David John Buerger
44

The Fulness of the Priesthood":
The Second Anointing in
Latter-day Saint Theology
and PracticeThere is no exaltation in the kingdom of God without the fulness of thepriesthood. . . . Every man who is faithful and will receive these [temple]
ordinances and blessings obtains a fulness of the priesthood, and the
Lord has said that "he makes them equal in power, and in might, andin dominion."
Joseph Fielding Smith, 1956
(Doctrines of Salvation, 3 :132)

T h e importance of the endowment and such temple-associated rituals as washing, anointing, and sealing has been widely addressed by Church authorities
and others in official Church publications.1 The endowment in particular has
been called the temporal steppingstone through which all people must pass toachieve exaltation with God the Father and Jesus Christ.2 Yet despite theattention given temple work in the Church press, most Mormons, even faithful
temple-goers, know little of the capstone of the endowment: receiving the "fulness of the priesthood" through the "second anointing," an ordinance also
sometimes referred to as the "other endowment," "second endowment," "second blessings," "higher blessings," etc. A surprising amount about this little
known ordinance can be learned, however, through a careful examination of
those sources published and unpublished, which discuss it. This essay attempts
to bring many of these sources together, placing them in the more general context of developing Mormon theology.
I
The Lord Almighty . . . will continue to preserve me . . . until I havefully accomplished my mission in this life, and so firmly established thedispensation of the fullness of the priesthood in the last days, that all thepowers of earth and hell can never prevail against it.
Joseph Smith, Jr., 1842
{History of the Church, 5:139-40)
DAVID JOHN BUERGER is a certified financial planner in San Jose, California. He wishes
to thank Lester E. Bush, Jr., and Anthony A. Hutchinson for help in the preparation of thispaper.
1For example, see James E. Talmage, The House of the Lord: A Study of Holy Sanctuaries, Ancient and Modern (Salt Lake City: The Deseret News, 1912), pp. 18, 99-100,
234-38; John A. Widtsoe, "Fundamentals of Temple Doctrine," Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine 13 (July 1922): 129; Franklin D. Richards, "The Temple of the Lord:
The Importance of Temples, Ancient and Modern," Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine 11 (Oct. 1920) : 146-49; Temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints(Salt Lake City: Corporation of the Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints, 1979) ; entire issue of Ensign 4 (Aug. 1974) ; and numerous conference talks by various Church leaders. Also see Nels B. Lundwall, comp., Temples of the Most High, rev. ed.
(Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1975), pp. 269-74; Young Woman's Journal 5 (Aug. 1894):
513; Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed. rev. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966),
pp. 109-10, 139-40, '226-28, 425, 594, 599, 613, 779; Bruce R. McConkie, comp., Doctrinesof Salvation: Sermons and Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954-56), 2:40-46, 176-79; 3:131-34. Scholarly articles of certain aspects of theendowment ceremonies include Lisle G. Brown, "The Sacred Departments for Temple Workin Nauvoo: The Assembly Room and the Council Chamber," BYU Studies 19 (Spring1979) : 361-74; Andrew F. Ehat, " 'They Might Have Known That He Was Not a Fallen
Prophet' — The Nauvoo Journal of Joseph Fielding," BYU Studies 19 (Winter 1979):
133-66 (esp. notes); Andrew F. Ehat, " ' I t Seems Like Heaven Began on Earth': Joseph
Smith and the Constitution of the Kingdom of God," BYU Studies 20 (Spring 1980) :253-80; Andrew F. Ehat and Lindon W. Cook, comps. and eds., The Words of Joseph
Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of the Prophet Joseph (Provo,
Utah: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1980) (esp. notes; hereafter cited as WJS) ; andD. Michael Quinn, "Latter-day Saint Prayer Circles," BYU Studies 19 (Fall 1978) : 79-105.
2
Gospel Essentials, rev. ed. (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints, 1979), p. 247.

12

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHTFor Joseph Smith and his successors, the temple clearly stood at the heart of
the restoration. Both in Kirtland and Nauvoo, Joseph Smith labored continuously to complete holy edifices where the Saints might be "endowed with powerfrom on high." 3 Washings, anointings, and sealings were first administered in
the Kirtland Temple in 1836. Other temple instructions and rites were addedin Nauvoo in 1842 and 1843. These have been continued to the present day.
Not unexpectedly, given the generally progressive nature of other early concepts within Mormonism, these early rituals also moved through a preliminary
stage.
The significance of what followed can best be understood in the context ofthe changing Latter-day Saint concept of salvation.4 Prior to mid-1831, Mormon theology was clearly not predestinarian. The Book of Mormon, for example, contains no mention of terms such as "calling and election," "elect,""destined," "predestined," or "predestinate" in respect to mankind's afterlife,
judgment or salvation. The Doctrine and Covenants' sole use of the phrase"calling and election" came in a June 1831 revelation (D&C 53:1, 7) thatsimilarly avoided eschatological implications.
At some point between June and November 1831, however, LDS "salvation theology" changed. A precipitating event seemed to be the 3 June 1831
conferral of the "High Priesthood" on Church elders.5 According to testimony
in 1887 by Book of Mormon witness David Whitmer, the introduction of highpriests, an event he considered to be an unfortunate aberration from scriptural
sources, "all originated in the mind of Sidney Rigdon"; "Rigdon finally persuaded Brother Joseph to believe that the high priests which had such great
power in ancient times, should be in the Church of Christ to-day. He had
Brother Joseph inquire of the Lord about it, and they received an answer according to their erring desires." G Official Church histories contain no recordof disagreement or controversy, and the significance of the event may have been
perceived differently as time passed. The new office of high priest quickly cameto be regarded as different from and greater than those of priest and elder because a high priest could "seal," that is, perform earthly ordinances which were
ratified in heaven. Joseph Smith spelled out this crucial function on 25 October
1831, when he is reported to have said at a conference in Far West: "The orderof the High Priesthood is that they have power given them to seal up the Saints
unto eternal life And . . . it was the privilege of every Elder present to be ordained to the High Priesthood." 73Joseph Smith, Jr., History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ed. B. H.
Roberts, 7 vols. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1973), 2:197 (hereafter cited as Historyof the Church). Remarks made on 15 Feb. 1835 by Oliver Cowdery.
4
I am indebted to Anthony A. Hutchinson for extensive assistance with the following
discussion of the evolution of Mormon salvation concepts.
s History of the Church 1:175-76.
6David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ (Richmond, n.p. 1887): 64,
35; see also pp. 32, 49, 62, 63, and 65.
7"Far West Record," in the Historical Department of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah (hereafter LDS Church Archives).

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"

13

The far-reaching implications of this teaching went well beyond the biblicalprecedents which used sealing in a seemingly related sense. In the New Testament, for example, the terms "to seal" and "to place a seal on" metaphoricallyreflected the ancient practice of placing a wax or clay seal to close and protect
a document from misappropriation. The confirming effect of a "sealing" isseen in several Pauline passages where God "seals" Christians by giving themthe Holy Spirit or the Holy Spirit of promise as a ratification of future blessingsand promises to come. The Revelation of John graphically depicts the servantsof God receiving the seal or imprint of God in their foreheads. In all pertinent
New Testament references, however, it is God who applies the seals; there is noclear reference to a human intermediary as part of the "sealing" function."
The sixteenth-century Reformation used many of these "sealing" passages
to support a belief in predestination. Liberal reaction to this Calvinist doctrine
arose early in the seventeenth century when Armenians rejected this view,
asserting that God's sovereignty and man's free will were compatible, and thatsuch "sealings" depended upon choices of the individual believer. The Armenian doctrines of free will and individual works continued to be propagatedon the American frontier through such nineteenth-century groups as Alexander
Campbell's followers and other primitivist "seekers." In 1829, when Joseph
Smith was working on the Book of Mormon manuscript, these same issues werediscussed throughout the Burned-over District of western New York state.
Aside from obvious nonmetaphorical usages of the term "sealing" (e.g.,"sealing up" a book or plates, or hiding an object), the Book of Mormon
employs the term much like the New Testament. Mosiah 5:15 (1st ed.,p. 167), for example, closely followed New Testament usage, but extended themeaning by clearly emphasizing works: "I would that you should be steadfast
and immovable, always abounding in good works, that Christ, the Lord God
Omnipotent, may seal you his, that you may be brought to Heaven." Alma
34:35 (1st ed., p. 321) further counters predestinarian ideas by warning: "If
ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance, even until death, behold, ye
have become subjected to the spirit of the Devil, and he doth seal you his; . . .
and this is the final state of the wicked."
The most significant development in Book of Mormon sealing theology was
God's sealing power granted to Nephi, the son of Helaman: "Whatsoever ye
shall seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on
earth, shall be loosed in heaven." (Hel. 10:7, 1st ed., p. 435)." This passage
parallels Christ's injunction to Peter in Matthew 16:17-19 : "Blessed art thou,
Simon Barjona . . . Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound inheaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
The shift from bind to seal—probably to remove "papist" associations with
8See, for example, Rom. 4:11, 2 Cor. 1:22; Eph. 1:13, 4:30; Rev. 13:16-18.
9The story clearly is patterned on the account of Elijah the Tishbite "sealing" theheavens by drought in 1 Kings 17; also compare the Nephi-Elijah connection in Hel. 5:30,
1 Kings 19: 11-12. Additional parallels to Matt. 16: 17-19 are Mark 8:29, Luke 9:20, andloose parallels in John 6:67-71 and 20:22-23. See also Gen. 14:26-32, JST.

14

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

the text10— does not carry the soteriological and eschatological overtones which"seal" had as a New Testament metaphor. Instead, Nephi can perform miraculous physical events such as commanding a drought that will bring about afamine (Hel. 11:4) to bring people to repentance. Thus, the Book of Mormon
modifies seal to allow a human agent (Nephi), to seal metaphorically as well
as a demonic agent (the devil), whereas the New Testament has only God
sealing, and then strictly in an extended sense of the term. Associating a humanwith this power allowed Joseph Smith to introduce a whole set of theologicalinnovations.
In this context, the 1831 ordination of high priests becomes such an innovation. In November 1831 these various concepts were transformed into a priesthood ritual allowing ordained high priests to "seal [persons] up unto eternallife" (D&C 68:2,12; D&C 1:8-9). Thus, Mormon priesthood bearers themselves could perform a ritual (no specified ceremony is mentioned) parallelingwhat strict Calvinists, for example, reserved solely to God. Zebedee Coltrin's
1831 missionary diary provides evidence that Mormon elders wasted no time in
implementing this ordinance: "Tuesday came to Shalersville held a meetingin the Evening with the Br and after laboring with them some length of time
Br David seeled them up unto Eternal life." X1 Whatever form the ordinancetook at that time, an empowered priesthood bearer could thus simultaneously
seal a whole group of people up to eternal life; this seems to have been aspoken ritual. No physical contact between the officiator and the recipients is
mentioned.12
A second precursor to the Kirtland Temple's endowment came in an 1832
revelation (now D&C 88) commanding that a "School of the Prophets" beestablished to instruct various Church leaders. After describing a format forgreeting members of the School, the revelation added that no one was to be
admitted unless he was "clean from the blood of this generation."
And he shall be received by the ordinance of the washing of feet, for unto this end
was the ordinance of washing of feet instituted.
And again, the ordinance of washing of feet is to be administered by the president,
or presiding elder of the church.
It is to be commenced with prayer; and after partaking of bread and wine, he is togird himself according to the pattern given in the thirteenth chapter of John's testimony concerning me. Amen. (D&C 88:139-41; see also verses 74-75)
10For other passages from the Book of Mormon which seem to describe the Roman
Catholic church from the perspective of anti-papist frontiersmen in the Burned-over District,see 1 Ne. 13:4-9, 24-29; 14:10-17; 2 Ne. 28:18-28. See also Susan Curtis Mernitz,"Palmyra Revisited: a Look at Early Nineteenth Century America and the Book of Mormon," The John Whitmer Historical Association Journal 2 (1982) : 30-37.
11
12

Zebedee Coltrin, Diary, 15 Nov. 1831, LDS Church Archives.

