Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1897-01-08

to this fact 40 not think you have
attached sufficient Importance, elss
you would not take such earnest ex
ceptlons TO what you call the DEsEEEI
NEWS setting up the right OF the Fret
| Ptesii ency "tO mpEe, alter, cha ugei
or revoke the laws" OF the Church
have not read the editorials OF the
| DEsERET NEWS to which you allude,
but certainly the News did not set
up that doctrine; that doctrine 10 ~
! old ms the Church ITSELF The very
day and hour the Church was organ
| Iced the Lord constituted the Presi-
dent Of the Church Its Prophet, Seer
and law-giveT, strictly commanding
| the Church 10 give heed "tO all II Is
words and commandments which he
shall give nut you as no feceiveto
tuam. for his worisn
said this Lord eye shall re-
ceive, as II from niue own
mouth. in all patience and faith"
(Doc. a. Gov. xxi)l 90 mot think the
DEsERET NEWS put u stronger than
that. 1t is tue President OF the Church
that receives the Ievclat Ons oil tod
and announces the Jaw to the Church.
This Ia the lav-nakiug power OF the
Church; there IL no other. The people
do not legIelAte Tor the Church. The
voice OF the people is not the voice of
the Lord, only as their voice is united
with and becomes the satue AZ the
voice OF God. IL 10 from this source
the revelations OF God through tho
Propuet-President OF the Church
that the Church has received Its
knowledge OF the Gospel and the
power OF the Priesthood. Ii Ia true
that these revelations, as they have
been received from time to time, have
been presented to the members OF the
Church for their acceptance, and up to
the present there always has been an
overwhelming majority OF the Saints
who have been sufficiently enlight-
ened by the Spirit o God to accept the
word OF tine Lord through ii Prophet
and carry 1t out, and my faith
Ia that It will always be so
In this dispensalion, for the reason
that God mas promised us that He
will consummate His work in this
dispensatiOn. OF course, IL 1t should
tTanspire that the Churcn should re.
iect the word OF the Lord through His
Prophet, as they have the liberty to
do IL they 30 elect, then they would
not change the truth or the law, but
would In effect cay. ave will not &C.
cepI the law of GoI;" anu II that I'M
happy time ever comes, they must as
sumo the iull responsibility OF the act
which rejects the cou nsels OF God.
You will perhaps remember the lsct
that ancient Israel once did this in u
very remarkable manner when they
rejected the mild government of the
Judges and ClamOred for king, that
they might he ike other nations; anu
when Samuel took the matter tO the
Lord, he was commanded to let them
have their way, to give them king,
anu apparently for tue encouragement
OF Samuel, tue Lord saiu: "Phey have
not rejected thee, but they have re-
ieoted me, that l should reign over
Them. Hesrken unto their (he peo-
ple's) voice." sRld tue Lord, "howbei',
yet protest solemDly unto them, ana
show them the manner of the Ring
that shall reign over them" Il
Samuel, Wig All OF which the
Prophet diu, uut without avail, and
Istael by sad experience through
long ptrloda OF tyran y by reason OF
kingly rule learned now solemn
thing 1t was to reject the word Of
God.
But you seem to think that the
power above rs,erIad to IA lodged 10 the
President Of the Church Is destructive
OF the principle OF common consent,
ana on that head say: "lf the First
Presidency has the right to change,
alter, or make laws Tor the Church,
common consent is obsolete anu there
can never exist Two supreme law.mak.
lug powers In any organization at one
anu the same time.' The mistake
you make lie in considering the mem.
bers OF the Church, through the opera.
ton OF the dcctrlne OF "cOmmon con-
sent" 40 thetone supreme Ia making
power in the Churou, whereas, In re-
alily, 1t Ia not the law.making POWER
at all. The Church OF Christ il gov
erned by the Laws of God, which laws
He reveals 10 the Church through him
who lie the President thereof, and II
the Church should reject that law,
they reject the law OF God and wouIu
he under condemnation and under
GOd's displeasure; Tor 1t cannot be that
He would be well pleased with those
who reject His cOunsels. You are
right in saying "there can never ex-
list two supreme laW.msking powers
in any organization at one and the
came time" Nor has GOD appointed
"iwo supreme law-malSing powers"
in His Church. He has ap.
pointed but one, and that one the
President Of the Church. And l
that very great amount OF
the difficulty encountered by yourself
and others who may take the same
view OF matters as you do, arlees from
the fact that you attempt to displaee
tho lsw-moking power, or what would
be MOTE accurate to say, the law an
nouncing power--Ior the lava nTe the
laws OF God--which God has appointed
in the Church, with another, ana that
other this members OF the Church,
through the operation OF the doctrine
OF common consent" The Church
OF Christ subeists by reason Of n volun.
thry acceptance OF its doctrines and
willing submission 10 its laws and
discipline ON the part OF It's membere.
FoUpie are converted TO tue truth IL
teaches and Of their own Tree viii sub
init to it's regulations; and as the
Church begius In voluntary RCcep-
lance o! It's doctrines, 80 1t continues;
ana an new truths are revealed, ana
coud ,tions require new regu.