New Book!



Chapter 2

Fundamentalists and the

Law of Consecration and Stewardship 

One complaint against the Church, often repeated by Fundamentalists involves the Law of Consecration and Stewardship, with its United Orders. Many modern polygamists today consider obedience to these principles to be second in importance only to polygamy. Among the various Fundamentalist splinter groups, several attempts to form united orders can be found.(1)

In their efforts to emphasize the importance of the law of consecration, it is not uncommon for modern polygamists to attribute the following quote to Brigham Young:

Hear it ye Elders of Israel, and mark it down in your log-books, the fullness of the Gospel is the united order and the order of plural marriage, and I fear that when I am gone, this people will give up these two principles which we prize so highly, and if they do, this Church cannot advance as God wishes for it to advance. (2) [Italics in original.]

The exact origin of this purported citation is unknown. It is supposed to have been uttered by Brigham Young "at [the] dedication of [the] St. George Temple"(3) however, significant research has been performed scrutinizing every known record of Brigham Young's sermons given at that dedication and any such reference is entirely absent.(4) Likewise it is not found in any of his other sermons (or in discourses from other General Authorities).

This alleged citation defines the "fulness of the gospel" as being polygamy and the law of consecration. However, it should be noted that any such a assertion would contradict the scriptures. The Doctrine and Covenants plainly states that the "fulness of the gospel" is contained in the Book of Mormon (D&C 20:9, 27:5, see also 35:17 etc.). The Book of Mormon only mentions the Nephites living the law of consecration in two verses (3 Ne. 26:19, 4 Ne. 1:3) and condemns polygamy (Jacob 2:23-31).(5)

It seems unlikely that Brigham Young would say such a thing because it contradicts the scriptures and even some of his own other teachings.


Church members today obviously do not live the full law of consecration. Consequently, a few Fundamentalist authors have used it as a point of criticism of the Church and its members.:

[Church members say that the] "United Order cannot be lived in our time," or that "it has been revoked" or that those doctrines have been "substituted" by something else. These are expressions of ignorance or confessions of personal weakness. The laws of the Gospel are eternal. Righteous people should attempt to live the Gospel regardless of the time, circumstances or the influences of the world. (Ogden Kraut,(6) The United Order, Salt Lake City, Utah: Pioneer Press, 1983, p. 8.)

This principle [united order] was a "commandment", and "everlasting order"; it was for "the salvation of men", and the Lord said it should last "until I come." But by the turn of the century, the last remnant of this holy system was dissolved, and no attempt has been made by the LDS Church to re-establish it. (Ogden Kraut, The Fundamentalist Mormon, Salt Lake City, Utah: Pioneer Press, 1989, p. 14.)

"But," say the Saints, "the law of Consecration was withdrawn from the Church and cannot be renewed until the Lord re-establishes it." We deny that the law was withdrawn from the Church. The Saints withdrew from the law. They were not prepared to live it. They chose to be driven from Zion -- in Jackson County, rather than abide in the law. And as for new revelation from heaven, the Saints may not expect any further revelation until they accept the revelations already given on the subject. (Joseph W. Musser, The Economic Order of Heaven, Salt Lake City, Utah: Truth Publishing Co., N.d. [1948], p. 79.)

Could it be that the only real problems with the Latter-day Saints today is that there are so few who are really looking for that City [Zion]: they are enjoying themselves too much with their cars, color TV's, successful jobs, civic leadership and involvements, to be concerned about a City in outer space trying to establish a homing beacon or a launching pad (an Earthly Zion) for it to be guided toward? (Robert Openshaw in The Notes, p. 468. Underlining in original.)

These revelations [on the law of consecration] inform the Latter-Day Saints that this was no temporary order to be set aside anytime or any place at the will and good pleasure of members or leaders. That it was to be in full force and effect until Christ comes. The Lord has not come yet, however, the Mormons did not wait for that great event to set aside His law in this or any other matter that interfered with their worldly ambitions. This law has long since been nullified by our disobedience and lack of effort to live it.

