instrument in the establishment of the Church of Christ in the earth.

[Footnote A: The assertion, "those professors were all corrupt," must not be taken as referring to the whole body of Christians; but rather as referring to the teachers of their creeds—the "professors;" that term not being used in the sense of "confessors" of the creeds, who merely accept their doctrine from the teachings of the "professors." This interpretation is justified from the immediate context of the passage: "They (the professors) draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me; they (the "professors") teach for doctrine the commandments of men." This context clearly proves that the charge of "corruption" is limited at least to the teachers, to the "professors," not to the whole body of Christians. Moreover, I am convinced myself that the declaration is still further limited to the "professors" who founded and by that act taught to the world the creeds that are an abomination in the sight of God—a fact not at all difficult of belief, or proof, upon an analysis of the creeds themselves. And those who originally could form such conceptions of God and man and the purposes of human existence, as the creeds teach, were certainly men of warped understandings, men of perverted or corrupted minds. But as to the whole body of Christians, we know that there were at the time of the opening of this new dispensation of the Gospel, and now, many who were not only not corrupt, except for the ordinary weaknesses or "corruption" of our human nature,—but virtuous, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, seeking after God, and hindered from finding him only by the abominable creeds formulated by the "professors" of the passage here considered.]

Because of this great revelation, by which the errors of ages were swept aside and the ground cleared for the re-establishment of the Church of Christ among men, it has placed us, in a way, in an attitude of antagonism to the religious world. We have been resisted to some extent because of this attitude of antagonism; and it is quite possible that we ourselves have not understood the true relationship in which we stand to the religious world, by more or less of misapprehension respecting this great revelation. I rejoice in the plainness and emphasis of this revelation, because from it I am made to realize that there is a very important reason for the existence of the work with which we are identified. I am glad to know that "Mormonism" did not come into existence because its founders chanced to disagree with prevailing notions about the form or object of baptism; that it did not come into existence through a disagreement as to the character of the government of the Church. From the revelation referred to I learn that "Mormonism" came into existence because there was an absolute necessity for a new dispensation of the gospel, a re-establishment of the Church of Christ among men. The gospel had been corrupted; its ordinances had been changed; its laws transgressed its truths so far lost to the children of men that it rendered this new dispensation of the gospel of Christ—miscalled "Mormonism"—necessary. I say that I rejoice in the fact that "Mormonism" came into the world, and exists in the world today, because the world stood and stands in sore need of it. But does this re-establishment of the Church of Christ, this new dispensation of the gospel, which we have received, make our relationship to the children of men one of unfriendliness? I answer, No. On the contrary our relationship to men is one of absolute friendliness, and we are anxious to do the world good. We ought to understand that. We do understand it. And it is important that the world should understand it, that they may come to regard us in our true light, as friends of humanity, and not enemies.

If you will look through some of the revelations given in the early history of the church, you will find that from time to time the Lord was under the necessity of correcting the ideas of the brethren respecting their attitude towards religious world. The Lord said to Martin Harris, by of correction:

"Thou shalt declare glad tidings, yea, publish it upon the mountains, and upon every high place, and among people that thou shalt be permitted to see. And thou do it with all humility, trusting in me, reviling not against revilers. And of tenets thou shall not talk, but thou shall declare repentance and faith on the Savior, and remission of sin by baptism and by fire, yea, even the Holy Ghost."

The Prophet also from time to time found it necessary to correct the Elders of the Church in respect of their attacks upon other churches. At Kirtland, in 1836, when many of the Elders were upon the eve of taking their departure for their fields of labor, he instructed them as follows:

"While waiting [for the Sacrament] I made the following remarks: The time that we were required to tarry in Kirtland to be endowed would be fulfilled in a few days, and then the Elders would go forth, and each stand for himself . . . . to go in all meekness, in sobriety, and preach Christ and him crucified; not to contend with others on account of their faith or systems of religion, but pursue a steady course. This I delivered by way of commandment; and all who observe it not, will pull down persecution upon their heads, while those who do, shall always be filled with the Holy Ghost; this I pronounced as a prophesy." [A]

[Footnote A: History of the Church, vol. II, p. 431.]

In other words, because the Lord has opened the heavens and has given a new dispensation of the gospel, it does not follow that his servants or his people are to be contentious; that they are to make war upon other people for holding different views respecting religion. Hence this caution to the Elders of the Church that they should not contend against other churches, make war upon their tenets, or revile even the revilers.

At an earlier date still, the Lord had said to Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer:

"If you have not faith, hope and charity, you can do nothing. Contend against no church, save it be the church of the devil. Take upon you the name of Christ, and speak the truth in soberness." [A]

[Footnote A: Doc. & Cov. Sec. 18, 19-21.]

"The church of the devil" here alluded to, I understand to mean not any particular church among men, or any one sect of religion, but something larger than that—something that includes within its boundaries all evil wherever it may be found; as well in schools of philosophy as in Christian sects; as well in systems of ethics as in systems of religion—something that includes the whole empire of Satan—what I shall call "The Kingdom of Evil."

This descriptive phrase, "the church of the devil," is also used in the Book of Mormon; and while in attendance at a conference in one of the border stakes of Zion, a question was propounded to me in relation to its meaning. The passage occurs in the writings of the first Nephi. An angel of the Lord is represented as saying to Nephi, "Behold, there are save two churches only: the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil." The question submitted to me was, "Is the Catholic church the church here referred to—the church of the devil?" "Well," said I, in answer, "I would not like to take that position, because it would leave me with a lot of churches on my hands that I might not then be able to classify." So far as the Catholic church is concerned, I believe that there is just as much truth, nay, personally I believe it has retained even more truth than other divisions of so-called Christendom; and there is just as much virtue in the Roman Catholic church as there is in Protestant Christendom; and I am sure there is more strength.

I would not like; therefore, to designate the Catholic church as the church of the devil. Neither would I like to designate