Doctrinal foundation of plural marriage |
|
Introduction of plural marriage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plural marriage in Utah |
|
End of plural marriage |
|
Did Brigham Young and Joseph Smith say that polygamists were allowed to go beyond normal bounds of social interaction?
Joseph’s point is clear—men, like Brigham, who have reached a certain degree of faithfulness may be asked to do even more difficult things
It is claimed that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young admitted that the practice of polygamy meant they were "free to go beyond the normal 'bounds'" and "the normal rules governing social interaction had not applied to" Joseph.[7]
"Sometimes Joseph phrased the matter [of polygamy] in terms of being free to go beyond normal ‘bounds,’" G. D. Smith announces. As evidence, he presents Brigham Young’s account of being taught plural marriage. Brigham worried out loud that he might marry a second wife but then apostatize, leaving his plural family "worse off." In Brigham’s account, Joseph replied, "‘There are certain bounds set to men, and if a man is faithful and pure to these bounds, God will take him out of the world; if he sees him falter, he will take him to himself. You are past these bounds, Brigham, and you have this consolation.’ But Brigham indicated that he never had any fears of not being saved" (p. 364).[8]
Joseph’s point is clear—men, like Brigham, who have reached a certain degree of faithfulness may be asked to do even more difficult things. They need not fear that they will lose their eternal reward if they falter in these Abrahamic tasks, for God "will take him to himself" before they reap damnation. But G. D. Smith seems to be reading "bounds" in the sense "a limit by which any excursion is restrained; the limit of indulgence or desire."[9] This is why he conceives of it as being "free to go beyond normal bounds"—that is, beyond normal limits or restrictions. This is clearly not Brigham’s meaning. Bounds should be understood as "the line which comprehends the whole of any given object or space. It differs from boundary."[10] These bounds are not a limit beyond which one may not go—they encircle and enclose all that one must do. Before polygamy, Brigham had already striven to be faithful to the whole of his duty to God. Having done so, he would not be damned. But he was now being asked to fulfill a task not asked of most. The circumference of his bounds—or duties—was enlarged.
Brigham was thus past the bounds because he had done all that God required and more, not because he would violate moral limits
Unfortunately for G. D. Smith’s reading, polygamy cannot be "the bounds" referred to since Joseph told Brigham that he was already (before practicing polygamy) "past these bounds"—that is, the duties required of all men by God—and thus "you have this consolation." Brigham was thus past the bounds because he had done all that God required and more, not because he would violate moral limits. He had crossed the finish line; he had not gone "out of bounds" or offside.
G. D. Smith argues that Brigham gave "a telling concession that the normal rules governing social interaction had not applied to [Joseph] Smith as he set about instigating polygamy." But Brigham is not conceding anything like this. His "bounds" are not limits beyond which one may not go, but duties that one must fulfill before anything else might be asked. The bounds are divine duties, not social rules. G. D. Smith caps his argument by citing Brigham’s belief that Joseph "passed certain bounds . . . before certain revelations were given" (p. 365). Thus G. D. Smith wants to paint Brigham as admitting that polygamy required one to transgress social or moral boundaries.
Brigham was clearly making the same claim about Joseph that Joseph made about Brigham. In Brigham’s view, Joseph had not been challenged by the command to practice plural marriage until he had proved sufficiently faithful to guarantee his salvation. For its first practitioners, the challenge of plural marriage was such that a merciful God would not, in Brigham’s mind, require it of those whose salvation would be at risk in the event of their failure.
Brigham sees the matter as a command that he does not wish to fulfill—he would prefer to be dead—but that God confirms as his will
Immediately preceding the language quoted by G. D. Smith, Brigham tells an apostle that
the spiritual wife doctrine came upon me while abroad, in such a manner that I never forget. . . . Joseph said to me, ‘I command you to go and get another wife.’ I felt as if the grave was better for me than anything, but I was filled with the Holy Ghost, so that my wife and brother Kimball’s wife would upbraid me for lightness in those days. I could jump up and hollow [holler?]. My blood was as clear as West India rum, and my flesh was clear.[11]
In this passage, Brigham sees the matter as a command that he does not wish to fulfill—he would prefer to be dead—but that God confirms as his will. His bounds are duties to fulfill, not limits that he is now free to exceed.
Further evidence: Heber C. Kimball
That this reading is correct, and that G. D. Smith is in error, is confirmed by Heber C. Kimball’s similar doubts and reassurance: "Finally [Heber] was so tried that he went to Joseph and told him how he felt—that he was fearful if he took such a step [to practice plural marriage] he could not stand, but would be overcome. The Prophet, full of sympathy for him, went and inquired of the Lord. His answer was, ‘Tell him to go and do as he has been commanded, and if I see that there is any danger of his apostatizing, I will take him to myself.’"[12]
Kimball’s bounds—the commandments given him—had increased. But having already proved his faithfulness, he would not be damned for failure. Kimball apparently clung to this promise and would soon write to his wife that "my prayer is day by day that God would take me to Himself rather than I should be left to sin against Him, or betray my dear brethren who have been true to me and to God the Eternal Father."[13]
The Kimball data is absent from Smith’s analysis, but one wonders if it would have helped. To accept it would require a modification of the thesis that polygamy was driven by lust and a violation of barriers, and that Joseph knew it.
Source(s) of the criticism
Did Brigham Young boast about his ability to get more wives even though he was married to 50-60 women?
The references do not support the claims
As is often the case, the references do not support the claims, and the worst possible interpretation is placed on what are likely innocent remarks, or remarks intended to teach a spiritual point.
The Tanners cite multiple sources for this claim. They are examined below.
Journal of Discousces 5:210
Brigham is here discussing Thomas B. Marsh's return to the Church, and it is inaccurate to describe him as "boasting."
In conversing with brother Marsh, I find that he is about the same Thomas that he always was—full of anecdotes and chit-chat. He could hardly converse for ten minutes without telling an anecdote. His voice and style of conversation are familiar to me.
He has told you that he is an old man. Do you think that I am an old man? I could prove to this congre[ga]tion that I am young; for I could find more girls who would choose me for a husband than can any of the young men.
Brother Thomas considers himself very aged and infirm, and you can see that he is, brethren and sisters. What is the cause of it? He left the Gospel of salvation. What do you think the difference is between his age and mine? One year and seven months to a day; and he is one year, seven months, and fourteen days older than brother Heber C. Kimball.
"Mormonism" keeps men and women young and handsome; and when they are full of the Spirit of God, there are none of them but what will have a glow upon their countenances; and that is what makes you and me young; for the Spirit of God is with us and within us.
When brother Thomas thought of returning to the Church, the plurality of wives troubled him a good deal. Look at him. Do you think it need to? I do not; for I doubt whether he could get one wife. Why it should have troubled an infirm old man like him is not for me to say. He read brother Orson Pratt's work upon that subject, and discovered that the doctrine was beautiful, consistent, and exalting, and that the kingdom could not be perfect without it. Neither can it be perfect without a great many things that the people do not yet understand, though they will come in the own due time of the Lord.
See Quote mining—Journal of Discourses 5:210 to see how this quote was mined.
Journal of Discourses 8:178
Brother Cannon remarked that people wondered how many wives and children I had. He may inform them that I shall have wives and children by the million, and glory, and riches, and power, and dominion, and kingdom after kingdom, and ..
See Quote mining—Journal of Discourses 8:178 to see how this quote was mined.
