Did Sidney Rigdon Influence the Priesthood Restoration?

The modern LDS Church presents the restoration of priesthood authority—first the Aaronic Priesthood by John the Baptist on May 15, 1829, and then the Melchizedek Priesthood by Peter, James, and John—as pivotal, well-documented events in church history. However, early sources and the timeline of doctrinal development tell a much murkier story, one that raises serious questions about whether these cornerstone claims were later fabrications, constructed to bolster Joseph Smith’s evolving authority. Central to this shift is Sidney Rigdon, a charismatic preacher steeped in Restorationist theology who joined the Mormon movement in late 1830—after the supposed priesthood restorations but before any record of them appeared.

Rigdon had been a prominent figure in the Campbellite movement, which called for a return to the original practices of the early Christian church. While Alexander Campbell, the movement’s founder, explicitly rejected any formal priesthood—writing in 1830 that “under the New Institution there is no priesthood… no sacerdotal order” (Millennial Harbinger, 1830, p. 125)—Rigdon took a more mystical, apocalyptic approach. He was deeply interested in spiritual gifts, direct revelation, and the restoration of divine authority.

Other religious leaders around this time also posited the existence of different types of priesthood. Alexander Crawford, a Scottish minister living in Canada, believed that three priesthoods existed anciently: a patriarchal priesthood after the “order of Melchizedec,” an Aaronic priesthood, and a priesthood held by Jesus Christ. Alexander Campbell of the Disciples of Christ also believed that the tribe of Levi held one priesthood and that Aaron and his sons held a “high priesthood.”

Joseph Smith Papers, Instruction on Priesthood, between circa 1 March and circa 4 May 1835 [D&C 107], Footnote in Historical Info. Cites: (Staker, Hearken, O Ye People, 148–151; Campbell, Delusions, 11.) Staker, Mark L. Hearken, O Ye People: The Historical Setting of Joseph Smith’s Ohio Revelations. Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2009. Campbell, Alexander. Delusions. An Analysis of the Book of Mormon; with an Examination of Its Internal and External Evidences, and a Refutation of Its Pretences to Divine Authority. Boston: Benjamin H. Greene, 1832.
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/instruction-on-priesthood-between-circa-1-march-and-circa-4-may-1835-dc-107/1#historical-intro

In 1827, Alexander Crawford, a Campbellite minister in Canada, preached about a patriarchal priesthood, which he also called a priesthood after the “order of Melchizedec,” an Aaronical priesthood, he said was originally held by Aaron, and a third priesthood held by Jesus Christ. The Mormon church was yet to be established, and Joseph Smith wouldn’t use any of these terms or ideas publicly for another 5-7 years. In 1834, Joseph claimed that in 1829 he has received both the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthood from heavenly beings. But such ideas were not original to Joseph. Sidney Rigdon, as a Campbellite preacher in the same group (later Disciples of Christ or Campbellite) as Alexander Crawford, would have been familiar with the ideas.

Other churches at the time—including ones with which many early Church members were familiar—taught about the priesthood. The Disciples of Christ, from which many early members of the Church converted, for example, had developed its own priesthood doctrines, influenced by Alexander Crawford, a Scottish minister living in Canada. In 1827, Crawford had delineated the existence of three distinct priesthoods: a patriarchal priesthood (which he also called a priesthood after the “order of Melchisedec”), an Aaronical priesthood (originally held by Aaron), and a priesthood held by Jesus Christ. Crawford regarded Melchizedek as a greater priest than Abraham, citing the fact that Abraham paid tithes to him; indeed, according to Crawford, Melchizedek was one of the key players in the order of the patriarchal priesthood. Crawford also considered the patriarchal priesthood and the Aaronical priesthood as branches of the Levitical priesthood. Alexander Campbell and the Disciples of Christ were influenced by Crawford’s ideas, although Campbell differed somewhat in his conception of the priesthood, arguing that God had given a “priesthood” to the tribe of Levi and a “high priesthood” to Aaron and his sons. [Footnote: Alexander Campbell, Delusions: An Analysis of the Book of Mormon; with an Examination of Its Internal and External Evidences, and a Refutation of Its Pretences to Divine Authority (Boston: Benjamin H. Greene, 1832), 11; see also Staker, Hearken, O Ye People, 148–50.] Regardless, as one historian has claimed, Campbell taught his understanding of priesthood “to many of his followers who [became] part of the Mormonite community and continued to believe the same doctrine.” [Footnote: Staker, Hearken, O Ye People, 150. As a former associate of Campbell, Sidney Rigdon was probably familiar with these ideas.]

