Why Was the Apostleship Restored First—and Which Priesthood Keys Came Later?
Christ Restores the Authority to Confer the Holy Ghost — Part 4
Introduction
If Peter, James, and John restored the Melchizedek Priesthood and the keys of Christ’s kingdom, two further questions arise. Why was Joseph Smith first given apostolic authority rather than simply being ordained an elder in the future Church? And why were the gathering and sealing keys restored later by Moses, Elias, and Elijah instead of being conferred by Peter, James, and John in 1829? The answers reveal that priesthood restoration was not a single undifferentiated event. It was an ordered process in which the Lord bestowed particular offices, authorities, and keys as His Church and His prophet became prepared to use them.
Why would the Lord restore the Apostleship first?
The Prophet Joseph Smith explained—
The twelve apostles . . .are called to . . . to preside over all the churches of the saints among the gentiles where there is no presidency established. They are to travel and preach among the Gentiles until the Lord shall command them to go to the Jews. They are to hold the keys of this ministry—to unlock the door of the kingdom of heaven unto all nations and preach the Gospel unto every creation. This is the virtue powr and authority of their Apostleship.1
When the seventy were called in February 1835, John Thompson noted, the Prophet explained that they were called “to follow after [the twelve] and assist them” in bearing “the keys of the kingdom to all nations, and unlock them.” Once they thus “built up” the church, they were to “set others [not of the twelve or seventy] to preside over them [the newly established branches] who are high priests.”2
Thompson also observed that the ordination to the office of apostle preceded ordinations to the office of elder in both the New Testament and Book of Mormon accounts of Christ’s organization of his church.3
Wherever early believers began gathering, sometimes through the preparatory ministry of those with lesser authority baptizing, the Apostles would come along and formally establish a church in two ways. They would ordain elders as local overseers, and the gift of the Holy Ghost would be given (see Acts 8:14–17; 11:29–30; 14:21–23; 20:16–17, 28; Titus 1:5; James 5:14; 1 Peter 5:1–3). Through this two-part pattern, Paul and his companions went about “confirming the churches” (Acts 15:41).
The offices of apostle and elder in the New Testament thus represented respectively 1) the higher authority sent by the Lord into the wilderness to inaugurate a church where one does not exist and 2) the initial authority that apostles step into or setup within the church to confirm it, through the gift of the Holy Ghost, and initially oversee it once it had been created. The two offices are a complimentary team working together to lay the foundation and begin to build up a kingdom of God.4
“In sum,” Thompson concluded, “the unique ‘virtue power and authority of [the] Apostleship’ was to have authority in ‘the wilderness’ (Revelation 12:14) where no kingdom is established and to turn the keys which they hold to establish the kingdom by eventually setting up presiding high priests and high councils.”5
In his orientation of the newly called twelve, the Prophet characterized the priesthood authority God gave him as “the authority to establish his church.” The apostles, he taught, were to do likewise in nations where the Church had not yet been established:
In the first place God manifested himself to me and gave me authority to establish his church, and you have receivd your [apostolic] authority from God through me; and now it is your duty to go and unlock the kingdom of heaven to foreign nations, for no man can do that thing but yourselves. Neither has any man authority or a right to go to other nations before you; and you, twelve, stand in the same relation to those nations that I stand in to you, that is, as a minister; and you have each the same authority in other nations that I have in this nation.6
Thus, the apostleship—the authority to open and establish the kingdom where it did not yet exist—was conferred before elders7 could be sustained and ordained to function within the newly organized Church and before additional offices within the higher priesthood, such as high priest8 and patriarch,9 were introduced.
How do the keys restored by Peter, James and John differ from the keys restored by Moses, Elias and Elijah?
