Child Prophet: The Curious Case Of John Willard Young, A Mormon Apostle

[CMZ]

From what happened when Joseph smith died it seems pretty clear that Brigham knew that just being in the First Presidency doesn't put you in line to be prophet.

[ttribe]

Why was John the Baptist ordained at 8 days old?  It does not appear that Zacharias was building a dynasty.

 

You don't see a difference in circumstances?  Really?

[CA Steve]

From what happened when Joseph smith died it seems pretty clear that Brigham knew that just being in the First Presidency doesn't put you in line to be prophet.

You realize that the First Presidency, as we now know it, didn't exist at the time of the death of JS correct?

[KevinG]

Distinguish between the office of Apostle and being a member of the Quorum of the 12.  

 

That will help if you are tempted to read manipulation or inspiration into the situation.  Perhaps Brigham was preparing the lad for future leadership, rather than politically positioning him into the quorum?

 

As far as Brigham being inspired to do so, or selfishly motivated to do so...  Only Brigham and God know that.

[CMZ]

You realize that the First Presidency, as we now know it, didn't exist at the time of the death of JS correct?

 

Do you mean because of it being dissolved when he died?

[KevinG]

...and how did the question of the ordination turn into a thread on all things bad about Brigham's family tree?  Oh.  Yeah.  It's Mormon Dialogue and Discussion rule #666: No topic will be immune from rabbit trails and cheap shots.

[CMZ]

Distinguish between the office of Apostle and being a member of the Quorum of the 12. 

 

They are related but not the same.

[KevinG]

They are related but not the same.

 

Yup...  Ordination does not necessarily mean given a position in the Church.  With or without the knowledge of others who are ordained to that office.

[CA Steve]

Do you mean because of it being dissolved when he died?

No. Who were members of the 1st Presidency at JS death and what office did they hold? Hint they were not apostles.

 

Brigham Young expanded the number of apostles later on from 12 to 15 (14?) so he could constitute the 1st presidency from apostles. Before that one did not have to be an apostle to be in the 1st presidency,and I don't believe any were, so Brigham Young's opinion of succession and the 1st presidency at the time of Joseph's death is irrelevant to Willard Young being made an apostle at such a young age.

[CV75]

Considering the violent (both human and natural) environment of the Old American West, perhaps President Young thought it prudent to have a secret repository of the keys in a few ordained apostles in case the formal quorums were "dispatched."

[longview]

You realize that the First Presidency, as we now know it, didn't exist at the time of the death of JS correct?

You may be making a cogent point.  However, I would be very appreciative if you could provide the distinctions between now and the original presidency established in 1833.  Elder Packard (deceased) stated:

"The First Presidency was in place by 1833; then two years later, in February of 1835, came the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. And that is as it should be. The First Presidency came first in sequence and stands first in authority. And, true to the pattern, it was made of men called from the ordinary pursuits of life."

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1996/10/the-twelve-apostles?lang=eng

 

No. Who were members of the 1st Presidency at JS death and what office did they hold? Hint they were not apostles.

 

Brigham Young expanded the number of apostles later on from 12 to 15 (14?) so he could constitute the 1st presidency from apostles. Before that one did not have to be an apostle to be in the 1st presidency,and I don't believe any were, so Brigham Young's opinion of succession and the 1st presidency at the time of Joseph's death is irrelevant to Willard Young being made an apostle at such a young age.

I have read one of Elder Packard's talks regarding the Melchizedek Priesthood. It actually has the apostleship as one of the offices. I would think that one has to be ordained an elder before making any further progression in the M.P. but I could be wrong?  Also, if one is called directly into the First Presidency as one of the counselors, would not that person be ordained into the "office" of apostle as part of that calling?  Even if he never were in the Quorum of the Twelve?

[CMZ]

No. Who were members of the 1st Presidency at JS death and what office did they hold? Hint they were not apostles.

 

Brigham Young expanded the number of apostles later on from 12 to 15 (14?) so he could constitute the 1st presidency from apostles. Before that one did not have to be an apostle to be in the 1st presidency,and I don't believe any were, so Brigham Young's opinion of succession and the 1st presidency at the time of Joseph's death is irrelevant to Willard Young being made an apostle at such a young age.