Despite the Book of Mormon’s teachings and the presence of priesthood concepts in other religions, some early Church members still expressed confusion about what the priesthood really was. Levi Hancock, for example, recalled in his autobiography that in January 1832, he and Lyman Wight conversed with a woman in Jefferson City, Missouri, who “said She liked the Doctrine for we had the Priesthood and that looked like Sense.” After this conversation, Hancock continued, he and Wight “had some conversation on the priesthood and neither of us understood what it was.” Both Hancock and Wight were present at a June 1831 conference where elders were first ordained to the high priesthood (with Wight performing some of the ordinations), yet, as Hancock put it, “I did not understand it and [Wight] could give me no light.”

Matthew C. Godfrey, “A Culmination of Learning: D&C and the Doctrine of the Priesthood,” in You Shall Have My Word: Exploring the Text of the Doctrine and Covenants, ed. Scott C. Esplin, Richard O. Cowan, and Rachel Cope (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2012), 167–81.
https://rsc.byu.edu/you-shall-have-my-word/culmination-learning-dc-84-doctrine-priesthood

Many early LDS leaders (such as including Parley P. Pratt, Isaac Morley, and Edward Partridge) were first members of Rigdon’s congregations before their conversion to the Mormon church. Sidney Rigdon first heard of the church from Parley P. Pratt and was baptized into the church on November 14, 1830. He converted hundreds of his own congregation to the church and thus quickly became a respected leader in the church. The next month, he travelled to New York to meet Joseph Smith, and six months later was ordained as a high priest in June 1831; his ideas began influencing the church structure and doctrines.

Rigdon was already preaching the need for a “restored” church and spiritual offices before ever meeting Joseph Smith. When he formally joined the Mormon church in November 1830, his theological influence was immediate and profound.

Long before Pratt and Cowdery came to his door as missionaries, Sidney Rigdon had longed for a restoration of New Testament Christianity. He was born in 1793 just outside of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and trained as a tanner, but his passion for learning and preaching the word of God took him into the Christian ministry. By the time he married Phebe Brooks in 1820, he had already begun his preaching career among the United Baptists. He soon found himself within the expanding influence of Alexander Campbell’s Reformed Baptist movement, which sought a return to the forms of New Testament Christianity.

Sidney Rigdon honed his public-speaking skills as a minister of the First Baptist Church of Pittsburgh. Rigdon’s interest in reform eventually caused a rupture with the more conservative Baptist leadership of Pittsburgh, and he moved with his growing family to northeastern Ohio, where he became an influential preacher across several counties. He was soon chosen to lead a congregation in a town called Mentor. Rigdon emphasized early Christian practice, and some members of his congregation even launched their own attempt to live having “all things in common,” as described in the book of Acts.

When Pratt, Cowdery, and other missionaries stopped in Ohio on their way to preach to American Indians living west of Missouri, many members of Sidney Rigdon’s congregation embraced their message. After his own conversion, Rigdon traveled to New York state with his former parishioner Edward Partridge to meet Joseph Smith.

Rigdon’s extensive biblical knowledge and powerful preaching helped nurture the young Church. Rigdon also served as a scribe for Joseph Smith’s inspired revision of the Bible and was the subject of several early revelations. When the Church’s First Presidency was first organized, Rigdon was called as Joseph’s counselor. In February 1832, Sidney and Joseph experienced a momentous vision together of the three degrees of glory, their account of which contains a powerful joint testimony of Jesus Christ.

LDS Website, Church History Topics, Sidney Rigdon
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/sidney-rigdon?lang=eng

The church websites give us all the history to understand this scenario. The church was restored (or established) without a single reference to the two priesthoods that are uniquely Mormon today. Before this, the growing Campbellite movement was considered a multi-level priesthood organization and used the names Aaronic and Melchisedek. Sidney Rigdon was an influential Campbellite preacher. He joined the church, rose quickly in the ranks. His “extensive biblical knowledge and powerful preaching helped nurture the young Church.” Is saying he “helped nurture” the church another way of saying he introduced new ideas to Joseph? Did he bring this Campbellite idea of priesthood organization and the need for a restoration with him?

Crucially, there is no mention of the priesthood restoration narratives—no John the Baptist, no Peter, James, and John—in any of Joseph Smith’s revelations prior to 1834. The Book of Commandments (1833), the church’s earliest printed revelation collection, makes no reference to these angelic ordinations. Even the foundational 1829 revelation to Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith (now D&C 8 and 9) speaks only of spiritual gifts and translating power, not of priesthood or ecclesiastical offices.

The Campbellites believed in a three-tiered priesthood: the “order of Aaron,” the “order of Melchizedec,” and a priestly authority of Jesus Christ. These orders were outlined in essays by Alexander Crawford and Walter Scott, who couched their discussion of priesthood authority in the “Abrahamic covenant” and God’s “plan of salvation” designed to save mankind from Adam’s fall from grace. These ideas on priesthood authority were absent in Mormon discourse prior to contact with the Campbellites in Kirtland, but shortly thereafter, Joseph Smith began producing revelations that echoed many of these themes. Sidney Rigdon, who had been a prominent Campbellite minister, likely had discussions with Joseph surrounding these ideas as they worked together on Joseph’s ‘translation’ of the Bible.

