Honey, I love you!

Last night in the fellowship meeting I attended I looked around and saw several single individuals in attendance. My thoughts and concern went out to them as I remember many of the circumstances I have been privy to in the course of baptizing others. Some who come seeking baptism, both men and women, have come to the point of asking for it without the agreement, and in some cases without the knowledge of their spouse. The pain of this rift between partners is all too evident when listening to the accounts of their belief in this doctrine, and the unbelief of their spouse.

Some believe it to be their duty to God, over the stability of their marriage, to go ahead with their baptism or to attend fellowship meetings regardless of the outcome. In these things, and many others, we face great challenges in our marriages. We forget sometimes that our greatest accomplishment can be to make our marriages holy. “Our marriages must become holy.”(Denver Snuffer.) With this in mind I would like to bring to our remembrance some things which have been said both recently, and things said around 180 years ago:

. To the teachers and baptizers I would like you to remember that the 1835 edition of the D&C contained an official article on marriage which stated: “It is not right to persuade a woman to be baptized contrary to the will of her husband, neither is it lawful to influence her to leave her husband.”

. To all of us I think another quoting of Hyrum’s epistle to the church in England, as the then co-president of the Church, may serve to set many minds at ease about this topic:

“To our well beloved brother Parley P. Pratt, and to the elders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in England, and scattered abroad throughout all Europe, and to the Saints–Greeting:
Whereas, in times past persons have been permitted to gather with the Saints at Nauvoo, in North America–such as husbands leaving their wives and children behind; also, such as wives leaving their husbands, and such as husbands leaving their wives who have no children, and some because their companions are unbelievers. All this kind of proceedings we consider to be erroneous and for want of proper information. And the same should be taught to all the saints, and not suffer families to be broken up on any account whatever if it be possible to avoid it. Suffer no man to leave his wife because she is an unbeliever. These things are an evil and must be forbidden by the authorities of the church or they will come under condemnation; for the gathering is not in haste nor by flight, but to prepare all things before you, and you know not but the unbeliever may be converted and the Lord heal him; but let the believers exercise faith in God and the unbelieving husband shall be sanctified by the believing wife; and the unbelieving wife by the believing husband, and families are preserved and saved from a great evil which we have seen verified before our eyes. Behold this is a wicked generation, full of lyings, and deceit, and craftiness; and the children of the wicked are wiser than the children of light; that is, they are more crafty; and it seems that it has been the case in all ages of the world.
And the man who leaves his wife and travels to a foreign nation, has his mind overpowered with darkness, and Satan deceived him and flatters him with the graces of the harlot, and before he is aware he is disgraced forever; and greater is the danger for the woman that leaves her husband. The evils resulting from such proceedings are of such a nature as to oblige us to cut them off from the church.
And we also forbid that a woman leave her husband because he is an unbeliever. We also forbid that a man shall leave his wife because she is an unbeliever. If he be a bad man (i.e., the believer) there is a law to remedy that evil. And if the law divorce them, then they are at liberty; otherwise they are bound as long as they two shall live, and it is not our prerogative to go beyond this; if we do, it will be at the expense of our reputation.
These things we have written in plainness and we desire that they should be publicly known, and request this be published in the STAR.
May the Lord bestow his blessings upon all the Saints richly, and hasten the gathering, and bring about the fullness of the everlasting covenant are the prayers of your brethren.”
(The forgoing was written by Hyrum Smith the Patriarch and co-president of the church, and any emphasis is mine.)

I can’t hardly believe how apropos this foregoing is for us today.

. “God has something in mind for each one of us. Each one will be cared for in His due time. Trust in Him. Take your problems to Him and weary Him.”

It is such a joy when the man and the woman are as one in their belief of the Doctrine of Christ, in what the scriptures truly say, in their desires together for their future, and in their collective belief in God and His commands to them. I heard once, somewhere, that it is such a rare thing when this is so that even the angels come down to see this phenomenon. But regardless of whether it exists between us as marriage partners today or not, our effort needs to be always in that direction. it is such an important thing in its scope and potential that it must be pursued always and only with persuasion, always in long suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; by kindness and pure knowledge. Perhaps you have just realized this is all a priesthood thing, which is as applicable to women as it is to men. God bless us all!

Keith Henderson

An Education Like None Other

I attend a fellowship meeting once each month with a group that meets in Riverdale. Last night was our scheduled meeting. For me it was a milestone meeting.

