Baptism for Healing
NOTE: This post was a quick review of Baptism for Health. In the years subsequent to this write-up, I with my co-author Kris Wright researched and published a complete history of the practice, which appeared in the fall 2008 issue of Journal of Mormon History, entitled, “‘They Shall Be Made Whole’: A History of Baptism for Health.” I refer that article to anyone interested in topic.
In our history there are stories of miraculous healings that occur upon baptism. Moreover, healing by immersion can be traced to the pool of Bethesda and the River Jordan. Interestingly, for close to a century, baptizing for health (and not for a remission of sins) was not uncommon in Mormon praxis.
William Clayton recorded the first of Joseph Smith’s instructions coupling the baptismal font and washing for health in 1841:
Brother Samuel Rolfe being present, and being seriously afflicted with a felon on one hand president Joseph instructed him to wash in the font, and told him he would be healed, although the doctors had told him it would not be well before spring, and advised him to have it cut. He washed his hands in the font and in one week afterwards his hand was perfectly healed. (1)
Michael Quinn noted that the practice became quite regular in Nauvoo (footnotes in original):
In time, baptisms for health were extended to the outlying branches of the Church, as indicated by the baptisms for health performed in October 1843 at Philadelphia by Jedediah M. Grant.
Although some were baptized for health purposes in the Nauvoo Temple font, still others resorted to the Mississippi River for this ordinance. The most notable example occurred when Joseph Smith baptized his wife Emma twice in the Mississippi River on 5 October 1842 because of her serious ill health, and then went with her on 1 November 1842, “to the temple [the font being the only part completed] for the benefit of her health.” The Prophet’s anxiety for his wife to receive baptism for health was such that a non-Mormon businessman reported that Joseph Smith had interrupted a business interview because “Mrs Smith lay Dangerously ill at the time and they ware about to administer the Rights of Baptism to her.” Apostle Willard Richards also baptized his wife frequently for her health. (2)
In fact, when Reverend George Moore visited Nauvoo and its unfinished Temple, he recounted that “in the basement is the baptismal font, supported by 12 oxen. In this I learned that persons are baptized for the dead, and for restoration to health.” (3)
Joseph Smith preached in the April 1842 general conference:
Baptisms for the dead, and for the healing of the body must be in the font, those coming into the Church, and those re-baptized may be baptized in the river. A box should be prepared for the use of the font, that the clerk may be paid, and a book procured by the moneys to be put therein, by those baptized, the remainder to go to the use of the Temple. (4)
Despite this early use of the temple, batism for healing extended beyond it. Seymour B. Young recounted in the 1921 General Conference how he was baptized by his father (Brigham’s brother Joseph) in the Mississippi for health while his siblings were re-baptized (5). In Nauvoo, there seemed to have been regular meetings that combined baptisms for the remission of sins and for health. John Taylor recorded the activities of such a meeting in his journal:
I baptized my mother, and my nephew, John Rich and his sister Elizabeth for their health; and John and Jerusha Smith, son and daughter of the late Bro. Hyrum Smith, Patriarch for their sins.(6)
These meetings continued during the Mormon Batallion (7), during the trek west (8) and on through the Utah period. Ora Card noted that Apostles Lorenzo Snow and John W. Taylor presided over a baptismal meeting in 1885 where several people were baptize for either remission of sins, rebaptism or for health (9). Indeed, Brigham Young preached in the tabernacle in 1873:
We can, at the present time, go into the Endowment House and be baptized for the dead, receive our washings and anointing, etc., for there we have a font that has been erected, dedicated expressly for baptizing people for the remission of sins, for their health and for their dead friends; (10)
This practice of multi-use Temple fonts continued into the 20th century. My mother and her siblings were all baptized in the Manti Temple at the age of eight. The continuance of healing baptism did, however, subside much earlier. In a 1922 letter to Temple Presidents, the office of the First Presidency wrote:
We feel constrained to call your attention to the custom prevailing to some extent in our temples of baptizing for health, and to remind you that baptism for health is no part of our temple work, and therefore to permit it to become a practice would be an innovation detrimental to temple work, and a departure as well from the provision instituted of the Lord for the care and healing of the sick of His Church. (11)
I can find no later instruction or reference to the practice.
