Thoughts on new First Presidency?

[Prof]

Carl B. Cook, president of the Seventy, will be the next apostle

[Okrahomer]

30 minutes ago, Prof said:

Carl B. Cook, president of the Seventy, will be the next apostle

This would not surprise me at all.  He and I were missionary companions in Germany years ago.  His deep spirituality and exceptional talent were already clearly evident.

Edited October 4, 2025 by Okrahomer

[bluebell]

50 minutes ago, Prof said:

Carl B. Cook, president of the Seventy, will be the next apostle

Two Elder Cooks would be interesting. 😁

[Stargazer]

On 10/3/2025 at 7:54 AM, The Nehor said:

Having a differing understanding of the gospel is not a pejorative though is it?

I would depend on how different it is, wouldn't it? While can easily imagine a difference of opinion on policy, policy is not the gospel, and I cannot imagine apostles having much of a difference of opinion on Jesus Christ and His atonement. 

[Stargazer]

On 10/3/2025 at 1:12 PM, Benjamin McGuire said:

Historically though, this is what we have seen ever since David O. McKay, when philosophical differences in the First Presidency led to complications - especially with prophets who have major health concerns (and old age is one of those major health concerns). The issue with David O. McKay is too much of a surprise - with his dementia, and the eventual six counselors in the First Presidency, there was bound to be some complications. The general preference now leans more towards having the President of the Q12 take over administrative work when the prophet is indisposed than to have the counselors int he First Presidency running everything (another issue that was reinforced in the issues experienced by President McKay's first presidency).

Your concern here is a lot like the suggestion that really, anyone could be picked as the prophet (there isn't some sort of written requirement in scripture, after all). However, historically, the President of the Q12 has always become the prophet. And the President of the Q12 has always been given to the apostle with the most seniority. But ... there was that incident with Brigham Young, when he ordained three of his sons as apostles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Willard_YoungJohn Willard Young was ordained an apostle at the age of 11). And to deal with this novel situation, President Lorenzo Snow changed the rule that gave the presidency of the Q12 to the most senior apostle to the apostle with the most time spent serving in the Q12. This reduced the seniority of Brigham Young Jr. (the only one of the three sons who actually served in the Q12). So we can talk about the spirit's involvement in these issues - but - there is a practical reality that these decisions are sometimes complicated, with lots of factors. We shouldn't ignore those other factors - and this isn't about pejoratives. There has simply been a historically present swing between different perspectives in the past. Some of these shifts have been quite significant. It is the First Presidency that chooses new apostles. It is also a matter of historical record that progressive leaning prophets (like David O. McKay or Gordon B. Hinckley) tended to pick progressive leaning apostles. When we have a more conservative prophet, they tend to pick more conservative leaning apostles. Oaks and Nelson were both called by Spencer W. Kimball. This doesn't mean that the spirit isn't involved - it suggests to me that revelation is only a part of the process. The selection begins with those who are believed to be appropriate leaders. I think that these differences in perspective are good for the LDS Church as a whole.

In Michael Ash's book Rethinking Revelation and the Human Element in Scripture: The Prophet’s Role as Creative Co-Author, he wrote:

"Once we recognize how humans participate in the revelatory process, we can better comprehend how some revelations can be both divinely inspired as well as humanly deficient and how prophets may act as co-authors to the scriptures they give to the world. To fully grasp this concept, however, requires that we “reconstruct the narrative” (to borrow Bushman’s phrase) when understanding how God communicates with His children."

Which tends to reflect what you've said here. But one must also remember that who is selected as President of the Church depends entirely upon God's veto. If God didn't want Oaks as President, he wouldn't be there to become such.

 

[Okrahomer]

After hearing Elder Brown’s stirring sermon just now, I would not be surprised if he were called to be an apostle.

[Peacefully]

1 minute ago, Okrahomer said:

After hearing Elder Brown’s stirring sermon just now, I would not be surprised if he were called to be an apostle.

I had the same thought!

 

[ZealouslyStriving]

5 minutes ago, Okrahomer said:

After hearing Elder Brown’s stirring sermon just now, I would not be surprised if he were called to be an apostle.

I was just going to say...

I know who has my vote now! 🔥🔥🔥

[JAHS]

25 minutes ago, Okrahomer said:

After hearing Elder Brown’s stirring sermon just now, I would not be surprised if he were called to be an apostle.

Agree. A very powerful and heartfelt talk and testimony.

[Stargazer]

31 minutes ago, Okrahomer said:

After hearing Elder Brown’s stirring sermon just now, I would not be surprised if he were called to be an apostle.

I agree, but Elder Cziesla's stirred me greatly, too. On the other hand, I don't know if the Lord wants two Germans in the Q12 at the same time.

Both of them were only called as General Authority Seventies in April, so may not be seen as having sufficient experience. 

Fortunately, the Lord is in charge, so my opinion is irrelevant!

