Origin of the 'Reorganized' Church and the Question of SuccessionSmith, Joseph Fielding
History
Origin of the 'Reorganized' Church and the Question of Succession
Smith, Joseph Fielding
Latter Day Saint churches -- Government; Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints -- Government
I take it that this means that the Lord would accept of their baptisms
in the river until they could prepare a place where the ordinance
could be attended to properly, and that He would not discontinue river
baptisms until they had had sufficient time to build such a place. I
want to read what the president of the "Reorganized" Church has to say
on this point. Said he:
"Baptisms for the dead was a permissive rite."
Of course I do not agree with him that it was a permissive rite, but to
continue the quotation:
"Baptism for the dead was a permissive rite; or to write more
plainly, the Church was permitted by the Lord to baptize for the
dead under certain rules."
Here is the rule:
"By terms stated in the revelation this permissive rite could be
performed and would be acceptable if performed in the river while
the time given the Church in which the Temple should be built was
passing. After the completion of the Temple, baptisms for the dead
were to be performed in it." (Saints' Herald, February 17, 1904).
We are certainly safe in saying that the Lord would not break His
promise, therefore if we can discover a time when baptisms were
discontinued in the river it will be a sign that the sufficient
time had expired, so far as baptisms in the river for the dead were
concerned. I turn to the minutes of the October conference, 1841, and
read from the remarks on baptism for the dead delivered by the Prophet
on the third day as follows:
"There shall be no more baptisms for the dead until the ordinance
can be attended to in the font of the Lord's house; and the Church
shall not hold another general conference, until they can meet in
said house. _For thus saith the Lord!_" (Times and Seasons, Vol.
II., page 578).
Remember this was in October, 1841--six months after the first stone
of the Temple was laid. Was the Temple finished? No. Was the Church
then rejected with its dead? Verily no! for this was 1841, and I have
already referred you to the editorial of the Prophet's of May, 1842,
wherein he says that never since the formation, or foundation, of the
Church was laid, have the Saints been so willing to comply with the
requisitions of Jehovah, and manifested a more ardent desire to do
the will of God, than in the building of that Temple. Therefore they
could not have been rejected. Yet the sufficient time was up.[13] What
must we then conclude? That the Temple had progressed so far that
baptisms could be performed in it for the dead in accordance with the
revelation, and it did not depend altogether, you will see, on the
complete finishing of the building; and as the rooms were finished one
by one and dedicated, they too, could be used for the ordinances of the
Temple until the whole Temple was built.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account