,” (2 Nephi 28:20) and if it were possible he shall “deceive the very elect.” (See Joseph Smith 1:5-37.)

“The adversary,” said Brigham Young, “presents his principles and arguments in the most approved style, and in the most winning tone, attended with the most graceful attitudes; and he is very careful to ingratiate himself into the favour of the powerful and influential of mankind, uniting himself with popular parties, floating into offices of trust and emolument by pandering to popular feeling, though it should seriously wrong and oppress the innocent. Such characters put on the manners of an angel, appearing as nigh like angels of light as they possibly can, to deceive the innocent and the unwary. The good which they do, they do it to bring to pass an evil purpose upon the good and honest followers of Jesus Christ.” (JD 11, 238-239.)

Those of us who think “. . . all is well in Zion . . .” (2 Nephi 28:21) in spite of Book of Mormon warning might ponder the words of Heber C. Kimball when he said, “Yes, we think we are secure here in the chambers of these everlasting hills . . . but I want to say to you, my brethren, the time is coming when we will be mixed up in these now peaceful valleys to that extent that it will be difficult to tell the face of a Saint from the face of an enemy against the people of God. Then is the time to look out for the great sieve, for there will be a great sifting time, and many will fall. For I say unto you there is a test, a Test, a TEST coming.” (Heber C. Kimball, 1856. Quoted by J. Golden Kimball, Conference Report, October 1930, pp. 59-60.)

One of the greatest discourses that I have ever heard or read on how to avoid being deceived was given from this pulpit during the priesthood session of the October, 1960 semiannual conference by Elder Marion G. Romney. (Ibid., October 1960, 73-75.) I commend it to you for your close study and wish that there were time to reread it. During the talk Elder Romney stated that there was no guarantee that the devil will not deceive a lot of men who hold the priesthood. Then, after referring to a talk on free agency by President McKay, Elder Romney states, “. . . Free agency is the principle against which Satan waged his war in heaven. It is still the front on which he makes his most furious, devious, and persistent attacks. That this would be the case was foreshadowed by the Lord. . . .”

And then after quoting the scripture from the Pearl of Great Price regarding the war in heaven over free agency (Moses 4:1–4) Elder Romney continues:

“You see, at the time he was cast out of heaven, his objective was (and still is) `to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captive at his will.’ This he effectively does to as many as will not hearken unto the voice of God. His main attack is still on free agency. When he can get men to yield their agency, he has them well on the way to captivity.

“We who hold the priesthood must beware concerning ourselves, that we do not fall into the traps he lays to rob us of our freedom. We must be careful that we are not led to accept or support in any way any organization, cause or measure which, in its remotest effect, would jeopardize free agency, whether it be in politics, government, religion, employment, education, or any other field. It is not enough for us to be sincere in what we support. We must be right!”

Elder Romney then outlined some tests to distinguish the true from the counterfeit. Now this is crucial for us to know, for as President [John] Taylor said, “Besides the preaching of the Gospel, we have another mission, namely, the perpetuation of the free agency of man and the maintenance of liberty, freedom, and the rights of man.” (JD 23, 63.)

It was the struggle over free agency that divided us before we came here; it may well be the struggle over the same principle which will deceive and divide us again.

May I suggest three short tests to avoid being deceived, both pertaining to this freedom struggle and all other matters.

1. What do the standard works have to say about it? “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them,” said Isaiah. (Isa. 8:20.) This is one of the great truths of Isaiah so important that it was included in the Book of Mormon scriptures. There it reads: “To the law and to the testimony; and if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” (2 Nephi 18:20.) And Hosea said, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: . . .” (Hos. 4:6.)

We must diligently study the scriptures. Of special importance to us are the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants. Joseph Smith said, “. . . that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” (DHC 4, 461.)

The Book of Mormon, Brigham Young said, was written on the tablets of his heart and no doubt helped save him from being deceived. The Book of Mormon has a lot to say about America freedom, and secret combinations.

The Doctrine and Covenants is important because it contains the revelations which helped lay the foundation of this great latter-day work. It speaks of many things. Section 134, verse 2, states that government should hold inviolate the rights and control of property. This makes important reading in a day when government controls are increasing and people are losing the right to control their own property.

2. The second guide is: what do the latter-day Presidents of the Church have to say on the subject-particularly the living President? President Wilford Woodruff related an instance in church history when Brigham Young was addressing a congregation in the presence of the Prophet Joseph Smith:

“Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down: and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said, `There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day.’ `And now,’ said he `when compared with the living oracles, those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation: `Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth’. . . .” (Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18-19.)

There is only one man on the earth today who speaks for the Church. (See D&C 132:7, 21:4.) That man is President David O. McKay. Because he gives the word of the Lord for us today, his words have an even more immediate importance than those of the dead prophets. When speaking under the influence of the Holy Ghost his words are scripture. (See D&C 68:4.) I commend for your reading the masterful discourse of President J. Reuben Clark Jr., in the Church News of July 31, 1954, entitled: “When Are Church Leader’s Words Entitled to Claim of Scripture?”

The President can speak on any subject he feels is needful for the Saints. As Brigham Young has stated: “I defy any man on earth to point out the path a prophet of God should walk in, or point out his duty, and just how far he must go, in dictating temporal or spiritual things. Temporal and spiritual things are inseparably connected, and ever will be.” (JD 10, 364) Other officers in the kingdom have fallen but never the Presidents. Keep your eye on the captain is still good counsel. The words of a living prophet must, and ever will take precedence.

President McKay has said a lot about our tragic trends towards socialism and communism and the responsibilities liberty-loving people have in defending and preserving our Constitution. (See, Conference Report, April 1953, pp. 112-113.) Have we read these words from God’s mouthpiece and pondered on them?

3. The third and final test is the Holy Ghost-the test of the Spirit. By that Spirit we “. . . may know the truth of all things.” (Moroni 10:5.) This test can only be fully effective if one’s channels of communication with God are clean and virtuous and uncluttered with sin. Said Brigham Young:

“You may know whether you are led right or wrong, as well as you know the way home; for every principle God has revealed carries its own convictions of its truth to the human mind, . . .

“What a pity it would be if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire of themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path that the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually.” (JD 9, 149-150.)

Elder Heber C. Kimball stated: “The time will come when no man or woman will be able to endure on borrowed light.” (Orson F. Whitney, Life of Heber C. Kimball, 1888 edition 461.)

How then can we know if a man is speaking by the spirit? The Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants give us the key. (See D&C 50:17–23; 100:5-8; 2 Nephi 33:1; 1 Cor. 2:10–11.) President Clark summarized them well when he said:

“We can tell when the speakers are moved upon by the Holy Ghost only when we, ourselves, are moved upon by the Holy Ghost. In a way, this completely shifts the responsibility from them to us to determine when they so speak . . . the Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.” (Church News, July 31, 1954.)

Will this Spirit be needed to check actions in other situations? Yes, and it could be used as a guide and a protector for the faithful in a situation described by Elder Lee at the last general priesthood session of the Church when he said:

“In the history of the Church there have been times or instances where Counselors in the First Presidency and others in high station have sought to overturn the decision or to persuade the President contrary to his inspired judgment, and always, if you will read carefully the history of the Church, such oppositions brought not only disastrous results to those who resisted the decision of the President, but almost always such temporary persuasions were called back for reconsideration, or a reversal of hasty action not in accordance with the feelings, the inspired feelings, of the President of the Church. And that, I submit, is one of the fundamental things that we must never lose sight of in the building up of the kingdom of God.” (Conference Report, April, 1963, p. 81.)

These then, are the three tests: The standard works; the inspired words of the Presidents of the Church, particularly the living Presidents; and the promptings of the Holy Ghost.

Now, brothers and sisters, in this great struggle for free agency just think what a power for good we could be in this world if we were united. Remember how President Clark used to reiterate in the general priesthood meeting of the Church that there was not a righteous thing in this world that we couldn’t accomplish if we were just united.

And President McKay has reiterated it again and again when he’s stated: “Next to being one in worshiping God, there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States!

“May the appeal of our Lord in His intercessory prayer for unity be realized in our homes, our wards, our stakes, and in our support of the basic principles of our Republic,” said President McKay. (The Instructor, February 1956. p. 34.)

To that I say Amen and Amen.

President McKay speaks of a unity on principles. President Clark said:

“God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall run not to individuals, that is, to government officials, no matter how great or how small they may be. Under His plan our allegiance and the only allegiance we owe as citizens or denizens of the United States, runs to our inspired Constitution which God Himself set up. So runs the oath of office of those who participate in government. A certain loyalty we do owe to the office which a man holds, but even here we owe, just by reason of our citizenship, no loyalty to the man himself. In other countries it is to the individual that allegiance runs. This principle of allegiance to the Constitution is basic to our freedom. It is one of the great principles that distinguishes this ‘land of liberty’ from other countries.

“Thus God added to His priceless blessings to us.

“I wish to say with all the earnestness I possess that when you youth and maidens see any curtailment of these liberties I have named, when you see government invading any of these realms of freedom which we have under our Constitution, you will know that they are putting shackles on your liberty, and that tyranny is creeping upon you, no matter who curtails these liberties or who invades these realms, and no matter what the reason and excuse therefore may be.” (The Improvement Era, 43, [July 1940] 444.)

We all should know by now what President McKay has said about liberty-loving peoples’ greatest responsibility. We’ve heard him tell of our drift toward socialism and communism. We know of his feelings regarding recent tragic decisions of the Supreme Court. We know the Church’s position supporting right to work laws and the Church’s opposition to programs of federal aid to education. These and many more things has President McKay told us that involve the great struggle against state slavery and the anti-Christ. Now, inasmuch as all these warnings have come through the only mouthpiece of the Lord on the earth today there is one major question we should ask ourselves. Assuming we are living a life so we can know, then what does the Holy Spirit have to say about it?

We are under obligation to answer this question. God will hold us responsible.

Let us not be deceived in the sifting days ahead. Let us rally together on principle behind the prophet as guided by the promptings of the Spirit.

We should continue to speak out for freedom and against socialism and communism as President McKay has consistently admonished us. We should continue to come to the aid of patriots, programs and organizations which are trying to save our Constitution through every legal and moral means possible.

God has not left us in darkness regarding these matters. We have the scriptures ancient and modern. We have a living prophet, and we may obtain the Spirit.

Joseph Smith did see the Father and the Son. The kingdom established through the Prophet’s instrumentality will roll forth.

We can move forward with it.

That we may all do so and be not deceived is my humble prayer. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

One of the purposes of my website ( www.LatterdayConservative.com ) is to show that it’s not just my opinion that socialism is wrong, but that the latter-day prophets since Joseph Smith have also taught that socialism is wrong, and more than that, they’ve also defined it.

I have compiled the following quotes in attempt to answer the question “Is socialism wrong? And what exactly is socialism?” These are not my words, only the words of the prophets. Also keep in mind that these are only some of the statements regarding socialism. The prophets have also told us that we should uphold the US Constitution, yet the socialistic laws and policies within the government are in violation of the Constitution. The prophets have also made many statements against communism, which shares many of the same ideas as socialism.

Is Socialism Wrong? And What is Socialism?

Joseph Smith

“I attended a second lecture on Socialism, by Mr. Finch; and after he got through, I made a few remarks… I said I did not believe the doctrine.” (History of the Church 6:33)

Heber J. Grant

“We again warn our people in America of the constantly increasing threat against our inspired Constitution and our free institutions set up under it. The same political tenets and philosophies that have brought war and terror in other parts of the world are at work amongst us in America…

“… Communism and all other similar isms bear no relationship whatever to the United Order. They are merely the clumsy counterfeits which Satan always devises of the gospel plan… Latter-day Saints cannot be true to their faith and lend aid, encouragement, or sympathy to any of these false philosophies. They will prove snares to their feet.” (Grant and McKay 273, 343)

David O. McKay

“Church members are at perfect liberty to act according to their own consciences in the matter of safeguarding our way of life. They are, of course, encouraged to honor the highest standards of the gospel and to work to preserve their own freedoms. They are free to participate in non-church meetings that are held to warn people of the threat of Communism or any other theory or principle that will deprive us of our free agency or individual liberties vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.” (”Statement Concerning the Position of the Church on Communism” 477)

First Presidency 1941 ( Heber J. Grant, J. Reuben Clark, Jr., David O. McKay )

“We believe that our real threat comes from within and not from without, and it comes from that underlying spirit common to Nazism, Fascism, and Communism, namely, the spirit which would array class against class, which would set up a socialistic state of some sort, which would rob the people of the liberties which we possess under the Constitution…

“As we see it, there is no way in which we can, to use your own words, “preserve and perpetuate our freedom—freedom to govern ourselves, freedom of speech, and freedom to worship God according to our own light,” except we shall turn away from our present course and resume the normal course along which this great country traveled to its present high eminence of prosperity, of culture, of universal education, and of the peace and contentment which we enjoyed prior to the inauguration of the “New Deal”. (1932-3)

“These things are not matters of partisan politics with us. We care nothing as Church leaders about partisan politics as such, nor about the dominance of one party or the other. We grant to every man the right to vote as he wishes, and we would not control his vote even if we could. But we do reserve to ourselves the right to tell our people what we think is right regarding politics as affecting the fundamentals of our government system, to warn them of the dangers that lie under the present course, and to try to persuade them that their peace, their happiness, and their security do not lie along the path of the present trends of government.

“Truly, we do not believe that—again to quote your own words—we can “preserve and perpetuate our freedom—freedom to govern ourselves, freedom of speech, and freedom to worship God according to our own light” unless we turn squarely about and return to the old-time virtues, and re-enthrone our liberties and free institutions.” (A Letter to the Treasury from the LDS First Presidency in 1941 )

Ezra Taft Benson

“No true Latter-day Saint can be a Communist or a Socialist because Communist principles run counter to the revealed word of God and to the Constitution of this land which was established by men whom the God of Heaven raised up unto that very purpose [D&C 101:80].” (”A Four-Fold Hope” 11)

“President McKay has said a lot about our tragic trends towards socialism and communism and the responsibilities liberty-loving people have in defending and preserving our Constitution. (See Conference Report, Apr 1963, pp. 112-13.) Have we read these words from God’s mouthpiece and pondered on them?” (”Be Not Deceived” 1064; compare GFC 340)

“Let us not be deceived in the sifting days ahead. Let us rally together on principle behind the prophet as guided by the promptings of the Spirit. We should continue to speak out for freedom and against socialism and communism. We should continue to come to the aid of patriots, programs, and organizations that are trying to save our Constitution through every legal and moral means possible.” (”Be Not Deceived” 1065; compare GFC 342)

“We must be righteous and moral. We must live the gospel principles—all of them. We have no right to expect a higher degree of morality from those who represent us than what we ourselves are. In the final analysis, people generally get the kind of government they deserve. To live a higher law means we will not seek to receive what we have not earned by our own labor. It means we will remember that government owes us nothing. It means we will keep the laws of the land. It means we will look to God as our Lawgiver and the Source of our liberty.” (CHB 28-31)

“I fear for the future when I realize that for some thirty years our once-free institutions, political, economic, educational and social, have been drifting into the hands of those who favor the Welfare State, and who would “centralize all power in the hands of the political apparatus in Washington. This enhancement of political power at the expense of individual rights, so often disguised as ‘democracy’ or ‘freedom’ or ‘civil rights,’ is ’socialism,’ no matter what name tag it bears…

“I fear for the future when I see an affluent but complacent citizenry paying little or no attention to these and many other socialistic trends in America.

“Dr. V. Orval Watts, noted political economist, has described this socialist system which I fear-and I have but suggested a very few evidences. Here are his words: ‘Socialism… is the theory and practice of coercive collectivism. It is the evil fruit of greed for other men’s possessions and greed for control over other men’s labor.’” (Elder Ezra Taft Benson December 10 1963. A Race Against Time.)

“We have moved a long way – and are now moving further and more rapidly down the soul-destroying road of socialism. The evidence is clear – shockingly clear for all to see…

“Now we should all be opposed to Socialistic-Communism, for it is our mortal and spiritual enemy – the greatest evil in the world today. But the reason many liberals don’t want the American people to form study groups to really understand and than fight Socialistic-Communism is that once the American people get the facts they will begin to realize that much of what these liberals advocate is actually helping the enemy.

“The liberals hope you’ll believe them when they tell you how anti-Communist they are. But they become alarmed if you really inform yourself on the subject of Socialistic-Communism. For after you inform yourself you might begin to study the liberal voting record. And this study would show you how much the liberals are giving aid and comfort to the enemy and how much the liberals are actually leading America towards Socialism itself.

