Ask Wally

Wally,

I am having a difficult time with the church, and I don't know how to reconcile what I have been taught, and what I read in the scriptures, particularly concerning being nourished continually by the word of God in Moroni 6:4, and not a watered down version of His words.

I read in the Book of Mormon that the "churches met together so that they could "hear the word of God" (Mosiah 25:20). And there "was nothing preached in all the churches except it were repentance and faith in God" (Mosiah 25:22).

I do not understand why we are, it seems to me, required to useGeneral Conference talks in Priesthood and Relief Society classes, and even in Sacrament meetings, when we have the written records which we are taught contain the word of God. It concerns me a great deal and is starting to make me wonder why we even have a General Conference. It is as if General Conference is justified just so the talks can be published and used as our learning curriculum. And it changes every six months. 

Abigail

Hi Abigail,

I have often wondered the same thing. While it is possible to hear the word of God spoken at General Conference, it is best if we believe Christ when He tells us to rely on the written records. In fact He always emphasizes the scriptures (the written records) over the teachings of men mingled with scriptures. Moroni’s admonition to nourish members with the word of God is the Lord's teaching. 

This said, there is a major gap between what is supposed to be taught, and what is actually taught in our meetings. If you are not being nourished by the word of God in your meetings, my advice is to search the scriptures while attending your meetings. While this may seem rude, you are at least being fed. That being said, you should not rely alone on others to teach you. It is up to you to seek and know the word of God. If you know or think someone has the gift of knowledge, you should seek that person out and asked to be taught. More

Best to you, Wally

Wally,

I have two questions, but they are related. First, my grandson lost his Church membership at a disciplinary council. Second, my cousin asked that her name be removed from the Church records. 

Questions: 

Are their baptisms still valid, even though neither is a member of record? or

Do they need to be re-baptized, and be members of record of the Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Latter-day Saints in order to repent, so as not to be under the bondage of sin?

Mindy

Hi Mindy,

When an adult person is baptized by proper authority, and the baptism was the first fruits of their repentance, then they are baptized unto repentance, or baptized so they can continue to repent. They kept the commandment of their Father to be baptized, and in order to keep the commandment to repent, they must be baptized. 

Let's compare your son's and cousin's experiences, to someone who has not had records removed, but simply has gone inactive. In the latter case, it seems there is no question but that the person was born of the water, baptized unto repentance, and if he decides to turn and repent, there is no need to be baptized again. 

While the Church's position will differ, the baptism in both cases is still a born of the water experience, and both of them, if they decide, can continue to repent without having to be baptized again. But if they want to be in full fellowship with the organized Church, the Church will require a new baptism, which is the Church's right to do so. But according to D&C 10:67-70, only those who repent are of His church, regardless of Church membership.

But, according to the Church, re-baptism is the ordinance required to restore the full blessings and covenant status within the established structure of the Church.

I would say to your Son and Cousin, however, that if they decide to repent, to ask God what is best for them, just repentance, or repentance and church membership. As the fruits of their repentance will include saying nothing but repentance to others, there is no better place to do so than among active Church members.

Best to you, Wally