The Savior described the keys Peter, James and John restored as the “keys of my kingdom, and a dispensation of the gospel for the last times” (D&C 27:13; 128:20).10 President Dallin H. Oaks taught that “the Melchizedek Priesthood keys of the kingdom” “conferred by Peter, James, and John” upon Joseph Smith “did not complete the restoration of priesthood keys. Some keys of the priesthood came later.” “Moses, Elias, and Elijah restored ‘the keys of this dispensation,’ including keys pertaining to the gathering of Israel and the work of the temples of the Lord.”11
The Church Handbook describes the additional keys conferred by Moses, Elias and Elijah as “further authority,” meaning presumably further “priesthood” authority:
[Joseph Smith] received the Melchizedek Priesthood and its keys from the Apostles Peter, James, and John (see Doctrine and Covenants 27:12–13).
In the Kirtland Temple, Moses, Elias, and Elijah appeared to Joseph Smith and committed to him the further authority necessary to accomplish God’s work in the latter days (see Doctrine and Covenants 110:11–16).12
President Russell M. Nelson described the process, or sequence, and nature of the priesthood authority restored by Peter, James and John (citing D&C 27) as follows: “Prior to the organization of the Church, heavenly messengers had conferred the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods upon the Prophet Joseph and had given him keys of both priesthoods.[D&C 13; 27:7-8, 12] These keys gave Joseph Smith authority to organize the Church in 1830 [D&C 20:1-4].”13
Bruce R. McConkie likewise described these Melchizedek Priesthood keys as “the keys of the kingdom by virtue of which [Joseph and Oliver were] empowered to organize, preside over, govern, and regulate the kingdom of God on earth, which is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They also receive[d] the keys of the dispensation of the fulness of times, that glorious age of restoration and refreshment in which God designs to gather all things in one in Christ.”14
“Then in the Kirtland Temple in 1836,” President Nelson added, “the conferral of . . . three additional priesthood keys—namely, keys of the gathering of Israel, keys of the gospel of Abraham, and keys of the sealing power—was essential. These keys authorized Joseph Smith—and all succeeding Presidents of the Lord’s Church—to gather Israel on both sides of the veil, to bless all covenant children with the blessings of Abraham, to place a ratifying seal on priesthood ordinances and covenants, and to seal families eternally. The power of these priesthood keys is infinite and breathtaking.”15
In other words, Peter, James and John restored the apostleship and the presiding keys of Christ’s kingdom—the authority to establish and govern the Church and to head the dispensation of the fulness of times. Other heavenly visitors the Prophet Joseph mentioned, who also “declared” or restored “their dispensation[s], their rights, their keys, their honors, their majesty and glory, and the power of their priesthood,” include Michael or Adam, Gabriel,16 Raphael17 and other “diverse angels” (D&C 128:20-21).
Finally (in importance, if not necessarily in time), Moses, Elias, and Elijah appeared immediately after, and under the direction of, the Savior in a dedicated House of the Lord to restore their dispensational keys.
Why didn’t Peter, James and John, who had received keys of the gathering of Israel and the sealing power from Moses and Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration,18 convey those keys at the time they restored their keys? We are not told. Perhaps the Lord’s methods in this and in all other aspects of His tutoring of the Prophet are instructive.
For one thing, the Savior has said He speaks and acts in ways that recognize His servants “weakness” and “manner of language,” so that they “might come to understanding” (D&C 1:24). When Peter, James and John conferred upon the 23-year-old Prophet their keys and authority in 1829, he was still at the very beginning stages of the tutoring course the Father had set Joseph on in 1820. Given its centrality to God’s plan and His restored kingdom on the earth, the restoration of something as all-encompassing as priesthood authority “in process of time” seems both reasonable and wise.
