Volume l #7 December 1992

EPHRAIM'S FORUM

For those who are of Ephraim, holding the rights

and responsibilities of the kingdom, this is your

forum; to pursue remedy for our ills, and

accomplish the bringing forth of Zion.

HOW EPHRAIM FUNCTIONS

The Order of Ephraim

Patriarchal Order ................. Order of the Fathers

"This order was instituted in the days of Adam,"...(D & C 107:41) "Adam was the first man appointed by God as ruler of the earth;" (JD 21:369)

I have sought to point out the many similarities of the U.S. govern-ment, etc. and that of Israel or the Lord's people. Before proceeding I wish to point out what appears to be a difference. The Founding Fathers studied the works of many notables, one of which was John Locke. In his "The Second Treatise of Government" he states, "(l) That Adam had not, either by natural right of fatherhood or by positive donation from God, any such authority over his children or dominion over the world as is pretended. (2) That if he had, his heirs yet had no right to it. (3) That if his heirs had, there being no law of nature nor positive law of God that determines which is the right heir in all cases ... (4) ... it is impossible that the rulers now on earth should make any benefit or derive any?????? the least shadow of authority from that which is held to be the fountain of all power: Adam's private dominion and paternal jurisdiction;" (page 1 of Chapter 1)

It is plain that John Locke was repudiating a perverse and corrupted claim(s) of priesthood authority, or government. Nor do I say this lightly as a study of priesthood shows that Locke was categorically wrong in his points, l - 4. (l) As the earth is the Lord's and all things therein, He has the right to rule. (2) God has established His priesthood, or His order of things, and "Priesthood ... is simply ... the rule and government of God ..." (JD 22:291, John Taylor) (3) And the right to priesthood is hereditary, and continues in our day.

"...literal descendants of Aaron they have a legal right to the bishopric, if they are the firstborn among the sons of Aaron; for the firstborn holds the right of presidency over this priesthood, and the keys or authority of the same." (D & C 68:16-17) I wish to make note of "this priesthood" as, unknown to some, Joseph spoke of three priest-hoods; the Melchizedek (without father or mother), Patriarchal Priest-hood, and Levitical Priesthood. (see TPJS 323) The Levitical, or Aaronic, we have established as an hereditary priesthood; Patriarchal is also hereditary, and can be seen as such in Joseph's blessings to his father and brother Hyrum. "So shall it be with my father: ... holding the keys of the Patriarchal Priesthood ...", and "He [Hyrum] shall stand

in the tracks of his father ... hold[ing] the right of Patriarchal Priesthood,"... (TPJS pages 38, 40) Not only has Hyrum's seed after him held the office of Presiding Patriarch, but Joshua, the son of Nun, who was a ruler among the children of Israel, was of Ephraim, the Patriarch-al tribe, and must have held the office that Hyrum and his seed now hold. (see Numbers 13:2, 8, 16, 14:6)

I have received a certain amount of static over this assumption be-cause of the "separation of powers of Church and State", the thing one must remember is that whether Church or State it is the priesthood which rules or governs, " ... in both civil or ecclesiastical affairs;" (TPJS page 252) Also, that the priesthood on earth is patterned after that in heaven, thus the Trinity in heaven, i.e. Father, Son and Holy Ghost, has its counterpart on earth of Patriarch, President (or King), and Bishop (presiding). As we look back over the different ages of the world, we see Hyrum, Joseph, and Edward Partridge; Joshua, Moses, and Aaron; back to Ephraim, Judah and Levi.

This brings me to a priesthood that I do not know of its ever having been mentioned; but can be found by inference. In our day the seed of Aaron does not preside in Aaron's rightful position as bishop. In Moses' day the seed of Judah did not preside in Judah's rightful posi-tion as president or king. But the seed of Judah, (David, who slew Goliath) was promised, "I will set up seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, ... And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established forever ..." (II Samuel 7:12, 13, 16) Joseph substantiates this; "... the throne and kingdom of David is to be taken from him and given to another by the name of David in the last days, raised up out of his lineage." (TPJS page 339)

More specifically, "Brigham Young ... on one occasion had said pub-licly, "Joseph [the prophet] said to me, "I shall have a son [descend-ant] born to me, and his name shall be called David; and on him, in some future time, will rest the responsibility that now rests on me." (Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith pages 284-285) (see also D & C 113, especially the root "unto whom rightly belongs the priesthood") Wilford Woodruff spoke repeatedly of when the Prophet put his mantle on the twelve; his "face shone like amber", and that he "was transfigured be-fore them," being "covered with a power that I had never seen on any man in the flesh before." (Doctrines of the Kingdom, page 566)

From Adam to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob our record shows a lineage of Patriarchs. With the twelve sons of Jacob (all patriarchs, sovereign, autonomous entities), the record shows a change from a single patriarch-al line to a multiple patriarchal line, or family. With the coming of the family who was to stand in the place of Jacob, who was to stand as father to the eleven other brothers? That power was divided, and dele-gated to Joseph, Judah, and Levi.

