"Mormon Royalty"

[Scott Lloyd]

Scott, this is such a great topic. My paternal grandmother was a terrible hero-worshiper along with her sibs and my father's sisters. There's even a section in a genealogical book on why "We are Cousins to the Prophet," showing that we connected back with Lucy Mack's grandfather. My father still jokes that if somebody's shadow once fell on you in Wellsville, that person is your cousin.

This old silliness, much more widespread than my crazy relatives, will, hopefully, be rotted out at some point. In the meantime, however, human nature being what it is, we'll continue to see it.

My own claims to royalty:

Cousin-dom to The Prophet.

Great-Great Grandson to two [count 'em] two councilors to Lorenzo Snow when he was BE Stake President.

Great-Great Grandson to an actual "First bunch of Seventies."

Great-Great Grandson to a Nauvoo cop and JSJr bodyguard.

Great-Great Grandson to the owner of the first brick 2-story in Nauvoo.

Great Grandson to a Sugarhouse Cohab.

And yet nobody makes me stake president or asks my opinion about Mitt Romney or consults me on questions of over-ritualization of the Sacrament in Sandy wards.

So . . . I said "Other." Something very like that existed/exists, but not as either the reporter or the Huntsman numbskull intended.

By the way, I have no Nauvoo ancestors whatsoever. All of my people emigrated from Sweden or the British Isles after the settlement of the Salt Lake Valley. So I guess that puts me squarely in the Commoner category.*

My wife, on the other hand, does have Nauvoo ancestry. So hereafter, I suppose, my posterity will be part of the Gentry.

*Pardon me, DavidB for mentioning my ancestors. I hope you are not too incensed.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[DavidB]

*Pardon me, DavidB for mentioning my ancestors. I hope you are not too annoyed.

Well I do have Navuoo stock...so nanner nanner, and it is my royal decree that you cease at once.

Edited August 28, 2012 by DavidB

[Scott Lloyd]

Of the six respondents (so far) who have voted "yes," I'm wondering if you ...

A ) are a faithful Latter-day Saint who truly and sincerely believes that descendants of Church presidents and apostles are entitled to be regarded as Mormon royalty.

B ) are trying to queer the poll results by answering disingenuously.

... or ...

C) have not understood the question.

If you fit into the A category, I would very much be interested to hear your rationale.

[Duncan]

Of the six respondents (so far) who have voted "yes," I'm wondering if you ...

A ) are a faithful Latter-day Saint who truly and sincerely believes that descendants of Church presidents and apostles are entitled to be regarded as Mormon royalty.

B ) are trying to queer the poll results by answering disingenuously.

... or ...

C) have not understood the question.

If you fit into the A category, I would very much be interested to hear your rationale.

I answered yes and I am very active in the Church. I admit I didn't see the part "to be" but I think some regard themselves and holier then others, just from my observations or hearsay from others and again not all descendants or close relatives think like that but some do. As I say I don't know what to think about how the brethren are called, what I hear and yet see can be two different things

[Scott Lloyd]

I answered yes and I am very active in the Church. I admit I didn't see the part "to be" but I think some regard themselves and holier then others, just from my observations or hearsay from others and again not all descendants or close relatives think like that but some do. As I say I don't know what to think about how the brethren are called, what I hear and yet see can be two different things

So you are in the C category, then, "Did not understand the question."

Thank you for your candor. I suspect there are others of the six to whom that applies as well.

[Paddy]

Scott

In Australia we do use the term "Mormon Royalty”, however it is usually a derogatory term. It does not relate to persons with family ties to Apostles, because that is extremely rare here. Also the term is rarely used.

It usually relates people who’s families have several generations in the church. It also relates to people who have “strong” or large families and tend to know a lot of “important” people. The definition of “strong” is usually families that are aware of their own self importance...

Paddy

[Scott Lloyd]

Still waiting to hear from someone who gave a proper "yes" response to the poll question.

By "proper," I mean the respondent is a faithful Latter-day Saint who truly and sincerely believes that a descendant of a Church president or apostle is entitled to be regarded as Mormon royalty.

I have edited the poll question, inserting the word "entitled," hoping that will more clearly convey the meaning and intent of the question.