“For Communism is just another form of socialism, as is fascism. So now you can see the picture. These liberals want you to know how much they are doing for you – with your tax money of course. But they don’t want you to realize that the path they are pursuing is socialistic, and that socialism is the same as communism in its ultimate effect on our liberties. When you point this out they want to shut you up – they accuse you of maligning them, of casting aspersions, of being political. No matter whether they label their bottle as liberalism, progressivism, or social reform – I know the contents of the bottle is poison to this Republic and I’m going to call it poison.” (Ezra Taft Benson. Stand Up For Freedom. Assembly Hall at Temple Square, Feb 11, 1966. Given to The Utah Forum for the American Idea)

Howard W. Hunter

“You were given a great message by Elder Marion G. Romney which was inspiring and profound. He compared socialism with the United Order. I encourage you to study carefully that message. He gave much of the basic theory, the principles, the similarities and the differences between these two basically conflicting systems. As I accept his premises, logic, and conclusions, with your permission, at this time, I would like to use his message as a springboard for my own. The basic principle in his message is the same principle in mine, as already discussed – the principle of the Law of the Harvest – As a Man Sows, So Shall He Reap.

“From my own experience in business and as a lawyer and church worker, and from my firsthand observations in this country and other countries of the world, there appears to me to be a trend to shift responsibility for life and its processes from the individual to the state. In this shift there is a basic violation of the law of the harvest, or the law of justice. The attitude of “something for nothing” is encouraged. The government is often looked to as the source of wealth. There is a feeling that the government should step in and take care of one’s needs, one’s emergencies, and one’s future. Just as my friend actually became a slave to his own ignorance and bad habits by refusing to accept the responsibility for his own education and moral growth, so, also, can an entire people be imperceptibly transferred from individuals, families, and communities to the federal government…

“What is the real cause of this trend toward the welfare state, toward more socialism? In the last analysis, in my judgment, it is personal unrighteousness. When people do not use their freedoms responsibly and righteously, they will gradually lose these freedoms…

“If man will not recognize the inequalities around him and voluntarily, through the gospel plan, come to the aid of his brother, he will find that through “a democratic process” he will be forced to come to the aid of his brother. The government will take from the “haves” and give to the “have nots.” Both have last their freedom. Those who “have,” lost their freedom to give voluntarily of their own free will and in the way they desire. Those who “have not,” lost their freedom because they did not earn what they received. They got “something for nothing,” and they will neither appreciate the gift nor the giver of the gift.

“Under this climate, people gradually become blind to what has happened and to the vital freedoms which they have lost.”
(Speeches of the Year 1965-1966, pp. 1-11, “The Law of the Harvest.” Devotional Address, Brigham Young University, 8 March 1966.)

I would also recommend that everyone read the talk by Elder Marion G. Romney entitled “Is Socialism the United Order?” This talk was recommended by Elder Hunter, and as mentioned by Elder Romney, he was asked by “the Brethren” to give this talk in General Conference Priesthood meeting of April, 1966. Here are some excerpts from that talk:

“Thus in both implementation and ownership and management of property, the United Order preserves to men their God-given agency, while socialism deprives them of it… Socialism is political, both in theory and practice. It is thus exposed to, and riddled by, the corruption that plagues and finally destroys all political governments that undertake to abridge man’s agency.

“…No, brethren, socialism is not the United Order. However, notwithstanding my abhorrence of it, I am persuaded that socialism is the wave of the present and of the foreseeable future. It has already taken over or is contending for control in most nations.

“We here in the United States, in converting our government into a social welfare state, have ourselves adopted much of socialism. Specifically, we have to an alarming degree adopted the use of the power of the state in the control and distribution of the fruits of industry. We are on notice according to the words of the President, that we are going much further, for he is quoted as saying: ‘We’re going to take all the money we think is unnecessarily being spent and take it from the ‘haves’ and give it to the ‘have nots.’” (1964 Congressional Record, p. 6142, Remarks of the President to a Group of Leaders of Organizations of Senior Citizens in the Fish Room, March 24, 1964.)

“Socialism takes: United Order gives.

“That is the spirit of socialism: We’re going to take. The spirit of the United Order is: We’re going to give.

Even the scriptures warn us against socialism:

“Wo unto you poor men, whose hearts are not broken, whose spirits are not contrite, and whose bellies are not satisfied, and whose hands are not stayed from laying hold upon other men’s goods, whose eyes are full of greediness, and who will not labor with your own hands!” (D&C 56:17)

“They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.” (Isaiah 65:22)

What greater condemnation of Socialism could there be than from God himself? A witness from the Old Testament, and one from the current dispensation through Joseph Smith, as well as many other warnings through His prophets and apostles throughout the years.

I recognize that some people, with good intentions, have been deceived into thinking that socialism is good. I think what needs to be realized and understood by those who feel that socialism is in line with the Gospel and teachings of Christ is that the problem is not regarding whether or not we should help each other, we do have a responsibility to help those in need, the problem is in others using force and violating our agency to accomplish it. The ends do not justify the means. Socialism violates man’s agency. We must be free to give unto others of our own choosing.

Socialism and other false “isms” which take away our agency are part of an ongoing battle; the war that started in heaven continues on earth today.

Further recommended reading:

• Moral Agency by Elder D. Todd Christofferson
• The War in Heaven on Earth Today by Brian R. Mecham
• Is Socialism the United Order? by Elder Marion G. Romney
• The Proper Role of Government by Ezra Taft Benson
• Two Contending Forces by David O. McKay
• Jesus Christ – Gifts and Expectations by Ezra Taft Benson
• The Law of the Harvest by Howard W. Hunter

…the Church has not found it possible to follow along the lines of the present general tendency in the matter of property rights, taxes, the curtailment of rights and liberties of the people, nor in general the economic policies of what is termed the “New Deal”….unless the people of America forsake the sins and the errors, political and otherwise, of which they are now guilty and return to the practice of the great fundamental principles of Christianity, and of Constitutional government, there will be no exaltation for them spiritually, and politically we shall lose our liberty and free institutions….We believe that our real threat comes from within and not from without, and it comes from the underlying spirit common to Naziism, Fascism, and Communism, namely the spirit which would array class against class, which would set up a socialistic state of some sort, which would rob the people of the liberties which we possess under the Constitution, and would set up such a reign of terror as exists now in many parts of Europe….We confess to you that it has not been possible for us to unify our own people even upon the necessity of such a turning about, and therefore we cannot unfortunately, and we say it regretfully, make any practical suggestion to you as to how the nation can be turned about. (Heber J. Grant, also J. Reuben Clark, Jr. and David O. McKay signed as the First Presidency, written during World War II Letter to the U.S. Treasury, September 30, 1941.)

Enjoy.

http://www.latterdayconservative.com/downloadables/ezra-taft-benson/Ezra-Taft-Benson-A-Race-Against-Time.mp3

To address you this morning is a signal honor, a very great pleasure and a challenging responsibility. My gratitude for this opportunity is increased by the realization that it may be several months-possibly years-before I come to this campus again.

I am grateful for the call which has come to me to again preside over the European Mission, even though I leave my beloved country this time with greater anxiety for its future than ever before.

Because of the nature of the message I bring to you, I have committed most of it to writing. I shall speak to you frankly and honestly. Some of you may not agree fully with everything I say. Thank God in this blessed land we can still speak our convictions without fear. I have been in nations where this blessed privilege is no longer enjoyed.

What I shall say are my personal convictions borne out of an active life which has taken me into forty-five nations and brought me close to the insidious forces which would destroy our way of life in this choice land. I express these convictions and warnings today because of my love for you, the true Church of Christ, and our beloved country.

I am not here to tickle your ears-to entertain you. I will talk to you as one who loves this great nation. The message I bring is not a happy one but it is the truth, and time is always on the side of truth. “Truth must be repeated again and again because error is constantly being preached round about.” (Goethe, 1749-1832, quoted in The Freeman, July, 1958.)

This morning I will dispense with the usual amusing story so often told at the beginning of a speech. I do this because time is so rapidly running out that I feel I must have your ears during every moment of the time allotted to me. I do not mean that the hour is late today. I do mean that the hour is very late indeed, on the time table of national survival. As Ernst Tillich stated in his testimony as an expert witness before the House Committee on Un-American Activities several years ago: “On the clock of survival the time is now five minutes before midnight. We have but this brief interval to choose between survival or extinction.”

The events which have taken place since Mr. Tillich testified have fully supported this grave warning. We have been plunging headlong down the primrose path toward the inevitable destruction of our great country. It is quite true that while the Socialist Communist Conspiracy, of itself, does not have, as yet, the power necessary to do the job, it is nevertheless receiving vital aid and comfort from the Fabian Socialists, fellow travelers, dupes and liberals, to such a degree that the communists are jubilant at the course of events.

In less than half a century this evil system has gained control over one-third of mankind, and it is steadily pursuing its vicious goal of control over all the rest of the world. Since World War II people have been brought under the communist yoke at the rate of more that 6,000 per hour, 144,000 per day, 52,000,000 per year. Truly the Fabian Socialists in this country are rolling out the red carpet, which will, without a doubt, unless we arouse ourselves, eventually result in a complete Communist take-over of America. This is their hope, their plan and their bold prediction.

This is not to say that all those lending their support to the Fabian Socialist camp are consciously helping the Communists. Undoubtedly there are many well-meaning people who have been misled or confused. However, it makes little difference who pulls the trigger of a gun aimed at your heart. The end result is the same.

There are real dangers ahead. Why do I have anxiety and fear for the future?

I fear for the future when I realize that for some thirty years our once-free institutions, political, economic, educational and social, have been drifting into the hands of those who favor the Welfare State, and who would “centralize all power in the hands of the political apparatus in Washington. This enhancement of political power at the expense of individual rights, so often disguised as ‘democracy’ or ‘freedom’ or ‘civil rights,’ is ‘socialism,’ no matter what name tag it bears.

“Here we should recall the warning of the late Dean Inge: ‘History seems to show that the powers of evil have won their greatest triumphs by capturing the organizations which were formed to defeat them, and that when the devil has thus changed the contents of the bottles, he never alters the labels. The fort may have been captured by the enemy, but it still flies the flag of its defenders.’” (Admiral Ben Moreell, November 22, 1963.)

I fear for the future when the Central Government now owns more than one-third of the total land area within the boundaries of the fifty states.

I fear for the future when the Central Government owns and operates more than 3,000 businesses and commercial activities in competition with its own private tax-paying citizens.

I fear for the future when I realize that the functions of the Federal Government are carried on by some 2,000 major operating units.

I fear for the future when the Federal Government directly lends $1 for every $5 loaned by private banks and that much of the federal funds loaned are at rates below the cost of the money to the government.

I fear for the future when in 1913-15 a couple making $10,000, paid in federal taxes $60, but in 1956 a couple earning $10,000 paid $1,590 in federal income tax.

I fear for the future when I realize that twenty-five years ago the Federal Government received one-fourth of all taxes collected in the United States. Today the Federal Government collects not one-quarter but 68 per cent of all our taxes.

I fear for the future when foreign governments have used and are using American tax money to pay for socialism.

I fear for the future because twenty-five years ago all taxes, federal, state and local, took 14 per cent of our national income. Today taxes take 35 per cent.

I fear for the future when I see our federal debt soar well above 300 billion dollars-over $7,000 per family of four-sixteen times the combined debt of the fifty states and at the same time see no evidence that this dangerous trend will be curtailed.

I fear for the future when I see an affluent but complacent citizenry paying little or no attention to these and many other socialistic trends in America.

Dr. V. Orval Watts, noted political economist, has described this socialist system which I fear-and I have but suggested a very few evidences. Here are his words:

“Socialism… is the theory and practice of coercive collectivism. It is the evil fruit of greed for other men’s possessions and greed for control over other men’s labor.

“This greed for goods and power is as old as man and as widespread as the human race. It goes by many names, disguised in many forms, as men think up many excuses for robbing and ruling their fellows.

“Socialist theory is a modern excuse, an elaborate rationalization for this greed and for the organized looting and despotism it seeks to achieve. But its materialism, its collectivist point of view, its reliance on violence and coercion, even most of its economics, are as old and as common as sin.

“It holds out to men the hope that they may reap where they have not sown. It teaches that man is the creature of his environment, and that he may be happy and good if he gets enough wealth, regardless of how or where. All that is needed, says the Socialist Tempter, is to bow down and worship the Socialist State, turning over to it authority and power to take wealth where it finds it and to direct labor as it wills. Just a little class hatred, a little lying propaganda, a little violence on the picket lines, a little suppression of adverse critics, and a few generations of compulsory education in Socialistic thought, then surely we shall see the bright new day of equality, peace, brotherhood, and freedom! So says the Socialist.”

In 1878, the great Southern statesman, Benjamin Hill of Georgia, warned us of these dangers on the floor of the United States Senate, in these prophetic words:

“I dread nothing so much as the exercise of ungranted and doubtful powers by this Government. It is, in my opinion, the danger of dangers to the future of this country. Let us be sure that we keep it always within its limits.

“If this great, ambitious, ever-growing corporation becomes aggressive, who shall check it? If it becomes wayward, who shall control it? If it becomes unjust, who shall trust it? As sentinels of the country’s watchtower, I beseech you to watch and guard with sleepless dread that corporation which can make all property and rights, all states and people, and all liberty and hope, its playthings in an hour, and its victims forever.”

Admiral Ben Moreell, who has spoken here, has wisely declared:

“We do not place our trust in government mechanisms, formulas, affirmations or men. Our faith is in God and in the capacity of free men and women to govern themselves. There is a proper function for government in a free society. But that function does not include the power to order citizens how to live their lives. Our government was not designed to administer the affairs of men; it was devised to administer justice among men, who would administer their own affairs.”

That great and wise American, Thomas Jefferson, warned us of the danger of conferring unwarranted power upon our government administrators in these sobering words:

“It would be a dangerous delusion, were a confidence in the men of our choice, to silence our fears for the safety of our rights. Confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism. Free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence. It is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power; our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go… In questions of power, then, let not more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

We are now-this very day-at war with the Socialist-Communist Conspiracy. This is a point that a lot of people do not seem to realize. They think that just because we are not shooting at each other with bullets that it isn’t a real war. But, we are really at war and we must win this war if we expect to survive as a free people. The following quotations by J. Edgar Hoover point this out clearly:

“We are at war with the communists and the sooner every red-blooded American realizes this the safer we will be. . . . We are living in an age of uncertainty-an age of awesome national peril-an age when the struggle between freedom and totalitarian enslavement is drawing toward a climax.” (J. Edgar Hoover, Address, December 7, 1961.)

“The Communist Party, USA, has been and is engaged in an all-out war against American freedom. Its tactics of confusion, retreat, advance, infiltration, and hypocrisy are in full play. The attack is both legal and illegal, offensive and defensive, open and concealed.

“Above the surface a gigantic propaganda and agitation campaign is in progress, a campaign that depends for success upon the support of non-communists.” (Hoover, Masters of Deceit, p. 195.)

“Communists are committed to the destruction of our way of life and dedicated to the establishment of a world Communist society. This conflict with communism is not a struggle of our choosing. But, even though we did not start it, we cannot ignore it. We must win the struggle if freedom is to survive.” (Hoover, A Study of Communism, p. 18.)

Yes, “We are at war with this sinister conspiracy! Every communist today must be considered an enemy, wherever he may be, at home or abroad! A ‘soft’ approach toward the menace of communism can lead only to national disaster! . . .”

The communists are winning the war and building their empire largely with the help of non-communists-fellow travelers, sympathizers, dupes, liberals, etc.

Some people foolishly believe that the communists are changing, that they are “mellowing.” This is not true.

“Today’s headlines,” says Hoover, “remind us there has been no basic change in Communist imperialism. The danger which world communism presents to the free nations has not abated. If anything, it has increased.” (Hoover, A Study of Communism, Foreword.)

“In our quest for peace, we must never lose sight of the well-documented fact that every Red leader from Marx and Engels through Khrushchev, Mao and the American communist spokesman Gus Hall is dedicated to an ideology which upholds world conquest as its ultimate goal.

“The communists have never deviated from this objective.” (Hoover, Address, November 16, 1963.)

The intellectuals, liberals and dupes are so obsessed with the idea of “academic freedom” that they encourage the use of communist speakers in our colleges, at youth conventions and even high schools. This is perversion of the true meaning of academic freedom.

Again J. Edgar Hoover warns us and expresses his fear in these words:

“I do fear so long as school boards and parents tolerate conditions whereby communists and fellow travelers under the guise of academic freedom can teach our youth a way of life that eventually will destroy the sanctity of the home, that undermines faith in God, that causes them to scorn respect for constituted authority and sabotage our revered Constitution.” (Hoover, Menace of Communism, p. 11.)

“Today, the communists are engaged in an intensive campaign to control the minds and win the allegiance of American youth. . . . During the past two years, communist spokesmen have appeared on nearly 100 campuses from coast to coast. Their purpose: To create confusion, raise questions and spread doubt among our young people concerning the American way of life. . . . “They are setting a trap for the nation’s youth.

In a masterful address, “Keys to Freedom,” before the Catholic Youth Organization last month, J. Edgar Hoover issued shocking and timely warnings to complacent Americans.

“Today,” he declared, “the communists are engaged in an intensive campaign to control the minds and win the allegiance of American youth. Toward this end, a National Youth Commission has been established within the Communist Party, USA; special publications have been issued; front groups have been organized; and an ambitious speech program has been directed against our colleges and universities.