There are three divisions of government, and every man is a govern-ment of himself; for Jacob to be properly represented by three of his sons they must act as one, be one, if they are to be what he was, do

what he did. This division of powers is an unerring example of checks and balances, and of how diversity can be united without an infringement of individual rights or agency, and create a synergy of tremendous power without baneful effects.

The Patriarchs held every power in themselves, and this passed to their sons. But such is the tendency of despotism, or unrighteous dominion, that the division of powers was seen as that. The inability to comprehend where power comes from, creates, in people, an idea, a concept, a tradition, that power comes from an office, not from the person(s) who created it. As long as that tradition exists the powers of government of priesthood will remain divided in the mind, and the mind or will of men can only be overcome from within. Joseph said he had received every priesthood (see ibid.) Abraham was told "Now this same Priesthood which was in the beginning, shall be in the end of the world also." (Moses 6:7) Joseph held every priesthood because his mind was capable of breaking off the chains of tradition and of embracing and abiding by all the Father had to give. Only as we break off the mental chains and seek, embrace, and abide by all that the Father has to give can we expect to receive all the priesthoods, and if we have not received all, there is no way we understand all. This simply means that men who understand government (priesthood) are the most rare and pre-cious commodity on the face of the earth.

A Family Order ............. The Principles

Because the priesthood is the government of God, whether God's people are a nation (Israel) or a church (gentile), the principles and pattern is the same; both Israel and Gentile must render obedience to the Gospel (i.e. law and order of Jesus Christ), and accept Him as their king. But the natural blood has the responsibility in bringing about the purposes of our Father in Heaven.

"In the lineage of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, according to the flesh, was held the right of heirship to the keys of the Priesthood for the blessing and for the salvation of all nations. ... no man can hold the keys of Priesthood or of Apostleship, ... unless he is a literal descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jesus Christ and his ancient Apostles of both hemispheres were of that lineage. ... I would never receive any man as an Apostle ... while he claimed to be of any other lineage than Israel." (JD 1:261-262 PPP)

It is important to note that if the literal descendants, who hold the rights of heirship, begin to forget their responsibilities and overstep their bounds in an infringement upon others' agency (unrighteous domin-ion); they begin to divorce themselves from the family of God, seeking adoption into some other. For Israel, and other nations, are not closed systems. Those not of Israel "Through this Gospel they are adopted into the same family [of Israel] and are counted for the seed of Abraham; they can then receive a portion of this same ministry under those [lit-eral descendants] who hold the presiding keys of the same." (ibid.)

When nations are seen as families it becomes easier to see why different laws and customs exist. Who does not understand that when coming under the roof of a family that the rules of that family must be obeyed, and that the father of that house is the Lord to whom all are amenable? So it is with those of other nations (families) who come to Israel (church or nation) and accept and covenant by baptism to abide by the rules of the house (Gospel or law of Jesus Christ) and accept Him as their king; to be amendable to him. "... those that were baptized were subjects for a king; and also the laws ..." (TPJS 273) With this in mind it becomes easy to see that upon this principle Israel can divorce herself from God (the eternal family order) by accepting or adopting the ways of other families (homosexuality, abortion, etc.) and be remiss in their responsibility and create a greater condemnation. Whenever more is given more is required; along with the capacity for greater blessings comes the capacity for greater cursings or condemnation.

Those who have accepted the Gospel have accepted Christ as their king and have agreed, by covenant to abide by his laws. With this in mind it may not be too hard to see why some nations are opposed to the Gospel and can even consider it treason. How long could a perverse king, or government last if the subjects thereto had Christ for their king and were dedicated to obedience to His laws?