Source(s) of the criticism
Why did Brigham Young say that women "have no right to meddle in the affairs of the Kingdom of God"?
Brigham's intent has been distorted
Brigham Young said women "have no right to meddle in the affairs of the Kingdom of God". This is used to portray Brigham as authoritarian and sexist. However, Brigham's intent has been distorted, and those who cite this have used presentism to bias the reader against him.
Sally Denton uses this quote, and uses D. Michael Quinn, as her source. Unfortunately, Denton omits the context which Quinn's volume provides:
- [women] have no right to meddle in the affairs of the Kingdom of God[—]outside the pale of this they have a right to meddle because many of them are more sagacious & shrewd & more competent [than men] to attend to things of financial affairs. they never can hold the keys of the Priesthood apart from their husbands. [14]
Brigham then continued, "When I want Sisters or the Wives of the members of the church to get up Relief Society I will summon them to my aid but until that time let them stay at home & if you see females huddling together veto the concern." [15]
Brigham's statement about "meddling," then, in no way reflects on women's competence or skills—he insists that many know better than men. Brigham's point is that women have no right to priesthood government. This statement was probably precipitated by Emma Smith's use of her role as head of the Relief Society to resist Joseph's teachings, especially plural marriage. [16] Brigham is signaling that those without priesthood power may not dictate to ordained priesthood leaders about priesthood matters.
The author relies on presentism, since Brigham and virtually all of his contemporaries (men and women) likely had attitudes about women's roles which would strike us as "sexist"
Though the quote seems offensive and exclusionary, we need to remember the context of the time. Attitudes toward women during that time, and even 100 years later, were far from our current attitudes. It is unreasonable to expect people living in a different time to fit 21st century perspectives. Brigham was, however, quite liberal for his day—he encouraged women to get an education: for example, he even assigned several to travel to the eastern United States to get training as physicians.
Source(s) of the criticism
Summary: Notes on BRIGHAM YOUNG's Unpublished Sermon of 8 October 1861.
Summary: After Joseph Smith's death, Brigham Young and Joseph's widow Emma came into conflict for a number of reasons.
Summary: Some critics have claimed that the Church has tried to hide Brigham Young's polygamy in a modern lesson manual—despite polygamy being the one thing for which Brigham is certainly known, in and out of the Church.
(Click here for full article)
Notes
- ↑ Gerald Causse, "The Spiritual Foundations of Church Financial Self-Reliance," 'Ensign, July 2018.
- ↑ Russell M. Nelson, “Opening the Heavens for Help,” April 2020 general conference.
- ↑ "Chapter 36: Receiving the Ordinances and Blessings of the Temple," in Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith (2011).
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 124:26–27, 41.
- ↑ Scott D. Whiting, “Temple Standard,” October 2012 general conference.
- ↑ See General Handbook, "27.2 The Endowment."
- ↑ George D. Smith, Nauvoo Polygamy: "...but we called it celestial marriage" (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2008), 364–365. ( Index of claims , (Detailed book review))
- ↑ Citing Brigham Young Manuscript History, 16 February 1849, Church Archives. The quoted material is on pp. 19–20.
- ↑ Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (New York: S. Converse, 1828), s.v. "bound."
- ↑ Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (New York: S. Converse, 1828), s.v. "bound." (Compare article for "boundary.")
- ↑ Church Historian’s Office, History of the Church, 1839–circa 1882, DVD 2, call number CR 100 102, vol. 19 (19 February 1849), 19.
- ↑ Whitney, Life of Heber C. Kimball, 325-326.
- ↑ Heber C. Kimball to Vilate Kimball, "My Dear Vilate" (23 October 1842), cited in Augusta Joyce Crocheron (author and complier), Representative Women of Deseret, a book of biographical sketches to accompany the picture bearing the same title (Salt Lake City: J. C. Graham & Co., 1884). (accessed 2 December 2008).
- ↑ D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power (Signature Books, 1994), 650.
- ↑ Seventies Record, 9 March 1845, holograph, Church Archives (cited in Beecher, see below).
- ↑ Maureen Ursenbach Beecher, "Women in Winter Quarters," Sunstone no. (Issue #8:4/15) (July 1983), note 37. off-site
Source(s) of the criticism
Jump to details:
Question: What are the worthiness requirements to enter a Mormon temple?
The possession of a "temple recommend" is an indication that the church member has passed a series of interviews in which worthiness to enter the temple is determined
The possession of a "temple recommend" is an indication that the church member has passed a series of interviews in which worthiness to enter the temple is determined. Having a "temple recommend" does not make a member worthy. It is possible to have a "temple recommend" and yet not be worthy to participate in the ordinances of the temple. The recommend is an identification card which is carried by the member, and which expires after two years, and which is then renewed by the member as the member desires. Cards are used because of the number of members in the Church worldwide, and the number of temples. The process to get a recommend involves two interviews (not one)-one with your local leader (a bishop or branch president) and the second with your regional leader (a Stake President or Mission President or their counselors).
Temple recommend questions
Both of these interviews consist of a series of questions, and depending on how the questions are answered, a recommend indicating temple worthiness is issued. The questions are as follows (the questions themselves, as provided here are in both instances taken from a 'recommend book' which contains blank recommends, and also instructions for giving the interview):[1]
- Do you have faith in and a testimony of God the Eternal Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost?
- Do you have a testimony of the Atonement of Christ and of His role as Savior and Redeemer?
- Do you have a testimony of the restoration of the gospel in these the latter days?
- Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?
- Do you live the law of chastity?
- Is there anything in your conduct relating to members of your family that is not in harmony with the teachings of the Church?
- Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
- Do you strive to keep the covenants you have made, to attend your sacrament and other meetings, and to keep your life in harmony with the laws and commandments of the gospel?
- Are you honest in your dealings with your fellowmen?
- Are you a full-tithe payer?
- Do your keep the Word of Wisdom?
- Do you have financial or other obligations to a former spouse or children? If yes, are you current in meeting those obligations?
- If you have previously received your temple endowment: 1) Do you keep the covenants that you made in the temple? 2) Do you wear the garment both night and day as instructed in the endowment and in accordance with the covenant you made in the temple?
- Have there been any sins or misdeeds in your life that should have been resolved with priesthood authorities but have not been?
- Do you consider yourself worthy to enter the Lord's house and participate in temple ordinances?
Temple interview questions are essentially similar to baptismal interview questions
Compare these questions with the following set of questions-used to determine a convert's readiness for baptism.[2] (If the candidate for baptism does not respond affirmatively to these questions, baptism may be postponed until the individual is better prepared to accept and live the Gospel of Jesus Christ.):
- Have you prayed about the gospel? Have your prayers been answered?
- Do you accept Jesus Christ as the literal Son of God?
- What are your reasons for knowing (or believing) that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God?
- Will you sustain the President of the Church as a prophet, seer, and revelator and as the Lord's representative on earth?
- Are you now living each of the Ten Commandments?
- What is your understanding of the law of tithing? Will you live this law?
- What is your understanding of the Word of Wisdom? Will you live this law by abstaining from tea, coffee, alcohol, tobacco [or other harmful drugs]?
- What is your understanding of the law of chastity? Will you obey this law?
- Have you repented of all past transgressions?
