The orders of the priesthood

In the pre-mortal existence the spirit children of God were organized into a perfect pattern and set in order, even into priesthood orders. This was the master pattern or template from which all dispensations took their appointments. Each dispensation used only a portion of the master pattern, which is why different dispensations do not mirror each other, each differing in what parts of the pattern were appointed to them.

The dispensation of the fulness of times is the dispensation that has the privilege of having the whole, heavenly, master pattern revealed, so that men can live on earth as they once lived in heaven. The dispensation of Joseph Smith is not the dispensation of the fulness of times, as many latter-day saints widely believe. His dispensation is a dispensation of the gospel for the last days and for the last time (see D&C 27:13;112:30), in the which is the dispensation of the fulness of times. The dispensation for the last times was intended to usher in the dispensation of the fulness of times, by beginning the process of gathering in one all the priesthood orders that were had in previous dispensations and all those orders found in the heavenly pattern, but which had never before been revealed. When the whole heavenly pattern has finally been gathered together and revealed in one, in Christ (see Ephesians 1:10), that is the when the dispensation of the fulness of times will begin.

Again, it is the priesthood orders that are being gathered together in one, which includes everything that pertains to them.

Now, all these orders were given a law by which they were to be governed, even the law that God ordained in the pre-mortal existence, and it had certain bounds and conditions. Regardless of which order one pertained to, be it a lesser or a greater order, as long as the law that governed the order was abided, the members of the order would be preserved, perfected and sanctified by the same. This principle is expressed by the following scripture:

And again, verily I say unto you, that which is governed by law is also preserved by law and perfected and sanctified by the same.

That which breaketh a law, and abideth not by law, but seeketh to become a law unto itself, and willeth to abide in sin, and altogether abideth in sin, cannot be sanctified by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment. Therefore, they must remain filthy still.

All kingdoms have a law given;

And there are many kingdoms; for there is no space in the which there is no kingdom; and there is no kingdom in which there is no space, either a greater or a lesser kingdom.

And unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions.

All beings who abide not in those conditions are not justified. (D&C 88:34-39)

Every one of us was foreordained to receive everything we could and would receive should we obey all of God’s commands here on earth. But all things here on earth would be given to us by appointment, according to the heavenly pattern and laws given to the individual orders. Should any one of us seek to become a law unto ourselves, without the Lord’s appointment, taking upon ourselves one of these orders, this would break the law of the orders and the wages of such sin would be our lot. Thus, the Lord would have complete control over which orders were set up by His appointment here on earth, and where and when they would be set up, despite our foreordination to receive everything. Without the confirmatory appointment here on earth, our heavenly foreordination did not convey authority to set up any heavenly priesthood order on earth before its appointed time.

Here is another scripture that also expresses this principle:

Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.

Will I accept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name?

Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed?

And will I appoint unto you, saith the Lord, except it be by law, even as I and my Father ordained unto you, before the world was?

I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord.

And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, by thrones, or principalities, or powers, or things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me or by my word, saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and shall not remain after men are dead, neither in nor after the resurrection, saith the Lord your God.

For whatsoever things remain are by me; and whatsoever things are not by me shall be shaken and destroyed. (D&C 132:8-14)

And thus we see that no one can take upon him/herself an order of the priesthood without an authorizing appointment. To Joseph Smith (and the First Presidency) the Lord said:

And now, verily I say unto you, I give unto you a commandment that you continue in the ministry and presidency.

And when you have finished the translation of the prophets, you shall from thenceforth preside over the affairs of the church and the school;

And from time to time, as shall be manifested by the Comforter, receive revelations to unfold the mysteries of the kingdom;

And set in order the churches, and study and learn, and become acquainted with all good books, and with languages, tongues, and people.

And this shall be your business and mission in all your lives, to preside in council, and set in order all the affairs of this church and kingdom. (D&C 90:12-16)

And how was the church to be set in order? By setting them into priesthood orders.