In some ways, this ordinance paralleled that revealed in D&C 60: 15 and D&C 84:92
wherein priesthood bearers were authorized to seal up wicked persons to a damning judgment with a washing-of-feet and shaking-off-of-dust ceremony. This "ordinance of damnation" could also be performed with reference to a group of people at once.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"

15

The School of the Prophets was formally established in late January 1833, andthis ordinance was administered as directed.1' While the revelation did not
explicitly state any relationship between the ordinance of washing feet and theritual of "sealing" which had been practiced for over a year, Joseph indicatedthat in addition to being "clean from the blood of this generation," participantsin the washing of feet were "sealed up unto eternal life." 14
Doctrine and Covenants 88:119 had commanded the Saints to "establish
a house, even a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house oflearning, a house of glory, a house of order, a house of God." Six months later,on 1 June, the Lord rebuked the Prophet for failing to begin construction of ahouse where He would "endow those whom I have chosen with power from onhigh" (D&C95:8).
While work on the Kirtland Temple thereafter proceeded apace, even before the dedication on 27 March 1836 (see D&C 109), Joseph had introduced
the promised new ordinances which were to comprise the core of what later wastermed the Kirtland endowment. On 21 January, according to Joseph Smith's
account in the History of the Church, the First Presidency
retired to the attic story of the printing office, where we attended the ordinance ofwashing our bodies in pure water. We also perfumed our bodies and our heads, in thename of the Lord.
At early candle-light I met with the Presidency at the west school room, in the
Temple, to attend to the ordinance of anointing our heads with holy oil . . . . I took
the oil in my left hand, Father Smith being seated before me, and the remainder of the
Presidency encircled him round about. We then stretched our right hands towards
heaven, and blessed the oil, and consecrated it in the name of Jesus Christ.
We then laid our hands upon our aged Father Smith, and invoked the blessings ofheaven. I then anointed his head with the consecrated oil, and sealed many blessings
upon him. The Presidency then in turn laid their hands upon his head, beginning at
the oldest, until they had all laid their hands upon him, and pronounced such blessings
upon his head, as the Lord put into their hearts, all blessing him to be our Patriarch,
to anoint our heads. . . . The presidency then took the seat in their turn, according totheir age, beginning at the oldest, and received their anointing and blessing under thehands of Father Smith. 15

After several days of anointings administered to other priesthood bearers, theProphet, on 6 February 1836,
called the anointed together to receive the seal of all their blessings . . . . The first part[of the inspired order was] to be spent in solemn prayer before God, without any talking or confusion; and the conclusion with a sealing prayer by President Rigdon, when
all the quorums were to shout with one accord a solemn hosanna to God and theLamb, with an Amen, Amen and Amen; and then all take seats and lift up their heartsin silent prayer to God, and if any obtain a prophecy or vision, to rise and speak that
all may be edified and rejoice together.10
is History of the Church, 1:322-23.
14
Ibid., p. 323, 23 Jan. 1833.
isibid., 2:379-82, 21 Jan. 1836.
18 Ibid., p. 391-92, 6 Feb. 1836.

16

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

A few weeks later at the dedication of the temple, Joseph Smith instructed
the quorums of lay members and Church officers on the ordinance of washingof feet.17 Two days later, on March 29th, the Presidency "proceeded to cleanse
our faces and our feet, and then proceeded to wash one another's feet." After
this was done, those in attendance "partook of the bread and wine." 18 The
next day, a group of about three hundred male Church members met in thetemple and, after the administration of the sacrament, received the ordinanceof washing of feet as well. The Prophet then announced that he "had now
completed the organization of the Church, and we had passed through all thenecessary ceremonies." 19 It was just four days later, however, again in the
Kirtland Temple, that Joseph received a vision recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 110, of the prophet Elijah20 who gave him the full sealing power of the
Melchizedek priesthood — an authority which Joseph Smith did not fully reveal and use until Nauvoo.
In Nauvoo the Prophet Joseph continued to expand Mormon salvation
concepts. He defined the principle of "making your calling and election sure"in a June 1839 sermon as a principle which allowed a Church member, after alifetime of service and devotion, to be "sealed up" to exaltation while yet living, a concept clearly based on 2 Peter 1:10-11: "Wherefore . . . brethren,
give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things,
ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly
into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." 21 This
June 1839 sermon22 has additional importance, for in it Joseph not only linked
making one's calling and election sure to sealing theology but also added thenotion of a "Comforter" (John 14:26), which he defined as a personal manifestation of Jesus Christ. These ideas were in turn associated with the conceptof personal revelation. He urged the Twelve Apostles and all Mormons to follow in his own footsteps and "become perfect in Jesus Christ." There was noreference to the temple in this sermon; indeed there were no functioning temples at this time.
In January 1841, well over two years after the Mormons had abandoned
Kirtland and its temple, Joseph announced another revelation. In it the Lord
" Ibid., p. 410-28, 27 March 1836.
is Ibid., pp. 429-30.
19 Ibid., pp. 430-33.
20
In addition to the scriptural parallels dealing with Elijah, the vision introducing Elijah
in 1836 formed a foundation for further theological innovations. Elijah began to serve as amajor symbol in Joseph Smith's sermons and in his 1838 account of his early life. No scriptural references from Malachi are cited by the angel in Joseph's 1832 account.
21
22

See also 2 Pet. 1:19, and Eph. 1:13-14.

History of the Church, 3 : 3 7 9 - 8 1 , 27 June 1839. T h e original source is Willard
Richards Pocket Companion, published in WJS, pp. 4 - 6 . A brief discussion of this doctrine
is in Roy W. Doxey, "Accepted of the Lord: T h e Doctrine of Making Your Calling andElection Sure," Ensign 6 (July 1 9 7 6 ) : 5 0 - 5 3 ; a more indepth discussion is: Hyrum L.
Andrus, Principles of Perfection (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1970), p p . 331-400.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"17

asked, "How shall your washings be acceptable unto me, except ye performthem in a house which you have built to my name?" (D&C 124:37) The purpose of this new temple would be "that I may reveal mine ordinances therein
unto my people; For I deign to reveal unto my church things which have been
kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain to thedispensation of the fulness of times." (D&C 124:40-41). Anointed Saints werethus advised that their Kirtland ordinances were forerunners to other ordinances to be revealed after a temple was completed in Nauvoo. As before,
however, these ordinances were revealed in advance by the Prophet to a selectgroup of Church leaders and their wives — the "Quorum of the Anointed," or"Holy Order." 23 This action proved providential, as Joseph was killed wellbefore the temple's dedication.
On 4 May 1842 the Prophet, after two days of preparation in the upper
story of his store in Nauvoo, gathered together nine men: James Adams, Heber
C. Kimball, William Law, William Marks, George Miller, Willard Richards,
Hyrum Smith, Newel K. Whitney, and Brigham Young. There, according to
the History of the Church, he
instructed] them in the principles and order of the Priesthood, attending to washings,
anointings, endowments and the communication of keys pertaining to the Aaronic
Priesthood, and so on to the highest order of the Melchisedek Priesthood, setting forth
the order pertaining to the Ancient of Days, and all those plans and principles bywhich any one is enabled to secure the fullness of those blessings which have been prepared for the Church of the First Born, and come up and abide in the presence of the
Eloheim in the eternal worlds. In this council was instituted the ancient order of things
for the first time in these last days. . . . therefore let the Saints . . . [know] assuredlythat all these things referred to in this council are always governed by the principleof revelation.24
23
T h i s g r o u p was also called t h e Holy O r d e r of t h e Holy Priesthood. F o r a brief discussion of this group, see D. Michael Quinn, "Latter-day Saint Prayer Circles," BYU Studies 19(Fall 1978): 84-96.
24

History of the Church, 5 : 1 - 2 . T h e context of the Nauvoo endowment ceremony is toocomplex to be fully treated in this short essay. Clearly one element was the gradual introduction of the practice of plural marriage, primarily to members of the elite "Holy O r d e r "although Joseph Smith never taught plural marriage in the endowment council or HolyO r d e r itself. "Sealing" spouses and families together for eternity (again finding their inspiration in the prophet E l i j a h ) , a n d progressing toward godhood ultimately required a formal
ritual to give a sense of permanence and divine sanction to these beliefs. T h e addition of this"sealing" ritual, in the context of this discussion of second anointings, was added to the1842 Holy O r d e r ceremony one year later. See Lawrence Foster, Religion and Sexuality:
Three American Communal Experimentsof the NineteenthCentury (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1981), p p . 123-225, 2 9 0 - 3 3 6 ; esp. see p p . 143-45. See also Danel W.
Bachman, " A Study of t h e Mormo n Practice of Plural Marriage Before the Death of Joseph
Smith" ( M A thesis, Purdue University, 1975).
T h e actual procedures of the endowment ceremony have created much speculation centered on its possible relationship to certain aspects of Masonic ritual. Some scholars haveconcluded that Joseph Smith relied heavily on certain Masonic rites in framing the endowment. D u r i n g this period his sermons contain many allusions to such Masonic notions as
signs, key words, tokens, degrees, ancient orders, etc. Indeed, Heber C. Kimball, a long-time
Mason, wrote to Parley P. Pratt on 17 J u n e 1842: "there is a similarity of preast Hood inmasonry. Br Joseph Ses Masonary was taken from preasthood b u t has become degenerated.

18

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

There are some problems with this account. It is historically interestingthat the History omits William Law and William Marks, who later became
disaffected.25 More significant is the apparent error in the statement that the"highest order of the Melchisedek Priesthood" was conferred upon these men.
About four months later, in late August 1842, Joseph Smith declared to theFemale Relief Society that "the Lord Almighty . . . will continue to preserveme . . . until I have fully accomplished my mission in this life, and so firmly
established the dispensation of the fullness of the priesthood in the last days,
that all the powers of earth and hell can never prevail against it" (italics
But menny things are perfect. . . ." (typescript; original in LDS Church Archives). The
introduction of a secret society may have been ideally suited to keep knowledge of polygamist
practices from uninitiated Saints and non-Mormons. Unfortunately, a definitive study of therelationship of Freemasonry and Mormonism has not yet been published. Introductory material includes Reed G. Durham, Jr., "Is There No Help for the Widow's Son?", Presidential
Address to the Mormon History Association, 20 April 1974; Kenneth W. Godfrey, "Joseph
Smith and the Masons," Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society 64 (Spring 1971):
79-90; S. H. Goodwin, Mormonism and Masonry: A Utah Point of View (Salt Lake City:
Grand Lodge, F.&A.M. of Utah, 1938) ; S. H. Goodwin, Additional Studies in Mormonism
and Masonry (Salt Lake City, 1932); Mervin B. Hogan, The Origin and Growth of Utah
Masonry and Its Conflict With Mormonism (Salt Lake City: Campus Graphics, 1978);
Mervin B. Hogan, Mormonism and Freemasonry: The Illinois Episode (Salt Lake City:
Campus Graphics, 1980) ; Anthony W. Ivins, Mormonism and Freemasonry (Salt Lake City,
1934) ; and E. Cecil McGavin, Mormonism and Masonry (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1956).
Brigham Young recalled specific procedures of the 4 May 1842 endowment on 7 February 1877:
Prest Young was filled with the spirit of God & revelation & said when we got our washings and anointings under the hands of the Prophet Joseph at Nauvoo we had only one
room to work in with the exception of a little side room or office were . . . he had performed these ceremonies. . . . then after we went into the large room over the store in
Nauvoo. Joseph divided up the room the best that he could . . . gave us our instructions. . . . After we had got through. Bro Joseph turned to me (Prest B. Young) and said
Bro Brigham this is not arranged right but we have done the best we could under thecircumstances in which we are placed, and I . . . wish you to take this matter in handand organize and systematize all these ceremonies. . . . I did so and each time I got something more so that when we went through the Temple at Nauvoo I understood and Knew
how to place them there, we had our ceremonies pretty correct. (L. John Nuttall,
Journal, typescript entry for 7 Feb. 1877, original in Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham
Young University, Provo, Utah.)Heber C. Kimball recorded his part in this event under a miscellaneous 1845 journal entry
entitled "Strange Events": " . . . I was aniciated into the ancient order was washed andannointed and Sealled and ordained a Preast, and so forth in company with nine others."(LDS Church Archives)
Mormon apostate John C. Bennett described his perspective of the Holy Order in his
History of the Saints (Boston: Leland & Whiting, 1842), pp. 217-35, 272-78.
25
A complete list of names is found in Kimball, "Strange Events." Kimball's 21 December 1845 journal entry refers to two unnamed participants in this event as being "worse thandead." Law apostatized from the Church shortly before Joseph and Hyrum Smith's murders
in June 1844; Marks became disaffected from the Church and, after briefly affiliating withSidney Rigdon, James J. Strang, and other dissidents, ultimately joined the Reorganized
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in 1859. D. Michael Quinn, "The Mormon
Succession Crisis of 1844," BYU Studies 16 (Winter 1976): 214.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"19

added). 26 The establishment of "the fulness of the priesthood" was an event
the Prophet viewed as his future life mission, not as an accomplished fact.
Almost a year later on 6 August 1843, Wilford Woodruff reported that
Brigham Young confirmed that the fulness of the priesthood was yet to begiven: "If any in the Church had the fullness of the Melchisedec Priesthood,he [Brigham Young] did not know it." Clearly, though, Joseph had at least
discussed this concept with him for Young added, "For any person to have thefullness of that priesthood, he must be a king and a priest.... A person may beanointed king and priest long before he receives his kingdom." 27
Other relevant facets of Mormon thinking had also matured by the time
Brigham Young made that statement, notably a refinement in the Latter-day
Saint view of "eternal life." Prior to receiving the "three degrees of glory"
vision in February 1832 (now D&C 76), Mormons, including Joseph Smith,understood "eternal life" in the same sense as other Protestants: an undifferentiated heaven as the only alternative to an undifferentiated hell. Even after
February 1832 and possibly as late as 1843, the Prophet apparently still conceived "eternal life" as dwelling in the presence of Elohim forever. It was not2
6 History of the Church, 5 : 139-40, 31 Aug. 1842. Since this citation is n o t in t h e regular N a u v o o Relief Society m i n u t es or in t h e M a n u s c r i p t History of t h e C h u r c h , it probably
represents an anachronistic reinterpretation of Joseph Smith's original comments.
27
History of the Church, 5:527. This account was taken from Wilford Woodruff's
Journal, 6 Aug. 1843, LDS Church Archives. Compare Orson Pratt's sermon, 24 May 1845,
Times and Seasons 5 ( 1 June 1845) : 920. Brigham Young's remarks on being anointed aking and priest originated in the endowment ritual administered to selected Church members
by Joseph Smith. As Heber C. Kimball explained to a Nauvoo Temple audience on 21 Dec.
1845, "You have been anointed to be kings & priests, but you have not been ordained to it
yet, and you have got to get it by being faithful." This concept was mentioned again by
George Q. Cannon in 1883: ". . . in the washing that takes place in the first endowment,
they are washed that they might become clean from the blood of this generation . . . in thesame way they are ordained to be Kings and Priests -—• that ordinance does not make them
. . . Kings and Priests. If they fully received of another endowment [i.e. the second anointing], a fulness of that power, and the promises are fulfilled in the bestowal of the power
upon them." (Salt Lake [City] School of the Prophets Minute Book, typescript entry for
2 Aug. 1883, original in LDS Church Archives; emphasis in original). In 1941, Apostle
David O. McKay explained that the "first anointing" is conferred in the initiatory ordinancesof the endowment where "one . . . is anointed to become a king and a priest of the Most
High; a queen and a priestess in the realms of God. . . . We are anointed that we may
become such." "The Temple Ceremony," address delivered at the Salt Lake Temple Annex,
25 Sept. 1941, LDS Archives; also published in Joseph C. Muren, comp., The Temple and
Its Significance, rev. ed. (Ogden, Utah: Temple Publications, 1974).

