There has always been some reluctance among historians to establish a precise starting point for the Reformation. Traditionally, most writers have held that Jedediah Grant’s preaching in the settlements just north of Salt Lake City initiated the Reformation. That would put the starting date on September 13, 1856. Searle and Larson have, with some lack of precision, suggested that this is the case.1 Reinwand reasoned that the Reformation began earlier, even as early as 1855.2
I would argue that the Reformation began in September 1856, approximately one week before Grant’s preaching tour. I would argue less confidently that it was Brigham Young who decided to commence a reformation, though it is apparent that Jedediah Grant was the individual who accelerated old reform methods and instigated new techniques in order to bring about increased righteousness among the Latter-day Saints. [55]
As demonstrated in the preceding chapter, reform had always been a cardinal concern among Church members, and by 1854 reform impulses were felt with some regularity in the Mormon kingdom. Still, even though the dictums issued from Mormon leaders were becoming more and more brazen, there is little evidence that Brigham Young had a programmed reform movement in mind prior to September 1856. It is true that Wilford Woodruff gave a talk in October 1856, in which he mentioned that Brigham Young “talked about this plan for some time before it came before the public.”3 However, a close reading of Woodruff’s sermon makes it clear that Brigham was referring to the handcart migrations of 1856 rather than to the Reformation. Certainly Young’s correspondence during the summer months of that year make no mention of intended reform pursuits; interestingly, by commenting on the peace and tranquility in the Mormon community, he implies that reform was not that necessary.4
But Brigham was of a different mood by late August or early September. One year later he described his feelings and told how such feelings led to a reformation:
I thank my Father in heaven, yes my soul says glory, hallelujah, praise the name of Israel’s God, for the blessings I enjoy at the present time. One year ago this very day, and previous to that time, my soul was pained within me. No tongue could tell, it could not be portrayed before the people, the feelings that I had; I could not tell them, and I did not know [56] but that, if I should come out in the presence of the people and try to speak my feelings, they would call me crazy. However, I tried to make the people understand my feelings, but have lived but a little time in this existence, had not God waked up the people, I wanted to take up my valise and go throughout the Territory crying, is there a man in this Territory for God?
If you want to know how I felt, I cannot tell you better than by describing my feelings in the way that I am now doing. One day I told a number of brethren how I felt, as well as I could, and br. Jedediah M. Grant partook of the Spirit that was in me and walked out like a man—like a giant—and like an angel—and he scattered the fire of the Almighty among the people. But what was the result, so far as he was concerned? He went beyond his strength, and it cost him his life.5
Obviously by September 7, 1856, Brigham had decided that some kind of a reform program was necessary. On that date a prayer circle meeting was held at which Young announced that it was his wish that Heber C. Kimball, Jedediah Grant, and the Twelve go among the people and preach the gospel to them.6
Acting on his leader’s counsel, Jedediah Grant, along with Joseph Young of the First Council of the Seventy and home missionaries D. D. Hunt, Gilbert Clements, Thomas Grover, and Williams Willes, journeyed to Kaysville, Davis County, to conduct a four-day conference. On Saturday, September 13, the first day of the conference, Grant announced that he had come with his brethren under the counsel of President Brigham Young to deliver a discourse on faith, repentance, and baptism for the remission of sins. While Grant’s traveling companions spoke on a variety of topics, Brigham’s counselor confined [57] his remarks to repentance and reform. At the Sunday morning session Grant “delivered a soul-stirring address on the text of Br. Brigham, ‘Saints, live your religion!’” Church members were urged to hold sacred their covenants and tidy up both themselves and their physical surroundings. Those that were not willing to do right were encouraged to leave the territory. In the Sunday afternoon session Grant called upon the people to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. He also advised the teachers in each district of the ward to report to the bishop at least once a month the standing of the members. After other speakers had elaborated on Grant’s remarks, Grant concluded the meeting by calling for a manifestation of support as to whether the Saints were willing to renew their covenants through rebaptism. It was unanimously given.7
The following day the first of several mass baptisms of Mormon settlements took place. All together, nearly five hundred Saints were immersed under Grant’s direction, approximately eighty, including the bishop and his counselors, being baptized by Grant himself. On this occasion the sick were administered to and the children blessed. After the service Grant counseled the bishop “to follow a systematic course to sustain the home missionaries who stood in need of assistance.”8
