In Mormonism, blood atonement is a controversial doctrine attributed to some early Latter-day Saint leaders, most notably Brigham Young, that there are certain sins such as murder to which the Atonement of Jesus does not apply, and that forgiveness requires that they "have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins".

While criticized by many Mormons and eventually repudiated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ("LDS Church"; see also Mormon) in 1978, this doctrine still has some adherents, and it is sometimes advanced by conservative Mormons to justify capital punishment. It has been cited as a reason why Utah was one of the last three U.S. states to continue the practice of execution by firing squad (for those who chose it over lethal injection), although in 2004 Utah governor Olene Walker signed a bill outlawing execution by firing squad, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints officially indicated no objection to this change. Provisions allow, however, for four individuals who have chosen death by firing squad as their form of execution.

Some of Brigham Young's early critics suggested that this doctrine was responsible for inciting the murders of some early Latter-day Saint apostates, dissenters, and critics. While some murders of early Latter-day Saint apostates, dissenters, and critics did occur, it is generally considered there is no conclusive evidence linking such murders to blood atonement doctrine.

The blood atonement doctrine is often confused with the unrelated so-called "blood oaths" that were part of the Latter-day Saint Endowment ceremony prior to 1990 (see below).

The Doctrine as Taught by Brigham Young

In Mormonism, the predominant Biblical view is that Jesus will atone for the sins of all who repent, except for those who have committed "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit". In addition, some Latter Day Saints believe that a condition of repentance is to restore what was lost (similar to the Unification Church concept of indemnity). On September 21, 1856, Brigham Young took that idea further, and stated:

"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 might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course." Journal of Discourses 4:43.

Later, in February 8, 1857, Young taught:

"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, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world ... Now take a person in this congregation who has knowledge with regard to being saved in the kingdom of our God and our Father and being exalted, one who knows and understands the principles of eternal life, and sees the beauty and excellency of the eternities before him compared with the vain and foolish things of the world, and suppose that he is taken in a gross fault, that he has committed a sin he knows will deprive him of the exaltation he desires, and that he cannot attain to it without the shedding of his blood, and also knows that by having his blood shed he will atone for that sin, and be saved and exalted with the Gods, is there a man or woman in this house but would say, `shed my blood that I might be saved and exalted with the Gods?' All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers or sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood?" (Journal of Discourses 4:219).

Controversy

Critics of the doctrine argue that Young's statements encouraged Mormons to murder apostates. However, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has repeatedly stated that it has never attempted to pass judgment on, or execute, an apostate. There were early reports of a few deaths by the above mentioned methods for apostates or known ‘ruffians’ by members of the church. The rumors of official LDS church connection have not be substantiated or tied to the church by recent historians, although critics of the church show convincing parallels between blood atonement and some killings. Apologists have countered that such parallels are explained as unofficial and unsanctioned examples of individuals applying blood atonement as they saw fit. Most historians both within and outside of the church are awaiting new documentation or primary sources to determine who was responsible for these deaths and have largely left the issue open-ended.

One of the examples cited by critics of the church is a set of murders in Springville, Utah of individuals who, according to historical documents and court records, were "very questionable characters." Judge Elias Smith stated in regard to the case: "We have carefully examined all the evidence furnished by a remarkably accurate stenographic reporter, and can only conclude that evidence before the court goes to show' that Durfee, Potter and two of the Parrishes got into a row about matters best, if not only, known to themselves, and for that Potter and two Parrishes were killed." -- Records published in the Deseret News, April 6th, 1859.

Some critics (including R.C. Evans, a second counselor in the RLDS, now Community of Christ church, in what some consider an attempt to discredit Brigham Young as Joseph Smith’s successor) of the LDS church during the late 1800s and early 1900s drew a comparison between these teachings and certain statements that members of the church would make in temples. These members would describe in detail various ways they would rather die, including slitting their necks, than break their covenants with God. This was done by the covenant-maker to show their understanding of the gravity of making covenants with God. Most modern historians, however, do not tie the two teachings together and credit Joseph Smith with the doctrine’s origin.