And so we got many priesthood orders, each of which had a law which governed it, which authorized certain duties, as well as gave limiting bounds and conditions. For example, we got

• the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God (D&C 76:57)
• the Aaronic order (Hebrews 7:11)
• the Levitical order (D&C 107:10)
• the order of the seventies (D&C 107:93)
• the evangelical (patriarchal) order (D&C 107:40)
• the new and everlasting covenant of marriage (D&C 131:2)
• the United Order

and many more orders. Every office and calling and ordinance in the church belongs to a priesthood order and likewise every priesthood quorum. Again, this principle is expressed by a scripture:

Every man in his own order, until his hour was finished, even according as his lord had commanded him, that his lord might be glorified in him, and he in his lord, that they all might be glorified. (D&C 88:60)

It matters not what order you are appointed to and commanded to enter into, for as long as you abide by the law of that order, you will inherit everything you were foreordained to inherit, which is all that the Father has. There should be no envy, whatsoever, between orders, for one order does not save any more or less than any other order.

Jealousy and envy between orders is inspired by the evil one, so that we break the laws of the orders we pertain to and lose our salvation, for any one who breaks the law of their order will be cursed, while all those who abide that law will receive a crown of glory:

For I, the Lord, have decreed in my heart, that inasmuch as any man belonging to the order shall be found a transgressor, or, in other words, shall break the covenant with which ye are bound, he shall be cursed in his life, and shall be trodden down by whom I will;

For I, the Lord, am not to be mocked in these things—

And all this that the innocent among you may not be condemned with the unjust; and that the guilty among you may not escape; because I, the Lord, have promised unto you a crown of glory at my right hand. (D&C 104:5-7)

The above scripture was speaking of the United Order, nevertheless, the principle applies equally to each and every order of the priesthood.

Will there be more orders revealed? Absolutely, until the day when the dispensation of the fulness of times bursts upon us and the complete, heavenly, master pattern is found on earth.

Are the orders independent? No. The bounds of one order extend into the bounds of other orders, either above or below, according to their laws, so that there is a connection between the orders, and a hierarchical order, which may work in reverse depending on conditions. For example, under one set of conditions, one order may take precedence to perform a task, while under a different set of circumstances, the other order may take precedence.

Is it wrong to seek an order to which we have not been appointed? That depends. If the order is open to us, then it is righteousness to seek it and obtain it by our faith. For example, if the endowment, which is another priesthood order, is open to us, then we can seek to be endowed. But if the order is not open to us, then it is not righteousness to seek it. A scriptural example is Alma’s desire to be an angel:

O that I were an angel, and could have the wish of mine heart, that I might go forth and speak with the trump of God, with a voice to shake the earth, and cry repentance unto every people!

Yea, I would declare unto every soul, as with the voice of thunder, repentance and the plan of redemption, that they should repent and come unto our God, that there might not be more sorrow upon all the face of the earth.

But behold, I am a man, and do sin in my wish; for I ought to be content with the things which the Lord hath allotted unto me. (Alma 29:1-3)

The Lord had appointed to him an order of priesthood and by desiring to go outside of that order and do more, he had sinned, for he had desired something that was not open to mortal men. Nevertheless, Alma was a special case, because his desire was made in faith, believing that the Lord could, and would, grant him what he desired, and so his exceedingly great faith turned a normally sinful desire into righteousness, for the Lord ended up granting his wish by translating him so that he could operate as an angel. Had Alma not desired this in faith, he would have been guilty of envy, but Alma’s faith was absolute and unshaken and whatsoever he asked and desired of the Lord, He believed he would get, nothing doubting. Nevertheless, he still felt uneasy about it for he knew his desire violated the normal, priesthood order laws, for we are to be content with what the Lord grants us.

This same principle can be seen with the Three Nephites who were embarrassed by their desires, for they were desirous to pass the bounds of their order, yet because of their faith, it was accounted unto them for righteousness:

And when he had spoken unto them, he turned himself unto the three, and said unto them: What will ye that I should do unto you, when I am gone unto the Father?

And they sorrowed in their hearts, for they durst not speak unto him the thing which they desired. (3 Ne. 28:4-5)

So we see that some orders are not open to us, yet still may be obtained by our faith. If it is something unattainable by faith, then asking for the thing will be accounted unto us as unrighteousness.

What is our duty as it pertains to the order which has been appointed to us? To magnify the offices, callings, ordinances, duties and orders that pertain to us by sanctifying ourselves before the Lord through faith on the Son of God unto the repentance of all our sins and the reception of the Holy Ghost.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Who is supposed to take the lead of meetings?

The day after general conference, I began looking over the scriptures that speak of priesthood offices and duties and new thoughts came to mind, some of which I am publishing here.

D&C 20:38-45 describes the calling and duties of an elder:

The duty of the elders, priests, teachers, deacons, and members of the church of Christ—An apostle is an elder, and it is his calling to baptize; and to ordain other elders, priests, teachers, and deacons; and to administer bread and wine—the emblems of the flesh and blood of Christ—and to confirm those who are baptized into the church, by the laying on of hands for the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost, according to the scriptures; and to teach, expound, exhort, baptize, and watch over the church; and to confirm the church by the laying on of the hands, and the giving of the Holy Ghost; and to take the lead of all meetings.

The elders are to conduct the meetings as they are led by the Holy Ghost, according to the commandments and revelations of God.

So, “an elder” is “to take the lead of all meetings.”

Which elder takes the lead?

The presiding elder.

And which elder is the presiding elder?

The elders’ quorum president is the presiding elder.

Deacons

A congregation has a quorum of elders and deacons, with presidencies for both, all present in a meeting.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

And to take the lead of all meetings.  (D&C 20:44)

Teachers

A congregation has a quorum of elders, deacons and teachers, with presidencies for each, all present in a meeting.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

If all the elders go missing, who then takes the lead?

The teachers’ quorum president, per D&C 20:56.

And he is to take the lead of meetings in the absence of the elder or priest—  (D&C 20:56)

Priests

A congregation has a quorum of elders, deacons, teachers and priests, with presidencies for each, all present in a meeting.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

If all the elders go missing, who then takes the lead?

The priests’ quorum president, per D&C 20:49.

And he is to take the lead of meetings when there is no elder present;  (D&C 20:49)

If all the elders and priests go missing, who then takes the lead?

The teachers’ quorum president, per D&C 20:56.

Priests’ quorum president!? What’s that?

That’s a presidency formed of three priests, one priest presiding and two priests as his counselors, just as the elders’, teachers’ and deacons’ quorums are all set up:

Verily, I say unto you, saith the Lord of Hosts, there must needs be presiding elders to preside over those who are of the office of an elder; and also priests to preside over those who are of the office of a priest; and also teachers to preside over those who are of the office of a teacher, in like manner, and also the deacons—wherefore, from deacon to teacher, and from teacher to priest, and from priest to elder, severally as they are appointed, according to the covenants and commandments of the church.  (D&C 107:60-63)

Continuing on…

The bishopric

A congregation has a quorum of elders, deacons, teachers and priests, with presidencies for each, all present in a meeting. Additionally, the bishopric also attends.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

If all the elders go missing, who then takes the lead?

The priests’ quorum president, per D&C 20:49.

If all the elders and priests go missing, who then takes the lead?

The teachers’ quorum president, per D&C 20:56.

Wait! Isn’t the bishop supposed to take the lead?

Nope. All bishops in the church are high priests who have been called, ordained and set apart as bishops. They function in the capacity of a bishop, not as a high priest. Their jurisdiction, while holding this calling, is that of a bishop. A bishop’s jurisdiction is over the Priesthood of Aaron in a ward, which includes presiding over the priests:

Also the duty of the president over the Priesthood of Aaron is to preside over forty-eight priests, and sit in council with them, to teach them the duties of their office, as is given in the covenants—this president is to be a bishop; for this is one of the duties of this priesthood. (D&C 107:87-88)

The office of a bishop pertains to both the higher or Melchizedek priesthood, being an appendage of it, and also to the lesser or Aaronic priesthood, presiding over it:

And again, the offices of elder and bishop are necessary appendages belonging unto the high priesthood.

And again, the offices of teacher and deacon are necessary appendages belonging to the lesser priesthood, which priesthood was confirmed upon Aaron and his sons. (D&C 84:29-30)

If we were to show this vertically, we could more clearly see that the office an elder always takes precedence over the office a bishop.

Lesser Priesthood

Teacher (1^st listed appendage)

Deacon (2^nd listed appendage)

High Priesthood

Elder (1^st listed appendage)

Bishop (2^nd listed appendage)

So, it does not matter whether a bishop is a high priest or a literal descendant of Aaron, once he has been set apart as a bishop, he is locked into it for the duration of the calling, meaning he cannot take the lead of any meeting in which an elder is present, for taking the lead of all meetings pertains to the office of an elder.

Now, in the case of a meeting in which members, priests and the bishopric are all present, but no elders are present, the president of the priests’ quorum*** takes the lead of the meeting, not the bishop.  This is because the scripture specifically gives this as the duty of a priest.  A bishop is given no such duty anywhere in the scriptures.

***

Keep in mind that the priests’ quorum presidency, which is made up of three priests, and the bishopric, which is made up of a high priest and two (elders or high priests) counselors, might be interpreted as two separate presidencies.  For example:

And again, I say unto you, I give unto you Vinson Knight, Samuel H. Smith, and Shadrach Roundy, if he will receive it, to preside over the bishopric; a knowledge of said bishopric is given unto you in the book of Doctrine and Covenants.

And again, I say unto you, Samuel Rolfe and his counselors for priests, and the president of the teachers and his counselors, and also the president of the deacons and his counselors, and also the president of the stake and his counselors.  (D&C 124:141-142)

Historically, these scriptures have been interpreted as meaning that the priests’ quorum is different than the teachers’ and deacons’ quorums, in that those quorums have quorum members (teachers and deacons) composing their presidencies, while the priests’ quorum has the bishopric as its presidency.  So, in the above, Vinson and counselors would have become a presiding bishopric, while Rolfe and counselors would have become a normal bishopric.  That is, indeed, one way of reading these verses.

But the wording also permits presidencies of deacons, teachers and priests, and also a separate bishopric which presides over the entire Aaronic Priesthood and has some special connection, in particular, to the quorum of priests.

In fact, taking this alternate view, we can also see that president of a stake and the president over the high priests’ quorum, which historically have been combined together into one president, can also be interpreted as two separate presidencies.  For example:

And again, I give unto you Don C. Smith to be a president over a quorum of high priests; which ordinance is instituted for the purpose of qualifying those who shall be appointed standing presidents or servants over different stakes scattered abroad; and they may travel also if they choose, but rather be ordained for standing presidents; this is the office of their calling, saith the Lord your God.

I give unto him Amasa Lyman and Noah Packard for counselors, that they may preside over the quorum of high priests of my church, saith the Lord.  (D&C 124:133-136)

So, the presidencies of the quorum of high priests are instituted for the purpose of qualifying men for the presidencies of the stakes.  The one is for the other, but they are not the same.  And so, after we read the Lord appointing who will be the presidency of the quorum of the high priests, we read that they were to also appoint a president of the stake and counselors:

And again, I say unto you, Samuel Rolfe and his counselors for priests, and the president of the teachers and his counselors, and also the president of the deacons and his counselors, and also the president of the stake and his counselors.  (D&C 124:141-142)

In like manner, the presidency of the quorum of priests, which presidency is made up of three priests of the quorum, may have been instituted for the purpose of qualifying men for the bishopric, hence the link between the bishopric and the priests.

In other words, the Aaronic priesthood priests’ quorum was to have two presidents: one an ordained bishop and the other an ordained priest.  This was to correspond to how the Melchizedek priesthood was originally set up: with two presidents; a first elder, apostle or president (Joseph Smith) and a second elder, apostle or president (Oliver Cowdery and later Hyrum Smith.)  The locally organized Melchizedek priesthood would also have two presidents: a president of the stake and a high priest president over the high priests’ quorum.

I suppose I could take this further, but I think what I have written will suffice.

High priests

A congregation has a bishopric as well as quorums of elders, deacons, teachers and priests, with presidencies for each, all present in a meeting. Additionally, there are high priests present.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

Why doesn’t the high priest take the lead?

High priests may only officiate as high priests when they are called to do so by the stake presidency.

High priests after the order of the Melchizedek Priesthood have a right to officiate in their own standing, under the direction of the presidency, in administering spiritual things, and also in the office of an elder, priest (of the Levitical order), teacher, deacon, and member. (D&C 107:10)

They may officiate in the office of an elder, priest, teacher, deacon and member, without permission from the stake presidency, but in any of these capacities, they still are subject to the leadership of the elders’ quorum president, who is to take the lead of all meetings.