At the same time, God knows His servants perfectly. As the First Born, Christ would have watched each of us grow and develop in premortality. He, with our Father, foreordained each of His leaders, including every member of the Church.19 He knows us and trusts us to fulfill our stewardships—in time and in eternity, on earth and in paradise. Thus, His delegating to Moroni, John the Baptist, Peter, James, John, Moses, Elias, Elijah and so many other faithful, departed spirits a continuing role in the unfolding work of the Restoration (including possibly the three Nephites in preparing the Whitmers for their key roles) is perfectly consistent with God’s plan to, as Elder Renlund put it, help us “grow up spiritually and join Him in the family business.”20
Conclusion
The staged restoration of priesthood authority was therefore not a deficiency in the 1829 restoration. It was part of the Lord’s method. Peter, James, and John supplied the foundational apostolic authority and keys of the kingdom; later messengers restored additional dispensational keys as the Church, its temples, and the Prophet’s understanding developed line upon line.
Notes
1. “Minutes and Discourses, 27 February 1835, as Reported by William E. McLellin,” 3, JSP, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/minutes-and-discourses-27-february-1835-as-reported-by-william-e-mclellin/1 as quoted in J. Thompson, “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” 277.
2. Journal, 1835–1836, 188, JSP, accessed October 17, 2026, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/journal-1835-1836/19, as quoted in J. Thompson, “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” 278.
3. Ibid. 286 (“The first authority Jesus established in the new church he organized during his visit to the Americas was to call twelve disciples (3 Nephi 11:21–22; 12:1).” Later, “he touched each of the twelve with his hand and told them to call in mighty prayer upon the Father in his name to have power to lay hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost (3 Nephi 18:36–37; cf. Moroni 2:2–3),” which the next day they did (3 Nephi 19:9–13). “If the authority to give the Holy Ghost was inherent in the initial calling of the twelve, the Savior later touching them and commanding them to pray for the power to lay on hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost would be an unnecessary redundancy. But if it is understood that the Nephite twelve were becoming elders of the Church with authorization to give the gift of the Holy Ghost, then the redundancy disappears. Through this foundation, the twelve disciples ‘were called the elders of the church’ (Moroni 3:1).”).
4. Ibid. Thompson adds that “Peter’s declaration that he was ‘also an elder’ of the church (1 Peter 5:1) signals that he not only has apostolic authority to establish the kingdom where one did not exist, but he also had authority to operate within a kingdom as an elder who can confirm members by the giving of the Holy Ghost.”
5. J. Thompson, “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” 279.
6. Record of the Twelve, 14 February–28 August 1835, 4, JSP, accessed October 17, 2026, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/record-of-the-twelve-14-february-28-august-1835/10, as quoted in J. Thompson, “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” 280.
7. “Since the authority of elder appears to be the first office born out of apostleship and is given to oversee a newly created church unit (or kingdom of God), it is understandable why some of the [historical] sources may refer to the restoration of this office as the restoration of Melchizedek priesthood. The office of elder is the priesthood office that signals the official existence of a church. It confirms the church by giving the Holy Ghost to its membership.” For this reason, then, Thompson argues, the Prophet could accurately report in his 1838 History of the Church that their wish to have the “promise [of John the Baptist] realized to us,” that they “should also have,” or receive, “the Melchesidec Priesthood,” was not realized until the voice of the Lord came to them in the chamber of Father Whitmer. In other words, even though they had previously received the Melchizedek Priesthood and ordained to the apostleship, they were not authorized to “confirm” or establish the Church, including being authorized to lay on hands for the Gift of the Holy Ghost, until June 1829 in Father Whitmer’s chamber (and their exercising the authority they received on this occasion had to wait until the organization of the church on April 6, 1830). J. Thompson, “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” 288-89.
8. At the general conference held in Kirtland on June 3–4/5, 1831, the minutes record that “Brs. Lyman Wight John Murdock Reynolds Cahoon Harvey Whitlock & Hyrum Smith were ordained to the high Priesthood under the hand <of> br. Joseph Smith jr.” It then adds, “Joseph Smith [Sr.] John Whitmer Joseph Smith jr. & Sidney Rigdon were ordained to the High Priesthood under the hand of br. Lyman Wight.” In his history, Joseph Smith describes this event as follows: “The authority of the Melechisedec priesthood was manifested and conferred, for the first time, upon several of the elders.” Minutes, circa 3–4 June 1831, 3-4, JSP, accessed October 22, 2026, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/minutes-circa-3-4-june-1831/2; see also “Historical Introduction,” citing JS History, vol. A-1, 118 (emphasis added). So, to what priesthood or priesthood office were these men, including the Prophet, being ordained?
