A very Strang finding

[smac97]

1 hour ago, CA Steve said:

This is probably the most recent work regarding Strang. I have not read it yet but it looks very interesting.

The King of Confidence: A Tale of Utopian Dreamers, Frontier Schemers, True Believers, False Prophets, and the Murder of an American Monarch

Apparently only a passing reference to the "Plates of Laban" (pp. 166-67) and a few spotty references to the "Book of the Law of the Lord."

Thanks,

-Smac

[JustAnAustralian]

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

True. So what do we call you? Nelsonites?

Well the Young-Taylor-Woodruff-Snow-Smith-Grant-Smith-McKay-Smith-Lee-Kimball-Benson-Hunter-Hinckley-Monson-Nelson is the continued line with no splits form a previous -ite branch, so I guess we'd still technically be Brighamites if we're using that terminology.

Edited February 5, 2021 by JustAnAustralian

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Yep, and they call us Papists (or worse). Question: Papist is a derogatory term. If a break-off sect call you a Brighamite, is that considered derogatory?

I know you are writing in a jocular vein here, and that’s fine, but if it’s OK, I will respond in a serious tone. President Nelson has asked us to not refer to the Church in any manner that implies that it is anything other than Christ’s own Church. Perhaps it is too much to expect others to comply, but I think it incumbent upon those professing to be faithful members of the Church to do so, even in our conversations with those outside the faith. 

Edited February 5, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[JAHS]

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

True. So what do we call you? Nelsonites?

I like how everything is an -ite.

Just following the Book of Mormon style. However as time has gone by I hope we are moving towards the following condition:
"There were no robbers, nor murderers, neither were there Lamanites, nor any manner of -ites; but they were in one, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God." (4 Nephi 1:17)

[Rajah Manchou]

9 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Through all my research in the past 2 months this page for some reason has affected me more than anything else. Does anyone no of a good place or book that could help me research the Strangites? Also, does it bother anyone else that 5000 people followed this man?

I had a very similar reaction when I first learned of Strang and his brand of Mormonism.

Many influential members of the early Church were convinced Strang was to be the successor to Joseph:

Strang's letter convinced several eminent Mormons of his claims, including Book of Mormon witnesses John and David Whitmer, Martin Harris and Hiram Page. In addition Apostles John E. Page, William E. M'Lellin, and William Smith, together with Nauvoo Stake President William Marks, and Bishop George Miller,[e] accepted Strang. Joseph Smith's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, and three of his sisters accepted Strang's claims. According to the Voree Herald, Strang's newspaper, Lucy Smith wrote to one Reuben Hedlock: "I am satisfied that Joseph appointed J.J. Strang. It is verily so." According to Joseph Smith's brother William, all of his family (except for Hyrum and Samuel Smith's widows), endorsed Strang. (source)

Although most of them eventually changed their minds.

In my opinion, the revelation of the Rajah Manchou plates and the Plates of Laban to James Strang are the most underestimated events in early Mormon history.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

True. So what do we call you? Nelsonites?

I like how everything is an -ite.

Any time we come up with a new name a new break off would claim it.

Your church didn’t change its name when the Old Catholics or the Independent Catholics showed up.

[Kenngo1969]

Joseph Smith Jr.: Often imitated, never duplicated!

[Calm]

4 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Yep, and they call us Papists (or worse). Question: Papist is a derogatory term. If a break-off sect call you a Brighamite, is that considered derogatory?

For some imo. I got the impression, though I am not particularly well read in this area so may have missed nuances, that for non scholars it tends to be somewhat dismissive.  At least implying it is not the true line of authority. 

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I had a very similar reaction when I first learned of Strang and his brand of Mormonism.

Many influential members of the early Church were convinced Strang was to be the successor to Joseph:

Strang's letter convinced several eminent Mormons of his claims, including Book of Mormon witnesses John and David Whitmer, Martin Harris and Hiram Page. In addition Apostles John E. Page, William E. M'Lellin, and William Smith, together with Nauvoo Stake President William Marks, and Bishop George Miller,[e] accepted Strang. Joseph Smith's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, and three of his sisters accepted Strang's claims. According to the Voree Herald, Strang's newspaper, Lucy Smith wrote to one Reuben Hedlock: "I am satisfied that Joseph appointed J.J. Strang. It is verily so." According to Joseph Smith's brother William, all of his family (except for Hyrum and Samuel Smith's widows), endorsed Strang. (source)

Although most of them eventually changed their minds.