For purposes contemporary to the endowment received by members of the Nauvoo Holy
Order, however, it may be that this "first anointing" was an actual, not promissory, ordination, for Heber C. Kimball's own diary recollection of the 4 May 1842 ceremony (citedn. 24) was that he was "ordained a Preast." Notably, the Kirtland "endowment" actuallypronounced recipients "clean from the blood of this generation"; yet Kimball's 21 Dec. 1845
diary also records him telling the same temple audience cited above of more blessings to come
"if you are faithful and keep your tongue in your mouth." Apparently the concept of purification was also undergoing development and the actual form of this ceremony changed as
Joseph Smith developed a fuller understanding of the fulness of the priesthood ordinance andits relationship to the Mormon concept of godhood.

20

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

until May 1843 that Joseph taught that the celestial kingdom ostensibly28 contained gradations, with the highest gradation reserved solely for men andwomen who entered into the new and everlasting covenant of marriage (seeD&C 131:1-4) ,29 In July 1843, Joseph dictated another revelation (now D&C
132) which defined those achieving "exaltation" in the highest degree of thecelestial kingdom as "gods." 30
The importance of this teaching is seen in another Joseph Smith sermon
given shortly thereafter on 27 August 1843. Significantly, these comments
occurred in a discussion of three orders or levels of priesthood: the Lcvitical or
Aaronic order, the patriarchal order of Abraham, and the fulness of the priesthood of Melchizedek which included "kingly powers" of "anointing & sealing— called elected and made sure." 31 Said Joseph: "No man can attain to
the Joint heirship with Jesus Christ with out being administered to by one having the same power & Authority of Melchisedec." This authority and power
came not from "a Prophet nor apostle nor Patriarch only but of [a] King &Priest [of Jesus Christ]." 32
During this same 27 August 1843 sermon the Prophet said: "Abrahams[sic] Patriarchal power" was the "greatest yet experienced in this church." 33
His choice of words is particularly revealing, for by this date ten men had received the initiatory washings and anointings, as well as the Aaronic andMelchizedek portions of the endowment of the "Patriarchal Priesthood" on
4 May 1842. Many of these had also received the ordinance of celestial marriage, for time and eternity with their wives. Joseph and Emma Hale Smith,for example, were sealed in May 1843, as were James and Harriet Adams,
Brigham and Mary Ann Angell Young, Hyrum and Mary Fielding Smith,and Willard and Jennetta Richards Richards.34 When Joseph said late in28
Although this is the current interpretation of this teaching, some have argued that
Joseph Smith was merely redescribing the trilogistic concept of three general degrees of glory
as outlined in D&G 76. In other words, the "highest level" spoken of in D&C 131:2 would
be synonymous with "celestial kingdom," while the "celestial glory" in D&C 131:1 would only
be referring to the "resurrection of the just" described by D&C 76.
29
A n early letter published by W . W . Phelps, Manager & Advocate 9 ( J u n e 1835) : 130,suggests that Joseph Smith may have taught a variation of this doctrine eight years prior to
D&C 131: "We shall by and bye learn that . . . we may prepare ourselves for a kingdom ofglory; become archangels, even the sons of God where the man is neither without the woman,nor the woman without the man in the Lord. . . ."30
Although the doctrine and limited practice of plural marriage had been extant forseveral years prior to the 12 July 1843 dictation of D&C 132, the recording of this importantrevelation introduced several crucial ideas which are pivotal in understanding the theology
surrounding the second anointing ritual. See Robert J. Woodford, "The Historical Development of the Doctrine and Covenants," Ph.D. diss., Dept. of Ancient Scripture, Brigham
Young University, 1974, vol. 3, pp. 1731-61; and Bachman, "The Mormon Practice of Plural
Marriage."31
Joseph Smith, Diary, LDS Church Archives; also cited in WJS, p. 244.
32
In "Scriptural Items," LDS Church Archives, as cited in WJS, p. 245.
33
C o m p a r e J o s e p h Smith sermon of 27 J u n e 1839, cited n . 2 2 .
34
Joseph Smith, Diary, 28 May 1843, LDS Church Archives. I am indebted to Andrew
F. Ehat for sharing his transcription of this entry which was originally made in Taylor
shorthand.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"21

August that the Patriarchal Priesthood was the "greatest yet experienced in thischurch," he was well aware that the fulness of the Melchizedek priesthood was
yet to be conferred through a higher ordinance.
In a sense the institution of this "higher ordinance" was the logical next
step. The previous twelve years of pronouncements, sealings, and anointings"unto eternal life" guaranteed a status that, according to Joseph's 1843 teachings, was subservient to that of the gods. From the perspective of these teachings, even the Nauvoo endowment administered to members of the "Holy
Order" simply provided that the men who received it would live in the celestial
kingdom as angels and servants. Until 1843, women had been excluded fromthese ordinances, possibly because of Joseph Smith's personal reluctance, Emma
Smith's rejection of polygamy, John C. Bennett's lurid expose, and/or the apostasy and subsequent reconciliation of Orson and Sarah Pratt over polygamy.
However, Doctrine and Covenants 131 and 132 indicated that this exclusion
deprived the men (who had received the previous ordinances) of the highest
kingdom of glory — godhood. The higher ordinance was necessary to confirm
the revealed promises of "kingly powers" (i.e., godhood) received in the endowment's initiatory ordinances. Godhood was therefore the meaning of this higher
ordinance, or second anointing, for the previously revealed promises in Doctrine
and Covenants 132:19—26 implicitly referred not to those who had been sealedin celestial marriage but to those who had been sealed and ordained "kings andpriests," "queens and priestesses" to God. Such individuals would necessarily
have received the "second anointing"; "Then shall they be gods, because they
have all power, and the angels are subject unto them."
This special priesthood ordinance was first administered on 28 September
1843 to Joseph and Emma Smith. The History of the Church gives a discreet
account of this event:
At half-past eleven, a.m., a council convened over the store, consisting of myself,
my brother Hyrum, Uncle John Smith, Newel K. Whitney, George Miller, Willard
Richards, John Taylor, Amasa Lyman, John M. Bernhisel, and Lucien Woodworth;and at seven in the evening we met in the front upper room of the Mansion, with
William Law and William Marks. By the common consent and unanimous voice ofthe counsel, I was chosen president of the special council.
The president led in prayer that his days might be prolonged until his mission on
the earth is accomplished, have dominion over his enemies, all their households be
blessed, and all the Church and the world.35

Joseph Smith's journal, the original source, gives a fuller account: "Baurak Ale[a code name for Joseph Smith] was by common consent, & unanimous voicechosen president of the quorum. & anointed & ord[ained] to the highest andholiest order of the priesthood (& companion)." 36 His "companion" was his
wife, Emma, to whom he had been sealed for time and eternity four months
earlier on May 28. Wilford Woodruff's record of this event, found in his 1858
ss History of the Church, 6:39.
36
Joseph Smith, Diary, 28 Sept. 1843, LDS Church Archives. Baurak Ale was a scriptural "code" designation for Joseph Smith; see D&C 103:21 (1971 ed.).

22

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

Historian's Private Journal, was equally explicit: "Then by common consent
Joseph Smith the Prophet Received his second Anointing of the Highest &Holiest order." 37
During the next five months this higher priesthood ordinance of the second
anointing was conferred upon at least twenty men and the wives of sixteen ofthese men. As the accompanying figure38 shows, fulness of priesthood blessings
during Joseph Smith's lifetime were reserved primarily for Church leaders. An
apparent reason for the Prophet's concern to complete the temple and administer the fulness of the priesthood to the Twelve was that these leaders must"round up their shoulders and bear it [the Kingdom] off," and, said Joseph," 'the Kingdom will be established, and I do not care what shall become ofme.' " As George Q. Cannon noted in 1869, "It was by the virtue of thisauthority [i.e., "endowment" and "holy anointing"], on the death of Joseph
Smith, that President Young, as President of the quorum of the Twelve, presided over the Church." 39
In an important discourse on priesthood on 10 March 1844, the Prophet
Joseph was recorded as saying: "The spirit power & calling of Elijah is that ye
have power to hold the keys of the revelations ordinances, oricles powers & endowments of the fulness of the Melchizedek Priesthood & of the Kingdom of
God on the Earth & to receive, obtain & perform all the ordinances belonging
to the Kingdom of God even unto the sealing of the hearts of the hearts [sic]fathers unto the children & the hearts of the children unto the fathers even those
who are in heaven." 40
Formally conferring the fulness of this, the sealing power of Elijah, completed the basic form of the priesthood endowment.41 In a real sense, however,the constant reshuffling and recombining of theological and scriptural images
during these early years could easily be termed "the fulness that was never full."
At each step of the way, Joseph Smith proclaimed he had "completed the organization of the Church," and "passed through all the necessary ceremonies," orrestored the "highest order of the Melchisedek Priesthood," only to introduce
more revelations and theological innovations creating yet new layers of ritual,
37
Wilford Woodruff, Historian's Private Journal, 1858, typescript p. 24, original in LDS
Church Archives.
38
T a b l e 1 is based u p o n i n d e p e n d e n t research by Lisle G . Brown, especially w i t h respect
to the table's graphic design, Andrew F . Ehat, whose " E h a t E n d o w m e nt D a t a Summary,"
cited in his "Joseph Smith's Introduction of Templ e Ordinances a n d the 1844 M o r m o n Succession Question" (M.A. thesis, Brigham Young University, 1982), p p . 9 7 - 9 8 , provides mostof the dating, a n d m y own research. T h e listing contains only names a n d dates for whichdocumentation is fairly certain. Some of the names included are documented as having received one or more of these ordinances, b u t no precise date has been located.
39
George Q . C a n n o n , sermon, 5 Dec. 1869, Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. (Liverpool:
L D S Book Depot, 1 8 5 5 - 8 6 ) , 13:49 (hereafter cited as / £ > ) .
40
Wilford Woodruff, 10 Mar. 1844, J o u r n a l ; also cited in WJS, p . 329.
41
See Brigham Young's 26 Dec. 1845 comments cited in the heading to part I I of thisessay, recorded in Heber C. Kimball Journal, same date.

23

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"

TABLE 1. K N O WN ENDOWMENTS, SEALINGS, AND SECOND ANOINTINGS
DURING J O S E P H SMITH'S LIFETIME

SeconcI
AnointingEndowment

Males

Sealing

8 Oct 43nd*Thirza Cahoon
22 Jul 43 Ruth Clayton
ndLois L. Cutler
Sister DurphyndHannah Fielding

29 Oct 43

James Adams
Almon Babbitt
John Bernhisel
Reynolds Cahoon
William Clayton
Alpheus Cutler

9 Oct 43
11 May 44
2 Dec 43
4 May 42
4 May 42
9 Dec 43
28 Sep 43
4 May 42
4 May 4223 Dec 43

Joseph Fielding
John P. Greene
Orson Hyde
HeberC.Kimball
William Law
Cornelius Lott
Amasa M. Lyman
William Marks
George Miller
Isaac Morley

26 Jan 44 23 Dec 43
2 Dec 43
9 Dec 43nd
9 Dec 43
27 Jan 44 4 May 42
dnr
11 May 44
31 Jan 44
2 Dec 43
8 Oct 43 4 May 42
26 Feb 44 28 Sep 43

Orson Pratt
Parley P. Pratt
William Phelps
Levi Richards
Willard Richards
Sidney Rigdon
George A. Smith
Hyrum Smith
John Smith

28 Sep 43

Joseph Smith, Jr.
Samuel H. Smith
William Smithnd
Orson Spencer
30 Jan 44
John Taylor
29 May 43
Hyrum Smith
Newel K. Whitney 21 Aug 42
Lyman Wight
Wilford Woodruff 11 Nov 43ndLucien Woodworth
29 May 43
Brigham Young
Joseph Young

25 Jan 44
20 Jan 44
dnr
4 Feb 44

22 Oct 43
26 Feb 44

21 Jan 44
2 Feb 44nd
30 Jan 44
8 Oct 43
27 Oct 43
28 Jan 44
dnr
22 Nov 43

5 May 4217 Dec 43
12 May 44
2 Dec 43
28 Sep 43
4 May 42
4 May 42
14 May 44
2 Dec 43
28 Sep 43
4 May 42
3 Feb 44

Endowment

28 May 43 Harriet Adams

4 May 42
12 May 44
28 Sep 43
dnr*
12 Nov 43 12 Oct 43
dnr
3 Feb 44
15 Nov 43 12 Oct 43

dbi*

Femalesdnr
nddnr
20 Sep 43nd

29 Oct 43
1 Oct 43
1 Nov 43

SecondAnointing

12 Nov 43
dnr
15 Nov 43

dnr
Miranda N. Hyde 18 Feb 44
1 Nov 43 20 Jan 44
Vilate Kimballdnr
1 Oct 43
Jane Law
23 Dec 43 4 Feb 44
Permilla Lott

Rosanna Marks

1 Oct 43

22 Oct 43

26 Feb 44 Lucy G. Morley
Fanny Y. Murray

23 Dec 43 26 Feb 44
23 Dec 43

23 Jun 43 Mary Ann Pratt
2 Feb 44 Sally W. Phelpsnd
23 Dec 43

29 May 43 Jenetta Richards

1 Nov 43 27 Jan 44

20 Jan 44 Bathsheba Smith 23 Dec 43
1 Oct 43
8 Oct 43 Mary F. Smith
8 Oct 43ndClarissa Smith
Lucy Mack Smith 8 Oct 43
28 May 43 Emma Hale Smith 28 Sep 43nd2 Feb 44

31 Jan 44
8 Oct 43
26 Feb 44
12 Nov 43
28 Sep 43

ndCatherine Spencer 23 Dec 43
1 Nov 43 30 Jan 44
Leonora TaylornddnrMercy Thompson
Elizabeth Whitney 8 Oct 43 27 Oct 43

Phoebe Woodruff 23 Dec 43 28 Jan 44
dnr
Phebe Woodworth 29 Oct 43
1 Nov 43 22 Nov 43
Mary Ann Young
Jane A. Young
3 Feb 44*dbi = "died before introduced"; dnr="did not receive" during Joseph Smith's lifetime; nd = "no date"available, but probably received during Joseph Smith's lifetime; blank space = nothing known, or received after Joseph Smith's death. Name of the sealings represent plural marriages.