There followed one more day of sermonizing. On this day, Tuesday, both Grant and Joseph Young spoke. Jedediah then called on the twelve teachers of the ward to pray and speak. The teachers were [58] followed by the home missionaries who were asked to bless the people, “which they did in the name of the Lord . . . Every heart was made glad and the people were deeply affected by the power of God.”9
Thus ended the first Reformation conference. While it is clear that Brigham Young sent Grant north to preach repentance and reform, it is also clear that Jedediah felt great latitude in carrying out Young’s instructions. One day after the Kaysville conference Grant said that while Brigham instructed him to tell Kaysville inhabitants to live their religion, “when he got there he felt like baptizing and confirming them anew into the Church.”10
It would also appear that Grant did not decide on his course of action until the conference had already begun. Indeed, initial conference sessions were similar to those that had been held in Utah since November 1855, when home missionaries were assigned districts. It seems that a remark made by Joseph Young, during or after a meeting, touched a vibrant chord in Jedediah and led to an infusion of fervor into subsequent proceedings. Grant described the actual circumstances as follows:
This makes me think of a circumstance that occurred when we went to Kaysville to preach the reformation, under the direction of brother Brigham. There was a dark and dull spirit there which was not very congenial to our natures, and brother Joseph Young felt life in him, he was full of the Spirit. After staying a couple of days, he said to me, “Brother Grant, they feel cold, and I guess we had better go to Farmington, preach there and go home.” After a while I said to him “Do you know how I feel about it? In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, I [59] will never leave this land, until this people surrender. I will hang the flag of the Lord Jesus Christ on their doors, and there shall be a siege of forty days. Then let every man storm the castle, and rule against the bulwarks of hell, and let every Elder throw the arrows of God almighty through the sinner, and pierce their loins, and penetrate their vitals, until the banner of Christ shall wave triumphantly over Israel. Shall we give up, and let the wicked and ungodly overcome us? No, in the name and by the power of God we will overcome them. We will cleanse the inside of the platter and have Israel saved, through the name of Jesus Christ, and by the power of his word.11
On the same Sunday that Jedediah Grant was telling Saints in Kaysville to live their religion, Brigham Young was rebuking the convened Saints at Salt Lake for lying, stealing, swearing, committing adultery, and quarreling with husbands and wives and children. Wilford Woodruff recorded that “it was one of the strongest addresses . . . ever delivered to this church” and that Young’s “voice and words were like the thundering of Mount Sinai.”12
But Brigham had much more to say. On September 21, 1856, Young delivered a sermon which undoubtedly caused many in Zion to tremble. Too many Saints, observed Young, were “in a dozy condition with regard to their religion,” and needed “to wake up before the time of burning.”13 Transferring his attention to individuals guilty of serious sin, Young observed the following:
There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, [60] whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world.14
Brigham admitted that these were stern words but insisted they were rooted in truth. After all, had not God destroyed those of ancient Israel who failed to adhere to sacred dictums? Certainly modern Israel must abide by the same laws, laws which in Young’s opinion had already been broken by some of God’s people:
I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course. I will say further; I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.15
Brigham concluded his remarks on sin and atonement typically by appealing to the Old Testament as justification. “There are sins that can be atoned for by an offering upon an altar, as in ancient days; and there are sins that the blood of a lamb, or a calf, or of turtle doves, cannot remit, but they must be atoned for by the blood of the man.”16
Jedediah Grant followed Young at the pulpit and continued in the same vein. Grant advised abject sinners to consult with the president, ask for a committee to attend to their cases, and select a location where their blood might be shed. For such hardened wrongdoers, water would simply not do as “their sins are too deep a dye.”17 [61]
It is doubtful that Young and Grant actually believed that such harsh actions were necessary (certainly Young was teaching something quite different by November of the same year), but many Saints, unaware of Brigham’s penchant for hyperbole and incendiary talk, were likely disturbed. The rhetoric caused much excitement and even frenzy among some Church members and certainly contributed to the emotionally-charged atmosphere which prevailed in Zion the remainder of the year.
