D&C 22

Section 22 is very short, only four verses, and covers an interesting topic, that of baptism and proper priesthood authority. The IM quotes President Joseph Fielding Smith as teaching, “Immediately after the Church was organized, converts were made. Some of these had belonged to churches which believed in baptism by immersion. In fact, many of the early converts of the Church had previously accepted this mode, believing that it was right. The question of divine authority, however, was not firmly fixed in their minds. When they desired to come into the Church, having received the testimony that Joseph Smith had told a true story, they wondered why it was necessary for them to be baptized again when they had complied with an ordinance of baptism by immersion.” It’s an interesting question, but I guess it would be the same thing if the Lord told us today that we had to be baptized every day in order to gain salvation, it would be about obedience and submission, about doing what he says to do. 22:1- - The IM asks “How important is it to have priesthood authority in performing a sacred ordinance?” And quotes Elder James E. Talmage as teaching, “When the Lord established his Church amongst the Nephites upon this continent, he told those who were chosen and ordained, unto whom authority was given, just how to administer the ordinance of baptism. They were to say: ‘Having authority given me of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ That does not give us in this age any such authority. The words that Christ spoke unto his apostles of old would be no authority unto the apostles today, nor unto any of the elders of the Church. I repeat, the words that he, the Lord, spoke unto the disciples who were chosen from among the Nephites would be no authority unto us; but in this day and age he has spoken again, and has given that same power and authority to speak in his name, and to administer the ordinances of the gospel, and after the pattern that he has set; and therefore the elders and priests who take candidates, who have professed their faith, and who have repented of their sins, into the waters of baptism today, declare that they have authority given them; and, being commissioned of Jesus Christ, they baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.” I like the way that DJR puts it when he says, “In verses 1 and 2, next, the Lord explains the reason for requiring that all who desire to enter His true Church, do so through proper, authorized, baptism. Among other things, He explains that this is a new covenant, not an existing one contained in other religious organizations which is being revised or updated. In other words, this is a ‘restoration’ of the true Church, not a revitalization of an existing sect or church.” Since we know that ordinances are for our good and not required by some heavenly accounting system, we have to ask ourselves what good would it do us personally to be rebaptized into the Church, how would we benefit personally? If we were to retain the baptism of another sect, and count it as legitimate for this church, it really says that other churches have the same power and authority from God to act in his name, it is the sentiment that we are no more right or true or powerful than any other sect, and then really, what is the purpose of having a new church at all, if we are just as right or just as wrong as everyone else. I’m going to go through verses 1-4, with DJR’s commentary in parenthesis. He says, “Behold, I say unto you that all old covenants (such as in the Law of Moses) have I caused to be done away in this thing (in the restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ through Joseph Smith); and this is a new and an everlasting covenant (‘new’ for this dispensation (the last days), because all other churches have gone into apostasy and have no priesthood authority, etc.) even that which was from the beginning (this is a restoration of the true Church, with the power and authority, which Adam had at the beginning of things on this earth).” The IM quotes President Joseph Fielding Smith as teaching about the concept of “New and everlasting covenant” saying, “The new and everlasting covenant is the fullness of the gospel. It is composed of ‘All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations’ that are sealed upon members of the Church by the Holy Spirit of promise, or the Holy Ghost, by the authority of the President of the Church who holds the keys. The President of the Church holds the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood. He delegates authority to others and authorizes them to perform the sacred ordinances of the priesthood. Marriage for eternity is a new and everlasting covenant. Baptism is also a new and everlasting covenant, and likewise ordination to the priesthood, and every other covenant is everlasting and a part of the new and everlasting covenant which embraces all things.” I’ve heard the “new and everlasting covenant” defined as celestial marriage, and that makes sense but it would also make sense that baptism, the sacrament, the endowment, all that would also be “new” maybe referencing it’s advent in this dispensation, and also “everlasting” being that it endures forever. I really liked this definition. The Lord continues in verse 2, “Wherefore, although a man should be baptized an hundred times it availeth him nothing, for you cannot enter in at the strait gate by the law of Moses (in other words, even the Law of Moses can’t get you into the celestial kingdom), neither by your dead works (other religions and churches of the day don’t have the necessary power and authority either).” DJR pauses here to say that “Next, in verse 3, the Lord explains that none of the existing churches of the day have the power and authority to save souls. In other words, the apostasy was universal.” The Lord continues, “For it is because of your dead works (baptism and other ordinances in existing churches which have no power or authority to perform them) that I have caused this last covenant and this church to be built up unto me, even as in days of old (just like I did in previous dispensations and restorations of the gospel.) Wherefore, enter ye in at the gate (be baptized by immersion by proper authority), and I have commanded, and seek not to counsel your God. Amen.” I liked the definitions of “dead works” as those things done without the power of the priesthood. When I first heard the phrase “dead works” it implied to me that those thing done were of no consequence, which didn’t make sense to me because everything we do has consequences, good and bad. But I like the idea that “dead works” doesn’t mean “pointless” or “good for nothing” work, but that it means they were done without the sealing power of the priesthood. Continuing, the IM comments on “Enter ye in at the gate” saying, “baptism is the gateway, or requirement, for entry into the celestial kingdom for anyone who has reached the age of accountability. The ordinance of baptism, while absolutely essential, becomes valid only when it is accompanied by a corresponding change of life. To be born again suggests that one begins a new life, that he is a new person. Elder John A. Widtsoe described such a changed life: ‘I remember the man who baptized me into the Church, a very common, ordinary man to begin with, a ropewalker with a jug of beer two or three times a day, a glass of whiskey a little alter, and a cud of tobacco mostly all day long, living a useless, purposeless life, except for three meals a day, and the satisfaction of some of the carnal appetites. He heard the Gospel and accepted it. It was good. It was something he had been longing for. The man grew in power and stature in the Church. As I recall it, he filled five or six missions and presided over one of the missions of the Church. He was the same man, with the same arms, same feet, same body, same mind, but changed because of the Spirit that comes with the acceptance of eternal truth. Have not we seen this in our own families and friends in the little towns in which we live? Have not we felt our own strength grow mightier in love for our fellow men, in love for our daily tasks, in love for all the good things of life?’”