The ordinance of baptism continues and becomes effectual when they “were wrought upon and cleansed by the power of the Holy Ghost.” Robert L. Millet explains:
Joseph Smith explained that “baptism is a sign to God, to angels, and to heaven that we do the will of God, and there is no other way beneath the heavens whereby God hath ordained for man to come to Him to be saved, and enter into the Kingdom of God, except faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, and baptism for the remission of sins, and any other course is in vain; then you have the promise of the gift of the Holy Ghost.” We often speak of being baptized to wash away our sins. That symbolism is helpful, and there is something to be gained from understanding water baptism as a cleansing. But the more powerful symbol is baptism as the death and burial of the old man of sin and the rise to newness of life (Rom. 6:3–5). The truth is, our sins are not really remitted in the baptism of water. In setting forth the doctrine of Christ, Nephi called upon his readers to “do the things which I have told you I have seen that your Lord and your Redeemer should do; for, for this cause have they been shown unto me, that ye might know the gate by which ye should enter. For the gate by which ye should enter is repentance and baptism by water; and then cometh a remission of your sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost” (2 Ne. 31:17; emphasis added). Truly, after people are received unto baptism, they are “wrought upon and cleansed by the power of the Holy Ghost” (Moro. 6:4).
The Holy Ghost is a sanctifier. After baptism we are “sanctified by the reception of the Holy Ghost” (3 Ne. 27:20). If we were to be immersed in water and then never be confirmed a member of the Church and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, we would still be in our sins. “You might as well baptize a bag of sand as a man,” Joseph Smith pointed out, “if not done in view of the remission of sins and getting of the Holy Ghost. Baptism by water is but half a baptism, and is good for nothing without the other half—that is, the baptism of the Holy Ghost.”
This dual aspect of baptism is also a feature of many descriptions of the early Christian baptismal practice in the Old World. The rite of immersion in water is accompanied with an anointing to receive the Holy Ghost. The two pieces might be differently ordered, with one preceding the other. Bradshaw describes the Syrian practice as recorded in Didascalia 16: “The unction of female baptismal candidates involved a twofold action, first of the head by the bishop and then of the whole body by a woman deacon. Other scholars have understood both actions to be pre-baptismal and to have been divided from one another in the case of female candidates only for reasons of propriety.” Bradshaw references the late 1970s work of Gabriele Winkler where she suggests a connection between baptism, the Holy Ghost, and entrance into the eschatological kingdom: “This, she believed, explained why at first oil was poured only over the head (this was the custom at the anointing of the kings of Israel), when the coming of the Spirit was associated with it (the Spirit of the Lord came over the newly nominated king), and why the anointing and not the immersion in water was regarded as the central feature of baptism in the early Syrian sources (this was the only visible gesture for what was held to be the central event at Christ’s baptism—his revelation as the Messiah-King through the descent of the Spirit).”
North African Christians had a similar anointing as part of the baptismal rite, along with the laying on of hands. While there is clearly some divergence in the forms as Christianity developed during the Old World apostasy, there was still a connection between baptism by immersion and the gift of the Holy Ghost. Interestingly, anointing with oil was also included in many of those Old World rites.
The next step is that the newly baptized and (in modern terms) confirmed converts “were numbered among the people of the church of Christ; and their names were taken.” Making a record of the names is reminiscent of the action taken when Benjamin’s people entered into their covenant: “And now, king Benjamin thought it was expedient, after having finished speaking to the people, that he should take the names of all those who had entered into a covenant with God to keep his commandments” (Mosiah 6:1).
The purpose of taking the names is not simply to have an official organizational roll but to make explicit the covenant of the name. Each person has taken the name of Christ, and Christ (represented by the church) has taken their name. There is an exchange of covenants and promises. Those who accept Christ have entered into a new relationship. Name-taking symbolizes the receipt of that covenant.
One purpose of this name-taking is the human function of providing care: “that they might be remembered.” Without the names, there is no known community. In a sense, the ancient Christian was adopted into a new family. Christ was the new father, and they had just become his sons and daughters. “And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters” (Mosiah 5:7).