While some Church leaders were hurling thunderbolts from the pulpit on Sundays in Salt Lake City, others spent their weekdays preaching reform in nearby Mormon settlements. After the successful conference at Kaysville, Jedediah and his entourage moved to nearby Farmington where he told the Saints that “a similar test would be made in this village” during their scheduled quarterly conference in October.18 Farmington Bishop John Hess responded that he wished the reform would begin tomorrow.19 Perhaps influenced by Hess’s comment, Grant replied that “the spirit in him said stay . . . and commence the work of reformation.”20 Over the next two days some 445 individuals were rebaptized.21
Undoubtedly satisfied with the results at Farmington, Jedediah continued on to Centerville and Bountiful, intent on rebaptizing Saints in those settlements. Unexpectedly he ran into problems. After a full day of preaching at Centerville, Grant was not satisfied [62] with the response of the people and decided to postpone baptism for a time until the people could prepare themselves by partaking of the sacrament.22 At Bountiful, baptism was postponed indefinitely as the people “were as cold as the ice of the Polar regions,” a condition that Jedediah attributed in part to a sleepy bishop.23
As Grant was finishing up his tour of the northern settlements, John Young began preaching and teaching at settlements south of Salt Lake. Starting at Spanish Fork in Utah County in the last of September, Young and his assigned group of home missionaries held conferences successively at Jordan Mill, Lake City (American Fork), Pleasant Grove, and Union.24 These conferences were even more fervent than those held by Grant and in many cases were reminiscent of Protestant religious revivals which took place earlier in the century.
The conference held at Pleasant Grove during the last of October may serve as a typical example. For two days Young and his companions preached the Saints into a frenzied state, stressing their slovenly ways and lethargic manners. When counselor Duncan McDonald opened one [63] of the meetings with prayer, Patriarch Young remarked that “five such prayers would freeze hell over.”25 The congregation was urged to confess their sins and many did so. One good brother apologized to Brother Farnsworth, a member of the bishopric, for “calling him a damned old Hypocrite.”26 Additional confessional sessions were held to allow all to make amends. In some cases young boys confessed when their parents were reluctant to.
When the collective penitence was deemed satisfactory, the congregation was baptized. Following the baptismal and confirmational services, the congregation again met for further spiritual edification. A Brother Wheeler promised a sister who had been blind fourteen years that she might have her sight restored if she exercised sufficient faith. An Elder Money spoke in tongues, and Counselor McArthur (the same individual whose prayer two days before could have frozen hell over) followed by both speaking and singing in the Adamic language (that language which Adam and his contemporaries spoke and which is considered by Mormons to be pure and enlightened above all other languages). Home missionary Long then interpreted Counselor McArthur’s song, and in a subsequent meeting other brethren spoke and sang in tongues. The meeting was then dismissed amid great rejoicing and Young and accompanying missionaries journeyed on.27 [64]
The meetings conducted by Grant in the north and especially those by Young in the south were characterized by types of religious experiences which were comparatively common during the 1830s when the Saints resided in Ohio, but which were largely absent from the Nauvoo and early Utah experience. Speaking in tongues, prophesying, and seeing visions were a part of early Reformation conferences in 1856, and one wonders if Jedediah was trying to revive old-time Mormonism with its supernatural manifestations, its frequent movings of the spirit, its pietistic orientation.
Certainly there seemed to be little specific direction to initial reform attempts. Grant used general terms such as “live your religion” and “hold to your covenants” while John Young urged the Saints to “set their homes in order” and “make everything straight.” Occasionally there were more specific dictates, such as not arguing over land claims and cleaning up one’s personal dwellings, but these were the exceptions. Nearly all the sermons were geared to exposing the spiritual emptiness of Church members and demonstrating the need for confession and rebaptism. It was hoped that rebaptism, a symbolic act that remitted sin and renewed covenants, would provide a significant fellowshipping experience.
