The following comes from John A. Tvedtnes, "Chapter 47: Sustaining Priesthood Officers," in Joseph Smith and the Ancient World (unpublished [copy in my possession]):
Chapter 47
SUSTAINING
PRIESTHOOD OFFICERS
_______________________
No person is to be ordained to any office in
this church, where there is a regularly organized branch of the same, without
the vote of that church; But the presiding elders, traveling bishops, high
councilors, high priests, and elders, may have the privilege of ordaining,
where there is no branch of the church that a vote may be called. (D&C
20:65-66).
In the restored Church, the concept of
“common consent” requires that each person selected to be ordained to a
priesthood or presiding office must be sustained by the local members of the
Church (D&C 26:2; 28:13). This was also true in early Christianity. For
example, the synodical letter issued in A.D. 382 by attendees at the Council of
Constantinople notes that
Accordingly
over the new made . . . church at Constantinople . . . We have ordained bishop
the right reverend and most religious Nectarius, in the presence of the
Ecumenical Council, with common consent, before the most religious emperor
Theodosius and with the assent of all the clergy and of the whole city. And
over the most ancient and truly apostolic church in Syria, where first the
noble name of Christians was given them, the bishops of the province and of the
eastern diocese have met together and canonically ordained bishop the right
reverend and most religious Flavianus, with the consent of all the church, who
as though with one voice joined in expressing their respect for him.[i]
The late first-century Clement
of Rome, in his epistle to the Corinthians, wrote:
Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would
be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason,
therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect foreknowledge of this, they
appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave
instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should
succeed them in their ministry . . . with the consent of the whole Church. (1
Clement 44)[ii]
Pope Leo the Great (reigned A.D. 440-461),
in his letter 14.6 to Anastasius, bishop of Thessalonica, wrote:
When
therefore the choice of the chief priest is taken in hand, let him be preferred
before all whom the unanimous consent of clergy and people demands, but if the
votes chance to be divided between two persons, the judgment of the
metropolitan should prefer him who is supported by the preponderance of votes
and merits: only let no one be ordained against the express wishes of the
place: lest a city should either despise or hate a bishop whom they did not
choose, and lamentably fall away from religion because they have not been
allowed to have when they wished.[iii]
A text
attributed to the twelve apostles describes the process by which the early
Christians sustained bishops:
I
Peter say, that a bishop ordained is to be, as we have already, all of us,
appointed, unblameable in all things, a select person, chosen by the whole
people, who, when he is named and approved, let the people assemble, with the
presbytery and bishops that are present, an the Lord's day, and let them give
their consent. And let the principal of the bishops ask the presbytery and
people whether this be the person whom they desire for their ruler. And if they
give their consent, let him ask further whether he has a good testimony from
all men as to his worthiness for so great and glorious an authority; whether
all things relating to his piety towards God be right; whether justice towards
men has been observed by him; whether the affairs of his family have been well
ordered by him; whether he has been unblameable in the course of his life. And
if all the assembly together do according to truth, and not according to
prejudice, witness that he is such a one, let them the third time, as before
God the Judge, and Christ, the Holy Ghost being also present, as well as all
the holy and ministering spirits, ask again whether he be truly worthy of this
ministry, that so "in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may
be established." And if they agree the third time that he is worthy, let
them all be demanded their vote; and when they all give it willingly, let them
be heard. (Constitutions of the Holy Apostles 8.4)[iv]
Cyprian of Carthage (3rd
century A.D.) acknowledged that Christians of his time had to approve
ordinations. In his Epistle 51.8,he wrote, “Cornelius was made bishop by the
judgment of God and of His Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy,
by the suffrage of the people who were then present, and by the assembly of
ancient priests and good men.”[v] In Epistle
54.5, he wrote that “no one would stir up anything against the college of
priests; no one, after the divine judgment, after the suffrage of the people,
after the consent of the co-bishops, would make himself a judge, not now of the
bishop, but of God.”[vi]
In Epistle 67.5, he instructed, “you must diligently observe and keep the
practice delivered from divine tradition and apostolic observance, which is
also maintained among us, and almost throughout all the provinces; that for the
proper celebration of ordinations all the neighboring bishops of the same
province should assemble with that people for which a prelate is ordained. And
the bishop should be chosen in the presence of the people, who have most fully
known the life of each one, and have looked into the doings of each one as
respects his habitual conduct.”[vii]
Cyprian
appealed to the Old and New Testaments as evidence for having the local
congregation approve its leaders. In Epistle 67.4, he wrote,
Which very
thing, too, we observe to come from divine authority, that the priest should be
chosen in the presence of the people under the eyes of all, and should be
approved worthy and suitable by public judgment and testimony; as in the book
of Numbers the Lord commanded Moses, saying, “Take Aaron thy brother, and
Eleazar his son, and place them in the mount, in the presence of all the
assembly, and strip Aaron of his garments, and put them upon Eleazar his son;
and let Aaron die there, and be added to his people.” [Numbers 20:25-26] God
commands a priest to be appointed in the presence of all the assembly; that is,
He instructs and shows that the ordination of priests ought not to be
solemnized except with the knowledge of the people standing near, that in the
presence of the people either the crimes of the wicked may be disclosed, or the
merits of the good may be declared, and the ordination, which shall have been
examined by the suffrage and judgment of all, may be just and legitimate. And
this is subsequently observed, according to divine instruction, in the Acts of
the Apostles, when Peter speaks to the people of ordaining an apostle in the
place of Judas. “Peter,” it says, “stood up in the midst of the disciples, and
the multitude were in one place.” {Acts 1:15} Neither do we observe that this
was regarded by the apostles only in the ordinations of bishops and priests,
but also in those of deacons, of which matter itself also it is written in
their Acts: “And they twelve called together,” it says, “the whole congregation
of the disciples, and said to them;” [Acts 6:2] which was done so diligently
and carefully, with the calling together of the whole of the people, surely for
this reason, that no unworthy person might creep into the ministry of the altar,
or to the office of a priest.[viii]
Summary
Joseph Smith
wrote, “We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the
laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and
administer in the ordinances thereof” (Article of Faith 5). But he also taught
that those called by this authority must be sustained by the members of the
congregation in which the individual resides (D&C 20:65-66). Indeed, the
first occasion for such a sustaining was on the day on which the restored
Church was organized, 6 April 1830, when the six elders voted to accept Joseph
Smith and Oliver Cowdery as the presiding officers of the Church. Like many
other practices instituted by Joseph Smith, this was a restoration of an
ancient Christian practice.
[i]
Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, eds., Nicene
and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series (reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson,
1994), 14:189.
[ii]
Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., Anti-Nicene Fathers (reprint Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 1:17.
[iii]
Ibid., 12:18.
[iv]
Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., Anti-Nicene Fathers, 7:481-2.
[v]
Ibid., 5:329.
[vi]
Ibid., 5:340.
[vii]
Ibid., 5:371
[viii]
Ibid., 5:370.
