provoman Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 (edited) SS Lesson is about succession of Prophets. The discussion went the "why, is ______ now in said position". It is an interesting discussion full of so much conjecture and "well it happens this way because" I would to speak up and say "Whoever is in what calling, is because the the Lord wants it that way. There is no require that so and and so it next in line." For me what happens when the tradition doesn't happen; a junior Apostle is called to be the Prophet or a Counselor to the Prophet? Edited August 12, 2018 by provoman
RevTestament Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 37 minutes ago, provoman said: SS Lesson is about succession of Prophets. The discussion went the "why, is ______ now in said position". It is an interesting discussion full of so much conjecture and "well it happens this way because" I would to speak up and say "Whoever is in what calling, is because the the Lord wants it that way. There is no require that so and and so it next in line." For me what happens when the tradition doesn't happen; a junior Apostle is called to be the Prophet or a Counselor to the Prophet? This particular tradition of successor presidents is merely tradition to me. It certainly wasn't the accepted norm at the time of Joseph Smith's death. There is nothing in our standard works which suggests the senior-most apostle should be the next president. As I have pointed out several times on this board, it seems the only requirement is that the President be a high priest, and be affirmed by the vote of the body of the Church. He does not have to be an apostle. Nor do I agree that the quorum of the presidency dissolves upon the death of the President. So I will likely hold my breath for this lesson. 2
Prof Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 58 minutes ago, RevTestament said: This particular tradition of successor presidents is merely tradition to me. It certainly wasn't the accepted norm at the time of Joseph Smith's death. There is nothing in our standard works which suggests the senior-most apostle should be the next president. As I have pointed out several times on this board, it seems the only requirement is that the President be a high priest, and be affirmed by the vote of the body of the Church. He does not have to be an apostle. Nor do I agree that the quorum of the presidency dissolves upon the death of the President. So I will likely hold my breath for this lesson. Agreed. If I recall correctly, there were several groups that splintered off from the main Church after Joseph's death because there was no official policy of succession. Is anyone aware of a written policy or doctrine on this matter of succession?
RevTestament Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 20 minutes ago, Prof said: Agreed. If I recall correctly, there were several groups that splintered off from the main Church after Joseph's death because there was no official policy of succession. Is anyone aware of a written policy or doctrine on this matter of succession? Yes. D&C says the President must be a High Priest, and be affirmed or voted in by the body of the Church. That's really it. Even Brigham Young thought of holding the presidency in receivership for Joseph's oldest son. If you will recall Sidney Rigdon also ran for President. The Church voted for Brigham Young, but he did not accept the position for years for the above reason. I think the Church has followed the tradition for fear that further splintering may occur, but it is merely tradition imho. 1
Josh516 Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 I know I'm a bit outside the thinking and beliefs of mainstream lds, but does the Church differentiate between the president of the Church and president of the Priesthood? If so, that would answer a lot of those questions.
Prof Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 14 minutes ago, RevTestament said: Yes. D&C says the President must be a High Priest, and be affirmed or voted in by the body of the Church. That's really it. Even Brigham Young thought of holding the presidency in receivership for Joseph's oldest son. If you will recall Sidney Rigdon also ran for President. The Church voted for Brigham Young, but he did not accept the position for years for the above reason. I think the Church has followed the tradition for fear that further splintering may occur, but it is merely tradition imho. Thanks, Rev!!!
CV75 Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 4 hours ago, provoman said: SS Lesson is about succession of Prophets. The discussion went the "why, is ______ now in said position". It is an interesting discussion full of so much conjecture and "well it happens this way because" I would to speak up and say "Whoever is in what calling, is because the the Lord wants it that way. There is no require that so and and so it next in line." For me what happens when the tradition doesn't happen; a junior Apostle is called to be the Prophet or a Counselor to the Prophet? I think the revelation to change the succession from the senior apostle to another proposed "candidate" would come through the same channels as revelations do now, and accepted unanimously among the Quorum of Twelve which functions as as a First Presidency during the Apostolic Interregnum http://www.byui.edu/devotionals/elder-gary-e-stevenson
JLHPROF Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 2 hours ago, Josh516 said: I know I'm a bit outside the thinking and beliefs of mainstream lds, but does the Church differentiate between the president of the Church and president of the Priesthood? If so, that would answer a lot of those questions. The Church does not differentiate. But Church History does. I assume that is what you are alluding to. All that is required in the D&C is the office of High Priest as has been pointed out, although D&C and the quoted history concerning Joseph's son places a Patriarchal office at the head of the Church. But were such a man called and voted in he would be head of the Church organization but there would be others holding higher priesthood authority and lesser organisational authority.