Christ is our king, but do we understand what a king is? This is important for as we are to Christ our wives are to be to us. (see I Corinthians ll:3) If we are not meant to be kings then how is christ to reign as King of kings? To some being a king is merely to rule arbi-trarily or according to one's will, or whims. A lack of knowledge as to what it means to be a king or to preside, is a root problem that exists. As I perused my dictionaries for the meaning of president and preside, I did not feel like I could find it. I believe that kings and presidents have overstepped their bounds over such an extended period of time, and been so proficient at it that it is acceptable for them to rule arbi-trarily. There is a difference between king and president, but I be-lieve that difference is only the separation of time; for what they meant originally they are synonymous, though neither is understood as such now.

If Christ is truly our king then the word president more fully con-veys the meaning, and this is important as we are to emulate Him. I feel the best explanation of a president is one who presides, the under-standing of which is best provided by parliamentary procedure. This allows for the presiding officer to be called to order by any member, and their powers are those delegated to them by the body they serve. All rights or powers are interlocked, or comprised within their respon-sibilities. This is a key: Do I have this right to exercise over others? If there is an accompanying responsibility, yes! If not, then if I have that right it is a right that all have, not just a privileged few.

All power is inherent in the patriarch, or father, but what is a son who comes of age? As a tree casts off its seed begetting other trees

all of the powers of the parent plant are innate in its offspring.

Though less in stature and foliage it stands on an equal basis as its capabilities are equal.

The reason John Locke could not accept the claims of the rulers in his day, though substantiated by claims equivalent to priesthood line-age, stemmed from one point ... inequality! It is on this basis that priesthood, or fatherhood, can be ascertained as pure or corrupt, true or false. Paul told us, "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God." (Phil. 2:5, 6)

This may be a bit confusing to some as it appears contradictory: l) Fathers or their sons according to primogeniture have the right to rule. 2) All men stand as equals holding the same rights. Perhaps what John Taylor said will clarify things: "... there seems to be an order in the priesthood pertaining to these matters that we cannot well ignore. It has been usual ... both in regard to the quorum of the Twelve and also in regard to high councils -- not always, perhaps, ... but acted upon in numerous instances - that is, that the members preside according to priority or ordination and seniority of age, and the two, I think, would probably go together." (The Gospel Kingdom, page 182)

Perhaps the genius of this cannot be seen until we look at our plague of those seeking to preside in one way or another each election. The divisions, and confusion that is used to try to propel one into office leaves people with no confidence in virtually any of the candidates. And the waste of time and money used to seek office ... serves no pro-ductive end except that of attaining to an office; which if gained by favors of money, etc., must as a natural course be reciprocated. And who is in a better position to give favors than one in office? Even its proponents recognize its malignancy.

Thus we see the malignant state that occurs when all are equals, and when according to primogeniture the firstborns rule arbitrarily. What we need is a balance of the two.

When we speak of "calling and election" we tend to speak of it as the ultimate in accomplishment. So it is, with a separation of the powers of government, so that no one nominates himself for office, those hold-ing the right of firstborn call (nominate) candidates, and the people elect to accept or reject the nomination. No electioneering, campaign-ing, false promises, etc. It doesn't matter if a person has a right to a position unless he is also responsible. If he isn't responsible why would any reasonable person elect him?

Thus a father's rights comprehend the right to preside, and the right to "call" or nominate candidates for office. The son's rights compre-hend the right to call a father to order, and to accept or reject his nominations or "callings".

A father's position is more one of responsibility than of privilege;

if a father will be responsible, he may have the privilege of presiding over his family.

A Family Order ............... The Pattern

It would be very satisfying to put on paper with ink the pattern of the eternal family order. Unfortunately, I am not certain of what might be termed the basic structure. Joseph said, "... the Church is not fully organized, in its proper order, and cannot be, until the Temple is completed," (TPJS page 224). There have been many temples completed since that time but the order is still incomplete. Brigham Young found the task formidable; "... when the people are sufficiently informed and have advanced further in the knowledge of the truth, ... every branch will have its full quota of officers - a Patriarch. President, Bishop, High Council, and all officers that are necessary ..." (JD 10:97) Although there is a great deal of data it cannot all be substantiated, and a diversity of order at first appears to exist. If one can look past the surface to see circumstances (getting started, distances, lack of time, men, etc.), then certain aspects can be eliminated and others added by inference. For instance, The Council of Fifty had a very limited organization; a Chairman, Recorder, Secretary, and mention made of an Executive Committee. Perhaps some may feel this was a full organ-ization, it is impossible, in my mind, for it, as an earthly priesthood body, to be patterned after the heavenly order when I can see that order much more defined in ancient Israel and the Church itself.