When Denver Snuffer gave the portion of his talk “Remembering the Restoration” in Grand Junction Colorado, he made a statement to the effect that “if you want an education like none other, then gather a group together and pay your tithing among yourselves, and help the poor among you.” Some who are very close to me and my family decided without further persuasion that was exactly what we would do. We began immediately to meet as two families which also included married children and their spouses, and began to pay the money previously given to the LDS Church to ourselves for use among “our” poor.

Almost from the beginning, in this quite intimate setting of 13 individuals, the idea was expressed that we should all affix our names to an agreement which would state our intent as a group and include a statement to the effect that anyone could withdraw at any time, but they must realize they would not receive any money back if they left, or any effects their donated money might have produce.

Shortly after the 10th portion of that talk, when it was re-iterated that we should begin to form fellowships, our small group was besieged with requests to join us in our meetings. That group has now swollen to the size that about 100 attend each meeting and I’m sure that many more have attended although perhaps not regularly. Throughout this growth the “Entry Promise” [which it came to be called] has been used to identify “members” who would have voting status on any group decisions which were to be made, particularly on how any collected tithing money should be used, and up until last night has continued to identify what was expected of those who would be a member. It was a good thing to know what we were about, and to be able to “control” somewhat, this increasingly diverse group. And I, particularly had a vested interest in this document, as it was me that wrote the damned thing.

Some things transpired over the last couple of weeks that made necessary a re-visiting of that agreement, and its intended effect, and result, and its potential to wreak havoc on those who had affixed their names to it, and what it was doing to those who wanted to fellowship with us, but would not sign the document. I don’t feel it necessary to go into all that input, but only to say that it began to make me burn with shame that I had essentially been the instigator of such a thing, and although I try not to speak very much in our fellowship meetings anymore, something I had written over a year ago continued to control how [and by who] our meeting was administered. I have since learned that when my opportunity came to instigate the insertion of that document way back when, we all would have been better off if I’d have just gotten on my horse and rode west.

Last night in our scheduled fellowship meeting I stood up and made it known that I would be blotting my name off that document. I stated my reasons why, which was that I essentially have made a grevious error in ever signing it, and then I proposed to the group that the “Entry Promise” be abolished.
Brothers and sisters. Below is a synopsis of what transpired:

Brothers and Sisters

In the meeting this evening a proposal was made and seconded, and then voted on in the affirmative by as far as I could tell every individual present, to abolish the “Entry Agreement.”

In effect I would surmise that what this primarily means is that the fellowship will be comprised of whoever is attending on any given evening.

If any of you reading this have a copy of that agreement, it is no longer supported by the original, as it was shredded in full view of all present tonight, and therefore should be considered null and void.

So, this puts this group back into the realm of an “idea” and not an institution with agreements and requirements.

I can’t tell you how happy this makes me. I hope all feel the same way, but if you don’t, [I was going to say, tough, but instead I will say I personally feel this way is more appropriate.]. It’s a done deal, and has the absolute, unanimous, common consent of everyone who came to the meeting.

Keith Henderson

Comments or questions for Keith

I received the following comment with questions just this past week, which I desire to publicly respond to:

“Something has been on my mind that I would like to address. It has nothing to do with this website, but I think it has been on some people’s mind.

Denver has repeatedly said that he will not start a new Church, be a strongman, etc…But how limited is that? I am aware, at least with my current understanding, that there needs to be a High Priest/Teacher after the Ancient Order through whom a covenant can be made between God and man, whereby we can receive adoption rites. (Correct me if I am wrong. I am paraphrasing Denver’s teaching on Alma 13: 14 and his interview with Tim Malone).

He has also stated we need to organize ourselves – which to me means we need practical experience and accept the responsibility which we have to rise up and know the Lord ourselves and be led by His Holy Spirit.

It seems many are organizing into small communities to do this. But, Denver has also stated that this cannot be rushed.

So, do you have any advice/knowledge about how and if we are to wait upon Denver to give us further direction? For example, if we should wait to assemble as a consecrated community and continue to prepare ourselves where we currently are?”

End of comment.

Everything following this is my answer to the above query. I would like to emphasize that I do not attempt to speak for Denver. For that you will have to go to the “prophetsclearinghouse.” ~:-)~ Most of what is below is of me, and is said regardless of whether Denver said it or not. I made no effort to find quotes by Denver that would substantiate any of what I said below.

