| 545 inference that the conference could not have formulated a reason is a wrong one. No complaint of the action of the previous conference in failing to sustain was formally made; nor was there an effort made upon the part of those withdrawing to obtain a reason for not sustaining; the reasons for such refusal to sustain were asked for by others than the ones who withdrew, and they urged at the former session that such reasons should be given.
9. The substance of the committee's report has been affirmed at repeated sessions of the conferences of the church, and its essence and spirit may be found in several of the actions of conferences held prior to 1885. The principle of toleration found in it, is found in the report of the Presidency in the fall of 1879; and has ever been recognized on all necessary occasions. The principle of toleration formulated by Jesus: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; and he that believeth not shall be damned;" permits no latitude to individual opinion; and though human privilege may exist to refuse credence without coercion, the "word spoken shall judge men in the last day."
10. If the report of the committee is in substantial agreement with those who withdrew; and if such report correctly states the position of the church; and if Elder Briggs' statement is correct that had these things been "incorporated in the proceedings of the conference of 1885," "it is probable" that "no withdrawal would have occurred;" the fault of misunderstanding does not rest upon the church, and we can all the more readily acquiesce in the statement of Elder Briggs, "we are willing to let the responsibility of the causes and the occasion for the 'grave mistake' rest where the record places it."
11. It almost seems that from the first to the last the church as a body has been placed as if individual rights were the only ones to be regarded; that rules of association, obligations of membership, courtesy to coworkers were all to be made subservient to individual rights and dignities; that the church was in duty bound to respect and regard individual rights and the sanctity of individual conscience and opinion whether she was heard and listened to or not. We do not say that such has been the intention or purpose, and trust that we mistake appearance.
(page 545) |
