Approving Revelations
LDS Summary:
The LDS changed the pattern of approving revelations given by Joseph Smith Jr as no longer needing approval of the priesthood quorums
RLDS Summary:
The RLDS followed the pattern provided by Joseph Smith Jr in the priesthood approving revelations and the order that the quorums approve a revelation
 March 3, 1836Joseph Smith himself provided the pattern for approving resolutions through all quorums. He considered all men in each quorum to be equals. | |
|---|---|
LDS |
RLDS / Restoration |
|
History, 1838–1856, volume B-1 [1 September 1834–2 November 1838] I then observed that these resolutions must needs pass through each quorum separately beginning at the presidency, and consequently it must first be thrown into the hands of the President of the Deacons and his council, as equal rights and privileges are my motto, and one man is as good as another, if he behaves as well, and that all men should be esteemed alike, without regard to distinctions of an official nature. The resolutions passed through the President of the deacons and his council by their unanimous voice. It was then thrown before the Presidents of the several quorums and their council in the following order, and, in the same manner as before, viz. the Teachers, Priests, Bishop of Kirtland, Bishop of Zion, Elders, High Priests, Seventy, High council of Zion, High Council of Kirtland, The Twelve, and lastly into the hands of the Presidency of the Church, and all the quorums: and received their unanimous sanction. |
|
1868RLDS Conference Resolution 87 states that the Church body has the right to vote on any issue brought before the Church | |
|---|---|
LDS |
RLDS / Restoration |
|
[RLDS] General Conference Resolutions, 1852-1900, page 13, 1901 Adopted April 6, 1868. No. 87. That all private members, male and female, have a right to vote on all questions that the elders may deem of sufficient importance to bring before the church. |
|
Jan 1, 1891LDS First Presidency member George Q. Cannon tries to explain how quorums voting to approve revelations is nonsensical (and described the order of voting backwards from the process defined by Joseph Smith Jr) | |
|---|---|
LDS |
RLDS / Restoration |
|
Juvenile Instructor, Vol. 26, No. 1, Jan 1, 1891, page 13-14 Another question which he propounds is: "It is alleged by men in what is called the Reorganized Church that when Joseph the Seer gave a revelation it must be tested in this way—that is, it must first be presented to the High Council or the Twelve Apostles, for their approval, and then pass on to the next quorum below for their approval, and so on down to the Deacons' quorums, and if it pass down to all the quorums of the Priesthood 'without meeting a snag', it must then be taken as true. This to me is a most strange and an unprecedented example, and while waiting for the assembling of the quorums would be followed with so much inconvenience as to render most of the revelations of God through His Prophet the same as null and void. Again, it is astounding to me that when Joseph himself testified to anything as revelation from God, it could not be credited at once as from God, without going through such an ungainly formula. And again, it seems strange in the extreme that the anointed Prophet of God, who was the only authorized revelator to the church, ordained and set apart to stand in the presence of God, and carry His word from His own mouth to mankind, the man who is of all others supposed to know that he is not deceived cannot be sure that he is right until he is tested in this way by men who are supposed to know the least about such matters. Surely such a process as the above cannot be true. Please, if you know anything about such a rule, tell me the particulars about it."...They were authentic and divinely inspired, whether any man or body of men received them or not. Their reception or non-reception of them would not affect in the least their divine authenticity. But it would be for the people to accept them after God had revealed them. In this way they have been submitted to the Church, to see whether the members would accept them as binding upon them or not. Joseph himself had too high a sense of his prophetic office and the authority he had received from the Lord to ever submit the revelations which he received to any individual or to any body, however numerous, to have them pronounce upon their validity. |
|
1892LDS President Wilford Woodruff testimony in the Western District of the Missouri U.S. Circuit Court acknowledges that revelation must be approved by the church | |
|---|---|
LDS |
RLDS / Restoration |
|
Abstract of Evidence, Temple Lot Case, U.S.C.C, filed 1893, page 296 The church has a right to reject or approve of revelations and any man independent of the action of the church has a right to accept it or reject it as he sees fit and the church has a right to say whether they will accept it or reject it as a revelation, and before a revelation can be accepted by the church, as a law, it must in some form or other be presented to the church and accepted by the church, and that has been true since the time I first became connected with the church. |
