It is easy enough to find what President John Taylor considered the most important part of the gospel in many ways (at least measured by emphasis and recurring themes): Priesthood.
But. In recent church history we tend to simplify the gospel to the same thirty words or so and then to give each of those words just one simple meaning.
So that if I asked an LDS audience what “priesthood” means I would get the same answer a hundred times in a row–and it wouldn’t mean what John Taylor meant.
Because to him it was fellowship, fraternity, the binding social connection that was important and that he used the word “priesthood” to describe.
Not surprising is that Joseph Smith used the word the same way at times. It was a core part of the message sent to us by God.
The Prophet designated it as the “‘olive leaf’ … plucked from the Tree of Paradise, the Lord’s message of peace to us.”
It is also a part of the gospel that we seem in the most danger of losing.
Ask yourself how social things are at church? When was the last time you felt fellowship or fraternity with your fellow saints? What binds you together in ties of friendship and family?
What do you think we can do to reclaim what the early prophets considered the core of the priesthood?
Are we immovable?
Wheat & Tares 
The quote is from D&C 88:133.
http://classic.scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/88/133b
Interesting questions. I don’t feel any kind of social connection to folks in my ward. I think that’s in part due to the fact that, outside of actual church on Sunday, I’m quite busy and I know a lot of other folks in the ward are as well. Also, because I’ve spent years speaking my mind about things, something that we’re actually discouraged from doing at church, I used up my social capital a long time ago and I’m likely seen as the ward crackpot if folks think about me at all. I have one or two friends in the ward I’d keep in touch with if I moved away, but other than that, nothing. As far as reclaiming the kind of friendship and fellowship Taylor and the early church leaders envisioned, I don’t think it’s possible. I actually think that a lot of people at the church aren’t drinking the Kool-aid, but until we’re able to drop all pretense and be honest with each other (what true friendship requires, IMHO) about what we’re feeling, thinking, etc., I don’t see this happening. Church has become a place where we seem more concerned with having someone, anyone validate our beliefs in the one true church than with making true, honest friendship connections. YMMV.
I think that the fellowship, fraternity, and friendship are the biggest casualties of the two-hour block. There simply isn’t enough time during Sunday meetings to develop that. “Ministering” can help some, but can’t do it all. That lack of opportunities led me to pushing for (and being put in charge of) a Progressive Dinner ward activity. For one night, at least, we got together in small groups and pretty much just hung out. My wife and I got to know an older couple that we really clicked with in our group of four couples. As much as I don’t want to go back to the three-hour block, I already miss that extra hour of the week being with the other members of my ward.
Brother Sky says “…we’re able to drop all pretense and be honest with each other (what true friendship requires)”
Dropping all pretense and being totally honest with each other is a pretty good way to have a circle of friends numbered in the zeroes.
Friendship requires affection first and foremost and it helps if you stop right there with just that. I cannot be honest or deceptive with my dog but I like him and he likes me.
Recite the Boy Scout Law for some good ideas: Trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
Out of curiosity (and not from a place of snark), did John Taylor mean just male fraternity, priesthood, fellowship?
ReTx, Here is the preceding context of the quotation which is not from John Taylor:
127 And again, the order of the house prepared for the presidency of the school of the prophets, established for their instruction in all things that are expedient for them, even for all the officers of the church, or in other words, those who are called to the ministry in the church, beginning at the high priests, even down to the deacons—
128 And this shall be the order of the house of the presidency of the school: He that is appointed to be president, or teacher, shall be found standing in his place, in the house which shall be prepared for him.
129 Therefore, he shall be first in the house of God, in a place that the congregation in the house may hear his words carefully and distinctly, not with loud speech.
130 And when he cometh into the house of God, for he should be first in the house—behold, this is beautiful, that he may be an example—
131 Let him offer himself in prayer upon his knees before God, in token or remembrance of the everlasting covenant.
132 And when any shall come in after him, let the teacher arise, and, with uplifted hands to heaven, yea, even directly, salute his brother or brethren with these words:
I don’t think it even occurred to any involved in the presidency of the school of the prophets or among the officers of the church in 1832 that women might be among them.
Stephen’s basis for attributing this concept of priesthood to John Taylor is unknown to me — not surprisingly, since I have made no focused study of John Taylor, his writings, or speeches..
When we consolidated into a single priesthood quorum, we lost a lot of our fellowship and fraternity. I miss our old Elder’s Quorum, where I could associate with other men in a similar stage of life and we could be there for each other, where we spoke the same cultural/generational language. Now that we meet together with the old guys, they pretty much took everything over. They hijack lessons with their comments and drown out the younger voices. We can’t organize projects or activities very well because the older men don’t do text messages or social media. I don’t need to hear another lecture about being a good father from a man who’s never touched a dirty diaper in his life. I can do without the lessons that heavily quote McConkie, Benson and Packer. Many of my generation have stopped going to meetings altogether. We could fix this by bringing back separate quorums.
