D&C 20 – Historical Background

Section 20 of the Doctrine and Covenants was one of the most important revelations for the early church. It was the first revelation selected for printing in the Evening & Morning Star, and the only revelation to be printed twice in that publication. In the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, section 20 was given prime placement, sequentially second only to the revealed preface. It was one of only two revelations deemed important enough to be carried around by individual elders and missionaries (the other: D&C 42), and announced its significance with its informal title: “the Articles and Covenants of the Church of Christ.”

D&C 20 is closely tied to the organization of the church. The understanding that the Lord wanted Joseph to organize a church came only gradually (apparently midway through the translation of the Book of Mormon) and seized Oliver Cowdery with particular interest. In June 1829 Joseph, Oliver, and David Whitmer prayed for instruction about how to organize the church, but the revelation–now D&C 18–addresses itself to Oliver in particular:

“Now, behold, because of the thing which you, my servant Oliver Cowdery, have desired to know of me, I give unto you these words.” (D&C 18:1)

He is then commanded to do the following:

“Rely upon the things which are written; for in them are all things written concerning the foundation of my church.” (D&C 18:3-4)

The “things which are written” was apparently a reference to the Book of Mormon; during the rest of 1829, Oliver combed through the Book of Mormon for clues to the Lord’s preferred organization and procedure for his church. The resulting document was called the “Articles of the Church of Christ” and contained reflections on baptism, ordaining priests and teachers, and church meetings, drawn primarily from 3 Nephi 11, 18 and Moroni 3-6, in addition to a few lines from the 1829 revelations and some of his own commentary. Oliver’s document bears some relation to what eventually became D&C 20, but the particulars of that relationship aren’t clear. Although it’s tempting to see the “Articles” as an early draft for D&C 20, they are perhaps better described as a forerunner, something like an anticipatory thought experiment (see here and here).

The precise date of D&C 20 is unknown, but although the section heading ties it to the organization of the church on April 6, 1830, it was almost certainly not ready by then. Its earliest possible date is April 10. Our only certainty is that it was completed by June 9, 1830, when it was presented and ratified at the first conference of the church.

The text itself is unique among the revelations. Rather than addressing a particular individual or group in the first-person voice of the Lord, D&C 20 speaks in the third person and seems most similar to contemporary Christian creeds or confessions of faith. It lays out the church’s position on several theological issues, including the fall, the nature of man, atonement, infant baptism, predestination, and redemption. In the section on priesthood duties that we’ll be looking at in detail (D&C 20:38-67) the Book of Mormon’s influence is obvious; the offices of elder, priest, and teacher, in addition to some of their duties, come straight from Moroni 3-4, but also would have been familiar to the early saints from other Christian churches of their day. It’s also important to remember that at the time, the priesthood had not yet been organized along “Aaronic” and “Melchizedek” lines, and that the term “apostle” (v. 38) probably referred to a more generic “witness” or “messenger” of Jesus, something akin to a missionary, but nothing like our specialized understanding of the office.

D&C 20 was revised over time–especially the section on priesthood offices–as clarification became necessary and understanding grew. I’ve spent some time looking over the changes, and while there are several, I don’t find them substantial enough for us to worry about. I plan on focusing on our current D&C text, and I’m confident that we aren’t doing a disservice to the “original text” in the process.

The next post will focus on v. 38-67 specifically and give us an idea of how priesthood was understood by the early church.

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under D&C 20

2 responses to “D&C 20 – Historical Background

  1. jennywebb

    Thanks for this, Kim. I didn’t realize that section 20 actually appeared twice the E&MS; I would assume that it was unusual for the publication to reprint things generally—do you know?
    A clarification: you refer to Oliver’s “Articles”, but then later on when discussing D&C 20 itself you refer to “Oliver’s reliance on the Book of Mormon”—I think you meant Joseph’s there? Or are you saying that Oliver’s reliance on the BoM in “Articles” influenced D&C 20 more directly than what you stated above?
    I also just wanted to emphasize your point about the revisions to D&C 20 that took place over time “as clarification became necessary and understanding grew.” I think this history of revision is especially important because it underscores the way continuing revelation worked for Joseph; even in (or perhaps *especially* in) a document as important and significant as this one, it’s incredibly instructive that revelation is highlighted *as a process* rather than a one-time, completely comprehensive flash.
    Joseph’s whole personal history with revelation is one of constant searching, asking, receiving, refining, studying, receiving more, etc. Sometimes I think we prioritize the First Vision experience at the expense of understanding it in context: an amazing initiation into an ongoing process of revelation, designed to provide Joseph with the confidence and trust necessary to facilitate the faith required to continually seek revelation. He doesn’t receive the plates the first time; Moroni appears multiple times in the night, repeating the same teachings; he puzzles out a translation while simultaneously putting together the puzzle that he’s actually to start a church: D&C 20’s continued refinement is something that very much fits into a prophetic pattern of revelation.

    • I’m not sure about the E&MS publications. It could be that a second version of D&C 20 was printed after some changes were made to it? A sort of “updated version?” That would make sense, but it’s complete speculation.

      Thanks for pointing out the clarification. We’re not sure how much Oliver’s influence is found in D&C 20, but there is a heavy Book of Mormon influence, and I was incorrectly conflating the two. I’ve edited the passage to be a bit more accurate.

      And thanks for highlighting the importance of the revisions and what they say about the process of revelation. I wish I’d thought to make that point in the post itself, but better late than never. 🙂

(Comments by invitation)

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s