If we look at the timeline of events that led up to the Revolutionary War and compare it to current day events, we will see a disturbing similarity. Must our present-day inaction, indifference, and silence in the face of tyranny cause us to march down the same dreaded path? Our wake-up call is so clear; why do we ignore it? (Jesse Winchester, via Quoty)

If the gospel were restored prior to the Revolutionary War, would the Founding Fathers be counted as faithful members? Would the revelations given to Joseph Smith about submitting to governments and law have negated the support for and determination in committing treason against England and waging a war against the present head of state?

There are many scriptures that discuss our role in relation to government. For example, the 12th Article of Faith states:

We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

What happens if the enforced law is tyrannical in implementation and satanic in nature? What happens if the legislation of the land is contrary to revealed gospel principles? We are further counseled:

Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land.
Wherefore, be subject to the powers that be, until he reigns whose right it is to reign, and subdues all enemies under his feet. (D&C 58:21-22)

One might argue that this revelation was given after the American revolution, and the same counsel might not have applied to those who preceded it. Were that not true, the Founding Fathers would have been required to “be subject to the powers that be” until Christ’s coming. Methinks there was a reason this counsel was given after America broke free of its English shackles.

We learn something interesting, however, in a revelation that mentions the Constitution and its divine origins:

Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil. (D&C 98:6-7)

Any law that contradicts the Constitution—even if it was instituted by popular vote—is evil. It is more or less than the Constitution, and therefore God describes it as satanic.

In an intriguing section on government and law, we find another interesting instruction regarding our subservience to the state:

We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience. (D&C 134:5)

Sedition and rebellion are therefore permitted and justified when the government is not protecting the citizen’s inherent and inalienable rights.

So the question stands, is there room for rebellion against our government today? With the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act, and other similarly abominable pieces of legislation that have destroyed our “inherent and inalienable rights”, we are doctrinally justified in resistance and rebellion. These laws—un-Constitutional in nature and satanic in substance—deserve to be hurled into eternal burnings where they belong.

To repeat Winchester’s question, “Our wake-up call is so clear; why do we ignore it?”

- - -

Connor Boyack is a blogger , husband, web designer, Latter-day Saint, constitutionalist, paleocon, classical liberal, preparedness practitioner, budding philanthropist, and master's student of political economy. He's from Poway, CA but lives in Happy Valley.

Comments (5)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Jeremy Parker said:

President Monson in the priesthood session: "As bearers of the priesthood, we have been placed on earth in troubled times. We live in a complex world with currents of conflict everywhere to be found. Political machinations ruin the stability of nations, despots grasp for power, and segments of society seem forever downtrodden, deprived of opportunity, and left with a feeling of failure." Contrast that with this from the Declaration of Independence: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." I believe that as in Germany under Hitler, the church fulfilled the greater good (ordinances and covenants of the gospel) by upholding the 12th article of faith. Had they not, the church would have been shut down and the greater good stifled for many years. That does not however mean that we are not justified (perhaps even sanctified) in opposing such a thing as was the Nazi state at that time. On the contrary, the God given Declaration of Independence informs us that it is then our duty. Just don't look for a church endorsement or even tolerance for your actions. The laws of God to the church and to us in this matter are clearly different. The only question is whether our government has as it's aim, despotism?

report abuse vote down vote up

April 11, 2008
Votes: +0

Connor said:

Jeremey - I agree. I don't expect the Church to come out in such bold opposition, as they may once have. I discuss this more in my "Prophetic Political Silence" article. But as you note, I believe there is a distinction between the Church itself and your average member. I believe that we as individuals must take it upon ourselves to be the movers and shakers. I'm reading more right now about the story of Helmuth Hübener, a 17 year old LDS resistance fighter, actively working to thwart the Nazi campaign. His story is fascinating, and relates to the discussion here, especially given the fact that he faced opposition from his local church leader regarding his resistance. Anywho, I agree - I think it's an individual matter instead of an organizational Church one.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 11, 2008 | url
Votes: +0

Mormon Paleo said:

	Great article.
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 11, 2008 | url
Votes: +0

Steven Montgomery said:

Connor, Great article. Generally I agree with the intent and tenor of the 12th article of faith. And sometimes it is better to suffer at the hands of unrighteous laws than to willy nilly take the law into your own hands. On the other hand, you might be interested in a compilation of quotes I put on the web in 2002 (great quotes, but it's in sad need of a facelift due to various formatting errors and problems) regarding our duty and responsibility when a law of God conflicts with a law of man. http://www.geocities.com/graymada/laws.html

report abuse vote down vote up

April 14, 2008 | url
Votes: +0

Jeremy Ashton said:

Like everybody else before me, great article. Daniel, Shadrack, Meshack, & Abendigo - among others from the scriptures - are all considered heros for rebelling against the rule of men when it conflicted with their religious convictions. We are all morally bound to follow natural law (i.e. the laws of God) - or that law which is based upon the rights of men. Laws of men, or legislation, is not natural law.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 14, 2008
Votes: +0

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment