CA Steve Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Interesting article (blog?) on the third son of Brigham Young, John Willard Young who was ordained an apostle at the age of 11. http://hartbrad.blogspot.com/2015/09/child-prophet-curious-case-of-john.html?m=1 On November 22, 1855, at the tender age of eleven, John Willard Young received his Endowment and was ordained an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ by the hand of his prophet father. The ordination, which was kept secret from the other members of the church’s First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, was eventually announced for the first time to church leaders in February of 1864, roughly eight years after John Willard’s original ordination. On that occasion, President Brigham Young ordained John Willard’s two older brothers, Joseph Angell and Brigham Jr., to be apostles as well, and set all three of his sons apart to be “Assistant Counselors to the President.” This is how the matter stood when Brigham Young took the eleven-year-old John Willard and ordained him an apostle. The next most junior apostle in age to John Willard was Franklin D. Richards (age34). As a result, John Willard was perfectly positioned to one day enjoy overwhelming seniority and lengthy tenure as church president. Keeping these facts in mind, it is almost impossible to deny that Brigham Young was determined to establish his family line as a dynasty that would extend long into the future. With now four of his sons ordained to the apostleship, Brigham was clearing stacking his own deck. If the Smith family was to be revered as Mormonism’s founders, the Young family would be revered as its future. On April 5, 1900, in a private meeting with his counselors, Lorenzo Snow made a slight but dramatic change to the way apostolic succession would be determined (which continues to be the standard to this day). Snow claimed that apostolic seniority was to be based exclusively on date of entrance into the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and that date of apostolic ordination was no longer to be considered.[35] As a result, John Willard Young went from being the most senior apostle to having no seniority at all.Interesting how John Willard's appointment affected the manner in which the prophet is selected and to see how Brigham was maneuvering to place his own family in positions of power within the church. 1
jkwilliams Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Fascinating. I knew about BY ordaining his young sons but did not know the rest of the story. Interesting that this affected seniority in the 12.
The Nehor Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Interesting how John Willard's appointment affected the manner in which the prophet is selected and to see how Brigham was maneuvering to place his own family in positions of power within the church.Interesting how you and that author are able to read Brigham Young's mind to verify the existence of this foul plot. 4
CA Steve Posted September 29, 2015 Author Posted September 29, 2015 Interesting how you and that author are able to read Brigham Young's mind to verify the existence of this foul plot.Interesting that you are able to read my mind also.
Guest Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Interesting article (blog?) on the third son of Brigham Young, John Willard Young who was ordained an apostle at the age of 11..if true, this is outrageous! And would cast serious doubt on the order of the Apostleship.
The Nehor Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Interesting that you are able to read my mind also.No, I just read your post. I suppose you might have lied in which case I apologize for believing you.
The Nehor Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 if true, this is outrageous! And would cast serious doubt on the order of the Apostleship.Why?
CA Steve Posted September 29, 2015 Author Posted September 29, 2015 No, I just read your post. I suppose you might have lied in which case I apologize for believing you.I suppose you just want to cast both the author and myself is as bad of light as possible to avoid any substantive response to the article. True to form. Instead of trying to make this about me, do you care to comment of the article itself ? 2
The Nehor Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 I suppose you just want to cast both the author and myself is as bad of light as possible to avoid any substantive response to the article. True to form. Instead of trying to make this about me, do you care to comment of the article itself ?I did, the part where Brigham Young was plotting a dynasty is pure supposition and mind reading. You endorsed this reading so I am calling that supposition out as a guess, reading it in the worst spirit possible. Since you and the author both made this supposition I am calling both of you out as well.So defend it with proof if you can. If you can prove that Brigham Young planned to take over the church for his dynasty and was planning for his family to rule the church indefinitely I will retract my statement and send you a nice fruit basket. 3
HappyJackWagon Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 I did, the part where Brigham Young was plotting a dynasty is pure supposition and mind reading. You endorsed this reading so I am calling that supposition out as a guess, reading it in the worst spirit possible. Since you and the author both made this supposition I am calling both of you out as well.So defend it with proof if you can. If you can prove that Brigham Young planned to take over the church for his dynasty and was planning for his family to rule the church indefinitely I will retract my statement and send you a nice fruit basket.Do you have an alternate theory for ordaining his 11 year old son to the apostleship and keeping it secret from the quorum and his presidency? 2
stemelbow Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 I did, the part where Brigham Young was plotting a dynasty is pure supposition and mind reading. You endorsed this reading so I am calling that supposition out as a guess, reading it in the worst spirit possible. Since you and the author both made this supposition I am calling both of you out as well. So defend it with proof if you can. If you can prove that Brigham Young planned to take over the church for his dynasty and was planning for his family to rule the church indefinitely I will retract my statement and send you a nice fruit basket. Curious what his motivation was to ordain his 11 year old as an apostle? It does seem like there was objection and concern of nepotism from Brigham. I don't think those are outlandish claims and I don't think they quite reach the point of wanting to rule the Church indefinitely.