And, furthermore,

I claim no great accomplishment (yet) in doing what I say, if it sounds like an admonition. In fact, I’ve already had a witness of the Spirit in the writing of this that I don’t meet many of the requirements I have written about. So I guess we’ll just have to rely on the Holy Spirit as to whether it’s all true, or not.

Brother R,

Good observations.

Denver said in the [7th & 10th] talks in Grand Junction Colorado and Mesa Arizona, that if you want an education like none other then join or form a fellowship, and pay your tithing among yourselves and help the poor among you. To think that a person is going to walk into Zion unprepared or unschooled in the principles required to exist in such a community is absurd. Zion is not the school, but the place to receive those that have prepared themselves to live in such a place. It is also not the place for the person that rises up to become the leader of his/her fellows, but is the place for those who have developed the ability to be the servant of all.

In this life there are kings and queens and priests and priestesses plenty. What there is a dearth of are those who are willing to carry the load, and will go the 2nd mile when they are required to only go one. Or those who will turn the other cheek to be smitten instead of retaliating. It is the place for those who know they have the physical prowess [if necessary] and/or the argument to win in most any situation, but will always use only persuasion with meekness, love unfeigned, and gentleness in doing so. It requires one to be a whole lot like his/her Lord, Jesus Christ.

What the Lord needs for Zion and also right now in these fellowships of instruction, is one who can “organize himself.” We do not need another institution with an organized hierarchy, and a book full of rules, but “one” who can control himself, and love others as himself. You become that person and watch and see how people will flock to you as their leader. Then it will be your requirement to learn how to handle that imposition without becoming prideful and a strong man.

The Lord needs you to be the one who could be the teacher/priest after The Ancient Order, because you have studied the scriptures, already given, thoroughly enough, and have a close enough relationship with the Savior that you can draw down from Him your own covenant that He trusts you enough to call you Son, and make you part of His family. He needs a man/woman who’s heart is like His own. That is what you will find in Zion.

These fellowships, of which there are now dozens, are not going to walk or be taken by angels into Zion en mass. They are, however, a necessary schooling device wherein a few might rise up, and become capable of living in Zion. And, there is already an existing commandment from God to associate in fellowship with our brothers and sisters. And with our enemies. And with the obnoxious. And with the little kids that run around and make noise. And, for heaven’s sake, with all those “needy” people. This is the school! And the success we make of it [or not] is all dependent on the individual, and whether his heart is right with God.

And furthermore, there is a requirement to be baptized (again) as a result from, and a commitment to, these things, and of coming to understand and remember the “Doctrine of Christ,” which then becomes the gate to that strait and narrow path God requires each of us to walk, hand in hand with Him; doing all things which His Holy Spirit directs of us, until He says to you, “My Son/daughter thou shalt have eternal life. (See D&C 131: 5-6.)

And I think that just as there is God’s requirement upon us to be baptized, there is a requirement upon us to also baptize, if we can. And outside of one’s own immediate family, the man that does this is required to have a certificate that certifies his worthiness, and is a blessing from the women in his fellowship. The signatures of seven women are required now, by an edict from the Lord, for a man to function in any priesthood outside of his immediate familial boundaries; with his own wife’s signature being the first.

So how can any of us consider ourselves candidates for Zion if we can’t meet these current requirements among ourselves in our fellowships, which usually begins with our just showing up.

This requires nothing of us about waiting upon Denver. It does however, require us to be up and about, doing the things God has already said we must do, through this man, in his capacity as “servant of the Lord.”

God bless you brother in your efforts and your desires to be about doing this work the Lord has commanded of us.

Central Recorder

There are save two churches only

Thoughts, I Think Worth Having

Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth. (1 Nephi 14: 10.)

If a person looks to the Doctrine of Christ and repents, believes in Christ, and is baptized, and therein accepts the promise of The Father that he will receive the Baptism of Fire, and the Holy Ghost (3 Nephi 11: 35.), which the scriptures say showeth all things, and teacheth the peaceable things of the kingdom (D&C 39: 6.), and if he doeth them and endure to the end (2 Nephi 31: 15.), then Jesus Christ says of that man, “he is of my church.” (D&C 10: 67.)

That man, as described above, has received an assurance of Jesus Christ that, he is of The Church of the Lamb of God.

If that man belongs simultaneously to another church, which does not applaud and promote the acts of that man, but would instead decry, and excommunicate one from their fellowship who follows that doctrine; who by so doing becomes a member of the Church of the Lamb of God; then that other church, which he also holds membership in, has proven itself to him, and to God, that it is not of Christ, but is against Christ, and therefore is the church of the devil.

Any man or institutional policy, which would do such a thing to a righteous man, or try to persuade him that it is not proper to follow the commands of God in such a doctrine, and the sacraments which Jesus Christ has instituted to follow this doctrine, “…………the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church.” (D&C 10: 68.) Such a person or institution is therefore anti-Christ.

Now, this written above, shows the fallacy and danger of hopping between two boughs, so to speak, and God no longer approves of us wasting 3 hours each Sunday attending meetings in which we [seem to] draw near to Him with our mouths, but are actually far from Him in the heart of our content and doctrine, thereby requiring additional [unapproved] time rectifying erroneous doctrine taught to ourselves, and to our children; which now begs the question, how long will we as a people keep attempting to serve God, and whatever Mammon we serve? Can we stretch so far as to keep one foot in one church, and the other in another, and still serve our intended master? If we believe the scriptures, we will know we cannot.

I am reminded of a scene in “Fiddler on the Roof”, in which the Jewish peasant Tevye confronts his daughter Havah about marrying a gentile. She says to him, “Papa, can’t you just accept us?” Tevye turns inward a moment to introspect on his beliefs and who he is, asking himself, “accept them? How can I accept them?” Then using a violent gesture which symbolically pushes them from him, Tevye cries out in anguish, “no Havalah, no! If I bend that far, I’ll break.”

I certainly am not unsympathetic to the issues we face in these times of new requirements placed upon us through the word of God to His servant, and the terrible turmoil which that can unleash upon a family, when children, and parents, and brothers and sisters will not or cannot understand our seemingly aberrant desires to obey God’s forgotten commandments. I am one of us, out here, weeping over my many problems, just as you do over yours:


What if the night falls, and we find our souls not saved in our intended Zion, because we have maintained allegiance with the devil, and his church one hour too long?

Keith Henderson

Times up

We have received many names to be recorded for those who have been baptized. We do not think that we have received the names of all those baptized, however.

So far those names which have been received have been stored electronically as well as on a back-up hard copy, but the time has now come for the real work to begin, which is to copy the submissions which have been given to us electronically, plus others that have been hand delivered or phone delivered, into the handwritten book, which will eventually be submitted to the Lord in His holy temple.

We are sure, however, with all the names we have received, that there are many more out there which have not been turned into us. We understand that there may be as many as 1000+ additional names of individuals who have recently been baptized, which have not yet been submitted to the Central Recorder. We would request they be promptly submitted through this website.

The book which will be handwritten with all the names submitted to us, is now in our hands, and the work must begin. So this is a call for the names of all individuals baptized in this order of The Doctrine of Christ, prior to and including the year 2014, be submitted immediately, and no later than July 1, 2015.

On July 1st I will begin transferring all the names submitted for baptisms performed through 2014 into this very special book. These names must be entered alphabetically, which means that if you have not submitted your name by this above stated deadline, it will not be entered into the main body of the entries for your particular year. There will be a provision for an amendment to each year, but again, if you are late on your submission your name will not be entered into the main body of the submissions.

If you cannot account positively for your name having been submitted, then you should take personal responsibility to see that it is done by submitting your name yourself. It will be an easy thing for us to identify and resolve redundancies. What will be impossible for us, will be to record your name into the main body if it is not submitted by the date specified above.

So, let me see if I can drive home the seriousness of what is being done here with a scripture:

Starting in the last part of D&C 85:7 we find spoken of, a person who will come along, and “…set in order the house of God, and arrange by lot the inheritances of the saints whose names are found, and the names of their fathers, and of their children, enrolled in the book of the law of God.”

And then skipping to verses 9 and 10 in that same section: “And they who are not found written in the book of remembrance shall find none inheritance in that day, but they shall be cut asunder, and their portion shall be appointed them among the unbelievers, where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth. These things I say not of myself; therefore, as the Lord speaketh, he will also fulfill.”