Modern Reactions to the Doctrine

Like several doctrines formulated by Brigham Young (see, e.g., Adam-God theory), the blood atonement doctrine has been widely criticized by Latter Day Saints. However, the doctrine has also garnered many prominent adherents in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Church historian and later President Joseph Fielding Smith taught the following about blood atonement:

"Man may commit certain grievous sins—according to his light and knowledge—that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ. If then he would be saved, he must make sacrifice of his Own life to atone—so far as in his power lies—for that sin, for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail.... Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their own blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf." (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp. 133-138.)

In addition, the late Apostle Bruce R. McConkie agreed with Brigham Young and Joseph Fielding Smith that "under certain circumstances there are some serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men must then have their own blood shed to atone for their sins." (Mormon Doctrine at 92).

In addition, in his first edition of the book Mormon Doctrine, McConkie opined that because blood atonement requires the "spilling of blood upon the ground", execution by firing squad was superior to execution by hanging, which would not suffice to create a blood atonement. See "Hanging", Mormon Doctrine. Upon pressure from the Church, this doctrine was deleted from McConkie's second edition of the book. However, this doctrine is one of the reasons why Utah was one of the last three U.S. states to continue the practice of execution by firing squad. This was discontinued on March 15, 2004. While the decision for this law was being made, the Church was consulted and stated that they had nothing against the discontinuation of this practice.

However, in 1978, Bruce R. McConkie, acting under the direction of Spencer W. Kimball and the First Presidency, repudiated the blood atonement doctrine:

"You note that I and President Joseph Fielding Smith and some of our early church leaders have said and written about this doctrine and you asked if the doctrine of blood atonement is an official doctrine of the Church today.

"If by blood atonement is meant the atoning sacrifice of Christ, the answer is Yes. If by blood atonement is meant the shedding of the blood of men to atone in some way for their own sins, the answer is No." (Letter from Bruce R. McConkie to Thomas B. McAffee, October 18, 1978.)

In McConkie's letter, he attempted to reconcile this repudiation with his earlier statements and those of Brigham Young by suggesting that the doctrine could, in fact, be valid, but only in a pure theocracy. He stated:

"There simply is no such thing among us as a doctrine of blood atonement that grants a remission of sins or confers any other benefit upon a person because his own blood is shed for sins. Let me say categorically and unequivocally that this doctrine can only operate in a day when there is no separation of Church and State and when the power to take life is vested in the ruling theocracy as was the case in the day of Moses." (Letter from Bruce R. McConkie to Thomas B. McAffee, October 18, 1978.)

Thus, deriving from McConkie's statements, one popular Mormon apologetic explanation is that the doctrine of blood atonement never truly existed, and that Brigham Young's statement were theoretical musings about what the doctrine would be if the Church were a theocracy, told to highlight the seriousness of murder and apostasy to the church members in the western frontier, where vigilante justice was often carried out. While a person might have their own blood shed to atone for their sins in a theocracy, the argument goes, there is no such option where there is separation between church and state. This argument has the advantage that it repudiates the blood atonement doctrine, yet it does not necessitate the conclusion that Brigham Young was wrong in his original statements in 1856 and 1857.

Some modern Mormon apologetics also compare Young’s statement to the statement of Jesus Christ in the New Testament that it would be better for those who offend children to have a millstone hung around their neck and be thrown into the depths of the sea than to be born.

Thus, despite McConkie's 1978 repudiation of the doctrine on behalf of the First Presidency, there remains some confusion as to the status of the doctrine in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While rejected by many Latter-day Saints outright, the doctrine that one might atone for their sins by the spilling of their blood continues to survive among some Utah Mormons. See Peggy Fletcher Stack, "Concept of Blood Atonement Survives in Utah Despite Repudiation", Salt Lake Tribune D1 (November 5, 1995); see also Richard J. Cummings, "Quintessential Mormonism: Literal-Mindedness As a Way of Life", 15(4) Dialogue 93 (1982).

References

• Lowell M. Snow, "Blood Atonement", 1 Encyclopedia of Mormonism (MacMillan 1992).
• Bruce R. McConkie "Blood Atonement Doctrine", Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City, 1966, 2d ed.).
• Charles W. Penrose, Blood Atonement, As Taught by Leading Elders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City, 1884).
• Joseph Fielding Smith, "The Doctrine of Blood Atonement", 1 Answers to Gospel Questions 180-91 (Salt Lake City, 1957).

Related articles

• Capital punishment
• Execution by firing squad
• Brigham Young