The practice of rebaptism was not unique to the Reformation. Since the 1830s Latter-day Saints had been rebaptized for a variety of reasons.28 Most individuals participated in the ordinance to signify their intent to rededicate themselves to the building up of the [65] kingdom of God. Others did so for the sake of their health, for entry into the United Order, or in preparation for marriage. The practice continued to be commonplace throughout the nineteenth century.29 In all probability the fact that many felt it to be a comparatively painless way to rid one’s self of sins led to the First Presidency’s discouraging the practice in 1897.30
The most widespread practice of the doctrine of rebaptism in the history of the Church occurred during the Reformation. During this period it became a binding directive. Brigham, himself, set the precedent. On October 2, 1856, just after Heber C. Kimball had dedicated the new baptismal font, the First Presidency baptized and confirmed each other.31 Three days later, at the close of the Sunday conference session, Young and Kimball went down to the font and baptized members of their own families.32 Later Apostle Lorenzo Snow joined them and numerous others participated in the rite. On October 6, Apostle Franklin D. Richards, recently returned from the [66] British Isles, baptized many of the elders who had served under him and who likewise had just come back to Zion. Richards also baptized their families.33 Finally, on October 8 and 9, thirty-six ecclesiastical leaders, the majority of them bishops, were rebaptized.34
All lay members were expected to follow the example of ecclesiastical leaders and be rebaptized. To convince them of their need to do so, the presiding brethren continued to scold and threaten the Saints, ever reminding them of their sinful ways. Anyone, regardless of his office or calling, was roundly criticized if he was slack in his duties. Heber C. Kimball rebuked Albert Rockwood “in the presence of the Saints in the Deseret Store for his stupidity and folly.”35 According to Wilford Woodruff, on October 16, Jedediah Grant spoke at the Salt Lake Fourteenth Ward and “took up Bishop Hoagland, his two councillors, then the Teachers, then the ward and all the people in it.” “He took at them,” asserted Woodruff, “with the light of truth and the candle of the Lord and the whole body was searched with a scrutinizing eye and all sins rebuked by the power of God.”36 Brigham Young even referred to Apostle Orson Hyde as “a stink in my nostrils.” Hyde, whose performance as a presiding officer [67] had been disappointing for some time to Young, was deemed “no more fit to stand at the Head of the Quorum of the Twelve than a dog.”37
Predictably, most Saints, harassed and frightened by the continual harangue, started to reform. As Franklin D. Richards noted, the improvement was almost immediate:
About a week before we arrived, a work of reformation had been efficiently started, and we were just in good time to share its cheering effects with the people. As good an evidence of this as I can offer, may be found in the fact, that on Sunday and Monday, at a Conference of the Territory, it required strong efforts of the Presidency and others, to raise between fifty and sixty teams to go and bring in our brethren coming by the handcarts on the plains; whereas, on the last Sunday but one, a few remarks from brother Kimball, to a congregation of this city only, induced one hundred and fourteen to give their names to furnish teams, and one man put down fifteen yoke of cattle. The change in the feelings of the people is indeed wonderful already, and yet it is just begun. Bishops are dropped, and their counsellors, when slothful at their duties, or when ruled by their wives; so are the Teachers, if they do not perform their duties, which are, to know every man and woman in their several districts, and to live their religion themselves. Misdeeds are not only publicly denounced, but the doers and their deeds are named before the public congregations. The arrows of the Almighty are with the Presidency. The terrors of the Almighty are upon the people. The high and the low are all feeling the scorching of the fire that has begun to be kindled in Zion. Already the power of the Holy Ghost has, in some instances, been so great upon them, that they have had to refrain from speaking, for the people have shrunk before them, because of the power of their words, while in other instances, congregations have been dismissed because of their darkness, and their unbelief in the word spoken. Many powers and responsibilities, heretofore retained in the hands of the Presidency, have been handed down to the Bishops. A thorough waking up has commenced that must reach the habitation of every Saint in Utah, and then extend to every Mission and Branch of the Church throughout the earth.38 [68]
Though much good had already been accomplished, Richards’s optimism proved to be premature. It soon became evident that a mass rebaptism of Church members in the valley would not bring about desired reform and that more systematic procedures would have to be adopted to ensure lasting changes. With this in mind, Church leaders on November 9 withdrew the sacrament from all communicants who had not made proper repentance and restitution.39 Cognizant that many were being rebaptized out of fear or pressure, they also emphasized that individuals should not participate in communion unless they were willing to forsake their sins. Early in the Reformation Brigham observed that “many will go into the waters of baptism . . . who are guilty of the most heinous crimes in the sight of both God and Man.” “We want the guilty,” asserted the Mormon leader, “to confess their sins, and repent of all their wickedness before they go into the waters of baptism.”40
Thus, the revivalistic spirit, the hurried confession, the mass baptism, gradually gave way to a less spontaneous, more directed reform. Some weeks would elapse before this more judicious and reasoned spirit would prevail but the steps leading to it are discernible by early November. This new sense of order and direction was brought about by investing local leaders with greater powers, by defining their duties with more precision, and by providing them with lists of [69] specific questions which could quickly point out how far individuals had lapsed from the faith.