Incidentally, in case you answered the question without understanding it, you can delete your vote; the board software enables that.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Mark Beesley]

One of my ancestors was a member of the original Quorum of the Twelve of the restored Church, as was his brother. Another was a handcart pioneer who wrote some of our favorite hymns. One ancestor had a brother whose son was a member of the Mormon Battalion. Yet another was an apostle who also served as an apostle, stake president, and temple president all at the same time. The only claim to fame I have from them is that they garnered so many blessings from the Lord in mortality that I continue to be blessed because of the surplus they bequeathed me. The only claim I have to royalty is the same claim every other Child of God has who is entitled to inherit kingdoms, principalities, and dominions as bequeathed by the Father. Personally, I think I'll be content with a modest home in a small corner of the universe I can share with my wife that doesn't have very severe temperatures and has a good wireless internet connection.

Edited August 29, 2012 by Mark Beesley

[TAO]

To be quite honest, I had never heard of the Huntsman's until this board. I don't really think there is Mormon Royalty... I am pretty sure most Mormons I know would agree there too =p.

Edited August 29, 2012 by TAO

[Scott Lloyd]

One of my ancestors was a member of the original Quorum of the Twelve of the restored Church, as was his brother. Another was a handcart pioneer who wrote some of our favorite hymns. One ancestor had a brother whose son was a member of the Mormon Battalion. Yet another was an apostle who also served as an apostle, stake president, and temple president all at the same time. The only claim to fame I have from them is that they garnered so many blessings from the Lord in mortality that I continue to be blessed because of the surplus they bequeathed me. The only claim I have to royalty is the same claim every other Child of God has who is entitled to inherit kingdoms, principalities, and dominions as bequeathed by the Father. Personally, I think I'll be content with a modest home in a small corner of the universe I can share with my wife that doesn't have very severe temperatures and has a good wireless internet connection.

Mark, this may be your best post yet.

[Duncan]

one of my favourite quotations

"I am very proud of my parentage. I do not think any one appreciates their parentage more than I do. But, I want to say to the Latter-day Saints, pride in parentage won't save you. If we get salvation, we must keep the commandments, and serve the Lord. Knowledge pertaining to the gospel of Jesus Christ does not come through ordination, nor by appointment, nor by lineage, nor through father and mother, though they are helpful. But no matter who my father and mother were, or how devoted and faithful they have been; no matter how much work they have accomplished, and how much gospel they have preached to the children of men, I tell you if Heber C. Kimball's children are saved in the kingdom they must keep the commandments of God, or they won't be saved."

Elder J. Golden Kimball

April, 1913 GC, pg 85

[Scott Lloyd]

one of my favourite quotations

"I am very proud of my parentage. I do not think any one appreciates their parentage more than I do. But, I want to say to the Latter-day Saints, pride in parentage won't save you. If we get salvation, we must keep the commandments, and serve the Lord. Knowledge pertaining to the gospel of Jesus Christ does not come through ordination, nor by appointment, nor by lineage, nor through father and mother, though they are helpful. But no matter who my father and mother were, or how devoted and faithful they have been; no matter how much work they have accomplished, and how much gospel they have preached to the children of men, I tell you if Heber C. Kimball's children are saved in the kingdom they must keep the commandments of God, or they won't be saved."

Elder J. Golden Kimball

April, 1913 GC, pg 85

J. Reuben Clark Jr. expressed essentially the same view in his classic address, "To Them of the Last Wagon," given in 1947 on the occasion of the centennial of the coming of the PIoneers to the Salt Lake Valley. If I get time tomorrow, maybe I'll find the applicable quote.

Add-on:

What the heck, I'll provide it now:

In living our lives let us never forget that the deeds of our fathers and mothers are theirs, not ours; that their works cannot be counted to our glory; that we can claim no excellence and no place because of what they did, that we must rise by our own labor, and that labor failing, we shall fall. We may claim no honor, no reward, no respect, nor special position or recognition, no credit because of what our fathers were or what they wrought. We stand upon our own feet in our own shoes. There is no aristocracy of birth in this Church; it belongs equally to the highest and the lowliest; for as Peter said to Cornelius, the Roman centurion, seeking him: “Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

“But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him” (Acts 10:34–35).

Here's the link.

Edited August 29, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[cinepro]

To be quite honest, I had never heard of the Huntsman's until this board. I don't really think there is Mormon Royalty... I am pretty sure most Mormons I know would agree there too =p.

I'm guessing you don't live in Utah.

I hadn't really heard of the Huntsmans until a small unit of their family moved into my ward a few years ago. They were definitely treated differently than other young couples that moved in.

