8/13/2019 Progression Between Kingdoms: History

1/3

8/13/2019 Progression Between Kingdoms: History

2/3

182 I Dialogue: A JournalofMormon Thought

the Church has never announced a definite doctrine upon this point. Someof the Brethren have held the view that it was possible in the course ofprogression to advance from one glory to another, invoking the principle ofeternal progression ; others of the Brethren have taken the oppo site view . Butas stated, the Church has never announced a definite doctrine on this po in t.That differences of opinion exist among several of the general authoritieson this topic is evident from a cursory overview of their statements. BrighamYoung held, for example, that non e would inher it this Earth w he n it becamecelestial and translated into the presence of God but those who would becrowned as Gods . . . all others would have to inherit another kingdom. . .[yet] they w ould eventually have the p rivilege of prov ing them selveswo rthy an d advan cing to a celestial kingdom bu t it wo uld be a slow pro ces s(Wilford Woodruff Journa l, 5 Au gus t 1855.) Wilford Woodruff be liev ed , Ifthere wa s a poin t where man in his progression could not proceed any further,the very idea would throw a gloom over every intelligent creature Journalof Discourses, 6:120 .

In late 1910, President Joseph F. Smith apparently sanctioned the viewthat at least some form of progression wo uld be po ssib le: [O]nce a perso nenters these glories there will be eternal progress in the line of each of theseparticular glories, but. . the privilege of pa ssing from one to an oth er thoughthis may be possible for especially gifted and faithful characters) is not p r o v i d e dfor (Improvement Era 14) [Novem ber 1910]:87, em ph asi s a dd ed ). Ap ostleMelvinJ.Ballard, however, disagreed. Those whos e lives have entitled themto terrestrial glory, he m aintained , can never gain celestial glory. On e whogains possession of the lowest degree of the telestial glory may ultimatelyarise to the highest degree of that glory, but no provision has been made forprom otion from one glory to ano ther ( Three Degrees of Glo ry, discoursedelivered in the Ogden Tabernacle, 22 September 1922). Elder Ballard's feel-ings were later shared and echoed by Elders Joseph Fielding Smith and BruceR. M cCo nkie. It has been asked if it is pos sible for one wh o inhe rits thetelestial glory to advance in time to the celestial glory ? Elder Sm ith p osite d. The answer to this ques tion, he continued, is,No " DoctrinesofSalvation11:31,em ph as is in original). Elder McC onkie forcefully rem arke d, Th ere arethose who say that there is progression from one kingdom to another in theeternal world. Or if not that, lower kingdoms eventually progress to wherehigher kingdoms once were. This is worse than false. It is an evil and per-nicious do ctrin e ( Seven Deadly He resies , 1June 1980, uned ited ).

Yet these are not the only views espoused by rank ing Ch urch autho rities.Reference to the First Presidency's disclaimers has already been made. Inearly 1960, President J. Reu ben Clerk, Jr., ad m itted, I am not a strict con-structionalist, believing that we seal our eternal progress by w hat w e do here .It is my belief that God wll save all of His children that he can; and while, ifwe live unrighteously here, we shall not go to the other side in the samestatus,so to speak, as those who lived righteously; nevertheless, the unrigh-teous will have their chance, and in the eons of the eternities that are tofollow, the y, too, ma y climb to the destinies to w hich they w ho are righteo us

8/13/2019 Progression Between Kingdoms: History

3/3

Notes and Comm ents I 183

and serve God, have climbed to those eternities that are to come (ChurchNews, week en din g 23 April I960, p. 3).The Church's determined reluctancy to endorse either view is evidencedby the changes in wording that appeared in successive editions of James E.Talmage's The Articles of Faith.Originally, Talmage h ad written ,

It is reasonable to believe, in the absence of direct revelation bywh ich alone absolute knowledge of the matter could be acquired, thatin accordance with God's plan of eternal progression, advancementfrom grade to grade within any kingdom, and from kingdom to king-dom, will be provided for. But if the recipients of a lower glory beenabled to advance, surely the intelligences of higher rank will not bestopp ed in their progress; and thu s we may conclude, that degrees andgrades will ever characterize the kingdoms of our God. Eternity isprogressive; perfection is relative; the essential feature of God's livingpurpose is its associated power of eternal increase. (1899 edition, pps.420-421).In 1917, the wo rds with in any kingdom, and from kingdom to king dom ,were replaced by the wo rds w ithin each of the three specified k ing do m s.Finally, in 1924, this parag raph was changed even further. The wo rds fromgrade to gr ad e and But if the recipients of a lower glory be ena bled toadvance, surely the intelligences of higher rank shall not be stopped in theirpro gre ss; a n d were entirely deleted. In place of the second set the followingwas adde d: tho ug h as to possible progress from one kingdom to ano ther thescriptures make no positive affirmation. Eternal advancement along differentlines is con ceiv ab le. The most recent edition of The Articles ofFaithreadsidentically to the 1924 edition. No mention of the changes incorporated intothe text, however, is offered.Neither explicitly treated in the Standard Works nor discussed by the FirstPresidency, except to disavow any position as being that accepted by theChurch, the notion of progression among the kingdoms is an open question.

Opinions expressed, either in favor of or against, should no more be used todetermine orthodoxy than does the colors of one's clothes.