Home missionaries became the key reformational organization. They had been organized a year earlier to preach reform to the lethargic Saints, but in the fall of 1856 they became an organization with considerable clout. Those who were chosen to be home missionaries were generally the most capable and devoted young men in the Kingdom. Many of the home missionaries that served during the Reformation had recently returned from overseas missions and Young, upon seeing their spiritual orientation reflected in the October conference addresses, proposed that they “go and strengthen their brethren throughout the Territory of Utah.”41
Before strengthening their brethren, however, the missionaries had to be strengthened themselves. On October 27, they met to be instructed by Jedediah Grant. Grant announced that they would be directed in their work by Wilford Woodruff and Franklin D. Richards of the Twelve and then informed them as to what course ought to be pursued. They were to assume that the people had not heard missionaries before and were told to prepare for battle. They were instructed to “wake up the bishops and all presiding officers, and then the people,” a pattern that became typical during the Reformation. Finally, Grant asked them to find out about the people and know what they were doing.42 On November 3, the missionaries met for further [70] instruction. According to John Powell, Brigham Young locked the doors after the opening song and prayer and announced that he was going “to question the brethren, and . . . charged them in the name of Jesus Christ to answer the truth.” To “those who cover up their sins,” said Brigham, “the curse of God shall be upon them.”43 Though it was a “soul-searching” time, apparently all were deemed worthy.44 The next day the missionaries were assigned their various fields of labor throughout the city, each of the twenty wards being assigned two missionaries.45
The assignment of purging, refining, and certifying leaders and lay members was not a new charge given to the home missionaries. It was simply a more streamlined attempt to revitalize Zion. Actually the other priesthood organizations, somewhat haphazardly, had been instructed to begin the refinement process earlier. In the 1850s there were three priesthood quorums of significance: the high priest and seventies quorums which were part of the higher, or Melchizedek, priesthood, and the teachers quorum, which was a part of the lower priesthood. The high priest quorum was a stake organization, the seventies sort of an at-large organization under the general direction of the First Quorum of Seventy, and the teachers quorum was a local ward organization. All were deemed in need of purification. [71]
The high priest quorum started its refinement program early in October. As a special meeting on the sixth, President John Young, their newly appointed leader, rejoiced that the time had come when the dividing line would be drawn, when the “sinner in Zion shall fear and tremble.”46 Some four weeks later Brigham himself addressed the quorum, describing the evils such as stealing and swearing that abounded in their society and attributing some of it to the high priests:
I’ll vouch there are those before me now in this little assembly who have been guilty of adultery, of swearing, of stealing, of lying, of cheating, of borrowing and not returning & etc. And I want you to find them out and cut them off from this Quorum. I have for years pleaded with the presidents of Quorums to cleans their Quorums. Can I get them to do it? No. . . . And if the High Priests were now to be weighed in the scales, the weight would fall quick I tell you. Oh ye High Priests, first get the spirit of your religion and then live by it every day and every hour and every minute.47
Though some Church leaders felt the high priests were lacking in spiritual fiber, they were better off than the seventies, especially in regard to their leadership. On October 7, Jedediah Grant publicly criticized the First Council of Seventy for their lethargic ways:
I feel that there are some things that grieve me. President Young was asked if it would not be well to send the Presidents of Seventies out thro’ the Territories with the Home Missionaries. He said, No! They would preach the people to sleep and then to hell. Now this shows me that the Presidents of the Seventies are asleep and there is something wrong with them. . . . Here is brother Levi Hancock why he will fiddle-diddle-di fiddle-diddle-do fiddle-diddle-dum and tweedle-deedle-de. He might preach a month and there would be no more Spirit of God in it [72] than there would be in a cabbage leaf. Now if you would preach the people to sleep and to hell you are guilty of some great heinous sins either of omission or commission . . . and you ought to be dropped.48
Grant continued his tirade on Hancock’s fellow seventies, exposing their so-called sins and spiritual lethargy. The Seventies and their Presidents were, concluded Grant, “as dry and dead as . . . old chip[s],” and “need[ed] to wake up and have the Holy Ghost in them.”49
Bishops apparently were also in a spiritual coma. At a special bishops and lesser priesthood meeting on September 30, Grant asked the bishops and their counselors if they attended to their prayers, family and private. He also inquired how many washed themselves once a week in pure water all over. When the majority of those present responded negatively to Grant’s questions, Jedediah asserted himself. The bishops must, said Grant, repent and purify themselves, and then go out and purify the whole city. “If the Bishops do not do this,” warned Jedediah, “they shall be removed from their place, and the Marshall shall receive orders to send Policemen round to wash the Bishops and people and cleanse every house, for the wrath of God burns against us.”50
Bishops, as heads of the Aaronic Priesthood, worked closely with teachers. For some years teachers had served as the liaison between the bishops and lay members of the wards, but, judging from the remarks of some, their efforts in many cases were both irregular [73] and ineffective.51 During the Reformation teachers, like bishops, were made more accountable for their assigned responsibilities.52 Oftentimes high priests and seventies were asked to act as acting teachers if the work load so demanded it.