24

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

deposited on or integrated with the old.42 Centrally embedded in the evolutionof the anointing ritual in early Mormon history (including passages from theBook of Mormon) was the theme of leadership.43 As the ritual evolved, lay
members of the Church advanced into the "inner circle," receiving ordinancesand symbols formerly held only by Joseph Smith and his immediate circle,
while Joseph and his associates moved on to higher kingdoms, more sure promises, and more secret rituals. Although change in the fundamental frameworkof ritual was frozen by Joseph Smith's death in June 1844, theologic perceptions dealing with certain aspects of the endowment — and, more particularly,
the second anointing — underwent further modification.
II
Every man that gets his endowment . . . [has been] ordained to the Melchisedeck Priesthood, which is the highest order of Priesthood . . . . those
who have come in here and have received their washing & anointing will
be ordained Kings & Priests, and will then have received the fulness of thePriesthood, all that can be given on earth, for Brother Joseph said he had
given us all that could be given to man on the earth.
Brigham Young, 1845
(Heber C. Kimball, Journal, 26 Dec. 1845)
Many aspiring to take control of the Church came to Nauvoo during thesummer of 1844. One of these was Sidney Rigdon, formerly a counselor toJoseph Smith in the First Presidency. Although Rigdon had received his endowment on 11 May 1844, he had not received his second anointing. Indeed,none of the major contenders to Brigham Young and the Council of the
Twelve — Sidney Rigdon, William Smith, James Jesse Strang, Lyman Wight,
and later Joseph Smith III -— had received this higher ordinance.44 After Rig42
Although it oversimplifies this complex developmental process, Andrew F. Ehat has
attempted to show how Joseph Smith's additions to the Kirtland endowment in Nauvoo did
not disrupt the ultimate order of the ceremony. His listing of temple ordinances, based on
the History of the Church, is intended to illustrate this point. Items first revealed in Nauvoo
are italicized, while those found in both the Kirtland and Nauvoo ceremonies are not:(1) Washing of the body with water and perfumed alcohol (set wording);(2) Sealing thewashing; (3) Anointing the body with oil; (4) Sealing the anointing (set wording) ; (5)Aaronic portion of the endowment;(6) Melchizedek portion of the endowment;( 7 ) Marriage for time and eternity; (8) Anointing with oil; a n d ( 9) Sealing the anointing;(10)
Washing of feet (cited in WJS, p p . 140—41, note 6 ; and " I n t r o d u c t i o n of T e m p l e Ordinances," p . 169.
43
Examples of this idea clearly can be seen in the frequent use of the word " a n o i n t "in the Book of M o r m o n with regard to kings (Jac. 1:9; E t h . 6 : 2 2 , 27, 9 : 4 , 14, 15, 2 1 , 22,
10:10, 1 6 ) , with ordained ministers in the early Doctrine and Covenants ( 6 8 : 2 0 - 2 1 ; 1 0 9 : 3 5 ,
5 3 ; 1 2 1 : 1 6 ) , and with Joseph Smith as the anointed leader with the sealing power (D&G

124:57; 132:7, 18, 19).
44
For the relationship of these contenders to the second anointing a n d the succession
issue, see Andrew F . E h a t , "Joseph Smith's Introduction of T e m p l e Ordinance s and the 1844
M o r m o n Succession Question" ( M A thesis, Brigham Y o u n g University, 1982), p p . 189ff,
esp. fig. 1.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"25

don's attempt to become "guardian" of the Church failed in August 1844, he
tried to undermine the authority of the Quorum of the Twelve by administering his own ceremony of washing and anointing to a group of dissidents. Primarily due to this action, Rigdon was excommunicated from the Church on
8 September 1844.45
Little actual ordinance work was done for a year or more after Joseph
Smith's death. The Saints donated money, time, art, furnishings, and othermaterial to make the temple attic ready for use;40 and in late 1845, Church
leaders began to prepare to administer the initial endowment to members. On
10 December 1845 the endowment was given for the first time in the temple.
Its first recipients were members of the "Holy Order," who desired "to go
through with our washings and Anointing again in the Temple of our God." 47
Between this date and 7 February 1846 when Brigham Young officially closed
the temple, approximately 5,200 members were endowed.48
The endowment that these initiates received, as described by Heber C.
Kimball's journal for the period, describes a sequence of ceremonial rituals,
enactments, and words taking place within the framework of a processional movement from room to room to symbolize progression from birth toexaltation.49
A special altar for sealing ordinances was dedicated on 7 January 1846.50
On January 8 the fulness of the priesthood was then administered for the firsttime in the Nauvoo Temple. Once again, among the earliest to receive thesecond anointing were those who had already received it from Joseph Smith.
The first were Heber C. Kimball and his wife, Vilate Murray. Brigham Young,
who performed the ordinance, and eight other observers gathered in Brigham's
Room No. 1, donned special temple clothing, sang a hymn, and proceeded withthe ordinance which involved anointing and the pronouncement of a blessing
by Brigham Young. Among other things, he promised Heber C. Kimball45
See Lisle G. Brown, " T h e Holy O r d e r in Nauvoo," unpublished manuscript, pp. 12—17;
copy in my possession.
46

F o r details concerning the construction of the Nauvoo Temple, including the administration of endowments in 1842 as well as December 1845-February 1846, see Brown, " T h e
Sacred D e p a r t m e n ts for T e m p l e Work in Nauvoo," a n d Ehat, " 'The y Might Have KnownT h a t H e Was No t a Fallen Prophet.' "47 H e b e r C. Kimball, Journal, 9 Dec. 1845.
48

History of the Church, 7 : 5 4 3 - 5 8 0 ; the last entry on page 580 gives two possible figures
for the final day's ordinance count: the Seventy's Record would bring the cumulative total to5,210; George A. Smith's estimate would boost this to 5,634 endowments. T h e lower figure
is probably more representative, however, for by using a third source (Heber C. Kimball,
Journal, 7 Feb. 1846) the cumulative total would be 5,154.
49
H e b e r C. Kimball, Journal, 11 Dec. 1845. Compare Increase McGee and Maria V a n
Dusen's expose, Positively True: A Dialogue Between Adam and Eve, the Lord and the Devil,
Called the Endowment(Albany: C. Kilmer, 1847).
50
History of the Church, 7:566. I n addition to journal accounts, another publisheddescription of this altar dedication is in Helen M a r Whitney, "Scenes in Nauvoo, and Incidents from H . C. Kimball's Journal," Woman's Exponent
12 (1 July 1 8 8 3 ) : 10. These
descriptions were taken from Heber C. Kimball, Journal, 7 J a n . 1846.

26

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

the "blessing of the Holy reserection, Even to the Eternal Godhead." Heber's
wife was then anointed "a Queen & Priestess unto her husband" and received
the same blessing as he did.51
Within the next few days, other leading brethren and their wives also received their second anointing. When the temple was closed on 7 February 1846,
over two thousand couples had been sealed for time and eternity, and justunder six hundred persons had received the fulness of the priesthood throughtheir second anointing. In addition to Brigham Young, at least nineteen othermen were delegated authority to perform second anointings.52 On a typicalday, six to twelve couples received this ordinance. A few women were sealed totheir current husband for time but as a queen to a deceased man (usuallyJoseph Smith) for eternity. For the first time several polygamous second anointing sealings were also performed.53
In actual practice the second anointing as performed for couples by an
officiator was the first of two parts comprising the fulness of the priesthood
ceremony. The second part was private, without witnesses, and involved only
the husband and wife. Its significance related to the resurrection of the dead as
Heber C. Kimball notes.04 In this part of the ordinance, the wife symbolically
prepared her husband for his death and resurrection, a ceremony that gave thewife a claim on her husband for herself in the resurrection.55 Kimball's journal
51
Book of Anointings, 8 J a n . 1846, p p . 3 - 4 , photocopy of holograph, original in L D S
Church Archives. T h e "Book of Anointings," a special record, lists all recipients of the second
anointing in t h e Nauvoo Temple, including texts of several of the personal blessings received
with the anointings ( L D S Church Archives). Kimball a n d his wife, Vilate, originally received
the second anointing on 20 J a n . 1844, and the second p a r t of the fulness of the priesthood
ceremony on 1 April 1844. Based on our discussion a t the end of p a r t 1 of this essay, it ispossible tha t Kimball's ordination to the "Eternal G o d h e a d " reflected a n elite modification forthis early M o r m o n leader's second anointing, which normally anointed a recipient to godhood; Brigham Young also was blessed, in his second anointing by Heber C. Kimball, to"attain unto [the] Eternal Godhead," as was his wife, M a r y Ann. Aside from these references,
no other evidence is presently known to support this supposition. I t is noteworthy that one
week prior to the commencement of second anointing conferrals in the Nauvoo T e m p l e ,Heber C. Kimball recorded a "temple wedding" between William A. Young a n d Adelia C.
Clark wherein Brigham Young "pronounced them H u s b a n d & Wife, a n d sealed them together
as such for time a n d for all eternity, and also sealed them u p to eternal life, against all sins,
except the sin against the Holy Ghost, which is the shedding of innocent blood, & pronounced
various blessings upon them." (Heber C. Kimball, J o u r n a l, 1 J a n . 1846; the Book of Anointings contains no record of a second anointing for William G. Young a n d Adelia C. Clark.)
52

Based on the Book of Anointings, typescript, original in L D S C h u r c h Archives, themen performing second anointings included Ezra T . Benson, Zebedee Coltrin, Winslow Farr,
William Huntington , Orson Hyde, Aaron Johnson, H e b e r C. Kimball, Amasa M . Lyman,
George Miller, Isaac Morley, William W . Phelps, Orson Pratt, Parley P. Pratt, Charles C.
Rich, William Smith, William Snow, Daniel Spencer, Orson Spencer, J o h n Taylor, a n d Brigh a m Young.
53

Book of Anointings, typescript.

54

Heber C. Kimball, Journal, "Strange Events."

55

Compare the blessing Hyrum Smith gave John Taylor on 23 July 1843, that "shall be
sealed upon your head in the day that you shall be anointed & your body prepared for its

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"27

refers to Mary washing and anointing Jesus' feet and may be derived from a
speculative belief taught by some early Mormons that Jesus Christ married
Mary and Martha, the sisters of Lazarus.56
A number of historical records indicate that the anointed husband and wife
might perform the second part of the fulness of the priesthood ordinance froma few days to as much as a few years after an officiator performed the second
anointing.57
These brief weeks in Nauvoo and its temple represent a unique concentration of second anointings. Although the endowment was sporadically administered after the Saints trekked westward, no available records or diaries indicatethat the higher ordinance of fulness was given for over two decades.