The bar for entrance into the temple is simply that one continues to keep the commitments that they made in baptism
Effectively, the questions amount to the same standard. The bar for entrance into the temple is simply that one continues to keep the commitments that they made in baptism, and that were clearly explained to them. As the authors point out, one of the qualifications necessary to enter the temple is "an agreement to obey the Word of Wisdom." When was this agreement made? When that individual was baptized into the LDS Church. What I want to demonstrate by this is that temple worship requires nothing more than that a person is actively living the gospel of Jesus Christ and fulfilling the covenants he made to God at baptism.
It is also relevant to note that for the most part, these requirements are based on the member's understanding of the gospel, and not a pre-determined list of rules regarding compliance to these questions. Taking tithing as an example, a good summary of the Church's position on this teaching is found in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:
By revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith, the Lord stated that members should pay "one-tenth of all their interest [increase] annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever." (D&C 119꞉4) Present Church policy specifically states that no one in the Church has any authority to interpret this revelation for another person (See Financial Clerk's Handbook). This prohibition applies to everyone, including Stake Presidents and Bishops. If a local Church leader instructs you how to calculate your tithing, then he is in violation of this policy. It is up to the agency of each individual person to determine what constitutes a fair interpretation of the revelation.[3]
In other words, even in complying with these requirements, the compliance largely hinges on a members understanding of the gospel principle. It is for this reason that some of the questions overlap, so that there is no question as to the requirements in specific instances-staying up to date on child support being one of those areas where it was decided that being more specific was necessary. Further, it is implied in this process that the person who goes unworthily into the temple is doing so both willfully and with a personal recognizance of their lack of worthiness. While God does not 'strike them down', they certainly do so to their own condemnation.
Multiple accounts of the First Vision/William Smith said First Vision was an "angel"
Note: From 1897 to 1933, the volumes begin each November. For example, October 1900 is volume 3 number 12, while November 1900 is volume 4 number 1. Beginning in 1934, the volume begins each January.
1897–1899, volumes 1–3
1897
1898
- January 1898, Vol. 1, No. 3
- February 1898, Vol. 1, No. 4
- March 1898, Vol. 1, No. 5
- April 1898, Vol. 1, No. 6
- May 1898, Vol. 1, No. 7
- June 1898, Vol. 1, No. 8
- July 1898, Vol. 1, No. 9
- August 1898, Vol. 1, No. 10
- September 1898, Vol. 1, No. 11
- October 1898, Vol. 1, No. 12
- November 1898, Vol. 2, No. 1
- December 1898, Vol. 2, No. 2
1899
- January 1899, Vol. 2, No. 3
- February 1899, Vol. 2, No. 4
- March 1899, Vol. 2, No. 5
- April 1899, Vol. 2, No. 6
- May 1899, Vol. 2, No. 7
- June 1899, Vol. 2, No. 8
- July 1899, Vol. 2, No. 9
- August 1899, Vol. 2, No. 10
- September 1899, Vol. 2, No. 11
- October 1899, Vol. 2, No. 12
- November 1899, Vol. 3, No. 1
- December 1899, Vol. 3, No. 2
1900–1909, volumes 3–13
1900
- January 1900, Vol. 3, No. 3
- February 1900, Vol. 3, No. 4
- March 1900, Vol. 3, No. 5
- April 1900, Vol. 3, No. 6
- May 1900, Vol. 3, No. 7
- June 1900, Vol. 3, No. 8
- July 1900, Vol. 3, No. 9
- August 1900, Vol. 3, No. 10
- September 1900, Vol. 3, No. 11
- October 1900, Vol. 3, No. 12
- November 1900, Vol. 4, No. 1
- December 1900, Vol. 4, No. 2
1901
- January 1901, Vol. 4, No. 3
- February 1901, Vol. 4, No. 4
- March 1901, Vol. 4, No. 5
- April 1901, Vol. 4, No. 6
- May 1901, Vol. 4, No. 7
- June 1901, Vol. 4, No. 8
- July 1901, Vol. 4, No. 9
- August 1901, Vol. 4, No. 10
- September 1901, Vol. 4, No. 11
- October 1901, Vol. 4, No. 12
- November 1901, Vol. 5, No. 1
- December 1901, Vol. 5, No. 2
1902
- January 1902, Vol. 5, No. 3
- February 1902, Vol. 5, No. 4
- March 1902, Vol. 5, No. 5
- April 1902, Vol. 5, No. 6
- May 1902, Vol. 5, No. 7
- June 1902, Vol. 5, No. 8
- July 1902, Vol. 5, No. 9
- August 1902, Vol. 5, No. 10
- September 1902, Vol. 5, No. 11
- October 1902, Vol. 5, No. 12
- November 1902, Vol. 6, No. 1
- December 1902, Vol. 6, No. 2
1903
- January 1903, Vol. 6, No. 3
- February 1903, Vol. 6, No. 4
- March 1903, Vol. 6, No. 5
- April 1903, Vol. 6, No. 6
- May 1903, Vol. 6, No. 7
- June 1903, Vol. 6, No. 8
- July 1903, Vol. 6, No. 9
- August 1903, Vol. 6, No. 10
- September 1903, Vol. 6, No. 11
- October 1903, Vol. 6, No. 12
- November 1903, Vol. 7, No. 1
- December 1903, Vol. 7, No. 2
1904
- January 1904, Vol. 7, No. 3
- February 1904, Vol. 7, No. 4
- March 1904, Vol. 7, No. 5
- April 1904, Vol. 7, No. 6
- May 1904, Vol. 7, No. 7
- June 1904, Vol. 7, No. 8
- July 1904, Vol. 7, No. 9
- August 1904, Vol. 7, No. 10
- September 1904, Vol. 7, No. 11
- October 1904, Vol. 7, No. 12
- November 1904, Vol. 8, No. 1
- December 1904, Vol. 8, No. 2
1905
- January 1905, Vol. 8, No. 3
- February 1905, Vol. 8, No. 4
- March 1905, Vol. 8, No. 5
- April 1905, Vol. 8, No. 6
- May 1905, Vol. 8, No. 7
- June 1905, Vol. 8, No. 8
- July 1905, Vol. 8, No. 9
- August 1905, Vol. 8, No. 10
- September 1905, Vol. 8, No. 11
- October 1905, Vol. 8, No. 12
- November 1905, Vol. 9, No. 1
- December 1905, Vol. 9, No. 2
1906
- January 1906, Vol. 9, No. 3
- February 1906, Vol. 9, No. 4
- March 1906, Vol. 9, No. 5
- April 1906, Vol. 9, No. 6
- May 1906, Vol. 9, No. 7
- June 1906, Vol. 9, No. 8
- July 1906, Vol. 9, No. 9
- August 1906, Vol. 9, No. 10
- September 1906, Vol. 9, No. 11
- October 1906, Vol. 9, No. 12
- November 1906, Vol. 10, No. 1
- December 1906, Vol. 10, No. 2
1907
- January 1907, Vol. 10, No. 3
- February 1907, Vol. 10, No. 4
- March 1907, Vol. 10, No. 5
- April 1907, Vol. 10, No. 6
- May 1907, Vol. 10, No. 7
- June 1907, Vol. 10, No. 8
- July 1907, Vol. 10, No. 9
- August 1907, Vol. 10, No. 10
- September 1907, Vol. 10, No. 11
- October 1907, Vol. 10, No. 12
- November 1907, Vol. 11, No. 1
- December 1907, Vol. 11, No. 2
1908
- January 1908, Vol. 11, No. 3
- February 1908, Vol. 11, No. 4
- March 1908, Vol. 11, No. 5
- April 1908, Vol. 11, No. 6
- May 1908, Vol. 11, No. 7
- June 1908, Vol. 11, No. 8
- July 1908, Vol. 11, No. 9
- August 1908, Vol. 11, No. 10
- September 1908, Vol. 11, No. 11
- October 1908, Vol. 11, No. 12
- November 1908, Vol. 12, No. 1
- December 1908, Vol. 12, No. 2
1909
- January 1909, Vol. 12, No. 3
- February 1909, Vol. 12, No. 4
- March 1909, Vol. 12, No. 5
- April 1909, Vol. 12, No. 6
- May 1909, Vol. 12, No. 7
- June 1909, Vol. 12, No. 8
- July 1909, Vol. 12, No. 9
- August 1909, Vol. 12, No. 10
- September 1909, Vol. 12, No. 11
- October 1909, Vol. 12, No. 12
- November 1909, Vol. 13, No. 1
- December 1909, Vol. 13, No. 2
1910–1919, volumes 13–23
1910
- January 1910, Vol. 13, No. 3
- February 1910, Vol. 13, No. 4
- March 1910, Vol. 13, No. 5
- April 1910, Vol. 13, No. 6
- May 1910, Vol. 13, No. 7
- June 1910, Vol. 13, No. 8
- July 1910, Vol. 13, No. 9
- August 1910, Vol. 13, No. 10
- September 1910, Vol. 13, No. 11
- October 1910, Vol. 13, No. 12
- November 1910, Vol. 14, No. 1
- December 1910, Vol. 14, No. 2
1911
- January 1911, Vol. 14, No. 3
- February 1911, Vol. 14, No. 4
- March 1911, Vol. 14, No. 5
- April 1911, Vol. 14, No. 6
- May 1911, Vol. 14, No. 7
- June 1911, Vol. 14, No. 8
- July 1911, Vol. 14, No. 9
- August 1911, Vol. 14, No. 10
- September 1911, Vol. 14, No. 11
- October 1911, Vol. 14, No. 12
- November 1911, Vol. 15, No. 1
- December 1911, Vol. 15, No. 2
1912
- January 1912, Vol. 15, No. 3
- February 1912, Vol. 15, No. 4
- March 1912, Vol. 15, No. 5
- April 1912, Vol. 15, No. 6
- May 1912, Vol. 15, No. 7
- June 1912, Vol. 15, No. 8
- July 1912, Vol. 15, No. 9
- August 1912, Vol. 15, No. 10
- September 1912, Vol. 15, No. 11
- October 1912, Vol. 15, No. 12
- November 1912, Vol. 16, No. 1
- December 1912, Vol. 16, No. 2
1913
- January 1913, Vol. 16, No. 3
- February 1913, Vol. 16, No. 4
- March 1913, Vol. 16, No. 5
- April 1913, Vol. 16, No. 6
- May 1913, Vol. 16, No. 7
- June 1913, Vol. 16, No. 8
- July 1913, Vol. 16, No. 9
- August 1913, Vol. 16, No. 10
- September 1913, Vol. 16, No. 11
- October 1913, Vol. 16, No. 12
- November 1913, Vol. 17, No. 1
- December 1913, Vol. 17, No. 2
1914
- January 1914, Vol. 17, No. 3
- February 1914, Vol. 17, No. 4
- March 1914, Vol. 17, No. 5
- April 1914, Vol. 17, No. 6
- May 1914, Vol. 17, No. 7
- June 1914, Vol. 17, No. 8
- July 1914, Vol. 17, No. 9
- August 1914, Vol. 17, No. 10
- September 1914, Vol. 17, No. 11
- October 1914, Vol. 17, No. 12
- November 1914, Vol. 18, No. 1
- December 1914, Vol. 18, No. 2
1915
- January 1915, Vol. 18, No. 3
- February 1915, Vol. 18, No. 4
- March 1915, Vol. 18, No. 5
- April 1915, Vol. 18, No. 6
- May 1915, Vol. 18, No. 7
- June 1915, Vol. 18, No. 8
- July 1915, Vol. 18, No. 9
- August 1915, Vol. 18, No. 10
- September 1915, Vol. 18, No. 11
- October 1915, Vol. 18, No. 12
- November 1915, Vol. 19, No. 1
- December 1915, Vol. 19, No. 2
1916
- January 1916, Vol. 19, No. 3
- February 1916, Vol. 19, No. 4
- March 1916, Vol. 19, No. 5
- April 1916, Vol. 19, No. 6
- May 1916, Vol. 19, No. 7
- June 1916, Vol. 19, No. 8
- July 1916, Vol. 19, No. 9
- August 1916, Vol. 19, No. 10
- September 1916, Vol. 19, No. 11
- October 1916, Vol. 19, No. 12
- November 1916, Vol. 20, No. 1
- December 1916, Vol. 20, No. 2
1917
- January 1917, Vol. 20, No. 3
- February 1917, Vol. 20, No. 4
- March 1917, Vol. 20, No. 5
- April 1917, Vol. 20, No. 6
- May 1917, Vol. 20, No. 7
- June 1917, Vol. 20, No. 8
- July 1917, Vol. 20, No. 9
- August 1917, Vol. 20, No. 10
- September 1917, Vol. 20, No. 11
- October 1917, Vol. 20, No. 12
- November 1917, Vol. 21, No. 1
- December 1917, Vol. 21, No. 2
1918
- January 1918, Vol. 21, No. 3
- February 1918, Vol. 21, No. 4
- March 1918, Vol. 21, No. 5
- April 1918, Vol. 21, No. 6
- May 1918, Vol. 21, No. 7
- June 1918, Vol. 21, No. 8
- July 1918, Vol. 21, No. 9
- August 1918, Vol. 21, No. 10
- September 1918, Vol. 21, No. 11
- October 1918, Vol. 21, No. 12
- November 1918, Vol. 22, No. 1
- December 1918, Vol. 22, No. 2
1919
- January 1919, Vol. 22, No. 3
- February 1919, Vol. 22, No. 4
- March 1919, Vol. 22, No. 5
- April 1919, Vol. 22, No. 6
- May 1919, Vol. 22, No. 7
- June 1919, Vol. 22, No. 8
- July 1919, Vol. 22, No. 9
- August 1919, Vol. 22, No. 10
- September 1919, Vol. 22, No. 11
- October 1919, Vol. 22, No. 12
- November 1919, Vol. 23, No. 1
- December 1919, Vol. 23, No. 2
1920–1929, volumes 23–33
1920
- January 1920, Vol. 23, No. 3
- February 1920, Vol. 23, No. 4