“It is indeed ironic that Communist Party speakers-whose minds and thoughts and actions are in no manner free-should demand the opportunity to parrot the Moscow line to young Americans under the guise of academic freedom!

“Academic freedom is not an instrument for the perpetuation of conspiratorial ideologies. Nor is it an agent of self-destruction-a freedom to destroy freedom. As a free-flowing channel of truth and knowledge, academic freedom is not obligated to carry along the silted tributaries of lies and distortions of known communists.

“The communists look upon students as potential sympathizers, supporters and contributors to the Party’s cause. Nor are they unmindful of the rich opportunity for infiltration presented by unwary racial and nationality groups.

“This is especially true of the intense civil rights movement within the United States-for America’s 20 million Negroes and the countless other citizens who share their objectives in the current struggle are a priority target for communist propaganda and exploitation. Every organization engaged in this struggle must constantly remain alert to this vital fact, for, once under communist domination, all freedoms and rights are lost.”

One of the dangerous present-day fallacies is the idea that we can continue with a policy of “Peaceful Coexistence.”

Here again Hoover warns us as follows:

“Key to the new Soviet strategy is the so-called ‘peaceful coexistence’ policy. It is a broad, psychological tactic cleverly devised by Khrushchev to serve a number of objectives. It is another powerful weapon in the Communist arsenal of deception, a weapon concealed behind an alluring campaign designed to provide a cover for the goal of attaining a world-wide communist society through revolutionary means.

“Through the weapon of peaceful coexistence, Soviet Communists are seeking to lull the free world-particularly the United States-into a false sense of security. It is a means of means of buying time through which they can consolidate past gains while probing for soft spots in the non-Communist world which present opportunities for future expansion.” (Hoover, A Study of Communism, p. 149.)

More is needed than merely to say that we oppose communism. We must aggressively take action to defeat it:

“It is the duty of all Americans to fully understand the true import of this threat to our heritage, to expose it, and to combat it with every weapon at our command.” (Hoover, Communist Target-Youth, p. 11.)

“It is not enough to be against communism. We must shed our complacency and aggressively meet this challenge.” (Hoover, Address, February 22, 1962.)

As the Ward Teaching Message, July, 1961, stated:

“It is the duty of freedom loving people to oppose and resist this evil with all the strength God has given us. If we do not, we stand to lose all we and our forebears have gained through the centuries.”

What is needed is more patriotism-more real “super patriots” if you will.

“A free society,” says Hoover, “depends for its vitality and strength upon the vigor and patriotism of its individual citizens.” (Hoover, A Study of Communism, Foreword.)

“Today, perhaps as never before, America has need for doers of extraordinary deeds, men and women with the moral strength and courage of our forefathers. The smoldering embers of patriotism should be fanned into a flaming spirit of loyalty so that the whole world will know Americans will stand, fight, and die for the dignity of man.” (F.B.I., Law Enforcement Bulletin, July, 1962.)

The real threat is here at home.

The seriousness of the insidious “internal” threat cannot be over-emphasized.

Again Mr. Hoover warns:

“The communist threat from without must not blind us to the communist threat from within. The latter is reaching into the very heart of America through its espionage agents and a cunning, defiant, and lawless Communist Party, which is fanatically dedicated to the Marxist cause of world enslavement and destruction of the foundations of our Republic.

“The Communist Party in this country has attempted to infiltrate and subvert every segment of our society.” (Hoover, Address, December 7, 1961.)

Unjust criticism of the anti-communists/anti-socialists helps the Conspiracy and is dangerous to our future.

In April, 1962, President David O. McKay, in his closing remarks at General Conference, quoted J. Edgar Hoover as follows:

“There is no place here in America for part-time patriots. This nation is face to face with the greatest danger ever to confront it, a sinister and deadly conspiracy which can be conquered only by an alert, informed citizenry. It is indeed appalling that some members of our society continue to deplore and criticize those who stress the communist danger. Public indifference to this threat is tantamount to national suicide. Lethargy leads only to disaster.” (F.B.I., Law Enforcement Bulletin, March, 1960.)

Yes, J. Edgar Hoover, probably the best informed man in America on the threatening Conspiracy, has repeatedly warned us that the gravest danger we face today comes from the Socialist-Communist Conspiracy-and from within.

Many people cannot see how this statement by Mr. Hoover can be true, since there are supposedly only about 10,000 or so Party members in this country. Those who doubt Mr. Hoover overlook the fact that for every member of the Communist Conspiracy there are at least ten others willing and eager to do their bidding. In addition to this, the Communists and their fellow travelers move toward key positions by which they can influence many others, just as iron filings move toward a magnet. Also, the Communists, at this stage, do not themselves intend to do much of the actual close-in fighting. Instead, they make use of non-Communists to serve their purposes. Their method of operation is to confuse the issues, divide one group against the other, and thus to conquer.

The Communist method of confusing the issues is to use pseudo-idealistic and pseudo-moral words and phrases in order to trap the unwary into following their designs. The fisherman knows that he cannot entice a fish to bite upon a raw, steel hook, so he dresses it up with a nice, juicy worm and the poor fish bites. In the same way, the pseudo-moral and pseudo-idealistic expressions trap many innocents so that they will follow out the aims of the Communist Conspirators, for example, the false appeals made by the Communists in the name of “peace” and the “brotherhood of man.” They know full well that Communism has nothing in common with these expressions as we understand them. Yet, they deliberately misuse them in order to deceive.

This has been the means by which the Communists, throughout the world, have been able to set class against class, religion against religion, race against race and group against group. The Conspiracy so enflames people against one another that they fight among themselves and thus bring about mutual destruction. The Communists then come in and take over.

The present strength of the Communist Conspiracy by itself would be insufficient to accomplish their aims in this country. However, they are being given a tremendous push and able assistance by the Fabian Socialists, their fellow travelers, dupes, liberals, etc. The name, Fabian, is derived from that of a Roman general who always avoided clear-cut contact with the enemy. Instead, he would whittle down the antagonist little by little, until the latter was so weakened that he would succumb.

The communists are eager to capitalize upon all areas of misunderstanding and unrest. Their cause is the cause of Soviet Russia, for the Communist Party, USA, is an inseparable part of the sinister international conspiracy which is financed and directed by the Kremlin. No amount of lies and duplicity can conceal this carefully documented fact.

If you want the terrifying facts about the Communist use of the Negroes, I recommend Manning Johnson’s book, Color, Communism and Common Sense, a reprint by American Opinion Magazine (Belmont 78, Massachusetts). The author, a Negro, was a Communist for ten years and served on the National Committee for the Communist Party here in America and assisted in planning the Conspiracy against his own race.

Let me pause a moment to point out some Pro-communist propaganda which has been widely circulated. It is frequently stated that Communism is on the extreme left and Fascism is on the extreme right. This is absolutely false. It is true that Communism is on the extreme left, but Nazism and Fascism are so closely allied with Communism that J. Edgar Hoover has called Communism, Red Fascism and Nazism, Black Fascism. They are all forms of Socialism. And, as has been pointed out by well-informed people in the West, they are all forms of “GOVERNMENTISM” where the government becomes lord and master and we become serfs and slaves.

The extreme right wing is composed of the anarchists who believe that people are so good at heart that no government at all is needed. Our forefathers knew that, while most people try to do the right thing, there are a few who run amuck. They, therefore, established our great constitutional Republic-a government of limited powers. They believed that we must have some government but it must be bound down by the chains of our Constitution, so that it will not slip farther and farther over into the realm of “GOVERNMENTISM” whether it be Communism, Nazism, Fascism, Welfare-Statism or some other form of Socialism.

Please note the words of George Washington, who stated:

“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence-it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master!” And, at a later date, Woodrow Wilson said that “the history of liberty is the history of limitations of government power, not the increase of it.” And at a still later day, that great spiritual leader and patriot, President David O. McKay, said this: “During the first half of the twentieth century we have traveled far into the soul-destroying land of socialism.” (Deseret News Church News Section, March 14, 1953.)

Now I want to point out just a few of the ways in which America is tripping down the primrose path. Anyone who is interested and who would care to make a careful study of the subject, will be both amazed and shocked at the progress made by the Marxian Socialists. Their tremendous influence and power can be grasped if we will read the carefully documented book by Dan Smoot, a former F.B.I. administrative supervisor and assistant to J. Edgar Hoover, entitled The Invisible Government. This book shows how the Fabians, operating through many influential organizations, have reached out their tentacles and are throttling free enterprise at the same time they are pyramiding and concentrating immense power in the Federal Government. In this way the advance of Communism is being comforted, aided and abetted by those who are not members of the Communist Conspiracy but who adhere to the same principles.

Dr. Carew Hunt, a world-wide authority on communist strategy, states: “Yet, where the ends they seek are concerned, Socialism and Communism are virtually interchangeable terms, as anyone who consults the ‘Oxford English Dictionary’ or any standard textbook will discover… Indeed, Lenin’s party continued to call itself ‘Social Democrat’ until the seventh Party Congress of March, 1918, when it substituted the term ‘Bolshevik’ as a protest against the non-revolutionary attitude of the socialist parties of the West.”

President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., expressed his conviction on this point in these significant words:

“The paths we are following, if we move forward thereon will inevitably lead us to Socialism or Communism, and these two are as like as two peas in a pod in their ultimate effect upon our liberties.

“And never forget for one moment that Communism and Socialism are state slavery. World conquest has been, is now, and ever will be its ultimate goal.”

The communists and fellow travelers have never deviated from this objective. Despite the high-pressure campaign they have insidiously directed behind Khrushchev’s phrase of “peaceful coexistence,” the communists know that this is simply a propaganda slogan. It is devised to further their own ends by stirring the hopes and emotions of those who seek an end to the turmoil, fear and sorrow that world communism itself created.

Actions continue to speak louder than words, and certainly the communists have shown no indication of a sincere quest for peace. Here are a few examples. There are many.

The take-over of Cuba and the establishment of a Communist base and island fortress in America; the ever-constant infiltration of Red Fascists into countries of Central and South America to create a Sovietized Latin America; the increase of espionage activities by Soviet and satellite agents in our country, particularly those who strive to penetrate our government processes from the protection afforded them by diplomatic assignments in New York in the United Nations and in Washington; the frantic efforts of the Communist Party, USA, to subvert our youth; and the intense drive of the Communists operating from concealed positions to wrest control of the movement for Negro rights-does all this indicate a real and sincere desire to live in “peaceful coexistence”?

To the Socialist-Communist Conspiracy there is no such thing as “peaceful coexistence” except as a tool for further conquest. Their stated objective is to “bury” us.

Since about the time of Woodrow Wilson, Fabian Socialists have been able to cuddle close to key people in our government and those who exercise influence. I will not take the time to trace their activities through the various administrations since Wilson’s time. I will be content to give you two or three examples approximating that of the Fabian Socialists.

It may shock you to learn that the first communist cell in government, so far as we know, was organized in the U.S. Department of Agriculture in the 1930′s. John Abt was there. It was John Abt whom Oswald, the accused assassin of President Kennedy, requested for his attorney. Harry Dexter White was there. Lee Pressman was there. And Alger Hiss, who was advisor to President Franklin D. Roosevelt at Yalta and Tehran and who was the principal architect and first Secretary General of the United Nations organizing meetings was there also.

Today, Walt Whitman Rostow, who is the chief planner for the State Department, has expressed a dangerous point of view somewhat like this: We must do everything in our power to avoid irritating and antagonizing the Communists. They are, after all, merely rough and crude Socialists and we must avoid doing anything that would escalate into a war. In fact, what we should do is to help them to develop so that they will mature and outgrow their violent impulses. In this way the Communists will move somewhat over in our direction. At the same time we must move our country over toward the left with more and more socialism until, ultimately, the two will merge. Each country will then give up its armaments and armed forces and place them in the hands of a One-World Government. (See the book, A Proposal: Key to an Effective Foreign Policy, by Wait W. Rostow and Max F. Millikan, Harper, New York, 1957. An outgrowth of the Dartmouth Conference in the fall of 1960 and the Crimea Conference of May, 1961, was the pamphlet, Freedom from War, the United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World, U.S. State Department Publication No. 7277, Disarmament Series 5, released September, 1961, U.S. Government Printing Office.)

And Arthur Schlessinger, Jr., former professor of history at Harvard and now high in the councils of government, has said: “There seems no inherent obstacle to the gradual advance of socialism in the U.S. through a series of New Deals,” and, that socialism appears quite practical as a long time proposition.

In either case the whole tendency is toward more and more GOVERNMENTISM, more and more centralization and less and less individual responsibility and freedom.

An interesting example of the socialist mind at work is the present so-called Civil Rights Bill of 1963. I am going to quote, in part, from a talk made by John C Satterfield, past president of the American Bar Association, over the Manion Forum, weekly broadcast No. 468, September 15, 1963:

“It is clothed in the name of civil rights and is called the Civil Rights Act of 1963. As a matter of fact, it is 10 per cent civil rights and it is 90 per cent extension of Federal executive power at the expense of individuals, states and municipalities-in fact, at the expense of everyone . . .

“Do you borrow money from a bank that is in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation system or the Federal Reserve system? Have you an FHA or VA loan? Have you a Small Business Administration loan? Are you a realtor, developer, home owner? Are you interested in schools and colleges? Are you a farmer who has anything to do with the Farm Credit Administration, Commodity Credit Corporation, Soil Conservation Service, Federal Crop Insurance, REA, Agricultural Research?

“If you are any of these, or participate in any of these, then under this Act the Federal Fair Employment Practices Commission will dictate to you whom you may hire, whom you may fire, whom you promote, whom you demote, and how you may handle your employees . . .

“Not only that, but it brings in almost every profession and every business-lawyers, realtors, doctors, small establishments, restaurants, gasoline stations, theaters, hotels, motels and lodging houses-and the Federal control will never end . . .

“Under the provisions of this Act, combining them all, the United States Commissioner of Education could come into a school and force the transfer of children from one school to another until there was either racial balance or religious balance . . .

“Not only that, but the next step to a complete and uncontrolled dictatorship of any government is the control of the voting and of the electoral machinery and transfer from the states to the Federal Government the right to fix qualifications for voters, contrary to the provision of the Constitution of the United States. It would also transfer, under the circumstances stated in the Act, the right of registration of voters from the state and local officers to Federal referees . . .

“You should think about this legislation because it destroys everything that we have heretofore felt protects us from a complete and absolute power of a central government. It is something that strikes home to every businessman, every home owner, and every worker in the United States . . .”

In other words, we may say that the states would be reduced to little more than subdivisions within the central government and largely subject to its control. It would be almost certain to result in an all-powerful national government with authority to intervene in the private affairs of individual citizens. It would, furthermore, control and adjust relationships between men in accordance with the dictates of those in charge.

It has been truly said by our former Chief Executive, Dwight D. Eisenhower, that, “The federal government did not create the states of this Republic. The states created the federal government. . . . If the states lose their meaning, our entire system of government loses its meaning and the next step is the rise of the centralized national state in which the seeds of autocracy can take root and grow.”

Those are strong but true words.

Never forget that history is filled with examples of men who mean to be good rulers but who nevertheless mean to rule.

With reference to the United Nations and spurious appendages, I would like to quote the Internal Security Annual Report for 1956, p. 213, as made by the Senate Internal Security Sub-Committee, as follows: “What appears, on the surface at least, to be by far the worst danger spot, from the standpoint of disloyalty and subversive activity among Americans employed by international organizations, is UNESCO-the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Among less than ninety Americans employed by UNESCO the International Organizations Employees Loyalty Board found fourteen cases of doubtful loyalty.” Then, in the footnote, we see this: “Information in the possession of the sub-committee, indicating a great deal of evidence not yet publicly adduced, points to the possibility that the parent body, the U.N., may be the worst ‘spot’ of all.” There is no indication that there has been the slightest improvement in the United Nations or its satellites since that time.

I have in my possession a copy of an unpublished manuscript on the United Nations Charter prepared in 1945 and given to me by that eminent international lawyer and former Under Secretary of State J. Reuben Clark, Jr.

President Clark’s declarations on this, as on other subjects, emphasize more and more with the passing of time his vision and statesmanship.

Commenting on the United Nations Charter and the “travesty on exhaustive consideration” as the charter was hastily approved by the Congress, under urging from the State Department, he continues with a devastating analysis and a sober warning to the American people that there will be a day of reckoning. I believe that day is near at hand. The hopes and the aspirations of the people have been betrayed. I hope this scholarly, unpublished memorandum by President Clark with its penetrating analysis will someday soon be available in full. Meantime, I urge all to read the solid volume, Stand Fast by the Constitution, which embodies much of J. Reuben Clark’s timely instruction. Meantime let us have no further blind devotion to the communist-dominated United Nations.

Today it is becoming an increasing handicap, it seems, to one’s career in government for a man or woman to take seriously his pledge of allegiance to our Constitution. Witness the firing of Mr. Otto F. Otepka, because he believed in a higher service-that service to our nation comes above service to any particular department of government.

The open and covert management of the news in this country is another case, frightening in its implications. One high government official has made the appalling statement to the effect that it is all right for the government to lie to the people if it serves the government’s purpose to lie. Certainly lies can take place by omission as well as by commission.