Ill
It would seem to be necessary that there should be more care taken in theadministration of the ordinances to the Saints in order that those who had
not proven themselves worthy might not partake of the fulness of the
anointings until they had proven themselves worthy thereof, upon being
faithful to the initiatory principles; as great carelessness and a lack ofappreciation had been manifested by many who had partaken of thosesacred ordinances.
John Taylor, 12 Oct. 1883
(Salt Lake School of the Prophets Minute Book)
As the Church and its members adjusted to their new environment, initialemphasis on physical survival shifted to more spiritual activities, such as completing personal and Church histories and doing temple work. The Endowment House was dedicated by Heber C. Kimball and endowments were firstburiel" (typescript from Patriarchal Blessing Book 3, p. 144, original in LDS Church Archives). For biblical accounts of Jesus Christ's anointing for his burial see Matt. 26:6-12,
Mark 14:3-9, John 12:1-8.
56
See O g d e n K r a u t , Jesus Was Married (n.p., 1969) for a compilation of early L D S
citations on this belief. A more scholarly analysis of this question is William E. Phipps, Was
Jesus Married? ( N e w York: H a r p e r & Row, 1970), a n d William E. Phipps, " T h e Case for a
Married Jesus," D I A L O G U E : A JOURNAL O F M O R M O N T H O U G H T 7 (Winter 1 9 7 2 ) : 4 4 - 4 9 .
57
Some journal entries which document this time separation between the first and second
parts of the fulness of the priesthood ordinance include Heber C. Kimball (cited in text
above) ; Phineas Richards, Journal, typescript entries for 22 Jan. 1846, 1 Feb. 1846, originalin LDS Church Archives; Robert McQuarrie, Journal, typescript entries for 13 Nov. 1890,
1 June 1894, original in LDS Church Archives; William H. Smart, Diary, typescript entries
for 31 May 1901, 20 June 1901, Western Americana, Marriot Library, University of Utah,
Salt Lake City, Utah; and Sylvester Q. Cannon, Journal, typescript entries for 30 Sept. 1904,
and 28 Oct. 1904, original in LDS Church Archives.

28

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

administered there on 5 May 1855.58 Another decade would pass, however,before second anointings were resumed. The explanation for this continued
hiatus is unknown. Unquestionably the general subject continued to be discussed. On 26 November 1857, for example, Wilford Woodruff recorded in hisdiary that, "In company with G A Smith I called upon President Brigham
Young and asked council about publishing the endowments or an outline of it
telling the time when the Twelve received their 2nd Anointing & about theorganization of the Council of 50 He gave his concent for us to publish an
account of it so that the Saints might understand it." 5<J A few weeks later, on
December 18 as he worked to update the official history of the Church, Woodruff recorded a few relevant procedural comments by George A. Smith who
noted "that Joseph taught that but one king & Priest could be anointed at one
meeting in a private room dedicated by permission to anoint in, but one person
could be anointed in a day but in the Temple several could be anointed in aday But at each anointing the meeting was dismissed and then came together."
In Brigham Young's view, however, "When the Temple is finished & a place
duly prepared we should not be confined to any particular Number in sealing
and anointing." 60
Whether President Young initially intended to await the completion of a
new temple before reinstating second anointings is not clear. However, by early
January 1867, ten years before the Saint George Temple was dedicated, hedecided to resume this highest ordinance of Mormonism. On 26 December
1866 President Young met in council with the First Presidency and Quorumof the Twelve in a session which touched on the subject of endowments andsecond anointings. In this meeting he clarified several procedural issues before
reinstituting the ordinance of the second anointing. Wilford Woodruff's diaryfor that procedural meeting on 26 December reports that President Youngdescribed "the order of the 2d Anointings"; the initiates would be dressed intemple clothes while "the Administrator" could wear street clothing or temple
clothing.61 A decade later he repeated these instructions to Wilford Woodruff.62
Furthermore, "there should be but one man anointed at any one meeting
if more than one man is anointed in a day They should come together andopen by Prayer as though their had not been any meeting before and thus continue to the end." 63 Wilford Woodruff's journal continues: "President Youngsaid when a woman was anointed a Queen to a good man and he died & the
woman was sealed to another man for time it was not necessary for her to be
anointed a Queen again but if she was anointed a Queen to a man who was58

J o u r n a l History of T h e C h u r c h of Jesus Christ of L a t t e r - d a y Saints, 5 M a y 1855, L D S
C h u r c h Archives.
59

Wilford Woodruff, Journal, 26 Nov. 1857, L D S C h u r c h Archives.

60

Ibid., 18 Dec. 1857.

61 Ibid., 26 Dec. 1866.
62 Ibid., 15 J a n . 1877.
63 Ibid., 26 D e c . 1866.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"29

not worthy of a wife & she is sealed to another man she should be anointed a
Queen unto him. When a good man dies & his wives have not been anointed
Queens unto him they may be anointed Queens to him after his death without
any Proxy." G4 This last comment suggests that the second anointing was, atleast during Brigham Young's administration, the only vicarious ordinance
wherein a living proxy was not always required.
The next day, the First Presidency and most of the Twelve consecrated
olive oil for use in administering the second anointing. And on 31 December
1866, Daniel H. Wells and his four wives received their second anointing from
Brigham Young who had perfumed the consecrated oil for this ordinance. As
Wilford Woodruff recorded, "The brethren rejoiced at the commencement
again of the administration of these ordinances which had not been administered since they were in the Temple at Nauvoo." 65
This event marked the beginning of a new period of conferring the fulnessof the priesthood. George Q. Cannon and his three wives received their second
anointing the next day, on 1 January 1867; Joseph A. Young received his on
January 2; Brigham Young, Jr. on January 3, Joseph F. Smith and his two
wives on January 4; and many others followed from January through June
1867.66
Brigham Young's views about the number of persons to receive the second
anointing on a single day apparently changed slightly during the initial week,
for on 2 January 1867, "it was decided by Presidet Young that we dress & offer
up the signs of the Holy Priesthood before we give the 2d anointing & only
anoint one man & his wives in one day at one place." 67 Eight weeks later, on
February 26th, President Young again revised the procedure: "We should
not anoint ownly one man & his family at one meeting, if any other women
are to be anointed to another man it must be a separate meeting, there may[be] two meetings in a day at one place." 68
After the ceremony was recorded in written form, President Young, thenin the last year of his life, appointed Woodruff to preside over the Saint George
64 ibid.
65

Ibid., 3 0 - 3 1 D e c . 1866. C o m p a re Elijah Larkin J o u r n a l , 31 D e c . 1866, Lee Library.

66

T h e cited name s a r e found in Woodruff Journal , 31 D e c . 1866, 1-4 J a n . 1867. I n
addition to Woodruff's entries for 1867, other private journals a n d diaries, many available
in t h e L D S C h u r c h Archives a n d Lee Library, record the administration of second anointings, including Elijah Larkin, J o u r n a l (31 D e c . 1866), T h o m a s Evans Jeremy, J o u r n a l ( 3 0April 1 8 6 7 ) , Jesse N . Smith, J o u r n a l (3 J u n e 1867), J o h n L y m a n Smith, Diary (30 July
1 8 6 7 ) , L . J o h n N u t t a l l , J o u r n a l (23 Sept. 1867), Lorenzo Brown, Diary (2 O c t . 1867),
Sylvester H . Earl, D i a r y ( 1 8 6 7 ) , J o h n Lyman Smith, D i a r y ( 2 3 O c t . 1868), H e n ry Eyring,J o u r n a l ( 2 4 F e b . 1 8 7 7 ) , J . D . T . McAllister, J o u r n al ( 1 0 April 1 8 7 7 ), Samuel H . Rogers,
J o u r n a l (1 F e b . 1 8 7 8 ) , Oliver B. Huntington, J o u r n a l (12 J a n . 1 8 8 1 ), Samuel Bateman,
D i a r y ( 3 0 Nov. 1 8 8 7 ) , a n d T h o m a s M e m m o t t , J o u r n a l ( 1 3 D e c . 1889 a n d 13 Feb. 1890).
A n i m p o r t a n t published account of the second anointing is M r s . T . B. H . (Fanny) Stenhouse,
An Englishwoman
in Utah: The Story of a Life's Experiencein Mormonism(London:Sampson Low, M a r s t o n , Searle, & Rivington, 1880), p p . 3 2 0 - 2 1 .
67 Woodruff, Journal, 2 Jan. 1867.
es Ibid., 26 Feb. 1867.

30

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

Temple which had opened earlier that year and take charge of its affairs. In sodoing, Woodruff recorded that the President gave "me power and authority togive Second Anointings, and seal women to me as I might be led by the Spiritof God."69 Consistent with Woodruff's emphasis on vicarious work for the dead,vicarious second anointings were conducted in the Saint George Temple.70
Six years later on 28 April 1883, Church President John Taylor announced
a revelation reestablishing the School of the Prophets for "all such as areworthy" -— and thereby raised several interesting questions. At a preliminaryorganizational meeting on 25 July 1883, George Q. Cannon, counselor in theFirst Presidency, and George Reynolds, secretary to the First Presidency, wereappointed to "get together all papers and information that they could obtain
relating to the former Schools of the Prophets that were organized under the
direction of the Presidents Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, so that the
School might be properly organized in accordance with the designs of the
Almighty."
They presented their findings to the First Presidency and the Twelve on
2 August 1883.71 Understandably, in view of the time elapsed and complexityof the intervening history, there was confusion about how all the previous initiation rites and ordinances fit together. The August 2 minutes taken by John
Irvine record George Q. Cannon's remarks:
Now, whether the washing of feet [at the original Kirtland School] was suspended by
the Endowment or not is a question in my mind, and probably, in all our minds. But
it seems to me clear that after Peter, at least, had received an uncommon bestowal ofpower at the Transfiguration, that the Savior even after that washed his feet and thefeet of the rest and commanded them that as they seen him do so should they do to
one another. It was one of the last ordinances he performed in their midst. Brother
Nuttall whispers to me a thing with which you are no doubt all familiar; that in thewashing that takes place in the first endowment, they are washed that they might
become clean from the blood of this generation — that is, I suppose, in the same way
they are ordained to be Kings and Priests — that ordinance does not make them clean
from the blood of this generation anymore than it makes them Kings and Priests. Ifthey fully received of another endowment [i.e, the second anointing], a fulness of thatpower, and the promises are fulfilled in the bestowal of the power upon them. (Emphasis in original.)

Further discussion led to the conclusion that the original School in Kirtland
had not used the "greeting" outlined in Doctrine and Covenants 88. Moreover, it was decided that the Kirtland School's washing ceremony was not intended to be a preparatory ordinance for the Kirtland Temple. Apostle Erastus
69
Typescript of signed statement by Wilford Woodruff, 26 M a r c h 1833, microfilm inJames G. Bleak Papers, L e e Library.
70
Samuel Hollister Rogers, J o u r n a l , typescript entry for 1 F e b . 1878, original in L e e
Library.
71

Salt L a k e [City] School of the Prophets M i n u t e Book, typescript entry for 2 Aug. 1883,
original in L D S C h u r c h Archives.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"31

Snow recalled: "I did not understand [it] to be a preparatory work . . . . I
understood it rather as a finishing work, and the words used in most cases
according to the best of my recollection, were: 'I wash you and pronounce you
clean from the blood of this generation.' " He defined "finishing" as the lastpart of the Kirtland endowment -—• "something extra." 72
President Taylor subsequently decided that the ordinance of washing offeet could be appropriately used to initiate individuals into the School of theProphets. The "form of ceremony" decided upon by President Taylor was similar to that used in the Kirtland endowment and to that used in Nauvoo toconfer the higher blessings in its invocation of proper authority, the place of
this ritual as "an introductory ordinance," and a pronouncing of blessings upon
the recipient. The ordinance was, of course, strongly reminiscent of the ritual
performed by the Savior with his apostles during the Last Supper. School
minutes state that President Taylor occasionally inserted "And I say unto
thee thy sins are forgiven thee." He also specified that "the washing of feet
is not the same ordinance associated with this as attended to administrationof Endowments in the Kirtland Temple . . . . This is a distinct thing andis introductory to the School of the Prophets. The other was an endowment." 73
The exact purpose of the washing of feet may have thus been primarily a reminder of their responsibility to be united and to provide selfless service.
President Taylor asserted that the Church was then (in 1883) operating ona "higher plane," 74 apparently higher than that of the School initiation and
the Kirtland endowment half a century earlier. His 1883 decision to allow thewashing of feet as an initiation to the school, complete with the pronouncementof cleansing from the blood of this generation, suggests that only those who hadreceived their second anointing, or were worthy to receive it, were admitted tothe school since the preparatory endowment washed initiates only to becomeclean from the blood of their generation. After the complete order of temple
ordinances was established in Nauvoo, it took conferral of the fulness of thepriesthood to completely "cleanse" an individual from this blood. It would
seem that if a member had not received the second anointing but was initiatedinto the 1883 school, the washing of feet would confirm earlier "cleansing"blessings from the preparatory endowment but would not affirm other promises
given in the second anointing. Those who had previously received the fulnessof the priesthood would merely be renewing blessings already received with thesecond anointing. A further requirement of those entering the 1883 school, besides the endowment and temple marriage, was "celestial" or plural marriage.75
72

School of the Prophets Minutes 27 Sept. 1883.

" I b i d . , 12 Oct. 1883.
74 Ibid., 28 Sept. 1883.
75
T h i s requirement would have been consistent w i t h a revelation received by President
J o h n T a y l o r o n 13 O c t . 1882 t h a t all C h u r c h leaders, both local a n d C h u r c h w i d e were toobey " m y l a w " — i.e., t h e law of plural marriage — o r they would n o t " b e considered worthy

32

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

President Taylor, reflecting on some of the foregoing uncertainties, explained at a meeting of the school on 12 October 1883:
The reason why things are in the shape they are is because Joseph felt called upon toconfer all ordinances connected with the Priesthood. He felt in a hurry on accountof certain premonition [sic] that he had concerning his death, and was very desirous
to impart the endowments and all the ordinances thereof to the Priesthood during hislife time, and it would seem to be necessary that there should be more care taken in
the administration of the ordinances to the Saints in order that those who had notproven themselves worthy might not partake of the fulness of the anointings until they
had proven themselves worthy thereof, upon being faithful to the initiatory principles;as great carelessness and a lack of appreciation had been manifested by many who had
partaken of these sacred ordinances.