Some leaders and laymen seek to conceal their own knowledge of willful disobedience on the part of the entire Mormon Church by saying this law and order applied only to the Zion of Jackson County, Missouri. Such a claim is but a wicked or silly subterfuge for avoiding the contempt of honest men. (B. Harvey Allred, A Leaf in Review, Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Printers, LTD., 1933, p. 105. Italics in original.)

The church has become one of the most ardent supporters of the Babylonian (American) capitalistic corporate structure, forgetting the true economic pattern of Zion. Where was the revelation disallowing or suspending the law of consecration? The church has missionaries all over the world, yet you don't seem to have much embarrassment over the fact that the doctrine on which there is the most revelation is not practices today. Interesting. Does no one want to live the economic laws of the Celestial Kingdom? Isn't it necessary anymore, but only an incidental superfluous commandment? (Excerpt from a letter written to one of the authors from a son of Rulon C. Allred, p. 34.)

Examining the history of the Law of Consecration might helps us to determine whether Fundamentalist criticisms are warranted.


The Encyclopedia of Mormonism gives this brief history of early efforts to live the law of consecration:

An early effort to live the law of consecration was first tried at Thompson, Ohio, in May 1831 by the members from the Colesville Branch who had moved there from New York. Complications arose when one of the participants withdrew his land and some of the members left for Missouri to help establish the center place of Zion before the practice could take root. Continued efforts to make necessary refinements in practicing the law in Ohio ultimately failed. A similar attempt was made at this same time to institute the law of consecration and stewardship in Missouri, but intolerance and bickering among some of the Saints and the lack of any surplus to consecrate rendered the attempt unsuccessful. (In Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 1:313.)

Hence, small groups of Church members unsuccessfully attempted to live the Law of Consecration in Ohio and Missouri. Specifically concerning Missouri, the Lord afterwards instructed: "And let those commandments which I have given concerning Zion and her law be executed and fulfilled, after her redemption" (D&C 105:34). Jackson County, Missouri has yet to be fully "redeemed," hence we wait.

A question arises: after the Lord withdraws a command or law, may we in good faith continue to practice the law and reap a greater blessing? This inquiry arose both in Missouri and Illinois. While in the Liberty jail in March, 1839, the Prophet counseled the Saints by letter:

Again, we would suggest to the brethren, that there be no organization of large bodies upon common stock principles, until the Lord shall signify it in a proper manner (i.e., by revelation). (Millennial Star, 5:69.)

A few zealous members on the Iowa side of the Mississippi River undertook to re-establish the law of consecration there. The Prophet, upon being apprised of the situation, called the High Council together. The minutes of the March 6, 1840, meeting reveal:

President Joseph Smith, Jun., addressed the Council on various subjects, and in particular the consecration law; stating that the affairs now before Congress was the only thing that ought to interest the Saints at present; and till it was ascertained how it would terminate, no person ought to be brought to account before the constituted authorities of the Church for any offense whatever; and [he] was determined that no man should be brought before the Council in Nauvoo till that time, etc., etc. The law of consecration could not be kept here, and that it was the will of the Lord that we should desist from trying to keep it; and if persisted in, it would produce a perfect defeat of its object, and that he assumed the whole responsibility of not keeping it until proposed by himself. (HC 4:93.)

The principles of consecration lay dormant through the rest or Joseph Smith's life in Nauvoo and almost to the end of Brigham Young's life in the Rocky Mountains. However, possibly in response to the depression which followed the panic of 1873, Brigham Young felt inspired to once again organize the Church into united orders. He told the Saints:

There are a few ideas and reflections that I wish to give to the people. I shall have to make my remarks brief in order to be prepared for our journey northward. You hear a good deal from time to time, and you think a good deal, about the condition of the Latter-day Saints, and what we are trying to do with them concerning the United Order. I wish you to understand that this is no new revelation; it is the order of the kingdom where God and Christ dwell; it has been from eternity and will be to eternity, without end, consequently we have nothing particularly new to offer you, but we have the commandments that have been from the beginning. With regard to those who wish to have new revelation they will please to accommodate themselves and call this a new revelation. On this occasion I will not repeat anything particular in respect to the language of revelation, further than to say Thus saith the Lord unto my servant Brigham, Call ye, call ye, upon the inhabitants of Zion, to organize themselves in the Order of Enoch, in the New and Everlasting Covenant, according to the Order of Heaven, for the furtherance of my kingdom upon the earth, for the perfecting of the Saints, for the salvation of the living and the dead.