|
1906LDS President Joseph F. Smith testified that revelation is only binding on the Church after acceptance by the Church at a conference. Note: President Smith also adds that only those members that vote to accept a revelation are considered "in good standing" (i.e. a veiled threat for opposition votes). | |
|---|---|
LDS |
RLDS / Restoration |
|
Congressional Series of United States Public Documents, Volume 4932, page 96 59th Congress, 1st Session, December 4, 1905-June 30, 1906, Vol. 24 Mr. Smith. I will say this, Mr. Chairman, that no revelation given through the head of the church ever becomes binding and authoritative upon the members of the church until it has been presented to the church and accepted by them. Mr. Worthington. What do you mean by being presented to the church? Mr. Smith. Presented in conference. Mr. Tayler. Do you mean by that that the church in conference mav say to you, Joseph F. Smith, the First President of the church, "We deny that God has told you to tell us this?" Mr. Smith. They can say that if they choose. Mr. Tayler. They can say it? Mr. Smith. Yes, sir; they can. And it is not binding upon them as members of the church until they accept it. Mr. Tayler. Until they accept it? Mr. Smith. Yes, sir. Mr. Tayler. Were the revelations to Joseph Smith, Jr., all submitted to the people? Mr. Smith. Yes, sir. Senator Overman. Does it require a majority to accept or must it be the unanimous voice? Mr. Smith. A majority. Of course only those who accept would be considered as in good standing in the church. |
The RLDS does not base "good standing" on the type of vote cast. |
1918RLDS President Frederick M. Smith explains the RLDS procedure for voting on revelations - the same as the early Church | |
|---|---|
LDS |
RLDS / Restoration |
|
The Disaffection of R. C. Evans, page 8 The only manifestations which are voted upon are those which come to the Church through its Prophet and President; and before these are voted upon each revelation is submitted to the several quorums for careful examination and scrutiny. When the several quorums are satisfied, then they present their report to General Conference and it is voted upon and thus becomes law to the Church. |
|
1924RLDS President Frederick M. Smith states that General Conference items to be voted on require "free and untrammeled discussion" free from coercion | |
|---|---|
LDS |
RLDS / Restoration |
|
Supreme Directional Control in Operation, page 2-3, 1922 President Smith in his document says:...Discussions should be free and open. Both sides should receive respectful hearing. Hasty decisions should not be formed. Conclusions should not be based on ex-parte testimony, one-sided arguments or statements, or unverified and untested alleged spiritual manifestations. We are unalterably opposed to anything which suggests machine politics, or an attempt to railroad measures, or to prevent free and untrammeled discussion. We believe it a mistake even to attempt to put something over on the people or to intimidate or coerce anyone. To pass any measure without free and full discussion, and then to select delegates without giving full opportunity for general nomination from the floor, and then binding the delegates thus selected to support conclusions thus arrived at, is, to say the least, questionable. |
|
1966Bruce McConkie (called to the Twelve Apostles after writing this book) agrees with George Q. Cannon regarding approving revelations is not necessary | |
|---|---|
LDS |
RLDS / Restoration |
|
Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, 1966, page 108 COMMON CONSENT Revelations given of God through his prophets, however, are not subject to an approving or sustaining vote of the people in order to establish their validity. Members of the Church may vote to publish a particular revelation along with the other scriptures, or the people may bind themselves by covenant to follow the instructions found in the revealed word. But there is no provision in the Lord's plan for the members of the Church to pass upon the validity of revelations themselves by a vote of the Church; there is nothing permitting the Church to choose which of the revelations will be binding upon it, either by a vote of people or by other means. Revelation is revelation. When the Lord speaks, he has spoken. His word is to be accepted and obeyed if men expect to receive salvation. To reject the word of the Lord is to reject the Lord himself to that extent. This is the case with members of the so-called Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. They have selected, by a vote of their people, which of the revelations they will accept and which they will reject. Naturally revelations dealing with salvation for the dead, temple work, and celestial marriage find no part in their philosophy, and in consequence they deny themselves the blessings offered in these revelations. |
|
