1 HEARKEN unto me, saith the Lord your God, and I will speak unto my servant Edward Partridge, and give unto him directions; for it must needs be that he receive directions how to organize this people.

2 For it must needs be that they be organized according to my laws; if otherwise, they will be cut off. [ Those who choose to live under this organization - note that the just stewards receive eternal life vs 18-20. Verses those who do not whom are cut off (excommunicated see D&C 50:8. ]

3 Wherefore, let my servant Edward Partridge, and those whom he has chosen, in whom I am well pleased, appoint unto this people their portions, [ A person's inheritance was to consist of personal property, to be operated permanently and freely for the benefit of the person and the family. ] every man equal [ Equal does not mean that everyone gets the same amount. Rather; I think that it means equal to the criteria presented. If the order is for the benefit if all, and we have been taught that each of us has different gift s fo the benefit of all, then does it not make logical sense to let's say give more ground to the farmer that can produce the most return of food on the ground? Everyone benefits the most from this rather than everyone have the same amount of ground and one produces an abundance and the other a failure year after year. ] according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs. [ Note that there are 3 criteria for portioning resources. Circumstances - or the ability to take care of, to return a profit so to speak - The Lord expects us to improve as in the story of the talents provide usury; 2 his wants - usually this is left out but in the lords plan there is provision to account for wants; however just because you want, if you do not meet the first condition - circumstances then the wants may not be totally fulfilled. Lastly needs; which is the purpose in the plan in the first plan to ensure that all who are in need are taken care of. ]

4 And let my servant Edward Partridge, when he shall appoint a man his portion, give unto him a writing that shall secure unto him his portion, that he shall hold it, even this right and this inheritance in the church, until he transgresses and is not accounted worthy by the voice of the church, according to the laws and covenants of the church, to belong to the church.

5 And if he shall transgress and is not accounted worthy to belong to the church, he shall not have power to claim that portion which he has consecrated unto the bishop [ So the property is donated to the church under secular law; if you leave the church after the donation has been made the church will still maintain ownership of the property. ] for the poor and needy of my church; therefore, he shall not retain the gift, but shall only have claim on that portion that is deeded unto him. [ However he can claim what the church has deeded back to him if he were to leave. ]

6 And thus all things shall be made sure, according to the laws of the land. [ So the deeds so to speak will be set under the name of the church, and then the church will deed the property to the individual in a separate deed that is binding under the laws of the church and not the laws of the land. ]

7 And let that which belongs to this people be appointed unto this people.

8 And the money which is left unto this people—let there be an agent appointed unto this people, to take the money to provide food and raiment, according to the wants of this people. [ Who is that agent? The Bishop see verse 12. ]

9 And let every man deal honestly, and be alike among this people, and receive alike, [ Or receive under the same pretense, meaning none shall just want to take, but be willing to participate in the work required according to their individual abilities. ] that ye may be one, [ Jacob 2:17, 4 Ne. 1:3, D&C 49:20. One in attitude, one in purpose. ] even as I have commanded you.

10 And let that which belongeth to this people not be taken and given unto that of another church. [ It appears as if each ward is responsible for themselves - to be responsible for the needs of the ward; and that it is not all to be brought to the central headquarters of the church where they are responsible. Geography posses different needs and capabilities. So it only makes sense to have local stewardship over the resources. ]

11 Wherefore, if another church would receive money of this church, let them pay unto this church again according as they shall agree; [ So it would appear that each ward is responsible for each ward and it one ward needs resources from another ward then the Bishop's make arrangements for suitable payment. ]

12 And this shall be done through the bishop or the agent, which shall be appointed by the voice of the church.

13 And again, let the bishop appoint a storehouse unto this church; and let all things both in money and in meat, which are more than is needful for the wants of this people, be kept in the hands of the bishop.