So, of what book does this scripture speak? And do you want to take a chance it is not this one? Many things given before have been renewed again now, and we need to do as the Lord has directed, moving forward in faith.

God bless every one of you engaged in this work. I know it is pleasing to God, because He is the author of it.

Central Recorder
Keith Henderson

Two issues regarding baptism

It has come to my attention that there are some questions, perhaps even action being taken, to change the age of baptism established by the teachings of Christ, by lowering from the age of eight. I have heard there are those who claim the right to lower the age, based on a parent’s discretion, or the superior ability of the child. There was even one case where Johnny, age five, (name changed to protect the “innocent” – pun intended) didn’t want to be left out because all of his siblings were baptized, so the parents just thought they’d try the system and see if they could get his name recorded.

My dear brothers and sisters, have we taken leave of our senses? Do we not read the scriptures? And if so, do we understand them? I will review some of the available scriptures which address this issue. You all can certainly manipulate this submission site into accepting the name of such a child, but why would you want to? We have a system to remove redundancies in which we believe almost all redundancies will be weeded out before the names are hand written into the sacred book. So, if we receive such a child’s name as a single submission in any particular year, it will be written that one time to stand forever in the book. We do not record multiple baptisms for one individual. If you submit a name for the year 2014 and tell us it is a valid baptism, it will be recorded in that year, and never again. You can be baptized as many times as you are prompted, or like, but there is only one necessary recording.

So can you see, if you send us your child’s name, having baptized him or her at an age less than eight, it will be recorded as though it is Ok, although it will be non-scriptural and non-conforming to the requirements established by Christ. We won’t know the difference, but you, and the lord and all the holy angels who look upon this book will. And then if you baptize the child again after they turn eight and re-submit to us the name, it will be discarded as a redundancy, unless you make a special comment that you have repented of the thing originally done, and specifically ask that the name be recorded again. Even at that, the original submission will remain because the only way we will have of changing it will be to draw a line through it, in effect blotting it out. We will not be able to erase.

So please don’t do this!

D&C 18: 42. “For all men must repent and be baptized, and not only men, but women, and children who have arrived at the years of accountability.”

D&C 20: 37. “And again, by way of commandment to the church concerning the manner of baptism–All those who humble themselves before God, and desire to be baptized, and come forth with broken hearts and contrite spirits, and witness before the church that they have truly repented of all their sins, and are willing to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ, having a determination to serve him to the end, and truly manifest by their works that they have received of the Spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins,shall be received by baptism into his church.”

I have to ask if the bolded part of this above scripture belongs to our little children?

D&C 68: 25-27. “And again, inasmuch as parents have children in Zion, or in any of her stakes which are organized, that teach them not to understand the doctrine of repentance, faith in Christ the Son of the living God, and of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, when eight years old, the sin be upon the heads of the parents. For this shall be a law unto the inhabitants of Zion, or in any of her stakes which are organized. And their children shall be baptized for the remission of their sins when eight years old, and receive the laying on of the hands.” (The Holy Ghost is an issue we will discuss another time.)

Section 22: 4 of the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants is comparable to the above section 68 of our modern day scriptures and says the same thing about the age of baptism for little children. Revelations Notebook #1 kept by Joseph Smith contains the same revelation under the date of 1 Nov, 1831-A. (See Joseph Smith Papers, Revelations and Translations, Vol. 1, p 201.) Some have tried to argue that there are discrepancies between these various sources, but the record does not bear that out. The Lord revealed that little children in our day and time are to be baptized at age eight. So I would think that as Mormon says below, baptizing your little children would be a “gross error” and “solemn mockery” if they are not yet that age at baptism. Please try to remember that this movement and the revelation which was received establishing it is to remember the Restoration began by Joseph Smith, not the dismantling of it.

Moroni 8: 4-12. “And now, my son, I speak unto you concerning that which grieveth me exceedingly; for it grieveth me that there should disputations rise among you. For, if I have learned the truth, there have been disputations among you concerning the baptism of your little children. And now, my son, I desire that ye should labor diligently, that this gross error should be removed from among you; for, for this intent I have written this epistle. For immediately after I had learned these things of you I inquired of the Lord concerning the matter. And the word of the Lord came unto me by the power of the Holy Ghost, saying: Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me. And after this manner did the Holy Ghost manifest the word of God unto me; wherefore, my beloved son, I know that it is solemn mockery before God that ye should baptize little children. Behold I say unto you that this thing shall ye teach–repentance and baptism unto those who are accountable and capable of committing sin; yea, teach parents that they must repent and be baptized, and humble themselves as their little children, and they shall all be saved with their little children. And their little children need no repentance, neither baptism. Behold, baptism is unto repentance to the fulfilling of the commandments unto the remission of sins. But little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world; if not so, God is a partial God, and also a changeable God, and a respecter of persons; for how many little children have died without baptism!”

