Revised Minutes, , Geauga Co., OH, 18–19 Feb. 1834. Featured version copied [ca. 19 Feb. 1834] in Minute Book 1, pp. 31–35; handwriting of ; CHL. For more complete source information, see the source note for Minute Book 1.
Historical Introduction
On 17 February 1834, at a meeting that included holders and other members of the church, JS oversaw the initial organization of a standing “Presidents Church Council” in , Ohio. , the clerk of the meeting, noted in the minutes of that meeting that “many questions have been asked during the time of the organization of this Council and doubtless some errors have been committed, it was, therefore, voted by all present that Bro Joseph should make all necessary corrections by the spirit of inspiration hereafter.” JS worked on amending the minutes the following day “with all the strength and wisdom that he had” and presented the revised minutes—featured here—to a council of sixty-two priesthood holders and church members on 19 February. JS’s revisions were significant and both added and deleted material from the original minutes. After hearing the revised minutes read three times and making at least one correction, the council unanimously voted to accept the revised minutes as “a form, and constitution of the of the hereafter,” with the proviso that “if the president should hereafter discover any lack in the same he should be privileged to fill it up.” At the 19 February meeting, after giving several blessings and items of instruction to members of the new council, JS reported that “the Council was organized according to the ancient order, and also according to the mind of the Lord.” Conducting itself according to procedures outlined in the minutes featured here, the council, later known as the Kirtland high council, then heard its first case.
These minutes also authorized at remote locations to, when necessary, organize similar, temporary disciplinary councils, the decisions of which could be appealed to the standing “high Council at the seat of the general government of the Church,” then in . In addition, though these minutes contained no provision for doing so, JS organized another standing high council following the same pattern outlined in the minutes featured here in , Missouri, the following July. After the main body of church members in moved from Clay County to in 1836–1837, this second standing high council conducted its meetings at , Caldwell County. Following JS’s move to Far West in March 1838, this Missouri council replaced the Kirtland high council as the “high Council at the seat of the general government of the Church” and, therefore, became the council to which appeals resulting from other church councils were made. Similar standing high councils were later organized in and , with the high council assuming appellate authority after its organization in October 1839. In the meantime, the revised minutes of the 17 February 1834 meeting were included as section 5 in the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants.
That the high council with appellate authority was identified as the “high Council at the seat of the general government of the Church” (rather than this newly organized Kirtland high council) suggests that JS anticipated a time when the seat of church government would not be at Kirtland.
Those counsellors who draw even numbers, that is, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12, are the individuals who are to stand up <in> the behalf of the accused and prevent insult or injustice.
In all cases the accuser and the accused shall have a privilege of speaking for themselves before the , after the evidences are heared, and the Counsellors who are appointed to speak on the case, have finished their remarks.
After the evidences are heared; the counsellors, accuser and <the> accused, have spoken, the president shall give a decision according to the understanding which he shall have of the case, and call upon the twelve Counsellors to sanction the same by their voices.
But should the remaining Counsellors who have not spoken*, or any one of them, after hearing the evidences and pleadings impartially, discover an error in the descision of the president, they can manifest it, and the case shall have a re-hearing; and if after a careful rehearing, any additional light is thrown upon the case, the descision shall be altered accordingly; but in case no additional light is given, the first decision shall stand; the majority of the Council haveing power to determine the same.
In cases of difficulty respecting doctrine, or principle; if there is not a sufficiency written to make the case clear to the mind of the Council, the president may inquire and obtain the mind of the Lord by revelation.
The , when abroad, have power to call and organize a after the manner of the foregoing, to settle difficulties when the parties, or either of them shall request it, <and the said council of high priests shall have power to appoint one of their own number to preside over such council> byappointingor chooseingoneoftheir numbertopreside overthecouncil for the time being.
It shall be the duty of said Council to transmit, immediately, a copy of their proceedings, with a full statement of the testimony with <accompanying> their decision, to the high council [p. 34]