Minutes, 8 September 1834

  • Source Note
Page 50
image
brother Carpenter, that it was contrary to the  rules and regulations of the , because, in  all our decisions we must judge from  actual testimony. Brother Gordon said the tes timony was had and the decision given before  the gift of tongues was manifested. Brother  Joseph advised that <we> speak in our own language  in all such matters, and then the adversary  cannot lead our minds astray. then gave a relation of a certain  difficulty which took place in a . He, presided, when  several of the brethren spake out of order,  and brother refused to submit to  to order according to his (’s) re quest. He now wished instruction on this point,  whether he, or some one else should preside  over this of the , and also  whether such conduct could be approbated  in conferences. Brother Gordon then  made some remarks on the subject which  was at the time before the .
Brother Joseph said, relative to the first ques tion, that brother Gordon’s tongues in the end,  did operate as testimony, as, by his remarks  in tongues, the former decision was set  aside, and his taken. That it was his  decision that brother Gordon’s manifest ation was incorrect, and from a sus picious heart. He approved the first  decision, but discarded the second.  Brother Joseph Keeler said that in the former  decision he had acted hastily himself in urging  brother Carpenter to make acknowledgement without [p. 50]
brother Carpenter, that it was contrary to the rules and regulations of the , because, in all our decisions we must judge from actual testimony. Brother Gordon said the testimony was had and the decision given before the gift of tongues was manifested. Brother Joseph advised that we speak in our own language in all such matters, and then the adversary cannot lead our minds astray. then gave a relation of a certain difficulty which took place in a . He, presided, when several of the brethren spake out of order, and brother refused to submit to to order according to his (’s) request. He now wished instruction on this point, whether he, or some one else should preside over this of the , and also whether such conduct could be approbated in conferences. Brother Gordon then made some remarks on the subject which was at the time before the .
Brother Joseph said, relative to the first question, that brother Gordon’s tongues in the end, did operate as testimony, as, by his remarks in tongues, the former decision was set aside, and his taken. That it was his decision that brother Gordon’s manifestation was incorrect, and from a suspicious heart. He approved the first decision, but discarded the second. Brother Joseph Keeler said that in the former decision he had acted hastily himself in urging brother Carpenter to make acknowledgement without [p. 50]
Page 50