At this point I quote a statement by Virgil Jordan: “In these days of fear and confusion, let us remember that the endless repetition of a lie, or the multiplication of an empty promise does not make a truth. Truth is something more than the greatest common denominator of mass ignorance and greed. It is never determined or demonstrated by majorities or pluralities or popular error and appetite. Ultimately, with God’s aid, it always emerges and finally prevails, supreme in its power over the destiny of mankind, and terrible in its retribution for those who deny, defy, or betray it.”

Constantine Brown, in an article in a recent issue of the Congressional Record, told of prominent people who had defected from Communism who now fear they have joined the losing side.

They gave two reasons:

1. Communism will win because western leaders (particularly in the United States) do not want to believe that the Soviets are planning to conquer the world.

2. Khrushchev knows that the United States will offer only token opposition to the Soviets’ plan to conquer in Latin America.

Now the question arises-what can we do to preserve our Constitution, and how can we avoid being misled into doing those things that would actually help to destroy it? During last October Conference I spoke on the subject “Be not Deceived.” I said there were three keys one could use to avoid deception: first, the scriptures; second, the words of prophets, especially the President of the Church (particularly the living one); and third, the Holy Ghost.

The scriptures tell us about the war in heaven over free agency-similar to the war we are going through now, where the devil’s program was guaranteed security as opposed to the Lord’s program of letting each choose for himself even if he makes the wrong choice. Once you understand these scriptures you will understand why the Presidents of the Church have opposed Communism, Socialism, and the Welfare State and you will see why you must oppose them, too, if you are in harmony with the word of the Lord.

The scriptures also tell about our inspired Constitution. If you accept these scriptures you will automatically reject the counsel of men like Senator Fulbright and others who depreciate our Constitution. If you use the scriptures as a guide you know what the Book of Mormon has to say regarding murderous conspiracies in the last day and how we are to awake to our awful situation today. I find certain elements in the Church do not like to see the Book of Mormon and D&C so much-it has too much to say about freedom.

The second criteria is the prophets, especially the living President. Do you realize what President McKay has said about some recent decisions of our Supreme Court? Do you realize that he has called Communism the greatest threat to the Church today and has said that this country has traveled far into the soul-destroying land of Socialism? He has opposed programs of federal aid to education; he has supported right-to-work laws. Are you in harmony with the prophet’s declarations? If you accept the scriptures and the prophets, then you will automatically separate yourself from the philosophy of some Mormons and you will have to part with a number of our national leaders and their programs.

The last criteria is the Holy Ghost-the test of the spirit. You cannot use this test unless you have the spirit of the Lord with you and that only comes through righteous living-which means being in harmony with Church doctrine in addition to simply being active in Church work and attending meetings.

These are the three main keys-apply them and you will avoid pitfalls and traps which even members of the Church and some teachers may set for you. President Joseph F. Smith said that one of the three things that plagued the Church within was false educational ideas-and I am sure you will be introduced to some of these ideas somewhere along your path. Using the scriptures and the prophets and the spirit as a guide, we can eliminate a lot of the deceptions and false philosophies and cure-alls of men and discern between the wheat and the chaff.

Thus, with the scriptures and the words of the prophets for a guide line, it is easier to select our reading-for we need information out of the best books to help us in this fight for our freedom. And when it comes to the writings of men, in addition to the tests we have suggested, it is helpful to select the men who have proved most accurate over the years. On this basis may I give to you my own personal recommendation of some reading which will help you in the fight to save our Constitution.

First, for a number of years President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., served on the board of trustees of the Foundation for Economic Education while he was a member of the First Presidency. President Clark, as you probably know, was an Under Secretary of State and Ambassador to Mexico. He wrote the famous memorandum on the Monroe Doctrine. In 1923 in the Salt Lake Tabernacle he warned us of the Communist-Socialist menace and what it was going to do-and he was right. No one in the Church has shown greater insight regarding our Constitution and the Socialist-Communist threat to it. The Foundation for Economic Education with which he served puts out some of the most enlightening freedom literature available. They also put out a free monthly magazine, entitled The Freeman, which is excellent. They will be happy to send you a free catalog of their literature. May I mention some of the books which they distribute: The Federalist, written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison, three of our inspired rounding fathers, explaining why the need of a constitution; The Constitution of the United States, by Mussatti; The Clich of Socialism; The Mainspring of Human Progress, by Weaver; Economics in One Lesson, by Hazlitt; and The Admiral’s Log, by Admiral Ben Moreell, which book is also on the M.I.A. reading list. The address for the Foundation for Economic Education is simply Irvington-on-Hudson, New York.

These books and others will show you what America stands for-our free enterprise system-our Constitutional Republic-how we became the world’s greatest power. For For first you need to know what America stands for before you can realize what could be a threat to it. For as President McKay has said, the fostering of full economic freedom lies at the base of all our liberties.

The next thing we must know about is the major enemy to our way of life-Socialistic Communism. In October Conference, 1959, President McKay admonished us to read what he called an excellent book, The Naked Communist. I agree with the President of the Church. Probably no man in America knows the internal Communist threat better than J. Edgar Hoover-his two books on Communism should be must reading. They are Masters of Deceit, and A Study of Communism. You Can Trust the Communists, by Dr. Fred Schwarz, whom President McKay called a true friend of freedom, is also an enlightening book. The House Committee on Un-American Activities and the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee have both put out instructive information. A list of their publications is available free of charge from the U.S. Superintendent of Documents, Washington 25, D.C.

Once you get the facts about our American Constitutional Republic and the threats to it-then you are going to want to do something. Certainly those who are organized and have a plan and are dedicated, though they be few, will always defeat the many who are not organized and have no plan or dedication. The Communists have proved this and the fighters for freedom must realize it too. If, then, you want to have impact through an organization, make sure that organization squares with the scriptures and the prophets and the spirit. Then move forward and use your free agency to accomplish that which is virtuous and praiseworthy and let the devil and his agents and dupes howl.

Yes, the Fabian Socialists are as busy as bees rolling out the red carpet which leads inevitably to Communism. Faced with this situation our first duty is that of education. Starting with ourselves we must become familiar with the broad outlines of our movement toward destruction. We must, as President McKay has urged, become alerted and informed. After becoming informed ourselves, we must carry the word to all within hearing or seeing range, so that they, too, can become awakened. Take every opportunity to pass sound literature and books around so that your neighbors and their neighbors will awaken before it is too late. We are literally in a race against time and we must take every opportunity to spread the word.

We must not become confused over side issues. Our enemy is not the Catholic, not the Protestant, not the Negro, not the white man, not the Jew, not the Gentile, not employers, not employees, not the wealthy, not the poor, not the worker, and not the employer. Our mortal enemies are the Satanic Communists and those who prepare the path for them.

It is not, however, enough to be acquainted with the grave dangers facing these United States. We must also instruct ourselves, and others, in the great spiritual values underlying our Divinely inspired Constitution and our American free-enterprise system. One of the many sure ways of defeating our enemy is to instruct the people about the eternal verities of our own country. A mind, so enlightened, will reject Marxian Socialism whether it be in the form of Communism, Nazism, Fascism, Welfare-Statism or some other man-made monstrosity.

In this time of deadly peril we must choose men and women to represent us in our government who have attained an inner atunement of mind, heart and soul with God. Only these people have anchors firmly rooted and strong enough to withstand the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. They, only, have the inner sense of direction, stability of spirit and firmness of character essential to our survival.

We must not place in positions of trust cheap opportunists who will sell their souls for a mess of pottage. Rather we should place in public office men and women who place the love of God first in their lives and who, as a consequence, can serve their fellow men with true wisdom.

Not cheap politicians but statesmen are needed today. Not opportunists but men and women of principle must be demanded by the people. In this time of great stress and danger we must place only those dedicated to the preservation of our Constitution, our American Republic, and responsible freedom under God. “Oh God, give us men with a mandate higher than the ballot box.”

In closing let me quote Bishop Exeter:

Give us men
Strong and stalwart ones;
Men whom highest hope inspires
Men whom purest honor fires,
Men who trample Self beneath them,
Men who made their country wreath them
As her noble sons,
Men who never shame their mothers,
Men who never fail their brothers
True, however false are others:
Give us men-I say again
Give us Men!

Give us Men!
Men who, when the tempest gathers,
Grasp the standards of their fathers
In the thickest fight:
Men who strike for home and altar,
(Let the coward cringe and falter)
God defend the right:
True as truth though lorn and lonely
Tender, as the brave are only:
Men who tread where saints have trod,
Men for Country,-Home-and God:
Give us Men: I say again again-
Give us such Men!

God bless you, my brothers and sisters, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

The Book of Mormon Warns America

As I’ve listened to and read through this talk, I feel that even though it was given over 40 years ago, it is still relevant to us today. Many want to deny the existence of ‘conspiracies’ and secret societies attempting to destroy the nation and our freedoms; I suppose they don’t understand the Book of Mormon, if they have read it. The label ‘conspiracy theory’ and ‘conspiracy theorist’ is used over and over again to discredit people. I admit that there are many theories out there which are simply theories. What’s unfortunate is that the conspiracy facts get thrown into the same pot, and the idea that our own government would be involved in such combinations is unbelievable to many people – to those people, I invite you to read the Book of Mormon (be sure to pay attention to what happened because of Secret Combinations in those days, and the warnings of the same thing happening today, even specifically in America.)

Some claim that this subversive threat to our government ended with communism (even though communism is still well alive in other parts of the world), and that the threat of a communist take-over of America is over.

The Prophets have not told us that we are no longer under condemnation and safe from the destruction of our nation for upholding Secret Combinations, letting them get power, gain, and destroy our freedoms – we know this continues on to this day. The prophets continue to warn us of the increasing wickedness of the people of this nation and that “political machinations ruin the stability of nations, despots grasp for power” and so on… Yes, they are being more careful about how they say it, with good reason, but the warning continues.

When you read/listen to The Book of Mormon Warns America (and many other past talks by prophets warning about communism) replace the word communism with socialism, fabianism, progressivism, or collectivism, and it very much still applies to the problems we face today. The enemy, with Lucifer at the head, has simply changed some of it’s strategies and tactics; the threat still exists.

As Ezra Taft Benson stated:

Suffice it to say that they have penetrated every major segment of our society, as J. Edgar Hoover has testified – the news media, the schools, the churches, the unions, etc. But their greatest desire and most successful drive has come from their effective penetration of government.

The open threat of communism in America may have been defeated, but it’s clear that Lucifer, through those in the Secret Combination and the assistance of “the misguided idealists, the political opportunists, the dupes and fellow travelers, and the ignorant and apathetic Americans” still has control of “every major segment of our society… the news media, the schools, the churches, the unions… government”

There may be some trials ahead – The War in Heaven continues on earth today – but I know that in the end Christ wins, along with those of us who stand with Him, and stand up for the Gospel, for Truth, Agency, Freedom, and Liberty.

Enjoy…

My dear brothers and sisters, what an inspiration and thrill it is to be with you on this oocasion. I congratulate you on your desire for an hour of worship in the midst of your classes and studies. I commend you for your devotion to the gospel and the Church which is so vital to the establish­ment of Zion, a society of the pure in heart, and for the advancement of the kingdom of God on the earth.

I approach my responsibility today with a sense of inadequacy and with a great desire for the blessings of the Lord. Will you share this responsibility with me? Will each of you offer a silent prayer within your heart that the Lord will inspire us today? If you will sincerely do so, and hunger and thirst for truth and righteousness and yearn for the understanding of the Spirit, I assure you that our prayers will be answered.

The Learning Process Lies Within You

Over 50 years ago a wealthy captain of industry was approached by representatives of Harvard University for a substantial contribution in cash to help establish and build a graduate school of business. At first this prominent industrial leader hesitated to contribute, until he was persuaded in his own mind of the worth and importance of this educational enterprise. Once convinced, he contributed many times more than what was initially requested of him.

As they were preparing for the dedicatory services they asked this great benefactor to make a speech. He declined. They tried to prevail, but again he declined. When the dedicatory services were being held, they again persisted and asked him if he would say but a few words on this important occasion. He stood before the assembly and essentially said: “I have but one thing I would like to say to you today, to the leaders and faculty and to the students of this business school …” Then after a long pause he said: “The learning process lies within.”
In these five words, “The learning process lies within,” is contained a wise and profound truth – a truth which to my understanding has helped shape the objectives and the methods of that great school of business for over a half century.

Responsibility for Education Is Yours

Beloved students, the learning process does lie within. The primary responsibility for your education here at Brigham Young University is yours. It is not the Church’s; it is not the administrators’ responsibility; it is not even your teachers’ – it is yours. To the degree you accept this responsibility and are diligent in discharging it, you will succeed, you will grow and develop an educated mind and an educated heart. As you are true to the laws of God you will develop a divine character.

To the degree that you do not accept this responsibility you will not grow and develop within. If you should “make it through school,” rather than obtain an education, you will receive only a diploma. This diploma may open certain doors of opportunity to begin with, but it will not keep them open. These doors of opportunity will only stay open if you truly become educated and grow and develop from within.

Resources and Opportunities

What does it mean to be responsible for your own education? It essentially means this: You realize fundamentally that your learning, your growth and development are based upon your own efforts. The teachers become a great resource for you – they represent a reservoir of knowledge; they stimulate your thoughts; they challenge your ideas, your concepts. They help you gain new ones; they give you abundant oppor­tunities for self-expression, for the development of your communication skills.

The library is also a resource, as are your textbooks and your fellow students. The whole atmosphere is conducive to learning. Grasp this opportunity. You may never be surrounded by more helps, more advantages and more opportunities in your entire life than you are right now.

You remember the essay of Elbert Hubbard, entitled “A Message to Garcia.” Let me read part of it.

When the war broke out between Spain and the United States, it was necessary to communicate quickly with the leaders of the Insurgents. Garcia was somewhere in the mountain fastnesses of Cuba – ­no one knew where. No mail nor telegraph message could reach him. The President must secure his cooperation and quickly.

Someone said to the President, “There is a fellow by the name of Rowan who will find Garcia for you, if anyone can.” Rowan was sent for and given a letter to be delivered to Garcia.

How the “fellow by the name of Rowan” took the letter, sealed it up in an oil-skin pouch, strapped it over his heart, in four days landed by night off the coast of Cuba from an open boat, disappeared into the jungle, and in three weeks came out on the other side of the Island, having traversed a hostile country on foot, and delivered his letter to Garcia – are things I have no special desire now to tell in detail. The point that I wish to make is this: McKinley gave Rowan a letter to be delivered to Garcia; Rowan took the letter and did not ask, “Where is he?”

Students, put this matter to a test. Suppose you are teaching a class. You give to your students an assignment for Friday after next to hand in an essay describing the essential elements of the President’s proposed national budget, giving their best over-all evaluation of it.

Will your students say, “Yes, sir,” and then go to the task and on Friday next, eleven days from today, hand in the finished assignment? Or will they come to you individually and ask: “Where can I find the President’s budget?” “Where is the information found? In magazines or books?” “What part of the library?” “What is the budget, anyway?” “Which President do you mean?” “What do you mean by ‘evaluation’? ”

Assume you have answered these questions. What, then, will happen Friday next? Will the asignments be handed in? By how many? Will there be some excuses such as: “Couldn’t get hold of the book – ­someone kept it out of the library too long,” or “I didn’t quite understand what you meant when you gave the assignment,” or “I just simply didn’t have enough time – can I hand it in late?”

Let us return to Elbert Hubbard’s closing paragraph:

My heart goes out to the man who does his work when the “boss “is away, as well as when he is at home. And the man, who, when given a letter for Garcia, quietly takes the missive, without any idiotic questions, and with no lurking intention of chucking it into the nearest sewer, or of doing aught else but deliver it, never gets “laid off,” nor has to go on a strike for higher wages. Civilization is one long anxious search for just such individuals. Anything such a man asks shall be granted. He is wanted in every city, town, and village – in every office, shop, store and factory. The world cries out for such: he is needed, and needed badly – the man who can carry a message to Garcia.

A True Story

To further illustrate the importance of accepting the responsibilities for your own education, I tell you a true story of a friend of mine as he learned this vital lesson the hard way.
In my friend’s university training, not here at the “Y,” he became “caught up” in an exciting new social life. He could fairly easily handle the academic side for he had a good mind and was capable of concentrating and memorizing under pressure.

His objective in university life was to get a degree and “have a lot of fun” in the process. He learned a short cut in getting what he wanted. Rather than paying the daily price of conscientious study and preparation for his classes, he learned to concentrate in his classes and to take thorough, exhaustive notes. He seldom bought textbooks, let alone read them. His preparation for his tests involved intensive cramming sessions in which he would summarize all of his notes and essentially memorize the summary. Like the open hungry sponge he would sop up all of the knowledge he could by cramming and then would squeeze it and squeeze it on the blue books until it was completely dry.

Using this “clever” study philosophy he consistently received good grades; in fact, he graduated from that university with honors, which, incidentally, reflects badly on both himself and the university. His goal was accomplished – he received his degree and had a lot of fun in the process.

