The Evolution of Mormon Priesthood: From Protestant Ministry to Abrahamic Patriarchal Authority (1829–1844)
The early Mormon priesthood (1830s) was an authority to preach, baptize, administer sacramental ordinances, and govern the church while the later Nauvoo priesthood was an authority to seal plural marriages, establish eternal families, and confer exaltation among the Gods.
The transformation from a Protestant style priesthood to a more lineal lineage based priesthood as the authority to practice plural marriage was not a sudden event in April 1836. It was a gradual development, with the years 1833–1836 serving as a bridge between early Mormon ecclesiastical authority and the later theology of Abrahamic priesthood, plural marriage, and eternal increase of male seed in imitation of the Gods (Abraham 4).
Three developments are key to understanding the development:
- 1833–1835: Joseph Smith's reported relationship with Fanny Alger, traditionally regarded as his first plural marriage, precedes the 1836 Kirtland Temple visions.
- April 3, 1836: Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery report receiving the keys of the gathering of Israel, the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, and Elijah's sealing authority.
- 1841–1844: The Nauvoo revelations and ordinances connect priesthood authority to eternal marriage/plural wives, dynastic family relationships, exaltation, and the continuation of posterity eternally.
Chronology of The Development of Mormon Priesthood:
1829–1830: Reported restoration of authority to baptize and administer the gospel; organization of the church with elders, priests, teachers, and deacons. The earliest institutional priesthood was principally ecclesiastical and missionary.
June 1831: Introduction of ordinations to the high priesthood at Kirtland. Priesthood hierarchy expands beyond the original organization.
1832: D&C 84 distinguishes greater and lesser priesthoods and traces Abraham's priesthood through Melchizedek. Abrahamic priesthood concepts already exist before 1836 but not fully developed.
1833: Joseph Smith's biblical revision and D&C 93 develop ideas about eternal intelligence, divine embodiment, and humanity's potential. This provides the metaphysical groundwork for later embodied-exaltation theology.
1833–1836: Joseph Smith's relationship with Fanny Alger, generally dated to the mid-1830s was a possible early plural marriage before the full Nauvoo sealing theology was formalized.
1835: D&C 107 systematizes the Melchizedek and Aaronic priesthoods; Twelve and Seventy organized. Administrative priesthood reaches a new level of sophistication.
April 3, 1836: Kirtland Temple vision of Moses, Elias, and Elijah, now D&C 110: Explicit association of priesthood keys with Israel, Abraham's posterity, and polygamous sealing ("Gospel of polygamist Abraham).
1838–1839: Expulsion from Missouri and establishment of Nauvoo and a full transition toward a new religious and social order at odds with Nicene-Christianity as a an embodied theosis. |
1840–1841: Baptism for the dead introduced; Nauvoo temple revelation, D&C 124; early marriage sealings priesthood authority increasingly extends beyond mortality as the priesthood is a lineage and the seed of the male body (see Abraham 2:11). |
1842: Nauvoo endowment introduced; Book of Abraham published depicting God the Father with an erect phallus in Facsimile 2 Figure 7. Ritualized scriptural development of priestly kingship, creation, and eternal existence of men becoming God-Kimgs and the Gods as omce menon other worlds.
1843: D&C 131 and 132; eternal marriage, plural marriage, and eternal increase articulated. Wives and/or concubines and posterity become central to the highest exaltation amomg the Gods of fleshly parts and passions.
1843–1844: Anointings, sealing networks, and priestly kingship become more developed as priesthood extends into familial, dynastic, and royal dimensions.
1844: Council of Fifty organized; Joseph Smith delivers the King Follett discourse and eternal progression and earthly kingdom-building reach a new stage where it is clear at this point that priesthood is about embodiment: it is about a specific lineage like the tribe of Ephraim having the right to the priesthood to raise up seed and produce a peoplehood; and as Joseph Smith put it to paraphrase, you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves by progressing and succeeding up the ladders of becoming, as the Gods are expansive beings with bodies of flesh and have the same biological drives as God-Kings seeking to expand their Kingdoms; and so when we on Earth embrace our biological drives that were given to us as we are the literal offspring of the Gods, we are in alignment with the Gods, and can become like the Gods by imitating the Gods.
The Joseph Smith Papers editors confirm that the 1835 priesthood instruction incorporated earlier revelations while introducing further clarification. They also document how the endowment developed from early promises of spiritual power into the more elaborate Nauvoo ordinance of 1842. See:
Fanny Alger: The significant development before Elijah's appearance.
Fanny Alger (1816–1889)
Alger is especially important because her relationship with Joseph Smith appears to precede the April 1836 Kirtland Temple vision, although its exact dates, nature, and contemporary justification remain disputed. The LDS Church recognizes Alger as Joseph Smith's first reported plural wife, generally dating the relationship or marriage to the mid-1830s. Historians have disagreed about whether it began around 1833, 1835, or somewhat later. There are two competing historical interpretations:
- Interpretation A: An early plural marriage. Joseph Smith had already begun experimenting with an Abrahamic model of marriage before receiving the 1836 keys. Under this interpretation, the Kirtland vision became part of the subsequent theological justification for a practice already underway.
