Since the publication of the last Times and Seasons, we have frequently been interrogated about the meaning of some remarks made by Elder Wm.
Smith in an article headed patriarchal, and also concerning some expressions in the editorial connected therewith: and as the nature of the office of Patriarch, does not seem to be fully understood, we thought a little explanation on this point might not be amiss.
So far as the editorial is concerned it was written rather hastily by our junior editor, W.W. Phelps, and did not come under our notice until after it was published.'-- There are some expressions contained in it, which might have been worded better and have rendered it less subject to criticism; but he assures us that no such intention was intended to be conveyed as that which is conceived by some. And concerning Brother Wm. Sm
ith we are better acquainted with him and with his views, than to believe that he intended to convey any such idea as the one which some persons would put upon, or gather from his sayings.
In regard to the office of Patriarch, William Smith has been ordained Patriarch to the Church; but he is not the only Patriarch, but would act as a senior Patriarch, holding the keys of that priesthood; and his labors would be more especially connected with the Church in Zion; and he would take the lead, priority, or presidency of the Patriarchal office in this place; and in this capacity if there should be a council of Patriarchs, he as a matter of course would preside by night of office. But every legally ordained Patriarch has the same right to bless that he has, and their administrations are just as legal as his are. Every ordinance that is administered by a legal administrator, is legal. A priest has as much right to baptize a person for the remission of sins as an elder, a high pri
est, or an apostle; but he cannot lay on hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, because he does not possess the authority to do it; but an elder does, and an elder's administration would be just as legal as the administration of any of the before-mentioned persons, or as that of the President of the Church.
Every father, after he has received his patriarchal blessing, is a Patriarch to his own family; and has the right to confer patriarchal blessings upon his family; which blessings will be just as legal as those conferred by any Patriarch of the Church; in fact it is his right; and a Patriarch in blessing his children, can only bless as his mouthpiece.
A Patriarch to the Church is appointed to bless those who are orphans, or have no father in the Church to bless them. Not as stated inadvertently, in the editorial above, alluded to, 'to bless all, and such as have not a father to do it,' for this he could not do, where the Church is so extensive; the burthen would be too
onerous; hence other Patriarchs have been ordained, both in this country, and in England, to assist the Patriarch to the Church, and hence the Provision made in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants: 'It is the duty of the Twelve, in all large branches of the Church, to ordain evangelical ministers, (Patriarchs) as they shall be designated unto them by revelation.' Page 104. And should any of those Patriarchs remove here, they have just as much right to administer in their patriarchal office under the direction of the Patriarch to the church, as an elder or priest would, who should remove from one of the branches to this place, under the direction of the presidency. Brother Wm. Smith however, 'holds the keys of the patriarchal blessings upon the heads of all my people,' and would of necessity have the seniority, and of course the priority and presidency; yet it would be left for those who wished to be administered to, to make their choice; just as much as it would for a candida
te for baptism to choose who should administer to him.
The above is the true doctrine of the Church in regard to this matter, and we speak of it for the information of the brethren at large, lest those who may have received their patriarchal blessings from other sources, or from their fathers, might be tempted to think they were of no avail, and also, to set at rest this agitated question. [p. 65] We now proceed to answer some of the remarks which we have heard: We have been asked, 'Does not patriarch over the whole Church' place Brother William Smith at the head of the whole church as president?
Ans. No. Brother William is not patriarch over the whole church; but patriarch to the Church, and as such he was ordained. The expression 'over the whole church,' is a mistake made by W. W. Phelps. He is patriarch to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Twelve are commanded to ordain evangelical ministers in all large branches of the church abroad, and who has ch
arge over them, the patriarch? No. Those who ordained them, and to whom is committed the power and authority to regulate all the affairs of the churches abroad. And who has the charge of the whole priesthood here? Ans. The presidency of the church; and not the patriarch.
But does not the Book of Doctrine and Covenants say, 'First, I give unto you Hyrum Smith to be a Patriarch unto you to hold the sealing blessings of my church, even the Holy Spirit of promise whereby ye are sealed up unto the day redemption, that ye may not fall.' Yes. But that is in regard to seniority not in regard to authority in priesthood, for it immediately follows, 'I give unto you my servant Joseph to be a presiding elder over all my church.' In page 110, D. C. we read 'the duty of president of the office of the high priesthood, is to preside over the whole church, and to be like unto Moses.' And from this it is evident that the president of the Church, not the Patriarch, is appointed by God to pre
side. [p. 66] But does not the Patriarch stand in the same relationship to the Church, as Adam did to his family, and as Abraham and Jacob did to theirs?
No. This is another mistake of our junior, and one that may be very easily made inadvertently. Adam was the natural father of his posterity, who were his family and over whom he presided as Patriarch, Prophet, Priest, and King. Both Abraham and Jacob stood, in the same relationship to their families. But not so with Father Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, or William Smith. They were not the natural fathers of the Church, and could not stand in the same capacity as Adam, Abraham, or Jacob; but inasmuch as there had been none to bless for generations past, according to the ancient order, they were ordained and set apart for the purpose of conferring Patriarchal blessings, to hold the Keys of this priesthood and unlock the door, that had long been closed upon the human family: that blessings might again be conferred according to t
he ancient order, and those who were orphans, or had no father to bless them, might receive it through a patriarch who should act as proxy for their father, and that fathers might again be enabled to act as patriarchs to their families, and bless their children. For like other ordinances in the Church, this had been neglected; and must needs be restored. But Father Joseph Smith was not president of the Church, nor the President's counsel. Nor was Hyrum Smith either president or President's counsel. He was once counsel but when he was ordained Patriarch he gave it up and another was ordained in his stead, (Wm. Law) and in all probability if Bro. William magnifies his calling he will not be able henceforth to attend to the duties of an apostle; but officiate in the same capacity in regard to blessing as his Brother Hyrum did. Not as President of the Church; but as Patriarch to it. [p. 67] The President of the Church presides over all Patriarchs, Presidents, and councils of the
church; and this presidency does not depend so much upon genealogy as upon calling, order and seniority. James and Joses were the brothers of Jesus, and John was his beloved disciple, yet Peter held the keys and presided over all the church. Br. William was in the Quorum of th
e Twelve during his brother's lifetime, nor [and] since; and if being ordained a Patriarch would make him President of the Church, it would have made Father Joseph Smith, and Hyrum Smith, Presidents over the church instead of Joseph.
Br. William understands the matter, and were it not for the folly of some men there would be no necessity for these remarks.
A Patriarch is what is termed in Scripture an evangelist, and Brother William acts in that capacity, and God placed in the church 'first apostles,' not first evangelists, but the president stands in the same relationship to the Church as Moses did to the children of Israel, according to the revelations.
Again who ordained Father Smith to the office of Patriarch? His son Joseph: and Father Smith ordained Hyrum, and the Twelve (of whom Bro. Wm. is one) ordained him. Who are appointed to ordain evangelical ministers? (See page 104 D. C.) Can a steam rise higher than its fountain?
No. Says Paul, 'verily the less is bles
sed of the better.' We think that every one will see that Bro. William Smith's patriarchal office will not exalt him higher in regard to priesthood than he was before, as one of the Twelve; but will rather change the nature of his office.
But will it take anything from his priesthood? it may be asked. No. You cannot take any man's priesthood away without transgression. Bro.
WIlliam will still retain the same power, priesthood, and authority that he did before, and yet will hold in connexion with that [of] the Patriarchal office and the keys of that priesthood, and as one of the Twelve must maintain his dignity as one of the presidents of the Church, of whom President Brigham Young is the president and head, and presides over all Patriarchs, Presidents and councils of the Church.
The article referred to in the above was headed Patriarchal, and published No. 9 Volume 6 of [the] Times and Seasons, May 15th, 1845.
In the evening about half past ten o'clock, there was an
alarm given that a man had been stabbed below my house in a cornfield. I had gone to bed when the alarm was given and did not hear about it until next morning:'-- some of our young men ran down to see him, and to help find the assassin. The man's name that was stabbed was Irvine Hodges a brother of the Hodges that had been arrested for thieving and murdering. Two policemen of the names of John Scott and Allen J. Stout, who were on guard at Bro. Brigham Young's, stated that they were outside the house conversing with Sister Young, when they heard two or three blows seemingly struck with a club, and directly afterwards a succession of shrieks; John Scott told Allen Stout to remain at his post, and he would run and see what the cause of the noise was: and immediately ran in the direction of the cries, running up to the fence he met Hodges climbing over, and asked him who he was, (it being dark he could not distinguish any thing,) he told him his name was Irvine Hodge and begg
ed him not to kill him, stating at the same time he was a murdered man. Scott asked him if he did not know him; and who it was that stabbed him. He said he knew him, he was Scott; and he knew who had stabbed him. Scott then asked him who they were, he said they were men whom he took to be friends, from the river. Scott asked their names; this he could not tell his strength having failed him. He grasped Scott's arm, and ran in the direction of Brother Brigham's; when opposite the door he fell on the ground, and seemd to be in great agony. Scott ran to Main Street, to raise the alarm; he told Mr. Clapp and several other men not belonging to the Church, to hurry up and see him.
When Mr. Clapp arrived, he asked Hodges if he knew him. He said he did; and told him to give him his hand. Clapp asked him if he knew the perpetrators.
He answered; he did. Clapp asked him who they were, this question he repeated several times; the only answer he received was; he could not tell. He w
as very anxious to be taken home. John Scott had gone for Dr. Bernhisel; while he was gone, Hodges gave a few struggles and expired.
Brother William Smith, (he having been in company with him a short time before,) and several other brethren soon arrived, and immediately instituted a search for the murderers and the place of murder, but it was of no avail. The coroner not being in the county two Justices of the Peace Squires Johnson and Higbee, acted in his place; and immediately proceeded to select a jury. The jury after hearing and interrogating the witnesses, (Gen. Deming Sheriff of the county, and several other strange gentlemen being present at the time,) returned the following verdict, to wit: 'That the deceased came to his death by violence; but by some person or persons unknown to the Jury; and the said body has upon it the following marks and wounds inflicted by some person or persons unknown to the Jury, and which this Jury find to have been the cause of his dea
th, to wit; with two or three cuts and bruises on the head supposed to have been inflicted by a club; also four cuts on his left side measuring from one inch to one inch and a quarter, supposed to have been inflicted by a bowie knife.' [p. 70] This man had a wife and family at Mechanicsville in this county, about thirty miles from this place, and had sustained a poor character for uprightness. It was reported he had said; if his brothers were hung Brother Brigham Young would die next; he had also threatened Bro. Elbridge Tufts, one of the old Police, for acting against his brothers at Burlington.
In his case is exemplified the justice of God against tran[s]gressors, and the misery connected with iniquity. At the time this took place, two of his younger brothers were sentenced to be hung; and one of his brothers, (a President in the Seventies, since cut off,) bound to appear on a charge of thieving. These men had been frequently warned to forsake their evil practices; but
this good counsel they would not hearken to. It is truly said the way of the transgressor is hard.
['The John Taylor Nauvoo journal, January 1845-September 1845,' BYU Studies 23:3 (1983) edited by Dean C. Jessee]
About this site: http://bit.ly/AboutMHist
No comments:
Post a Comment