14 And let him also reserve unto himself for his own wants, and for the wants of his family, [ There is a contrast here between the Law of Tithing and this law, which requires the person to search their soul to determine what or how much they can give, what are valid wants and needs. This is a little trickier in implementation than one might expect, as what one person feels is a need may not be the need of another and judgement will enter quickly in, which fosters distrust, gossip, and judgement from other members. But one has to remember when one enters this law that the consecration is solely between the Bishop (the Lord) and the person. ] as he shall be employed in doing this business. [ Also what is required in order to generate more income for the community as a whole. In such a case the bishop may use some of the resources from the storehouse to be employed by another for the benefit of all D&C 42:70-73. ]

15 And thus I grant unto this people a privilege of organizing themselves according to my laws.

16 And I consecrate unto them this land for a little season, [ This is only to be a temporary location. ] until I, the Lord, shall provide for them otherwise, and command them to go hence;

17 And the hour and the day is not given unto them, wherefore let them act upon this land as for years, [ Even though this is to be a temporary location for the church they are instructed to act and learn from the experience as though it would be that way forever. ] and this shall turn unto them for their good. [ A "practice" for bigger things - or the United Order. ]

18 Behold, this shall be an example unto my servant Edward Partridge, in other places, in all churches. [ This is set as an example a type to be followed by the other branches of the church. ]

19 And whoso is found a faithful, a just, and a wise steward shall enter into the joy of his Lord, and shall inherit eternal life. [ The reward for those who are found faithful and diligent in living this law. ]

20 Verily, I say unto you, I am Jesus Christ, who cometh quickly, [ This phrase is similar to the often repeated “I come quickly”, cp. Rev. 22:20, D&C 33:18, D&C 87:8. The KJV is ambiguous enough to allow the reader to interpret it to mean the Second Coming is imminent, but a better translation into contemporary English (using the Greek of Rev. 22:20) would be “I am arriving swiftly”, meaning “when I do come, you wont have much warning”. This is reiterated here in v. 20 when he says, “who cometh quickly, in an hour you think not”. ] in an hour you think not. Even so. Amen.

 