JLHPROF Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 5 hours ago, provoman said: SS Lesson is about succession of Prophets. The discussion went the "why, is ______ now in said position". It is an interesting discussion full of so much conjecture and "well it happens this way because" I would to speak up and say "Whoever is in what calling, is because the the Lord wants it that way. There is no require that so and and so it next in line." For me what happens when the tradition doesn't happen; a junior Apostle is called to be the Prophet or a Counselor to the Prophet? That tradition is unlikely to be changed or violated any time soon. It has been too well established by precedent and Presidential directives. And it was a challenge getting there so I don't see them hurrying to go through that again. 1
Glenn101 Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 44 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: That tradition is unlikely to be changed or violated any time soon. It has been too well established by precedent and Presidential directives. And it was a challenge getting there so I don't see them hurrying to go through that again. The tradition established an unwritten order of things that has served the church well . There is a possibility that it will be bypassed at some point in the future, but as CV75 said, it would come through the revelatory process. Glenn
bluebell Posted August 12, 2018 Posted August 12, 2018 4 hours ago, Josh516 said: I know I'm a bit outside the thinking and beliefs of mainstream lds, but does the Church differentiate between the president of the Church and president of the Priesthood? If so, that would answer a lot of those questions. Not really. It does differentiate between the president of the church and the president of the quorum of the 12 apostles though.
JLHPROF Posted August 13, 2018 Posted August 13, 2018 1 hour ago, bluebell said: Not really. It does differentiate between the president of the church and the president of the quorum of the 12 apostles though. That's because in the Church beliefs the President of the Church has always been the man holding the highest priesthood. The question is whether or not that has to be the case or is automatically the case. According to Church History both Joseph and Brigham indicate that the two roles aren't required to be the same man. It's just never been otherwise in Church teachings. 1
Josh516 Posted August 13, 2018 Posted August 13, 2018 That's my understanding as well. Joseph Smith wanted Hyrum to be president of the Church.
provoman Posted August 13, 2018 Author Posted August 13, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, JLHPROF said: That tradition is unlikely to be changed or violated any time soon. It has been too well established by precedent and Presidential directives. And it was a challenge getting there so I don't see them hurrying to go through that again. Thank you. The way it was spoken about - calling of a new Prophet - made me think "If it didnt happen as tradition has it, could we the people of the Church handle it." Edited August 13, 2018 by provoman
Guest Posted August 13, 2018 Posted August 13, 2018 9 hours ago, provoman said: SS Lesson is about succession of Prophets. The discussion went the "why, is ______ now in said position". It is an interesting discussion full of so much conjecture and "well it happens this way because" I would to speak up and say "Whoever is in what calling, is because the the Lord wants it that way. There is no require that so and and so it next in line." For me what happens when the tradition doesn't happen; a junior Apostle is called to be the Prophet or a Counselor to the Prophet? First of all, a person can and has served a members of the First Presidency as counsellors, more than once. It is true that the senior Apostle becomes the next President of the Church, but it is because they (he) are already President of the Quorum of the Twelve. As President of the Quorum, they are already in charge. But, I am confident that if it were God's will, then any Apostle could become President of the Church. But, I think God is too loving and too kind to thrust someone who is lacking in the decades of learning to make him President. Besides, it is not an and election, leading to a vote like in the Catholic Church. But, you are right there is a lot of conjecture that takes place when such questions are asked. You probably should have gone ahead and given your answer. 1
Josh516 Posted August 13, 2018 Posted August 13, 2018 Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the President of the Church sustained by vote of the people? So a theodemocracy?
carbon dioxide Posted August 13, 2018 Posted August 13, 2018 Tradition or not, the current system works well. All of the apostles are qualified to be the President of the Church so it seems logical to simply have the most senior apostle take the lead. This prevents any issues of debate and contention occurring in the Church. What perhaps could be changed is the idea that the President of the Church must serve until death. It would seem that if health issues arise then why can't he be released from the calling to allow the next in line in?