Tokens and Signs: The Man of Sin Revealed: The High Priesthood and Discernment
https://tokensandsigns.org/man-of-sin-revealed/

With the priesthood restoration, Joseph Smith was implementing a concept of multiple priesthoods using the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthood titles just as the Campbellites did years earlier. More importantly, Sidney Rigdon came to Joseph Smith from the same Campbellite movement, and not long after his arrival, these priesthood claims began to appear. They were not mentioned before Sidney Rigdon, and Sidney Rigdon knew these ideas.

The first detailed account of a priesthood restoration by heavenly messengers comes from Oliver Cowdery, in a letter published in Messenger and Advocate in 1834—five years after the alleged event and four years after Rigdon joined the church. By 1835, the revised Doctrine and Covenants includes new interpolations, such as D&C 27:5–12, which retroactively inserts visits from multiple apostles and biblical figures to confer authority—text that did not exist in earlier versions of the revelation.

The lack of structure in priesthood offices—which later would become signs of privileged authority—existed because early Mormons regarded priesthood itself in a much different way. Participants at the church’s organization had a unitary sense of authority rather than a belief in dual priesthoods of different ranks. According to current tradition, both the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods functioned in the church after the spring of 1829 when Smith and Cowdery were visited first by John the Baptist, who restored the lesser or Aaronic priesthood, and then by Peter, James, and John, who restored the higher or Melchizedek priesthood. A closer look at contemporary records indicates that men were first ordained to the higher priesthood over a year after the church’s founding. No mention of angelic ordinations can be found in original documents until 1834-35. Thereafter accounts of the visit of Peter, James, and John by Cowdery and Smith remained vague and contradictory.

The distance between traditional accounts of LDS priesthood beginnings and the differing story of early documents points to retrospective changes made in the public record to create a story of logical and progressive development.

D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power (1994), Page 14-15
https://archive.org/details/mormonhierarchyo0000quin/page/14/mode/2up

Historian D. Michael Quinn observes that there is no contemporary documentation for any of the 1829–30 angelic ordinations prior to the mid-1830s, and concludes that these stories emerged to resolve growing internal conflicts over leadership and authority. Similarly, Richard L. Bushman also acknowledges that “the story of John the Baptist conferring the Aaronic priesthood was not told in print until 1834, and the account of Peter, James, and John came even later,” and even that “the late appearance of these accounts raises the possibility of later fabrication.” These aren’t minor delays or innocent omissions—they reflect a pattern of backdating revelatory claims to give the appearance of divine continuity to what was, in reality, a developing and often reactive theology.

When we connect these dots, a troubling pattern emerges: the doctrine of priesthood authority, so essential to modern Mormon claims of exclusivity, was constructed only after Sidney Rigdon—a man already obsessed with divine authority and restoration—entered the picture. It was added to revelations and scriptures retroactively, without contemporary documentation, and only when it became theologically or politically useful. The earlier absence of these accounts and the convenient timing of their introduction strongly suggest that the priesthood restoration narrative was not a foundational event but a later invention to reinforce Joseph Smith’s growing ecclesiastical claims, and we can trace the ideas from Alexander Crawford to Alexander Campbell, to Sidney Rigdon’s own restorationist theology.

What begins as a seemingly coherent and miraculous narrative—the heavens opening, angels descending to restore ancient authority—begins to crumble under closer scrutiny. The story is compelling because it was carefully crafted to be so, not because it reflects actual historical events. For many believing members, discovering these late additions and theological rewrites becomes a turning point. For some, it’s a stumbling block that must be rationalized away to preserve faith. For others, it is an eye-opener—a moment of clarity that exposes the delicately constructed nature of Mormonism’s origin story.

If you’ve wrestled with these questions, or if the inconsistencies in Mormon history have led you to reevaluate your faith, you’re not alone. Many others have gone through similar journeys of deconstruction, reflection, and growth. Share your own story at wasmormon.org, a platform for honest accounts of belief, doubt, and discovery. Your experience might be the light someone else needs to begin their own journey.

• Matthew C. Godfrey, “A Culmination of Learning: D&C and the Doctrine of the Priesthood,” in You Shall Have My Word: Exploring the Text of the Doctrine and Covenants
• https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/8h1xhc/til_in_1827_a_minister_in_canada_came_up_with_a/
• https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/priesthood
• josephsmithpapers.org/person/sidney-rigdon
• eom.byu.edu/index.php/Rigdon,_Sidney
• sunstonemagazine.com/episode-10-restoring-what-was-lost-priesthood-restoration-narratives/
• https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/sidney-rigdon?lang=eng
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Rigdon
• Hearken, O Ye People: The Historical Setting of Joseph Smith’s Ohio Revelations by Mark Lyman Staker
• The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power, by D. Michael Quinn