Age Of Presidency

[Cobalt-70]

I believe Joseph wanted Hyrum to succeed him initially (which is why he did not want Hyrum to accompany him to Cathage) and for Joseph III to ultimately succeed him when he came of age. I am convinced JSIII would still have become president of the church had he come to Utah. It is interesting to me that none of the church presidents were set apart as president of the church until after the death of JSIII. It appears that before that time church presidents presided solely by virtue of their apostolic rank and the exercise of common consent.

I agree that Hyrum would have been Joseph's successor had he lived. Even Brigham Young agreed with that. Also, Young and others said they recognized that Joseph Smith III had a natural claim. I think that Brigham Young was the right man for the job at the time in Nauvoo, and I think most Mormons recognized that, and felt that it was God's will. But honestly, they had to kind of invent a mechanism for Young to preside which Smith had never taught, and which contradicted what Smith had in mind. But who knows, perhaps Smith, looking down from heaven, would have agreed with what happened under the circumstances. Hyrum and Samuel Smith died, JS III was too young, his unborn son David obviously wasn't old enough, Smith didn't particularly like Sidney Rigdon, and William Marks' claim to the presidency was no better than Young's, yet Young was clearly the better leader.

That doesn't necessarily mean that the mechanism that was invented to justify Young's presidency has to continue in perpetuity. It could always change, unless a particular mode of succession enters the LDS canon and settles the issue.

[zerinus]

I could see it happen when the Brethren disband the senior member becoming prophet standard. This has always bothered me because it is devoid of revelation or input from the Lord. I seriously reject any argument that the Lord calls them in a specific order so that they can serve at his appointed time. It just rubs me the wrong way completely.

So, when God tells them he is ready for a new prophet and he happens to be the sixth apostle in line, then the sixth apostle will become the prophet. I apologize for my little soap box, but this process has always appeared artificial to me and flies in the face of our belief in revelation.

Well, the current process is not quite as artificial as it looks. It is a natural outgrowth of D&C 107:22-27. When the President dies, the Quorum of the Twelve automatically becomes the governing council of the Church according to revelation, therefore the President of the Twelve become the de facto presiding officer of the Church, whether he likes it or not; and when it comes to reorganizing the First Presidency, it is hard to override the de facto President unless there is valid justification to do so. He is the one who basically decides! If he is good enough to make the decision, he is good enough to be chosen.

When Joseph Smith died, the First Presidency was not organized for several years. The Twelve ruled. Brigham Young was acting like the President of the Church because he happened to be the President of the Twelve; and the Lord respected his position enough that when He wanted to give an important revelation to the Church (D&C 136), He gave it through Brigham Young. When that revelation was received, BY was not the President of the Church. He was Prescient of the Twelve. Having therefore established himself in that position, and the Lord acknowledging it by a revelation, it wouldn't seem a reasonable thing for the Lord to do to bypass him for the Presidency of the Church in favor of someone else.

If the Lord were to appoint another successor, who would be receiving the revelation? It would have to be the President of the Twelve! So he would be receiving a revelation from the Lord telling him that he was not to be the next President of the Church, but to appoint someone else! But if he is good enough to be in that position, and to receive that revelation, doesn't that mean that he is good enough to be the successor himself? Strictly speaking, however, it is not an automatic process. It is conceivable that at some point in the future the Lord may decide to appoint someone other than the senior Apostle to become the President of the Church, in which case that revelation would have to come through him!

[zerinus]

We know it's not cast in stone, because before Joseph Smith died, he taught many different (contradictory, actually) succession scenarios. Had Hyrum lived, for example, nobody would have disputed, Brigham Young included, that he would have succeeded Smith. But Hyrum was never a member of the Quorum of the Twelve. Hyrum held two offices: (1) Presiding Patriarch, and (2) the Assistant President of the Church (part of the First Presidency). We don't have either of these offices in the church today.