You can accommodate yourselves by calling this a new revelation, if you choose; it is no new revelation, but it is the express word and will of God to this people. (JD 17:154.)

Organizing the Latter-day Saints in the "order of Enoch" included the establishment of united orders:

[Brigham Young] organized the first united order at St. George, Utah on February 9, 1874. The last known Church-authorized united order was organized at Cave Valley, Chihuahua, Mexico, on January 9, 1893. In the interim more than 200 united orders were organized in LDS communities in several mountains states, including Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Arizona, and Nevada, mostly in 1874 and 1875. (L. Dwight Israelsen in Encyclopedia of Mormonism 4:1494.)

It is important and interesting to note that these united orders all paid tithing to the Church. Concerning the Utah united orders, Dr. George Steward et al have written:

The United Order, as it was established in Utah, was a modification of the stewardship plans instituted in Ohio and Missouri. Those who participate in the Utah movement consecrated all of their property to the United Order corporation, but lived as one big family, and not as stewardships individually operated. The consecrated property became community property and was managed by the chosen leaders of the Order. The members of the Order were assigned to different tasks of work by the leaders, according to the program of work outlined from day to day. (Priesthood and Church Welfare(7) pp. 127-128.)

One of the most famous of these orders was one at Orderville, a town especially created for application of united order principles and auspiciously named for that purpose - "The Orderville United Order." It was created on July 14, 1975. The General Authorities had encouraged the order but did not approve of some of its strict governing rules. Erastus Snow, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, visited Orderville and on April 20, 1877, stated:

I have been exercised much in regard to the method adopted at Orderville. I do not think the Lord is particular how we make the garments with which we ar clothed, or as to the manner in which we prepare our food. Neither do I think the Lord cares much about whether we sit down to one or more tables.(8)

The leadership of the order later reported:

We verily believe we were in the line of our duty, endeavoring to work out a problem, and felt that we were sustained by the general church authorities,(9) until our last quarterly conference when we were visited by Apostle Erastus Snow, who said that it (the Order) was not a command of God, and never had been, that it was a financial experiment. Brother Snow said that our credit system was defective that we gave equal credits for unequal labor, and such a system would not stand and proposed a change in that respect.

We counseled this matter over and found that this would completely revolutionize our whole system. Bishop Chamberlain and others went to Salt Lake city, and had a long talk with the First Presidency and Brothers (Lorenzo) and Nuttall. The result was about the same. They admired the spirit that actuated us in our union and labor of love, and greatly desire that we should retain it, and continue to be united and not break up. Said the Lord had not revealed a plan for the people to follow, but when he did that we at Orderville would, with our experience, be better prepared to receive it than those who had not that experience. --So you see we are thrown entirely upon our own responsibility.(10)

Other united orders were established in different parts of the Utah territory which were quite distinct from Orderville. It appears that one unalterable form for the united order was never advanced by Brigham Young, but different ventures were launched, some with greater success than others. Notwithstanding, by 1877 at the time of President Young's death, most of the united orders had already failed.(11) Attempts to organize the entire Church into united orders were officially brought to an end in 1882 by President Taylor, when he said in part:

Our relations with the world and our own imperfections prevent establishment of this system at the present time, and therefore, as Joseph stated in an early day, it cannot yet be carried out."(12)

In summary, the Law of Consecration and Stewardship was given to Joseph Smith in 1831 but attempts to live it failed and the Lord instructed the Prophet Joseph in 1840 that it was His will that they "desist from trying to keep it" and the law of tithing was instigated. Brigham Young was inspired in 1874 to implement various forms of the United Order which were ultimately unsuccessful. In 1882, the Lord's Prophet John Taylor instructed that it "could not yet be carried out" and emphasis upon operating United Orders dwindled. Consistent with the order of heaven, all of these instructions have come to the Church through God's mouthpiece upon the earth.