He went on to graduate school. Then something happened. This school cared but little for knowledge alone and cared even less for a student’s ability to memorize and regurgitate. My friend was overwhelmed. Competition was stiff. The other students seemed far more informed than he; they seemed to be able to think more clearly, to analyze, and to create. They could communicate in a more organized, clear, and persuasive fashion. The school emphasized thinking and decision-making and the power to communicate.

My friend said to himself, “What have I done? I have deceived myself. My old short-cut techniques won’t work here. What can I do now?” For some time he tried to shift the responsibility; he wanted to excuse himself. He blamed his alma mater, his teachers, and then in honesty – himself.

It was a bitter pill he had to swallow. His classes demanded more than he could deliver. In his frustration he got his trained, self-disciplined roommate to do part of his work – the hard part. But his roommate couldn’t help him on his tests. Soon each day became a test, and for the first time in his life he faced real failure.

The Law of the Harvest

He learned the truth of the Law of the Harvest: As a Man Sows, So Shall He Reap. Little by little he had to unlearn his lazy school habits and learn new habits of diligence and perseverance and self-reliance. Even­tually, by paying the price of long, late hours, mental sweat, and continuous struggling for over two years, he was able to undo his past self-deceiving error and achieve a real success. He now attributes his real formal education to those two years.

Immutable Laws

The laws governing mental or social or spiritual development are as immutable and unswerving in their spheres as are the laws governing physical development. This coming week our great basketball team will make a bid for victory at the National Invitational Tournament in New York. Rather than conscientiously practicing basketball every day, what would happen if our team just took it easy, took the course of least resistance, and then the day before the basketball tournament really crammed in an intensive practice session? The foolishness of this is transparent.

Likewise, it is a foolish thing, a self-deceiving thing, to attempt to reap success to any endeavor by cramming or by any short-cut method. You cannot force the physical growth process overnight; neither can you force the mental growth process. People grow mentally, socially, emotionally, and spiritually only to the degree they obey on a daily basis the laws governing such growth.

The Lord tells us this clearly and powerfully:

There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated – And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated. (D&C 130:20–21.)

“Every Act Rewards Itself …”

Many consider Ralph Waldo Emerson one of the wisest Americans. He discovered in his own way the truth that all blessings are predicated on obedience to both natural and spiritual law. His expression is very profound, so you must listen very carefully:

…Every secret is told, every crime is punished, every virtue rewarded, every wrong redressed, in silence and certainty…
Every act rewards itself, or in other words inte­grates itself, in a twofold manner, first in the thing, or in real nature; and secondly in the circumstance, or in apparent nature. Man calls the circumstance, the retribution. The casual retribution is in the thing and is seen by the soul. The retribution in the circumstance is seen by the understanding; it is inseparable from the thing, but is often spread over a long time and so does not become distinct until after many years. The specific stripes may follow late after the offence, but they follow because they accompany it….

I wish time would permit us to study this great essay.

Nations Also Subject to Basic Principles

My fellow students, what is true with an individual is also true with a nation. You can absolutely rely on this – a nation cannot violate basic principles with impunity, that is, without paying the awful price, anymore than an individual can violate basic principles with impunity.

We hear a lot of economic and political arguments going on around the country today. We have for a long time. Words like “socialism,” “free enterprise,” “the welfare state,” “states rights,” “federal control,” “human rights,” “property rights,” “communism,” are bantered around widely. You may wonder what these words mean. I wonder myself because they are used with such varieties of meaning. Often in your search to understand them you run into a barrage of more such words and even prej­udice and bull-headedness, and you come out of the fray more confused and more frustrated. I believe much of this can be simplified.

There is operating in your own daily life here at Brigham Young University the basic principles which lie at the heart of all of these argu­ments, words, and issues.

Socialism and the United Order Compared

Last week you were given a great message by Elder Marion G. Romney which was inspiring and profound. He compared socialism with the United Order. I encourage you to study carefully that message. He gave much of the basic theory, the principles, the similarities and the differences between these two basically conflicting systems. As I accept his premises, logic, and conclusions, with your permission, at this time, I would like to use his message as a springboard for my own. The basic principle in his message is the same principle in mine, as already discussed – the principle of the Law of the Harvest – As a Man Sows, So Shall He Reap.

From my own experience in business and as a lawyer and church worker, and from my firsthand observations in this country and other countries of the world, there appears to me to be a trend to shift responsibility for life and its processes from the individual to the state. In this shift there is a basic violation of the Law of the Harvest, or the law of justice. The attitude of “something for nothing” is encouraged. The government is often looked to as the source of wealth. There is the feeling that the government should step in and take care of one’s needs, one’s emergencies, and one’s future.

Just as my friend actually became a slave to his own ignorance and bad habits by refusing to accept the responsibility for his own education and moral growth, so, also, can an entire people be imperceptibly transferred from individuals, families, and communities to the Federal Government.

Right of Free Agency

The right to own and control private property is not only a human right; it is a divine right. We will largely be judged, if I understand the Savior’s teachings correctly (see Matthew 25), by how we use our property voluntarily for the blessings and benefit of our Father’s other children. President McKay continually teaches us that this right of free agency is our most precious heritage. It is our greatest gift in this world and is to be valued even more than life itself.

If you deprive a man of his right to fail in the righteous use of his property, you also deprive him of his right to succeed. If you remove from a man his right to “go to hell,” you likewise remove his free agency to go to heaven. Satan’s entire philosphy is based on a “something for nothing” philosophy: salvation without effort – a free gift. This counterfeit doctrine was rejected by God our Father. Our Elder Brother, Jesus Christ, accepted our Father’s plan and agreed to pay the infinite price to become our Savior and Redeemer and to show us the way back to the Father. The way is often the hard way. It is the Law of the Harvest. It is the same basic law in the spiritual realm which the farmer must obey in the physical realm. He plants in the spring and cultivates, waters, weeds, and nourishes the ground and its new life and then harvests in the fall.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ Restored

Christianity in its fulness and truth has been restored to the earth by direct revelation. The restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the most significant fact since the resurrection of Jesus Christ. What was restored? In a very real sense, the true Law of the Harvest was restored – the law of justice, the law of mercy, the law of love. It was restored in a free country under the influence of a God-inspired Constitution which created a climate of freedom, opportunity and prosperity. The basic virtues of thrift, self-reliance, independence, enterprise, diligence, integrity, morality, faith in God and in His Son, Jesus Christ, were the principles upon which this, the greatest nation in the world, has been built. We must not sell this priceless, divine heritage which was largely paid for by the blood of patriots and prophets for a mess of pottage, for a counterfeit, a false doctrine parading under the cloak of love and compassion, of humanitarianism, even of Christianity.

Working on the Roots of Prosperity

Under a free enterprise economy, little more than 6 percent of the population has produced nearly half of the world’s goods. We can today best wage a war on poverty by working on the roots of prosperity, not by sapping their vital strength. To sap the self-reliant spirit of enterprising independent souls in the development of a welfare state can bring only “poverty equally divided.” When the responsibility for their own welfare is completely shifted from the shoulders of individuals and families to the state, a lethal blow is struck at both the roots of our prosperity and our moral growth.

What is the real cause of this trend toward the welfare state, toward more socialism? In the last analysis, in my judgment, it is personal unrighteousness. When people do not use their freedoms responsibly and righteously, they will gradually lose these freedoms.

Let me illustrate: If I, as an employer, in my policies and practices exploit my employees, I will either lose them and my business, or my employees will gather together and threaten to strike me. They will strive to exercise an influence on the legislative process so that laws will be enacted dictating fair employment policies and practices, thus limiting my freedom to determine these things for myself.

If man will not recognize the inequalities around him and voluntarily, through the gospel plan, come to the aid of his brother, as outlined by Brother Romney, he will find that through “a democratic process” he will be forced to come to the aid of his brother. The government will take from the “haves” and give to the “have nots.” Both have lost their freedom. Those who “have,” lost their freedom to give voluntarily of their own free will and in the way they desire. Those who “have not” lost their freedom because they did not earn what they received. They got “something for nothing,” and they will neither appreciate the gift nor the giver of the gift.

Vital Freedoms Endangered

Under this climate, people gradually become blind to what has happened and to the vital freedoms which they have lost – just as my friend, the student, was blind to what was really happening as he took the short­cut route through school, until one day he was caught up in a new reality, demanding far more than he was prepared to deliver.
Let me remind you of the first thing Cain said after he murdered Abel. In his blind fury and hatred and envy of his brother, he swore to himself and to Satan in secret that he would kill his brother because Abel’s offering in righteousness was accepted by the Lord where his own was not. Listen carefully:

And Cain went into the field, and Cain talked with Abel, his brother. And it came to pass that while they were in the field, Cain rose up against Abel, his brother, and slew him.

And Cain gloried in that which he had done,saying: [Now listen to this.] I am free; surely the flocks of my brother falleth into my hands.

And the Lord said unto Cain: Where is Abel, thy brother? And he said: I know not. Am I my brother’s keeper? (Moses 5:32–34.)

Cain said that he was free. How deceived he was. In fact, he became a slave.

A thief takes something and gives nothing. He thinks he is free but sooner or later his freedom vanishes into walls and bars. Likewise, a person becomes a thief of his own soul by deceiving himself that he can live unrighteously, immorally, that he can cheat, lie, and take advantage of his neighbor; but all the while he is imprisoning himself behind bars and walls of his own making. “Be not deceived; God is not mocked.” (Galatians 6:7.)

Freedom Through Personal Righteousness

Dear students, the only way we can keep our freedom is through our personal righteousness – by handling that freedom responsibly. We are our
brother’s keeper. We must be concerned for the social problems of today. We must take that responsibility upon ourselves according to the gospel plan but not according to the socialistic plan.

You know that it is vain and foolish for a doctor to criticize the symptoms of a disease and refuse to work upon the roots. So, also, it is superficial to only criticize socialism and the welfare state and the many other evil “isms” growing up among us unless we work upon the roots. Thousands of you here have served missions. You worked upon the roots. It is only in the changing of a man’s heart – a second birth – the changing of an individual, that the root strength comes to change a people or a nation.

Righteousness, Responsibility, Freedom

I sincerely hope that the net effect of this message this morning is that each of us, each of you, will be ever more determined to live righteously. Why? Because righteousness and freedom are inseparable, just as respon­sibility and freedom are inseparable.

If you are dishonest in your dealings, if you cheat in your examinations, you are sowing the seeds of slavery and you will reap that harvest even though you might rationalize to yourself, “I am free.” If you are involved in necking and petting and immoral practices, you are becoming enslaved to your own passions and appetites, even though in your self-justifying pride you may say, “I am free.” If you, yourself, resist these satanic temptations and determine to pay the daily price, to live the Law of the Harvest by clean, moral thoughts and practices, by upright, honest dealings, by integrity and conscientiousness in your studies, by fasting, prayer and worship, you will reap the harvest of freedom and inner peace and prosperity.

What Can We Do Now?

What can you do here and now? First, resolve to live the Law of the Harvest and realize that this will involve a price, and with some that price will be very, very heavy. Then go to work, resisting temptation, overcoming bad habits, and developing the good habits of an upright character, and be a diligent student. A wise educator and leader, William George Jordan, beautifully describes this process of acquiring self-control:

It is only the progressive installment plan Nature recognizes. No man can make a habit in a moment or break it in a moment. It is a matter of development, of growth. But at any moment man may begin to make or begin to break any habit. This view of the growth of character should be a mighty stimulus to the man who sincerely desires and determines to live nearer to the limit of his possibilities.

Like the light set on a hill, like the leaven of a loaf, you will influence for good our entire country and help preserve this great Republic and its inspired Constitution and its great climate of freedom.

The Real Issue Is Righteousness

God will preserve our country and protect it from all enemies, within and without, if we will worship the God of this land, who is Jesus Christ. The real issue is righteousness. We must not pray, as did Augustine, “O God, make me clean, but not yet.”

I witness that Jesus Christ lives, that He is the Author of freedom and the perfect exemplar of the Law of the Harvest.

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatso­ever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. (Galatians 6:7.)

We love you and believe in you, and in a very real measure we entrust the future of our country and great Church into your worthy hands. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

I suppose the best way to start a comparison of socialism and the United Order is with a definition of the terms. Webster defines socialism as:

Socialism defined

“A political and economic theory of social organization based on collective or governmental ownership and democratic management of the essential means for the production and distribution of goods; also, a policy or practice based on this theory.” (Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2nd ed. unabridged, 1951.)

George Bernard Shaw, the noted Fabian Socialist, said that:

“Socialism, reduced to its simplest legal and practical expression, means the complete discarding of the institution of private property by transforming it into public property and the division of the resultant income equally and indiscriminately among the entire population.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1946 ed., Vol. 20, p. 895.)

George Douglas Howard Cole, M.A. noted author and university reader in economics at Oxford, who treats socialism for the Encyclopedia Britannica, says that because of the shifting sense in which the word has been used, “a short and comprehensive definition is impossible. We can only say,” he concludes, “that Socialism is essentially a doctrine and a movement aiming at the collective organization of the community in the interest of the mass of the people by means of the common ownership and collective control of the means of production and exchange.” (Ibid., p. 888.)

Socialism arose “out of the economic division in society.” During the nineteenth century its growth was accelerated as a protest against “the appalling conditions prevailing in the workshops and factories and the unchristian spirit of the spreading industrial system.”

Communism, starting point

The “Communist Manifesto” drafted by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels for the Communist League in 1848 is generally regarded as the starting point of modern socialism. (Ibid., p. 890.)

The distinction between socialism, as represented by the various Socialist and Labour parties of Europe and the New World, and Communism, as represented by the Russians, is one of tactics and strategy rather than of objective. Communism is indeed only socialism pursued by revolutionary means and making its revolutionary method a canon of faith. Communists like other socialists, (1) believe in the collective control and ownership of the vital means of production and (2) seek to achieve through state action the coordinated control of the economic forces of society. They (the Communists) differ from other socialists in believing that this control can be secured, and its use in the interests of the workers ensured, only by revolutionary action leading to the dictatorship of the proletariat and the creation of a new proletarian state as the instrument of change. (Ibid.)

German Socialism

A major rift between so-called orthodox socialism and communist socialism occurred in 1875 when the German Social Democratic party set forth its objective of winning power by taking over control of the bourgeois state, rather than by overthrowing it. In effect, the German Social Democratic party became a parliamentary party, aiming at the assumption of political power by constitutional means.

Fabian Society

In the 1880′s a small group of intellectuals set up in England the Fabian Society, which has had a major influence on the development of modern orthodox socialism. Fabianism stands “for the evolutionary conception of socialism . . . endeavoring by progressive reforms and the nationalization of industries, to turn the existing state into a ‘welfare state.’” Somewhat on the order of the German Social Democrats Fabians aim “at permeating the existing parties with socialistic ideas [rather] than at creating a definitely socialistic party.” They appeal “to the electorate not as revolutionaries but as constitutional reformers seeking a peaceful transformation of the system.” (Ibid.)

Forms and policies of socialism

The differences in forms and policies of socialism occur principally in the manner in which they seek to implement their theories.

They all advocate:

(1) That private ownership of the vital means of production be abolished and that all such property “pass under some form of coordinated public control.”

(2) That the power of the state be used to achieve their aims.

(3) “That with a change in the control of industry will go a change in the motives which operate in the industrial system. . . .” (Ibid.)

So much now for the definition of socialism. I have given you these statements in the words of socialists and scholars, not my words, so they have had their hearing.

The United Order

Now as to the United Order, and here I will give the words of the Lord and not my words. The United Order the Lord’s program for eliminating the inequalities among men, is based upon the underlying concept that the earth and all things therein belong to the Lord and that men hold earthly possessions as stewards accountable to God.

On January 2, 1831, the Lord revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith that the Church was under obligation to care for the poor. (See D&C 38.) Later he said:

“I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth, . . .and all things therein are mine.

“And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine.

“But it must needs be done in mine own way. . . .” (D&C 104:14–16.)

Consecration and stewardship

On February 9, 1831, the Lord revealed to the Prophet what his way was. (See D&C 42.) In his way there were two cardinal principles: (1) consecration and (2) stewardship.

To enter the United Order, when it was being tried, one consecrated all his possessions to the Church by a “covenant and a deed which” could not “be broken.” (D&C 42:30.) That is, he completely divested himself of all of his property by conveying it to the Church.

Having thus voluntarily divested himself of title to all his property, the consecrator received from the Church a stewardship by a like conveyance. This stewardship could be more or less than his original consecration, the object being to make “every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs.” (D&C 51:3.)

This procedure preserved in every man the right to private ownership and management of his property. At his own option he could alienate it or keep and operate it and pass it on to his heirs.

The intent was, however, for him to so operate his property as to produce a living for himself and his dependents. So long as he remained in the order, he consecrated to the Church the surplus he produced above the needs and wants of his family. This surplus went into a storehouse from which stewardships were given to others and from which the needs of the poor were supplied.