The JSP editors’ “Historical Introduction” to these minutes states:
[While] this conference marked the first time elders in the church were “ordained to the High Priesthood,” . . . what this ordination meant to conference participants at the time is unclear. Although those ordained to the high priesthood at this conference were still listed as elders in the minutes of conferences that followed over the next four months, the minutes of the 25 October 1831 conference recorded the “names of those ordained to the High priesthood” separately from the elders, priests, teachers, and deacons, suggesting that the high priesthood was by then recognized as a distinct office in the church. Accounts suggest that the participants at the time of the June conference believed the ordination carried with it additional power (https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/minutes-circa-3-4-june-1831/2#historical-intro).
John Thompson addresses this apparent difficulty in his section “The Melchizedek Priesthood for Ruling a Kingdom (High Priest).” Thompson argues that the statement that Melchizedek Priesthood authority was manifested and conferred “for the first time” in June 1831 can properly be understood as referring to the high-priest office and its governing authority, rather than to the first conferral of every office, authority, or portion belonging to the Melchizedek Priesthood.
Under Thompson’s interpretation, the apostleship had already authorized Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to open and establish the kingdom where it did not exist; the office of elder (in or of the Church), which the Lord instructed be instituted at the organization of the Church on April 6, 1830, authorized officers to function within, build up, and confirm the newly organized Church; and the June 1831 ordinations introduced the high-priest office—the comprehensive ecclesiastical form of the Melchizedek Priesthood needed to preside over the established kingdom. The men ordained in June 1831 could therefore receive this authority “for the first time” without implying that Joseph and Oliver had possessed no Melchizedek Priesthood authority before that conference. See J. Thompson, “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” 289–94. For Thompson’s broader explanation that understanding the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood as a restoration of different “portions or degrees” of the priesthood in process of time, see 272–94.
9. In an August 27, 1843, sermon in the grove next to the Nauvoo Temple (notes of which were recorded by Franklin D. Richards, among others), the Prophet Joseph Smith described “3 grand principles or orders of Priesthood portrayed in” Hebrews chapter 7:
1st Levitical which was neve[r] able to administer a Blessing but only to bind heavy burdens which neither they nor their fath wer[e] able to bear. 2 Abrahams Patriarchal power which is the greatest yet experienced in this church 3d That of melchisedec who had still greater power even power of endless Life of which was our Lord Jesus Christ which also Abraham obtained by the offering of his son Isaac which was not the power of a Prophet nor apostle nor Patriarc[h] only but of King or Priest to God to open the windows of Heaven and pour out the peace & Law of endless Life to man & No man can attain to the Joint heirship with Jesus Christ with out bein[g] administered to by one having the same power & Authority of Melchisede[c]
Discourse, 27 August 1843, as Reported by Franklin D. Richards, 26, JSP, accessed October 23, 2026, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/discourse-27-august-1843-as-reported-by-franklin-d-richards/2. For other journal entries recording recollections of this sermon, see “Discourse, 27 August 1843, as Reported by James Burgess,” 14, JSP, josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/discourse-27-august-1843-as-reported-by-james-burgess/1; “Discourse, 27 August 1843, as Reported by Willard Richards,” 71, JSP, josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/discourse-27-august-1843-as-reported-by-willard-richards/3.
The JSP editors note that Joseph Smith’s reference to “Abrahams Patriarchal power” “possibly referred to priesthood power as experienced in the development of rituals connected to the temple.”