 

Well, yeah; you still don't have to be an apostle to be in the First Presidency (it's still a quorum of "three presiding high priests"). I thought you were maybe talking about something else. There were even a few examples in the 20th century of First Presidency counselors who were high priests and not apostles (I can think of at least three). Brigham knew at the time of Joseph's death that just being an apostle longer than anyone else didn't make you the prophet, but that you had to be an apostle who had also risen through the ranks of the Quorum of the Twelve until you were the seniormost such apostle.

[cinepro]

Distinguish between the office of Apostle and being a member of the Quorum of the 12.  

 

That will help if you are tempted to read manipulation or inspiration into the situation.  Perhaps Brigham was preparing the lad for future leadership, rather than politically positioning him into the quorum?

 

As far as Brigham being inspired to do so, or selfishly motivated to do so...  Only Brigham and God know that.

 

Go back and read the articles linked in post #86.  Until Lorenzo Snow declared otherwise, it was assumed that being an Apostle was enough to put you in line for succession.  Here's the quote:

 

On March 31, 1900, the aging President Lorenzo Snow and his counselors, George Q. Cannon and Joseph F. Smith, had a private discussion, in which they agreed that the previous policy of apostolic seniority by date of ordination, which Brigham Young had implemented, was incorrect, and that seniority should be gauged by date of entrance into the Quorum. Although Joseph F. Smith had ranked below Brigham Young, Jr., in Quorum rankings, succession sequence, and solemn public sustainings in conference, Snow told Smith that Brigham Young, Jr., would now rank below him in seniority. There is no escaping the fact that this was a straightforward change in policy; nevertheless, it was also an entirely reasonable and sensible change. However, there remained the difficult problem of informing Brigham Jr. that neither he (nor John Willard) would be the next president of the church.

 

Obviously, Brigham didn't document his exact thoughts on why he ordained John to be an apostle at the age of 11, so we'll never know for sure. 

 

But if your first comment is correct and we can use the difference between being an Apostle and being a member of the  Q12 as an indicator of the likelihood of manipulation, then the fact that most Church members (including Brigham Young) didn't think there was a difference and that it was the date or ordination that determined seniority at the time of John's ordination, then by your reasoning that would make manipulation likely. 

 

Can't say that I argue with you.

[CA Steve]

You may be making a cogent point.  However, I would be very appreciative if you could provide the distinctions between now and the original presidency established in 1833.  Elder Packard (deceased) stated:

"The First Presidency was in place by 1833; then two years later, in February of 1835, came the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. And that is as it should be. The First Presidency came first in sequence and stands first in authority. And, true to the pattern, it was made of men called from the ordinary pursuits of life."

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1996/10/the-twelve-apostles?lang=eng

 

I have read one of Elder Packard's talks regarding the Melchizedek Priesthood. It actually has the apostleship as one of the offices. I would think that one has to be ordained an elder before making any further progression in the M.P. but I could be wrong?  Also, if one is called directly into the First Presidency as one of the counselors, would not that person be ordained into the "office" of apostle as part of that calling?  Even if he never were in the Quorum of the Twelve?

Was Oliver Cowdery a member of the quorum of the 12 at the time of Joseph's death?

This thread is about Williard Young and has evolved into a discussion on what was viewed as a proper succession route to being the prophet.

Unless I am misunderstanding CMZ, he seems to be saying that length of service as an apostle in the quorum of 12 was always understood as the proper route and there was no change necessitated by the appointment of Williard Young at such a young age. He pointed to the 1st presidency at the time of Joseph's death as evidence to back up his point. I do not think that was a good example.

 

So my distinction between the first presidencies then and now, which bears on the discussion in this thread, has to do with being a member of the quorum of the 12. They were not at the time of Joseph's death and while I would have to check a few things, I am pretty sure it was Brigham Young, later on in Utah, that started the custom of calling them from the quorum of the 12 which he expanded for what appears to be the purpose of calling them from that very quorum. It has been a while since I read all of that so I am going on memory, but I do recall the 1st presidency at the time of Joseph were not  from quorum of the 12 apostles.

[Zakuska]

...and how did the question of the ordination turn into a thread on all things bad about Brigham's family tree?  Oh.  Yeah.  It's Mormon Dialogue and Discussion rule #666: No topic will be immune from rabbit trails and cheap shots.

