Minutes, 17 February 1834
-
Source Note
Minutes, , Geauga Co., OH, 17 Feb. 1834. Featured version copied [ca. 17 Feb. 1834] in Minute Book 1, pp. 29–31; handwriting of ; CHL. For more complete source information, see the source note for Minute Book 1.
-
Historical Introduction
The following minutes of a 17 February 1834 meeting record the initial organization of a standing “Presidents Church Council” in , Ohio—later known as the “ of the ,” or the Kirtland high council. The minutes also document the rules the council should follow when judging a church member accused of a transgression. Before 17 February, such issues had been judged by “” or “councils” of priesthood holders (with other church members often in attendance). Who composed these conferences and councils varied with location and the availability of potential attendees. Revelations dictated by JS in August and November 1831 also provided for a to hear such cases, as well as for an appellate “court of the church before the .” The November revelation also empowered the president to call twelve available to assist in adjudicating a case. The new standing council in Kirtland was to serve as “an ensample” for similar, temporary councils organized as occasions demanded in outlying areas and also as an appellate court placed between lower disciplinary councils and the presidency of the high priesthood.According to the minutes featured here, JS stated that he organized the high council on the same principles that governed the “order of Councils in ancient days.” Five days earlier JS had discussed this ancient order in a council of and high priests, where he focused his remarks on the qualifications and conduct required of individual members of such councils. An earlier reference in Minute Book 1 to educating elders on “the ancient manner of conducting meetings” indicates the topic had been on JS’s mind as early as 1831 and suggests that the 17 February 1834 meeting represents an important milestone in JS’s ongoing effort to restore the ancient gospel, as he understood it, to the earth.Pursuant to the instructions recorded near the end of the document featured here, JS “laboured . . . with all the strength and wisdom that he had” the following day to correct these minutes. On 19 February, JS presented the corrected minutes to the council, which, after hearing the revised minutes read three times and suggesting at least one additional correction, unanimously voted to accept them “for a form, and constitution of the high Council of the Church of Christ hereafter.” JS then reported that “the Council was organized according to the ancient order, and also according to the mind of the Lord.”
Footnotes
- 1
-
2
Revelation, 1 Aug. 1831 [D&C 58:14–18]; Revelation, 11 Nov. 1831–B [D&C 107:72, 78–80].
- 3
- 4
- 5
Document Transcript
Footnotes
-
1
The “law of God” probably refers to the 11 November 1831 revelation describing the court of the president of the high priesthood. (Revelation, 11 Nov. 1831–B [D&C 107:78–79].)
-
2
The word “Presidents” here refers to JS, Rigdon, and Williams, who together constituted the presidency of the high priesthood. The names that follow were the twelve members appointed to the high council.
-
3
According to the revised minutes, twenty-four high priests attended the meeting. Since fifteen of those were appointed to the high council, nine were left to ratify the council’s formation. (Revised Minutes, 18–19 Feb. 1834 [D&C 102:1].)
-
4
These pages of the minute book contain the minutes of the 12 February 1834 meeting of high priests and elders at which JS spoke about the conduct and personal worthiness expected of council members in ancient and modern times. (Minutes, 12 Feb. 1834.)
-
5
When JS revised these minutes over the following two days, he omitted this specific explanation of an appeals process. An earlier revelation provided for a “Court of the high priesthood,” composed of the president of the high priesthood and twelve other high priests, whose “desision upon controvers[i]es” was final. Subsequent records indicate that by the end of April 1843, individuals dissatisfied with the decision of a high council with appellate authority were still able to appeal their case to the First Presidency. (Revelation, 11 Nov. 1831–B [D&C 107:79–80]; JS, Journal, 30 Apr. 1843; “Trial before the First Presidency,” 30 Apr. 1843, JS Collection, CHL.)
Smith, Joseph. Collection, 1827–1846. CHL. MS 155.
-
6
For JS’s revisions and corrections to the minutes featured here, see Revised Minutes, 18–19 Feb. 1834 [D&C 102].
-
7
That the members of the council drew lots may indicate that they originally intended to hold a disciplinary hearing that day; at disciplinary hearings, council members drew lots to determine who would speak on behalf of the accused and who would speak on behalf of the accuser. The revised minutes of this meeting, however, said that casting “lots by numbers” was the duty of the counselors whenever a high council was “regularly organized.” Thus, the casting of lots at this meeting may have simply indicated that the council considered itself officially organized at this point. In any event, the order in which counselors were to speak, as determined by lots at this meeting, was honored in the next two meetings of the council. (Revised Minutes, 18–19 Feb. 1834 [D&C 102:12]; Minutes, 19 Feb. 1834; Minutes, 20 Feb. 1834.)