__________________
- Journal of William Clayton, 1840-1845, p. 21, 8 November 1841, Church Archives as cited in (2)
- D. Michael Quinn (1978) The Practice of Rebaptism at Nauvoo. BYU Studies, vol. 18 pg. 230
- George Moore Diary (1982)Western Illinois Regional Studies vol. 5 pg.6
- Joseph Smith Times and Seasons vol. 3 no. 12 pg. 763; HC 4:586 & 7:358; J. C. Jensen (1901), Authority and Records Go Hand in Hand. Improvement Era. vol. 4, no. 8; see also An Epistle of the Twelve to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in all the World (January 14, 1845) Times & Seasons Extra vol 6 no. 1 pg. 779; The John Taylor Nauvoo Journal (1983) BYU Studies, vol. 23, no. 2; HC 7:358.
- Seymour B. Young, Conference Report, April 1921 pg. 114
- The John Taylor Nauvoo Journal, BYU Studies, vol. 23 (1983)
- Daniel Tyler (1881), A Concise History of the Mormon Battalion in the Mexican War, 1846-47 pg. 140; John Steele diary, 31 Aug. and 1 Sept. 1846, typescript, Special Collections, Lee Library; Extracts from the Journal of Henry W. Bigler (1932) Utah Historical Quarterly. vol. 5 no. 2 pg. 37
- William Clayton, William Clayton’s Journal: A Daily Record of the Journey of the Original Company of Mormon Pioneers from Nauvoo, Illinois, to the Valley of the Great Salt Lake pg. 102 or George D. Smith (1995) An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton. p.305; George Q. Cannon (1882) Early Scenes in Church History, p.30 – p.31
- The Diaries of Charles Ora Card: The Canadian Years, 1886-1903 (September 1, 1896 entry), as included in: Book Reviews, BYU Studies (1995), vol. 35
- JD vol. 16 pg.187
- Messages of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, vol. 5 pg. 224 note that only a portion of the letter was included in the text.
Fascinating stuff, J. I had never heard of any of it.
I think modern-day baptisms for health would be kind of cool.
Comment by NFlanders — 11/4/2005 @ 12:25 am
Good work, J.!
As your opening paragraph implies, one can think of several stories from the Old and New Testaments that could be used to give a kind of scriptural sanction to this practice. Is there any evidence that these stories were ever used to justify baptisms for health? Alternatively, is there any surviving source for the doctrinal justification behind this practice?
Comment by RoastedTomatoes — 11/4/2005 @ 1:02 am
Thank you. Sadly, besides other examples of mid-nineteenth century baptisms, I didn’t find much else. I didn’t have a ton of time, though and there are several resources I have yet to mine. I plan on doing that, and if I find anything I will be sure to add it.
Comment by J. Stapley — 11/4/2005 @ 8:44 am
Great post, J.!
It’s interesting that the 1922 letter refers to the practice as an “innovation” as if unaware of the history of the practice.
Comment by ed — 11/4/2005 @ 10:26 am
Thanks for another great Splendid Sun post.
Comment by John Mansfield — 11/4/2005 @ 11:45 am
I appreciate your posts, I always learn something. I knew they had done baptisms for healing, but didn’t realize the temples and endowment house fonts were used.
It is interesting that someone who is sick would muster up the strength to go get baptized….in cold water, then having to dry off and get dressed, sounds cold and difficult to me. Much easier to just call one of the sisters in to give you a blessing.
Comment by Don — 11/4/2005 @ 1:37 pm
Funny how physical health and financial success so easily become intertwined with gospel doctrines and Church practice.
Comment by Dave — 11/4/2005 @ 1:57 pm
LOL, Don.
Dave, I’m not sure what angle your getting at…how does this relate to finances?
Ed, I had the same thought. It is true that most the folks alive at that time didn’t live in Nauvoo, but most the old timers should have remembered at least some Utah administrations. Even though the letter was sent from the office First presidency, it was not written by one of its members. Maybe an over zealous assistant?
Comment by J. Stapley — 11/4/2005 @ 2:07 pm
Nice post, J.
From my studies I’ve ascertained that the 1922 message was written and sent out by an office intern. After church leaders discovered what he had done, he was fired and then excommunicated.