The President concluded, "Had Joseph Smith lived he would have had much
more to say on many of those points which he was prevented from doing by his
death." 76IVNo man receives a fullness of the Melchisedek Priesthood till he has received his second anointings. Men recommended for this sacred ordinanceshould be men of God whose faith and integrity are unquestioned.
Joseph F. Smith(in Anthony W. Ivins, Diary, 8 April 1901)
Once the basic format was established, second anointings were regularly
administered in the temples at Saint George and Logan, and later at Salt Lake
City and Manti; the ordinance typically was performed by the temple president, who, with the exception of Wilford Woodruff at Saint George for someyears, was not an apostle. During the 1883 discussions in the School of theProphets, President Taylor indicated that too many members had received thehigher ordinances of the temple before they had proven themselves worthy.
He and George Q. Cannon felt it would be advisible for the endowment to beadministered in separate stages, with the fulness of the priesthood given only
after the candidate had proven himself or herself worthy of the higher blessing.77
Because of the proliferation of second anointings, the First Presidency issued,
over the next few decades, several procedural requirements.
On 7 October 1889, six months after he was sustained president of the
Church, Woodruff "spoke in regard to second anointing [sic] and said thePresidents of Stakes were to be judges of who were worthy to receive them."
He also indicated that "it was an ordinance of the eternal world which beto hold my priesthood." "Revelation," cited in B. H. Roberts, Life of John Taylor (Salt Lake
City, 1892, pp. 349-51. See also John Taylor, 6 Oct. 1884, Journal of Discourses, 25:309.
76
School of the Prophets Minutes, 12 Oct. 1883.
77
School of the Prophets Minutes, 2 Aug. 1883, 27 Sept. 1883.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"33

longed particularly to old men." 78 Although stake presidents were shortly
thereafter given final signatory authority for general temple recommends, a
6 November 1891 First Presidency directive indicated that second anointings
were still to be given final approval only by the president of the Church.79
In 1901, Lorenzo Snow, fourth Church president, stated "that persons who
are recommended for second anointings should be those who have made an
exceptional record, that they are persons who will never apostatize." so Other
early twentieth-century First Presidency writings and correspondence81 indicates that at various times the following criteria of worthiness were applied:(1) Unquestionable and unshaken integrity to the work of the Lord.
(2) "Valient in the defense of the truth," "active in all good works," haveborne "the heat and burden of the day, and endured faithfully to theend."(3) Obedience to commandments such as tithing, law of chastity, honesty,etc.
(4) Age was to be considered, but a member did not need to be "old" toreceive the ordinance; recipients, however, typically were over fifty
years old.
(5) Candidates had to have "gathered with the body of the Church."
Faithful "non-gatherers" would be "dealt with by the authority on theother side of the veil."(6) Candidates could not be guilty of any major sins — e.g., a man who
committed adultery after receiving his endowment would not be recommended, even after full repentance.82
78
A b r a h a m H . C a n n o n , Journal , typescript entry for 7 O c t . 1889, vol. 11, p . 129, original in L e e L i b r a r y ; see also C a n n o n ' s journal entry for 18 Aug. 1893, vol. 17, p . 94, for a similar c o m m e n t on stake presidents' authority to recommend candidates for second anointings.
79
Wilford Woodruff, George Q . Cannon, a n d Joseph F . Smith, 6 Nov. 1891, T o the
Presidents of Stakes a n d Bishops of Wards, L D S C h u r c h Archives; also cited in James R.

Clark ed., Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,
1833-1964,
6 vols. (Salt L a k e C i t y: Bookcraft, 1 9 6 5 - 7 5 ) , 3 : 2 2 8 ; hereafter cited as MFP).
A similar circular letter was released just a few days later on 10 Nov. 1891 which was identical except for the omission of any mention of second anointings; also cited in MFP, 3 : 2 2 9 .
80
A n t h o n y W . Ivins, J o u r n a l , typescript entry for 8 April 1901, original in U t a h State
Historical Society, Salt Lake City, U t a h .
81See, for example, Joseph F . Smith, J o h n R. Winder, A n t h o n H . L u n d to C. R. Hakes,
1 A u g . 1 9 0 2 ; Smith, W i n d e r , a n d L u n d to S. L . C h i p m a n , 16 J u n e 1905 ; Smith a n d W i n d e r
to D a v i d J o h n [and] Joseph B. Keeler, 18 M a r c h 1902; Smith, Winder, and L u n d to C. N .
L u n d , 21 N o v . 1 9 0 6 ; Smith, Winder, a n d L u n d to Lewis Anderson, 14 M a r c h 1907 ; Smith,Winder, a n d L u n d t o O l e e n N . Stohl, 22 M a y 1908; Smith, Winder, a n d L u n d to Isaac
Smith, 16 F e b . 1 9 0 9 ; J o s e p h F . Smith, " T e m p l e Instructions to the Bishops," 1918, in MFP,
5 : 1 1 2 ; a n d "Special Instructions to the Stake President," for 1 9 0 1 - 2 1 . All of these documents a r e in Confidential Research Files.
82
Isaac C . H a i g h t , w h o , according to tradiitonal sources, was excommunicated forauthorizing t h e M o u n t a i n Meadows Massacre, was later rebaptized a n d died en route to
the temple to receive his second anointing.

34

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT(7) Candidates did not have to be Church officers, but it was expectedthat officers such as apostles, stake presidents, high councilmen, bishops, and patriarchs would be worthy to receive the ordinance.
(8) Candidates for posthumous second anointings had to have received
their endowment during their lifetime, and therefore must have been
members of the Church as well.
(9) Usually candidates must have been married and sealed in the temple.
Living bachelors ordinarily were not allowed to have deceased women
anointed to them; single living women were more frequently anointed
to deceased men.
Specific guidance on women's recommends varied somewhat. During Wilford Woodruff's administration, the rule was "not to permit a woman to be
anointed to a man unless she had lived with him as his wife." 83 According toa First Presidency letter in 1900 (during President Snow's administration), this"rule" was a "restriction of the rule in such case which [was] obtained during
the lifetime of President Brigham Young and John Taylor." After reviewing
this policy, the First Presidency decided to "restore the practice" as follows:"Any woman who has been sealed to a man in life or by proxy whether she has
lived with him or not, shall have the privilege of being anointed to him inasmuch as he shall have had his second blessings." 84 Joseph F. Smith, fifth president of the Church, followed this new rule in 1902,85 but by 1907 he and hiscounselors John R. Winder and Anthon H. Lund wrote: "It is not customary
for woman [sic] to be sealed to men, to whom they may have been sealed after
death, but with whom they had not lived in their lifetime as husband and wifein the marriage relation. . . . They must be, or have been, husband and wife
. . . or one flesh, to use the scriptural expression." 8G One 1904 First Presidency
letter denied conferral of the second anointing upon a woman whose deceased
husband was not considered worthy of a recommend due to his indifference
toward temple work prior to his death.87
83
Lorenzo Snow, George Q . C a n n o n , a n d Joseph F . S m i t h to J o h n D . T . McAllister,
14 April 1900, Lorenzo Snow Letterpress Book, Confidential Research Files. See also Wilford
Woodruff to J a m e s H . M a r t i n e a u, 26 Oct. 1887, ibid.
84

Snow, C a n n o n , a n d Smith to J . D . T . McAllister, 14 April 1900, ibid.

85

First Presidency letter of 11 J u n e 1902, recorded in J . D . T . McAllister J o u r n a l , typescript entry for 31 Dec. 1902, original in Lee Library.
86
Joseph F . Smith, J o h n R . Winder, a n d A n t h on H . L u n d t o Lewis Anderson, 14 M a r c h1907, Confidential Research Files.
87

Smith, Winder, and Lund to Thomas R. Bassett, 4 Nov. 1904, ibid. Other letters containing directives on second anointings for females are the First Presidency to Thomas E.
Bassett, 5 Jan. 1902; Smith, Winder, and Lund to Thomas E. Bassett, 16 Nov. 1903; Smith,Winder, and Lund to C. N. Lund, 21 Nov. 1906; Smith, Winder, and Lund to William
Budge, 22 May 1908. With respect to the rule that a man and wife were to have beenendowed members during their lifetimes in order to receive the second anointing posthumously, the First Presidency counseled one stake president that persons who had died before
the Church was organized could be recommended, provided that adequate evidence was

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"35

The recommend itself was usually initiated by a candidate's stake president. It is not known to what extent stake presidents were encouraged to submit recommends for second anointings to the Church president. Evidence suggests that some men and women had requested second anointings prior to the1890s.88 One letter from Wilford Woodruff to Salt Lake Stake President Angus
M. Cannon suggests that local initiative was occasionally exercised.89 Bishops,
however, were discouraged from submitting such recommends.90 If a stakepresident felt a couple worthy of the ordinance — almost presupposing that all
stake presidents had previously received the second anointing — they rilled out
an ordinary temple recommend without indicating on it that it was for a second
anointing. They then submitted the recommend together with a short biographical summary of the candidates directly to the Church president, a procedure followed for both the living and the dead. Only after the Church president returned the signed recommend would the stake president then contact
the candidates, who usually knew nothing of their candidacy. Recommended
candidates were instructed not to discuss their second anointing with anyone
outside the temple, and stake presidents were directed not to send more than
one family per week to the temple for completion of the ordinance to maintain this confidentiality.91
available to determine their worthiness. See Smith, Winder, a n d L u n d to Oleen N . Stohl,
22 M a y 1908, Confidential Research Files.
88
F o r example, see J o h n Taylor to Eliza Perry Benson, 14 M a r c h 1886, J o h n Taylor
Letterpress Book, 1 8 8 6 - 8 7 , L D S C h u r c h Archives; J o h n Hawkins to J o h n Taylor, 6 J u n e1886, J o h n Taylor L e t t e r M s . File, L D S C h u r c h Archives; Benjamin F . Johnson to First
Presidency, 9 D e c . 1886, Office of the First Presidency J o u r n a l , L. J o h n Nuttall Papers, L D S
C h u r c h Archives; Eliza R. Snow to First Presidency, 27 D e c . 1886, ibid.; a n d Wilford Woodruff to M . W . Merrill, 29 M a r c h 1888, L D S Archives. ( N o t e : most of the letters citedt h r o u g h the balance of this essay are in restricted files w i t h various titles. These are citedfrom a compilation of extracts of First Presidency letters entitled "Historical D e p a r t m e n t —Confidential Research Files 1950-1974," L D S C h u r c h Archives vault, copy in Archives a n dManuscripts, Lee Library.) O n e request from Benjamin F . Johnson to J o h n Taylor, 29 J a n .
1887, L D S C h u r c h Archives "as[ked for] the Priviledge of 2d anointing for my son James
Fransis, w h o is t h e Present Bishop at T e m p e . . . . H e is over 30 years of age and apears reallyone of the comeing young m e n of Zion." (Confidential Research F i l e ) .
89
Wilford Woodruff to Angus M . C a n n o n , 24 J a n . 1888, ibid. See letter from Smith,Winder, a n d L u n d to President Moses W . Taylor, 4 J a n . 1902: " W e would say that it is no t
expected t h a t people shall be found asking that this most sacred ordinance shall be administered to them, b u t you should take pains to seek out the worthy people u n d e r your jurisdiction, a n d this by means of your counselors a n d Bishops," ibid.
90
A b r a h a m H . C a n n o n , Journal, 18 Aug. 1893, vol. 17, p . 94, Lee Library; Smith,Winder, a n d L u n d to Moses W . Taylor, 4 J a n . 1902; George F . Gibbs (Secretary to the First
Presidency) to I r a W . Hinckley, 9 D e c . 1 9 0 5 ; Smith, W i n d e r , a n d L u n d to T h o m a s E. Bassett, 4 F e b . 1902; George F . Gibbs to Alma Merrill, 14 J a n . 1 9 0 8 ; W i n d e r and L u n d to D o n
C. Walker, 24 M a r c h 1 9 0 9 ; Joseph F . Smith, " T e m p l e Instructions to the Bishops," 1918
(also cited in MFP, 5 : 1 1 2 ) . All documents in Confidential Research Files.
91
Smith, Winder, a n d L u n d to T h o m a s E. Bassett, 4 F e b . 1902; Smith, Winder, andL u n d to C. R. Hakes, 1 A u g . 1902; Smith, Winder, a n d L u n d to J. S. Paige, Jr., 22 Sept.
1903; George F . Giggs to A l m a Merrill, 14 J a n . 1908; W i n d e r a n d L u n d to D o n C. Walker,
24 M a r c h 1 9 0 9 ; a n d "Special Instructions to the Stake President," for 1 9 0 1 - 2 1 , ibid.