[Stargazer]

900,000 converts in the past 36 months? Wow! Wish some of them were in my ward.

I'd love to know the geographical distribution. 

Edited October 4, 2025 by Stargazer

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Okrahomer said:

After hearing Elder Brown’s stirring sermon just now, I would not be surprised if he were called to be an apostle.

I thought the same thing!

[Prof]

As for the first presidency, I would love to see Uchtdorf or Kearon there as counselors.

Probably not going to happen. 

I really enjoyed both of their talks today.

[ZealouslyStriving]

If the order the were called on to conduct is a clue, it will be Erying and Bednar.

[Duncan]

10 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

If the order the were called on to conduct is a clue, it will be Erying and Bednar.

who conducts a session has no bearing on who will be called as counselor in the 1st Pres. Elder Cook conducted tonite, Elder Stevenson conducted last time sometime, I doubt they'd have more than two counselor's in the 1st presidency

[JLHPROF]

54 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

If the order the were called on to conduct is a clue, it will be Erying and Bednar.

Probably - but Eyring being in the wheelchair I think makes it less likely.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Prof said:

As for the first presidency, I would love to see Uchtdorf or Kearon there as counselors.

Probably not going to happen. 

I really enjoyed both of their talks today.

I doubt very much Oaks will select either.  Not unless he wants to present a softer gentler counterpoint as counselors.

[bluebell]

15 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I doubt very much Oaks will select either.  Not unless he wants to present a softer gentler counterpoint as counselors.

There is always a chance that he might want counselors with a different perspective. Time will tell. 

[JAHS]

5 hours ago, Stargazer said:

900,000 converts in the past 36 months? Wow! Wish some of them were in my ward.

I'd love to know the geographical distribution. 

“From 2000 to 2019, the average was 264,769 per year. In 2024 it was 308,000.

[ZealouslyStriving]

2 hours ago, Duncan said:

who conducts a session has no bearing on who will be called as counselor in the 1st Pres. Elder Cook conducted tonite, Elder Stevenson conducted last time sometime, I doubt they'd have more than two counselor's in the 1st presidency

 My post had nothing to do with the variety of people conducting, but merely with who were the first two to conduct.

BTW, there has been times where the First Presidency has had more than 2 counselors.

(I think too many here don't read posts, they skim them looking for something to argue about.)

Edited October 5, 2025 by ZealouslyStriving

[ZealouslyStriving]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

There is always a chance that he might want counselors with a different perspective. Time will tell. 

I've been listening to Pres. Oaks' biography- I think you'd both be surprised how soft he really is.

While in Chicago he started a justice project where students aided in the defense of indigent persons. He also helped fight for judicial reform in laws that disproportionately affected minorities.

While clerking for the Supreme Court, he found himself agreeing with the liberal side much more often than he anticipated.

Apparently, the "sternness" we see is because of how seriously he approaches Church callings, but at home he's loads of fun. His kids make fun of him about it.

I encourage you to read or listen to it.

Edited October 5, 2025 by ZealouslyStriving

[InCognitus]

9 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I've been listening to Pres. Oaks' biography- I think you'd both be surprised how soft he really is.

While in Chicago he started a justice project where students aided in the defense of indigent persons. He also helped fight for judicial reform in laws that disproportionately affected minorities.

While clerking for the Supreme Court, he found himself agreeing with the liberal side much more often than he anticipated.

Apparently, the "sternness" we see is because of how seriously he approaches Church callings, but at home he's loads of fun. His kids make fun of him about it.

I encourage you to read or listen to it.

I hear President Oaks has a great sense of humor (from someone who has worked with him at church headquarters).

[teddyaware]

4 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I've been listening to Pres. Oaks' biography- I think you'd both be surprised how soft he really is.

While in Chicago he started a justice project where students aided in the defense of indigent persons. He also helped fight for judicial reform in laws that disproportionately affected minorities.

While clerking for the Supreme Court, he found himself agreeing with the liberal side much more often than he anticipated.

Apparently, the "sternness" we see is because of how seriously he approaches Church callings, but at home he's loads of fun. His kids make fun of him about it.

I encourage you to read or listen to it.

About 25 years ago, when my younger brother was a Stake President, then apostle Dallin Oaks was a visiting General Authority at one of the Stake Conferences. Elder Oaks had meals at my brother’s home and slept in the guest room one night. Right after this special weekend happened, my brother told me that Elder Oaks was so casual, self deprecating, and down right funny that they spent much of the evening engaged in uproarious laughter. 

[Duncan]

43 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

 My post had nothing to do with the variety of people conducting, but merely with who were the first two to conduct.

BTW, there has been times where the First Presidency has had more than 2 counselors.

(I think too many here don't read posts, they skim them looking for something to argue about.)

no, it doesn't mean what you mean to think it does. As I said who conducts a session has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with who will become the newest member(s) of the 1st Pres. I know there have been times when they had more than two counselors in the 1st Presidency. 