Presently, Church members obey a portion of the Law of Consecration in the form of the law of tithing. We await the re-establishment of the Law of Consecration through God's Prophet, the President of the Church.


In response to the failures of the Saints to live the Law of Consecration, the Lord gave the law of tithing (D&C 119). President Lorenzo Snow explained:

Tithing replaced the broken law of consecration. There was no one man in the Church that could have bought that land (Jackson County, Missouri); there were no two men, or half a dozen men, or a hundred men that could have bought it. The people as a general thing were poor. There were no rich men that received the gospel in those early days. But by combination and union they could have secured the means to carry out the purposes of the Almighty in regard to the purchase of that country. They failed because of their love for money. In a revelation after this we are told that they failed to give their names as they were commanded. The Lord sent elders throughout the states where there were Latter-day Saints, to collect means for this purpose; and the people in Jackson County were required to observe the law of consecration. But they failed to do it, and therefore the lands were not secured. The Lord could have sustained the people against the encroachments of their enemies had they placed themselves in a condition where He would have been justified in doing so. But inasmuch as they would not comply with His requirements, the Lord could not sustain them against their enemies. So it will be with us, or with any people whom the Lord calls to comply with His requirements and whom He proposes to confer the highest blessings upon, as He has in reference to us, and as He did in reference to the people in Jackson County.

There having been a failure in regard to this law of consecration--a failure so serious that it resulted in great misery to the people of God--a few years after that the Lord gave another law for the Saints to observe in place of the law of consecration. It is called the law of tithing. If we look upon this law in its proper light, we will see the importance of it and the danger that will result if we fail to observe it. (7 October 1899, CR, p. 24 as quoted in Teachings of Lorenzo Snow pp. 159-160.)

In all these circumstances there were individual Saints who were obedient and diligent, but the Lord tailored His program to fit the whole Church and revoked the Law of Consecration and set in force the law of tithing. Orson Pratt expressed it so:

Did the Lord forsake us? No; he had compassion upon us, as he had upon ancient Israel, when they were cast away out of their land from time to time. In what respect did he have compassion upon us? When he saw the hold that the traditions in which we had been trained had upon our hearts, he revoked, for the time being, the law of full consecration. Says one, "What! God revoke a commandment?" Yes, that is the way he did in ancient times, and he is the same God yet. He did it for our good; for if that law had been in full force this people would not have been in these mountains this day. Our selfishness and covetousness are so great that, as a people, we never would have complied with it. A few amongst us might have done so, but as a people we should have been overcome and ruined; but owing to that law being revoked, many of us will now, perhaps, be saved.

In the year 1834, a few months after, we were driven out from that goodly land, God said unto us in a revelation, given on Fishing River, "Let those laws and commandments which I have given concerning Zion and her properties, be executed and fulfilled after the redemption." Thus you see, Latter-day Saints, that we are not under the law of full consecration, and if not under the law we are not under the penalty thereof. (JD 16:5-6; see also pp. 156-157.)

Thus as stated by Orson Pratt, the revocation of the law of consecration came at the same time the Lord relieved the Saints of redeeming Zion.

Modern Church leaders are well aware that our obedience to the Law of Tithing is a temporary situation. Elder John A. Widstoe, a former member of the Quorum of the Twelve, explained:

Tithing is a lesser law. The greater and more perfect law is the law of consecration, also known as the Order of Enoch or the United Order. The Latter-day Saints have not yet attained to a degree of perfection enabling them to live under this more comprehensive law. Until that time comes the Lord requires obedience to the law of tithing-an equitable law under which the widow's mite counts for as much as the rich man's thousands. When all the members of the Church are full and honest tithe payers, we may begin to look for the establishment of the law of consecration. Then the Lord may re-establish the higher law...

And let it be remembered that the coming [of the United Order] will be authorized through the revelation of the Lord to the President of the Church and not from any other source.(13)

President Joseph Fielding Smith instructed:

In the stead of this higher law, the Lord gave to the saints a schoolmaster, as he did ancient Israel to teach them and bring them to the fullness of the Gospel of Christ. This is the law of tithing. But it should be understood that the law of consecration has never been abrogated or set aside, which is that we shall love him above all else and be willing to lay down our lives or forsake all that we have or hold dear for his sake, if it should be required. That law is just as binding upon members of the Church today as when first uttered by Christ in the days of his ministry. He has, however, released us from the necessity of consecrating all of our properties to the Church in the "united order" at this time. (Joseph Fielding Smith, Way to Perfection p. 276.)

President Ezra Taft Benson counseled:

We must not lose sight of the fact that all that we are doing now is but a prelude to the establishment of the united order, and living the law of consecration. The individual Saints must understand this.(14)

The law of consecration is a law for an inheritance in the celestial kingdom. God, the Eternal Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and all holy beings abide by this law. It is an eternal law. It is a revelation by God to His Church in this dispensation. Though not in full operation today, it will be mandatory for all Saints to live the law in its fulness to receive celestial inheritance. You young people today abide a portion of this higher law as you tithe, pay a generous fast offering, go on missions, and make other contributions of money, service, and time.(15) (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson p. 123.)

Sometimes, Fundamentalists seem to assert that they are the only ones truly trying to serve the Lord. Seldom do they acknowledge that many Latter-day Saints are sincerely searching the scriptures, engaging in mighty prayer, building up Zion and serving their fellow men more fervently than do Fundamentalists. Many Church members eagerly await a return to the Law of Consecration. Living it would liberate time and other resources which might be used to better serve the Lord.


Verses in the Doctrine and Covenants clearly indicate that it is impossible to consecrate properties to the Lord without legitimate priesthood authority. The revelations specify an active participation by the Church and its leaders:

And behold, thou wilt remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken.

And inasmuch as ye impart of your substance unto the poor, ye will do it unto me; and they shall be laid before the bishop of my church and his counselors, two of the elders, or high priests, such as he shall appoint or has appointed and set apart for that purpose.

And it shall come to pass, that after they are laid before the bishop of my church, and after that he has received these testimonies concerning the consecration of the properties of my church, that they cannot be taken from the church, agreeable to my commandments, every man shall be made accountable unto me, a steward over his own property, or that which he has received by consecration, as much as is sufficient for himself and family.

And again, if their shall be properties in the hands of the church, or any individuals of it, more than is necessary for their support after this first consecration, which is a residue to be consecrated unto the bishop, it shall be kept to administer to those who have not, from time to time, that every man who has need may be amply supplied and receive according to his wants.

Therefore, the residue shall be kept in my storehouse, to administer to the poor and the needy, as shall be appointed by the high council of the church, and the bishop and his council;

And for the purpose of purchasing lands for the public benefit of the church, and building houses of worship, and building up of the New Jerusalem which is hereafter to be revealed-- (D&C 42:30-35.)

The word of the Lord, in addition to the law which has been given, making known the duty of the bishop who has been ordained unto the church in this part of the vineyard, which is verily this--

To keep the Lord's storehouse; to receive the funds of the church in this part of the vineyard.

To take an account of the elders as before has been commanded; and to administer to their wants, who shall pay for that which they receive, inasmuch as they have wherewith to pay;

That this also may be consecrated to the good of the church, to the poor and needy.

And he who hath not wherewith to pay, an account shall be taken and handed over to the bishop of Zion, who shall pay the debt out of that which the Lord shall put into his hands.

