Bruce R. McConkie

Theory vs.

Actual Practice Fast forward to the 20th century, and church leaders like Apostle Bruce R. McConkie and President Joseph Fielding Smith found themselves in a pretty difficult position.

While they still maintained that blood atonement was a true theological principle, they flatly denied it was ever actually practiced by the early Mormon church.

They claimed it was purely theoretical.

Part 6 A Lingering Modern Legacy So, when Utah established its early laws, the theology directly dictated the penal code.

Early Mormons incorporated this concept that a murderer's blood literally had to flow.

Therefore, hanging was heavily criticized by leaders like Apostle Bruce R. McConkie because strangulation on a gallows does not comply with the law of blood atonement, no blood is actually shed upon the earth.

Instead, early Utah law gave the condemned the choice of being hung, shot, or beheaded.

What a glorious time we're living in.

Bruce R. McConkie says, They were still a distinct people many hundreds of years later, for the resurrected Lord visited and ministered among them following his ministry on this continent among the Nephites.

Obviously, he taught them in the same way and gave them the same truths which he gave his followers in Jerusalem and on the American continent.

And obviously, they recorded his teachings, thus creating volumes of scripture comparable to the Bible and Book of Mormon.

It becomes complete when they press forward, feasting upon the word of Christ and endure to the end.

The scriptures call this process making our calling and election sure.

Elder Bruce R. McConkie says, Then they must be called and elected again in this life, an occurrence which takes place when they join the true church.

Finally, in order to reap eternal salvation, they must press forward in obedient devotion to the truth until they make their calling and election sure.

Well, I, you know, and, and the main question that I would ask there, by calling it new Mormonism, I would ask them to define what is old Mormonism, right? Because even in their construction or their idea of what this old Mormonism is, setting aside the issue that it is very informed by kind of evangelical, uh, polemic literature and, and caric- caricatures of, of historical Mormonism, uh, you can't tell me that, uh, within the history of the church we haven't had different iterations, different generational, uh, type developments in the way that we understand, practice, and, uh, uh, um, articulate the restored gospel to other people.

Um, I think, you know, the question I would ask is if we're taking the thought of Joseph Smith, and then of Brigham Young, and then of Wilford Woodruff, and then of Joseph F. Smith, and then of David O. McKay, and then Bruce R. McConkie, and then, you know, Russell M. Nelson or Dallin H. Oaks, we can see, you know, a, a kind of living evolution or development of the way that we understand our church and our faith.

Uh, and I would ask out of all of those, how do you slice it up to determine which chunk is old Mormonism and which chunk is new Mormonism? Uh, uh, I think, I think that there, you know, it would be wrong to deny that, uh, certain forms of change have occurred.

Uh, you know, even now we've had, you know, uh, uh, certain changes with respect to our temple worship.

We will receive a degree of glory.

I love Elder Mc- Elder Bruce R. McConkie.

He's speaking to, um, CES teachers and leaders and at one point he asked them to raise their hands if they believed that they were coming to the celestial kingdom and not as many raised hands as he thought would, is so it seemed.

And he said to them in response, "How dare you make God a liar?" God is going to redeem his people.