[ Historical Material Pertaining to Doctrine & Covenants 51 The Law of Consecration was established in D&C 42. Here, the Bishop responsible for administering it gets more specific guidance when the time arrives to put it into practice. The covenants made by land owners, Leman Copely in specific, who donated land for the member’s use, were largely broken and resulted in the revelation of D&C 54. Below are two brief contemporaneous quotes, and then a historical summary followed by a lengthy historical overview of the events surrounding this section and leading up to D&C 54. Excerpt from History of the Church Not long after the foregoing [e.g., D&C 50] was received, the Saints from the State of New York began to come on, and it seemed necessary to settle them; therefore at the solicitation of Bishop Partridge, I inquired, and received the following: [D&C 51 quoted] (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, volume 1, page 173) Excerpt from Book of John Whitmer About these days the disciples arrived from state of New York to this place Kirtland, state of Ohio. They had some difficulty because of some that did not continue faithful, who denied the truth and turned into fables. (John Whitmer, Book of John Whitmer, chapter 7, paragraph 1) Excerpt from Doctrine and Covenants Commentary Shortly after the Revelation recorded in Section 50 had been received, the Saints from Colesville, N.Y., began to arrive in Ohio. They had been directed to gather in that locality (Sec. 37:3) and they had been promised that there they would receive The Law (Sec. 38:32). The Saints in Ohio had been instructed to divide their land with their Eastern brethren (Sec. 48:2), and it was the duty of Edward Partridge, who had been appointed Bishop (Sec. 36) to take care of the newcomers, as far as possible. Under the circumstances, Bishop Partridge asked for divine guidance. The Prophet inquired of the Lord for him, and received this answer to his prayers. (Hyrum M. Smith and Janne M. Sjodhal, Doctrine and Covenants Commentary, page 296) Excerpt from Regional Studies in LDS History Series: Missouri Originally, the Colesville Branch, from Broome and Chenango Counties, New York, had intended to settle in Ohio and participate in the general gathering of the Saints to that state. However, problems arising between certain members of the Colesville Branch and Leman Copley greatly interfered with their becoming established in Ohio, and they were sent on to settle in the Kaw Township in Jackson County, Missouri. Leman Copley had been associated with the United society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing, commonly known as Shakers, until his conversion to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in March 1831. Though living apart on his farm in Thompson Township (now Madison), Ohio, he and his wife Sally had enjoyed close ties with the Shaker settlement of North Union (present-day Cleveland suburb of Shaker Heights), just 15 miles west of Kirtland. As a newly ordained LDS elder, Leman accompanied Sidney Rigdon and Parley P. Pratt on a proselyting mission to that Shaker community in March 1831 (see D&C 49). Their visit turned into a confrontation between the Mormon missionaries and Elder Ashbel Kitchell, who was avidly protecting his Shaker flock in his capacity as first disciplinarian and gospel organizer of North Union, a position which he had held since the spring of 1826. Rejected by Kitchell and his fellow Shakers, the brethren withdrew. Leman was among those adherents to the Church who volunteered the use of his holdings to Bishop Edward Partridge under the law of consecration and stewardship. The Copley property, in Thompson Township, totaling 759 acres, became the initial location for the members of the Colesville Branch to settle upon their arrival from New York.3 Apparently the first of these immigrants were Joseph Knight, Sr., his wife Polly, and their daughter Lucy, who had come to Kirtland with the Prophet in January and February 1831. Emily Coburn, a sister to Sally Coburn Knight, may have also been at Thompson with the Knights, for she had likewise journeyed to Kirtland that same winter from Colesville, perhaps with Joseph Knight, Sr. They subsequently settled at the Copley farm the following March. The majority of the Colesville Branch, under President Newel Knight, did not arrive in Ohio until the middle of May 1831. Jared Carter and a few other members of the Colesville Branch came to Kirtland slightly before the main body by circumventing the ice freshet which held the others bound in Buffalo harbor. Boarding a steamboat at Dunkirk, New York, they sailed to Fairport Harbor, Ohio. Then, as Jared explained, from Fairport “we went to Kir[t]land where we found Joseph, the se[e]r. Here we found that preparations was made for the Church from which we were to settle in Thompson. We went from here to Thompson and there continued until the boddy of the Church arrived to Fairport and then we moved our things and families to Thompson. Here we had some severe trials.” Newel Knight related that a contract was agreed upon with Copley, and they began to work the property in good faith. At the same time, Joseph Knight, Jr., observed, “[We] commenced preparing houses on a brother's land who had a thousand acres.... We planted and sowed a great deal.” Carrying out his assigned duties (see D&C 51), Bishop Edward Partridge settled as many as 100 Saints on the Copley farm. The majority of this number were from the Colesville Branch, but apparently not all. Ezra Thayre, a convert from Ontario County, New York, had previously come to Ohio, seemingly in company with the Prophet Joseph Smith, and was then settled on land consecrated by Copley in Thompson. Expectations for an amicable relationship were shattered by the emergence of serious internal problems. Deep divisions arose over the nature of the consecration of property among Leman Copley, Ezra Thayre, Newel Knight, and others at the site. Unable to bear certain criticisms leveled against him relative to the failure of the earlier mission to the Shakers and to irregularities in his observance of the law of consecration, Copley let his faith in the enterprise quickly wane. John Whitmer said that Leman's rebellion “confused the whole church.” In the latter part of May or in early June 1831, Leman enlisted the aid of his former mentor, Elder Ashbel Kitchell, in an effort to repossess his land. He likewise begged to be reunited with the Shakers. Kitchell remarked, “After some consultation we concluded to give him [Leman] union, and help him through; and to accomplish this, I went home with him, and held a meeting in the dooryard, among the Mormons.” A lively exchange ensued between Elder Kitchell on one side and Newel Knight and his father, Joseph Knight, Sr., on the other. Newel Knight simply specified, “We had not labored long before the above named Copley broke the engagement which he made with us. At this time I went to Kirtland to see Brother Joseph and to attend a conference which had been appointed to commence on the sixth of June 1831 [June 3-5, 1831].” When faced with the dilemma of the Colesville Saints, the Prophet sought divine assistance and was directed to instruct the branch to leave the Thompson area and move immediately to Missouri (D&C 54). (Excerpt from an essay entitled “The Colesville Branch in Kaw Township, Jackson County, Missouri, 1831 to 1833" by Larry C. Porter, published in Regional Studies in LDS History Series: Missouri, edited by Arnold K. Garr and Clark V. Johnson, pages 281-283) ]