| 216 Whereas, It has been so taught through the Herald, (see issue for September 1, 1876, article by W. W. B.,) and
Whereas, We consider the position of Bro. Briggs in apparent harmony with these positions, therefore, be it
Resolved, That we consider reason number four not well taken.
Fifth. On reason number five, it was
Resolved, That while J. W. Briggs declares emphatically that reason number five misrepresents him throughout, and while we are willing to accord to him the benefit of this declaration, we are of the opinion that there is ground for reason five, arising either from the ambiguity in which the writer has expressed himself, or of design in such expressions.
We respectfully recommend to your honorable body that the brother be relieved from the odium attached to his name as an officer of the church, that he may labor in his exalted calling; or, if still deemed guilty by the body, of the accusations made by the committee at the semiannual conference of 1877, that he be brought to trial, and the right of defense granted him as made and provided for in the law of the church.
Submitted with respect, by order of committee.
ALEX. H. SMITH, Chairman of Committee.
It was moved that the report be adopted, and that it be taken up and acted upon by sections.
Number one of the report was read, also number one of the reasons given by the committee last fall for not sustaining Bro. Briggs, with his reply thereto, also his letter to Bro. Gurley in Herald of May 15, 1877, and the vote was taken on the first clause, and it was declared as affirmed. Division being called for, the rising vote showed eight for and six against the adoption of the first clause of the present report. . . .
Number two of the report was read, and also that of the former committee, with Bro. Briggs' reply to it, and a portion of an article in The Messenger, for October, 1876, concerning Tyre, and also the fifteenth to twenty-first verses of Ezekiel, twenty-sixth chapter, with 1 Corinthians 14: 29, as called for successively, . . . and a vote being taken, the second clause was negatived, with only one affirmative vote. . . .
Clause three was read, and also that of the former committee, and Bro. Briggs' reply to it, and a vote being taken, . . . the vote stood six for and seven against adoption. . . .
Clause four was read, and that of the former committee, with reply of Bro. Briggs. The question was spoken to by Brn. Banta, Short, Blair, Chatburn, and the resolution of 1876, on the gathering, was read, also portions of an article by W. W. B. in Herald for September 1, 1876, on that subject. . . . The clause was voted on and adopted. . . .
Clause five with reasons of former committee and Bro. Briggs' answer, were read and adopted without discussion. . . .
A request from the Quorum of the Twelve that the minutes should show that they have taken no part in voting on the case of Bro. J. W. Briggs
(page 216) |
