by Autumn Dickson

In a day and age where many are curious as to why women can’t hold specific positions in the church or be ordained to priesthood offices, reading about Deborah the prophetess can be confusing. Here is a verse that describes her as a prophetess.

Judges 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.

If Deborah can be a prophetess, can we have a prophetess in our day? What does it even mean that she was a prophetess and what are the implications for women in the latter days?

I think it’s important to note that I’m not an official representative of the church. However, I’d like to share some of my own perspectives and interpretations surrounding Deborah and what it means as a female Latter-day Saint.

But first, some context.

Judges is a book of scripture that describes the time period when Israel had no king. Joshua, the prophet after Moses, died, and there was no prophet that directly succeeded him. We don’t know exactly how long it took before the Lord called another centralized prophet (Samuel), but educated guesses suggest 300-450 years.

As a society, they had the Law of Moses, and the government could be described as a tribal confederation. Despite having a law given unto them from God, they often fell in with Canaanites and found themselves in varying levels of apostasy.

Sometimes, in response to the Israelites finding themselves in trouble, the Lord would send a “judge.” The way that we define “judge” is not necessarily accurate in this particular book of scripture. In this context, a judge was a charismatic military leader that would help Israel. There were some major judges such as Samson; there were other minor judges that would help regions rather than the entire nation of Israel.

So who was Deborah?

Deborah was one of the major judges sent by God to help Israel. She was a judge in every sense of the word. She was a military leader, but people also literally went to her for guidance to settle their problems. She was also a spiritual leader over the nation of Israel.

Was she a prophet? The scriptures describe her as a prophetess, and she led all of Israel politically and spiritually. But was she a prophet in the way that we define “prophet” in our day?

At this point, I think it’s important to clarify what it means to have a prophet.

Definition One. The way that we usually define “prophet” in our church in the Latter-days is unique. It’s not just someone who studies the scriptures and knows them really well. It’s not just someone who receives revelation. When Latter-day Saints speak of prophets, we are often describing the man who has the authority to speak for God on behalf of the entire church. He is the only one with spiritual jurisdiction to lead (under Christ) the church. He holds all of the priesthood keys.

And yes, he is a male.

We don’t know if that will ever change. I don’t know if it’s doctrine that means this particular role will always be male, or if someday the Lord will use His unchanging love and wisdom to adapt His church according to circumstances as He has throughout the course of history.

But there is also a broader definition of this term, “prophet.”

Definition two. Anyone can have the spirit of prophecy which is defined as a “testimony of Christ.” We know that Jerusalem had centralized prophets in ancient times as well as lesser “prophets” who would also be sent by the Lord to teach and call upon people to repent. I am not a prophet in the sense that I hold all the priesthood keys or can define doctrine on behalf of the Lord for the entire church. However, I have come to view myself as a prophetess within my own family. Beside my husband, I lead our home. I receive revelation on behalf of our kids and what we need to do. I learn the will of the Lord for our family. I fulfill so many of the “prophetic” responsibilities often associated with prophets; I simply do it within the context of my own family. Most importantly, I am a witness of Christ to my family.

What kind of prophetess was Deborah? With the information we’ve been given, I feel pretty safe assuming she was the second kind of prophet. The Lord had declared that priesthood responsibilities would go through male descendants of Aaron and the tribe of Levi. Deborah was not ordained nor did she hold any keys.

So Deborah was a prophetess but not necessarily how we often define it in our day.

Perhaps there are some who are disappointed by this news. Perhaps there are some who hoped that because Deborah was a prophetess, we could have one in our day. Perhaps there are some who cling to the idea that things will change and long for the day to see a prophetess lead the church. I don’t know whether that will be a thing. If anyone has any insight into that particular doctrine, feel free to comment. But as far as I know, we don’t know.

Here’s what I do know.

Deborah doesn’t need to be disappointing. In fact, if we understand her properly, we should be exultant. If we understand what the Lord would like to bestow upon His daughters and His sons, then we would hold no fear. Deborah is excellent proof of what the Lord would have all of us do.

Deborah may not have been a prophetess in the modern sense of the word, but guys! She was still a prophetess! She was a national leader, and people followed her. She changed Israel. She made a difference. She has been regarded with respect by millions who learned about her generation after generation.

And she didn’t need the priesthood keys to do it.

The Lord is wonderful and wise and set up a priesthood organization with offices and keys. I know that can be a painful sticking point for some. I understand that. I’m personally grateful for this organization, but I can simultaneously understand why it’s painful. But that’s not really my point today.

My point is that you have all that you need to become everything God wants you to become, and He has much more in mind for you than you have for yourself. This has implications for men too. About 3-5% of men will hold priesthood keys at any given time in the church. That number jumps to 10-20% of men who will hold priesthood keys at some point in their lifetime.

BUT YOU DON’T NEED KEYS TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND CHANGE THE WORLD.

No one came to Deborah and ordained her as a prophetess. The bible doesn’t tell us how she rose to that role, but I have my guesses as to how it happened.

It happened because she was a faithful daughter of God who chose to follow the Lord wherever He chose to lead her.

Following the Lord and handing your life over to Him in faith (female or male) does not mean you will be recorded for people to pore over your life story for generations to come. It doesn’t mean you’ll be famous or even particularly loud. But if that’s what you’re looking for, then you’re in the wrong place anyway.

I love the example of Deborah, if for no other reason than her story means that I can be a powerful tool for the Lord regardless of what mankind recognizes in me. Regardless of whatever official roles I’ve been given, I could part seas or change lives. Really what it comes down to is what the Lord wants for me and what He’s trying to teach me. Having enough power to change the world isn’t really the question here; the Lord will give me everything I need. The true question is whether I will give my life over to Him in whatever capacity He asks.

I have as well as I can, and I love my life.

I testify that we have everything we need to do everything the Lord wants us to do and become everything He wants us to become. I likewise testify that He has much more in mind for you than you have for yourself. If you (female or male) feel left out because you can’t be or aren’t a bishop, then hold tight. The Lord has much bigger plans for you. He loves you so much. You are so important to Him. It would be silly to ask more from Him when He already plans on giving you everything that He has.

Autumn Dickson was born and raised in a small town in Texas. She served a mission in the Indianapolis Indiana mission. She studied elementary education but has found a particular passion in teaching the gospel. Her desire for her content is to inspire people to feel confident, peaceful, and joyful about their relationship with Jesus Christ and to allow that relationship to touch every aspect of their lives. Autumn was the recipient of FAIR’s 2024 John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Judges 2–4; 6–8; 13–16 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

Earlier this month, the First Presidency announced a change in the Sunday class schedule, beginning September 6, 2026. Adults and youth will attend Sunday School every week, followed by classes for priesthood quorums, young women, and Relief Society. Lessons in Aaronic Priesthood and Young Women meetings will focus on truths in the updated edition of For the Strength of Youth: A Guide for Making Choices.

This week, the Young Women and Young Men General Presidencies gave more details about the format and content of the Sunday Lessons.

Opening exercises will no longer be held. The meeting will begin with a prayer and then immediately begin the lesson discussion.

• First Sunday (Fast Sunday) lesson will focus on one of the truths listed in that month’s chapter in the For the Strength of Youth: A Guide for Making Choices.
• Second and third Sunday lessons will study the topic further, using an 8-page resource printed monthly in the For the Strength of Youth magazine. See a sneak peak of the September curriculum. This resource contains questions and references that can be used during the discussion time. When there are not four Sundays in the month (such as months that have stake or general conferences), then the second and third Sunday lessons should be combined, so that the youth always experience the first Sunday (fast Sunday) lesson and the last Sunday lesson.
• Last Sunday lesson will be a study of what it means to live as a covenant daughter or son of God. Young women will study the first line of the Young Women theme along with a corresponding statement from the lesson outline each month. Young men will study the first line of the Young Men theme along with a corresponding statement from the lesson outline each month. The classes will then study a story of a woman or man in the scriptures who exemplifies that principle.
• Weekly activity ideas will also appear in the 8-page resource printed monthly in the For the Strength of Youth magazine. At least one activity during the month should relate to the topic studied on Sundays.

So that youth, parents, and leaders have access to this monthly 8-page resource, subscribe now to get your monthly free printed copy of the magazine. You will receive your first magazine 6–8 weeks after subscribing.

For more details, and to watch videos from the Young Women and Young Men General Presidencies, see

• “How Young Women Classes Will Be Structured During Shorter, 25-Minute Classes”
• “Young Men general presidency invites youth to prepare for new resources and Sunday curriculum”

My Youthful Reflection

When I was young, I preferred interacting with, and being interviewed by, male church leaders rather than female leaders. There are a number of reasons for this.

First, I trusted men more than I did women. I found men to be more trustworthy. Their positions as designated church leaders gave me confidence that I would be treated in a Christlike manner.

Second, I felt men were more likely to keep confidences. Women gossiped and shared information. If you told a man something, it didn't seem likely to be spread around the ward. If you told a woman, it tended to be.

Third, I felt women were shallow. I often got cliches and platitudes from women. When I talked with men, I tended to get a more thoughtful, reflective response.

Fourth, I felt loved by my male church leaders. I felt like they really cared about me, even if they couldn't do anything for me. I felt like they desperately wanted to, but they just didn't know what to do for me. I genuinely felt their concern for me, much more so than I did from the women leaders.

The Current Controversy

I know that some local church leaders have taken advantage of people under their care. However, I don't believe it is as big a problem as our critics do, and certainly not the problem some women think.

I don't object to young women taking a trusted parent or companion in with them to meet privately with local church leaders. I just wouldn't do it.

Also, these proponents don't seem to see the problems it might exacerbate or create.

If a young women takes her mother in with her to a Bishop's interview, it could complicate things. The mother may be the source of the young women's problems. The mother may be controlling her and abusing her in a variety of ways, such as emotionally, mentally, and verbally.

If this is the case, a Bishop would not be able to speak candidly with the young woman to unearth this.

There is probably a lot of things a young woman wouldn't want to admit to, or discuss with, a leader if her mother were in the room.

This could all render the Bishop's interview farcical.

Having a female companion or parent could indeed make some women, especially young women, feel comfortable meeting one-on-one with a male church leader. I'm just not one of them. I suspect there are other women who feel as I do.

Conclusion

I applaud the Church's decision to allow someone to have a companion with them in a confidential interview if they choose.

However, we shouldn't be so naive as to think it can't cause some problems in addition to solving some others.

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Genesis 5; Moses 6 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

by Autumn Dickson

I want to share something from the Official Declaration 1, the declaration that ended the practice of polygamy in the latter-days. This post isn’t specifically about polygamy, but the principle I want to teach is being taught through the polygamy example.

The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.

He then proceeds to ask the people what would be better: to comply with the law of the land and cease the practice of polygamy or continue to practice polygamy and lose the priesthood organization and temples and be forced to stop polygamy anyway?

I’ve heard people express the idea that the church supposedly believes in revelation but fold the second they receive outside pressure. I’ve heard it conveyed that it was so convenient for the Lord to stop the practice of polygamy when things got too difficult for the people to live it. Even as a teenager, I believed in the church but remember thinking, “Isn’t there a third option? Can’t the Lord enable them to continue practicing polygamy without losing all of the men and the temples?”

Though polygamy is unique in many ways, there is not really any new argument against God. These specific questions boil down to a question that is as old as religion, “If your God is truly so powerful, why doesn’t He enable you?”

The answer to that specific question varies because the circumstances of mankind vary, but I’ll do my best to teach the overarching principles by referring to this specific example of polygamy.

According to President Woodruff, the Saints were facing some pretty dire circumstances. He had a vision of everything that the Saints would lose if they continued the practice of polygamy. To put it shortly, they would lose everything that mattered. I don’t think Satan was worried about stopping polygamy as he was about utilizing polygamy to stop the work in general. If the Saints continued on, this would surely stop the work. They would lose temples and the men; if they lost these, apostasy would reign and Satan would have won (especially since the Lord has promised that we will not fall into a Great Apostasy again).

When we face dire circumstances, the Lord can react in a number of ways and He makes wise decisions based on what will bring about His purposes.

The Lord’s potential reaction #1:

Sometimes He asks us to continue on through difficulty and lose everything. I think of Abinadi. Abinadi was asked to continue preaching despite the fact that it put his life in danger. Abinadi died. Sometimes the Lord asks for the ultimate sacrifice. He could have asked the Saints to make the ultimate sacrifice, but He didn’t.

The Lord’s potential reaction #2:

The Lord can tell His people to keep going and then remove the difficulty. There are a million examples of this, the most obvious being Moses parting the Red Sea.

When it came to polygamy, the Lord could have responded in this way. He could have “parted the sea” and removed the difficulty. The Lord could have enabled His Saints to continue practicing polygamy. He could have wiped out the entire earth other than the Saints if that’s what it took, but He didn’t.

The Lord’s potential reaction #3:

Sometimes the Lord tells us to stop. I think of Alma and his people. They were threatened with death if they prayed, and so they only prayed in their hearts. The Lord could have commanded them to keep praying, but it wasn’t their time and so He didn’t. Technically they kept praying, but there are other instances. For example, there was Zion’s camp. An “army” of members left Kirtland to go win back Missouri for the Saints, but the Lord told them to turn around after they got there. I did a whole video on why the Lord might have chosen after this manner. There was also the time when the Lord excused His people from building the temple in Zion for a time.

Sometimes the Lord does tell us we can stop. People love to act like this is because our God isn’t real or that He isn’t powerful. The answer is neither.

Sometimes the Lord tells us to stop because He is wise.

Despite the fact that the Lord could ask His Saints to sacrifice everything and despite the fact that the Lord could have removed the obstacles they were facing, He chose not to. I emphasize the point that we do not always know why the Lord makes specific choices unless He tells us directly, but let’s think for a bit about why the Lord would have made this decision.

Despite the fact that the Lord reigns over all and despite the fact that He is tremendously powerful, sometimes He chooses to act in a certain way with mankind because of His purposes. The “limitations” are not true limitations; they are self-imposed limitations that enable Him to push His purposes along.

His purpose is to bring about the immortality and eternal life of man and because of His chosen purpose, He often works within the constraints of mankind so He doesn’t ruin His own plan. Let’s look at this principle in the context of polygamy.

The Lord’s potential reaction #1:

The Lord could have asked them to continue on in difficulty and sacrifice. They would have lost the temples and priesthood organization that kept His restored church on the earth. That doesn’t really fit His purposes so He’s not going to choose this option.

The Lord’s potential reaction #2:

The Lord could have asked them to continue on and then removed the difficulty for them. This answers the question that I’ve heard posed more than once in my life. Believe it or not, this would have also frustrated His purposes. He COULD have destroyed everyone except the Saints, but that doesn’t contribute to His purposes. He COULD have sent down miracles to stop the rest of America from being able to infiltrate Utah and take the temples and arrest the men, but it would have taken some large-scale miracles in order to keep the work moving forward.

In the history of the world, the Lord has performed some incredible large-scale miracles. We read about these miracles, and we rejoice in them.

However, the Lord does not often choose to work after this manner. He just doesn’t. Why? Because faith is an essential ingredient in His plan. I have studied the purpose of faith over and over and over. You can’t bring about the Plan of Redemption if you wipe out the principle of faith, and large-scale miracles run the risk of doing just that.

The Lord could perform large-scale miracle after large-scale miracle and fix everything, but He doesn’t. Why? Because removing faith from the mortal experience has far dire consequences than anything we could potentially face on earth.

So the Lord COULD have chosen potential reaction #1 or #2, but He didn’t because they don’t contribute to His purposes.

The Lord’s potential reaction #3:

He stops it.

And honestly, this makes sense. Temple work and the priesthood organization were more important. Faith was more important.

I believe that polygamy was a policy laid down by God. I do. I also believe that polygamy doesn’t make logistical sense on a grand scale so it was the wisest choice the Lord could have made.

There are a million arguments made against the church. One of them is the idea of, “If your God is so powerful, why doesn’t He enable you to xyz?”

I testify that God is real and powerful, and I testify that He is in this work. I also testify that God is wise and because He is wise, He has self-imposed limitations in order to bring about His purposes. He could easily interfere with evil on a daily basis, but He knows the cost would be too high. I testify that the Lord is wise enough to make the decisions necessary to bring about our eternal life.

Autumn Dickson was born and raised in a small town in Texas. She served a mission in the Indianapolis Indiana mission. She studied elementary education but has found a particular passion in teaching the gospel. Her desire for her content is to inspire people to feel confident, peaceful, and joyful about their relationship with Jesus Christ and to allow that relationship to touch every aspect of their lives. Autumn was the recipient of FAIR’s 2024 John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – The Articles of Faith and Official Declarations 1 and 2 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

by Autumn Dickson

With Joseph and Hyrum martyred, Brigham Young was now the prophet. After the Saints were expelled from Nauvoo, Brigham was in charge of finding them a permanent home in the mountains of the west. Though the westward movement of the Saints was among the most impressive immigrations of Americans, it did not start out that way.

The Saints were starving and freezing along the trail. Muddy quagmires kept the Saints from reaching their goal to plant crops ahead of everyone coming. Brigham described feeling like he was dragging around a 25 ton weight. He felt like he had a large family with no way of taking care of them. At Winter Quarters in Nebraska, he turned to the Lord for guidance.

The Lord told Brigham how to organize the company, but He taught Brigham much more important things that would turn the tide for the Saints’ ability to make it to their destination.

Here is the verse that introduces the important concept that turned things around.

Doctrine and Covenants 136:2

Let all the people of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and those who journey with them, be organized into companies, with a covenant and promise to keep all the commandments and statutes of the Lord our God.

The Saints were to be organized into companies that would stick together, and they entered into those companies by making covenants to keep the commandments and statutes of the Lord.

There were two major principles at work here that changed the game.

Principle one. When people normally made their way across towards the west (Saints and non-Saints alike), it was done very loosely with every man vying for his own family. They often travelled together for safety, but companies broke apart and came together with different members more than once. That is the first principle: Brigham Young organized them into companies with leadership at different levels, and each company was expected to stick together throughout the entire journey. If one made it, they were all going to make it.

The second principle was to focus on spirituality again. Not only were they to focus on the eternal nature of their work, but they were to focus on the fact that they believed in the same God who helped many groups of people travel to new destinations, the God of Israel.

This becomes even more significant when you recognize what the Lord was preparing Brigham for.

In 1877, Brigham Young organized the priesthood structure of the church. After travelling around Utah, he found that there were many people scattered and not enrolled in wards. There were overlapping authorities where spiritual jurisdictions were confusing, and it was unclear who would have the responsibility of showing their stewardship to the Lord. There were bishops who had never been ordained, and this was setting the stage for people to become more vulnerable as they were travelling the covenant path.

The Saints had now grown large enough that they needed to be organized or two things would happen: losing people and losing the doctrine that had been restored with such difficulty.

So that’s what Brigham did. Under the direction of the apostles, Saints scattered across Utah were better organized into stakes and wards. Bishops were set apart. Every member found themselves in a ward with a leader who would watch over them. Priesthood roles were clarified so that everyone understood what they were in charge of. This would lessen the gaps in which people could fall through with no one to watch over them, and it would also serve to help the Lord speak to His entire church when He revealed something rather than sending word out and hoping everyone was able to receive it.

It’s hard to overstate the unglamorous importance of what Brigham did.

Let’s tie it back to what we talked about in the beginning, and let’s talk about it from the perspective of an imaginary Saint who could have lived it

A widow is trying to get her kids across the plains to gather with the Saints. Her oldest child is 10 years old and he helps, but he is still only 10. She started out with one company as she began her journey across the plains only to have fallen behind and found herself in a new company. As she tries to nurse her sick baby back to health, they fall behind again as the 10 year old can only get the wagon going so far. She finds herself in a new company once again. At this point, she is simply hoping that she gets to their destination before she reaches the end of the line of companies.

Organizing the Saints into companies that cared for each other changed the game. No one got left behind. This is powerful for the widow, but it’s also powerful for the ones who are watching out for the widow. It’s powerful for the entire company who works together, mourns together, lifts one another. If you can cry with someone, you are very likely to rejoice with each other as well. Everything changes when you’re not alone.

The widow cries as she holds her baby and a 16 year old from another family has stepped up to drive her wagon along. Her 10 year old looks up at the 16 year old with something akin to hero-worship. This is the beginning of hope. The widow finds renewed faith in her ability to make it, and the 16 year old is changed too.

This doesn’t even mention the fact that all of this hope and change invites the Lord to rain down manna on the heads of the Saints.

Now let’s fast forward. The Saints are in the valley, and it is now 1877. There is a young family whose father has broken his leg in a wagon accident. Mother and teenage daughter are doing everything they can to keep the farm and home running, but it’s not going well. What will winter look like if they can’t finish the work?

But then a man shows up and knocks on their door. He sees the ragged family and introduces himself as their bishop. Over the course of the next few weeks, there are rotations of brethren coming in to harvest the family’s crop. There are young women who come in and help mother prepare the crop to last through the winter.

This is all good and beautiful and inspiring, but I want to fast-forward again.

We are accustomed to living in wards and stakes with leadership that enables lightning fast communication from our beloved prophet to each member. If there is a change wanted by the Lord, it is implemented overnight if that’s what He wants. We are organized, and we enter into a covenant in order to become part of the organization.

It changes the game when this kind of organization is used effectively. It didn’t do much good if the companies that were travelling the plains stayed in the same geographical area but still found themselves laboring alone.

When was the last time you looked around your ward and saw a family? When was the last time you made a valiant attempt to make it a ward family? When was the last time you ministered to make sure no one was lost out on the plains, physically or spiritually? When it comes to the Lord’s work, it’s not just about the widow who is being served. It’s about how we change when we forget our own problems, and we all work together towards common purposes.

Picture the vast difference between the beginning of the Saints journey towards Utah and the end of it. That’s the difference we will find in our own lives if we recognize what the Lord has given us in His organization of the church.

I testify that wards and stakes and leadership and priesthood organization are gifts from the Lord. I don’t believe we recognize the full power of what we’ve been given. I worry that we won’t recognize the full power until we’re ready to bring everyone along the covenant path together. Zion is available everywhere; we do not have to wait. The Lord wants us to experience those blessings today, but He can’t force us to find them. He can simply offer the opportunity and wait for us to step into those blessings. I testify that He loves us and gave us organizations to protect us and lift us.

Autumn Dickson was born and raised in a small town in Texas. She served a mission in the Indianapolis Indiana mission. She studied elementary education but has found a particular passion in teaching the gospel. Her desire for her content is to inspire people to feel confident, peaceful, and joyful about their relationship with Jesus Christ and to allow that relationship to touch every aspect of their lives. Autumn was the recipient of FAIR’s 2024 John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 135–136 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading and Videos

• Alexander L. Baugh and Richard Neitzel Holzapfel, “‘I Roll the Burthen and Responsibility of Leading This Church Off from My Shoulders on to Yours’: The 1844/1845 Declaration of the Quorum of the Twelve Regarding Apostolic Succession,” BYU Studies 49, no. 3 (2010): 4–19.
• Dallin H. Oaks, “The Suppression of the Nauvoo Expositor,” Utah Law Review 9, no. 4 (Winter 1965): 862–903. Oaks argued that the Nauvoo city council’s action to destroy the Expositor press was legal within the understanding of the law in Joseph’s time. (This article was published twenty years before he became an apostle.)
• Joseph L. Lyon and David W. Lyon, “Physical Evidence at Carthage Jail and What It Reveals about the Assassination of Joseph and Hyrum Smith,” BYU Studies 47, no. 4 (2008): 4–50.
• Mark Lyman Staker and LaJean Purcell Carruth, “John Taylor’s June 27, 1854, Account of the Martyrdom,” BYU Studies 50, no. 3 (2011): 25–62.
• D. Michael Quinn, “The Mormon Succession Crisis of 1844,” BYU Studies 16, no. 2 (Winter 1976): 187–233. Quinn argued that Joseph did not leave clear directions on who should succeed him and this spurred a crisis that was resolved only when the majority of the Saints threw their support behind Brigham Young and the Twelve.
• Ronald K. Esplin, “Joseph, Brigham and the Twelve: A Succession of Continuity,” BYU Studies 21, no. 3 (Summer 1981): 301–41. Esplin countered Quinn’s article by arguing that the path of succession was clear from Joseph’s statements and the canonized revelations.
• Russel R. Rich, “Nineteenth-Century Break-offs,” Ensign, September 1979, 68–71. Rich described some of the schismatic groups that broke away from the restored Church during the Prophet Joseph’s life and after his death.
• R. Jean Addams, “Aftermath of the Martyrdom: Aspirants to the Mantle of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 62 (2024): 335–402. Addams examines the individuals who claimed the mantle of the Joseph Smith, their motives, and the churches or organizations they founded in the decade following the death of the Prophet.
• Road to Carthage: A Joseph Smith Papers Podcast is an eight-part documentary miniseries that explores the history of the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum Smith in 1844. The episodes focus on the historical events that led to the assassination of the Prophet and his brother by a mob, as well as the aftermath of that tragic event. Series host Spencer W. McBride interviewed historians and Church leaders for this podcast.
• LaJean Carruth, “Brigham Young on Brigham Young: His Life, Conversion, and Faith, in his Own Words,” 2024 FAIR Conference.
• Daniel C. Peterson, “Appreciating Brother Brigham,” 2024 FAIR Conference.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 135–136 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading and Videos

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 132 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

• This week’s lesson notes include a comparison of the sources used to compile section 130. (See notes, pp. 15–32.)

• Joseph Smith’s teachings about the Holy Ghost in D&C 130:22 were emended in 1854 under the direction of Brigham Young. For an explanation of what happened and why, see Ronald E. Bartholomew, “The Textual Development of D&C 130:22 and the Embodiment of the Holy Ghost,” BYU Studies Quarterly 52, no. 3 (2013): 4–24.

• Stan Larson, “The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text,” BYU Studies 18, no. 2 (Winter 1978): 193–208. Joseph’s 7 April 1844 sermon, delivered at the funeral of his friend, Elder King Follett, is arguably the most important of his published discourses. In it, Joseph explained his understanding of the nature of God, including the doctrine that God the Father is an exalted Man who once had a mortal existence. Four different individuals took notes during Joseph’s sermon. Their accounts were synthesized into a single text in 1855 by Church scribe Jonathan Grimshaw; Grimshaw’s version was published by B. H. Roberts in his seven-volume History of the Church (6:302–17) and in many other Church publications. Stan Larson’s 1978 amalgamated text attempted to remove Grimshaw’s textual emendations and provide proper weight and balance to the various accounts.

• On 16 June 1844, only eleven days before his death, Joseph gave his “Sermon in the Grove” that expanded on the nature of God and other ideas he had presented in the King Follett Discourse. The most complete account of his sermon was made by Thomas Bullock; you can read his handwritten notes on the website of the Joseph Smith Papers or a parallel comparison of his and two other accounts on the archived website of the Book of Abraham Project.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 129–131 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

The post Face to Face: How Hebrew Reveals Women’s Priesthood Power appeared first on Public Square Magazine.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

• FAIR has an article on The Danites with links to several other resources.

• R. Scott Lloyd, “Hawn’s Mill Massacre: ‘New Insights and Interpretations’,” Church News, 9 November 2013. Recent research indicates that the name of the Mormon settlement was spelled Hawn’s Mill, rather than Haun’s, and that the Saints there were not aware of Joseph Smith’s counsel to move closer to Far West to avoid violence.

• Transcript and photograph of Governor Lilburn W. Boggs’ “Extermination Order,” Missouri Executive Order 44, issued 27 October 1838.

• Emma Smith’s letter to Joseph Smith, Jr. in Liberty Jail, 7 March 1839. In her letter, Emma updated her incarcerated husband on her status and the the welfare of their children: “Was it not for conscious innocence, and the direct interposition of divine mercy, I am very sure I never should have been able to have endured the scenes of suffering that I have passed through…but I still live and am yet willing to suffer more if it is the will of kind Heaven, that I should for your sake.”

• Sections 121, 122, and 123 of the Doctrine and Covenants are extracts from a letter written by Joseph Smith and other Church leaders from Liberty Jail on 20 and (c.) 22 March 1839. Images of the original letter, along with an uncorrected transcript, are available on the Joseph Smith Papers website: Part 1 (20 March 1839); Part 2 (ca. 22 March 1839).

• Kent P. Jackson and Robert D. Hunt, “Reprove, Betimes, and Sharpness in the Vocabulary of Joseph Smith,” The Religious Educator 6, no. 2 (2005): 97–104. Jackson and Hunt explain what these words meant in 1839 and the context in which they were used in D&C 121:43.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

What This Means

Upon the passing of a prophet, the First Presidency is dissolved. The senior Apostle—currently Dallin H. Oaks—is called as President. Two Apostles are chosen by revelation to serve with him as counselors, forming the First Presidency.

This sacred reorganization ensures continuity, divine direction, and stability in the leadership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The post A New First Presidency: Called by Revelation appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

• BMC Team, “Why Was Martin Harris Cut Off from the Church?”, Book of Mormon Central, 1 June 2021. This brief article explains why Martin Harris, one of the Three Witnesses of the Book of Mormon, was excommunicated from the Church in late 1837 during a period of mass apostasy.

• Stephen C. Harper, “The Tithing of My People,” Church History: Revelations in Context, last modified 13 January 2016. Harper, a historian for the Church History Department, explains how the Saints in Missouri understood how to calculate “one-tenth of all their interest annually” as tithing. (D&C 119:4)

• Dennis B. Horne, “Reexamining Lorenzo Snow’s 1899 Tithing Revelation,” Mormon Historical Studies – Fall 2013, Vol. 14, No. 2. President Lorenzo Snow did not prophesy an end to the southern Utah drought at the time he received his famous tithing revelation in St. George in 1899 (as portrayed in the church-produced movie “The Windows of Heaven”). The tithing manifestation was indeed true and real, but President Snow’s son LeRoi C. later created an accompanying fiction of a prophecy that if the locals paid their full tithing it would yet rain that very season and save their livestock and crops. President Snow uttered no such prophecy and there was no end to the drought for two years.

• Elder Boyd K. Packer, “The Least of These,” General Conference, October 2004. “I remember my servant Oliver Granger; behold, verily I say unto him that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever, saith the Lord.” (D&C 117:12)

• Elizabeth Kuehn, “Finances and Faith in the Kirtland Crisis of 1837,” 2017 FAIR Conference.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 111–112, 114–115, 117–120 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

This biography of Dallin H. Oaks was written by Richard E. Turley, Jr., who has been associated with Oaks throughout most of his (Turley’s) professional life. Turley has served as the Director of the Church History Department (originally selected to work for the department by Oaks), Assistant Church Historian, and Director of Public Affairs. He has previously written or co-written several other books, including Victims: The LDS Church and the Mark Hoffman Case and Massacre at Mountain Meadows: An American Tragedy.

The Beginning of Dallin H. Oak’s Life

Dallin Harris Oaks was born August 12, 1932 in Provo, Utah. “Harris” comes from his mom’s side of the family, who was descended from a brother of Martin Harris. He grew up in Provo; Twin Falls, Idaho; Payson (where he stayed with his grandparents at times due to the death of his father when he was 7); and Vernal. As a child, he came close to dying several, beginning with his birth, with miraculous preservation of his life occurring each time.

Education, Marriage and Military

Oaks eventually made it to Brigham Young University, where he met his first wife, June Dixon, and married her in his junior year. He was in the Utah National Guard, and the Korean War was going on, so he was unable to serve a mission. After BYU, he graduated cum laude from the University of Chicago Law School, worked as a clerk for the Supreme Court, and then began working at a law practice. During this time he also served as a stake missionary.

He then returned to the University of Chicago Law School as a professor (also serving in the stake presidency) until he was chosen to be the president of Brigham Young University. From there he went on to become a justice of the Utah Supreme Court. He was a potential candidate twice for the United States Supreme Court, but both times felt it wasn’t right. When asked about it once, he said: “That job is like being called to be a General Authority. Only a fool would aspire to it, but no one would turn it down” (page 168).

Called to the Apostleship

In 1984 he received a surprise phone call from President Gordon B. Hinckley of the First Presidency, and he was called as an apostle, which he found to be shocking. “‘I feel so unworthy and so unprepared for this sacred calling,’ he confessed, ‘Yet I do know that there is nothing I cannot do if I am worthy of the help of our Heavenly Father. My challenge is to be worthy and to be in tune’” (page 180).

During his time as an apostle, he had many assignments and took very seriously his role as a special witness of the name of Christ. He became known for his doctrinal addresses. “He felt the heavy responsibility of spiritually feeding those who came–or tuned in–to hear him, and he wanted to align his will with God’s in selecting, developing, and addressing topics of importance in advancing the Lord’s purposes” (page 322).

Powerful Priesthood Witness

One of his talks that is among my favorites was “Healing the Sick,” given in the April 2010 General Conference. Oaks gained faith in the power of the priesthood early in his life. His father was a doctor and someone once “asked him if he was going to grow up to be a doctor like his father and heal people. ‘No,’ he answered. He was going to be a ‘high priest like my father and bless babies’” (page 7).

Later, when he was ten years old, he had an experience that “has been a significant influence on my faith in the power of the priesthood” (page 15). When he was staying with his grandfather, his younger cousin fell unnoticed into an irrigation ditch and wasn’t found for 20 or 30 minutes. He had been floating facedown and was dead. His grandfather gave him a blessing and he was revived. “‘He suffered no after-effects, filling a mission to Australia, marrying a lovely girl, and living an exemplary life as a Latter-day Saint husband and father. I am witness,’ Dallin concluded, ‘to the miracle of his childhood death and restoration’” (page 17).

The Mark Hoffman Case

One of his assignments was with Public Affairs, and this was when the Mark Hofmann case occurred. He was involved in responding to the media and encouraged transparency from the First Presidency in their dealings with Hofmann. After Hofmann was arrested and pleaded guilty, he wrote: “The outcome vindicates the Church in every particular! How blessed are we! The Lord truly looks after His work and His servants. We are buffeted by the world and afflicted with the consequences of our own mistakes, but when the stakes are large and the survival or significant momentum of the work is on the line, we are saved as by a miracle” (page 208).

When later reviewing the manuscript of Turley’s Victims, he wrote: “The facts are there, and his effort will set the record straight for purposes of history. Those who want to believe the worst about the Church and its leaders will do so, but those who want the truth and have ears to hear and hearts to understand will at last have the complete facts on the Church…involvement in the Hofmann affair” (page 209).

Travel Assignments

There were many travel assignments, including time spent as the Philippines Area President. As he got older, this became harder, and in 2006 during a trip to Africa, he wrote: “As I reflect on what I have been doing on this trip…I have been impressed with the fact that I am working so hard that I would not possibly do this for money. I love doing this for the Lord, and I love the people with whom I work and those I meet on these trips” (page 292).

The Family: A Proclamation to the World

The book gives us some information about the creation of “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” and Oaks’ role:

During the fall of 1994, at the urging of its Acting President, Boyd K. Packer, the Quorum of the Twelve discussed the need for a scripture-based proclamation to set forth the Church’s doctrinal position on the family. A committee consisting of Elders Faust, Nelson, and Oaks was assigned to prepare a draft. Their work, for which Elder Nelson was the principal draftsman, was completed over the Christmas holidays. After being approved by the Quorum of the Twelve, the draft was submitted to the First Presidency on January 9, 1995, and warmly received.

Over the next several months, the First Presidency took the proposed proclamation under advisement and made needed amendments. Then on September 23, 1995, in the general Relief Society meeting held in the Salt Lake Tabernacle and broadcast throughout the world, Church President Gordon B. Hinckley read “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” publicly for the first time.

During the period that the proclamation was being drafted, Church leaders grew concerned about efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in the state of Hawaii. As that movement gained momentum, a group of Church authorities and Latter-day Saint legal scholars, including Elder Oaks, recommended that the Church oppose the Hawaii efforts…. (Page 215.)

There has been a theory that the Proclamation began as a response to the legalization efforts in Hawaii, and was written by a team of lawyers, but this clearly shows that not to be the case. If it sounds like it might have been written by legal experts, it’s probably because two of its co-writers were Oaks (a former Utah Supreme Court Justice) and Faust (a former lawyer).

Widower and Second Marriage

Dallin’s wife, June, died in 1998. He later had an experience in the temple where he felt her presence and heard her voice in his mind. She told him “(1) she is busy and happy, and (2) she knows why she died at this time. I was comforted.”

Four months after she had died, he was in the temple again. This time he didn’t feel her presence, but “I did feel a thought she had left for me, somewhat like a written message: ‘Your needs are not so great now, so I will not visit you on a regular basis, but from time to time as you need.’…Elder Oaks wrote that he ‘went away strengthened for a new era in my life’” (pages 235-236).

After that, he began thinking of remarriage and received advice and help from Elder L. Tom Perry, who introduced him to Kristen McMain. After a brief courtship and with the consent of his children, they were married.

Written Correspondence

As an apostle, Oaks responded to many letters. There are portions of some of his responses in the book. Here are some excerpts from those that I found interesting:

On another occasion…Elder Oaks offered four suggestions. The first was about reading from varied sources in searching for truth. Sometimes, Elder Oaks observed, those who say they read broadly exclude reading sources “that will sustain and nourish faith.” Second, he explained, “while doubt can be a virtue when it moves people to seek knowledge, it is also an eternal principle that faith precedes the receipt of knowledge from above.” Third, knowing the Church is true does not require “the kind of transcendental experience the Prophet Joseph Smith had.” That knowledge can come from simply keeping the Lord’s commandments. Fourth, we must avoid judging godly things “according to what seems ‘godly’ according to our standards or culture or experience.” Instead, “we are to learn from Him, not teach Him or confine Him within our criteria.” Finally, Elder Oaks wrote, no one can pass the responsibility for personal conversion to another. “The whole case is in your hands…and its resolution is between you and your Heavenly Father.”

…To a man who wrote on reconciling science and religion, Elder Oaks responded, “Because our knowledge of the truths of the gospel is still evolving with continuing revelation, and because the ‘truths’ of science are also very dynamic, I am skeptical about bringing them together at present, though I know that they will each be gloriously consistent when all truths are known.”

A man wrote asking whether he should refrain from promoting new concepts that came to him about Christ’s Atonement. “The Lord has given us a prophet and his two counselors,” Elder Oaks replied, “and they are the ones to whom we look for ‘new concepts’ on our doctrine. The rest of us should refrain.”

…One correspondent was bothered that a family member talked openly about purported spiritual manifestations… “Have you noticed,” Elder Oaks asked in response, “that General Authorities, fifteen of whom are sustained as prophets, seers, and revelators, rarely speak about personal and sacred spiritual experiences?

“That cannot be a coincidence,” he taught. “It is also true that there are many miracles and sacred spiritual experiences among the Latter-day Saints, and we rarely hear of them across the pulpit or in classes. That cannot be a coincidence either.

“True,” Elder Oaks agreed, “some individuals speak of their personal and sacred spiritual experiences, but I have noticed that those individuals are cautioned not to do so, and if they persist, they are generally released from their Church positions or requested not to speak in Church meetings.

“What explains all of this?” Elder Oaks inquired of the writer. “A person has only to read the directions in the Doctrine and Covenants to see that the Lord has told us that our sacred experiences are personal and are not to be shown before the world.” He concluded, “If every person would be careful to limit the use of their spiritual experiences to their own personal benefit, instead of using them for other purposes, the adversary would have less occasion to mislead us by counterfeit spiritual experiences.” (Pages 336-341.)

Called to the First Presidency

In 2018, Elder Oaks became President Oaks as he was called to be a counselor in the First Presidency. At this time, I observed that there were some that felt that the counselor under President Monson that he was effectively replacing (Dieter F. Uchtdorf) was being demoted. However, when Uchtdorf “met with President Nelson, he recommended two other men to be counselors in the First Presidency. ‘Elder Oaks was one of my recommendations,’ he later explained.

‘Through the course of those interviews,’ President Nelson recounted, ‘it became very clear to me, as I prayed about it, that Dallin should be First Counselor because, upon my demise, he’s the next President of the Church. That’s the kindest thing I could do to the Church and for him…to give that exposure” (page 345).

As a member of the First Presidency,

“My understanding of the power of the Atonement of Jesus Christ has increased enormously. As a judge, I applied mortal laws and penalties. In contrast, as I have reviewed the cases of persons who have sinned previously and now seek renewal in the Church, I have been awed by the love of God and His merciful forgiveness of those who repent and return to Him…. I have greatly increased in knowledge of and appreciation for the inspired service of the members of the Twelve, the Seventy, the Presiding Bishopric, our General Officers, and our local leaders…. I have grown in my testimony of the reality of revelation to our living prophet, President Russell M. Nelson” (page 368).

Describing the First Presidency meetings, he said they

“continue to be very revelatory for all three of us: open discussion of different points of view followed by sweet coming together in unity” (page 356).

On another occasion he wrote that

“The Lord is in charge, and with His direction we can make big changes” (pages 358-359).

Later he wrote, “President Nelson is receiving…inspiration, and it is always confirmed to President Eyring and me. Thrilling!” (page 359).

Changes in the Church

Speaking of the many changes that have been made by the First Presidency since it was formed, Oaks said to members in Arizona:

“Change is almost always exciting… But as I have thought about the many recent changes in the Church, I have felt some caution. The changes we have experienced in our Church meetings and policies should help us, but by themselves they won’t get our members to where our Heavenly Father wants us to be. The changes that make a difference to our position on the covenant path are not changes in Church policies or practices, but the changes we make in our own desires and actions” (page 361).

How the Book is Organized

The book goes through Oaks’ life chronologically until his calling as an apostle. At that point, it shifts into being arranged thematically. This includes a chapter devoted to his first wife. It’s followed by a chapter about his courtship and marriage to his second wife. The last three chapters cover his calling to the First Presidency and events leading up until the publishing of the book. A summary of the book can be found in the final chapter.

I would have preferred as much detail of his later life as there is of earlier parts of his life. But it’s understandable that many aspects of being an apostle and member of the First Presidency require confidentiality. (The author does explain this problem in the introduction.) The details that we are given are extremely interesting. I can see the value of arranging his apostolic ministry into themes. Many things would have been interwoven throughout multiple years otherwise.

I enjoyed this book so much that I gave a copy to my dad for his birthday. He read it and then bought a copy for his sister. President Oaks has truly lived a remarkable life. This book has inspired me to be a better person and increased my testimony of living prophets and apostles.

Author

Trevor Holyoak is the Vice President of FAIR. He joined FAIR in 1997 and received the John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award in 2014. Trevor graduated magna cum laude from Weber State University with a BS in computer science and now works as a programmer and systems administrator. Currently, he is currently serving as a young mens advisor in his ward. In his spare time, Trevor is also involved in the leadership of the Utah Valley Amateur Radio Club. He and his wife have five children and live in Cedar Hills, Utah.

The post Book Review: “In the Hands of the Lord: The Life of Dallin H. Oaks” appeared first on FAIR.

by Autumn Dickson

Disclaimer. I want to talk about the priesthood this week, but the more I dive into it, the more I realize that I know hardly anything about it. There is so much; it’s rather overwhelming. I have done my research. I have tried very hard to understand, but it’s also important to note that I’m imperfect. If I have made any mistakes about principles surrounding the priesthood or even policies, I apologize. Please feel free to correct; I’d much rather learn truth in comparison to standing in ignorance.

Another disclaimer. Elder Neil L. Anderson teaches, “There is an important principle that governs the doctrine of the Church. The doctrine is taught by all 15 members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. It is not hidden in an obscure paragraph of one talk. True principles are taught frequently and by many.”

There are quotes that I’m sharing today that are doctrine, taught over and over through inspired church leaders. I also want to declare that I am sharing personal interpretations, as well as ideas that have not been taught frequently or been canonized. Why do I share them if they are not official doctrine?

I share them for a lot of reasons. They inspire questions, revelation, and for me, they inspire wonder. How much do we not know yet? It’s mind boggling and beautiful. I don’t think there’s anything objectively wrong with exploring doctrine and learning and wondering and asking questions and forming theories as long as we keep a healthy understanding that the Lord reveals official doctrine through a prophet to the whole church.

So without further ado.

Section 107 helps to explain the idea of different aspects of the priesthood. One of the clarifications we receive about the priesthood is as follows:

Doctrine and Covenants 107:18, 5 (why yes, I’m sharing them out of order)

18 The power and authority of the higher, or Melchizedek Priesthood, is to hold the keys of all the spiritual blessings of the church-

5 All other authorities or offices in the church are appendages to this priesthood (Melchizedek Priesthood).

Before I continue on, I want to give a quick tangent here that will help me clarify what I’m talking about as I go through my post. The Melchizedek Priesthood is the power we’ve been given on earth from God. It holds all the spiritual blessings of the church. There are many powers we have not been given in the church. God’s power extends far beyond what we currently have the ability to utilize. In other words, there is Melchizedek Priesthood and then there is priesthood.