So one scenario that could replace the seniority rule would be to bring back the Assistant President office as a kind of "vice presidency," so that the person occupying that office would succeed the President when he dies or retires. A lot of thought and prayer could go deciding who should be the person who holds that office, and perhaps filling the office might even require an actual revelation. If no revelation is received, then when the President dies, the First Presidency remains vacant until a revelation is received. There is precedent for that. When Smith died, the First Presidency was vacant for several years, because Brigham Young initially said that nobody could possibly step into Smith's shoes.

All wrong. See my previous post.

[mapman]

The First Presidency can be found unworthy to lead the Church. There's a process for this: http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/revelation-12-january-1838%E2%80%93a#1. If this were to happen, we could end up with a younger president. I don't see it happening, but it is theoretically possible.

[Cobalt-70]

And that successor was Brigham Young and the Twelve. Joseph told Brigham that he would be at the head and in the Grand Council he held with both men and women before he died he laid out what the succession would be. Truman Madsen talks about this in his lectures on Joseph Smith. Joseph and Brigham met together many times and the plan to go west was Joseph's carried out by Brigham. Yes Joseph tried to keep Hiram from going and told him it was because he wanted him to be the President, but do you really think Joseph didn't know that Hiram, his most loyal follower, would not go.

Can you please provide more detail, or a link to more detail, about Truman Madsen's claims. Is this about the Anointed Quorum? If so, and this was a viable succession theory, you'd think that 19th century Mormons would have picked up on it and used it as a justification for Young's presidency. The fact that they didn't makes me wonder how good the claim really is.

[cinepro]

Well, the current process is not quite as artificial as it looks. It is a natural outgrowth of D&C 107:22-27. When the President dies, the Quorum of the Twelve automatically becomes the governing council of the Church according to revelation, therefore the President of the Twelve become the de facto presiding officer of the Church, whether he likes it or not; and when it comes to reorganizing the First Presidency, it is hard to override the de facto President unless there is valid justification to do so. He is the one who basically decides! If he is good enough to make the decision, he is good enough to be chosen.

Keeping in mind that D&C 107 is from 1835, and parts of it have been "improved upon" over the years...

36 The standing high councils, at the stakes of Zion, form a quorum equal in authority in the affairs of the church, in all their decisions, to the quorum of the presidency, or to the traveling high council.

37 The high council in Zion form a quorum equal in authority in the affairs of the church, in all their decisions, to the councils of the Twelve at the stakes of Zion.

Edited March 22, 2012 by cinepro

[Cobalt-70]

Well, the current process is not quite as artificial as it looks. It is a natural outgrowth of D&C 107:22-27. When the President dies, the Quorum of the Twelve automatically becomes the governing council of the Church according to revelation, therefore the President of the Twelve become the de facto presiding officer of the Church, whether he likes it or not; and when it comes to reorganizing the First Presidency, it is hard to override the de facto President unless there is valid justification to do so. He is the one who basically decides! If he is good enough to make the decision, he is good enough to be chosen.

D&C 107 says nothing about succession. It also says nothing about the First Presidency dissolving after the death of the President. After all, the Quorum of the Twelve does not dissolve after the death of its president. After Smith's death, the surviving member of the First Presidency was Sidney Rigdon. Also, D&C 107:37 says that the presiding Stake High Council had equal authority to the Twelve. The president of the presiding High Council was William Marks.

When Joseph Smith died, the First Presidency was not organized for several years. The Twelve ruled. Brigham Young was acting like the President of the Church because he happened to be the President of the Twelve; and the Lord respected his position enough that when He wanted to give an important revelation to the Church (D&C 136), He gave it through Brigham Young. When that revelation was received, BY was not the President of the Church. He was Prescient of the Twelve. Having therefore established himself in that position, and the Lord acknowledging it by a revelation, it wouldn't seem a reasonable thing for the Lord to do to bypass him for the Presidency of the Church in favor of someone else.

But D&C 136 says nothing about establishing Brigham Young as President of the Church. There is nothing in our canon that establishes the current mode of succession.

If the Lord were to appoint another successor, who would be receiving the revelation? It would have to be the President of the Twelve! So he would be receiving a revelation from the Lord telling him that he was not to be the next President of the Church, but to appoint someone else! But if he is good enough to be in that position, and to receive that revelation, doesn't that mean that he is good enough to be the successor himself? Strictly speaking, however, it is not an automatic process. It is conceivable that at some point in the future the Lord may decide to appoint someone other than the senior Apostle to become the President of the Church, in which case that revelation would have to come through him!