- March 1920, Vol. 23, No. 5
- April 1920, Vol. 23, No. 6
- May 1920, Vol. 23, No. 7
- June 1920, Vol. 23, No. 8
- July 1920, Vol. 23, No. 9
- August 1920, Vol. 23, No. 10
- September 1920, Vol. 23, No. 11
- October 1920, Vol. 23, No. 12
- November 1920, Vol. 24, No. 1
- December 1920, Vol. 24, No. 2
1921
- January 1921, Vol. 24, No. 3
- February 1921, Vol. 24, No. 4
- March 1921, Vol. 24, No. 5
- April 1921, Vol. 24, No. 6
- May 1921, Vol. 24, No. 7
- June 1921, Vol. 24, No. 8
- July 1921, Vol. 24, No. 9
- August 1921, Vol. 24, No. 10
- September 1921, Vol. 24, No. 11
- October 1921, Vol. 24, No. 12
- November 1921, Vol. 25, No. 1
- December 1921, Vol. 25, No. 2
1922
- January 1922, Vol. 25, No. 3
- February 1922, Vol. 25, No. 4
- March 1922, Vol. 25, No. 5
- April 1922, Vol. 25, No. 6
- May 1922, Vol. 25, No. 7
- June 1922, Vol. 25, No. 8
- July 1922, Vol. 25, No. 9
- August 1922, Vol. 25, No. 10
- September 1922, Vol. 25, No. 11
- October 1922, Vol. 25, No. 12
- November 1922, Vol. 26, No. 1
- December 1922, Vol. 26, No. 2
1923
- January 1923, Vol. 26, No. 3
- February 1923, Vol. 26, No. 4
- March 1923, Vol. 26, No. 5
- April 1923, Vol. 26, No. 6
- May 1923, Vol. 26, No. 7
- June 1923, Vol. 26, No. 8
- July 1923, Vol. 26, No. 9
- August 1923, Vol. 26, No. 10
- September 1923, Vol. 26, No. 11
- October 1923, Vol. 26, No. 12
- November 1923, Vol. 27, No. 1
- December 1923, Vol. 27, No. 2
1924
- January 1924, Vol. 27, No. 3
- February 1924, Vol. 27, No. 4
- March 1924, Vol. 27, No. 5
- April 1924, Vol. 27, No. 6
- May 1924, Vol. 27, No. 7
- June 1924, Vol. 27, No. 8
- July 1924, Vol. 27, No. 9
- August 1924, Vol. 27, No. 10
- September 1924, Vol. 27, No. 11
- October 1924, Vol. 27, No. 12
- November 1924, Vol. 28, No. 1
- December 1924, Vol. 28, No. 2
1925
- January 1925, Vol. 28, No. 3
- February 1925, Vol. 28, No. 4
- March 1925, Vol. 28, No. 5
- April 1925, Vol. 28, No. 6
- May 1925, Vol. 28, No. 7
- June 1925, Vol. 28, No. 8
- July 1925, Vol. 28, No. 9
- August 1925, Vol. 28, No. 10
- September 1925, Vol. 28, No. 11
- October 1925, Vol. 28, No. 12
- November 1925, Vol. 29, No. 1
- December 1925, Vol. 29, No. 2
1926
- January 1926, Vol. 29, No. 3
- February 1926, Vol. 29, No. 4
- March 1926, Vol. 29, No. 5
- April 1926, Vol. 29, No. 6
- May 1926, Vol. 29, No. 7
- June 1926, Vol. 29, No. 8
- July 1926, Vol. 29, No. 9
- August 1926, Vol. 29, No. 10
- September 1926, Vol. 29, No. 11
- October 1926, Vol. 29, No. 12
- November 1926, Vol. 30, No. 1
- December 1926, Vol. 30, No. 2
1927
- January 1927, Vol. 30, No. 3
- February 1927, Vol. 30, No. 4
- March 1927, Vol. 30, No. 5
- April 1927, Vol. 30, No. 6
- May 1927, Vol. 30, No. 7
- June 1927, Vol. 30, No. 8
- July 1927, Vol. 30, No. 9
- August 1927, Vol. 30, No. 10
- September 1927, Vol. 30, No. 11
- October 1927, Vol. 30, No. 12
- November 1927, Vol. 31, No. 1
- December 1927, Vol. 31, No. 2
1928
- January 1928, Vol. 31, No. 3
- February 1928, Vol. 31, No. 4
- March 1928, Vol. 31, No. 5
- April 1928, Vol. 31, No. 6
- May 1928, Vol. 31, No. 7
- June 1928, Vol. 31, No. 8
- July 1928, Vol. 31, No. 9
- August 1928, Vol. 31, No. 10
- September 1928, Vol. 31, No. 11
- October 1928, Vol. 31, No. 12
- November 1928, Vol. 32, No. 1
- December 1928, Vol. 32, No. 2
1929
- January 1929, Vol. 32, No. 3
- February 1929, Vol. 32, No. 4
- March 1929, Vol. 32, No. 5
- April 1929, Vol. 32, No. 6
- May 1929, Vol. 32, No. 7
- June 1929, Vol. 32, No. 8
- July 1929, Vol. 32, No. 9
- August 1929, Vol. 32, No. 10
- September 1929, Vol. 32, No. 11
- October 1929, Vol. 32, No. 12
- November 1929, Vol. 33, No. 1
- December 1929, Vol. 33, No. 2
1930–1939, volumes 33–42
1930
- January 1930, Vol. 33, No. 3
- February 1930, Vol. 33, No. 4
- March 1930, Vol. 33, No. 5
- April 1930, Vol. 33, No. 6
- May 1930, Vol. 33, No. 7
- June 1930, Vol. 33, No. 8
- July 1930, Vol. 33, No. 9
- August 1930, Vol. 33, No. 10
- September 1930, Vol. 33, No. 11
- October 1930, Vol. 33, No. 12
- November 1930, Vol. 34, No. 1
- December 1930, Vol. 34, No. 2
1931
- January 1931, Vol. 34, No. 3
- February 1931, Vol. 34, No. 4
- March 1931, Vol. 34, No. 5
- April 1931, Vol. 34, No. 6
- May 1931, Vol. 34, No. 7
- June 1931, Vol. 34, No. 8
- July 1931, Vol. 34, No. 9
- August 1931, Vol. 34, No. 10
- September 1931, Vol. 34, No. 11
- October 1931, Vol. 34, No. 12
- November 1931, Vol. 35, No. 1
- December 1931, Vol. 35, No. 2
1932
- January 1932, Vol. 35, No. 3
- February 1932, Vol. 35, No. 4
- March 1932, Vol. 35, No. 5
- April 1932, Vol. 35, No. 6
- May 1932, Vol. 35, No. 7
- June 1932, Vol. 35, No. 8
- July 1932, Vol. 35, No. 9
- August 1932, Vol. 35, No. 10
- September 1932, Vol. 35, No. 11
- October 1932, Vol. 35, No. 12
- November 1932, Vol. 36, No. 1
- December 1932, Vol. 36, No. 2
1933
- January 1933, Vol. 36, No. 3
- February 1933, Vol. 36, No. 4
- March 1933, Vol. 36, No. 5
- April 1933, Vol. 36, No. 6
- May 1933, Vol. 36, No. 7
- June 1933, Vol. 36, No. 8
- July 1933, Vol. 36, No. 9
- August 1933, Vol. 36, No. 10
- September 1933, Vol. 36, No. 11
- October 1933, Vol. 36, No. 12
- November 1933, Vol. 36, No. 13
- December 1933, Vol. 36, No. 14
1934
- January 1934, Vol. 37, No. 1
- February 1934, Vol. 37, No. 2
- March 1934, Vol. 37, No. 3
- April 1934, Vol. 37, No. 4
- May 1934, Vol. 37, No. 5
- June 1934, Vol. 37, No. 6
- July 1934, Vol. 37, No. 7
- August 1934, Vol. 37, No. 8
- September 1934, Vol. 37, No. 9
- October 1934, Vol. 37, No. 10
- November 1934, Vol. 37, No. 11
