Among the least publicly discussed subjects in Latter-day Saint temple theology is an ordinance historically known as the second anointing.
The subject attracts sensationalism precisely because the modern Church rarely discusses it. That is the wrong approach.
We do not need to expose sacred wording or reconstruct private ritual details. The theological question is enough: what does it mean for a person’s “calling and election” to be made sure, and where did this ordinance come from?
“Calling and election made sure” is not secret doctrine
Official LDS materials openly teach the concept.
Doctrine and Covenants 131:5 defines the “more sure word of prophecy” as knowing that a person is “sealed up unto eternal life” through revelation and priesthood power.
A 1976 Ensign article explains the doctrine at length. It quotes Bruce R. McConkie describing calling and election made sure as an unconditional guarantee of exaltation, subject to the severe exceptions recognized in LDS theology.
The article associates the doctrine with 2 Peter 1, priesthood sealing, sanctification, covenant faithfulness, receiving Christ, and eventual godhood.
This is not an anti-Mormon invention. It is part of LDS theological history.
The second anointing
Historical records show that Joseph Smith’s Nauvoo temple theology continued to develop beyond the initial endowment.
David John Buerger’s landmark historical study traced the ordinance commonly called the second anointing or “fulness of the priesthood” through nineteenth-century LDS records. The ordinance became connected with the idea that an individual’s exaltation had been made especially secure.
Modern official manuals are cautious. One LDS teacher manual tells instructors: “Do not attempt in any way to discuss or answer questions about the second anointing.”
That instruction proves neither embarrassment nor fraud. Religions are allowed to treat rites as sacred.
It does confirm that there is a distinction between the publicly taught doctrine of calling and election and a temple ordinance modern classroom materials decline to explain.
D&C 132 and Joseph Smith
Doctrine and Covenants 132 contains unusually strong assurance language. In verse 49, Joseph Smith is told that his exaltation is sealed upon him.
The passage belongs to the same broader Nauvoo world of sealing, eternal marriage, priesthood keys, and exaltation. Joseph increasingly taught that heavenly blessings could be sealed through priesthood authority.
The second-anointing tradition fits this development.
Does 2 Peter teach a temple ordinance?
Second Peter tells Christians to “give diligence to make your calling and election sure” (2 Peter 1:10).
The context is ethical and spiritual. Believers are told to add virtue, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly affection, and love.
The text does not describe a new temple ceremony, secret priesthood rite, elite ordinance, or ecclesiastical act that guarantees exaltation.
The LDS interpretation links Peter’s phrase to later Joseph Smith teachings about priesthood sealing. That connection depends on Restoration revelation. It is not derived naturally from 2 Peter alone.
Assurance in Orthodox Christianity
Orthodoxy takes salvation with immense confidence in Christ and deep seriousness about perseverance.
Christ conquers death. Baptism truly unites us to Him. The Eucharist gives His life. The Spirit indwells the Church.
Yet Orthodoxy does not normally teach a class of baptized Christians that has received a secret ordinance effectively moving the final judgment forward.
The Christian life remains one of repentance, humility, sacramental communion, vigilance, love, and perseverance.
St. Paul himself speaks with profound hope while also saying he disciplines himself lest, after preaching to others, he should become disqualified (1 Corinthians 9:27).
Theosis is not guaranteed godhood by ordinance
Because Latter-day Saints sometimes compare exaltation with Orthodox theosis, the distinction matters here.
Orthodoxy teaches real participation in the divine life. Human beings become “partakers of the divine nature” by grace.
But theosis is not a legal certificate converting a human into a god of the same ontological order as God. Nor is it secured by a nineteenth-century priesthood ritual.
It is eternal communion with the uncreated Trinity through Christ. The creature remains creature. God remains uncreated God.
Is secrecy itself the objection?
No. Orthodox Christianity has mysteries. Historically, catechumens were dismissed before the Eucharistic portion of the Divine Liturgy, and sacred things were not treated casually.
Sacredness is not suspicious merely because something is not broadcast publicly.
The objection is historical and theological: where is the apostolic evidence for this specific saving ordinance?
If Mormonism claims restoration rather than innovation, that question is unavoidable.
The burden of restoration
Joseph Smith’s Nauvoo religion accumulated endowment, sealing, eternal marriage, higher priesthood concepts, and second-anointing traditions.
The system is internally coherent within mature Mormon theology.
But it is historically difficult to identify these distinctive ordinances in Acts, Paul, the Apostolic Fathers, Justin, Irenaeus, the early baptismal tradition, or ancient catholic liturgy.
A doctrine can be defended as new revelation. But then its authority rests on Joseph Smith. It cannot simultaneously be called a recovery of clearly documented apostolic ritual without evidence.
Final Verdict
The second anointing is a real feature of LDS history, and the associated doctrine of having one’s calling and election made sure is openly attested in official Latter-day Saint teaching.
Christians should not sensationalize sacred details. The decisive problem is more basic.
Second Peter 1 exhorts Christians to persevere in virtue; it does not describe an elite temple ordinance guaranteeing exaltation. The distinctive Mormon rite emerges in Joseph Smith’s nineteenth-century Nauvoo theology without a demonstrable counterpart in the apostolic Church.
From an Orthodox perspective, salvation is assured in Christ yet lived through repentance, sacramental communion, faith working through love, and perseverance—not through a later secret ordinance that certifies exaltation in advance.
Key Sources
- Doctrine and Covenants 131:5; 132:49.
- LDS Ensign, “Accepted of the Lord” (1976): https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1976/07/accepted-of-the-lord-the-doctrine-of-making-your-calling-and-election-sure?lang=eng
- LDS Doctrines of the Gospel Teacher Manual, “Eternal Life”: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrines-of-the-gospel/chapter-19?lang=eng
- David John Buerger, “‘The Fullness of the Priesthood’: The Second Anointing in Latter-day Saint Theology and Practice”: https://www.dialoguejournal.com/articles/the-fullness-of-the-priesthood-the-second-anointing-in-latter-day-saint-theology-and-practice/
- 2 Peter 1:3–11; Philippians 2:12–13; 1 Corinthians 9:24–27.