Home missionaries, bishops, and teachers, then, once purified and refined, carried the brunt of the responsibility in carrying out the Reformation. But still the problem remained of determining exactly what was to be carried out. In other words, the people needed reforming, but in what areas? What specifically were they to do that they had not been doing?
To determine exactly what was expected of Church members, a list of questions was drawn up which contemporary Church leaders called a catechism. The origins of the catechism are hazy, but it appears that its roots can be traced to Grant’s initial reformation journey to the northern settlements. On that occasion Grant asked two or three fundamental questions like, “Are you having both private and family prayers?” and “Are you washing yourself regularly?”53 In September at the special bishops’ meeting he asked bishops these same [74] questions.54 Alarmed when many indicated that their life-styles did not include regular washings, Grant formulated more questions which had to do with cleanliness. Approximately five weeks later the list of questions, probably by this time numbering some twelve or thirteen, was used to weigh the newly-called home missionaries, Apostles, Seventies, bishops and counselors, and teachers.55 Within a few days additional questions were added, the copy was sent to the printer’s, and the printed copies were placed in the hands of home missionaries, bishops, and teachers. By this time there were some twenty-seven questions:
Have you committed murder, by shedding innocent blood, or consenting thereto?
Have you betrayed your brethren or sisters in anything?
Have you committed adultery, by having any connection with a woman that was not your wife or a man that was not your husband?
Have you taken and made use of property not of your own, without the consent of the owner?
Have you cut hay where you had no right to, or turned your animals into another person’s grain or field, without his knowledge and consent?
Have you lied about or maliciously misrepresented any person or thing?
Have you borrowed anything that you have not returned, or paid for?
Have you borne false witness against your neighbor?
Have you taken the name of Deity in vain?
Have you coveted anything not your own?
Have you been intoxicated with strong drink?
Have you found lost property and not returned it to the owner, or used all diligence to do so?
Have you branded an animal that you did not know to be your own?
Have you taken another’s horse or mule from the range and rode it without the owner’s consent?
Have you fulfilled your promises in paying your debts, or run into debt without prospect of paying? [75]
Have you taken water to irrigate with, when it belonged to another person at the time you used it?
Do you pay your tithing promptly?
Do you teach your family the gospel of salvation?
Do you speak against your brethren, or against any principle taught us in the Bible, Book of Mormon, Book of Doctrine and Covenants, Revelations given through Joseph Smith the Prophet and the Presidency of the Church as now organized?
Do you pray in your family night and morning and attend to secret prayer?
Do you wash your body and have your family do so as often as health and cleanliness require and circumstances will permit?
Do you labor six days and rest, or go to the house of worship, on the seventh?
Do you and your family attend Ward meetings?
Do you preside over your household as a servant of God, and is your family subject to you?
Have you labored diligently and earned faithfully the wages paid you by your employers?
Do you oppress the hireling in his wages?
Have you taken up and converted any stray animal to your own use, or in any manner appropriated one to your benefit without accounting therefor to the proper authorities?56
It would appear that the earliest questions were concerned with what exactly individual Saints had done that was wrong. Many of the questions dealt with sins of omission. The broad range of questions appears to have been deliberate, pointing out to even the most diligent of Saints that his life was in need of reforming.