Why would only the President of the Quorum of the Twelve receive such a revelation? Only because, by custom, we consider the First Presidency to dissolve at the death of the President, and the Twelve as the supreme governing body next to the First Presidency. All of this is not found in our canon, however, and is the result of the historical accident that Brigham Young happened to be the best living leader for the church after Joseph Smith died.

[Deborah]

you'd think that 19th century Mormons would have picked up on it and used it as a justification for Young's presidency. The fact that they didn't makes me wonder how good the claim really is.

Actually, since the majority of the church followed Brigham Young and the Q12 I think they did understand this. It is interesting that those who disputed it, including Sidney Rigdon weren't included in that last great counsel. Joseph seemed to know who was going to remain faithful. The lectures are on CD.

[Cobalt-70]

Actually, since the majority of the church followed Brigham Young and the Q12 I think they did understand this. It is interesting that those who disputed it, including Sidney Rigdon weren't included in that last great counsel. Joseph seemed to know who was going to remain faithful. The lectures are on CD.

If Rigdon didn't know because he wasn't included, then the "majority of the Church" didn't know either, for the same reason. But surely somebody would have mentioned this. Historically, the reason why the majority of the church picked Brigham Young was the simple reason that he was the obvious best candidate. That, and the fact that Young smoked Rigdon at the debate prior to the vote in which the Twelve was chosen over the First Presidency as the leading body.

Edited March 22, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[Alan]

CFR that "none of the church presidents were set apart as president of the church until after the death of JSIII". He didn't die until 1914.

I'm more than comfortable with Brigham Young's having been set apart in 1847, and each of the others in turn. Lorenzo Snow was the first to have been designated a President of the Church immediately after the death of his predecessor, but that is not the same thing. Even that happened in the XIX, not the XX.

Lehi

I think you will find that no president was set apart as president of the church until after 1914. All previous presidents organised the First Presidency by virtue of their position as president of the Twelve and the de facto president f the church.

I have searched but I cannot find any record of any church president being set apart as president of the church until after 1914. I believe this was because the president designate was still alive.

[Cobalt-70]

I think you will find that no president was set apart as president of the church until after 1914. All previous presidents organised the First Presidency by virtue of their position as president of the Twelve and the de facto president f the church.

I have searched but I cannot find any record of any church president being set apart as president of the church until after 1914. I believe this was because the president designate was still alive.

I think what you might be referring to is the fact that early Presidents of the Church were merely "set apart" to the calling, whereas later they started to be "ordained." I'm pretty sure that's true, and is documented in one of D. Michael Quinn's Hierarchy books. But I don't know if there is any direct evidence this had anything to do with Joseph Smith III.

[Bob Crockett]

I think what you might be referring to is the fact that early Presidents of the Church were merely "set apart" to the calling, whereas later they started to be "ordained." I'm pretty sure that's true, and is documented in one of D. Michael Quinn's Hierarchy books. But I don't know if there is any direct evidence this had anything to do with Joseph Smith III.

I'm not sure that is accurate, either. I heard Elder Holland speak to a small group of LA lawyers a few days after his ordination. He said he came to speak because his commitment had been made a year ago. He said that presidents are no longer ordained, because their ordination came as apostles.

Edited March 23, 2012 by Bob Crockett

[Cobalt-70]

I'm not sure that is accurate, either. I heard Elder Holland speak to a small group of LA lawyers a few days after his ordination. He said he came to speak because his commitment had been made a year ago. He said that presidents are no longer ordained, because their ordination came as apostles.