“Patriarch” in the third paragraph of Franklin D. Richard’s summary of the Prophet’s sermon referred to the priesthood office of patriarch, which was first formally instituted in December 1834 when Joseph Smith Sr. was ordained Patriarch to the Church and soon thereafter began administering patriarchal blessings to members of his family, the fatherless, and other members of the Church. See “Account of Meetings, Revelation, and Blessing, 5–6 December 1834,” “Historical Introduction,” JSP, accessed October 22, 2026, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/account-of-meetings-revelation-and-blessing-5-6-december-1834/1. The 1835 “Instruction on Priesthood,” now Doctrine and Covenants 107, identified patriarchs as “evangelical ministers” and directed the Twelve to ordain them “as they shall be designated unto them by revelation” (D&C 107:39). It further explained that this “order” of priesthood “was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made” (D&C 107:40). See “Instruction on Priesthood, between circa 1 March and circa 4 May 1835 [D&C 107],” 85 (verses 17-18), JSP, accessed October 22, 2026, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/instruction-on-priesthood-between-circa-1-march-and-circa-4-may-1835-dc-107/4.
The Prophet described the ancient principle of descent of a priesthood office by lineage: “The oldest man of the Blood of Joseph or of the seed of Abraham … should be a patriarch for the benefit of the posterity of the Saints as it was with Jacob in giving his patriarchal blessing unto his Sons.” (Church History Topics, “Patriarchal Blessings,” https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/patriarchal-blessings?lang=eng). This principle of lineal descent in the office of Patriarch to the Church (to the first-born worthy male when possible; see the Patriarchal Blessings topic for description of exceptions to the hereditary principle in note 8 and the “distinction [that] arose between the Patriarch over the whole Church and those patriarchs assigned to branches or stakes” beginning in 1837) also applied to the presiding priesthood office in the “church,” which anciently was family based. “From Adam to the flood,” Bruce R. McConkie explained, “the presiding church officer was always both a high priest and a patriarch, and the office descended from father to son. This order of priesthood itself was called the patriarchal order. As an order of the priesthood it is preserved in the Church today only where the office of Patriarch to the Church is concerned.” Mormon Doctrine, “Patriarchal Order,” 559. (In 1979, President N. Eldon Tanner announced in General Conference that Eldred G. Smith, the then-serving Patriarch to the Church, would become emeritus and no successor would be appointed, arguably preserving the hereditary office of Patriarch to the Church but without a current holder.)
Abraham described the family-based or lineal-based descent of the presiding priesthood office: “It was conferred upon me from the fathers; it came down from the fathers, from the beginning of time, yea, even from the beginning, or before the foundation of the earth to the present time, even the right of the firstborn, on the first man, who is Adam, or first father, through the fathers unto me” (Abraham 1:3). Church leaders today generally refer to the patriarchal order of the priesthood as included within, or as the fullest expression of, the Melchizedek Priesthood (D&C 131:2). For example, after stating that “Adam and Eve were joined together in marriage for time and for all eternity by the power of [the] everlasting priesthood (see Gen. 2:24–25; Moses 3:25; Abr. 5:18–19),” President Nelson added: “Adam held the priesthood. Eve served in matriarchal partnership with the patriarchal priesthood.” (“Lessons from Eve,” Ensign (November 1987), 86-87) President Boyd K. Packer similarly stated:
There are references to a patriarchal priesthood. The patriarchal order is not a third, separate priesthood. (See D&C 84:6–17; D&C 107:40–57.) Whatever relates to the patriarchal order is embraced in the Melchizedek Priesthood. ‘All other authorities or offices in the church are appendages to [the Melchizedek] priesthood.’ (D&C 107:5.) The patriarchal order is a part of the Melchizedek Priesthood which enables endowed and worthy men to preside over their posterity in time and eternity.”