What if the high priest officiates in his own standing?

Okay, in that case the high priest is given an assignment by the stake president and is sent out, (essentially as a local apostle). A high priest’s main duty is to teach:

And again, my brethren, I would cite your minds forward to the time when the Lord God gave these commandments unto his children; and I would that ye should remember that the Lord God ordained priests, after his holy order, which was after the order of his Son, to teach these things unto the people. (Alma 13:1)

therefore, the high priest will be sent to his own ward or to some other ward of the stake, to deliver some message or teaching. We get these all the time in the form of high counselors delivering their talks on assignment from the stake presidency. In such a case, the high priest still doesn’t take the lead of the meeting.

The reason is because they are acting in their capacity as, or exercising their right to officiate as, high priests, not as elders. Elders have the right to take the lead of all meetings, therefore, a high priest on assignment, sent by the stake presidency, must still defer meeting conducting and leadership to the elders’ quorum president. Although the high priest is there on his own authority, once an elders’ quorum is established with an elders’ quorum presidency, the elders’ quorum president is the man in charge of all the meetings. So, although he may get up and speak to the congregation, he must do so with the permission or consent of the elders’ quorum president. If he tries to take the lead of any meeting, while a presiding elder is there, he will be trampling upon the elder’s rights and the priesthood order set up by God in the scriptures.

Now, if there are no presiding elders present in the congregation, then the high priest who is officiating in his standing, defers to the priests’ quorum president.  If there are no priests, then he defers to the teachers’ quorum president.  This is because these quorums have been given the jurisdiction of leading meetings in the absence of elders or priests.  High priests have no such right of leading meetings.

Also, if there is a high priest in the congregation, but he is not officiating in his own standing, not currently being under assignment, and if the congregation is missing all its elders, then the high priest can officiate in the office of an elder (without anyone’s permission) and he has the right to take the lead of that meeting, even with priests and teachers present, because they cannot take the lead when an elder is present.

However, the moment an elders’ quorum member enters the meeting, that man is the elder who takes the lead of the meeting. This is because his membership in the established quorum of elders takes precedence over any high priest officiating in the office of an elder, for although the high priest can be considered an elder while he’s officiating as such, he does not pertain to the elders’ quorum established in that ward, from which presiding elders are to be chosen. So the quorum member elder becomes the de facto presiding elder (and thus the leader of the meeting) the moment he walks into the room.

What about apostles and seventies?

Apostles and seventies are all elders that travel. As such, they have all the duties of the normal elders, but because they do not pertain to the elders’ quorums of the wards they attend, they must submit to the leadership of the established elders’ quorum president, so they cannot take the lead of any meeting that is attended by a quorum member elder.

What about the stake presidency? Surely they can take the lead!

Not on a ward level. The name of the game is jurisdiction. The elders’ quorum president has complete jurisdiction over taking the lead of all meetings of his ward. Only if there is a stake meeting, of several wards and branches, only then does the stake presidency take the lead of the meetings. So, the reunion of a stake brings everyone under his jurisdiction, while the reunion of a ward brings everyone under the jurisdiction of an elders’ quorum president. When the stake president enters a ward to speak, he does so as a visiting high priest (an apostle), and not as a president of anything in the ward, and so everything that pertains to a high priest officiating in his own standing pertains to him, including having to submit to the leadership of the elders’ quorum president.

What about the president of the church?!

It doesn’t matter what title a person holds. There are only a limited number of priesthood offices and a president of the church is a high priest, so everything that applies to a high priest applies to him. If the president of the church comes to a ward, he must submit to the leadership of the elders’ quorum presidency:

No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; by kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile— (D&C 121:41-42)

The principle is this: When you enter the jurisdiction of someone else’s priesthood quorum, you essentially enter without priesthood. You may influence them, or attempt to influence them, but cannot do so by virtue of your priesthood office, nor can you remove the rights that pertain to their office, calling and quorum.

I will close with a final scripture:

But notwithstanding those things which are written, it always has been given to the elders of my church from the beginning, and ever shall be, to conduct all meetings… (D&C 46:2)

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist