This week’s Come, Follow Me lessons cover the Law of Consecration by encouraging members to think of all their time, energy, and possessions as stewardships given to them of the Lord, but ultimately belonging to God. Members are also guided to consider the harm wrought on others by breaking their covenants. Finally, the lesson materials once again encourage members to consider the church their ultimate guide in discerning truth from error, while relying heavily on the fear of being deceived by the adversary.
“All Your Property Are Belong to God”
Before Joseph Smith’s arrival, the members in Kirtland had been experimenting with communitarianism on Isaac Morley’s farm. This experiment was essentially modelled of Owenite principles, much like the commune in nearby Kendal, Ohio. Notably, the bulk of the Kirtland converts were in some way connected to the commune on Isaac Morley’s farm, including Sidney Rigdon. Therefore, Joseph Smith would have undoubtedly been made familiar with this communitarian impulse when Rigdon travelled to meet with Joseph before he produced a revelation commanding the New York Mormons to relocate to Ohio. It is perhaps unsurprising then, that shortly after arriving in Kirtland, Joseph produced more revelations that would direct the future of the Kirtland communitarian experiment under his control as president of the church. The sections of the Doctrine and Covenants covered in the present lessons deal largely with Joseph’s efforts to direct this experiment, both in Kirtland but also in Jackson County, Missouri—the designated location of the Zion of the latter days, and the eventual New Jerusalem.
Let’s take a look at how the lesson materials set up a discussion of the Law of Consecration:
If you were a member of the Church in 1831, you might have been invited to live the law of consecration by signing over your property to the Church through the bishop. He would then return to you, in most cases, what you donated, sometimes with a surplus. But it was no longer just your possession—it was your stewardship. Today the procedures are different, but the principles of consecration and stewardship are still vital to the Lord’s work. Consider these words from Elder Quentin L. Cook: “We live in perilous times when many believe we are not accountable to God and that we do not have personal responsibility or stewardship for ourselves or others. Many in the world are focused on self-gratification … [and] do not believe they are their brother’s keeper. In the Church, however, we believe that these stewardships are a sacred trust” (“Stewardship—a Sacred Trust,” Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2009, 91). Come, Follow Me — Individuals and Families Manual, 23 May 2021, emphasis my own.
Below is a video on the Law of Consecration produced by the Church History Department as a part of their promotion of the Saints series. This is included in the materials in the Individuals and Families lesson manual and is clearly an effort by the church to normalize for a modern audience this bit of Mormon history.
There are a number of problems with this video that I want to highlight briefly below:
First, they quote the 1835 revision of D&C 42:30 as reading “consecrate OF thy properties” and referencing the needs of the poor, but these were not part of the original revelation in 1831, or the 1833 Book of Commandments. These earlier versions read “consecrate ALL thy properties” and made scant mention of caring for the poor. The language was changed shortly before the publication of the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants. I encourage you to follow the links provided above and compare these for yourself.
Second, the Partridges are portrayed as going to Missouri and graciously buying land for the members of the church to live on with their own money, but this was heavily financed by the members in Ohio, especially N. K. Whitney & Co. Undoubtedly, the Partridges made sacrifices of their own in this endeavor, but they didn’t finance it entirely on their own. Furthermore, Edward Partridge was the bishop over the church in Missouri, meaning he oversaw the entire endeavor of managing the church’s assets in Missouri and dividing up stewardships. This put him and his family in a position of immense power with control over vast amounts of properties that had been purchased with other members’ money. Leaving out that context seems dishonest.
Third, the members are said to have not been compelled or required to live the law of consecration, but is that accurate? The Feb 1831 revelation gives it as a commandment “with a covena[n]t and Deed which cannot be broken” and “he that doeth them not shall be damned.” Here is an example of one such deed; I encourage you to read it. The lived practice of the law of consecration was that members gave everything to the church, which then “leased” properties back to member families to live and work on, giving all profits back to the church. Everything was intended to be forfeit if they left or were cast out of the church. Such an arrangement made members essentially a kind of indentured servants to the church, since they owned nothing, worked for the church for their own subsistence, and would lose everything if they chose to leave or were cast out for transgression.
Fourth, the Mormon Missouri immigrants are said to receive more than they gave in every instance, but that is because they were largely poor—having been commanded to sell their properties in a hurry to relocate to Ohio and then Missouri. What they received was financed by others in Kirtland. The way this is characterized in the video doesn’t present the whole picture.
Fifth, the video claims that tithing is not a replacement of the law of consecration—just a smaller part of it. They suggest that this replacement idea is just common confusion, but church leadership and correlated materials have taught this very thing for years. The video also claims that the withdrawal of the Law of Consecration was not the result of member weakness or unfaithfulness to the principle, but that also contradicts previous discourse of this subject from the church’s own materials. Consider the following quotations taken from the LDS church’s Institute manual for the Doctrine and Covenants, and compare them to the narrative provided in the video above:
President Joseph Fielding Smith explained: “The Lord had given to the Church the law of consecration and had called upon the members, principally the official members, to enter into a covenant that could not be broken and to be everlasting in which they were to consecrate their properties and receive stewardships, for this is the law of the celestial kingdom. Many of those who entered into this solemn covenant broke it and by so doing brought upon their heads, and the heads of their brethren and sisters, dire punishment and persecution. This celestial law of necessity was thereupon withdrawn for the time, or until the time of the redemption of Zion." [...] Although tithing had been mentioned in earlier revelations, this revelation [D&C 119] established a new and exacting law to replace the law of consecration, which had been revoked by the Lord. “The law of tithing, as understood today, had not been given to the Church previous to this revelation. The term ‘tithing’ in the prayer … and in previous revelations (64:23; 85:3; 97:11), had meant to them not just one-tenth, but all ‘free-will offerings,’ or ‘contributions’ to the Church funds.” [...] Elder Orson F. Whitney explained: “The Law of Tithing was given to supersede, for the time being, a greater law known as the Law of Consecration [D&C 42:30–42], the object of which was and is to sanctify the Lord’s people and ‘prepare them for a place in the celestial world’ [D&C 78:7]. […] A brave attempt to practise it was made by the Latter-day Saints, soon after this Church was organized. But they lacked experience, and did not completely rise to the occasion. Selfishness within, and persecution without, prevented a perfect achievement. So the Lord withdrew the Law of Consecration [see D&C 105], and gave to his people a lesser law, one easier to live, but pointing forward, like the other, to something grand and glorious in the future. That lesser law, the Law of Tithing, is as a schoolmaster, a disciplinary agent, to bring the Saints eventually up to the practise of the higher law, and meanwhile to keep their hearts open for its reception when it returns. Those who obey the Law of Tithing will be prepared to live the Law of Consecration. Those who do not obey it will not be prepared. That is the whole thing in a nut shell.” “Section 119, The Law of Tithing,” Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual (2002), 292–94; emphasis my own.
Also consider the heading to D&C § 119:
... The Lord had previously given to the Church the law of consecration and stewardship of property, which members (chiefly the leading elders) entered into by a covenant that was to be everlasting. Because of failure on the part of many to abide by this covenant, the Lord withdrew it for a time and gave instead the law of tithing to the whole Church. The Prophet asked the Lord how much of their property He required for sacred purposes. The answer was this revelation. Doctrine and Covenants § 119, section heading; emphasis my own.
Leman Copley Changes His Mind
We covered Leman Copley a fair bit last week. Briefly, Copley was a convert with associations among the Shaker community in North Union, Ohio. He was sent on a missionary errand with Sidney Rigdon and the impetuous Parley P. Pratt to deliver a revelation produced by Joseph Smith addressing the Shakers and their beliefs specifically. It was not well received—to say the least—culminating with the leader of the Shaker community rebuking a weeping Copley directly: “You hypocrite, you knew better;—you knew where the living work of God was; but for the sake of indulgence, you could consent to deceive yourself.” Leman was shaken by the experience.
