Skip navigation.

Proclamation on economy

Update 28 Oct 2008 - It has been pointed out that this posting is inaccurate. Read Orson Scott Card's article about this topic here: Proclamation on the Economy

Most families have the proclamation on the family and the proclamation of the twelve apostles hanging somewhere on their walls. In 1875, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles issued a proclamation on the economy. If it was applicable then, it should be even more applicable today. A part of it was to push the community's self-sustainance with ZCMI (which eventually went directly against the proclamation before it was sold a few years ago).

The proclamation:

The experience of mankind has shown that the people of communities and nations among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, are the least exposed to tyranny and oppression and suffer the least from luxurious habits which beget vice. Under such a system, carefully maintained, there could be no great aggregations of either real or personal property in the hands of a few; especially so while the laws, forbidding the taking of usury or interest for money or property loaned, continued in force.

One of the great evils with which our own nation is menaced at the present time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few individuals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and courageously, and which they bequeathed to us as a priceless legacy, are endangered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few individuals and a few powerful corporations. By its seductive influence results are accomplished which, were it equally distributed, would be impossible under our form of government. It threatens to give shape to the legislation, both state and national, of the entire country. If this evil should not be checked, and measures not taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the poor, the nation is likely to be overtaken by disaster; for, according to history, such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.

Years ago, it was perceived that we Latter-day Saints were open to the same dangers as those which beset the rest of the world. A condition of affairs existed among us, which was favorable to the growth of riches in the hands of a few at the expense of many. A wealthy class was being rapidly formed in our midst whose interests in the course of time, were likely to be diverse from those of the rest of the community. The growth of such a class was dangerous to our union; and, of all people, we stand most in need of union and to have our interests identical...

...the Latter-day Saints were acting in utter disregard of the principles of self-preservation. They were encouraging the growth of evils in their own midst which they condemned as the worst features of the systems from which they had been gathered. Large profits were being consecrated in comparatively few hands, instead of being generally distributed among the people. As a consequence, the community was being rapidly divided into classes, and the hateful and unhappy distinctions to which the possession and lack of wealth give rise were becoming painfully apparent....

Your Brethren,

Brigham Young, George A. Smith, Daniel H. Wells, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Orson Hyde, Orson Pratt, Charles C. Rich, Lorenzo Snow, Erastus Snow, Frankling D. Richards George Q. Cannon, Brigham Young, Jr., Albert Carrington

The full text can be found here.

That's not what he said...

He said we should LIFT OTHERS instead of descending to their level.

captitalsim only works with c

captitalsim only works with competiton and comparison. your argument by analogy doesn't work.

So in my trying to lift other

So in my trying to lift others, am I bad because I am not equal with someone. Am I going to hell because I am not equal to all spiritually. Do you really think that we are all equally spiritual in heaven?

and yours does?

and yours does?


Why while lifting should i stagnate my own growth? it should be continually growing while lifting others. thus there will always be inequality


I don't know where you pull these implications from but it's obviously not from anything anyone has said. I have to admit you have a very "active" imagination.

Since you are above us all...

Please lift me oh rhydogg, I'm so far beneath you.


"But it is not given that one man should possess that which is above another,
wherefore the world lieth in sin." - D&C 49:10

Salvation only works in a community. If you are the only one who goes to 'heaven' then you are pretty much in hell because you will be alone. Joseph Smith once said that if Mormons go to hell, then that'll be fine because we'll go to hell and make a heaven out of it.

"Do you really think that we are all equally spiritual in heaven?"

That is the goal.

Try taking odd your capitalis

Try taking off your capitalist goggles. It's blurring your vision.

you are still struggling to m

you are still struggling to make a good point about this equality thing. help me understand.

now you are not even talking

now you are not even talking about the subject and trying to recover by these cool little burns. Well done.

silly assumptions

when did i say i was above you? never. but if you confess such a situation i will be happy to help you.

yes, that is the goal, but is

yes, that is the goal, but is that the way it is. NO.

Why? i have 20/20 vision wit

Why? i have 20/20 vision with them.

that scripture has to do with

that scripture has to do with things temporally, and in a sense that you do not understand. I admit that neither do i, but we are all spiritually inequal. we are eternally progressing, that is the goal. it wont matter who is ahead and behind, what matters is that we are progressing. but there is still inequality.

We better just stop trying th

We better just stop trying then.


I didn't post the "subject" that you are talking about. I was simply pointing out the ridiculously pompous attitude of rhydogg.

You are missing the point

You are missing the point

am i pompous because you cann

am i pompous because you cannot respond to my comment and you are frustrated with yourself? i think so.

don't call him angry and cont

don't call him angry and contentious because you haven't talked about he subject once, and have only tried to make rhydogg look like a moron. Just stick to the subject, not the person.

Do you have a point besides b

Do you have a point besides being the right-wing police force?

Do you have a point besides t

Do you have a point besides the left-wing police force?


so is the left right? tell me this, when the history of our church has the leadership been of the left wing? Never...the lord calls those who will lead this church in the right direction, no pun intended.

Moderate Left = Joseph Smith,

Moderate Left = Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, David O McKay, Howard W. Hunter, James E. Talmage, Samuel the Lamanite, King Benjamin, Jesus, John the Baptist, Jeremiah, Orson Pratt, Hugh Nibley (pseudo-leader), Alma (both elder and younger), Moroni
Extreme Right = Harold B Lee, Ezra T. Benson, Joseph Fielding Smith, Boyd K Packer, my mission president,

I'm getting really tired, so that's all I can think of off the top of my head. It'd be interesting to see where they all fit on the political compass

When have I EVER acted as a l

When have I EVER acted as a left-wing police force?

When have I EVER acted as a r

When have I EVER acted as a right-wing police force?


explain to me how they are left wing? because of one line of one scripture of their entire book?