These divine principles are very simple and easily understood. A comparison of them with the underlying principles of socialism reveal similarities and basic differences.

Comparisons and contrasts: Similarities

The following are similarities: Both

(1) deal with production and distribution of goods;

(2) aim to promote the well-being of men by eliminating their economic inequalities;

(3) envision the elimination of the selfish motives in our private capitalistic industrial system.

Differences

Now the differences:

(1) The cornerstone of the United Order is belief in God and acceptance of him as Lord of the earth and the author of the United Order.

Socialism, wholly materialistic, is founded in the wisdom of men and not of God. Although all socialists may not be atheists, none of them in theory or practice seek the Lord to establish his righteousness.

(2) The United Order is implemented by the voluntary free-will actions of men, evidenced by a consecration of all their property to the Church of God.

One time the Prophet Joseph Smith asked a question by the brethren about the inventories they were taking. His answer was to the effect, “You don’t need to be concerned about the inventories. Unless a man is willing to consecrate everything he has, he doesn’t come into the United Order.” (Documentary History of the Church, Vol. 7, pp. 412-13.) On the other hand, socialism is implemented by external force, the power of the state.

(3) In harmony with church belief, as set forth in the Doctrine and Covenants, “that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property” (D&C 134:2), the United Order is operated upon the principle of private ownership and individual management.

God-given agency preserved in United Order

Thus in both implementation and ownership and management of property, the United Order preserves to men their God-given agency, while socialism deprives them of it.

(4) The United Order is non-political.

Socialism is political, both in theory and practice. It is thus exposed to, and riddled by, the corruption that plagues and finally destroys all political governments that undertake to abridge man’s agency.

(5) A righteous people is a prerequisite to the United Order.

Socialism argues that it as a system will eliminate the evils of the profit motive.

The United Order exalts the poor and humbles the rich. In the process both are sanctified. The poor, released from the bondage and humiliating limitations of poverty, are enabled as free men to rise to their full potential, both temporally and spiritually. The rich, by consecration and by imparting of their surplus for the benefit of the poor, not by constraint but willingly as an act of free will, evidence that charity for their fellowmen characterized by Mormon as “the pure love of Christ.” (Moro. 7:47.)

Socialism not United Order

No, brethren, socialism is not the United Order. However, notwithstanding my abhorrence of it, I am persuaded that socialism is the wave of the present and of the foreseeable future. It has already taken over or is contending for control in most nations.

“At the end of the year [1964] parties affiliated with the [Socialist] International were in control of the governments of Great Britain, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Israel, and the Malagasy Republic. They had representatives in coalition cabinets in Austria, Belgium, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, and Switzerland, constituted the chief opposition in France, India, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand and West Germany; and were significant political forces in numerous other countries. Many parties dominant in governments in Africa, Asia, and Latin America announced that their aim was a socialist society.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1965 Book of the Year, p. 736.)

United States has adopted much socialism

We here in the United States, in converting our government into a social welfare state, have ourselves adopted much of socialism. Specifically, we have to an alarming degree adopted the use of the power of the state in the control and distribution of the fruits of industry. We are on notice according to the words of the President, that we are going much further, for he is quoted as saying:

“We’re going to take all the money we think is unnecessarily being spent and take it from the ‘haves’ and give it to the ‘have nots.’” (1964 Congressional Record, p. 6142, Remarks of the President to a Group of Leaders of Organizations of Senior Citizens in the Fish Room, March 24, 1964.)

Socialism takes: United Order gives

That is the spirit of socialism: We’re going to take. The spirit of the United Order is: We’re going to give.

We have also gone a long way on the road to public ownership and management of the vital means of production. In both of these areas the free agency of Americans has been greatly abridged. Some argue that we have voluntarily surrendered this power to government. Be this as it may, the fact remains that the loss of freedom with the consent of the enslaved, or even at their request, is nonetheless slavery.

As to the fruits of socialism, we all have our own opinions. I myself have watched its growth in our own country and observed it in operation in many other lands. But I have yet to see or hear of its freeing the hearts of men of selfishness and greed or of its bringing peace, plenty, or freedom. These things it will never bring, nor will it do away with idleness and promote “industry, thrift and self-respect,” for it is founded, in theory and in practice, on force, the principle of the evil one.

As to the fruits of the United Order I suggest you read Moses 7:16–18 and 4 Nephi 2:-3, 15-16. If we had time we could review the history, what little we know, of Zion in the days of Enoch and about what happened among the Nephites under those principles of the United Order in the first two centuries following the time of the Savior.

What can we do?

Now what can we do about it?

As I recently reminded my wife of the moratorium on the United Order, which the Lord placed in 1834 (D&C 105:34), that socialism is taking over in the nations and that its expressed aims will surely fail, she spiritedly put to me the question: “Well, then, what would you suggest, that we just sit on our hands in despair and do nothing?” Perhaps similar questions have occurred to you. The answer is, “No, by no means!” We have much to do, and fortunately for us the Lord has definitely prescribed the course we should follow with respect to socialism and the United Order.

Constitution God-inspired

He has told us that in preparation for the restoration of the gospel, he himself established the Constitution of the United States, and he has plainly told us why he established it. I hope I can get this point over to you. He said he established the Constitution to preserve to men their free agency, because the whole gospel of Jesus Christ presupposes man’s untrammeled exercise of free agency. Man is in the earth to be tested. The issue as to whether he succeeds or fails will be determined by how he uses his agency. His whole future, through all eternity, is at stake. Abridge man’s agency, and the whole purpose of his mortality is thwarted. Without it, the Lord says, there is no existence. (See D&C 93:30.) The Lord so valued our agency that he designed and dictated “the laws and constitution” required to guarantee it. This he explained in the revelation in which he instructed the Prophet Joseph Smith to appeal for help,

Just and holy principles

“According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles;

“That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.

“And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose. . . .” (D&C 101:77–78, 80.)

Sustain Constitutional law

Previously he had said:

“And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.

“And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind and is justifiable before me.

“Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land [the test of its constitutionality in the words of the Lord here is whether it preserves man's agency];

“And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this cometh of evil.

“I, the Lord God, make you free therefore ye are free indeed; and the law [that is, constitutional law] also maketh you free.

“Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.

“Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.” (D&C 98:4–10.)

These scriptures declare the Constitution to be a divine document. They tell us that “according to just and holy principles,” the Constitution and the law of the land which supports the “principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before” God; that, “as pertaining to [the] law of man whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.” They remind us that the Lord has made us free and that laws that are constitutional will also make us free.

“When the wicked rule, the people mourn”

Right at this point, almost as if he were warning us against what is happening today, the Lord said: “Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.” Then, that we might know with certainty what we should do about it, he concluded: “Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold. . . .”

In its context this instruction, according to my interpretation, can only mean that we should seek diligently for and support men to represent us in government who are “wise” enough to understand freedom—as provided for in the Constitution and as implemented in the United Order—and who are honest enough and good enough to fight to preserve it.

“. . . under no other government in the world could the Church have been established,” said President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., and he continued:

“. . . if we are to live as a Church, and progress, and have the right to worship as we are worshipping here today, we must have the great guarantees that are set up by our Constitution. There is no other way in which we can secure these guarantees.” (Conference Report, October 1942, pp. 58-59.)

Now, not forgetting our duty to eschew socialism and support the just and holy principles of the Constitution, as directed by the Lord, I shall conclude these remarks with a few comments concerning what we should do about the United Order.

What to do about United Order

The final words of the Lord in suspending the order were: “And let those commandments which I have given concerning Zion and her law be executed and fulfilled, after her redemption.” (D&C 105:34.)

Further implementation of the order must therefore await the redemption of Zion. Here Zion means Jackson County, Missouri. When Zion is redeemed, as it most certainly shall be, it will be redeemed under a government and by a people strictly observing those “just and holy principles” of the Constitution that accord to men their God-given moral agency, including the right to private property. If, in the meantime, socialism takes over in America, it will have to be displaced, if need be, by the power of God, because the United Order can never function under socialism or “the welfare state,” for the good and sufficient reason that the principles upon which socialism and the United Order are conceived and operated are inimical.

In the meantime, while we await the redemption of Zion and the earth and the establishment of the United Order, we as bearers of the priesthood should live strictly by the principles of the United Order insofar as they are embodied in present church practices, such as the fast offering, tithing, and the welfare activities. Through these practices we could as individuals, if we were of a mind to do so, implement in our own lives all the basic principles of the United Order.

As you will recall, the principles underlying the United Order are consecration and stewardships and then the contribution of surpluses into the bishop’s storehouse. When the law of tithing was instituted four years after the United Order experiment was suspended, the Lord required the people to put “all their surplus property . . . into the hands of the bishop” (D&C 119:1); thereafter they were to “pay one-tenth of all their interest annually. . . .” (D&C 119:4.) This law, still in force, implements to a degree at least the United Order principle of stewardships, for it leaves in the hands of each person the ownership and management of the property from which he produces the needs of himself and family. Furthermore to use again the words of President Clark:

“. . . in lieu of residues and surpluses which were accumulated and built up under the United Order, we, today, have our fast offerings, our Welfare donations, and our tithing all of which may be devoted to the care of the poor, as well as for the carrying on of the activities and business of the Church.”

What prohibits us from giving as much in fast offerings as we would have given in surpluses under the United Order? Nothing but our own limitations.

Furthermore, we had under the United Order a bishop’s storehouse in which were collected the materials from which to supply the needs and the wants of the poor. We have a bishop’s storehouse under the Welfare Plan, used for the same purpose. . . .

“We have now under the Welfare Plan all over the Church, . . . land projects . . . farmed for the benefit of the poor. . . .

“Thus . . . in many of its great essentials, we have, [in] the Welfare Plan . . . the broad essentials of the United Order. Furthermore, having in mind the assistance which is being given from time to time . . . to help set people up in business or in farming, we have a plan which is not essentially unlike that which was in the United Order when the poor were given portions from the common fund.”

It is thus apparent that when the principles of tithing and the fast are properly observed and the Welfare Plan gets fully developed and wholly into operation, “we shall not be so very far from carrying out the great fundamentals of the United Order.” (Conference Report, October 1942, pp. 51-58.)

The only limitation on you and me is within ourselves.

A Prayer:

And now in line with these remarks for three things I pray:

(1) That the Lord will somehow quicken our understanding of the differences between socialism and the United Order and give us a vivid awareness of the awful portent of those differences.

(2) That we will develop the understanding, the desire, and the courage born of the Spirit, to eschew socialism and to support and sustain, in the manner revealed and as interpreted by the Lord, those just and holy principles embodied in the Constitution of the United States for the protection of all flesh, in the exercise of their God-given agency.

(3) That through faithful observance of the principles of tithing, the fast, and the welfare program, we will prepare ourselves to redeem Zion and ultimately live the United Order, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

I speak to you as a fellow citizen of the United States of America deeply concerned about the welfare of our beloved country.

I am not here to tickle your ears – to entertain you. I will talk to you frankly and honestly. The message I bring is not a happy one, but it is the truth, and time is always on the side of truth. As the German philosopher Goethe, said: “Truth must be repeated again and again because error is constantly being preached round about.”

I realize that the bearer of bad news is always unpopular. As a people we love sweetness and light – especially sweetness. Ralph Waldo Emerson said that every mind must make a choice between truth and repose. Those who will learn nothing from history are condemned to repeat it. This we are doing in the Americas today.

George Washington stated, “Truth will ultimately prevail where there are pains taken to bring it to light.” To bring the truth to light is our challenge – this day and everyday.

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:32)

Returning recently from two years abroad has caused me to reflect seriously on recent trends and present conditions in our beloved country. I am shocked and saddened at what I find. I am sorry to say that all is not well in so-called prosperous, wealthy and powerful America.

We have moved a long way – and are now moving further and more rapidly down the soul-destroying road of socialism. The evidence is clear – shockingly clear for all to see.

With our national prestige at – or near – an embarrassing all-time low, we continue to weaken our domestic economy by unsound fiscal, economic and foreign aid policies which corrupt our national currency. Ever increasing centralization of power in the federal government in Washington, D.C. is reducing our local and state governments to virtual federal field offices while weakening individual initiative, enterprise and character.

With the crass unconstitutional usurpation of powers by the Executive Branch of the federal government, anti-spiritual decisions of the Supreme Court – all apparently approved by a weakly submissive rubber-stamp congress – the days ahead are ominously frightening.

Surely – certainly – it behooves patriotic citizens – such as you – to meet together to seriously consider present conditions in our beloved nation. It is imperative that American citizens become alerted and informed regarding the threat to our welfare, happiness and freedom.

No American is worthy of citizenship in this great land who refuses to take an active interest in these important matters.

All we hold dear as a great Christian nation is at stake.

In leaving for Europe two years ago, I could not help but feel a very deep sense of anxiety for this great land of America which had just passed through a terrible crisis. To have the President of the United States suddenly torn from his high office by the violent hand of an assassin was an insidious and dastardly act which struck at the very foundation of our Republic,

All of us felt the impact of it. All of us caught the ominous spirit f tragedy and sorrow which accompanied it. Each of us sensed in a very personal way the heartbreak which had come to the Kennedy family.

But after the services and burial were over, we also realized something else. There was the cold, stark reality that the assassin’s murder of President Kennedy was just one more monstrous treachery in the ling list of crimes against humanity which have been inspired down through the years by the Godless philosophy of Communism.

It was Communism that sowed the seeds of treason in the mind of President Kennedy’s assassin. This is something which must not be forgotten.

Now two years and one month later, I am appalled at the shortness of our memories. When the events surrounding President Kennedy’s assassination were remembered last December, practically no mention was made of Oswald’s communist affiliations nor the present communist threat to our society. Have we so soon forgotten that communism sowed the seeds of hate that destroyed our President and that communism continually seeks to subvert and destroy our complete way of life.

The assassination of President Kennedy, the daily slaughter of our boys in Viet Nam, the communist control of the Berkeley riots and communist inspired demonstrations from coast to coast should serve as a shock therapy to that segment of our population who like to call themselves “liberals.” America is big enough to make room for many different kinds of thinking, but many liberals have claimed to see virtues in socialism and communism which I, for one, have not been able to find. To promote their ideas, American liberals have become a highly organized, hard-core establishment in the United States and they have been excusing their appeasement and coddling of communism on the ground that they were being “tolerant,” “broadminded,” and “working for peace.”

But the assassination of President Kennedy should have jolted them into a realization that they have been pampering, protecting and promoting the very nest of serpents which produced Lee Harvey Oswald. The diabolical spirit of murder and violence which struck down the President is that same spirit of Communist violence which has been allowed to spread its terror into the heart of every continent on the face of the earth. Perhaps those who have been apologists for this conquering Marxist Socialist-Communist movement might now agree to reconsider the fatal decision they have been following.

Two additional things happened in connection with this tragedy which are worthy of comment,

First was the speed with which the Communist leaders spread the word that the slaying of the President must have been the work of American conservatives. Moscow has conducted a five year propaganda campaign to make American conservatives look like hysterical fanatics. It has called them “rightists,” “extremists,” and even “fascists.” Within an hour after the assassination and before Oswald was captured, Moscow was assuring the world that this crime was a product of the “rightist” movement on the United States.

The second thing which happened was the amazing rapidity with which American liberals took up the Moscow line. They too were quick to fix the blame even though there hadn’t been the slightest hint as to who had committed the crime. I wonder what would have happened if Oswald had not been captured and identified as an active Communist who was in direct contact with Party headquarters in New York City? Undoubtedly the liberal element would be blaming this tragedy on conservative Americans to this day.

And even after Oswald was captured and identified as a Moscow-associated Communist there were those who insisted that any who had opposed the President during his term of high office was guilty of that same “spirit of hate” as that which led to the President’s death. This line of thinking was expressed by a number of prominent persons through the press, radio and TV. To me it was incomprehensible.

To equate Oswald’s hate and homicidal bitterness with patriotic Americans who happened to oppose some of the policies of the President’s administration was the height of distorted and fallacious thinking. The American people can respect their President, pray for their President, even have a strong affection for him, and still have an honest difference of opinion as to the merits of some of his programs.

Another recent development has been the call for national unity. I believe there needs to be a unity in our land. But it must not be blind, senseless, irresponsible unity. It should not be a unity just for the sake of unity. It needs to be a unity built on sound principles.

We Americans have strayed far from sound principles – morally, Constitutionally and historically. It has been getting us into a quagmire of trouble all over the world, and especially here at home.

Americans at the grass roots level have sensed that their way of life is being threatened. During the last several years there has been a rising tide of resistance to the prevailing political trend. Compromises with Communism abroad and flirtations with socialism at home have stirred up opposition in both political parties. If this has lead to disunity then by all means let us return to a program of sound Constitutional principles on which we can unite.

There would be no virtue in calling for unity to support certain legislation if the majority of Americans were opposed to it. And the fact that both Democrats and Republicans in congress have at times resisted certain legislation shows that the Executive branch of the government may get out of step with the people.

I believe the American people know what they want. It would appear that the people want their civil rights safeguarded but not a destruction of states’ rights.

The farmers want opportunity for reasonable income security but not agricultural “dictatorship” security.

