CHAPTER XXXIX.

CONCLUSION-A LETTER TO ELDER T. E. L.

A letter to Elder T. E. L.-Modern revelation-Apostles and prophets-Church organization-Its various officers-Two Priesthoods "Those abominations"-Early Christians-A charge repelled Those idolatrous Israelites-No new revelation necessary-The "basic idea of Mormonism"-An important question-The New Testament a perfect guide-Five pointed questions-Six reasons examined-The Bible a detector-A mere srcapping of incidentsThe whole system wrong-Conclusion.

OTHER topics might be discussed with propriety, and possibly with profit, but as we have examined many of the more important questions connected with Mormon theology, it will perhaps be sufficient to close this volume with a letter to a prominent Elder of the Reorganized Church, to which no reply was made. Following is the letter:

DEAR BROTHER:

Your communication of recent date came duly to hand, and its contents have been carefully considered. In the opening paragraphs of your letter you express the thought that I seem to "confess, at least in part, the faith of the Saints" concerning God's revealments to man at the present day. Then so let it be; for I am very glad the "Saints" have some things in common with all Christian people which I am able to endorse.

I am quite aware it is the "faith of the Saints" that any person may receive a revelation for himself, but while this is true, it is likewise a fact that all are

alike prohibited from receiving revelation for the benefit of the church. This divine prerogative is confined to the "Prophet, Seer, Revelator and Translator," Joseph Smith, "for he receiveth them even as Moses." So says the "Doctrine and Covenants.”

MODERN REVELATION.

It is hardly necessary for me to say that I most heartily disbelieve this whole revelation business, and for the best of reasons. I have seen too much of it. Too many gross errors and glaring absurdities, not to mention the "grosser crimes," have been authorized through its exercise for me to repose the least confidence in it. The "grosser crimes" of Utah, including polygamy and murder; the abominations of Strangism on Beaver Island, including polygamy, wholesale theft, highway robbery and foulest murder; the gross absurdities of "Baneemyism," and the unblushing obscenity of Rigdonism, all had their origin in pretended revelation.

In view of these facts I repeat the question, Of what possible benefit is this professed revelation to the world? In answer to this question I undertake to say that no good, but much evil, has resulted, and nothing else can reasonably be expected.

I prefer a system of religion with moral, spiritual and intellectual advancement as its leading characteristics, with no revelation but the Bible, to a system that claims so much in the way of new revelation, whose tendencies are in the opposite direction, and whose fruit has ever been evil. "A tree is known by its fruits."

APOSTLES AND PROPHETS.

Respecting a church organization with inspired apostles and prophets, you ask: "But why not apostles and prophets to-day?" Now, Bro. Lloyd, let us try to take a fair, sensible, honest view of this matter, as I am fully assured you are capable of doing, if only you can rise above sectarian prejudice, and for the time, at least, lay aside pre-conceived opinions.

And in order to get the question fairly before your mind, allow me to present a proposition for your consideration. It is this: In the original and Biblical sense of the word you have neither an apostle nor a prophet in the church.

It is true you have what you are pleased to call apostles, but they are not such in the proper sense of that term, and no proof can be adduced to support the claim. And further, there is no class of ministers in your organization designated and known as "prophets." Please note this carefully. This, you know, is a fact not to be questioned for one moment. Take any work extant recognized by the church as authoritative, and run over the list of officers, or what is termed "the order of the priesthood," from the First Presidency" down to the deacon, and the office of "prophet" does not appear.

For proof of this you are referred to "Presidency and Priesthood," by Apostle W. H. Kelley, and "Manual of the Priesthood," by Chas. Derry, president of the "High Priest's Quorum." In neither of these works can be found the office of prophet.

As to the church organization of which you boast, and which is claimed to be strictly Biblical, allow me to say it is wholly unauthorized. No such organiza

tion as that which you claim for the church is known to the New Testament, or the Old either, for that matter. I speak advisedly while making this declaration, knowing whereof I affirm.

66

See that ye make all things according to the pattern," is the watchword of all Latter Day Saints, and I intend to hold them strictly to a rule of their own choosing respecting their form of church government.

CHURCH GOVERNMENT.

W. H. Kelley, in his "Presidency and Priesthood," on pages 53 and 83, gives the list of officials in the church as follows:

1. "The First Presidency," consisting of one "chief apostle and Melchizedek high priest," and two "counselors' or "assistants."

2. The quorum of twelve apostles.

3. The (a) seventy elders.

4. The elders.

5. Biphops ["the presiding bishop and his two counselors," called the (b) "Bishoprick"]?

Here we have eleven distinct offices presented by Mr. Kelley as necessary to the complete organization of the Church of Christ, and that they constitute the organic structure of the body he represents.

It is quite needless, perhaps, for me to remind you that some of these offices are not once mentioned in the entire history of the New Testament Church.

Prominently among these are the "First Presidency." Neither Christ nor his apostles knew anything whatever of a "First Presidency."

Mr. Kelley, in rendering his list, totally ignores an office in his church second only in dignity to that of the “First Presidency," namely, that of "Patriarch.” Why he did so we are left to imagine. No hint can be found in the New Testament Scriptures of the existence in the church of such a thing as a Patriarch.

66

66

Not a word about a "Bishoprick," consisting of a presiding bishop" and his two counselors." No mention-not even a hint-in all the Bible of a "Quorum of High Priests." Nothing said about the office of "priest" in the Church of Christ. Not a syllable about the "High Council in Zion," nor yet of the "High Council in the stakes (!) of Zion." Not a word about any of these things; and yet you urge them as a part of the organic structure of the church. And while you do this you say exultingly to the entire religious world, "See that you have all things according to the divine pattern, as it is laid down in the Bible." Truly may we exclaim, "O consistency, thou art indeed a jewel."

66

Now, my dear brother, no one knows better than do you that in all God's word there can be found no support whatever for such a wild vagary. Not a scrap of history, either sacred or profane, can be produced that even so much as remotely hints at such an organization as that which you seek to maintain.

No man in the history of the Mormon Church has entered upon this difficult task with as much painstaking labor as has W. H. Kelley in his "Presidency