It is interesting that rebirth symbolism dominated some ancient commentaries on baptism, rather than Paul’s emphasis on death and resurrection. According to Paul F. Bradshaw: “A man comes out of that water reborn as a ‘son’ of God.… So it was that, in allusion to the concept of rebirth, some ancient commentators referred to the font as a womb, but never as a grave, and the idea of Romans 6:3–5 (of Christians being baptized into the death and resurrection of Christ) made no mark upon early Syrian thought about baptism.”
The Book of Mormon also uses rebirth symbolism. Baptism as symbolic death and resurrection is not part of Nephite understanding, a fact that is consonant with the absence of cross/death theology that was important to Christianity in the Old World which had to imaginatively encompass a dying Messiah. The Nephites’ Messiah was a transcendent, not a dying, figure.
Baptism into the church was adoption into a new family of God, which brought with it the obligations of kin. One of these obligations toward new members was to “[nourish them] by the good word of God, to keep them in the right way.” (The obligations of the member to the community are discussed in verse 5.) These responsibilities of the community of faith continue in the latter days. The Lord has specifically directed: “And I give unto you a commandment that you shall teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom” (D&C 88:77). These instructions are repeated in Doctrine and Covenants 20:42: “… and to teach, expound, exhort, baptize, and watch over the church.”
The statement “relying alone upon the merits of Christ” is a reminder that Christ is the only one capable of providing for our salvation: “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
Vocabulary: The verse continues by describing Christ as “the author and the finisher of their faith.” Here, “finish” does not have the connotation of “ending” something, since obviously Christ does not end our faith. However, a finisher is also one who completes or perfects something (e.g., a cabinet finisher). Hebrews 12:2 states: “Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.” Here “finisher” is the King James translators’ choice for the Greek term teleiotes meaning “perfector/completer.” Christ is the author and the completer of our faith, the alpha and omega, the starting point and the epitome of the final goal.
Moroni 6:5
5 And the church did meet together oft, to fast and to pray, and to speak one with another concerning the welfare of their souls.
Moroni had, before this point, separated liturgical elements into different chapters. He even put the two sacrament prayers into separate chapters and made chapter breaks between the introduction and the first liturgical description (chap. 2). But even though Moroni has finished discussing baptism, he does not end the chapter. Probably he saw verses 5–9 as growing out of the baptismal covenant, even though we would see those items under slightly different categories.
The second topic of this chapter deals with liturgical time, or the repeated acts of the “church.” In modern LDS practice, we are very familiar with the weekly observance of special religious activities. We go to church. We pray publicly. We sing songs. We partake of the sacrament. We hear people teach us. All of these elements are part of our church-going or religious practice, but so is the fact that we do it every Sunday.
We do not know which day of the week was the sabbath for the Nephites, nor can we be certain that they met weekly. Moroni’s description is simply: “the church did meet together oft.” Assuming that they maintained a sabbath, it seems reasonable that they made the transition from the Israelite sabbath to the Christian “day of the Lord” without difficulty. A separate question is whether the Nephites made a similar shift as did the Old World from Saturday (sabbath) to Sunday (“day of the Lord”). Old World Christians attached meaning to the day of resurrection but also needed to separate Christian worship from those of the Jewish community. Neither condition would have been relevant to the Nephites.
What occurred as these Nephites met together “oft”? Moroni tells us that they fasted and prayed. He does not say how often they fasted, but obviously this practice was part of regular worship observances. They also prayed together, presumably publicly and orally. Because Nephi prayed on his garden tower (Hel. 7:10–11), vocal prayers in public places must have been acceptable.
In addition to public prayer, they also “speak one with another concerning the welfare of their souls.” Moroni is probably describing some form of instruction or teaching, especially since some ecclesiastical officers were designated “teachers.” Moroni also mentions singing as part of the communal service (v. 9). Thus, a cautious reconstruction of a Nephite “church meeting” would have public prayers, singing, the administration of the sacrament (v. 6), and some form of instruction.