If you made good , thought out comments, maybe you would have a point. Have you thought about  learning critical thinking skills ? I get that you people shun that but hey, buck the trend

[Calm]

1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

About 25 years ago, when my younger brother was a Stake President, then apostle Dallin Oaks was a visiting General Authority at one of the Stake Conferences. Elder Oaks had meals at my brother’s home and slept in the guest room one night. Right after this special weekend happened, my brother told me that Elder Oaks was so casual, self deprecating, and down right funny that they spent much of the evening engaged in uproarious laughter. 

I had a positive view of him as President of BYU, did not seem rigid or legalistic to me at the time (nor later, but then I tend to like his style of speaking more than folksy).

I was wondering what the general view of him at BYU was, not sure how accurate AI can be with this (does it rely on the first sources it finds or seek more for a broader view?, after reading wiki, it seems heavily dependent on that), but it coincides with what I remember, though I don’t remember any rumors surrounding his release.

Quote

• Academic and intellectual focus: Oaks accelerated the faculty's intellectual development and elevated academic standards. He helped establish the J. Reuben Clark Law School and the Graduate School of Management.
• Positive changes: He instituted a three-semester plan and gave more authority to deans and department chairs.
• Emphasis on women's equality: His administration instituted affirmative action policies to hire more women and equalize salaries between male and female employees.
• Lighter atmosphere: In contrast to the perceived austerity of the Wilkinson era, Oaks was seen as well-liked and personable, sometimes displaying a dry, subtle sense of humor. 

 

Criticisms and controversial events

• Reduced building pace: The rate of new building construction slowed compared to Wilkinson's time.
• Honor Code enforcement: Oaks delegated student discipline and honor code enforcement to the dean of students, taking a more "hands-off" approach than his predecessor. However, his administration is remembered by some critics for intensifying efforts to police LGBTQ students. Campus police reportedly used undercover tactics, including visiting gay bars and interrogating students in the drama and fine arts programs.
• Political clashes: Oaks often clashed with more conservative elements on the Board of Trustees, including Ezra Taft Benson, over political and academic issues. This included Oaks's refusal to allow a highly political course taught by conservative professor W. Cleon Skousen.
• Abrupt departure: The conflict with Benson over a faculty appointment was a contributing factor cited for Oaks's unexpected release in 1980. Oaks himself stated he was simply worn out after nine years in the post. 

The only issues I remember during Oaks’ tenure were honor code and the gay underground rumors and some controversies with Jim McMahon.  And I don’t remember any of Oaks’ involvement (wiki says he was hands off with the honor code, left it to the dean of students which would explain the lack).  There was quite a bit of discussion and controversy with the honor code while I was there, including one memorable scandal.  Pants were allowed for women, but more dress denim only, no jeans (not till 1981, that was a joyous moment).  A woman showed up at the Testing Center wearing nice denim pants and whoever was processing students (probably an older student I think) didn’t allow her to take the exam as it didn’t pass their personal standard.  So she went to the restroom, removed her pants (had a coat that came down long enough) and went and took the test with nothing on her lower half (bare legs were not allowed with skirts if you worked for BYU iirc, had to be nylons or tights—it would be the only reason I would have had a pair, don’t think I have owned any since I left BYU—but I can’t recall if required for students in ‘78).  The student wrote the Daily Universe about the craziness (guys were getting in wearing jeans).

https://universe.byu.edu/2019/04/15/honor-code-changes-have-followed-controversies-1/#:~:text=One of its more notable,the no-pants episode followed.

There were also some occasions where male students were policing female students, making comments and putting notes in coat pockets or backpacks.  In these cases these women were not breaking the dress code, but were still seen as immodest and for some reason, the male students thought it was their duty to police women’s standards.  No doubt there were men getting dinged by women for hair too long, etc, but I don’t remember them.  I do remember hearing a lecture from another student in one of my psych classes on how it was the duty of men to ensure women’s purity with clothing standards, but he was not considered mainstream by other students.  Most of the men I knew when it was discussed thought the self appointed modesty police were jerks.

Because most students I knew saw Pres Oaks as a moderate at that time, I was rather surprised to find he became seen as conservative when an apostle.  I started out in physics and then switched to engineering on the advice of my dad (should have talked to a career counselor as he was out of date), so I remember the affirmative action efforts Oaks was promoting for less discrimination against women.  Didn’t like engineering and switched to psych after two years.

Have to say it always feels a bit disconcerting to see Pres Oaks in the last 20 years or so, his appearance when he was at BYU seems to have been imprinted on my brain, lol.

https://president.byu.edu/directory/dallin-h-oaks

I was not surprised when he was called as an apostle.  He carried himself with a natural sense of authority, imo.  Probably his confidence.  Mixed with a genuine sense of caring.

Edited October 5, 2025 by Calm