In my opinion, the revelation of the Rajah Manchou plates and the Plates of Laban to James Strang are the most underestimated events in early Mormon history.

Hey, I now see where your name and picture come from. Are you/were you a Strangite?

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Any time we come up with a new name a new break off would claim it.

Your church didn’t change its name when the Old Catholics or the Independent Catholics showed up.

Yep. We just stick with the Nicene Creed for our name: "I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church."

[JLHPROF]

12 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Yep. We just stick with the Nicene Creed for our name: "I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church."

Too bad Christ and the Apostles weren't around when a bunch of Bishops thought that up.  😮

 

[Rajah Manchou]

27 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Hey, I now see where your name and picture come from. Are you/were you a Strangite?

I looked into affiliating at one point, but at present I guess I'm a "non-denominational Mormon", meaning I adhere to the Mormon faith but I do not follow any single branch of Mormonism.

In my opinion, there was revelation that came through Strang that is relevant to our day, just as there was revelation that came through the Brighamite branch. At some point, I expect all Mormon branches will come together.

[Bernard Gui]

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

True. So what do we call you? Nelsonites?

I like how everything is an -ite.

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as per President Nelson’s instructions?

Edited February 6, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[JLHPROF]

5 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as per President Nelson’s instructions?

I have no issue with these instructions but it sounds SO pretentious when we correct people.

[Rajah Manchou]

11 hours ago, bluebell said:

Any word on what happened to the plates in question?

11 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

I was really hoping that wasn't going to be the answer ☹

Depends on which plates. After Strang extracted the plates referred to as The Record of Rajah Manchou of Vorito, they weren't hidden or concealed. Strang carried them around with him and was fond of showing them to everyone he met. There were several people, both Mormon and non-Mormon, who observed and described them. There was no attempt to hide them and they were not returned to an angel. They just went missing after Strang was killed.

The members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strang used the full name before the Brighamite branch adopted it with a hyphenated Latter-day) have a page on the Voree Record.

http://www.strangite.org/Plates.htm

Edited February 6, 2021 by Rajah Manchou

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I looked into affiliating at one point, but at present I guess I'm a "non-denominational Mormon", meaning I adhere to the Mormon faith but I do not follow any single branch of Mormonism.

In my opinion, there was revelation that came through Strang that is relevant to our day, just as there was revelation that came through the Brighamite branch. At some point, I expect all Mormon branches will come together.

I can see this viewpoint on a doctrinal basis but not on a Priesthood basis.  The one man on earth holding the keys is a cornerstone Mormon doctrine.  I don't see how one could claim to follow Mormonism without a priesthood head.

[InCognitus]

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Yep, and they call us Papists (or worse). Question: Papist is a derogatory term. If a break-off sect call you a Brighamite, is that considered derogatory?

A derogatory term loses its power if you accept it and laugh it off.  A few years ago I saw a car on one of the freeways in Phoenix, Arizona, and the personalized license plate on the car was "PAPIST".  I'm pretty sure the person driving the car was a Catholic, because I don't know why anyone else would choose to have that license plate   

(Hmm.... I don't think BRIGHAMITE would fit on the license plate.)

Edited February 6, 2021 by InCognitus

[Rajah Manchou]

33 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I can see this viewpoint on a doctrinal basis but not on a Priesthood basis.  The one man on earth holding the keys is a cornerstone Mormon doctrine.  I don't see how one could claim to follow Mormonism without a priesthood head.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (no hyphen) has a different perspective on priesthood and living prophets:

http://www.strangite.org/Prophets.htm

From Chapter 36 of the Book of the Law of the Lord:

PRIESTHOOD

1. There are two Priesthoods: the Priesthood of an endless life; and the Priesthood of life. (15, 72)

2. In the Priesthood of an endless life are two Orders; that of Apostles, and of Priests. (16, 68)

3. Of Apostles there are four Degrees. (6, 29)

4. The first Degree is that of Lawgiver, and is Apostle, Prophet, Seer, Revelator and Translator. This Degree is sole, and gives the word of God as from his own mouth. (30, 128)