- December 1934, Vol. 37, No. 12
1935
- January 1935, Vol. 38, No. 1
- February 1935, Vol. 38, No. 2
- March 1935, Vol. 38, No. 3
- April 1935, Vol. 38, No. 4
- May 1935, Vol. 38, No. 5
- June 1935, Vol. 38, No. 6
- July 1935, Vol. 38, No. 7
- August 1935, Vol. 38, No. 8
- September 1935, Vol. 38, No. 9
- October 1935, Vol. 38, No. 10
- November 1935, Vol. 38, No. 11
- December 1935, Vol. 38, No. 12
1936
- January 1936, Vol. 39, No. 1
- February 1936, Vol. 39, No. 2
- March 1936, Vol. 39, No. 3
- April 1936, Vol. 39, No. 4
- May 1936, Vol. 39, No. 5
- June 1936, Vol. 39, No. 6
- July 1936, Vol. 39, No. 7
- August 1936, Vol. 39, No. 8
- September 1936, Vol. 39, No. 9
- October 1936, Vol. 39, No. 10
- November 1936, Vol. 39, No. 11
- December 1936, Vol. 39, No. 12
1937
- January 1937, Vol. 40, No. 1
- February 1937, Vol. 40, No. 2
- March 1937, Vol. 40, No. 3
- April 1937, Vol. 40, No. 4
- May 1937, Vol. 40, No. 5
- June 1937, Vol. 40, No. 6
- July 1937, Vol. 40, No. 7
- August 1937, Vol. 40, No. 8
- September 1937, Vol. 40, No. 9
- October 1937, Vol. 40, No. 10
- November 1937, Vol. 40, No. 11
- December 1937, Vol. 40, No. 12
1938
- January 1938, Vol. 41, No. 1
- February 1938, Vol. 41, No. 2
- March 1938, Vol. 41, No. 3
- April 1938, Vol. 41, No. 4
- May 1938, Vol. 41, No. 5
- June 1938, Vol. 41, No. 6
- July 1938, Vol. 41, No. 7
- August 1938, Vol. 41, No. 8
- September 1938, Vol. 41, No. 9
- October 1938, Vol. 41, No. 10
- November 1938, Vol. 41, No. 11
- December 1938, Vol. 41, No. 12
1939
- January 1939, Vol. 42, No. 1
- February 1939, Vol. 42, No. 2
- March 1939, Vol. 42, No. 3
- April 1939, Vol. 42, No. 4
- May 1939, Vol. 42, No. 5
- June 1939, Vol. 42, No. 6
- July 1939, Vol. 42, No. 7
- August 1939, Vol. 42, No. 8
- September 1939, Vol. 42, No. 9
- October 1939, Vol. 42, No. 10
- November 1939, Vol. 42, No. 11
- December 1939, Vol. 42, No. 12
1940–1949, volumes 43–52
1940
- January 1940, Vol. 43, No. 1
- February 1940, Vol. 43, No. 2
- March 1940, Vol. 43, No. 3
- April 1940, Vol. 43, No. 4
- May 1940, Vol. 43, No. 5
- June 1940, Vol. 43, No. 6
- July 1940, Vol. 43, No. 7
- August 1940, Vol. 43, No. 8
- September 1940, Vol. 43, No. 9
- October 1940, Vol. 43, No. 10
- November 1940, Vol. 43, No. 11
- December 1940, Vol. 43, No. 12
1941
- January 1941, Vol. 44, No. 1
- February 1941, Vol. 44, No. 2
- March 1941, Vol. 44, No. 3
- April 1941, Vol. 44, No. 4
- May 1941, Vol. 44, No. 5
- June 1941, Vol. 44, No. 6
- July 1941, Vol. 44, No. 7
- August 1941, Vol. 44, No. 8
- September 1941, Vol. 44, No. 9
- October 1941, Vol. 44, No. 10
- November 1941, Vol. 44, No. 11
- December 1941, Vol. 44, No. 12
1942
- January 1942, Vol. 45, No. 1
- February 1942, Vol. 45, No. 2
- March 1942, Vol. 45, No. 3
- April 1942, Vol. 45, No. 4
- May 1942, Vol. 45, No. 5
- June 1942, Vol. 45, No. 6
- July 1942, Vol. 45, No. 7
- August 1942, Vol. 45, No. 8
- September 1942, Vol. 45, No. 9
- October 1942, Vol. 45, No. 10
- November 1942, Vol. 45, No. 11
- December 1942, Vol. 45, No. 12
1943
- January 1943, Vol. 46, No. 1
- February 1943, Vol. 46, No. 2
- March 1943, Vol. 46, No. 3
- April 1943, Vol. 46, No. 4
- May 1943, Vol. 46, No. 5
- June 1943, Vol. 46, No. 6
- July 1943, Vol. 46, No. 7
- August 1943, Vol. 46, No. 8
- September 1943, Vol. 46, No. 9
- October 1943, Vol. 46, No. 10
- November 1943, Vol. 46, No. 11
- December 1943, Vol. 46, No. 12
1944
- January 1944, Vol. 47, No. 1
- February 1944, Vol. 47, No. 2
- March 1944, Vol. 47, No. 3
- April 1944, Vol. 47, No. 4
- May 1944, Vol. 47, No. 5
- June 1944, Vol. 47, No. 6
- July 1944, Vol. 47, No. 7
- August 1944, Vol. 47, No. 8
- September 1944, Vol. 47, No. 9
- October 1944, Vol. 47, No. 10
- November 1944, Vol. 47, No. 11
- December 1944, Vol. 47, No. 12
1945
- January 1945, Vol. 48, No. 1
- February 1945, Vol. 48, No. 2
- March 1945, Vol. 48, No. 3
- April 1945, Vol. 48, No. 4
- May 1945, Vol. 48, No. 5
- June 1945, Vol. 48, No. 6
- July 1945, Vol. 48, No. 7
- August 1945, Vol. 48, No. 8
- September 1945, Vol. 48, No. 9
- October 1945, Vol. 48, No. 10
- November 1945, Vol. 48, No. 11
- December 1945, Vol. 48, No. 12
1946
- January 1946, Vol. 49, No. 1
- February 1946, Vol. 49, No. 2
- March 1946, Vol. 49, No. 3
- April 1946, Vol. 49, No. 4
- May 1946, Vol. 49, No. 5
- June 1946, Vol. 49, No. 6
- July 1946, Vol. 49, No. 7
- August 1946, Vol. 49, No. 8
- September 1946, Vol. 49, No. 9
- October 1946, Vol. 49, No. 10
- November 1946, Vol. 49, No. 11
- December 1946, Vol. 49, No. 12
1947
- January 1947, Vol. 50, No. 1
- February 1947, Vol. 50, No. 2
- March 1947, Vol. 50, No. 3
- April 1947, Vol. 50, No. 4
- May 1947, Vol. 50, No. 5
- June 1947, Vol. 50, No. 6
- July 1947, Vol. 50, No. 7
- August 1947, Vol. 50, No. 8
- September 1947, Vol. 50, No. 9
- October 1947, Vol. 50, No. 10
- November 1947, Vol. 50, No. 11
- December 1947, Vol. 50, No. 12
1948
- January 1948, Vol. 51, No. 1
- February 1948, Vol. 51, No. 2
- March 1948, Vol. 51, No. 3
- April 1948, Vol. 51, No. 4
- May 1948, Vol. 51, No. 5
- June 1948, Vol. 51, No. 6
- July 1948, Vol. 51, No. 7
- August 1948, Vol. 51, No. 8
- September 1948, Vol. 51, No. 9
- October 1948, Vol. 51, No. 10
- November 1948, Vol. 51, No. 11
- December 1948, Vol. 51, No. 12
1949
- January 1949, Vol. 52, No. 1
- February 1949, Vol. 52, No. 2
- March 1949, Vol. 52, No. 3
- April 1949, Vol. 52, No. 4
- May 1949, Vol. 52, No. 5
- June 1949, Vol. 52, No. 6
- July 1949, Vol. 52, No. 7
- August 1949, Vol. 52, No. 8
