Principles

It was Groucho Marx that said “those are my principles and if you don’t like them I have others.” While Groucho was attempting to get a laugh, he brought up the important subject of principle. Joseph Smiths famous quote when ask how he governed so many people was “I teach them correct principle and they govern themselves.” Once we learn and know correct principles, they should determine how we act.

Today correct principles are seldom mentioned in the public forum. It seems that, like many other good things, they are swept under the carpet in a dark closet. I would like to address three of the principles I believe to be correct. First I would like to tackle is the principle of a person's word being his or her bond. 

A bond is an assurance or insurance that if all goes wrong, the bond can be relied upon to right the wrong and save the day. When a person gives his/her word, it should be relied upon as solid and immoveable. In the Book of Mormon this principle is well demonstrated. 

In Alma 44 Moroni offers Zerahemnah a contract that if he and his army would give up their weapons of war and enter into a covenant of peace, then he and his people would be spared death. Zerahemnah replied to Moroni‘s offer this way in verse eight “Behold here are our weapons of war; we will deliver them up unto you, but we will not suffer ourselves to take an oath unto you, which we know we shall break…” Even though he faced death, he would not give his word when he knew it would be broken down the line. The Lamanites were not, what we might call, a good people. They had many faults and evil ways, not the least of which was their desire to destroy the freedom of others.  However, in the principle of keeping their word, they were in the right. How far we have drifted from this principle today?

Too often today someone gives their word with little intention of keeping their contract. When confronted with the breach, they make light of the contract and state other obligations interfered with their performance. This reminds me of the old movie “The Blues Brothers” when Jake is making excuses for why he stood up Carrie Fisher at the alter.  He said “I ran out of gas. I, I had a flat tire. I didn’t have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn’t come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake, a terrible flood, locusts.” In all seriousness people seem to give their word at the drop of a hat and break it just as easy.  Just as serious is the fact that good intentions do not excuse or negate a broken promise. We must make certain that we can actually do what we say we can do. If we have made a previous commitment, we should not make another on top of it. Making a promise to be somewhere or do something is a serious commitment which, if kept, will form a good habit whereas if it is broken, a bad habit will be established. These habits become much more serious when we are making covenants with God. If we keep our word with our fellow men, we are much more likely to keep our word with Heavenly Father.

The next principle is that of obeying the law. Many church leaders, Joseph Smith being the first, have addressed this issue. This is a principle that has with it the companion scripture in Doctrine and Covenants 131: 6 “It is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance.” We can not obey what we do not know.

My understanding of the scriptures is that we are held accountable for what we know to be true. Those who know less are held at a different standard. I believe people who have never heard of keeping the Sabbath day holy are not under the same standard of judgement as those of us who have accepted it as a commandment. Likewise, we must know what the law is and how it applies to us. The basic God given rights should be the governing premise to judge what laws apply and which ones do not. A law professor once stated that “the law was moral”. Protecting rights is moral. It can also be drawn that laws that do not protect rights are immoral. 

Attorney Jerry Salcido, in his article Proposition St8, explains that now days the government has taken the position of doling out rights and has taken the place of God. The government and its courts tell you what rights you have, not God.

There is a glaring example of this in Church history when the Church, in 1890, challenged the United States on its laws restricting religious practices. The Church thought that the 1st Amendment was a strict prohibition against the Congress in making any law concerning a religion. The Supreme Court said, and I paraphrase, that Congress had general and plenary powers over the Territories and the Bill of Rights only apply to the States, not the Territories.  Years later the court reversed itself in another case but the damage was already done to the Church. These examples of government abuse do not alter the fact that we should and must obey the law at all times. We simply need to know who we are, were we habitat, and what laws apply to us. It should be obvious that we can’t learn these things by osmosis.

The last principle needing attention is that of holding fast to our principles even in the face of danger or trial.  In the hymn “Do What is Right” we sing “do what is right let the consequence follow”. If we are true to our correct principles we may run into a government or other people who want us to relinquish our principles and follow the crowd, essentially develop Grocho Marx principles.