And the labors of the faithful who labor in spiritual things, in administering the gospel and the things of the kingdom unto the church, and unto the world, shall answer the debt unto the bishop in Zion;

Thus it cometh out of the church, for according to the law every man that cometh up to Zion must lay all things before the bishop in Zion.

And now, verily I say unto you, that as every elder in this part of the vineyard must give an account of his stewardship unto the bishop in this part of the vineyard--

A certificate from the judge or bishop in this part of the vineyard, unto the bishop in Zion, rendereth every man acceptable, and answereth all things, for an inheritance, and to be received as a wise steward and as a faithful laborer;

Otherwise he shall not be accepted of the bishop of Zion.

And now, verily I say unto you, let every elder who shall give an account unto the bishop of the church in this part of the vineyard be recommended by the church or churches, in which he labors, that he may render himself and his accounts approved in all things. (D&C 72:9-19; see also 51:1-6 and all other references in the D&C to the law of consecration.) 

These scriptures suggest that the Lord's Church, with its bishops and storehouses, must be actively involved in any effort to live the law of consecration. Any present attempts to live the law of consecration without proper priesthood authority would be problematic.(16) 


The Lord gave the command to the Saints in Independence, Missouri in 1831, but withdrew it in 1834 and later gave the law of tithing. Even attempts to live united orders in the 1870s did not supersede the law of tithing since the orders themselves paid one-tenth to the Church.

The law of consecration is the law of the celestial kingdom and will be required of all privileged to live there, but for the present, the law of tithing. President Lorenzo Snow elaborated:

Tithe paying brings temporal and spiritual blessings. After the law of consecration was given, and the covenants entered into with the Lord by the people in Jackson County were broken, the Lord gave another law (tithing) six years later which was vastly different from the law of consecration. We are now under that law; and the same promises have been made to us if we will keep that law as were made to the people in Jackson County; the land will be sanctified, and we shall be counted worthy to receive the blessings of the Lord and to be sustained and supported in our financial affairs and in everything we do, temporal as well as spiritual. And it is a very small matter indeed, so far as sacrifice is concerned, in comparison to the giving of our entire property over to the bishop, and then receiving from him only a portion of it again as circumstances might demand. (12 June 1899, JH, p. 13. Teachings of Lorenzo Snow p. 158.)

Until the Lord, through his prophet, the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints again authorizes the Church and its Bishops to receive properties in the law of consecration, we will prepare ourselves for it by observing the lesser law of tithing, making generous offerings (as we are able), and participating in the Church's Welfare Plan.(17) We will also remember that the Lord desires far more than just the earthly possessions He has given because he also wants us to consecrate our hearts and minds to Him as well.

Individuals who assert that we must be living the full law of consecration today seem to ignore revelations and other inspired teachings given after 1831. It appears that any effort to live the law of consecration without proper priesthood authority could not be recognized by the Lord: "For it must needs be that they be organized according to my laws; if otherwise, they will be cut off" (D&C 51:2).




1. Examples include the United Effort Plan in Colorado City, Arizona and a separate united order scheme in Bitterroot, Montana which is sponsored by the United Apostolic Brethren formerly led by Rulon C. Allred.

2. The earliest publication of this alleged quote yet identified is by J. Leslie Broadbent, Celestial Marriage? In the Case of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints vs. Joseph Leslie Broadbent, N.p, N.d. [1927] p. 1.

3. Ibid.

4. Elden J. Watson, editor of the Manuscript History of Brigham Young, 1801-1844, Salt Lake City: Elden Jay Watson, 1968, has purposefully attempted to find the quotation attributed to Brigham Young by Fundamentalists. Searching through private journals and all other known sources, he has been unable to locate this citation as having been stated at St. George or at any other time in President Young's life. (Personal communication.)

Apparently some Fundamentalist authors are aware of the suspicious source of this quotation. In his several publications, including one book devoted exclusively to the United Order, Ogden Kraut neglects quoting the citation though he is undoubtedly aware of its existence. Other writers, such as Joseph W. Musser (see The Economic Order of Heaven p. 14), Robert Openshaw (The Notes p. 468 though Openshaw lists his own reference as 27:169a which doesn't discuss the fulness of the gospel in any way - an obvious publishing error), Dennis Short (Questions On Plural Marriage p. 5, question 15) and others quote the purported reference as authentic.