But for this post, I may use Melchizedek Priesthood and the general term “priesthood” interchangeably. This is not because they are synonymous; it is because it’s much shorter to just say priesthood. So, when I use the word Melchizedek Priesthood or just the general term priesthood, I am referring to the power that is currently given to the church to bring about the salvation of mankind on the earth.

Phew. Lot’s of groundwork today. Back to the verses.

The Melchizedek Priesthood is the power and authority of God given to us today; all of the other permissions and powers we structurally recognize in the church have grown out of that one priesthood. If you continue reading on in Section 107, we learn that even the Aaronic priesthood is an appendage to the Melchizedek Priesthood. The Melchizedek Priesthood stands independent of all these other offices and authorities.

In the institute manual, we read a quote by Joseph Fielding Smith that teaches this.

“There is no office growing out of this priesthood that is or can be greater than the priesthood itself. It is from the priesthood that the office derives its authority and power. No office gives authority to the priesthood. No office adds to the power of the priesthood. But all offices in the Church derive their power, their virtue, their authority from the priesthood.”

This is actually a critical understanding. The Melchizedek Priesthood is the power and authority of God. Here is another quote from Joseph F. Smith; “Priesthood is the power of God, delegated to man (as in mankind, humanity), to act in the earth for the salvation of the human family.” That’s it. It’s the power of God given so that we can help people return home to Him. We often limit the Melchizedek Priesthood to the specific offices of Elder, High Priest, Patriarch, Seventy, and Apostle. Those are offices within the Melchizedek Priesthood, but if the verse we read earlier is correct, then those offices are literally just appendages. The Melchizedek Priesthood is actually so much more.

All of the other stuff we read in relation to the priesthood (performing ordinances, men getting ordained to the priesthood, etc.) are actually just appendages. They utilize priesthood, but they are not THE priesthood.

Here is my perspective on what that actually means. Once again, gospel according to Autumn.

The Melchizedek Power is just a fancy way of saying that God is supplying the power behind our actions in order to bring His children home. This is doctrine. So much of what we interpret as the Melchizedek Power is actually just policy.

For example, when a boy turns 12, he gets ordained as a deacon. When he is 14, he becomes a teacher. When he is 16, he becomes a priest (This is why it was able to change! Boys went from passing the sacrament when they turn 12 to passing the sacrament at the beginning of the year in which they turn 12). This list goes on and on. All of this structure is actually just policy that is meant to help us along. It is a structure that the Lord has put into place. Think of it like a calling. The actual priesthood acts independently of the calling. You don’t need callings for the Melchizedek Priesthood to exist. Rather, the Lord organizes everything so that it’s easier to come back home to Him. The priesthood structure that was given by the Lord (from deacon to prophet) were all put in place to help us, but are they necessary?

That’s an extremely complicated question. It’s like asking whether a prophet is necessary. In an ideal world where we were all tremendously righteous, no, a prophet would not be necessary. We could all be prophets unto ourselves. Unfortunately, most of us need more of a support system than pure intelligence coming into our minds through the power of the Spirit. In that manner, YES, we need a prophet.

It’s the same with the priesthood organization. If we were all righteous enough, I wonder if we would still be operating on the patriarchal form of priesthood in Abraham’s day where the dad was the presiding officer and took care of his family. There wasn’t a more complicated structure than that.

The point I’m trying to make boils down to this: the Melchizedek Priesthood is the power of God, and it extends far beyond the priesthood structure that God put into place. The structure is helpful, and because of that, it’s necessary. However, the priesthood structure is not the priesthood.

So I’ve made my point. Why the heck does it matter?

BECAUSE IT PUSHES US TO LIVE UP TO OUR PRIESTHOOD PRIVILEGES.

Example.

I was reading a message delivered by Wendy Ulrich, a member of the Relief Society Advisory Council Member. She said this.

“…when women give birth within the new and everlasting covenant, they are in essence performing for themselves for their child that sealing function that cannot otherwise be done except by a sealer in the temple.”

Um. What?!

I love being a mother. I appreciate pregnancy (as much as I hate being pregnant), childbirth, all of it. I have a deep reverence for the female body I’ve been given, and I am in awe that God has trusted me with this divine calling that embodies all the most important aspects of my Heavenly Mother.

In a world that increasingly diminishes and detests motherhood, I declare that I am utilizing the most powerful force in existence: the Melchizedek Priesthood. The childbirth process that I participate in seals my child in the new and everlasting covenant by the power of God, by His Melchizedek Priesthood.

Let’s extend this further. Let me bring two ideas together.

Idea 1. I’m repeating a quote from earlier. Joseph F. Smith said, “Priesthood is the power of God, delegated to man (as in mankind, humanity), to act in the earth for the salvation of the human family.”

Idea 2. Childbirth somehow creates a soul. We know that a woman’s body creates a physical vessel, a body. But somewhere in that process, a spirit is placed into that body.

Creating physical vessels for the spirit children of our Heavenly Parents is absolutely essential for the salvation of the human family. Does that mean pregnancy and childbirth (independent of the sealing power) are also acting by the Melchizedek Priesthood?

Honestly, I’m not sure. There are so many things that have not been revealed to us. We don’t know when the spirit enters the body. We don’t know how that process occurs. But this I do know. When a man baptizes his child, it is said that he is acting with the priesthood to further their salvation even though it’s not really the man’s power. He is merely the vessel in which God is furthering the salvation of that child. Is it really so different from bringing a child into the world? I didn’t design this body to do this miraculous process. I don’t even have to think about it. Like a man who baptizes his child, I am merely the vessel in which this sacred process is occurring.

Once again, I don’t know for sure. All of that was just a long-winded way of saying something I do know.

The Melchizedek Priesthood is available for all of us to utilize. The very power that shaped the universe is the same power that God extends to you regardless of whether you’re a deacon, bishop, prophet, or mother. It’s not about being a leader in a priesthood structure. It’s about serving. And as we serve in the way that Christ served, we change the world.

I testify that God’s power is available to all who are willing to follow Him and try to serve His children. I testify that women can hold as much power as any man. I testify that the power God is willing to extend to any person is proportionate to how willing we are to follow the Lord. That is the only qualifier for how much priesthood power we are capable of wielding.

Autumn Dickson was born and raised in a small town in Texas. She served a mission in the Indianapolis Indiana mission. She studied elementary education but has found a particular passion in teaching the gospel. Her desire for her content is to inspire people to feel confident, peaceful, and joyful about their relationship with Jesus Christ and to allow that relationship to touch every aspect of their lives. Autumn was the recipient of FAIR’s 2024 John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 106-108 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.