Brigham Young on several things, conveniently in one quote:
Posted on June 29th, 2005 by M* Ben
I came across an interesting Brigham Young quotation the other day. I’ll quote it and then explain why I thought it interesting.
I wish to speak a few words about the Bible as I have hinted at it. The Ordinances of the Kingdom of God on the Earth are the same to the children of Adam from the commencement to the end of his posterity pertaining to the carnal state on this Earth, and the winding up scene of this mortality. With regard to the Bible we frequently say, we believe the Bible, but circumstances alter cases, for what is now required for the people may not be required of a people that may live a hundred years hence. But I wish you to understand, with regard to the Ordinances of God’s House to save the people in the Celestial Kingdom of our God, there is no change from the days of Adam to the present time, neither will there be until the last of his posterity is gathered into the Kingdom of God.
Those who are not acquainted with our doctrine are astonished, and say, “That is strange indeed; we thought no such thing as preaching faith, repentance, and baptism was practiced in ancient, or Old Testament times.” I can tell you that no man from the days of Adam, no woman from the days of Eve to this day, who have lived, and who are now living upon the Earth will go into the Kingdom of their Father and God, to be crowned with Jesus Christ, without passing through the same Ordinances of the House of God, you and I have obeyed. I wish you distinctly to understand that.
There are many duties, and callings spoken of in the scriptures, and there are many not written, those for instance which are handed out to you by your President as circumstances require. Those imposed by the President of the Church of God, or by the president of any portion of it, are duties as necessary to be observed as though they were written in the Bible; but these requirements, duties, callings etc. change with the circumstances that surround the people of God. But when you speak of the system of Salvation to bring back the children of Adam and Eve into the presence of our Father and God, it is the same in all ages, among all people, and under all circumstances worlds without end[.] Amen.
The Essential Brigham Young, p.89
This struck me for several reasons.
1) Salvational ordinances belong to every generation, ie. everyone must be baptised all the way through the temple ordinances. In this, Brigham echoes Joseph, who taught this in several places.
2) Because of changing circumstances, there may be other binding and necessary things in each generation which are required as if they were in the Bible, and these will come from the President of the Church.
3) While I have seen both of these principles taught elsewhere, I don’t recall seeing them juxtaposed in this way, with the “always-required and eternal” next to the “for-our-time and temporary” right next to each other. Here are two separate examples from Joseph Smith.
We all admit that the Gospel has ordinances, and if so, had it not always ordinances, and were not its ordinances always the same?…all that were ever saved, were saved through the power of this great plan of redemption, as much before the coming of Christ as since; if not, God has had different plans in operation (if we may so express it), to bring men back to dwell with Himself; and this we cannot believe.
-TPJS, 59.
God said, “Thou shalt not kill;” at another time He said, “Thou shalt utterly destroy.” This is the principle on which the government of heaven is conducted—by revelation adapted to the circumstances in which the children of the kingdom are placed.
-TPJS, 256.
It seems to me that there is tension between these two principles that touches many issues large and small- The influence of culture and circumstances on revelation, commandments, and counsel, the tension between living prophets and cannonized scripture, the dead horse we’re always happy to beat over what constitutes “official” doctrine, the two-earring issue, the unwritten order of things, etc.
(Note: I’m going on vacation this evening, and won’t have internet access for 2 weeks.)
» Filed Under Any
Comments
5 Responses to “Brigham Young on several things, conveniently in one quote:”
Leave a Reply
Ben, I think it is precisely this tension that causes so much confusion for people in our time. On the one hand, there have been many progressive changes that are clearly making the world a better place (ending slavery, women’s right to vote, civil rights, laws against child labor), and on the other hand there have been many “progressive” changes that have not made the world a better place (socialism that restricts personal freedom, excessive sexualization of the culture, etc). So, many people will look at the broad range of progressive changes and say they want more of it. But the reality is that modern-day prophets have told us that there will be many positive things in our day but that there will be many negative things at the same time. I was floored when reading Joseph Smith’s quotation that you cite at TPJS 256 a few months ago. In a short statement, he summed up exactly our dilemma — how do you know what is right in this very confusing time? Well, you know what is right by following the teachings of the modern-day prophets. They’ll tell you what is right for our time. That is the true test.
Perhaps it disagrees with the spirit of the first part of the quote, but the last paragraph to me suggests that the adaptability of the Gospel throughout history is only a mechanical adaptation, and that the spiritual commitments and teachings remain the same. So for example, while the Lord required circumcision of the Jews, He requires baptism of us–both are a deliberate act that joins the actor to God’s community and kingdom, although each take different forms. Where the Lord required sacrifice of Adam, and observance of Levitical ordinances by the Jews, He requires temple covenants of us. Etc, etc. In each case the spirit of God’s requirement is the same, although the outward manifestation or behavior expected changes with the times.
I’m a crazy liberal theologian who’s not quite convinced that sealings and endowments as we know them took place in the Jewish tabernacle and temple, but IMHO my own reading of BY’s quote doesn’t seem to jibe with that given my reasoning above.
I also am not “quite convinced that sealings and endowments as we know them took place in the Jewish tabernacle and temple”, but I don’t think they need to have been. See my post here.
Of course, Ms. Barker would assert that “sealings and endowments as we know them didn’t take place in the Deuteronmists’ tabernacle and temple.” However, as she makes a case for, and Joseph Smith’s many “patriarchal” revelations seem to suggest, the fundamental concepts of the temple endowment seem to be present in the revelatory “High Priest” type experiences of the patriarchs in Joseph’s texts.
Anyway, that doesn’t seem to be the point here. I do think that this confusion is troublesome at times. It’s hard, perhaps even for prophets, to know exactly what is binding eternally and what is binding temporally. For example, I had a BYU religion professor (I know, I know, bad example, but still) who is convinced that Brigham didn’t understand that polygamy wasn’t an eternally binding principle when he said all that stuff about it being necessary to get into celestial kingdom. “The eternal standard is one husband and one wife: Like Adam and Eve,” he told me repeatedly. If his assertion is at least plausible, it would seem to suggest that perhaps sometimes maybe it doesn’t even matter whether things are temporally or eternally binding. This is incoherrent, and I may come back to it later…
I think those quotes set some nice bounds. For instance, we shouldn’t expect to find the office of a deacon, a twelve year old young man, who passes the sacrament and usually has the back of his collar flipped up, in the ancient church. In the same token, we shouldn’t think that Baptism, or other essential ordinances weren’t performed in the ancient church.