Those who had not the privilege of a personal acquaintance with Jesus, might be supposed to have no interest in favouring a personage whose pretensions, if countenanced, would disturb their quietude, and impugn their motives, and threaten the prosperity of a system that they supposed as old as the days of Abraham, and teachings as orthodox as the sayings of Moses. But whatever was said or done by Jesus that could possibly be construed by prejudiced minds to his disadvantage, these things were heeded with readiness, and published in the social circle, and riveted by the butt of ridicule upon every mind; and those who loved to laugh at the expense of the innocent, could furnish stock for the purpose, by retailing tales about the supposed impostor, that had their origin in misapprehension and falsehood; but they were well received and cheered by those who affected grave reverence for the Supreme Deity, while they could trample with scorn (unconsciously) upon the brightness of His glory in the person of His Son.
Now let me ask if the character and conduct of Mr. Smith is not equally misunderstood by modern religionists. Mr. Smith only claims to be a prophet, raised up to usher in the last dispensation, while Jesus Christ was more obnoxious in proportion to the superior magnitude of his claims as the Son of God. How difficult it is for persons, in the present age, to form a correct estimate of the true character and views of Mr. Smith. The public mind is always forestalled concerning him. It is taken to be sound orthodoxy that there is no more need of prophets or revelations; the canon of scripture is full; consequently the man that will claim to be a prophet, or revelator, and seer, must be a base impostor and knave. With this educational prejudice, sanctioned by the best men for a thousand years past, and riveted by solemn vows to abide in orthodoxy, they see as though they saw not, and hear as though they heard not.
If excellent things are taught by Mr. Smith, it is considered by prejudiced minds as a good bait employed to cover a well-barbed hook; by many he is considered more detestable and dangerous, because, say they, if he did not mix so much good with his system, he would not be so dangerous and so likely to deceive.
Again, can the people of this country obtain a correct knowledge of the prophet through the religious prints? I apprehend they never will. Those who control the religious prints, conceive they know in the premises, that God has not raised up such a prophet, therefore they will not tarnish the columns of their periodicals by publishing any thing favourable to him. While they feel bound to withhold whatever might commend the prophet to the favourable regards of impartial men, they feel solemnly constrained to advertise the public of all rising heresies. Thus while our supposed heresies are published from very questionable data, our real virtues are buried in oblivion. We do not murmur; if Jesus, the master, could not be known in his true character, but said with mingled pity and forgiveness, they know not what they do, we cannot expect better treatment from those who know but little of us, while they say much to our disadvantage.
Paul did the Ancient Saints much harm, and wasted them greatly, being ignorant of their true character, and unbelieving as to their doctrines. It is certain that Latter-day Saints have received much harm from those who are ignorant of their character, and unbelieving as to their doctrines. Religious editors, generally, know very little of us, except what they have learned from our enemies. Jesus Christ was entirely stript of his reputation by his enemies, and was put to death by learned, yet ignorant, zealots, who were too self-wise to be taught by one whom they knew to be an impostor in the start; but those men were mistaken in the character of our Lord; and so are our enemies mistaken in the character and views of the modern prophet.
My own personal observation teaches that it is a very difficult matter to instil into the minds of sectarian churches, a true knowledge of the faith and practice of Latter-day Saints. Though one should go among them that was once highly esteemed by them, they are alarmed at his approach, and his virtues are conceived to render him more deserving of a repulse. His influence, say they, may be formidable; we must not bid him God speed, consequently he is not asked to pray in the family or public meeting. If he can, by great effort, get an opportunity to preach, it is not thought advisable for any body to go and hear him, lest they should be led away by his errors.
Thus you see, brother, how difficult in former and latter days to bring the true faith to the knowledge of men, through prejudice. They have prejudged a matter of which they are almost wholly ignorant. This same notion of treating new matters has veiled the sun in darkness, and hung the Prince of Life in agonies. How long shall this treatment of the Saints be persisted in? How long shall prophets be persecuted and slain, without being fully known, and the servants of God be excluded from an impartial hearing, when they seek to publish good tidings—even salvation to the inhabitants of the earth?
Now let me ask my former friends in the eastern churches, with whom I once held sweet intercourse, how it is possible for the Latter-day Saints to introduce their views among the sectarian churches and the world, with any more favourable reception than the Ancient Saints had in introducing theirs? Prejudice and persecution faced them down always, and so it is in these days. It is certainly a mistaken idea to suppose that people are much better now than they were anciently, when the true gospel was misunderstood, and its promoters sincerely accounted disturbers, and heretics worthy of exemplary punishment. But, say the wise and great men among the sectarian churches, "we do understand the true gospel, and have already embraced it, and it is only error and heresy we oppose; and the weight of our contempt and ridicule is hurled at impostors and knaves, who palm off gross deceptions upon the public, and lead captive ignorant zealots by pretended revelations and spurious miracles." But do they not know that substantially the same charge was brought against Jesus Christ and the primitive disciples. Let it be proved that we are what our enemies call us; let us file our respective pleas and come to a speedy and impartial trial. To this our opposers will not consent; they intend to employ all the advantage of education and prejudice to exclude us from a hearing—so did the opposers of the Ancient Saints: but I solemnly ask whether it has ever been necessary, in any moral enterprise, for those who have the truth on their side, especially gospel truth, to defend that truth by foreclosing discussion, and shunning public investigation, and then carry on their depredations by the use of such small arms as ridicule and preconceived objections, that need only be brought to light to be dissipated like fog in the meridian sun?
Do temperance lecturers, bible and education agents, and other moral reformers find it necessary to carry on their enterprises by such means? Do they seek to avoid an open and frank discussion with the intemperate portions of the community? Do they avoid a manly investigation because the intemperate portions of the community combine, in their life and conduct, beastly sottishness, unprovoked abuse to wives and children, a prodigal waste of competence and ample fortunes, and the overthrow of intellect, and the dissolution of all moral ties? No, by no means! They seek the broad day light of public discussion, because they know the truth and power of that side of the cause which they have espoused. They know that intemperance cannot survive the impartial observation of good men. All we ask is that the word of God may have free course. We wish that it may come distinctly to the knowledge of men, that they may sit in impartial judgment upon it.
By the word of God, we mean not only what was revealed for the ancients especially, but also what is now revealed for this generation. Oh! says the objector, he wants the word of Joseph Smith to have a free circulation, and this we oppose, because it is blasphemous and preposterous. Yes, we want the word of God by Joseph Smith, to be known and read of all men, because it is written not with ink, but by the spirit of the living God. What were Peter, Elijah, or Moses, but earthen vessels, by whom God communicated his own knowledge, power, and glory? Does not the word by Joseph commend itself to every man's conscience where it is heard with due candour? I have never seen that person who had read the Book of Mormon, and the Book of Doctrine and Covenants entirely through, with an earnest desire to know whether it was of God or not, who could raise any worthy objection against them. A few isolated portions of these books are often selected out and made to speak some other besides their true meaning, and thereby a dislike for these books is created; consequently, some refuse to read them at all, while some others read only to confirm their prepossessions and prejudices; and superficial inquirers hear with credulity that such a minister, editor, or professor of some College, has published an exposè or refutation of Mormonism, that will inflict a fatal wound upon this glaring and blasphemous heresy.