Leman had previously consented to consecrate his farmland in Thompson, Ohio to the church, as a place for immigrating Mormons from New York to settle. However, likely because of his missionary experience in North Union, Copley was now having reservations about this decision and decided to rescind his offer. This created an understandably tense situation that required Joseph to produce another revelation (D&C § 54) to resolve. The solution was for the New York Mormons who had settled on Copley’s farm to pack up again and emigrate to Missouri, where they would receive stewardships of land under the direction of bishop Edward Partridge. This land was purchased by funds consecrated by members in Ohio, especially Newell K. Whitney and his business associate, Sydney Gilbert.
Shame-Based Institutional Loyalty
The lesson materials use Leman Copley as a cautionary example of the consequences of “breaking one’s covenants,” by emphasizing how it harms others. Throughout the manuals, Copley is depicted as weak in his commitment and loyalty to the church and selfishly callous to the needs of others. This caricature of Copley serves as the foil against which members are encouraged to compare themselves as they imagine themselves into this telling of the Mormon story. Members are encouraged to imagine how they might have felt or how they might have reacted if Leman Copley had thus mistreated them, and to extrapolate from that exercise how they can identify similar situations in their own lives. The lessons ask members to ponder how they are hurt by others’ “poor choices,” in the context of a story about a man who “broke his covenant” with the church. The natural implication is that those who leave the church are “covenant breakers” who hurt others through their “poor choices.” Of course, one can also read this messaging as referring to keeping one’s commitments generally—not just to the church—but the message of faithfulness to the church is also a prominent one.
I can turn to the Lord when I am hurt by others’ choices.
Leman Copley had a large farm near Kirtland, and he covenanted to allow the Saints to settle on his land. However, soon after they started settling there, Copley wavered in his faith, broke his covenant, and evicted the Saints from his property (see Saints, 1:125–28).
As recorded in section 54, the Lord told Newel Knight what the Saints should do about their situation. What do you find in this revelation that can help you when another person’s broken commitments or other poor choices affect you?
Come, Follow Me — Individuals and Families Manual, 23 May 2021, emphasis my own.
I can turn to the Lord when I am hurt by others’ choices.
Many of us have suffered disappointment when someone we depended on didn’t keep his or her commitments. This happened to the Saints from Colesville, New York, who expected to settle on Leman Copley’s land in Ohio.
They could imagine that they had a friend among the Colesville Saints and then find counsel in section 54 that they could share with their friend. Or they could search the revelation for something that might help someone who is suffering because of another person’s choices.
Come, Follow Me — Sunday School Manual, 23 May 2021, emphasis my own.
By asking members to engage in the exercise of imagining the ways that they or others are hurt when someone “breaks their covenants,” the lessons instill the message that leaving hurts others. This is made more clear in the Primary lessons, which explicitly tie this message to one’s baptismal covenants and commitment to the church. The implied message is that each member has made promises to God and that breaking those promises hurts God and hurts others. The effect of such messaging is that those who struggle with their faith and contemplate leaving the church are wracked with the additional psychological burden of how their decision to step away will hurt other people. Again, this is not the only message one can take from these lessons on fidelity to one’s commitments, but it is a prominent message.
I should always keep my promises. (Junior Primary) Leman Copley had covenanted to let Saints from Colesville, New York, live on his land in Ohio. But after they arrived, he broke his covenant and made them leave. Cut a paper heart in half, and give each half to two different children. Ask them to hold up their halves together to make a whole heart. Let other children take turns holding up part of the heart. Help the children compare this to the promises or covenants we make with God. God will always hold up His side of the covenant if we hold up ours. Remind the children that when they are baptized, they will covenant, or promise, to obey God’s commandments. I should always keep my covenants. (Senior Primary) Even though our covenants are personal, our faithfulness in keeping them can affect the lives of others. The story of Leman Copley and the Saints from Colesville, New York, illustrates this truth. Share with the children what happened when Saints from Colesville, New York, settled on Leman Copley’s land. How would it feel to be one of those Saints and find out that Leman broke his covenant to share his land? What does this story teach us about keeping our covenants? Remind the children of the covenants they made when they were baptized (see Mosiah 18:8–10). Help them think of ways they are keeping these covenants, and help them see how this will prepare them to make additional covenants in the future. Come, Follow Me — Primary Manual, 23 May 2021, emphasis my own.
