Thanks for stopping by. In many ways I’m right there with you. I’ve come to the same conclusion that there were and are many shady things that happened in church history that I don’t agree with. The same goes for Christianity in general.

I have felt the Spirit testify to me the Book of Mormon is true. I’ve felt the Spirit testify to me baptism is true. I’ve also felt the spirit in the temple. Do I agree with everything leaders of the church have done or said? No, but that’s why we have the Spirit to guide us in all truth.

A relative of mine said something that has helped me out a lot. He was inactive in the LDS church for many years and decided to return to activity because in his words, “if I’m going to be a Christian, this is the best option we’ve got.” Also, he said he was happier when he was active vs. when he wasn’t.

Lyman Wight was sent to Texas by Joseph Smith. When Smith died, BY tried to get him to come along, but Wight refused to recognize Brigham’s authority. There is an organization called “Wightites” that lasted for a time in Texas.

Brigham excommunicated William Smith (as well as Sidney Rigdon) for apostasy. William Smith followed James Strang for a time (in Voree, Wisconsin–still in existence as the Strangites), but left him, started his own church which failed miserably, and eventually joined the RLDS church. He did make an overture to BY before the Civil War broke out, but stayed put with the RLDS church.

Oliver was rebaptized in the LDS church, but died of tuberculosis before he could come to SLC. Sidney Rigdon started a church of his own in Pennsylvania (The Church of Jesus Christ of Children of Zion), but that eventually fizzled. One of his converts by the name of William Bickerton started a movement called the Bickertonites (still in existence), and views JS as first prophet, Sidney as #2, and Bickerton as #3, though Rigdon never actually joined with the Bickertonites. (I have a 5 part series on Rigdon at my blog.)

I agree with Larry, except for Emma. She did attend the RLDS church, and her previous baptism was accepted as valid. She tried to support her sons in the RLDS church, and was technically a member of record in both churches right up to her death.

The more I read of the actual words from CoC or RLDS members/leaders/apologists, the more they convince me that the original RLDS/JS-III group didn’t have the priesthood authority to do what they did, and have since then gone farther and farther astray. They seem to have continually watered down Joseph’s religion. They’ve done to Mormonism sort of what the Protestants have done to Catholicism.

No temple endowments? No new temples? JS Jr was very big on temples, from Kirtland to Independence, Far West, and Nauvoo. No exaltation? No eternal marriage? No baptisms for the dead? Whoa there! I have testimonies of those things.

The claims of the “new-RLDS” seem even weirder to me, even though they are trying to go back to pre-CoC RLDS conditions. If, as they say, the CoC has “gone astray”, then the new-RLDS is just as wrong, because they are an off-shoot. Kind of like how if the Catholic church is wrong, then all the Protestants are wrong along with them, because they came off of or out of from them.

I’ll support everyone’s _right_ to believe as they want, as in Article of Faith #11. But the CoC/RLDS stuff is not for me.

1) Ummm, I don’t read comments that are over 2 pages (or screen’s worth of text), but I do skim them.

2) In my opinion, Priesthood succession has nothing to do with what secular or civil authorities decree. So what judges ruled or decided has no bearing with me on matters of priesthood succession.

The overall point I’m making here (in this item #2), is that when things boil down to a “he said/she said/they said” matter, it’s like trying to determine the issue of Joseph’s prophetic calling (or the truth of the Book of Mormon) all over again. We, or at least I, can’t rely on the testimony of men and the decisions of third parties to determine “Truth”. We have to get a spiritual confirmation for ourselves.

So to me, the issue of priesthood succession after JS’s death, is just like determining if JS was a prophet, or if the Book of Mormon is true in the first place: one needs to go to Heavenly Father in prayer and get an answer on one’s own. I’ve done that, and I received an answer.

I acknowledge and respect the possibility that you received a different answer than I did. In that case, we’ll have to reconcile things in the future, perhaps at that future point in time, as promised by Jesus, that all mysteries will be made known.

3) the Q of the 12 sided with Brigham. (though apostle Lyman Wight sided with Brigham, he went to Texas, not out west. And apostle William Smith didn’t go west, but I don’t know the details of whether he sided with BY or not at JS’s death. If William Smith did not side with BY, then he was actually the only one of the 12 who did not.

The others you mentioned, who you say had a connection to the RLDS church at some point, really don’t count as arbiters of succession, since they had no priesthood standing with the church (or Joseph) at the time of Joseph’s death. They were all either excommunicated (while Joseph was still prophet), or in the case of Sidney Rigdon, estranged from him.

And as far as Oliver Cowdery and Sidney Rigdon, both eventually requested rebaptism into the SLC-based LDS church.

The succession issue can be made to appear very messy.

But to put it in the simplest terms I can, the main point is: all the 12, with maybe the exception of William Smith, sided with Brigham. And 10, all but 2 (William Smith and Lyman Wight), went out West with Brigham.

Second point: No one, not one of those who held apostolic (Q of the 12 or member of the 1st presidency) authority under Joseph Smith Jr at the time of his death, gave or bestowed that authority on Joseph Smith III. Nobody left outside of Brigham’s group had any authority to “give” JS III anything.

Third point: JS III had no apostolic authority himself at the time of his father’s death, so there was no way he could “assume” anything.

Taking point 2 and point 3 together, there was no chain of priesthood authority or apostolic authority between JS Jr and JS III. With the death of JS Jr, everything rested in the apostles.

And, even if one were to think that Lyman Wight or William Smith transfered any apostolic authority to JS III (and I don’t think the RLDS ever claimed that they did), by separating themselves from the body of the 12, Lyman and William cut themselves off anyway.

4) If we’re allowed to, let’s look each other up on the other side of the veil in the spirit world and compare notes again.

Interesting take on Grace and works I haven’t seen before. thanks for stopping by.

Actually, Mormons believe all mankind is SAVED by the GRACE of God, even Hitler will end up in a degree of glory (for Mormons hell is a lesser glory relative to the higher state where God dwells and family units are eternal). Conversely, Evangelicals believe a person must perform the WORK of physically “accepting Jesus” vocally to be saved. For them, not all will be “saved.”

Therefore, mormons believe in being saved by grace and Evangelicals believe in salvation by works (act of being born again).

The Community of Christ (CoC) has been going through many theological debates over the last 20 years or so. Many CoC members have become disenchanted with the CoC due to ordaining women to the priesthood, new prophets outside of the Smith family, a position that the Book of Mormon is hot historical, belief in the trinity, etc. A group of former RLDS members formed a schism of the CoC and re-created a new group which they call the RLDS church (since the name is now available.) James belongs to one of these groups. It seems to me that this happened in 2004, but I could have the date wrong. Perhaps someone can correct my memory if it is wrong.

James,

While I know you view the Community of Christ as heretical, I think you should read their prophet’s most recent statement on Joseph Smith and polygamy. It is found at the official Community of Christ website, of which your documents come from.

I’ve bolded a few things that CoC Prophet and President Stephen M. Veazey said as recently as April 2009,

“Another example is how we have viewed the origin of celestial or plural marriage in the early church. There is no doubt the early Reorganization endeavored to distance Joseph Smith Jr. from the doctrine and practice of plural marriage. Such separation was viewed as critical to church identity and survival.

So, where does this leave us? The Reorganized Church has always said that plural marriage in the early church was wrong, regardless of its origins. We need to let it go at that. Reigniting old debates over this issue will be unproductive and only serve to distract us from more important endeavors.