- Interpretation B: A relationship later understood as plural marriage. The surviving contemporary evidence is too limited to establish that Joseph Smith and Alger entered a marriage under a developed priesthood sealing doctrine. Later witnesses interpreted the relationship differently, with some defending it as marriage and Oliver Cowdery describing it in strongly critical terms as a an elicit affair.
This distinction matters. We have retrospective accounts of the relationship, but not a surviving contemporary marriage certificate or an independently documented 1835 sealing ceremony. In my view, Joseph came to believe that as the choice seer from the lineage of Jesse and Ephraim, he was entitled to additional romantic partners as a member of the royal lineage of Israel, but that he had not fully developed the later sealing doctrines which came later. In other words, I do not personally think that Joseph Smith believed he was having an "extra marital affair" with Fanny Alger but that just as the Patriarchs of the Old Testament had wives and concubines / mistresses, as a member of the royal lineage he was entitled to those practices; and so in his mind I don't think he believed he was sinning by having a romantic relationship with any Fanny. For Joseph Smith was constantly incorporating the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible into his theology, which is very clear in his dictation of the Book of Mormon in early 1829-1830: which is basically a synthesis of the Old and New Testament as a form of midrash; so it was inevitable that he would begin to reframe his sexual morality to align more with the sexual morality of the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible. So the way I see it, to criticize Joseph Smith is to basically criticize the morality of the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible. So the most historically defensible thesis is that Joseph Smith's early experimentation with plural marriage (or concubinage) with Fanny preceded, and was subsequently integrated into, a more elaborate Abrahamic and sealing-priesthood theology in the 1840s. My sources for this ananysus were:
April 3, 1836: The decisive scriptural turning point takes place here where it is explicitly stated that it is now the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, that is the gospel of polygamy and raising up seed, and imitating the Gods who as Joseph Smith put it in a letter to Nancy Rigdon are basically more liberal in their views.
D&C 110 contains three separate transmissions of authority.
| Heavenly messenger | Scripture| Keys or blessings|
| ------------ | ------------- | ---------------------------------------|
| Moses | D&C 110:11| Keys of gathering Israel|
| Elias | D&C 110:12 | Dispensation of the gospel of Abraham|
| Elijah | D&C 110:13–16 | Keys associated with turning the hearts of fathers and children|
The distinction between Elias and Elijah is especially important for understanding the transition from a Protestant style in the early 1830s to a more lineage-based Abrahamic Mormon gospel post 1835.
Elias and the Abrahamic promise. D&C 110:12 declares:
"In us and our seed all generations after us should be blessed."
The verse explicitly connects the dispensation of Abraham to descendants and intergenerational blessing. Thus we can see that Mormonism had become a lineage-based religion of the royal seed of Israel having the rights and privileges of the priesthood, the priesthood as the seed of the body (Abraham 2:11), which royal lineage provided the right to receive the keys to unlock the privledge to practice plural marriage and concubineage. Later, D&C 132 develops this Abrahamic theme into a doctrine of eternal marriage, plural wives, posterity, and exaltation in the eternities: wherein is it is explained that exaltation is to be like the Gods in that you increase your lineage (an increase of lives) on Earth and into the eternities, just as the Gods themselves increase their seed and continue their lineage; and thus to be a God according to D&C 132 is to increase and continue while the lesser angels (as servants of the Gods) cannot increaase their seed and their lineage does not continue into the eternities.
Notice the relationship:
D&C 110:12 (1836): Abrahamic promises involving seed and future generations.
D&C 132:30–37 (1843): Abraham's posterity, marriage, plural wives, concubines, and the continuation of his promised increase.
D&C 132:19–20 (1843): Eternal marriage and exaltation, with the promise that spouses may become Gods.
Elijah and sealing authority:
D&C 110:13–16 describes Elijah's appearance in connection with Malachi's prophecy about fathers and children.
Later Nauvoo teachings expand the implications of this authority beyond ordinary church administration to include binding relationships across generations and beyond death. Note the strong connection to embodiment and lineage. Note the meaning of sealing expands between the Kirtland and Nauvoo periods. See:
There was thus a clear progression from Protestant-style ministry to Abrahamic priesthood lineage-making deification. In the earliest phase in the 1830s, priesthood principally authorizes religious ministry. By Nauvoo, Joseph Smith is teaching that priesthood authority can establish dynastic relationships that continue into eternity. This transformation becomes especially clear in three documents:
D&C 107 (1835): Church government and hierarchy that emphasizes presiding offices, priesthood orders, quorums, and administration. The document also contains material about patriarchal priesthood, so it is not purely Protestant in character. See:
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/instruction-on-priesthood-between-circa-1-march-and-circa-4-may-1835-dc-107/1
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/instruction-on-priesthood-between-circa-1-march-and-circa-4-may-1835-dc-107/1
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/doctrine-and-covenants-1835/90
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/doctrine-and-covenants-1835/90
D&C 110 (1836): Abrahamic and sealing keys. This revelation introduces an explicit heavenly transmission of the dispensation of Abraham and Elijah's keys. The original 1836 record is preserved in the Joseph Smith Papers. See:
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/visions-3-april-1836-dc-110/2
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/visions-3-april-1836-dc-110/2
D&C 132 (1843): Eternal marriage and increase: this revelation gives the later doctrine its fullest expression. D&C 132:19–20 associates exaltation with eternal marriage, and verse 19 promises a continuation of the seeds forever. Verses 30–37 connect Abraham's promised posterity to his marriages and to Joseph Smith's restoration of the ancient order.