The Nehor Posted August 13, 2018 Posted August 13, 2018 2 hours ago, Josh516 said: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the President of the Church sustained by vote of the people? So a theodemocracy? Not really. Politically it matches more a rigged democracy where there is only one candidate. Sol not a real democracy. I do not mean to insult the Church by the comparison. The act of sustaining has real significance but to be democratic you would need another choice. 1
Meerkat Posted August 13, 2018 Posted August 13, 2018 I like the current succession idea. Experience is needed to run a worldwide organization like the Church. Going through the Quorum of the Twelve to become president of the quorum ensures a depth of knowledge and leadership ability. Whether tradition ir common sense, it seems like a good idea to me. 3
clarkgoble Posted August 13, 2018 Posted August 13, 2018 (edited) 23 hours ago, provoman said: SS Lesson is about succession of Prophets. The discussion went the "why, is ______ now in said position". It is an interesting discussion full of so much conjecture and "well it happens this way because" I would to speak up and say "Whoever is in what calling, is because the the Lord wants it that way. There is no require that so and and so it next in line." For me what happens when the tradition doesn't happen; a junior Apostle is called to be the Prophet or a Counselor to the Prophet? We have so little information about prophets in the pre-exilic period it's hard to say much. The Elijah → Elisha transition sure seems akin to our system (at least from my perspective). What was this mysterious "school of the prophets" in the pre-Kingdom era? There appears to be little or no structure in the time of Josiah when Jeremiah, Lehi and others prophesy. Indeed it appears there are competing prophets which is unheard of to us. (Unless one counts people like Dehlin as prophets - but no one outside of the Snufferites really claims prophesy) I agree what we have is just tradition - and that arrived at fairly late. (Arguably it's not really a tradition until the early 20th century) One interesting thing Nelson is doing is explicitly making an easier transition for when he's ill or dead. That has been I think a big issue in the 20th century. When a President is enfeebled then conflicting factions among the Apostles can somewhat run wild. That's how we got the financial ruin of the Church in the 1960's that Pres. Tanner had to come in and fix. Arguably it was Pres. Hinkley who was in the First Presidency from the 1970's up through when he was prophet that stabilized things the most. Both due to his personality and skills but also just being a constant figure for so many decades. With Pres. Monson I think arguably things got a little out of whack again due to his rumored ill health and dementia. Not bad - nothing like one can find in the 20th century. But still enough of an issue that I think Nelson is trying to establish some new traditions to deal with Apostles living so much longer but dementia becoming more of an issue generally in the west. My guess is that Oaks will follow this tradition and put his successor in the First Presidency rather than leaving them as President of the Twelve. I know many people were upset with the "demotion" of Uchtdorf but I think this should be seen more in terms of the problem of dementia and less as a parallel to Joseph Fielding Smith's conflict with Hugh B. Brown. Edited August 13, 2018 by clarkgoble 1
provoman Posted August 13, 2018 Author Posted August 13, 2018 15 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said: First of all, a person can and has served a members of the First Presidency as counsellors, more than once. It is true that the senior Apostle becomes the next President of the Church, but it is because they (he) are already President of the Quorum of the Twelve. As President of the Quorum, they are already in charge. But, I am confident that if it were God's will, then any Apostle could become President of the Church. But, I think God is too loving and too kind to thrust someone who is lacking in the decades of learning to make him President. Besides, it is not an and election, leading to a vote like in the Catholic Church. But, you are right there is a lot of conjecture that takes place when such questions are asked. You probably should have gone ahead and given your answer. I do not have your tact, so I withheld.
Doctrine 612 Posted August 14, 2018 Posted August 14, 2018 Before Joseph f Smith the church policy was the most senior apostle was the next president then then changed it to the most senior apostle in the quorum of the 12 is the next president.
Guest Posted August 14, 2018 Posted August 14, 2018 On August 12, 2018 at 9:09 PM, Josh516 said: That's my understanding as well. Joseph Smith wanted Hyrum to be president of the Church. Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith were co-Presidents of the Church when they were murdered.
strappinglad Posted August 14, 2018 Posted August 14, 2018 Would it be possible for a president to resign a la a recent Pope ? What about becoming emeritus ? I have always been under the impression that if the Lord wanted a different person as President of the Church , He could arrange for a strategically placed banana peel. Seriously, I'm sure the Lord plans many steps ahead for His Prophet.
Recommended Posts