Now in the words of Jacob, if I didn’t have another issue to discuss with you, we could all go our way and be satisfied that we had covered our topic. But alas, there is another concern:

I know floating out there on the internet is an offer by a woman to baptize others, claiming because of the purity of women, and I suppose she claims particular purity herself, that all women should be able to baptize in this new order of The Doctrine of Christ. My personal opinion is that this is wrong (for now) and I think we should be able to make quick dispatch of the issue by resorting to the comments of Denver Snuffer which he made in the tenth talk.

I, however, do not dispute there may be those women with greater spiritual insight and worthiness and they may have a better general standing in connection with heaven. There is, however, at play here a law, which at this particular time cannot be annulled by men, or women. That law was set at the fall of man and reconfirmed by the Lord recently:

“In my disgust and personal preference, I asked the Lord that priesthood get extended beyond the confines of the men who have continually abused and neglected it. I was told that priesthood is confined to men because of the Fall and the conditions ordained by God at that time. Until we reverse things in the Millennium, that is the way it is going to remain, as to the ordinances thus far given in public. I asked the Lord to change that order. It is not going to change. I then asked the Lord that if only men were to hold priesthood for our public ordinances, then could only women vote to sustain them. The saying pleased the Lord, for it was already in His heart. But he said to me: “There shall be a minimum of seven women to sustain the man in any vote, and if the man is married, his wife shall be one of them.” (Denver Snuffer 10th talk, P.15, Paragraph #4. emphasis mine.)

If I find this becomes a continuing issue I will have my computer assistant add another required field to the submissions which will say something like baptised by; Male__ Female__. I will not be able to record the baptism if the field is marked “Female.”

Of course lying is still an option, if one doesn’t mind having it available for all to see for a thousand years. Can you see that Recording matters, and IT WILL be available for all to see.

Central Recorder
Keith Henderson

Importance of Personal Recording

As you may well now be aware, there is not much individual information which actually gets recorded by the Central Recorder. Now I don’t want to give the idea that I’m just sitting here twiddling my thumbs, because when I multiply what is recorded for one name by a couple of thousand others, I keep pretty busy. But for each individual there is only recorded here, Last name, middle name, first name, and year baptized, and that’s it. But should that be all that is recorded? For me the answer is yes. For you, the answer is no.

Baptism for most is a very special event.

Many times, it’s a very spiritual event, highlighted by intense feelings of gratitude, love, and a connectivity with heaven. Many times there has been an intense preparation for the occasion. For others, their spouse or beloved children have been left home not caring to partake because of unbelief. There are feelings of elation, grief, sorrow, and gratitude that span a spectrum of many other emotions driven by our individual circumstances.

Special friends have been invited, and there may be a special bond with the baptizer asked to perform the ordinance.

There are many locations where the baptisms are held, which are breathtakingly beautiful, and wonderfully symbolic things have taken place. Perhaps doves have made an appearance, or eagles have flown above, or geese and ducks have made spectacular takeoffs or landings. Some have been baptized in driving rain, and have felt blessed because of it, and for others the weather has cleared miraculously allowing the beauty of the sun to magically appear through thick clouds. Some have broken the ice and have felt an icy death as they were laid under, while yet others were baptized in balmy 103 degree water coming out anew into 20 degree air, brisk and enlivening.

Many times a specific date for our baptism has been chosen, perhaps coinciding with birthdays, solstice, equinox, or other phenomenon, that will forever engrave in our minds the occasion.

Many times instruction has been given which bolsters faith and drives testimony of the occasion. Sometimes there seems a ethereal strangeness because of our traditions which require white clothing, formal witnesses, and full names to be given, when instead we are baptized in cutoffs, wet suits, and various other garb, while at times it is only us and the baptizer, and other times there are dozens to observe; and all the baptizer wants to use as our name is the name we think God would call us if He was speaking directly to us. And to top it off, the prayer is different.