5. The second Degree is that of Counsellor, and is Apostle, Prophet, Seer and King. (14, 63)

6. The third Degree is that of Embassador. Of these there shall be twelve. They shall be Apostles and witnesses to the nations, and Rulers in all places where the Lawgiver shall send them. (33, 149)

7. The fourth Degree is that of Evangelist. Evangelists are Apostles, and witnesses of the Kingdom, to whatever nation they are sent. Seven are a full Quorum; and there shall be but one Quorum to any nation, kindred, tongue or people. (40, 184)

8. Of Priests there are two Degrees. (6, 27)

9. The first Degree is that of High Priests. (8, 33)

10. The second Degree is that of Elders. (7, 29)

11. In the Priesthood of life are three Orders; that of Priest, of Teacher, and of Deacon. (16, 67)

12. Of Priests, of the Priesthood of life, there shall be a Chief Priest, a first and second High Priest, and a Leader of each Course of Priests, to every Temple. (30, 123)

13. This Priesthood shall be divided into Courses, according to the nature of their duties; and officers appointed in the several Courses, to guide and direct in the duties of the Course. In organizing the Courses, those may be included who have been ordained to a higher Priesthood. (47, 227)

14. Of Teachers there are five Degrees; Rabboni, Rabbi, Doctor, Ruler, and Teacher. (12, 62)

15. Of Deacons there are three Degrees; Marshals, Stewards, and Ministers. (10, 57)

Edited February 6, 2021 by Rajah Manchou

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

I have no issue with these instructions but it sounds SO pretentious when we correct people.

Why do you have to correct people? Just use the proper name yourself and allow them their freedom of choice. 

[MiserereNobis]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Too bad Christ and the Apostles weren't around when a bunch of Bishops thought that up.  😮

 

I actually think y'all would agree with the definition, but just apply to yourselves:

one: there is only one Church of Christ

holy: it is of God

catholic: it is universal, i.e. the only Church of Christ anywhere and it is everywhere

apostolic: it is based on the apostles

 

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I looked into affiliating at one point, but at present I guess I'm a "non-denominational Mormon", meaning I adhere to the Mormon faith but I do not follow any single branch of Mormonism.

In my opinion, there was revelation that came through Strang that is relevant to our day, just as there was revelation that came through the Brighamite branch. At some point, I expect all Mormon branches will come together.

Even the Unitarians?

[Rajah Manchou]

47 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Why do you have to correct people? Just use the proper name yourself and allow them their freedom of choice. 

There's no way to enforce the proper name, because all the off-shoots and branches also claim the proper name. The entity called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was legally dissolved by the US government by ruling of the Supreme Court in 1887. The proper name is now the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints headquartered in SLC is not the only Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

http://www.strangite.org/Name.htm

[Scott Lloyd]

20 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

There's no way to enforce the proper name, because all the off-shoots and branches also claim the proper name. The entity called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was legally dissolved by the US government by ruling of the Supreme Court in 1887. The proper name is now the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints headquartered in SLC is not the only Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

http://www.strangite.org/Name.htm

The only authority I recognize as pertaining to the proper name of the Savior’s Church is the Savior Himself as He has revealed it through anointed prophets, seers and revelators. 

But I think you misunderstood me or misconstrued what I have said. I said nothing about “enforc[ing]” the proper name of the Church among those who, for whatever reason, refuse to use it. They may do as they please; they have their free will. I have only said that those who profess to be faithful adherents to the restored Church of Jesus Christ ought to themselves abide by the admonition of a prophet of God acting under divine inspiration with regard to the name of the Church. 

Edited February 6, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[Rajah Manchou]

18 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I have only said that those who profess to be faithful adherents to the restored Church of Jesus Christ ought to themselves abide by the admonition of a prophet of God acting under divine inspiration with regard to the name of the Church. 

Not sure I understand what you're saying here. I'm reading it as "those who profess to be faithful adherents to the restored Church of Jesus Christ ought to themselves abide by the admonition of President Nelson." Have I misunderstood?

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Not sure I understand what you're saying here. I'm reading it as "those who profess to be faithful adherents to the restored Church of Jesus Christ ought to themselves abide by the admonition of President Nelson." Have I misunderstood?

I’m referring to President Nelson when I say “a prophet of God acting under divine inspiration with regard to the name of the Church.” I don’t understand why that wasn’t clear to you.