At this point I’d like to consider the church’s recent obsession with the phrase “covenant path.” This particular phrase is only as recent as 2007, but we have seen a dramatic increase in its usage since Russell M. Nelson became church president in 2018. The idea of a path of increasing covenantal commitment to the church—from baptism, priesthood ordination (for males), temple endowment, and “the new and everlasting covenant” of marriage—is the primary focus on this rhetorical phrase. Each step along the path includes more commitments, with more promised blessings, and more potential perils for those who stray from the covenant path.
The foremost emphasis of these General Conference addresses invoking the “covenant path” is the need to “stay on the covenant path,” “keep on the covenant path,” “return to the covenant path,” etc. The emphasis is continually on remaining committed to the gospel (i.e. the church) portrayed as a series of solemn promises with dire consequences for breaking. This idea of the “covenant path” is indirectly invoked when the Primary manual encourages children to ponder the ways that their baptismal covenant includes preparing “to make additional covenants in the future.”
Trust the Church to Avoid Deception
The lesson materials return to the theme of the perils of deception by Satan and the outside world. We discussed these last week as well, and we will surely see it again. Indeed, the theme of separation from the dangerous and deceptive outside world is a common theme in the Doctrine and Covenants and in the church’s materials. Looking clearly at these messages in the current manuals should demonstrate that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is still very much a separatist religion in much the same spirit as it was in the 19th century. The suspicion of the outside world (i.e. “Gentiles”) would become even more pronounced as the Mormons faced moved into Missouri, Nauvoo, and especially Utah.
Experiences with derision and persecution would only intensify these sentiments and carry them forward into the present day. It should be noted that many of the persecutions the Mormons experienced were truly heinous and entirely undeserved. However, not all of the criticisms of the Mormons were without merit, and the early members often engaged in activities that alarmed their neighbors and provoked them to hostility. Thus the Mormon experience of paranoid separatism and subsequent persecution served as a sort of self-reinforcing feedback loop that one might consider as “self-fulfilling prophecy.”
Individuals and Families With many people claiming spiritual manifestations, the early Saints were concerned about being deceived. How could they tell who was “accepted of [God]”? In Doctrine and Covenants 52:14–19, the Lord gave a helpful pattern. How can you apply this pattern to detect false messages in the world? You might also use this pattern to evaluate yourself: consider using phrases from these verses to write questions such as “When I speak, is my spirit contrite?” Sunday School How can we apply the pattern in verses 14–19 to avoid deception we find in the world today? Primary In these verses, the Lord gave a pattern so “that [we] may not be deceived” by false teachers and messages. Show the children an example of a pattern (such as a pattern for sewing clothes or making something), and talk about why patterns are helpful. To help the children learn about a pattern from the Lord, write on the board phrases like He that _______, the same is _______, He that _______ shall be _______, and He that _______ is not _______. Invite the children to read Doctrine and Covenants 52:15–18 and fill in the blanks. Why is this pattern helpful to us? Come, Follow Me — Lesson Manuals, 23 May 2021, emphasis my own.
Members are taught that the Holy Ghost will assist them in discerning truth from error and avoiding Satan’s deceptions. These lesson materials emphasize a pattern whereby members can avoid false teachings and messages. This echoes messaging from an earlier lesson regarding the story of Hiram Page’s seer stone. As we discussed then, the pattern that the church has set, and the way they teach about the Holy Ghost’s role in revealing truth, is all centered around reinforcing the authority of church leaders. That is, members can know if a teaching is truth if it agrees with church leadership. Likewise, members can know if their personal revelations are from the Holy Ghost or “another source” by comparing it for agreement with church leaders. Whatever the case, the teachings of church leaders are given preeminence and serve as the final word on what is truth and what is error. This has led some to refer to this pattern of discernment as a “hermetically sealed system” of thought.