D & C 107:22-32 establishes an order of: l) a quorum or Presidency of three, 2) a quorum of twelve Apostles, 3) a quorum of 70 elders or apostles. With each of these quorums holding equal power and authority, and a general assembly of these three quorums constitute the spiritual authorities of the Church; also called a "General Council" in TPJS page 92.

I do not consider this order comprehensive as both the Patriarch and Bishop are not mentioned. In my mind they belong in a grand presidency or council to be checks and balances on the President. "There was, how-ever, an executive committee within the Council of Fifty that consisted of seven members..." (BYU Studies Vol. 20, No. 2 Winter 1980, page 18_). There are seven dispensations, and Lorin Wooley had a Council of Seven, though I suppose I'm straining to make my point. Continuing my conjecture; the division into three at the head would emulate the Trinity, and the union of those divisions might well constitute a Grand Council. (A general and grand council of heaven are mentioned in WJS, page 371)

If the procedure used by the Council of Fifty in Brigham's Ghost legislature as found in Pierce's "The Rise and Fall of the Kingdom of God in Pioneer Days"; most business would take place in a General Council making things function more by the will of the body than one at the top. Also making the various councils more like permanent commit-tees to conduct the business the body has agreed upon.

The Family

In families there exist two main, fundamental problems: l) the children are rebellious and fractious and will not abide by law and order, therefore there is none. 2) The fathers are proud and dicta-torial, crushing the wills of their children beneath their own. This

is the pattern that runs through governments past, present, but hope-fully not the future.

The family is the basic component of any nation; a nation is only a reflection of its base parts. In other words, only as families adopt or abide by the principles and pattern of the heavenly family can Israel be redeemed, and Zion be established. No restoration of Israel can occur while the law and order of heaven is omitted, or neglected.

The Law of Moses was done away with with the crucifixion of Christ, but what part of the Law of Moses, or the law that Moses gave, was to be done away and what part is the Gospel (law of Jesus Christ) that was added to. (see TPJS page 60) That not all was to be done away is shown in some of the last words of Moses to the children of Israel.

"And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath driven thee, and shalt return unto the Lord thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy chil-dren, with all thine heart, and with all thine soul; that then the Lord thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return [unto thee] and gather thee from all the nations, ... I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: That thou mayest love the Lord thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he [the Lord thy God] is thy life, and the length of thy days:" (Deut. 30: l, 2, 19, 20) Check this out.

This was the desire and purpose of our progenitors who came to this land long before the Constitution was written, or this nation formed. It was their search for and attempts at living God's law that brought forth a generation with the will and resolve to stand firm and throw off a government contrary to that of their king, Jesus Christ. With that government established, the true Church of Jesus was able to be estab-lished, which Thomas Jefferson prophesied would come with the coming of religious freedom (see The Real Thomas Jefferson______). The redemption of Israel has been the work of generations, perhaps it will be this gen-eration search for and attempts at returning to the Law of Jesus Christ (Gospel) that will at last bring to fruition the redemption of Israel, the hope of our fathers.

If Israel is to be redeemed it must begin on an individual basis, spreading forth in families, and breaking forth as a nation. This must be our goal, it is to this we must seek.

APPENDIX: Historical evidence to substantiate presidencies of seven. "President Smith then presented Sidney Rigdon and Frederic G. Williams as his counselors, and to constitute with himself the three first Presi-dents of the Church. ... President Smith then introduced Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith, Sen., Hyrum Smith, and John Smith for assistant counsel-ors. These last four, together with the first three, are to be con-sidered the heads of the Church. Carried unanimously." (DHC Vol. II, page 509)

At the sitting of the council of the 26th of March, according to the plan taught at the solemn assembly, which was, that the seven High Priests who were sent from Kirtland to build up Zion, viz. - Oliver Cowdery, W. W. Phelps, John Whitmer, Algeron Sidney Gilbert, Bishop Partridge and his two counselors - should stand at the head of affairs relating to the Church in that section of the Lord's vineyard:" (DHC Vol. I, pages 335-336)

"There was, however, an executive committee within the Council of Fifty that consisted of seven members ..." (BYU Studies Vol. 20, No. 2 Winter 1980, page 183)

There are seven dispensations with Christ as one of those heads over one of the dispensations. For those who believe in Adam God, there would be two of the Godhead as heads of dispensations, and those who accept Joseph Smith as the third member of the Godhead the whole thing should make perfect sense. Enoch, Noah, Abraham, and Moses would have been assistant counselors to the first three in the Grand Council of Heaven if this theory is correct.