Now that the home missionaries, bishops, and teachers were armed with a questionnaire, they set about to rechannel the spiritual energies of their fellow Saints. The plan was similar throughout the twenty wards in the Salt Lake area. Home missionaries would generally contact the bishop, meet with his particular congregation, and announce that they would be working with the ward for an indefinite [76] period of time to remove the cobwebs of lethargy. Oftentimes the home missionaries would catechize the bishop and his counselors, then the teachers, before starting on the members. Expectedly, there was some variation from ward to ward. Occasionally the home missionaries assigned much of the catechizing responsibility to the teachers while in at least one of the wards the bishop preferred to assume the burden.57 Teachers were asked to contact families on their assigned blocks at least once every two weeks, and report meetings were held two or three times a month to allow teachers and bishops to evaluate the spiritual status of those under their jurisdiction to the home missionaries. Missionaries in turn met regularly with Woodruff and Richards to report on the wards and receive instruction concerning future efforts.58 In early December the bishops began to meet with the missionaries, a move that was probably engendered to unify reform efforts as well as alleviate some of the bishop-missionary authority conflicts which had cropped up.59
From what scanty journal accounts remain, it would appear that most missionaries approached their assigned tasks with zeal. Certainly Richard Ballantyne, called to serve as a missionary in the Salt Lake First Ward, did. During his tenure as a home missionary, Ballantyne kept a detailed diary. It is a candid document and [77] provides insight into the tensions, frustrations, and successes of this era.
In his initial Reformation entry, Ballantyne recorded that the people were “disorderly and filthy and the Bishop disposed to excuse them together with his counselor.”60 By November 13, 1856, progress had been made.
[We] met with the Lesser Priesthood and gave them much instruction. They seemed to rejoice in our teachings and a good spirit prevailed, but Bro. Houston [the recalcitrant counselor] was still rebellious, and wanted to judge us. We reproved him severely and he held his peace. The Bishop and the Teachers felt that he deserved the rebuke and felt to sustain us, for which I feel to praise the name of my God. In giving reproof I was filled with the Spirit of God to make manifest, and the brethren felt to improve upon it. They expressed their willingness to clean up and set the Ward in order.
I told the Bishop that if he and his two wives would improve their son would get well, and would improve in health as they improved in cleaning up and getting the spirit of God. I helped him to this effect, and today I found him nearly well as they had cleaned up and done what was required. This was a testimony to them of the power of God that is with us.61
Soon afterward Ballantyne wrote of Houston’s conversion and noted his (Ballantyne’s) reliance upon the Lord.
[We] had a meeting in the school house . . . The power of God was poured out upon the people. The Bishop’s Counsellor, James Houston, made Confession, and humbled himself. Many spoke of the goodness of God and the blessings they had received in obeying our counsel. One Sister spoke in tongues and I bore testimony that if they continued in well doing and in cleaning up, that they would soon be prepared for the waters of Baptism. I thanked God for His great mercy to us, and for the outpouring of the holy spirit upon the people. May the work of reformation continue until we progress to that condition that the Holy Ghost shall be in us from morning to evening . . . Then shall the [78] Angels of God minister to us, and we shall see as we are seen and know as we are known. It is my mission to know every person in the first ward as though I had made them, which requires the outpouring of the Holy Ghost in such measure as I have not heretofore enjoyed. May I be calm and deliberate that the Holy Ghost may teach me all things, and show me things to come.62
Some two weeks later Ballantyne observed that “the work of reform proceeds but slowly in this ward notwithstanding the great power of God that has been manifested in convincing the people.” “There is still much slackness manifest among them,” he asserted, “though they generally receive our teachings with joy and gladness.”63 A day later Ballantyne told of his experience in asking the catechismal questions:
Today at 10 o’clock I met with the Teachers of the Ward, sixteen in number, to take them through the catachism. They went through tolerably well. They manifested a good pliable feeling, and were blessed. All of them had to Confess their sins, though some were worse than others. Some of them had taken and made use of property not their own, but were willing to restore it and make the Satisfaction required. All had taken the name of the Deity in vain. All had failed to pay their tithing promptly. And in other points some were guilty. None of them Confessed the sins of Adultery or of shedding innocent blood or of being accessory. And I believe the general Confession was true and correct.
There was no lack of confidence in revealing their feelings, though they were not called upon nor allowed to reveal individual acts, except so far as they were public.