The historical introduction to the 1843 revelation confirms that plural unions preceded the written revelation by years. See:
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/revelation-12-july-1843-dc-132/1
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/revelation-12-july-1843-dc-132/1
One particularly important piece of evidence of a progression from a Protestant-style priesthood to an Abrahamic priesthhod of increase-of-seed is that the LDS Church's own historical essay explicitly connects Elijah's 1836 appearance with later eternal marriage ordinances and the perpetuation of families beyond death. See:
- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng
- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng
Two additional pieces of evidence are that first, the 1835 marriage statement creates a revealing contrast. The original 1835 Doctrine & Covenants included a statement affirming monogamous marriage, even as later historical accounts place Joseph Smith's relationship with Alger around this period. The statement was publicly accepted, but its preparation and Joseph's personal involvement require careful examination. This suggests that public Mormon marriage teaching and Joseph's private religious experimentation did not necessarily develop together. See:
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/appendix-3-statement-on-marriage-circa-august-1835/1
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/appendix-3-statement-on-marriage-circa-august-1835/1
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/statement-on-marriage-circa-august-1835-as-published-in-latter-day-saints-messenger-and-advocate/2
- https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/statement-on-marriage-circa-august-1835-as-published-in-latter-day-saints-messenger-and-advocate/2
Second, the distinction between the Melchizedek priesthood and the later sealing keys becomes clearer in Joseph Smith's Nauvoo teachings. The Joseph Smith Papers editors note that Joseph subsequently associated Elijah with the fulness of Melchizedek priesthood authority and ceremonies sealing marriages and parent-child relationships for eternity. This supports my view of a developing priesthood theology, rather than a fully articulated system existing in 1830. See:
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/visions-3-april-1836-dc-110/2
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/visions-3-april-1836-dc-110/2)
The priesthood already had Abrahamic associations in D&C 84 in 1832, and the 1835 priesthood instruction discussed patriarchal succession. Thus, 1836 is best understood as a major authorization point within an ongoing development, but not the first appearance of Abrahamic ideas.
My historical priesthood development theory in a nutshell:
- Between 1829 and 1835, Mormon priesthood evolved from a predominantly ecclesiastical and missionary authority, sharing features with contemporary Protestant restorationist movements, into a more elaborate hierarchy grounded in ancient priesthood orders based on Old Testament concepts of royal Israelite lineage. Joseph Smith's reported relationship with Fanny Alger in the mid-1830s suggests that experimentation with biblical plural marriage and/or concubinage began before the mature theology of eternal sealing was articulated.The April 3, 1836 Kirtland Temple vision, in which Elias transmitted the dispensation of Abraham and Elijah conferred sealing keys, provided a scriptural framework subsequently connected to eternal marriage, patriarchal posterity, and intergenerational salvation as viacroyal linkages to Joseph's kingly royalty. During the Nauvoo period, especially from 1841 to 1844, Joseph Smith expanded these ideas into a theology of eternal marriage, plural sealings, exaltation, and continuing posterity. Priesthood authority was no longer concerned merely with governing a church and administering Christian ordinances; it also became the authority through which an eternal patriarchal family order could be established. In short, priesthood became synonymous with the seed of the male body and the capacity to increase one's genome on Earth and into the eternity as the very method the Gods use to expand their seed by creating worlds and building their ongoing kingdoms.
The Nauvoo priesthood was thus considerably more expansive than the priesthood of the early 1830s. The reason for this is obvious and supports my conclusion that Mormonism is the development away from a Protestant style form of church, as it grew into more of a literal tribe or peoplehood as a religion about imitating the Gods of Flesh and Bones; and Adam fell that he might have joy and we are punished for our own sins and not Adam's transgressions and as Joseph Smith put it, Adam did not sin; and as Joseph told Nancy, God is more liberal in his views; and as Joseph Smith himself described himself as someone who was more cheerful and who often was criticized for being too embodied, too joyful, playful, and living life as a man (competing, wrestling, etc.) rather than seeking to be a Monkish nun or celibate priest. Mormonism is in essence the imitation of fleshly Gods of parts and passions and the Abrahamic priesthood is best understood from an independent Mormon perspective as the rights and privilege of a particular lineage from the north in the 1800s, as the elect tribe of Ephraim, who were called to embody and model the way of the Gods and grow into a People (Tribe). The way of the Gods is the way of Friendship, Tribe, and Increase, which is the way of joy and happiness through a life lived in the body, and the embracing of the masculine and feminine instincts which has been articulated by a non-mormon Dr Paul Dobransky throigh his use of Greek myths to explain our gender instincts. See: masculinepsychology.substack.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment