100-plus years ago, Charles W. Penrose also explained why he is a Mormon

 

(Editor's note: this blog was published 10 years ago at StandardNet. I rescued it from Wayback. My faith has moved away from calling itself "Mormons." Leaders prefer we use the full-term, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I'm a Mormon site ended in 2018. Of course it was never a dating site; it just seemed like one. I still like Elder Penrose's far earlier effort at telling us about why he's a Latter-day Saint.)

At the I'm a Mormon website, this beautiful 30-something strawberry reddish/blonde named Rochelle is smiling at me … for a few seconds. A click on her profile indicates she’s a married Mormon mom from Texas. I imagine that Rochelle is soon ignored by the scores of thousands of single men, mostly Mormon, who peruse the social media chat site “I’m a Mormon” — as do the many single women who likely pass on 25-34 married man, Todd.

A social media site to connect Mormons across the globe is an obvious cybercentury tool. But it’s not being cynical to also see “I’m a Mormon” as a dating site trove for lonely church members. It’s designed to look like one. Users can peruse any gender preference. I type in Female, African-American, 25-34 and find Lydia, Jewel, Laney and dozens more just waiting for a click. There’s a lot of information shared but the dating site analogy only goes so far. There’s no body measurements or described “turn-ons.”

I’ve had enough of “I’m a Mormon.” I’d have a tough time explaining my interest if my wife caught me perusing the site. Besides, I really belong on the 35 to 49-age webpages. (Today I'm 58, and still happily married).

However, “I-am-a-Mormon” efforts are not without precedence in the LDS Church. They’ve just been more staid in the past. I’m perusing a very yellowed, torn 110-year-old pamphlet, “Why I Am a Mormon,” written by President Charles W. Penrose. Published by the missions (all 10) located in North America, begins with the same fussing about calling LDS members “Mormons” that was heard recently at General Conference. Penrose writes, “To call them ‘Mormons,’ therefore, is as nonsensical as it would be to call them Jeremiahs or Daniels. Peters or Paul.” Penrose adds that he regards as “Mormonism” as “vulgarly” used by his faith’s opponents.

There’s a good bet that was true in 1901, and Penrose is a good sport to tell the gentile world why he’s a Mormon. I have a great deal of affection for this tract — given to me as a family heirloom by a woman who died shortly after I received it. It’s an unapologetic, no evasions tolerated defense of the Gospel. It can be bought — old or new editions — at amazon and elsewhere.

Penrose’s main argument is that Mormonism “is the only religious system that professes to have been established by direct divine authority.” He’s blunt about the divine failures of other religions, including Catholicism, Episcopalism, or those of the Protestant Reformation. He writes, “They are the works of men. It matters not whether their founders were good or bad. God had no direct hand in their establishment for the men who made them did not believe in present revelation. To their minds, Deity was dumb to the world.”

Penrose uses the old-fashioned term, “Romish” church to draw a geneaogy of all then-current U.S. churches, drawing a comparison with his claim that the Mormon Church was a restored version of the New Testament gospel.

Midway into the pamphlet, Penrose delves into sharp theological differences that the LDS Church has with other religions, describing the distinctions as a positive that solves the dilemma of human existence. In sometimes confusing parlance, the LDS doctrines of pre-existence, eternal intelligences, and the potential for Godhood are hinted at.

He writes, “Man is capable of advancement into higher spheres until the divinity within him by birth is developed into the fullness of the Godhead, and he becomes one with the Father and Son.”

The latter portions of the tract explains — to the uninitiated — the outlines of eternal marriage and the importance of The Book of Mormon as latter-day Scripture. Penrose is both blunt, “A woman cannot enter into the fullness of celestial glory in a single state, neither can a man” (thus the interest in today’s mormon.org, perhaps?) and a bit of an early feminist, writing, “She (woman) is an independent member of the Church, with a vote equal to a man’s on all public questions.” (the world “public” is significant, however). The Book of Mormon, besides being lauded as being “in perfect accord with the Bible,” is used as a challenge for investigators who may be squeamish about other aspects of the LDS Church. Penrose writes, “If the Book of Mormon is true, ‘Mormonism’ is true. It is a question I heard growing up and still hear often in church meetings.