If it was just after Holland's ordination, he might not have known, because he hadn't yet participated in the ceremony where they ordain a new President. Church publications say that they are "ordained and set apart." to the office. Here is a sampling:

Monson: http://www.lds.org/Static%20Files/PDF/Magazines/Ensign/English/2008/EN_2008_04_03___02204_000_003.pdf

Hinckley: http://www.lds.org/new-era/1995/05/sweet-is-the-work-gordon-b-hinckley-15th-president-of-the-church?lang=eng

Hunter: http://institute.lds.org/manuals/presidents-of-the-church-student-manual/pres-ch-13-15-14.asp

Benson: http://www.lds.org/ensign/1985/12/president-ezra-taft-benson-ordained-thirteenth-president-of-the-church?lang=eng

Kimball: http://www.lds.org/ensign/1974/02/president-spencer-w-kimball-ordained-twelfth-president-of-the-church?lang=eng (noting that Kimball was "ordained," but his counselors were "set apart")

Lee: http://www.lds.org/ensign/1972/08/president-harold-b-lee-ordained-eleventh-president-of-the-church?lang=eng (Lee was "ordained" and his counselors were "set apart")

[Storm Rider]

I suppose you could look at it as God controlling how long The prophet and each Apostle lives, therefor selecting the next prophet that way. Who is to say God can't plan ahead?

This is essentially the position the Church takes to support the senior member becoming prophet. The problem I have with this position is that there is nothing remotely similar in scripture to support such a process. The current situation was created to prevent any further situations similar to what happened after Joseph died where several said they were the next prophet. The crisis was averted, but not after many members chased after these other leaders only to find most of them fail miserably.

We are a church built upon revelation; it is one of our strongest and most fundamental beliefs. If we believe in revelation, then let God speak and tell the Brethren who should serve rather than follow a predetermined process. This is a personal soapbox and it does not cause me to lose any sleep. It just shows you how human I am and how far I have to go before I could be called humble.

[cinepro]

This is essentially the position the Church takes to support the senior member becoming prophet. The problem I have with this position is that there is nothing remotely similar in scripture to support such a process. The current situation was created to prevent any further situations similar to what happened after Joseph died where several said they were the next prophet. The crisis was averted, but not after many members chased after these other leaders only to find most of them fail miserably.

We are a church built upon revelation; it is one of our strongest and most fundamental beliefs. If we believe in revelation, then let God speak and tell the Brethren who should serve rather than follow a predetermined process. This is a personal soapbox and it does not cause me to lose any sleep. It just shows you how human I am and how far I have to go before I could be called humble.

I sometimes think we underestimate God's flexibility and creativity when it comes to such things:

24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Acts 1

The only problem I have with the process is when LDS point to the pre-set pattern of succession as being "inspired" because there is no debate or discussion about who the next Prophet might be.

I agree that it is really nice that there isn't any politicking or debate, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the process came from God. It just means that the process was set up in such a way that there isn't any flexibility.

It's no different than the succession of the US Presidency if the President dies. There is no politicking or debate; the Vice President simply assumes the office, with clear-cut rules that take the office down the list. That doesn't mean God inspired the succession process. It just means the decision was made to make that process as smooth and quick as possible.

Edited March 27, 2012 by cinepro

[zerinus]

This is essentially the position the Church takes to support the senior member becoming prophet. The problem I have with this position is that there is nothing remotely similar in scripture to support such a process. The current situation was created to prevent any further situations similar to what happened after Joseph died where several said they were the next prophet. The crisis was averted, but not after many members chased after these other leaders only to find most of them fail miserably.

We are a church built upon revelation; it is one of our strongest and most fundamental beliefs. If we believe in revelation, then let God speak and tell the Brethren who should serve rather than follow a predetermined process. This is a personal soapbox and it does not cause me to lose any sleep. It just shows you how human I am and how far I have to go before I could be called humble.

Point taken; but who would be receiving the revelation to determine who the new Prophet should be? The Twelve Apostles, no doubt. But they have a President who holds the keys of presidency over the Twelve; and logically the revelation should come through him, as established by precedent (biblical as well as D&C). So he would effectively be receiving a revelation appointing someone other than himself to be the next President. But what if the Lord wanted him to be the next President aniway? No revelation should be needed. So the convention developed that he should automatically become the next President unless the Lord reveals it otherwise. But I agree that the mindset that the senior Apostle must automatically become the next President needs to change. I think that President Monson would have been glad if someone else had been appointed to that position rather than himself. I don't think he felt comfortable in it then, and I don't think that he still does.