Parents want better school for their children but not a federal subsidy leading to control of the teachings and text books as well as the ideologies of the children.

People want sound pay-as-you go spending with a balanced budget, not reckless spending and tax cuts with an unbalanced budget.

If there is a need for urban renewal, people want it under local direction, not under the red tape of Washington bureaus armed with confiscatory powers over property.

People want the development of power dams but not the strangulation of privately-owned power companies which have proven far more efficient and economical than utilities run by the government.

In other words, there are some legitimate functions and services which the Federal Government can and should provide, but those who want the federal power to exceed the authority delegated to it by the Constitution will be resisted both by Democrats and Republicans. This is what is happening in some limited areas today, may the trend increase.

And anyone who tries to equate this love of Constitutional principles as meaning hatred of our national leaders is using Goebbels-style deception. History has already demonstrated that conservative opposition to national leaders was not “hate” but an attempt to do them a favor.

Let me give you some examples:

Was it “hate” when General Albert C. Whedemeyer pleaded with general Marshal and President Truman to reverse their policy before they lost china?

Was it “hate” when Whitaker Chambers tried to warn President Roosevelt in 1939 That Alger Hiss had been giving the Soviet Union more espionage data than any other member of the Washington spy network?

Was it “hate” when J. Edgar Hoover tried to warn President Truman that Harry Dexter White was a member of the Soviet spy apparatus and was doing great danger to the nation as Assistant-Secretary of the Treasury?

Was it “hate” when I went to the Secretary of State under President Eisenhower and pleaded with him not to support the Communist, Fidel Castro?

Was it “hate” when I urged the President of the United States to go to the aid of the brave freedom fighters in Hungary?

Was it “hate” when the Democratic Senator from Connecticut, Thomas Dodd, pleaded for two years with the President not to support the United Nations blood bath against the free people of Katanga?

Is it “hate” when distinguished military leaders advise that an-all out effort could end the Viet Nam struggle almost over night?

This list of acts by well-meaning citizens who want and wanted to prevent their Presidents from making serious mistakes could be extended at length. But they would all illustrate the same point. History will show that many terrible mistakes occurred because the advice of these well informed and well-meaning citizens was not heeded.

Therefore, I repeat, this kind of resistance to a national leader is rooted in love and respect, not hate. Regardless of which political party is in power, you do not want to see your President make a serious blunder. You don’t want him to lose China. You don’t want him to allow the enemy agents to make fools of us. You don’t want him to lose Cuba. You don’t want him to suffer the humiliation of a “Bay of Pigs disaster”, or allow a Soviet Gibraltar to be built 90 miles from our shores.

Every one of these events which have been so disastrous and which have destroyed freedom for hundreds of millions of our allies, could have been prevented. And the voices of those who tried to warn Washington of what was coming cannot be attributed to hate. It has been out of a love for our country and respect for our leaders that the voice of warning has been raised.

What causes one to wonder is why these warnings were not carefully considered and acted upon. Why is it that men in high places in government, regardless of party have been deceived? I am convinced that a major part of the cause can be justly laid at the door of the Socialist-Communist Conspiracy, which is lead by masters of deceit who deceive the very elect. J. Edgar Hoover put it well when he said, “I would have no fears if more Americans possessed the zeal, the fervor, the persistence, and the industry to learn about this menace of Red fascism. I do fear for the liberal and progressive who have been hoodwinked and duped into joining with the Communists.”

Therefore, let those who call for unity and the elimination of hate be sure they are not merely trying to silence the friends of freedom. These are they who respect their leaders and resist them only when it is felt they are headed for a catastrophe. What patriotic American would wish to stand silent if he saw the President verging on a blunder because of bad advice or a mistake in judgment of the facts?

I believe one of the most serious mistakes a President could make would be to weaken the Constitution.

From the time I was a small boy, I was taught that the American Constitution is an inspired document. I was also taught that the day will come when the Constitution will be endangered and hang as it were by a single thread. I was taught that we should study the Constitution, preserve its principles and defend it against any who would destroy it. To the best of my ability I have always tried to do this. I expect to continue my efforts to help protect and safeguard our inspired Constitution.

Some two years ago, however, a critic from Washington, D.C. claimed that a person who serves in a church capacity should not comment on such matters. He charged that the separation of church and state requires that church officials restrict their attention to affairs of the Church.

I, of course, also believe that the institutions of church and state should be separated, but I also do not agree that spiritual leaders cannot comment on basic issues which involve the very foundation of American liberty.

In fact, if this were true, we would have to throw away a substantial part of the Bible. Speaking out against immoral or unjust actions of political leaders has been the burden of prophets and disciples of God from time immemorial. It was for this very reason that many of them were persecuted. Some of them were stoned, some of them were burned, many were imprisoned. Nevertheless it was their God-given task, as watchmen on the towers, to speak up.

It is certainly no different today.

To Moses God said: “….proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.” (Lev. 25:10)

Why? For God knows full well that the gospel – His plan for the blessing of His children can prosper only in an atmosphere of freedom.

To modern men God has said: the Constitution “should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh.” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:77)

Is the Constitution being maintained or is it in jeopardy? Senator J. William Fulbright of Arkansas, says the American Constitution is nothing more than a product of the Eighteenth Century agrarian society. It is now obsolete he claims. Senator Joseph S. Park of Pennsylvania says the separation of powers with its checks and balances must be curtailed because they keep the President from making quick and decisive decisions. Gus Hall, head of the Communist Party U.S.A., agrees with these two Senators – yes – Gus Hall agrees with these two senators and demands that there should be a new federal charter eliminating states’ rights. America’s national sovereignty should be abandoned according to Walt Rostow, chairman of the State Department Policy Planning Board. He has boldly demanded “an end of nationhood as it has been historically defined.” (Quoted in the extension of remarks by Senator Strom Thurmond, Congressional Record, June 6, 1963, pp. A3662-3)

These are some of the same men who see great virtue in the collectivized, socialized society. They want vast powers concentrated in Washington. Samuel Addams of the founding fathers said this was the very thing Constitutional government was designed to prevent.

Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., is another powerful influence in Washington and a former Presidential adviser. He not only advocates socialism for the United States but believes that we could eventually form a permanent alliance with Communism. He says this would be achieved by having America move to the left while the Communists move to the right. We would then meet at the vital center of the socialist-left. The American Constitution, of course, would automatically be discarded. Arthur Schlesinger and his associates are also apposed to the liberation of the captive nations, even if these nations do it by themselves. These men do not look upon Communism as an enemy. They consider Communist leaders to be over-zealous allies who will mellow. Therefore, they believe in containing Communism, but otherwise supporting it, not short of thwarting it. They further recommend that wherever Communists or Socialists regimes are collapsing, we should prop them up….feed them, trade with them, grant them loans on long term credits.

From reading the daily paper, you will know that the ideas of these men have, unfortunately, already been adopted by Washington as the official policy of the United States.

Now I would say in the great free country like ours, if these men advocate these suicidal and often treasonable doctrines shouldn’t every patriotic American be free to speak out against them?

At this particular moment in history the United States Constitution is definitely threatened and every citizen should know about it. The warning of this hour should resound through the corridors of every American institution – schools, churches, the halls of Congress, press, radio and TV and so far as I am concerned and I am sure so far as you are concerned it will resound – with God’s help.

Our Republic and Constitution are being destroyed while the enemies of freedom are being aided. How? In at least ten ways:

1.       By diplomatic recognition and aid, trade and negotiations with the Communists.

2.       By disarmament of our military defenses.

3.       By destruction of our security laws and the promotion of atheism by decisions of the Supreme Court.

4.       By loss of sovereignty and solvency to international commitments and membership in world organizations.

5.       By undermining of local law enforcement agencies and Congressional investigation committees.

6.       By usurpations by the Executive and the Judicial branches of our Federal Government.

7.       By lawlessness in the name of civil rights.

8.       By staggering national debt with inflation and the corruption of the currency.

9.       By a multiplicity of executive orders and federal programs which greatly weaken local and state government.

10.   By the sacrificing of American manhood by engaging in wars we apparently have no intention of winning.

Wherever possible, I have tried to speak out. It is for this very reason that certain people in Washington have bitterly criticized me. They don’t want people to hear the message. It embarrasses them. The things which are destroying the Constitution are the things they have been voting for. They are afraid of their political careers if these facts are pointed out. They therefore try to silence any who carry the message – anyone who will stand up and be counted.

But these liberal politicians are not the only ones who are trying to silence the warning voice of American patriots. Moscow is equally alarmed.

It was in 1960 when the Communist leaders first decided to do something drastic about the rising tide of patriotism in the United States. The loss of Cuba to the Soviet Union had alerted many Americans. Citizens were holding study groups, seminars and freedom schools. The more they studied the more they realized how fast Communism was advancing on all fronts. They also learned to their amazement that most Washington politicians were doing practically nothing about it. In fact in many cases they were doing things to promote Communism. So the protests began to pour into the national capital from every state in the union. All over America there was an awakening.

The Soviet leaders knew this trend could create a crisis for Communism, not only in the United States, but elsewhere.

Therefore, they called together Communist delegates from eighty-one countries and held a meeting in Moscow.

In December, 1960, just five years ago – this Communist convention issued an edict that the rising tide of patriotism and anti-communism must be smashed. Especially in the United States. All the tricks of hate propaganda and smear tactics were to be unleashed on the heads of American patriots.

Now if the communists had been forced to do this job themselves, it would have been another failure. Americans would have simply closed ranks and united. But what mixes up so many people up is the fact that the attack on patriotism and the smear of the anti-Communist movement did not come in the name of Moscow. It came in the name of influential Americans who espoused the Socialist-Communist line.

This was a minority block of liberals, American liberals, who formed a propaganda coalition with the Communists. Their strategy was ingenious. Almost over night they drew the fire away from the Communist Conspiracy and focused the heat of attack on the patriots.

How did they do it? They did it by saying that THEY were against the Communists but ALSO against the anti-Communists. They said one was as bad as the other.

Now what kind of logic was this? What if we had taken this approach in the fight against Nazism? Informed patriots recognized it as confusion compounded by delusion. In any event, this deceptive line of propaganda had its impact. These liberal voices would denounce Communism and then turn right around and parrot the Communist line. They claimed they were anti-Communists, but spend most of their time fighting those who were really effective anti-Communists.

As I asked some of them at the time, “Are you fighting the communists or not? You claim to be fighting the fire, but you spend nearly all your time fighting the firemen!”

By 1962 these American liberals had almost completely neutralized the resurgence of American patriotism. They had frightened uninformed citizens away from study groups and patriotic rallies. They had made it popular to call patriotism a “controversial” subject which should not be discussed in school assemblies or churches.

From Washington, D.C., the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) issued an edict to radio and television stations that if they allowed the controversial subjects of “Americanism,” “anti-Communism,” or “States’ Rights” to be discussed on their stations they would be required to give equal time, free of charge, to anyone wishing to present an opposite view.

Can you imagine this happening in a free country? I said to my family, “It is fantastic that anything like this could have happened in America.”

Now we should all be opposed to Socialistic-Communism, for it is our mortal and spiritual enemy – the greatest evil in the world today. But the reason many liberals don’t want the American people to form study groups to really understand and than fight Socialistic-Communism is that once the American people get the facts they will begin to realize that much of what these liberals advocate is actually helping the enemy.

The liberals hope you’ll believe them when they tell you how anti-Communist they are. But they become alarmed if you really inform yourself on the subject of Socialistic-Communism. For after you inform yourself you might begin to study the liberal voting record. And this study would show you how much the liberals are giving aid and comfort to the enemy and how much the liberals are actually leading America towards Socialism itself.

For Communism is just another form of socialism, as is fascism. So now you can see the picture. These liberals want you to know how much they are doing for you – with your tax money of course. But they don’t want you to realize that the path they are pursuing is socialistic, and that socialism is the same as communism in its ultimate effect on our liberties. When you point this out they want to shut you up – they accuse you of maligning them, of casting aspersions, of being political. No matter whether they label their bottle as liberalism, progressivism, or social reform – I know the contents of the bottle is poison to this Republic and I’m going to call it poison.

We do not need to question the motive of these liberals. They could be most sincere. But sincerity or supposed benevolence or even cleverness is not the question.  The question is: “Are we going to save this country from the hands of the enemy and the deceived?”

As J. Edgar Hoover said, “A tragedy of the past generation in the United States is that so many persons, including high-ranking statesmen, public officials, educators, ministers of the Gospel, professional men have been duped into helping communism. Communist leaders have proclaimed that Communism must be partly built with non-Communist hands, and this, to a large extent, is true.” (Masters of Deceit, p. 93)

“We cannot defeat Communism with socialism, nor with secularism, nor with pacifism, nor with appeasement or accommodation. We can only defeat Communism with true Americanism.” (Address by J. Edgar Hoover, Oct. 9, 1962)

So from the very beginning of this Moscow campaign, to stop the anti-Communist movement in this country, it was an important part of the Communist strategy to get their liberal American friends to carry out an attack against patriotic organizations. Of course, the Communists have learned not to attack all patriotic groups at once. Their strategy is to focus on just one organization and make it so detestable and ugly in the public mind that they can hold it up as a sort of a tar baby and then use it to smear all other individuals or groups in the same category.

It was interesting to see just where the Communists would begin their dirty work; which organization would be singled out to get the tar brush treatment. It could have been the American Farm Bureau which the Communists have consistently denounced. It could have been the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, the DAR, the Sons of the American Revolution. These have been favorite Communist targets in the past as had J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI.

As it turned out, it was none of these. Instead, the Communists chose to focus their attack on a fairly new organization which very few people had heard about, including myself. They decided to level practically their entire arsenal on The John Birch society. For the non-political Birch Society had within it, both the policy, the program and the personnel to help defeat the Conspiracy in this country. And the communists knew it, for they had seen its results.

On February 25, 1961 the official Communist paper in California, the PEOPLE’S WORLD, came out with the opening blast. It said there is a new secret, fascist society which is setting up “cells” all over the United States. They said it was the most serious threat to the American way of life.

That was the signal for the bloc of American liberals to pick up the torch, and they did. Overnight the patriotic campaign against Communism was almost completely forgotten as the liberal vigilantes heroically rode out in full force to save the country from the “terrible Birchers.”

Not only the ultra-liberal forces rallied to the battle, but some of the most respected conservative press took up the hue and cry, and many prominent, highly respected Americans also fell for the deceptive line.

The Communists had intended to confuse the American people and they did. The tar brush tactic smeared the image of the new, small, but rapidly growing John Birch Society to the point where many people thought it must be a group of neo-Nazis or a revival of the Ku Klux Klan. Some prominent, highly respected men who were so deceived that they declared that the infiltration of The John Birch society was equally bad as the infiltration of the Godless Communist Conspiracy.

From the beginning of this attack The John Birch Society pleaded for some kind of official investigation so the truth about them could be given to the public. They believed this was the only way they could counteract the tidal wave of false propaganda which was being heaped upon them. But the investigation was so long in coming that the purposes of the Communist-liberal coalition were completely accomplished. It will probably be a long time before the official report on The John Birch Society gets an honest hearing. This investigation was conducted by trained investigators who were working for the California Senate Fact-Finding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities. The investigation took two years. Sworn affidavits were obtained from scores of people. The attacks on the Society were studied. Interviews were conducted with detractors and supporters of the society. Undetected investigators attended Birch meetings. The Senate Fact-Finding report was issued in June, 1963.

But even this report was recklessly distorted by some of the liberal press stories. I therefore obtained a copy of the report myself so I could see what was in it. The report is sixty-two pages long, was signed by all members of the Committee, and was issued by the President Pro Tem of the California Senate, Senator Hugh M. Burns, a Democrat.

Here are a few quotes from the report.

“The society had been publicly charged with being a secret, fascist, subversive, Un-American, anti-Semitic organization. We have not found any of these accusations to be supported by the evidence.”

And a further quote from the report.

“We believe that the reason the John Birch Society has attracted so many members is that it simply appeared to them to be the most effective, indeed the only organization through which they could join a national movement to learn the truth about the Communist menace and than take some positive, concerted action to prevent its spread.”

This report also goes on to verify what I have already told you, namely, that the attack against The John Birch Society commenced with an article in the PEOPLE’S WORLD, California Communist paper.

Now in the light of what I have just related, you will understand my feelings when people would ask how I felt about The John Birch Society because of the amazingly effective propaganda against them, it has been very unpopular to defend this group. I can remember when it was unpopular to defend my own Church. Nevertheless, as soon as I learned what the Communists and liberals were doing to The John Birch Society, I felt a deep indignation that this should happen to any non-political, patriotic group of American citizens. I felt it was dishonest, immoral and crass hypocrisy. I still feel that way.

One liberal Congressman attacked the Society claiming it was “rotten to the core.” Other influential liberals said they objected to the Society’s “methods.” If it was rotten to the core the California Senate Fact-Finding investigators couldn’t discover it.