Yeah, Jack, I’m baby-boomer high priest known to have escaped high priests group meeting (and its attendant sometimes alternating boredom and offense) to sit in with the rather younger EQ which the then and still EQ president promptly designated a “sanctuary quorum.” I miss it, too. But the fact is the experience with combining the HPs and Es into a single EQ varies quite widely from one ward to the next.
CS Eric, Some of that fellowship, fraternity, and friendship went away before the 2-hour block. It went away with the loss of any real degree of financial autonomy of wards and stakes — no more fund raising, joint building efforts, actual participation in building, and other matters that required working together. Some of it went away with the demise of activities committees and resulting activities. Some went away with consolidating into the 3-hour block. Some went away with stake welfare farms. Some went away with the cancellation of general and regional MIA activities. For many women the loss of Relief Society autonomy was also a factor. There are pros and cons to all these changes, but they all reduced opportunities and maybe obligations for developing a community of friends among church members.
Part of the problem is that the leaders of wards have that fraternity and often don’t realize it’s missing among much of their congregation. If you serve in a presidency or bishopric, you probably have it. If you don’t, you probably don’t.
Jack Hughes is also right about combining the quorums. Not that things were great before, but they’re even worse now. I always attend Sunday School, but I admit I often find excuses to skip out on EQ. I need experiences that strengthen my testimony, not experiences that weaken it.
Where I am now, church members place too much focus on conformity.. Most men here who refuse to conform to some pretty silly cultural rules end up simply leaving.
I’ll have to follow the tangent and admit that the new EQ is much more boring than my old HP group or my even older EQ. I don’t find that the “old guys” dominate the discussion, I find that no one does. It’s generic and bland and unfocused. No one participates, we all just sit there waiting for it to end. Couple that with my personal perception that the new second hour seems eternities longer than the old second hour of the 3 hour block and I find myself thrilled to be in Sunday School twice a month.
I’m in the Primary so my sense of social belonging hovers around zero. Especially now that they don’t even make announcements in Sacrament Meeting, I’ve joked that they could restore the open practice of polygamy but if they only announced it in EQ and Relief Society, I wouldn’t hear about it for a month at least.
Outside of Sunday we socialize with a family that we’re friends with (I used to be their home teacher) but that’s it. We haven’t seen my “ministers” and have no idea who they are.
The sense of being disconnected is felt by my entire family. It’s a combination of geography (our ward is more sprawling than our previous one, and we’re in a distant corner) and ward demographics. Not really sure how to fix it or if it’s even possible.
LDS wards used to be close knit social groups because of the sheer number of activities members were required to be involved in, working elbow to elbow (see JR’s comment above). As these activities have been pushed off to the community (drama, music, sports, and now scouting) or to the corporate church (welfare farms, church construction, budget decisions), there is a subsequent loss of cohesiveness. Given member’s busy weekday schedules, the two-hour block, and the emphasis on no conversations in the chapel (Holland’s most recent conference address) it’s only going to get worse.
On the positive side, we have more opportunities to interact with non-members in the community and form social groups outside of the Gospel, which is good for missionary work, but bad for John Taylor’s priesthood fellowship.
As something of an outsider here (non-LDS), I am truly saddened by many of the comments to this post. The social aspects of church are, to me, an integral aspect along with worship, ritual, and study. How much do you think this lack of “fellowship” results from an over-emphasis on “doing” and an under-emphasis on “being”? Kind of sounds like the church version of “all work and no play….”
Especially since putting “Community” into our church name, Community of Christ congregations have by and large intentionally focused on that aspect. In my own congregation, for example, we encourage members to participate in a variety of dinner groups. My wife and I hosted this month, with 22 showing up in a local restaurant for an early thursday-evening meal (it’s easier to find places to serve large groups early on weeknights rather than weekends). Of course, we’re pretty much all retired so it makes that workable. About 18 came back to our house for dessert and a couple hours of sitting around, talking, and eating. There’s other groups, too, such as the moms with young children and the Community Kids Club.
I think that JR’s thoughts on fellowship, fraternity and friendship going away with the changes made in the last 30+ years. The lack of activities and working together has made us more distant from each other. Fellowship, fraternity and friendship are built by working together and playing together. And by removing those things we are becoming Balkanized in our wards. Some callings require us to work in small groups, meeting often and working together, and in those situations we see friendship and fraternity form sometimes for a lifetime. We do few things anymore as a ward or as either elder’s quorum or RS, and it shows.
Pet peeve moment. I hate the way “ministering” has worked out. It has turned out to be home/visiting teaching by a different name. There should not be assignments made or very few. Bro. Jones said he does not know who his ministers are. I know who they are. They are your friends you talked about, the ones you socialize with, and you are theirs. How about the little old couple next door? Or the young family that just moved in across the street? How about your children’s friends’ family, the ones you see at soccer games? Worlds full of people to minister too.