Seriously, speaking of being baptized in cold water, here is another account of a baptism done for healing (ca. 1850):
“Lorenzo and Mrs. Young were tired with the labors and cares of the long journey, and not long after its close the latter was taken seriously ill, first by a fever, followed then by inflammatory rheumatism. Many friends gave her up, believing she was past recovery, but her husband and his brother Joseph, who had come on from Kanesville still had faith that she might recover. On one of these days of affliction Lorenzo sat by her bed where she had been suffering such excruciating pain that she was a living skeleton. She remarked to him, ‘If I could be baptized for my health I believe it would do me good.’ The weather was cold and the ice thick on a pond close by. Lorenzo sent for his brother Joseph, and when he came he brought with him Brother Reynolds Cahoon. A hole was cut in the ice and Mrs. Young was carried to it in an armchair and immersed in the water with the usual ceremonies of baptism. From that hour she got better and soon regained her health, but her right shoulder was ever after crippled so that she could not raise her right hand to the top of her head” (“Biography of Lorenzo Dow Young,” Utah Historical Quarterly 14.1-4 (1946): 120-21).
Comment by Justin — 11/4/2005 @ 3:43 pm
It is interesting to note that the John Bills baptism for health in Nauvoo (mentioned by Quinn in his BYU Studies article) was performed seven (the number of completeness or perfection) straight mornings. It calls to mind Naaman’s seven immersions.
Alexander’s Mormonism in Transition has this valuable discussion on pages 290-91 regarding the end of the practice:
———————————–
“Rebaptism and baptism for health had been common until the mid-1890s.
Even though Wilford Woodruff had questioned the practice of rebaptism in the 1890s, after the turn of the century it was used quite extensively both as a sign of repentance and as a healing ordinance. Marriner W. Merrill, for instance, brought his daughter…to the temple to be baptized for the cure of an afflicted eye. In 1903 Heber J. Grant took William A. Nuttall to the temple to be baptized for his health….
On one occasion President Lund gave the rationale for the practice of rebaptism as a means of healing. He pointed out that though baptism was not mentioned in the revelations for healing, Jesus had said that it was easier to forgive sins than to heal someone. Since baptism is for the remission of sins and sickness is often the result of violation of a law of nature or of God, Elder Lund justified rebaptism on the ground that when faith accompanies baptism, it may be used for the restoration of health.
Nevertheless some authorities, apparently uncomfortable with these views, thought the temples should be closed to healing ordinances. In 1915, for instance, Francis M. Lyman said that members ought not go to the temple for their health. President Lund pointed out that on Tuesdays ordinances for health were scheduled, and Elder Lyman withdrew his objection. In May 1918 Alvin Smith said that members ought not be encouraged to come to the temple when the elders could as well come to their homes to administer to them. Lund, again, disagreed with this view.
President Lund, however, seems to have been among the last of the general authorities who favored rebaptism and temple healing ordinances. In December 1922, a year and a half after his death, the First Presidency issued a circular letter [quoted by J. above]….Several reasons seem to have been paramount in abolishing the practice. There was concern that some members believed that going to the temple for an administration was superior to an ordinance given by a priesthood holder outside. In addition, the use of the temple for performing vicarious work for the dead had increased greatly, and the pressure for baptism and administrations for health occupied temple facilities.”
Comment by Justin — 11/4/2005 @ 5:21 pm
Justin, thank you very much for those additions. Late me restate publically that you ROCK!
Comment by J. Stapley — 11/4/2005 @ 11:04 pm
Curious. I recall new testament scripture of a centurian of some prominance who became leprose and Christ instructed him to immerse in the Jordan River a certain number of times to be healed. He recoiled at having to do it at such a dirty river…he finally did and was healed.
Comment by Robin Bishop — 11/5/2005 @ 1:30 am
J & RT,
The Greco-Roman world indeed practiced what may have appeared to be healing baptisms, although the word “baptism” is somewhat of a misnomer because in our day the word is too semantically loaded to describe what they were doing. For them, it wasn’t an initiation rite nor did it have much to do with remission of sins. Indeed, as you state above, it was for healing, but it wasn’t necessarily tied to any of the Roman-Hellenistic cults as a ceremony of any special importance. For all this, cf. Backgrounds of Early Christianity by Everett Ferguson, 3rd Ed.