Edited March 25, 2012 by zerinus

[Alan]

D&C 43 provides for the incumbant prophet to designate a successor, even if he has lost the prophetic gift through transgression. In these circumstances the revelation would not come through the Twelve or even the president of the Twelve.

Like I said before, I am of the opinion this is exactly the situation Joseph set up by designating Hyrum (Brigham admitted Joseph designated Hyrum) and Joseph III.

However, Hyrum died at Carthage (in fact, he died before Joseph) and JSIII was only 11 years old. Therefore a default position was adopted, probably as a temporary measure, but has persisted to this day given that JSIII never came to the presidency, and the system served us well. On the basis that "if it ain't broke don't fix it" I am personally happy for the current system to continue, but understand President Monson could designate a successor instead and that would be ok too.

[Avatar4321]

I could see it happen when the Brethren disband the senior member becoming prophet standard. This has always bothered me because it is devoid of revelation or input from the Lord. I seriously reject any argument that the Lord calls them in a specific order so that they can serve at his appointed time. It just rubs me the wrong way completely.

So, when God tells them he is ready for a new prophet and he happens to be the sixth apostle in line, then the sixth apostle will become the prophet. I apologize for my little soap box, but this process has always appeared artificial to me and flies in the face of our belief in revelation.

Except it is by revelation. For the First 3 or 4 Presidents of the Church after Joseph's death, the Church was actually run by the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Section 107 spelled out that the Quorum of the Twelve has equal authority to the First Presidency, so naturally when President of the Church dies, and the Quorum is disolved, the Twelve is the highest ranking authority of the Church, with the President of the Twelve the defacto leader of the Church. As I was saying, the First 3 or 4 times, the President and the quorum would pray seeking guidance about if and when to reorganize the First Presidency and who would take their places. The Lord finally revealed that He has already established the pattern and they shouldn't be waiting so long between the death of the President and the reorganization fo the Presidency. Hence, why we do it the way we do it.

Just because it's not currently in the scriptures, doesnt mean it wasn't revealed.

[Avatar4321]

Well, the current process is not quite as artificial as it looks. It is a natural outgrowth of D&C 107:22-27. When the President dies, the Quorum of the Twelve automatically becomes the governing council of the Church according to revelation, therefore the President of the Twelve become the de facto presiding officer of the Church, whether he likes it or not; and when it comes to reorganizing the First Presidency, it is hard to override the de facto President unless there is valid justification to do so. He is the one who basically decides! If he is good enough to make the decision, he is good enough to be chosen.

When Joseph Smith died, the First Presidency was not organized for several years. The Twelve ruled. Brigham Young was acting like the President of the Church because he happened to be the President of the Twelve; and the Lord respected his position enough that when He wanted to give an important revelation to the Church (D&C 136), He gave it through Brigham Young. When that revelation was received, BY was not the President of the Church. He was Prescient of the Twelve. Having therefore established himself in that position, and the Lord acknowledging it by a revelation, it wouldn't seem a reasonable thing for the Lord to do to bypass him for the Presidency of the Church in favor of someone else.

If the Lord were to appoint another successor, who would be receiving the revelation? It would have to be the President of the Twelve! So he would be receiving a revelation from the Lord telling him that he was not to be the next President of the Church, but to appoint someone else! But if he is good enough to be in that position, and to receive that revelation, doesn't that mean that he is good enough to be the successor himself? Strictly speaking, however, it is not an automatic process. It is conceivable that at some point in the future the Lord may decide to appoint someone other than the senior Apostle to become the President of the Church, in which case that revelation would have to come through him!

Experience seems to indicate that when the Lord wants that done, He has the current Church President rearrange the seniority of the Apostles before His death.

[Cobalt-70]

Point taken; but who would be receiving the revelation to determine who the new Prophet should be? The Twelve Apostles, no doubt. But they have a President who holds the keys of presidency over the Twelve; and logically the revelation should come through him, as established by precedent (biblical as well as D&C). So he would effectively be receiving a revelation appointing someone other than himself to be the next President. But what if the Lord wanted him to be the next President aniway? No revelation should be needed. So the convention developed that he should automatically become the next President unless the Lord reveals it otherwise. But I agree that the mindset that the senior Apostle must automatically become the next President needs to change. I think that President Monson would have been glad if someone else had been appointed to that position rather than himself. I don't think he felt comfortable in it then, and I don't think that he still does.