- September 1949, Vol. 52, No. 9
- October 1949, Vol. 52, No. 10
- November 1949, Vol. 52, No. 11
- December 1949, Vol. 52, No. 12
1950–1959, volumes 53–62
1950
- January 1950, Vol. 53, No. 1
- February 1950, Vol. 53, No. 2
- March 1950, Vol. 53, No. 3
- April 1950, Vol. 53, No. 4
- May 1950, Vol. 53, No. 5
- June 1950, Vol. 53, No. 6
- July 1950, Vol. 53, No. 7
- August 1950, Vol. 53, No. 8
- September 1950, Vol. 53, No. 9
- October 1950, Vol. 53, No. 10
- November 1950, Vol. 53, No. 11
- December 1950, Vol. 53, No. 12
1951
- January 1951, Vol. 54, No. 1
- February 1951, Vol. 54, No. 2
- March 1951, Vol. 54, No. 3
- April 1951, Vol. 54, No. 4
- May 1951, Vol. 54, No. 5
- June 1951, Vol. 54, No. 6
- July 1951, Vol. 54, No. 7
- August 1951, Vol. 54, No. 8
- September 1951, Vol. 54, No. 9
- October 1951, Vol. 54, No. 10
- November 1951, Vol. 54, No. 11
- December 1951, Vol. 54, No. 12
1952
- January 1952, Vol. 55, No. 1
- February 1952, Vol. 55, No. 2
- March 1952, Vol. 55, No. 3
- April 1952, Vol. 55, No. 4
- May 1952, Vol. 55, No. 5
- June 1952, Vol. 55, No. 6
- July 1952, Vol. 55, No. 7
- August 1952, Vol. 55, No. 8
- September 1952, Vol. 55, No. 9
- October 1952, Vol. 55, No. 10
- November 1952, Vol. 55, No. 11
- December 1952, Vol. 55, No. 12
1953
- January 1953, Vol. 56, No. 1
- February 1953, Vol. 56, No. 2
- March 1953, Vol. 56, No. 3
- April 1953, Vol. 56, No. 4
- May 1953, Vol. 56, No. 5
- June 1953, Vol. 56, No. 6
- July 1953, Vol. 56, No. 7
- August 1953, Vol. 56, No. 8
- September 1953, Vol. 56, No. 9
- October 1953, Vol. 56, No. 10
- November 1953, Vol. 56, No. 11
- December 1953, Vol. 56, No. 12
1954
- January 1954, Vol. 57, No. 1
- February 1954, Vol. 57, No. 2
- March 1954, Vol. 57, No. 3
- April 1954, Vol. 57, No. 4
- May 1954, Vol. 57, No. 5
- June 1954, Vol. 57, No. 6
- July 1954, Vol. 57, No. 7
- August 1954, Vol. 57, No. 8
- September 1954, Vol. 57, No. 9
- October 1954, Vol. 57, No. 10
- November 1954, Vol. 57, No. 11
- December 1954, Vol. 57, No. 12
1955
- January 1955, Vol. 58, No. 1
- February 1955, Vol. 58, No. 2
- March 1955, Vol. 58, No. 3
- April 1955, Vol. 58, No. 4
- May 1955, Vol. 58, No. 5
- June 1955, Vol. 58, No. 6
- July 1955, Vol. 58, No. 7
- August 1955, Vol. 58, No. 8
- September 1955, Vol. 58, No. 9
- October 1955, Vol. 58, No. 10
- November 1955, Vol. 58, No. 11
- December 1955, Vol. 58, No. 12
1956
- January 1956, Vol. 59, No. 1
- February 1956, Vol. 59, No. 2
- March 1956, Vol. 59, No. 3
- April 1956, Vol. 59, No. 4
- May 1956, Vol. 59, No. 5
- June 1956, Vol. 59, No. 6
- July 1956, Vol. 59, No. 7
- August 1956, Vol. 59, No. 8
- September 1956, Vol. 59, No. 9
- October 1956, Vol. 59, No. 10
- November 1956, Vol. 59, No. 11
- December 1956, Vol. 59, No. 12
1957
- January 1957, Vol. 60, No. 1
- February 1957, Vol. 60, No. 2
- March 1957, Vol. 60, No. 3
- April 1957, Vol. 60, No. 4
- May 1957, Vol. 60, No. 5
- June 1957, Vol. 60, No. 6
- July 1957, Vol. 60, No. 7
- August 1957, Vol. 60, No. 8
- September 1957, Vol. 60, No. 9
- October 1957, Vol. 60, No. 10
- November 1957, Vol. 60, No. 11
- December 1957, Vol. 60, No. 12
1958
- January 1958, Vol. 61, No. 1
- February 1958, Vol. 61, No. 2
- March 1958, Vol. 61, No. 3
- April 1958, Vol. 61, No. 4
- May 1958, Vol. 61, No. 5
- June 1958, Vol. 61, No. 6
- July 1958, Vol. 61, No. 7
- August 1958, Vol. 61, No. 8
- September 1958, Vol. 61, No. 9
- October 1958, Vol. 61, No. 10
- November 1958, Vol. 61, No. 11
- December 1958, Vol. 61, No. 12
1959
- January 1959, Vol. 62, No. 1
- February 1959, Vol. 62, No. 2
- March 1959, Vol. 62, No. 3
- April 1959, Vol. 62, No. 4
- May 1959, Vol. 62, No. 5
- June 1959, Vol. 62, No. 6
- July 1959, Vol. 62, No. 7
- August 1959, Vol. 62, No. 8
- September 1959, Vol. 62, No. 9
- October 1959, Vol. 62, No. 10
- November 1959, Vol. 62, No. 11
- December 1959, Vol. 62, No. 12
1960–1970, volumes 63–73
1960
- January 1960, Vol. 63, No. 1
- February 1960, Vol. 63, No. 2
- March 1960, Vol. 63, No. 3
- April 1960, Vol. 63, No. 4
- May 1960, Vol. 63, No. 5
- June 1960, Vol. 63, No. 6
- July 1960, Vol. 63, No. 7
- August 1960, Vol. 63, No. 8
- September 1960, Vol. 63, No. 9
- October 1960, Vol. 63, No. 10
- November 1960, Vol. 63, No. 11
- December 1960, Vol. 63, No. 12
1961
- January 1961, Vol. 64, No. 1
- February 1961, Vol. 64, No. 2
- March 1961, Vol. 64, No. 3
- April 1961, Vol. 64, No. 4
- May 1961, Vol. 64, No. 5
- June 1961, Vol. 64, No. 6
- July 1961, Vol. 64, No. 7
- August 1961, Vol. 64, No. 8
- September 1961, Vol. 64, No. 9
- October 1961, Vol. 64, No. 10
- November 1961, Vol. 64, No. 11
- December 1961, Vol. 64, No. 12
1962
- January 1962, Vol. 65, No. 1
- February 1962, Vol. 65, No. 2
- March 1962, Vol. 65, No. 3
- April 1962, Vol. 65, No. 4
- May 1962, Vol. 65, No. 5
- June 1962, Vol. 65, No. 6
- July 1962, Vol. 65, No. 7
- August 1962, Vol. 65, No. 8
- September 1962, Vol. 65, No. 9
- October 1962, Vol. 65, No. 10
- November 1962, Vol. 65, No. 11
- December 1962, Vol. 65, No. 12
1963
- January 1963, Vol. 66, No. 1
- February 1963, Vol. 66, No. 2
- March 1963, Vol. 66, No. 3
- April 1963, Vol. 66, No. 4
- May 1963, Vol. 66, No. 5
- June 1963, Vol. 66, No. 6
- July 1963, Vol. 66, No. 7
- August 1963, Vol. 66, No. 8
- September 1963, Vol. 66, No. 9
- October 1963, Vol. 66, No. 10
- November 1963, Vol. 66, No. 11
- December 1963, Vol. 66, No. 12
1964
- January 1964, Vol. 67, No. 1
- February 1964, Vol. 67, No. 2
- March 1964, Vol. 67, No. 3