I did some research on the idea that taking the sacrament “renews baptismal covenants,” and found that this wasn’t always the case with the church. It seems as though many people in the late 1800s were always wanting to be re-baptized in order to renew their relationship with God, and the brethren grew tired of these petitions, and began telling the people that taking the sacrament would suffice, and that it would essentially do the same thing. Hence the idea in our time that taking the sacrament “renews baptismal covenants.” It is curious to note that the people were regularly re-baptized, and that it was eventually discouraged and replaced with the bread+wine/water. Most of this is in Ogden Kraut’s Rebaptism, which anyone can probably snag from Benchmark Books or Sam Weller’s for cheap.
On “baptismal covenants,” I know several Mormons who doubt its existence and/or veracity.
Comment by David J — 11/5/2005 @ 11:59 am
The idea of baptismal covenant and sacramental renewal is not one completely cooked up by LDS leaders. There are strong thematic and verbal connections in the scriptures between baptism and the wording of the sacrament prayers.
Discourses of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 273
“Baptism is a covenant with God that we will do his will.”
Then again, pay attention to the wording in Mosiah 18:10
“Mos 18:10 Now I say unto you, if this be the desire of your hearts, what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, (and what are the stipulations of the covenant?) that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, (and what is the blessing?) that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?”
(Note the connection between keeping the commandments and having the spirit poured out upon you, which should call to mind the sacramental prayers. Nephi also make sthe connection in 2 Nephi 31:13 between taking Christ’s name upon us by baptism, which further connects baptism to the wording of the sacramental prayers.)
Alma 7:15 “show unto your God that ye are willing to repent of your sins and enter into a covenant with him to keep his commandments, and witness it unto him this day by going into the waters of baptism.”
“Baptism is a sign to God, to angels to heaven that we do the will of God ” Words of Joseph Smith, 108.
According to these scriptures, baptism may not be the covenant itself, but the witness/sign/token (same word in Hebrew, ‘ot) of the covenant ( Gen 9:13, Gen. 17:11, Alma 46:21-22 ) that you make to repent of your sins, keep the commandments, and obey God. If such is the case, then the actual agreement to the covenant is the baptismal interview, which explicitly asks if people will agree to do these things.
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 [a sacrificial/covenantal phrase. Psalm 50:5,51:17, D&C 97:8], 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.
Comment by Ben S. — 11/5/2005 @ 1:27 pm
On this one, I am going to have to go with Ben. Even though our perceptions of baptism/sacrement have changed, I think the scripture that Ben recites offers a significant source for understanding baptism in terms of covenants.
Comment by J. Stapley — 11/5/2005 @ 3:11 pm
Yeah, again I hear you. I shot Ben’s verses out to this guy and he had a way of explaining it that was (surprisingly) cogent. I don’t recall the details, however (probably a good indicator that I didn’t really care). But I mentioned it above because the idea is out there, creeping among us as wolves in sheep’s clothing, ripe to pounce upon us with its lasciviousness in effort to take over and brain-wash our minds…
Comment by David J — 11/5/2005 @ 3:54 pm
One last thing, slightly tangential.
The original context of the sacrament is explicitly covenantal.
Matthew 26:27-28 27 Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. (Cf. Mark 14:24).
The idea of “blood of the covenant” goes back to Exo 24:8, where the blood of the covenant is the blood of the animal that is sacrificed to ratify the covenant they make.
Comment by Ben S. — 11/6/2005 @ 4:30 pm
Interesting anectdote:
I just talked to my mom (of Manti Temple baptism fame), and she remembered her family talking about baptisms for health when she was little. I thought that was cool.
Comment by J. Stapley — 11/7/2005 @ 9:37 pm
My mother was baptised in 1920 in the Manti Temple font, first for admission to the Church and then again for her health, because she was ill at the time. In her later life she recounted this is a sunday school class, and a sister retorted that they never did such a thing in a temple, which ticked off my mother, who told her she did know what she was talking about. So it was being done as late as 1920.
Comment by Lisle B — 11/27/2005 @ 5:50 pm
Thanks for sharing this Lisle, it is an honor to have you comment. Moreover, this is a wonderful example. It falls two years before the First Presidency’s moratorium on the practice.
Comment by J. Stapley — 11/28/2005 @ 11:50 am