If we followed Joseph Smith's own precedent, we would expect the current President of the Church would select and ordain his successor. While the President is still in office, the successor would occupy the office of Assistant to the President, a position within the First Presidency (held by Oliver Cowdery and then Hyrum Smith) that no longer exists, but could easily be revived.

[zerinus]

If we followed Joseph Smith's own precedent, we would expect the current President of the Church would select and ordain his successor. While the President is still in office, the successor would occupy the office of Assistant to the President, a position within the First Presidency (held by Oliver Cowdery and then Hyrum Smith) that no longer exists, but could easily be revived.

Sorry Cobalt, but after reading many of your posts, I have come to the conclusion that you have a penchant for talking nonsense, therefore the best course of action is not to reply to them. Good luck with replies from others.

[Cobalt-70]

Sorry Cobalt, but after reading many of your posts, I have come to the conclusion that you have a penchant for talking nonsense, therefore the best course of action is not to reply to them. Good luck with replies from others.

Don't take my word for it. Just look at the history books. The existence of the office of Assistant President, and the fact that Hyrum Smith, as the holder of the office, was the universally-recognized successor of Joseph Smith had Hyrum survived, are well documented and accepted by Mormon and non-Mormon historians alike.

Edited March 27, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[Alan]

Don't take my word for it. Just look at the history books. The existence of the office of Assistant President, and the fact that Hyrum Smith, as the holder of the office, was the universally-recognized successor of Joseph Smith had Hyrum survived, are well documented and accepted by Mormon and non-Mormon historians alike.

Absolutely correct Cobalt. Hyrum was Assistant President, not simply a counsellor in the First Presidency (though he was that too). And he was designated to succeed Joseph, as testified to by Brigham Young. Therefore, this system could be reintroduced at any time if the brethren felt inspired to do so.

The current system also works ok. As I said previously, it's the default system. It was used because JSIII was not of age; and when he was he refused to come. Therefore, we have an apostolic system based on seniority for the time being.

Edited March 27, 2012 by Alan

[zerinus]

Absolutely correct Cobalt. Hyrum was Assistant President, not simply a counsellor in the First Presidency (though he was that too). And he was designated to succeed Joseph, as testified to by Brigham Young. Therefore, this system could be reintroduced at any time if the brethren felt inspired to do so.

The current system also works ok. As I said previously, it's the default system. It was used because JSIII was not of age; and when he was he refused to come. Therefore, we have an apostolic system based on seniority for the time being.

The only "system" ("default" or otherwise) is D&C 107:22-27. There is no other.

[ebeddoulos]

If we followed Joseph Smith's own precedent, we would expect the current President of the Church would select and ordain his successor. While the President is still in office, the successor would occupy the office of Assistant to the President, a position within the First Presidency (held by Oliver Cowdery and then Hyrum Smith) that no longer exists, but could easily be revived.

The LDS system of succession works flawlessly. It has worked for every transition since the beginning of the restoration. I cannot conceive of a circumstance where your system would be necessary. Furthermore, your system does not work in the short nor the long term.

Case in Point: The RLDS/CofC followed the process you outlined where the President of their church designates his successor -- historically a direct descendant of Joseph Smith, Jr.. Frederic M. Smith, the third RLDS/CofC president, did not designate his successor. Instead, Israel A. Smith was appointed by the RLDS/CofC leadership. Interestingly, the first non-Smith descendant, W. Grant McMurray, on the retirement of Wallace B. Smith was designated as the new RLDS/CofC president. However, McMurray did not name a successor when he resigned. McMurray's successor, Stephen A. Veazey, was not a direct descendant of Joseph Smith, Jr. either. Rather Veazey was serving as the President of the Council of the Twelve Apostles.

Your little pet theory just doesn't work on a consistent basis.