Some of the finest and best informed Americans I know have endorsed the Society and its program including a number of former FBI agents and officials, counterspies, intelligence and security officers, and so on. Many nationally prominent patriotic Americans serve without pay on its Council. As to its “methods” the report described the Society as a study group organization designed to “first learn the facts about Communism and than implement that knowledge with effective and responsible action.” (p. 37) Now what is wrong with such methods as these? It was Communists and American liberals who objected to these “methods” because they were effective. They turned out to be traditional American methods that I could find no fault with.

Even in my own church I found a certain amount of confusion. I heard people say that the LDS church was opposed to The John Birch Society. This may come, in part at least, as a result of a statement made by the First Presidency three years ago. However, when President McKay discovered that this statement was being misinterpreted and certain people were quoting it to try and prove the LDS Church was opposing The John Birch Society, he authorized a clarifying statement. This statement appeared in the official Church newspaper for March 16, 1963, and says “The church is not opposing The John Birch Society or any organization of like nature.” And “that members of the Church are free to join anti-Communist organizations”. The statement also says that only one man, President David O. McKay, speaks for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on matters of policy.

Just as a matter of interest you may like to know in a few words what The John Birch Society is and what it stands for so that you will have a little better idea why some of us have risen to its defense. Actually what would be better for you to do would be to read some of their literature for yourself. Everything the Birch Society publishes is available to member and non-member alike and their headquarters at Belmont Massachusetts 02178 will be happy to provide this literature including some other free introductory material.

The society takes its name from one of the greatest heroes of World War II, Captain John Birch, who was murdered by the Chinese Communists ten days after the war.

The society attempts through an educational and monthly action program to use every legal and moral means practicable to preserve our inspired Constitution. These programs have had a real impact against the Conspiracy. The various programs are purely suggestive and the members are cautioned never to do anything that goes contrary to their conscience and judgment.

The Society is not a political organization – It never endorses a candidate or contributes to candidates. It encourages its members, whether they be Democrats, Republicans or Independents to study the issues and candidates in the light of our Constitution, and the threats to it, and than govern themselves accordingly.

Among other things the Society is for a balanced budget, for the Monroe Doctrine and for letting the states solve their own problems.

It is against foreign aid to the Communists, against the Marxist graduated income tax and against the Federal Government competing with tax paying free enterprise. In a sentence, The John Birch Society believes in less centralized government, more personal responsibility and a better world.

I do not belong to The John Birch Society, but I have always defended this group, just as I do not belong to but have defended the American Farm Bureau, the DAR, the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and any other patriotic group trying to alert Americans to the Socialist-Communist threat. I have also defended J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI.

When my son Reed was invited to be a state coordinator for The John Birch Society, he asked me if he should accept it. I had read the Blue Book and other basic materials of the Society. I had met Mr. Welch and other leaders and members. I had read Mr. Welch’s famous letter which has since been published in book form entitled THE POLITICIAN. I knew Reed would be enrolling in an unpopular cause. I also knew he would receive a certain amount of vilification if he took this job. Nevertheless, I told him to go ahead if he thought this was a most effective way to defend the Constitution and fight the Socialist-Communist menace. I would have given him equal encouragement if he had been considering the FBI or any of our national patriotic organizations dedicated to the fight against the Godless Conspiracy which threatens all we hold dear.

When he joined I expressed my opinion that I was convinced that The John Birch Society was the most effective non-Church organization in our fight against creeping socialism and Godless communism. I also stated that I admired Reed’s courage and applauded his decision.

Some people, I’m sure well meaning, have told me this was not good strategy, but I disagree. I feel it is always good strategy to stand up for the right, even when it is unpopular. Perhaps I should say, ESPECIALLY when it is unpopular.

I had to make this same decision all over again when President David O. McKay received an invitation from former Congressman John Rousselot, asking that I be authorized to give a patriotic speech at a testimonial dinner for Robert Welch. President McKay after careful consideration, told me I should make the talk and that I had his permission and blessing. And so the invitation was accepted.

This talk was given at the Hollywood Palladium, September 23rd, 1963. Nearly 2,000 heard my talk that night and 4,000 Kiwanians heard a similar message the following day when I spoke at their annual convention.

Both talks dealt with the preservation of the Constitution and the need to resist the Communist threat. At the Welch Testimonial dinner I commended The John Birch Society and encouraged them to protect the principles of liberty throughout the land.

Of course, as all of you know, this talk brought an immediate outcry from some liberal elements in Washington. These voices said that I, as a Church official, had no business speaking at the Robert Welch dinner. They said it was making me “controversial.” Patrick Henry and the Founding Fathers were also “controversial,” as true patriots have ever been. Perhaps they did not realize that I had fulfilled this assignment with the full approval of President McKay. And perhaps they did not realize that President David O. McKay has not hesitated to speak out for freedom even if some people have considered such patriotism as “controversial.” And neither will I hesitate. The fight to save the Constitution is not near controversy, nor the fight against Communism. In fact, it is a war with the devil – Christ verses anti-Christ – and I am willing to fight it. It is a fight against the greatest evil in this world – a ruthless, powerful, godless conspiracy.

J Edgar Hoover has warned that the cold war is a real war and that the threat is increasing. I agree, and unfortunately we are losing the war.

I think it is time for every patriotic American to join with neighbors to study the Constitution and the Conspiracy. Subscribe to several good patriotic magazines such as AMERICAN OPINION. Buy a few basic books, such as MASTERS OF DECIET and A STUDY OF COMMUNISM by J. Edgar Hoover; THE NAKED COMMUNIST by Cleon Skousen, recommended by President David O. McKay, in the General Conference of the Church, October 1959; YOU CAN TRUST THE COMMUNISTS by Dr. Fred Schwartz, and so on. And then prepare to do some independent thinking. And remember that the organized who have a plan and are dedicated though they be few, will always defeat the many who are not organized and who lack plans and dedication. The communists know this and have proven it. Isn’t it about time that most Americans realize it too?

In conclusion may I say that one of our most serious problems is the inferiority complex which people feel when they are not informed and unorganized. They dare not make a decision on these vital issues. They let other people think for them. They stumble around in the middle of the road trying to avoid being “controversial” and get hit by traffic going both ways.

To the patriots I say this: Take that long eternal look. Stand up for freedom no matter what the cost.

It can help to save your soul – and maybe your country.

This is a choice land….choice above all others. Blessed by the Almighty, our forefathers have made and kept it so. It will continue to be a land of freedom and liberty as long as we are able to advance in the light of sound and enduring principles of right. To sacrifice such principles for momentary expediency – often selfishly motivated – is to endanger our noble heritage and is unworthy of this great American people.

With all my heart I love this great nation. I have lived and traveled abroad just enough to make me appreciate rather fully what we have here. To me this is not just another nation. It is not just one of a family of nations. This is a nation with a great mission to perform for the benefit and blessing of liberty-loving people everywhere. It is my firm conviction that The Constitution of this land was established by men whom the God of heaven raised up unto that very purpose. This is part of my religious faith.

The days ahead are sobering and challenging, and will demand the faith, prayers and loyalty of every American. As the ancient apostle declared:

“The night is far spent, the day is at hand; let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.” (Romans 13:12)

May God give us the wisdom to recognize the dangers of complacency, the threat to our freedom and the strength to meet this danger courageously.

Our challenge is to keep America strong and free – strong socially, strong economically, and, above all, strong spiritually, if our way of life is to endure. There is no other way. Only in this course is there safety for our nation.

In this mighty struggle each of you has a part. Every person on the earth today chose the right side during the war in heaven. Be on the right side now. Stand up and be counted. If you get discouraged remember the words of Edward Everett Hale when he said:

“I am only one, but I am one.

I can’t do everything, but I can do something.

What I can do, that I ought to do,

And what I ought to do,

By the grace of God, I shall do!”

And this is my prayer for you this day. May God bless all of you, each and every one. Thank you very much.

I speak to you today on a most vital subject. As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “we believe … the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.” (A of F 1:8.) God has so declared it, so have its writers, so have its witnesses, and so do all those who have read it and received a personal revelation from God as to its truthfulness.

In section 20 of the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord says that he gave Joseph Smith “power from on high … to translate the Book of Mormon; Which contains … the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ … ; Which was given by inspiration.” (D&C 20:8–10.)

Nephi, one of the prophet-writers of the Book of Mormon, testifies that the book contains “the words of Christ” (2 Ne. 33:10), and Moroni, the last writer in the book, testifies that “these things are true.” (Moro. 7:35.)

This same Moroni, as an angelic being sent from God, showed these ancient records to three witnesses in our day. Their testimony of the records is contained in the front the Book of Mormon. They state: “We also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true.”

And Joseph Smith, the Prophet, the instrument whom God used to translate this record, testified that “the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” (History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 4:461.)

The Book of Mormon was written for us today. God is the author of the book. It is a record of a fallen people, compiled by inspired men for our blessing today. Those people never had the book—it was meant for us. Mormon, the ancient prophet after whom the book is named, abridged centuries of records. God, who knows the end from the beginning, told him what to include in his abridgment that we would need for our day. Mormon turned the records over to his son Moroni, the last recorder; and Moroni, writing over 1,500 years ago but speaking to us today, states: “Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing.” (Morm. 8:35.)

The purpose of the Book of Mormon is stated on the title page. It is “to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD.”

Nephi, the first prophet-writer in the Book of Mormon, states: “For the fulness of mine intent is that I may persuade men to come unto the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and be saved.

“Wherefore, the things which are pleasing unto the world I do not write, but the things which are pleasing unto God and unto those who are not of the world.

“Wherefore, I shall give commandment unto my seed, that they shall not occupy these plates with things which are not of worth unto the children of men.” (1 Ne. 6:4–6.)

The Book of Mormon brings men to Christ through two basic means. First, it tells in a plain manner of Christ and his gospel. It testifies of his divinity and of the necessity for a Redeemer and the need of our putting trust in him. It bears witness of the Fall and the Atonement and the first principles of the gospel, including our need of a broken heart and a contrite spirit and a spiritual rebirth. It proclaims we must endure to the end in righteousness and live the moral life of a Saint.

Second, the Book of Mormon exposes the enemies of Christ. It confounds false doctrines and lays down contention. (See 2 Ne. 3:12.) It fortifies the humble followers of Christ against the evil designs, strategies, and doctrines of the devil in our day. The type of apostates in the Book of Mormon are similar to the type we have today. God, with his infinite foreknowledge, so molded the Book of Mormon that we might see the error and know how to combat false educational, political, religious, and philosophical concepts of our time.

Now God expects us to use the Book of Mormon in several ways. We are to read it ourselves—carefully, prayerfully—and ponder as we read, as to whether this book is the work of God or of an unlearned youth. And then when we are finished reading the things in the book, Moroni exhorts us to put them to the test in these words:

“And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.” (Moro. 10:4.) I have done as Moroni exhorts, and I can testify to you that this book is from God and so is verily true.

We are to use the Book of Mormon as the basis for our teaching. In section 42 of the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord states: “And again, the elders, priests and teachers of this church shall teach the principles of my gospel, which are in … the Book of Mormon, in the which is the fulness of the gospel.” (D&C 42:12.)

As we read and teach, we are to liken the Book of Mormon scriptures unto us “that it might be for our profit and learning.” (1 Ne. 19:23.)

We are to use the Book of Mormon in handling objections to the Church. God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ revealed themselves to Joseph Smith in a marvelous vision. After that glorious event, Joseph Smith told a minister about it. Joseph was surprised to hear the minister say that there were no such things as visions or revelations in these days, that all such things had ceased. (See JS-H 1:21.)

This remark symbolizes practically all of the objections that have ever been made against the Church by nonmembers and dissident members alike. Namely, they do not believe that God reveals his will today to the Church through prophets of God. All objections, whether they be on abortion, plural marriage, seventh-day worship, etc., basically hinge on whether Joseph Smith and his successors were and are prophets of God receiving divine revelation. Here, then, is a procedure to handle most objections through the use of the Book of Mormon.

First, understand the objection.

Second, give the answer from revelation.

Third, show how the correctness of the answer really depends on whether or not we have modern revelation through modern prophets.

Fourth, explain that whether or not we have modern prophets and revelation really depends on whether the Book of Mormon is true.

Therefore, the only problem the objector has to resolve for himself is whether the Book of Mormon is true. For if the Book of Mormon is true, then Jesus is the Christ, Joseph Smith was his prophet, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true, and it is being led today by a prophet receiving revelation.

Our main task is to declare the gospel and do it effectively. We are not obligated to answer every objection. Every man eventually is backed up to the wall of faith, and there he must make his stand. “And if they are not the words of Christ, judge ye,” said Nephi, “for Christ will show unto you, with power and great glory, that they are his words, at the last day; and you and I shall stand face to face before his bar; and ye shall know that I have been commanded of him to write these things.” (2 Ne. 33:11.) Every man must judge for himself, knowing God will hold him accountable.

The Book of Mormon is to be used “for a standard unto my people, which are of the house of Israel,” the Lord says, and its words “shall hiss forth unto the ends of the earth.” (2 Ne. 29:2.) We, the members of the Church, and particularly the missionaries, have to be the “hissers,” or the tellers and testifiers, of the Book of Mormon unto the ends of the earth.

The Book of Mormon is the great standard we are to use. It shows that Joseph Smith was a prophet. It contains the words of Christ, and its great mission is to bring men to Christ and all other things are secondary. The golden question of the Book of Mormon is “Do you want to learn more of Christ?” The Book of Mormon is the great finder of the golden contact. It does not contain things which are “pleasing unto the world” (1 Ne. 6:5), and so the worldly are not interested in it. It is a great sieve.

Anyone who has diligently sought to know the doctrines and teachings of the Book of Mormon and has used it conscientiously in missionary work knows within his soul that this is the instrument which God has given to the missionaries to convince the Jew and Gentile and Lamanite of the truthfulness of our message.

Now, we have not been using the Book of Mormon as we should. Our homes are not as strong unless we are using it to bring our children to Christ. Our families may be corrupted by worldly trends and teachings unless we know how to use the book to expose and combat the falsehoods in socialism, organic evolution, rationalism, humanism, etc. Our missionaries are not as effective unless they are “hissing forth” with it. Social, ethical, cultural, or educational converts will not survive under the heat of the day unless their taproots go down to the fulness of the gospel which the Book of Mormon contains. Our Church classes are not as spirit-filled unless we hold it up as a standard. And our nation will continue to degenerate unless we read and heed the words of the God of this land, Jesus Christ, and quit building up and upholding the secret combinations which the Book of Mormon tells us proved the downfall of both previous American civilizations.

Some of the early missionaries, on returning home, were reproved by the Lord in section 84 of the Doctrine and Covenants because they had treated lightly the Book of Mormon. As a result, their minds had been darkened. The Lord said that this kind of treatment of the Book of Mormon brought the whole Church under condemnation, even all of the children of Zion. And then the Lord said, “And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon.” (See D&C 84:54–57.) Are we still under that condemnation?

Reading the Book of Mormon is one of the greatest persuaders to get men on missions. We need more missionaries. But we also need better-prepared missionaries coming out of the wards and branches and homes where they know and love the Book of Mormon. A great challenge and day of preparation is at hand for missionaries to meet and teach with the Book of Mormon. We need missionaries to match our message.

And now grave consequences hang on our response to the Book of Mormon. “Those who receive it,” said the Lord, “in faith, and work righteousness, shall receive a crown of eternal life;

“But those who harden their hearts in unbelief, and reject it, it shall turn to their own condemnation—

“For the Lord God has spoken it.” (D&C 20:14–16.)

Is the Book of Mormon true? Yes.

Who is it for? Us.

What is its purpose? To bring men to Christ.

How does it do this? By testifying of Christ and revealing his enemies.

How are we to use it? We are to get a testimony of it, we are to teach from it, we are to hold it up as a standard and “hiss it forth.”

Have we been doing this? Not as we should, nor as we must.

Do eternal consequences rest upon our response to this book? Yes, either to our blessing or our condemnation.

Every Latter-day Saint should make the study of this book a lifetime pursuit. Otherwise he is placing his soul in jeopardy and neglecting that which could give spiritual and intellectual unity to his whole life. There is a difference between a convert who is built on the rock of Christ through the Book of Mormon and stays hold of that iron rod, and one who is not.

Over a quarter of a century ago I listened in this Tabernacle to these words: “A few years ago as I began to practice law, members of my family were a little uneasy. They were afraid I would lose my faith. I wanted to practice law, but I had an even greater desire to keep my testimony, and so I decided upon a little procedure which I recommend to you. For thirty minutes each morning before I began the day’s work I read from the Book of Mormon . … and in just a few minutes a day I read the Book of Mormon through, every year, for nine years. I know that it kept me in harmony, so far as I did keep in harmony, with the Spirit of the Lord.” (Conference Report, Apr. 1949, p. 36.) It will hold us as close to the Spirit of the Lord as anything I know. That was President Marion G. Romney. I echo his counsel.

What, then, are we to say of the Book of Mormon? I bear witness that it is verily true. I know this as I know that I live. We stand with the Prophet Joseph Smith when he said, “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” (History of the Church, 4:461.)

May we know and use the keystone and get nearer to God, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.