CA Steve Posted September 29, 2015 Author Posted September 29, 2015 I did, the part where Brigham Young was plotting a dynasty is pure supposition and mind reading. You endorsed this reading so I am calling that supposition out as a guess, reading it in the worst spirit possible. Since you and the author both made this supposition I am calling both of you out as well.So defend it with proof if you can. If you can prove that Brigham Young planned to take over the church for his dynasty and was planning for his family to rule the church indefinitely I will retract my statement and send you a nice fruit basket.I didn't endorse anything. I said manipulates. Feel free to continue with your mind reading.
Duncan Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 (edited) From what I read he was ordained and then his brother John A. Young to the apostleship, 10 years later, but neither were in the Q12.They really didn't do much until they were called into the FP in the declining years of their father. I got the drift that John W. Young wasn't too involved with the Church as he had business interests that kept him away from doing anything. I think it's a neat piece of history but I don't see it being testimony shaking Edited September 29, 2015 by Duncan
The Nehor Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Do you have an alternate theory for ordaining his 11 year old son to the apostleship and keeping it secret from the quorum and his presidency?God told him to do so and keep it secret to prevent charges of nepotism.Curious what his motivation was to ordain his 11 year old as an apostle? It does seem like there was objection and concern of nepotism from Brigham. I don't think those are outlandish claims and I don't think they quite reach the point of wanting to rule the Church indefinitely.He would not be the first apostle that young (pun intended).
ttribe Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 God told him to do so and keep it secret to prevent charges of nepotism. So, the rest of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve couldn't have received immediate confirmatory revelation from God that would have made the whole "secrecy" element unnecessary?
stemelbow Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 God told him to do so and keep it secret to prevent charges of nepotism. It didn't prevent such charges, though.
The Nehor Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Interesting how John Willard's appointment affected the manner in which the prophet is selected and to see how Brigham was maneuvering to place his own family in positions of power within the church.I didn't endorse anything. I said manipulates. Feel free to continue with your mind reading.No, you said "maneuvering to place his own family in positions of power" which is what the article said. That is pretty much an endorsement. It was also "maneuvering" not "manipulates" but no need to be pedantic I guess.
The Nehor Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 So, the rest of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve couldn't have received immediate confirmatory revelation from God that would have made the whole "secrecy" element unnecessary?No idea, the early apostles were of a more hard-headed variety. Same reason Joseph Smith complained that all but a few of the apostles seemed to get consecration.It didn't prevent such charges, though.It delayed them a while.
ALarson Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 John Willard Young caused a lot of problems for his Father, Brigham. It's interesting to read about and I can actually understand why Brigham showed some favoritism to his own sons and wanted them to be the next leaders of the church. What I don't understand is how Brigham sent John tithing money to live on after he left Utah and the church.
ttribe Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 No idea, the early apostles were of a more hard-headed variety. Same reason Joseph Smith complained that all but a few of the apostles seemed to get consecration. At the risk of sounding cliche, Occam's Razor would seem to apply here.
Jeanne Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 I had no idea that he ordained a younger son. This if very interesting! I love history!
Duncan Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 I had no idea that he ordained a younger son. This if very interesting! I love history! 3 actually! only one became a member of the Twelve, Elder Brigham Young Jr.
Jeanne Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 I had no idea that he ordained a younger son. This if very interesting! I love history!
CA Steve Posted September 29, 2015 Author Posted September 29, 2015 No, you said "maneuvering to place his own family in positions of power" which is what the article said. That is pretty much an endorsement. It was also "maneuvering" not "manipulates" but no need to be pedantic I guess.Amazing how you can determine my mind set from "maneuvering". Truly I am impressed.
Recommended Posts