36

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

Consequently, it is unclear precisely what long-term effect the second
anointing had upon the lives of its recipients, nor, for that matter is it known
to what degree the conferral of godhood by the second anointing was held to beconditional or unconditional. Most of the earliest nineteenth-century comments explicitly dealing with the second anointing clearly imply that the ordinance was then held to be unconditional. As early as August 1843 Joseph
Smith had expanded on the Calvinist doctrine of the elect in a sermon containing overtones of predestination. On August 13, the Prophet reportedly
said, "When a seal is put upon the father and mother it secures their posterity
so that they cannot be lost but will be saved by virtue of the covenant of theirfather." Another report recorded: " . . . the Covenant sealed on the fore headsof the Parents secured the children from falling that they shall all sit upon
thrones as one with the God-head joint Heirs of God with Jesus Christ." 92
This promise seems to have been invoked in Heber C. Kimball's personalsecond anointing blessing given by Brigham Young on 8 January 1846 related
to his posterity.93
Indeed, even the promises of godhood outlined in Joseph Smith's revelation on celestial marriage (now D&C 132) seemed unconditionally dependent
upon having received the key ordinances of celestial marriage and being "sealedby the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power" (v. 18), a reference to the second anointing. Joseph
equated this "sealing" with the "Holy Spirit of promise" in a 10 March 1844
sermon as "i e Elijah." He then explained, "to obtain this sealing is to makeour calling and election sure." 94 Indeed, "the power of Elijah is sufficient tomake our calling & Election sure." 95 This sealing power of Elijah, the power
to seal on earth and in heaven, even the "Holy Spirit of promise," was bestowed"by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed,
whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed
unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is neverbut one on the earth at a time on whom this power and keys of the priesthood
are conferred)" (D&C 132:7).9G
92
William Clayton, Diary, 13 Aug. 1843, a n d Franklin D . Richards' "Scriptural Items,"
as cited in WJS, p p . 241—42, originals in L D S C h u r c h Archives. C o m p a r e History of the
Church, 5 : 5 3 0 - 3 1 . I n WJS, p . 300, Ehat and Cook argue that this effect upon the posterityof parents was conditional, not unconditional. Their comment is based only upon the H o w a r d
and M a r t h a Coray Notebook, cited in WJS, p . 2 4 1 ; furthermore, they assume the "sealing"
spoken of by Joseph Smith is that of marriage. T h e actual "seal" discussed, however, wasthat of the Holy Spirit of Promise or the second anointing, n o t on a couple's marriage. This,as well as t h e comments cited in the narrative clearly show that Joseph Smith intended tostate that the sealing unconditionally affected a couple's posterity after this life.
93
Book of Anointings, 8 J a n . 1846.
94" S c r i p t u r al I t e m s , " cited in WJS, p . 3 3 5 ; emphasis in original.
95
Wilford Woodruff, Journal, same d a t e , cited in WJS, p . 3 3 0 ; see also D &C 1 2 4 : 1 2 4 .
This contemporar y interpretation of equating t h e " H o l y Spirit of p r o m i s e " with t h e "callingand election sure" doctrine, particularly with respect t o its conferral by a h u m a n intermediary, has since undergone significant reinterpretation.
96
The ultimate receipt of this powerful sealing authority from a sole human intermediary,
Joseph Smith, represented a striking departure from Joseph Smith's earlier caution against

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"37

The unconditional promise of exaltation in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom as gods and goddesses inherent in this priesthood sealing ordinance of Elijah was weighty indeed, yet so was the sole postmortal alternative:
banishment as sons and daughters of perdition for whom there is no forgivenessin this life or in the hereafter.97 The sealing of the Holy Spirit of promise seemingly did not leave recipients of the second anointing eligible for the graded
degrees of judgment outlined in Doctrine and Covenants 76: they would beeither gods or devils.
Doctrine and Covenants 132:26-27 implies that such persons would be deprived of godhood only if they committed the unpardonable sin: i.e., ". . . murder wherein ye shed innocent blood, and assent unto my death." 98 This would
seem to give license to commit a wide variety of sins including adultery, rape,incest, theft, extortion, etc., and still be guaranteed godhood after "they shallbe destroyed in the flesh, and shall be delivered unto the bufferings of Satan
unto the day of redemption." "Themes of the unconditional nature of the second anointing occasionallyappeared in public sermons of Church authorities in Utah. On 7 April 1855,
Orson Pratt stated,
But we have no promise, unless we endure in faith unto the end . . . . In speaking of
this, I will qualify my language by saying, that the Saint who has been sealed unto
eternal life and falls in transgression and does not repent, but dies in his sin, will beafflicted and tormented after he leaves this vale of tears until the day of redemption;
but having been sealed with the spirit of promise through the ordinances of the houseof God, those things which have been sealed upon his head will be realized by him in
the morning of the resurrection.100

Pratt's September 1860 comments on this subject were given in the same vein:"This would seem to be as near an unconditional promise as can well be madeto mortals. But this is not altogether unconditional, for there are some exceptions; but it would come as near as anything we have ever read of." 101 And in
the t w o great abominations of all Christian primitivists, papism a n d priestcraft; see Susan
Curtis Mernitz, " P a l m y r a Revised," p p . 3 3 - 3 5 .
97 See Brigham Young, 8 Aug. 1852, JD, 3 : 9 3 .
98

I t is possible t h a t some early M o r m o n s m a y have extended this deprivation of godhood
to anyone w h o committed t h e unpardonable sin; J o h n D . Lee's recollection of t h e deliberations preceding t he M o u n t a i n Meadows massacre describes t h e concern of those involved thatby killing t h e w o m e n a n d children, they might b e guilty of shedding innocent blood. Thistask w a s left t o t h e I n d i a n s so that " i t would be certain t h a t no M o r m o n would be guilty of
shedding innocent blood — if it should h a p p e n t h a t there was any innocent blood in th e comp a n y t h a t were to d i e . " J o h n D . Lee, Mormonism
Unveiled; or The Life and Confessions of
the Late Mormon Bishop, John D. Lee (St. Louis: B r a n d & C o m u a n y , 1877), p . 2 3 7 ; emphasis in original. L e e received his second anointing 17 J a n . 1846, J o h n D . Lee, Diary, typescript entry for same date, original in L D S C h u r c h Archives.
99

T h i s passage of scripture m a y have provided some theoretical basis for t he latter-day
doctrine of blood a t o n e m e n t preached by several nineteenth-century C h u r c h authorities.
i°°/JD, 2:260.
ioi 16 Sept. 1860, JD, 8:311-312.

38

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

November 1867, Brigham Young affirmed, "When men and women have
travelled to a certain point in their labors in this life, God sets a seal upon themthat they never can forsake their God or His kingdom; for, rather than theyshould do this, He will at once take them to Himself." 1 0 2
Despite these affirmations of unconditionality, however, others were concerned that those who had received the second anointing might see it as alicense to commit any sin short of the unpardonable one. These later expressions concerning the second anointing's conditional nature were not only more
frequent than comments about its unconditional nature, but these conditional
expressions implicitly or explicitly indicated that the second anointing could beinvalidated by actions less serious than the sin against the Holy Ghost. Heber
C. Kimball, for instance, graphically stated:
Some will come with great zeal and anxiety, saying, "I want my endowments; I want
my washings and anointings; I want my blessings; I wish to be sealed up to eternal
lives; I wish to have my wife sealed and my children sealed to me;" in short, "I desire
this and I wish that." What good would all this do you, if you do not live up to yourprofession and practise your religion? Not as much good as for me to take a bag ofsand and baptize it, lay hands upon it for the gift of the Holy Ghost, wash it andanoint, and then seal it up to eternal lives, for the sand will be saved, having filled themeasure of its creation, but you will not, except through faith and obedience.103
Eighteen months later, Kimball further explained, "Now you say I believe inthe principle of election. I d o ; I believe . . . if [the elected] . . . be faithful tothe end of their days, they will be saved — every one of them. T h a t is as far
as I believe in election." 1 0 4 Brigham Young echoed this idea: "There are few
who live for the blessings of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob after they are sealed
upon them. No blessing that is sealed upon us will do us any good, unless welive for it." 1 0 5 This pragmatic emphasis on salvation through works was alsopreached by George Q . Cannon:
W h e n h e [Brigham Young] sealed a m a n u p to eternal life, h e bestowed u p o n h i m t h e
blessings pertaining to eternity, a n d to t h e G o d h e a d , o r w h e n h e delegated others to d oit i n his stead, G o d in t h e eternal world r e c o r d ed t h e a c t ; t h e blessings t h a t weresealed u p on t h a t m a n or t h at w o m a n , they were sealed t o b e b i n d i n g in this life, a n d
in t h a t life w h i c h is t o come; they became p a r t of t h e records of eternity, a n d would
be fulfilled t o t h e very letter upon t h e heads of those u p o n w h o m they were p r o 102 17 Nov. 1867, JD, 12:103. Also of interest a r e H e b e r C . Kimball's 2 April 1854
remarks: " W h a t you have agreed to do, God will require you to perform, if it should be ten
thousand years after this time. And when the servants of God speak to you, a n d require you
to do a thing, the Lord God will fulfil His words, a n d make you fulfil His words h e gave to
you through His servants. Inasmuch as you have come into this C h u r c h , a n d made a coven a n t to forsake the world, and cleave unto the Lord, a n d keep His commandments, the Lord
will compel you to d o it, if it should be in ten thousand years from this time. These are myviews, and I know it will be so." JD, 2 : 1 5 1 .
103 Kimball, 6 O c t . 1855, JD, 3 : 1 2 4 .
104
Ibid., 19 April 1857, JD, 4 : 3 6 3 - 6 4 .
5:18-19.

See also his c o m m e n t s o n 6 April 1857, JD,

los Brigham Young, 26 June 1865, JD, 11:117.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"

39

nounced, provided they were faithful before God, and fulfilled their part of thecovenant.100

Indeed, the conditional nature of the second anointing has become evenmore pronounced within the last two generations, due to an apparent reinterpretation of the "Holy Spirit of promise." "Elijah's seal" is not seen as
Joseph Smith saw it — as making one's "calling and election sure" — but isnow explained as the Holy Ghost. In the writings of twentieth-century Church
authorities,107 the Holy Spirit of promise, or Holy Ghost, has now become a"divine censor" which both seals and unseals ordinances according to an everchanging judgment of an individual's worthiness. Given this viewpoint, it isunclear when the Doctrine and Covenants 132:26 punishments of "destruction in the flesh" and "bufletings of Satan" would be applied for sins otherthan the unpardonable one. A strict interpretation would hold for immediate
punishment after someone who received the second anointing and Holy Spiritof Promise sealing committed "any sin or transgression of the new and everlasting covenant whatever, and all manner of blasphemies." If the second
anointing is "unsealed" however, it seems that these persons would no longer
be subject to these prescribed penalties. Moreover, by ascribing a conditional
stance to the second anointing, it would be difficult to perceive it as significantly
different from the promissory anointing received in the regular endowment.
V
It is not customary now for presidents of Stakes, as you know, to recommend people for higher blessings.
Heber J. Grant, 1927
(Heber J. Grant to Levi S. Udall, 6 April 1927)
At the turn of the century the Church had 264,000 members and about
fifty stakes; by 1920 there were 508,000 members; in 1928 the one-hundredth
stake was organized.108 By the time Heber J. Grant became president late in1918, over 14,000 second anointings had been performed for both living anddeceased members.109 In the midst of this growth, President Grant issued a106

George Q . C a n n o n , 12 Aug. 1883, JD, 24:274. See also Charles W. Penrose, 2 J a n .
1881, JD, 2 1 : 3 5 6 .
107
See Joseph Fielding Smith's opinion on this question in Doctrines of Salvation, 1:55,
and 2 : 9 4 - 9 9 . Bruce R. McConkie echoes this idea in Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed., p . 362.
McConkie's " T h e Seven Deadly Heresies," a fireside address at Brigham Young University,
1 J u n e 1980, should also be understood in light of this question. BYU Devotional
Speechesof the Year, 1980 (Provo, U t a h : BYU Press, 1981): 74-80, esp. p . 77.
108

James B. Allen and Richard O . Cowan, Mormonismed. (Provo, U t a h : B Y U Press, 1969), p p . 5 1 , 54.

in the TwentiethCentury,rev.

109 This figure is based on the Salt Lake Temple Ordinance Book, L D S Church Archives,
as well as J. D . T . McAllister's "Totals T o year ending Dec. 3 1 , 1898" for the Saint George,
Logan, M a n t i , a n d Salt Lake temples, L D S Church Archives. McAllister was, at the time,
the president of the M a n t i Temple.