 

Well... if anything nefarious can be made out of something... you better bet they will exploit it.

[CA Steve]

Well, yeah; you still don't have to be an apostle to be in the First Presidency (it's still a quorum of "three presiding high priests"). I thought you were maybe talking about something else. There were even a few examples in the 20th century of First Presidency counselors who were high priests and not apostles (I can think of at least three). Brigham knew at the time of Joseph's death that just being an apostle longer than anyone else didn't make you the prophet, but that you had to be an apostle who had also risen through the ranks of the Quorum of the Twelve until you were the seniormost such apostle.

If Brigham knew this why did President Snow and his counselors believe that was exactly what Brigham had implemented and think it was difficult to inform Brigham's sons they were no longer 1st in seniority?

[CMZ]

Unless I am misunderstanding CMZ, he seems to be saying that length of service as an apostle in the quorum of 12 was always understood as the proper route

 

No, I'm not exactly saying that. I'm saying that it always was the proper route in the mind of the Lord even if it took us mere mortals dealing with some circumstances that called it into question to realize what was always the mind of the Lord. So, yes, there definitely were some times where some mortal men had other ideas but they eventually caught on to the proper way of doing things. And this came in stages, not all at once. Just like with how the proper role of the Seventy wasn't fully realized until the 1980's or so (yes, I know there are many nuances to it and that I am speaking in broad generalizations right now).

[CMZ]

If Brigham knew this why did President Snow and his counselors believe that was exactly what Brigham had implemented and think it was difficult to inform Brigham's sons they were no longer 1st in seniority?

 

Because they were all in the middle of learning.

[CMZ]

We have to keep in mind that while all this was going on that the Lord himself wasn't wondering, "Hmm, I wonder what a good succession plan is." He already knew and the mortals down on earth were steadily catching on to how it should be.

[CA Steve]

No, I'm not exactly saying that. I'm saying that it always was the proper route in the mind of the Lord even if it took us mere mortals dealing with some circumstances that called it into question to realize what was always the mind of the Lord. So, yes, there definitely were some times where some mortal men had other ideas but they eventually caught on to the proper way of doing things. And this came in stages, not all at once. Just like with how the proper role of the Seventy wasn't fully realized until the 1980's or so (yes, I know there are many nuances to it and that I am speaking in broad generalizations right now).

I am a bit curious as to how you know we have the mind of the Lord figured out now? Clearly back then, they thought the very same thing. It seems that the learning only happens for future generations. For all we know, by your reasoning, in the future we may determine there is an even more proper way of doing things. And, does the present determination the proper route invalidate what was done in the past? Because if it doesn't than I am not sure what point you are trying to make at all.

 

This line of reasoning does not inspire much confidence in prophets.

[KevinG]

This line of reasoning does not inspire much confidence in prophets.

 

Do you expect your children to be well versed in the rules of the road when they are 8?

 

The Church and its members, like all of God's children learn line by line, precept by precept.  Yet we are assured through the atonement of Jesus Christ that no mistake made my men, even inspired one's, will destroy the program of the Church and the teaching and preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

I don't have confidence in Prophets.  I have confidence in Christ who guides them.  And when I pray to confirm the counsel they give, I have not been disappointed yet, even with the direction Brigham took the LDS Church.

[Teancum]

Why was John the Baptist ordained at 8 days old?  It does not appear that Zacharias was building a dynasty.

 

 

Apples and oranges really. 

[jkwilliams]

Apples and oranges really.

I thought it was locusts and honey.

[ttribe]

I thought it was locusts and honey.

 

Win.

[CA Steve]

Do you expect your children to be well versed in the rules of the road when they are 8?

 

The Church and its members, like all of God's children learn line by line, precept by precept.  Yet we are assured through the atonement of Jesus Christ that no mistake made my men, even inspired one's, will destroy the program of the Church and the teaching and preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

I don't have confidence in Prophets.  I have confidence in Christ who guides them.  And when I pray to confirm the counsel they give, I have not been disappointed yet, even with the direction Brigham took the LDS Church.

I think comparing 8 year olds, who are still finding out how to read and write, with prophets who are trying to work our the proper route of prophetic succession makes my point a lot more than yours.