We also had in that same ward a granddaughter of President McKay. She was the nicest, most humble person I've ever met. The only time she ever mentioned her grandfather was when it was really pertinent to a lesson, and she had a good story to share. She never would have considered herself "royalty."

But we still treated her like she was.

[TAO]

I'm guessing you don't live in Utah.

You'd be right. I live in Cali.

[Libs]

We had an Eyring in our Ward. She was directly related to Henry Eyring (first cousins, I believe). She was interesting, because she had lost her faith and left the church, right after serving a mission. Had been gone for most of her adult life. She was in her late 50's, I believe, when she returned. Very sweet person and, although, I wouldn't say she was exactly treated differently, everyone was very aware of her connection, and very interested in her "stories".

I just noticed recently that she submitted her testimony to "Mormon Scholars Testify". (She is a Linquistics Professor at CSUF...my alma mater)..

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm guessing you don't live in Utah.

Neither do you . At least that's what you said on the other thread.

I hadn't really heard of the Huntsmans until a small unit of their family moved into my ward a few years ago. They were definitely treated differently than other young couples that moved in.

We also had in that same ward a granddaughter of President McKay. She was the nicest, most humble person I've ever met. The only time she ever mentioned her grandfather was when it was really pertinent to a lesson, and she had a good story to share. She never would have considered herself "royalty."

But we still treated her like she was.

So putting it together, I gather that these alleged instances of fawning took place in a unit of the Church outside of Utah, and thus cannot really be attributed to the quirkiness of [Darn] Utah Mormons. Or am I missing something?

[Tacenda]

I'm active in the church so I hope I qualify, I hope, to comment. The only thing I've heard not seen, since I haven't lived in very many affluent wards, is someone that moved into my ward and told of her experience living in a ward on the hill near the Bountiful Temple. She didn't say anyone was Mormon Royalty per say, but that they dressed like royalty. She said if you didn't own a mink coat you wouldn't fit in. Of course this was many years ago, before the backlash from PETA.

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm active in the church so I hope I qualify, I hope, to comment. The only thing I've heard not seen, since I haven't lived in very many affluent wards, is someone that moved into my ward and told of her experience living in a ward on the hill near the Bountiful Temple. She didn't say anyone was Mormon Royalty per say, but that they dressed like royalty. She said if you didn't own a mink coat you wouldn't fit in. Of course this was many years ago, before the backlash from PETA.

Must have been a good many years ago. I think mink is a generational thing, and for the most part it's only old ladies who wear it these days -- assuming they can afford it.

The "Mormon royalty" claim here has to do not necessarily with the person being rich, but being related to a General Authority or a famous member of the Church.

[Mark Beesley]

Mark, this may be your best post yet.

Ah shucks . . .

Personally, I would place it at a close second to this one.

But thanks for the compliment.

[Scott Lloyd]

Still waiting to hear from someone who gave a proper "yes" response to the poll question.

By "proper," I mean the respondent is a faithful Latter-day Saint who truly and sincerely believes that a descendant of a Church president or apostle is entitled to be regarded as Mormon royalty.

I have edited the poll question, inserting the word "entitled," hoping that will more clearly convey the meaning and intent of the question.

Incidentally, in case you answered the question without understanding it, you can delete your vote; the board software enables that.

Well, it has been a day or two now, and so far none of the eight "yes" respondents has come forward to identify him/herself as a faithful Latter-day Saint who truly and sincerely believes that a descendant of a Church president or apostle is entitled to be regarded as Mormon royalty.

Thus I feel justified in concluding that the respondents either didn't understand the question or they answered it disingenuously.

[Calm]

Next time you create a poll, I believe there is an option so you can see who voted for what so if you want it limited to those who see themselves as faithful, it will be easier to tell if people went along with your requirement or not.

[Scott Lloyd]

Next time you create a poll, I believe there is an option so you can see who voted for what so if you want it limited to those who see themselves as faithful, it will be easier to tell if people went along with your requirement or not.

Interesting. Didn't know that. As I said, this is my first experience with it.

Do you think I could do it retroactively?

[Calm]

Don't have a clue.

[blackstrap]

Scott,you omitted the obligatory,' this is a silly poll' response.

[Scott Lloyd]

Scott,you omitted the obligatory,' this is a silly poll' response.

I guess I figure most people are like me. If I think the poll is silly, I don't waste my time with it.