Is it true that the Mormons were kicked out of Missouri because of speeches given by Sidney Rigdon, a Mormon leader? Are Mormons themselves to blame for the infamous Extermination Order Governor Boggs issued against them?
One Response to “Is it true that the Mormons were kicked out of Missouri beca…”
Fernando Duarte
2008-07-28 05:02:46
The infamous Extermination Order, in which then Governor Lilburn Boggs authorized the extermination of the Mormon people, brought to an end the Missouri period of Mormon history. Though Mormons had been previously expelled from other areas without significant resistance, they decided it would be best to resist injustice in Missouri. While it is true that Mormons were by no means pacifists in the face of Missouri persecution, it's hard to believe that anything would justify the authorized extermination of an entire people. Recent research has also discovered that the extermination order was perfectly timed so as to allow Mormon lands to be confiscated by the persecutors. It's hard to deny that the anti-Mormon mobs had nefarious motives.
I've heard several anti-Mormons make the claim that speeches given by Sidney Rigdon, a Mormon leader, were so threatening that Mormons deserved the persecution they received. Not only is this claim insensitive to modern Mormons, history does not support the allegation.
Anti-Mormons usually focus on two of Sidney Rigdon's Missouri speeches. The text of the first speech, the Salt Sermon, is not available, nor is a summary. From second-hand sources, however, it seems almost certain that this speech was directed towards angry ex-Mormons who were still living in Mormon communities. Many of these disillusioned ex-Mormons were apparently spreading lies about the Mormons and stirring up the local Missourians, thereby putting Mormon lives in jeopardy. A few days after the Salt Sermon, 83 prominent members of the community signed a "Note of Warning" requiring that these agitators leave Caldwell County or face forced expulsion. The speech didn't mention native Missourians, however, so it's hard to believe that it elicited the Missourians' fury.
In a second speech given on July 4th, Rigdon did focus his attention on the Missourian persecutors. Though his language was excessive, he clearly stated only that the Mormons would defend themselves, not that they would initiate violence. "We take God and all the holy angels to witness this day, that we warn all men in the name of Jesus Christ, to come on us no more forever, for from this hour, we will bear it no more, our rights shall no more be trampled on with impunity...We will never be the aggressors, we will infringe on the rights of no people; but shall stand for our own until death. We claim our own rights, and are willing that all others shall enjoy theirs...No man shall be at liberty to come into our streets, to threaten us with mobs, for if he does, he shall atone for it before he leaves the place, neither shall he be at liberty, to vilify and slander any of us, for suffer it we will not in this place...Neither will we indulge any man, or set of men, in instituting vexatious law suits against us, to cheat us out of our just rights, if they attempt it we say we be unto them." While this second speech did address the native Missourians, Rigdon made it clear that Mormons would not be the first to attack, that they would only defend themselves. Again, the speech hardly seems to elicit justified fury.
Sidney Rigdon was later charged with and acquitted of murder and treason. After he explained the persecution he had suffered, the once anti-Mormon courtroom audience immediately raised $100 and gave it to him, wanting to help an innocent man return to his destitute family.
While neither of Rigdon's speeches threatened the native Missourians except in case of self-defense, it is true that Rigdon's words were excessive. The Missourians, who already hated the Mormons, make have taken advantage of his fiery rhetoric in trying to justify their cruelty. I think Mormon leaders agreed with the content of Rigdon's speeches--that angry ex-Mormons who put others' lives in jeopardy should not be allowed to remain in Mormon communities and that Mormons had the right to defend themselves against violent aggressors--but I don't think they would have necessarily chosen to use such forceful words. Rigdon's excessive rhetoric may have had its roots in his troubled past. He had been tortured by anti-Mormon mobs in 1832 and suffered a head injury from which he never fully recovered. Many modern scholars believe he had bipolar disorder. Without diminishing the many great contributions he made to early Mormonism, it is important to point out that Rigdon was not always emotionally stable.
I've heard several anti-Mormons make the claim that speeches given by Sidney Rigdon, a Mormon leader, were so threatening that Mormons deserved the persecution they received. Not only is this claim insensitive to modern Mormons, history does not support the allegation.
Anti-Mormons usually focus on two of Sidney Rigdon's Missouri speeches. The text of the first speech, the Salt Sermon, is not available, nor is a summary. From second-hand sources, however, it seems almost certain that this speech was directed towards angry ex-Mormons who were still living in Mormon communities. Many of these disillusioned ex-Mormons were apparently spreading lies about the Mormons and stirring up the local Missourians, thereby putting Mormon lives in jeopardy. A few days after the Salt Sermon, 83 prominent members of the community signed a "Note of Warning" requiring that these agitators leave Caldwell County or face forced expulsion. The speech didn't mention native Missourians, however, so it's hard to believe that it elicited the Missourians' fury.
In a second speech given on July 4th, Rigdon did focus his attention on the Missourian persecutors. Though his language was excessive, he clearly stated only that the Mormons would defend themselves, not that they would initiate violence. "We take God and all the holy angels to witness this day, that we warn all men in the name of Jesus Christ, to come on us no more forever, for from this hour, we will bear it no more, our rights shall no more be trampled on with impunity...We will never be the aggressors, we will infringe on the rights of no people; but shall stand for our own until death. We claim our own rights, and are willing that all others shall enjoy theirs...No man shall be at liberty to come into our streets, to threaten us with mobs, for if he does, he shall atone for it before he leaves the place, neither shall he be at liberty, to vilify and slander any of us, for suffer it we will not in this place...Neither will we indulge any man, or set of men, in instituting vexatious law suits against us, to cheat us out of our just rights, if they attempt it we say we be unto them." While this second speech did address the native Missourians, Rigdon made it clear that Mormons would not be the first to attack, that they would only defend themselves. Again, the speech hardly seems to elicit justified fury.
Sidney Rigdon was later charged with and acquitted of murder and treason. After he explained the persecution he had suffered, the once anti-Mormon courtroom audience immediately raised $100 and gave it to him, wanting to help an innocent man return to his destitute family.
While neither of Rigdon's speeches threatened the native Missourians except in case of self-defense, it is true that Rigdon's words were excessive. The Missourians, who already hated the Mormons, make have taken advantage of his fiery rhetoric in trying to justify their cruelty. I think Mormon leaders agreed with the content of Rigdon's speeches--that angry ex-Mormons who put others' lives in jeopardy should not be allowed to remain in Mormon communities and that Mormons had the right to defend themselves against violent aggressors--but I don't think they would have necessarily chosen to use such forceful words. Rigdon's excessive rhetoric may have had its roots in his troubled past. He had been tortured by anti-Mormon mobs in 1832 and suffered a head injury from which he never fully recovered. Many modern scholars believe he had bipolar disorder. Without diminishing the many great contributions he made to early Mormonism, it is important to point out that Rigdon was not always emotionally stable.