The blessings of the Lord rested upon us, and I felt to say that the object of the confession was to save and not to injure the people.64
Though Ballantyne seemed satisfied with the repentant attitude of the teachers, he was “led to suspend all of them from office until they should make restitution.”65 The suspension was lifted less than [79] a week later when it was made known that all “had either made restitution or desired to do so.”66 On this same occasion Ballantyne gave farewell remarks, having been shifted to another ward. He left with good feelings, believing that, while ward members were not ready for rebaptism, they were “enjoying a goodly portion of the Holy Spirit” and manifesting a disposition to reform.67
Ballantyne soon found that his new assignment, the Salt Lake Fifteenth Ward, would prove challenging. However, diligence and reliance on the Spirit saw him through. In December he recorded the following:
We had a meeting last Sabbath evening in the 15th Ward School House. The Spirit of vanity and light-mindedness in the female portion of the assembly would have bound the spirit of the Lord and the testimony we had concerning their sins and backslidings but the Lord helped us in delivering our testimony, though our words seemed to come back to us. We testified that the women did not love the order of plurality of wives and that they ruled the Ward. We said the Ward was in the worst condition of any in this city. Some felt to rebel against this testimony, and so strong was the opposition that we resolved to meet them in small companies where we might have more power.
During the week we accordingly met the people of each block in private houses each day at 10 o’clock. We had power given to us to melt the hearts of the people, and for the time being they manifested that they would serve the Lord, and make restitution to God and their brethren. Many confessed their sins in part, and resolved to work righteousness. We had power given in some of the meetings to tell each one by name of the condition and of their besetting sins, and to reprove them sharply; afterwards we blessed them, and prophesied good concerning them inasmuch as they would truly repent, and do the works of righteousness.68
Ballantyne, like all home missionaries, made extensive use of the catechism. This list of questions included most of what [80] Brigham and other Church leaders were concerned about, and it was regarded as an accurate way to gauge individual righteousness. There were items, however, not found in the catechism, that were areas of concern to Church leaders. Oftentimes these particulars were not given much attention publicly, but they were nonetheless emphasized during the Reformation. In the main they had to do with relationships between husbands and wives.
By September 1856 it is apparent that Brigham was concerned with feminine encroachment in masculine domains. Too many men were dominated, even governed by their wives, an event that was deemed serious enough to have these women dropped from ecclesiastical positions.69 There was too much feminine bickering, too much complaining about their unfortunate lot or their lack of fashionable attire.70 According to Heber C. Kimball the women in some cases were as lifeless as the men, “dull and stupid,” and lacked direction and purpose.71 In short, Church leaders felt the women needed to be reminded of their purpose and role in life.
One role that some Mormon women had difficulty assuming was that of plural marriage. Again, while there were comparatively few public declarations urging Church members to enter into this highest order of marriage, it was made known through home missionaries, [81] bishops, and teachers that any Mormon with spiritual substance would be a polygamist. Realizing that the doctrine would be distasteful to some women, the Brethren stressed that a monogamist, though worthy, would never inherit the highest chambers in heaven. Those coveted places, as the fifth verse of a noted Reformation song made plain, were reserved for the plurally married.
Now sisters, list to what I say
With trials this world is rife,
You can’t expect to miss them all,
Help husband get a wife!
Now, this advice I freely give,
If exalted you would be,
Remember that your husband must
Be blessed with more than thee.
Then, O, let us say,
God bless the wife that strives
And aids her husband all she can
T’ obtain a dozen wives.72
The consequences of this advocacy of polygamy were almost immediate. By December 1856, correspondence sent to Brigham Young included numerous requests from bishops in behalf of individuals within their wards to marry plural wives.73 In most letters the bishop attested to the worthiness of the individuals to assume this role and oftentimes the prospective wife’s father indicated that he approved of the marriage. In nearly all cases Brigham granted permission. [82]
Polygamy, of course, had been practiced by Mormons for many years, but it was never a popular doctrine among either sex. The comparatively positive response of both men and women to the “plural marriage decrees” of the Reformation, then, can be viewed as a valid indicator of just how far Church members were willing to bend in order to please their leaders and thereby increase their level of righteousness. It was also a manifestation of the emotion and turbulence which had prevailed in Zion for some three months. But the ferment and excitement were soon replaced by a calmer, more measured reform spirit. This change was in part due to the death of a noted Reformation leader. On December 1, 1856, Jedediah Grant died. [83]