Boyd K. Packer, ‘What Every Elder Should Know—and Every Sister as Well: A Primer on Principles of Priesthood Government,” Ensign (February 1993)(emphasis added). For a more extensive discussion of how Joseph Smith’s 1843 discourse concerning three priestly “portions,” “degrees,” or manifestations of the priesthood square with ideas about priesthood found in the earliest tutoring influences the Prophet received, including translating the Book of Mormon, see generally J. Thompson, “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” 263–66, 300–301, 305–8.
10. S. Kent Brown explains that the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” promised to Peter in Matthew 16:18–19 signified Christ’s authorization to lead and govern the earthly Church, administer its doctrine and ordinances, and perform acts that God would ratify in heaven. Brown connects these keys with authority to open entry into Christ’s earthly and heavenly kingdoms and with the “key of knowledge,” concluding that Peter and the Twelve became administrators of the house of God. This helps explain the foundational, presiding character of the “keys of the kingdom” restored by Peter, James, and John, as contrasted with the specific dispensational keys later restored in the Kirtland Temple. “Peter’s Keys,” in The Ministry of Peter, the Chief Apostle, ed. Frank F. Judd Jr., Eric D. Huntsman, and Shon D. Hopkin (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2014), 91–102.
11. Dallin H. Oaks , “The Melchizedek Priesthood and the Keys,” Liahona (May 2020), 70, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2020/04/36oaks?lang=eng, citing D&C 110:16.
12. General Handbook 3.1, “Priesthood Principles—Restoration of the Priesthood,” https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/3-priesthood-principles?lang=eng.
13. Russell M. Nelson, “Rejoice in the Gift of Priesthood Keys,” Liahona (May 2024), 121, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2024/04/57nelson?lang=eng.
14. Bruce R. McConkie, “The Keys of the Kingdom,” Ensign (May 1983), 21, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1983/04/the-keys-of-the-kingdom?lang=eng.
15. Nelson, 121. Elder McConkie adds that Moses, Elias and Elijah brought the “keys and powers” “from their dispensations,” which “they had exercised as mortals.” Thus, he concluded, “in process of time, [the] ‘whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories . . . from the days of Adam even to the present time’” described by the Prophet in Section 128 (verse 18) came to fruition. “The Keys of the Kingdom,” 21.
16. The Prophet Joseph Smith identified Gabriel as Noah and taught that he “stands next in authority to Adam in the Priesthood.” Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 157. For a summary of the arguments that Gabriel, or Noah, was the Elias who appeared in the Kirtland Temple, see note 48 above and Fluckiger, chapter 16, “The Spiritual Treasures from the Dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham,” 216–18 and nn. 3–7.
17. Raphael’s mortal identity has not been revealed. Because the Prophet’s listing of divers angels in Section 128, including Raphael, does not otherwise expressly name a messenger from Enoch’s dispensation, Elder Bruce R. McConkie suggested (as a possibility only, not revealed fact) that Raphael “may be Enoch or some other great prophet from his dispensation” and may have restored keys exercised in Enoch’s day, possibly including power associated with translation. See Mormon Doctrine, “Raphael,” 618; and “This Final Glorious Gospel Dispensation,” Ensign, April 1980, 21–25. 1 Enoch portrays Enoch as seeing Raphael among the named angels in heaven, thus treating Raphael as distinct from the narrator of the account, Enoch himself (1 Enoch 70:8–9). See Book of Enoch (Oxford University Press, 1913), chapter 71, accessed at https://urantiapedia.org/en/Bible/Book_of_Enoch/71.
18.Fluckiger, Drawing Upon the Spiritual Treasures of the Temple, 55 & n.9, 246-47, 283 & note 13.
19. Ibid. 64, 68, and 85 & note 23; see also 154-55, 156-57, 170-71 & notes 10 & 11.
20. Dale G. Renlund, “Choose You This Day,” Ensign, November 2018, 104, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2018/10/choose-you-this-day?lang=eng.
Comments