The final two sections are testimonies of the Prophet Joseph Smith and a personal testimony of how Mormonism satisfies Penrose’s “every human need.”

Whether a believer in the LDS Church or not, Penrose’s pamphlet is compelling reading. It’s persuasive religious propaganda, direct, to-the-point and delivers answers to eternal questions that dwell within most persons’ hearts. Works such as “Why I Am a Mormon,” as well as many other efforts, are the reason the LDS Church grew from strange, very unpopular cultish sect into a global religion with more than 10 million members.

Although the banal, virtually non-doctrinal, attractive faces/social media “I’m a Mormon” campaign may have its place in a digital world, I can’t help thinking that it would appall Penrose — who died 96 years ago — if he rose from the dead and witnessed it today.

-- Doug Gibson

100-plus years ago, Utah, Mormon Church sold lots of magazines for publishers

I read a Rolling Stones piece on the Kingston polygamy family. It’s a breathless piece. The subject is described as “America’s most twisted crime family.” (You can read it at http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/inside-the-order-one-mormon-cults-secret-empire-20110615.) Today’s polygamists are a muckraker’s dream, just as the current Mormon Church was 100-plus years ago. At the 2011 Mormon History Association meeting, a small “keepsake” book — courtesy of historians Michael Paulos and Kenneth L. Cannon II — was offered. “Cartoonists and Muckrakers: Selected Media Images of Mormonism During the Progressive Era” featured excerpts from 100-plus-year-old muckraking pieces against the Utah Mormons, those purveyors of polygamy, once paired with slavery as the “twin relics of barbarisms.”

Rolling Stone’s piece has nothing on these pieces. Here’s a sample of early 20th century progressive journalism as directed against The LDS Church and its chief henchman, its president, Joseph F. Smith:

• Cosmopolitan Magazine, No. 50, March, 1911, “Viper on the Hearth” — a three-part series: “The name of the viper — I take it from the mouth of the viper — is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. It lies coiled on the country’s hearthstone, and on;y asks time to grow and collect a poison and a strength to strike. … True, the Mormon himself had place in my mind for what he was and is — one who prefers lust’s substance to love’s shadow and would sooner wallow than dream; but it was not until my visit to Salt Lake City that he and his religion dawned upon me for the national threat they really are …” (The author, Alfred Henry Lewis, was the most celebrated writer in America at that time). Lewis described the LDS prophet Joseph F. Smith as an evil mastermind over a weak-willed, easy-to-lead U.S. senator, fellow Mormon, Reed Smoot.

• McClure’s Magazine, in its January, 1911 article, “The Mormon Revival of Polygamy,” described the LDS church President Joseph F. Smith in this hyperbolic manner as a man who had revitalized polygamy to Utah two decades after the manifesto. It reads: “Even before 1901 polygamous households had been reestablished on a considerable scale, but with the succession of Joseph F. smith to the presidency of the church the restoration of old conditions became practically open. … All of Brigham’s successors have been mild-mannered souls, but President Smith is a man of violent passions; one could easily imagine him torturing heretics or burning witches to advance the kingdom of God.” (The writer of this piece was Burton J. Hendrick, who later in his career would win three Pulitzer prizes).

• Pearson’s Magazine ran a three-part expose on Mormonism beginning in the September 1910 issue. It was titled, “The Political Menace of the Mormon Church” and dealt with Smith, polygamy, and the church’s political power and wealth. It was penned by Richard Barry, a famous war correspondent of that era. An excerpt: “These 375,000 people have more political power than any million in the United States because they are a unit. There is little secession among them from the will of their leader. … This political force, compact, unreasoning, unpatriotic, unAmerican, has a curious character, at once sinister and serene. It is the backbone of the Mormon empire, which is an echo from the time that antedates the Christian era.”

It’s very interesting to read these examples of muckraking articles against the Mormon Church.

-- Doug Gibson

Originally published in 2011 at StandardNET (blogs)