40

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

policy change which has affected the frequency of second-anointing administrations to this day.
The records which indicate the precise date of this policy change are notpresently available to historians, but on 30 January 1926, President Grant
wrote: "Second Blessings are only given by the President of the Church uponrecommendation of a member of the Council of the Twelve." Evidently inresponse to a stake president's inquiry, the president continued: "At some time
when one of the Apostles is in your Stake, if he feels to properly recommend
Brother . . . the matter will [be] taken under advisement." 110This implied decision to discontinue receiving recommendations from stakepresidents for second anointing candidates was reiterated by President Grant
on 6 April 1927: "It is not customary now for presidents of Stakes, as you
know, to recommend people for higher blessings. That matter should be taken
up by the visiting apostle at your quarterly conference, and all recommendations of this kind should come direct from the apostles." 11X
This policy change dramatically curtailed second anointings among members. According to a George F. Richards letter written in 1949 during his tenure as president of the Council of the Twelve, the policy was a direct result of
an incident occurring "about 1928." A "brother who had received his Second
Blessings, while speaking in a priesthood meeting in one of the Idaho stakes,
told the brethren that they all should have their Second Blessings. Of coursethat was a serious infraction of the charge which he received when he had his
Second Anointings; but I have never learned of any serious consequences tofollow, except the action on the part of the Authorities, discontinuing the administration of these blessings in the Church." 112
While figures are not available for each president, averages proportioned
to their dates in office would indicate that Wilford Woodruff authorized nearly
2,000 or an average of just over 300 each year the Salt Lake Temple operated
during his administration. Lorenzo Snow apparently also authorized about
2,000 second anointings, roughly twice as many per year as had Woodruff.
Joseph F. Smith apparently authorized about 4,000 anointings, or less thanhalf as many per year as his predecessor. And Heber J. Grant apparently authorized only a few hundred for an annual average only one-tenth that of his
predecessor. In the Salt Lake Temple the frequency of second anointingspeaked at the turn of the century during President Snow's short administrationand fell sharply in 1922 to a mere trickle by 1928. After 1928, the average
was less than two per year for at least the next decade and a half. Data after
110

Heber J. Grant to S. L. Chipman, 30 Jan. 1926, Heber J. Grant Letter Books,
Confidential Research Files.
111
Heber J. Grant to Levi S. Udall, 6 April 1927, First Presidency Letterpress Copybooks, LDS Church Archives.
112
George F. Richards to the Members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the
Twelve, typescript copy, no date (but based on Richards 18 Aug. 1949 journal entry, thisletter was delivered on the same date), original in George F. Richards Collection, LDS
Church Archives.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"

41

1941 are not presently available to historians. By 1941, a total of 6,000 second
anointings for the living and over 2,000 for the dead had been administeredin the Salt Lake Temple during the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Three-fourths of the total were for the living; and three-fifths of the total were
for women. Counting all temples, just under 15,000 second anointings had
been performed for the living by 1941, and just over 6,000 for the dead.113
During this period of declining administrations of higher blessings, George
F. Richards singlehandedly labored to revive this practice. An apostle from1906 to 1950, he was also president of the Salt Lake Temple from 1921 to 1937
and chaired a special apostolic committee which made extensive proceduralchanges in the endowment ceremony.114 In a 1934 letter to President Grant,
he listed five General Authorities who had not received second anointings andwrote, "I understand that it is in order for a member of the Council of the
Twelve to recommend worthy members to the President of the Church toreceive their Second blessings. Accordingly, I recommend that these brethren
and their wives be invited to receive their blessings." 115 At least one of thesecandidates was not approved until December 1942 when he recorded in his
journal, "I have anxiously looked forward to this action. The records showthat there have been 32,495 such blessings administered in the Church and thatduring the last 12 years there have been but 8 administrations. Thirteen of the
32 General Authorities have not had theirs and at least two others who have
had them with their first wives have later wives not yet anointed to their husbands." 116 A few days later he wrote in another journal entry: "This has beena wonderful year for me and my family . . . .1 have been instrumental in renewing the former practice in the Church of administering Second Anointings
113
See note 109 and statistical reports in Genealogical and Historical Magazine of the
Arizona Temple District 14 (April 1938) : 10-11, and 15 (April 1939) : 10-11. These statistics were published under the direction of Franklin T. Pomeroy. Interestingly the same typeof statistics were included in George F. Richards's letter (cited n. 112) ; however, his totals
are significantly different from those cited in the text. Richards claimed that just over 22,000
second anointings had been performed for the living by the end of 1942, with over 10,000 forthe dead. His statistics for second anointings in the Nauvoo Temple are almost 150 short of
the number recorded in the Book of Anointings, and his Salt Lake Temple statistics weredramatically inflated above those officially recorded in the Salt Lake Temple Ordinance Book.
It should also be noted that although a great number of vicarious second anointings were
performed, Church officials seemed somewhat reluctant to permit a wholesale rash of theseordinances for the dead. President Lorenzo Snow was quoted as saying, "Many faithfulpeople have gone into the spirit world without those blessings [i.e., the second anointing], andthey will lose nothing by it," and that he preferred "to refer [them] to the future than toundertake to endorse recommends for persons who cannot be regularly recommended." George
F. Gibbs to D. H. Cannon, 22 Dec. 1900. On 19 Oct. 1926, Heber J. Grant, Anthony W.
Ivins, and Charles W. Nibley wrote Joseph W. McMurrin, saying it "has been some years
since ordinances bestowing second blessings [i.e., second anointings] have been performed incases where both parties are dead," Confidential Research Files.
114
George F. Richards, Journal, 7, 8, 12 April 1921; 10, 27, 28 Dec. 1921; 3, 7 June
1922; 30, 31 August 1922; 14, 16, 17, 19, 20 April 1923; 12 July 1924; 9, 16 Dec. 1926;
25, 27 Jan. 1927 for a description of this committee's activities; LDS Church Archives.
u s ibid., 19 April 1934.
u s Ibid., 10 Dec. 1942.

42

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

to faithful members, the practice having gone practically into disuse . . . .
I am sure that the Lord has inspired what I have been able to do along theselines." 117
Judging from his remarks seven years later, however, in a 1949 letter presented to the Council of the First Presidency and the Twelve, Richards still
expressed frustration: "For a long time I have felt that I would like to express
to you the disappointment I feel in that we have practically discontinued theadministration of Second Anointings in the Church . . . . I have not been able
to bring myself to feel that the Lord is pleased with us in neglecting such animportant and sacred endowment . . . . Thousands of good and faithful men
and women are dying without receiving a fulfillment of the promise made themin connection with the temple ceremonies." After citing various statistics andthe Idaho incident discussed above, Richards concluded:
It appears to me that the mistake made by the good brother in Idaho was not so
serious as to justify letting those sacred ordinances come into disuse in the Church. I
think now is the time to act; with such modifications as to details as the brethren mightfeel to make, insuring that these blessings be administered only to those who are worthy
to receive them. . . .
If there is condemnation resting upon us for our neglect, the longer we delay action
the greater will be our condemnation. . . .
Temples under construction now and in the future should be provided with a room
for the administration of these blessings alone, to be known as the Holy of Holies, forif we do not move in the matter before us, some others coming after us will do so for
it must be done, and temples should be designed and constructed with that thoughtin mind.
It is to be hoped that this communication will not be shelved and forgotten without full consideration by this Council. For several years these matters have given me
great mental anxiety and spiritual concern, and but for want of courage I would havesought an opportunity to be heard years ago. I do not want to leave this sphere ofaction without vigorously protesting our indifference and neglect.118

While the results of this exchange are not presently available, Richards did notein his journal that day: "The paper and other statements made by me in connection therewith were accepted 100%." 110
Aside from a few letters and other fragmentary bits of information, very
little is known of recent LDS practice regarding second anointings. One person recalled that when he was a small boy in a rural Utah town early thiscentury, "second endowments [i.e., second anointings] were spoken of rather
frequently." 120 Today, however, members typically do not understand suchreferences or know of the ordinance. Nonetheless, occasional instances of" 7 I b i d . , 31 Dec. 1942.
118

L e t t e r cited n. 112.

119

Richards, J o u r n a l , 18 Aug. 1949.

120

Asael Carlyle Lambert, from holograph notes titled "Second E n d o w m e n t s , " which recount an interview w i t h H o w a r d S. M c D o n a l d, located in A. C. L a m b e r t Papers, Special Collections Division, M a r r i o t t Library, University of U t a h ; emphasis in original.

BUERGER: "Fulness of the Priesthood"43

present-day anointings have occurred.121 Vicarious second anointings are also
performed, but are less frequent. Formerly the Church president delegatedauthority to perform second anointings to General Authorities and temple
presidents; today it is understood that if the Church president does not performthe ceremony, he ordinarily must be present in the room while it is done by adesignated individual, although his presence has not always been possible. The
policy of the Church president calling up candidates to receive the second
anointing still continues. In the past the ordinance typically was held in a
special room called the Holy of Holies, a room with which only a few temples
are equipped. At present, any room in a temple specifically set apart for the
purpose will suffice.122
However, a more perplexing doctrinal question remains, without a clear
answer presently available: In Mormon theology, must a faithful member receive the second anointing for exaltation in the highest degree of the celestial
kingdom? The record of former LDS practices, both for the living and thedead, seems to say yes. Yet the current official policy initiated by Heber J.
Grant suggests that Church authorities now feel that the second anointing is
not required for exaltation.123 However, the fact that the ordinance continues
to be performed — albeit on a small scale — seems to signal some importance.
While its current limitations may have partially stemmed from anxiety of thehierarchy to prevent this ritual from being conferred upon people who mightlater fall from faithfulness, it is more likely that the Church's current postureresulted from the second anointing becoming a conditional ordinance rather
than an "unconditional" one. As a conditional ordinance, it becomes a "special blessing" for a limited number of proven, trustworthy older men andwomen or for the upper levels of a highly exclusivist and insular hierarchy.
In such a light, much of the significance of the ordinance is reduced.124
121

For example, see Carrel H. Sheldon's letter in DIALOGUE : A JOURNAL OF MORMONT H O U G H T 14 (Winter 1981) : 15 where she tells of knowing one couple who received thesecond anointing during David O. McKay's administration and two couples during Spencer
W. Kimball's administration.
122 This procedural information was related to me by Provo Temple President Orville
Gunther in M a r c h 1978 and was reiterated by Oakland Temple President Richard B. Sonne
in a personal interview on 14 Nov. 1981, and by Idaho Falls Temple President Devier Harrison 29 Dec. 1982. A picture of the Holy of Holies in the Salt Lake Temple was published inJames E. Talmage's original edition of House of the Lord; more recent "reprints" haveremoved the picture. T h e same picture was reprinted in Improvement Era 39 (Nov. 1936) :241.
123 W h en J o h n A. Tvedtnes, for instance, asked Apostle Harold B. Lee in a Salt Lake
Temple missionary question-and-answer session, if the "second endowment" existed and, "ifso, w h a t connection does it have with the Holy Spirit of Promise, and who receives it andwhy and h o w ? ", Lee answered, "You don't have to worry. You've received all the ordinances
necessary for exaltation. . . . It is a special blessing given by the President of the Church tomen who have been called. It is not necessary to receive it, however. You have all the endowment you need to be exalted." John A. Tvedtnes, Journal, 30 J u n e 1961; recounted bypermission.
124
I n an interview with one temple president, I was told the second anointing was merelya "special blessing" and is not essential to exaltation. H e said he was not sure why people

44

DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT

The early Mormons who received the second anointing recorded the eventin their diaries with great joy. Abraham O. Smoot wrote that it "was a dayof great enjoyment for me, it gave birth to the greatest blessings and an higher
exaltation in the Priesthood than ever had been anticipated by me." 125 John
D. Lee, called by Brigham Young to keep records of the anointings, wrote inhis diary: "We received our anointings yea, Holy anointings in the Temple of
the Lord — under the hands of Elder Orson Hyde this certainly produced morejoy comfort and pleasure & reconciliation of feeling — than could possibly havebeen imagined." 126 For them, the event clearly had theological significance as
well. Theoretically the blessing of the fulness of the priesthood is still attainable. As Bruce R. McConkie of the Quorum of the Twelve has noted,
Holders of the Melchizedek Priesthood have power to press forward in righteousness,
living by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God, magnifying theircallings, going from grace to grace, until through the fulness of the ordinances of thetemple they receive the fulness of the priesthood and are ordained kings and priests.
Those so attaining shall have exaltation and be kings, priests, rulers, and lords in theirrespective spheres in the eternal kingdoms of the great King who is God our Father. 127

Whether, as Joseph Fielding Smith asserted, "There is no exaltation in the
kingdom of God without the fulness of the priesthood," 128 remains to be seen.

were called t o receive second anointings a n d for t h a t reason h a d " p u t t h e subject o u t of his
m i n d . " I t is n o t e w o r t hy that during his remarks preceeding a temple w e d d i n g ceremony I
attended, h e defined "fulness of the priesthood" as h a v i n g received t h e Melchizedek Priesthood, t h e e n d o w m e n t , a n d the marriage sealing for eternity. "By receiving t h e temple m a r riage sealing," h e stated, "you will receive t h e 'fulness of t h e priesthood' i n t h e sense t h a t it is
the final o r d i n a n ce for exaltation." I n talking with h i m later, I mentione d it was m y u n d e r standing t h e p h r a s e "fulness of t h e priesthood" referred to t h e second anointing. H e disagreed a n d reaffirmed w h a t h e stated before t h e w e d d i n g . I asked h i m if h e h a d received
precise instruction from higher sources regarding his statemen t o n "fulness of the priesthood."H e replied h e h a d n o t ; t h a t " I researched it o u t o n m y own, a n d if you read Joseph Fielding
Smith a n d Bruce R . McConkie, they say t h e same t h i n g . " A n o t h e r interview with a different
temple president dre w similar comments. T h i s president, however, n o t only described t h esecond anointing as a "special blessing" b u t stated: " T h e second anointing doesn't d o anything more for you t h a n the first anointing a n d e n d o w m e n t ; n o special ordination is per formed i n t h e second anointing." If this information is correct, it seems likely t h a t t h e ceremony's structure h a s been altered in recent years t o reflect C h u r c h leaders' concerns abou t
ordaining m e m b e r s to godhood as was done in former years. T h i s would help explain presentday C h u r c h leaders' uniform, widespread use of t h e descriptive t e r m "special blessing" w h e n
referring t o t h e second anointing.
125 A b r a h a m O . Smoot, Journal, typescript entry for 17 J a n . 1846, p . 246, original in L e e
Library.
126

J o h n D . L e e , Diary, typescript entry for 17 J a n . 1846, original in L D S C h u r c hArchives.
127

M c C o n k i e , Mormon

128

J o s e p h Fielding Smith, Doctrines

Doctrine,

2nd ed., p . 4 2 5 .
of Salvation,

3:132.