There are these and so many more things no one but ourselves can know about us, and what we feel about this occasion. All of these things should be recorded, and there is no one who can do it justice except you.

And this is not all:

“Now the nature of this ordinance consists in the power of the priesthood, by the revelation of Jesus Christ, wherein it is granted that whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven…or, in other words, taking a different view of the translation, whatsoever you record on earth shall be recorded in heaven…”

“It may seem to some to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of–a power which records or binds on earth and binds in heaven. Nevertheless, in all ages of the world, whenever the Lord has given a dispensation of the priesthood to any man by actual revelation or any set of men, this power has always been given. Hence, whatsoever those men did in authority, in the name of the Lord, and did it truly and faithfully, and kept a proper and faithful record of the same, it became a law on earth and in heaven, and could not be annulled, according to the decrees of the great Jehovah. This is a faithful saying. Who can hear it?”(D&C 128: 8-9.)

What I record will generate a record in heaven binding those names it contains, and the record will be kept in the temple for at least a thousand years where it will be researched by many, and will stand as a testimony to the faith through obedience, of those pioneers who entered the waters of baptism in this age, in accordance with the Doctrine of Christ.

What you record will be a witness containing your testimony and the circumstances of the event to your descendants, and to those others who will stand in awe at your faithfulness. I have no doubt that my record and your record will be combined in heaven as a binding law, which shall never be annulled.

Central Recorder
Keith Henderson

Correspondence & reply

I have been receiving correspondence from several, asking essentially the same question:

“Is it wise to put us under “penalty of law” in order to submit a name? Why not just accept the names that are submitted and leave any judgement in the hands of the Lord? I am also wary of making an oath of honesty.”

“Why the requirement for email addresses, phone numbers, or any contact information at all? The reason I ask is that if you believe there are eternal consequences to not having your name recorded, then wouldn’t you want to be sure that you do not unnecessarily cause someone to “not” submit their name? What if there are people out there who do not submit their name because they do not want to provide their contact information, or because they don’t want to swear an oath?”

My answer in each case has been:

We have all been trammelled because of oaths, etc. However there are some reasons for including the statements we have made and requiring identifying information from those submitting names for themselves and especially for others.

. All the person is attesting to, is that the name is correct to the best of their knowledge and that the work was actually done. We are requiring no allegiance of any kind. This actually amounts to another level of security against the spurious submission of names.

. The internet has created some interesting issues which Joseph Smith never had to deal with. Although the requirements for the name being submitted are minimal, (only the person’s names and year of baptism), there has to be an identifier for the one doing the submitting. In this case the easiest is email and phone number. This is so I can verify I haven’t just received part of the LA phone book as their submission. I suppose if a submitter is really adamant that they not have to give out this information, they can always travel to my address [which is included in this web site], and personally hand me their list. They will then, never really know or not, if their image was caught on surveillance.

. D&C 128: 4 says the following: “Then, let there be a general recorder, to whom these other records can be handed, being attended with certificates over

    their own signatures, certifying that the record they have made is true.

Then the general recorder can enter the record on the general church book, with the certificates and all the attending witnesses, with his own statement, that he verily believes the above statement and records to be true…When this is done, the record shall be just as holy as if he had seen with his own eyes and heard with his own ears…”

Before I make my attestation that I believe the above submissions are true and accurate, I want every avenue open to me to convince me that they are, because I am making that statement to someone much higher than myself, who requires me to do my best.

Central Recorder.

Purpose of this Website

Well, we are now up and running. Submissions of individuals names, baptized or re-baptized in the Doctrine of Christ may be made on this site. To do so, simply click on the SUBMISSIONS link above or click here and follow the instructions.

It is not the intent of this site to retain in long time storage, the names collected here. This is to be an enabling tool for the Central Recorder.

Each year, when the collection of names for those baptized that year is complete, the recorder will transfer those names into a special book via handwriting with special archival ink. This book will be preserved and eventually placed in the temple which will be built, where it will be maintained throughout the Millennium.

As often as required there will be messages placed here, primarily in answer to questions posed by submitting recorders. These messages will be designed to help expedite the work and clarify issues which may be presenting problems.

May God bless us all in moving this work forward.

Keith Henderson
Central Recorder