- April 1964, Vol. 67, No. 4
- May 1964, Vol. 67, No. 5
- June 1964, Vol. 67, No. 6
- July 1964, Vol. 67, No. 7
- August 1964, Vol. 67, No. 8
- September 1964, Vol. 67, No. 9
- October 1964, Vol. 67, No. 10
- November 1964, Vol. 67, No. 11
- December 1964, Vol. 67, No. 12
1965
- January 1965, Vol. 68, No. 1
- February 1965, Vol. 68, No. 2
- March 1965, Vol. 68, No. 3
- April 1965, Vol. 68, No. 4
- May 1965, Vol. 68, No. 5
- June 1965, Vol. 68, No. 6
- July 1965, Vol. 68, No. 7
- August 1965, Vol. 68, No. 8
- September 1965, Vol. 68, No. 9
- October 1965, Vol. 68, No. 10
- November 1965, Vol. 68, No. 11
- December 1965, Vol. 68, No. 12
1966
- January 1966, Vol. 69, No. 1
- February 1966, Vol. 69, No. 2
- March 1966, Vol. 69, No. 3
- April 1966, Vol. 69, No. 4
- May 1966, Vol. 69, No. 5
- June 1966, Vol. 69, No. 6
- July 1966, Vol. 69, No. 7
- August 1966, Vol. 69, No. 8
- September 1966, Vol. 69, No. 9
- October 1966, Vol. 69, No. 10
- November 1966, Vol. 69, No. 11
- December 1966, Vol. 69, No. 12
1967
- January 1967, Vol. 70, No. 1
- February 1967, Vol. 70, No. 2
- March 1967, Vol. 70, No. 3
- April 1967, Vol. 70, No. 4
- May 1967, Vol. 70, No. 5
- June 1967, Vol. 70, No. 6
- July 1967, Vol. 70, No. 7
- August 1967, Vol. 70, No. 8
- September 1967, Vol. 70, No. 9
- October 1967, Vol. 70, No. 10
- November 1967, Vol. 70, No. 11
- December 1967, Vol. 70, No. 12
1968
- January 1968, Vol. 71, No. 1
- February 1968, Vol. 71, No. 2
- March 1968, Vol. 71, No. 3
- April 1968, Vol. 71, No. 4
- May 1968, Vol. 71, No. 5
- June 1968, Vol. 71, No. 6
- July 1968, Vol. 71, No. 7
- August 1968, Vol. 71, No. 8
- September 1968, Vol. 71, No. 9
- October 1968, Vol. 71, No. 10
- November 1968, Vol. 71, No. 11
- December 1968, Vol. 71, No. 12
1969
- January 1969, Vol. 72, No. 1
- February 1969, Vol. 72, No. 2
- March 1969, Vol. 72, No. 3
- April 1969, Vol. 72, No. 4
- May 1969, Vol. 72, No. 5
- June 1969, Vol. 72, No. 6
- July 1969, Vol. 72, No. 7
- August 1969, Vol. 72, No. 8
- September 1969, Vol. 72, No. 9
- October 1969, Vol. 72, No. 10
- November 1969, Vol. 72, No. 11
- December 1969, Vol. 72, No. 12
1970
- January 1970, Vol. 73, No. 1
- February 1970, Vol. 73, No. 2
- March 1970, Vol. 73, No. 3
- April 1970, Vol. 73, No. 4
- May 1970, Vol. 73, No. 5
- June 1970, Vol. 73, No. 6
- July 1970, Vol. 73, No. 7
- August 1970, Vol. 73, No. 8
- September 1970, Vol. 73, No. 9
- October 1970, Vol. 73, No. 10
- November 1970, Vol. 73, No. 11
- December 1970, Vol. 73, No. 12
- REDIRECT Prevalence of plural marriage in Utah/Further Reading
Question: Should there be only one temple?
Through Joseph Smith, the Lord directed the construction of many buildings besides temples
One critic of the Church claims that "Joseph Smith only built one building. He completed the Kirtland temple. He got the Nauvoo temple started, but Joseph Smith only built one building."[4]:30, and that there should not be more than a single temple: I will briefly mention there will need for a temple to be built at some point. Not yet and not more than one. But there will be a need for one.[4]:4
This claim, which is made by Denver Snuffer, is false. The Doctrine and Covenants commands that consecrated Church funds be used for a variety of purposes:
Therefore, the residue [of the funds] shall be kept in my storehouse, to administer to the poor and the needy, as shall be appointed by the high council of the church, and the bishop and his council;
And for the purpose of purchasing lands for the public benefit of the church, and building houses of worship, and building up of the New Jerusalem which is hereafter to be revealed...(D&C 42꞉34-35, italics added)
Through Joseph, the Lord directed the construction of many buildings besides temples:
- A house in Kirtland for himself[5]
- A house in Kirtland for Sidney Rigdon[6]
- "a house...for the work of the printing of the translation of my scriptures, and all things whatsoever I shall command you."[7]
- The Nauvoo House (D&C 128꞉55–75).
Snuffer's history is simply wrong, and he makes false claims based upon his false history.
Notes
- ↑ [citation needed]
- ↑ [citation needed]
- ↑ Howard D. Swainston, "Tithing," in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 4 vols., edited by Daniel H. Ludlow, (New York, Macmillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1481.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Denver Snuffer, "Preserving The Restoration," Lecture 10, Mesa, Arizona (9 September 2014). https://www.scribd.com/doc/239760895/10-Phoenix-Transcript-Preserving-the-Restoration
- ↑ "it is meet that my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., should have a house built, in which to live and translate.(D&C 41꞉7).
- ↑ "it is meet that my servant Sidney Rigdon should live as seemeth him good, inasmuch as he keepeth my commandments" (D&C 41꞉8).
- ↑ the second lot on the south shall be dedicated unto me for the building of a house unto me, for the work of the printing of the translation of my scriptures, and all things whatsoever I shall command you. And it shall be fifty–five by sixty–five feet in the width thereof and the length thereof, in the inner court; and there shall be a lower and a higher court. And this house shall be wholly dedicated unto the Lord from the foundation thereof, for the work of the printing, in all things whatsoever I shall command you, to be holy, undefiled, according to the pattern in all things as it shall be given unto you (D&C 94꞉10-12).