5. A review of the references to the "fulness of the gospel" and "fullness of the gospel" in the Journal of Discourses completely fails to support the interpretation used today by modern polygamists. It appears that the term have been given a whole new definition by Fundamentalists just as the term "priesthood" was redefined by Joseph Musser in 1933 to identify an actual organization capable of existing outside of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (see chapter eight).

6. Ogden Kraut also shares similar criticisms in a number of his other publications such as 95 Theses, Salt Lake City, Utah: Pioneer Press, 1975, items 52 and 53 (see also 13b, 19, 51). The book 95 Theses with its 95 contrived criticisms against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is an attempt to parallel Martin Luther's 95 theses against the Catholic Church which he nailed to the door of the Wittenberg church in about 1517. Ogden's book is poorly written and extremely inconsistent (e.g. #72 on the Keys of the Priesthood - Held by many or few?) but serves his purposes well as it allows Fundamentalists to continue believing their largely unexamined theology.

7. Dr. George Stewart, Dr. Dilworth Walker and E. Cecil McGavin, Priesthood and Church Welfare, Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Company, 1938.

8. Mark A. Pendileton, "The Orderville United Order of Zion," Utah State Historical Quarterly, Volume VII (Oct. 1939) 4:156.

9. At April Conference, 1873, Brigham Young counselled: "I will say first, the Lord Almighty had not the least objection in the world to our entering into this order of Enoch [not the full law of consecration]. I will stand between this people and all harm in his. (JD 16:8)

10. Mark A. Pendileton, "The Orderville United Order of Zion," p. 156. This is a quote from the "Kanab Stake of Zion, Orderville Ward."

11. Leonard J. Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom, Lincoln, Nebraska, University of Nebraska Press, 1966, p. 337.

12. F. Y. Fox, Social Security Program of the Mormon Church under Joseph Smith and Brigham Young as quoted in Priesthood and Church Welfare p. 129.

13. John A. Widstoe, Evidences and Reconciliations, pp 286-287, 377.

14. Quoted from "The Training Challenge," General Welfare Services Committee, Salt Lake City, Utah, 2 February 1977.

15. Quoted from "A Vision and a Hope for the Youth of Zion," in 1977 Devotional Speeches of the Year p.75.

16. Elder John Widstoe explained:

A full understanding of the United Order requires careful study of the revelations on the subject. In briefest outline it is formed and operated as follows: It is organized under Church authority by the voluntary action of a group of men holding the Holy Priesthood, for themselves and their families. (Evidences and Reconciliations, p. 374.)

17. Elder Albert E. Bowen has written:

"The Welfare Plan as an integral part of the church organization is a striking counterpart to the pattern laid down in the early revelations concerning the care of the saints. One tenth of the increase annually of members is consecrated to the needs of the Church--a true and irrevocable consecration--augmented by the fast offering. There is not a consecration of all with `inheritances' given back, but there is a retention of individual possessions, with a duty of `stewardship' reaching out to the tithe, and the fast and the sundry contributions for the building up of the Church, sustaining its missionary system, its temples, houses of worship and the like. There are the storehouses, where are kept something comparable to the `residues' being surplus accumulations multiplied by the vast commodity productive power which grows out of free will offerings in time and labor. There are the bishops charged with the same duties of receiving the contributions or consecrations whichever name we prefer, preserving them and caring for the material needs of the sick or distressed. It is not asserted that the Welfare Plan is the United Order, but perhaps there is a much greater nearness of approach than we have been accustomed to think. Safe it is to say that a complete living of the law governing this Plan, and the practice of the principles involved, would make transition to the organization of the United Order not too difficult." (Albert E. Bowen, The Church Welfare Plan, p. 145. Mormon Doctrine p. 813-814.)