- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SD – Ray’s example comes straight from the President Hinckley life book. And it worked well. In a way it gave us a President for over three decades. I see it the same way Ray does, not just for keeping Nelson and others off the chair, but it also gives Uchtdorf and Eyring (but Uchtdorf most especially) more time as a leader. Uchtdorf’s placement holds weight in GC as well as in private meetings. His present calling ranks him above the other senior GA’s. That is a plus we probably don’t give enough credit to. Once President Monson passes there is no guarantee Uchtdorf or Eyring would retain their spots.
I know people here assume that because Monson and Hinckley were connected as councilors then President and Councilors that is how it works, but historically councilors have come from various places. Some GA’s, some 70’s, and so on. I don’t see Nelson selecting Uchtdorf.
Having Monson hang on is a gift to everyone. Even if it’s just six more months.
I agree with you Mom. Eyring and Uchtdorf still constitute the Council of the First Presidency who do work together independent of the Council of the Quorum of the Twelve. They meet separately, then together. I disagree that Nelson won’t choose Uchtdorf. We do love some tradition, and recent tradition holds that he will retain the counselors if that time comes. In the more distant past outsiders could be and were chosen as counselors. The closest we have come to anything like that is actually when Nelson and Oaks were called as apostles and they were not already GAs. One major change since that time is that we have many more GAs (Seventies) than we had then.
The last non-Apostle FPC we had was Thorpe B. Isaacson, who was an Assistant to the Twelve at the time (a since abolished office whose duties are now filled by the Seventy). Thorpe had also been a counselor in the Presiding Bishopric. He was an additional counselor (not first or second) to McKay at the time when he had five counselors. Issacson was called in October 1965 and had a stroke in February 1966, rendering him unable perform his duties and necessitating the call of Alvin R. Dyer. When McKay died in 1970, Issacson returned to his position as Assistant to the Twelve and died that same year.
Joseph Fielding Smith, also a counselor to McKay, became president on McKay’s death and he retained N. Eldon Tanner and added Harold B. Lee, but did not retain Hugh B. Brown who was apparently able bodied. That’s the last time a new president did not retain an able counselor, and it was likely because Brown did not agree with the much more conservative Smith on a few things, and apparently Brown actually questioned whether Smith was fit to hold the office. Brown returned to the Q12. Marion G. Romney was not retained by Ezra Taft Benson, but Romney was incapacitated at the time. Prior to Fielding Smith not retaining Brown, the last time a counselor was not retained was when Joseph F. Smith did not retain Rudger Clawson, who had served only 5 days under Lorenzo Snow and had not been set apart. Clawson returned to the Q12 and later served as president of the quorum. John Taylor did not retain either first or second counselors to Brigham Young, but Young also had additional counselors, including George Q. Cannon and Joseph F. Smith who became first and second counselors respectively. Joseph F. also served as counselor to Wilford Woodruff and Lorenzo Snow.
It should also be noted that Dyer was an apostle but was never a member of the Q12 and returned to his duties as an Assistant to the Twelve (and subsequently the FQot70) after McKay’s death. Dyer was also a perpetrator of the idea Blacks could not hold the priesthood because they are descendants of Cain (now disavowed by the church). Smith had two able counselors and there was not a need at that time for additional counselors as McKay had had, so Dyer was released as additional counselor.
DarkJedi wrote:In the past when we had incapacitated presidents (the most recent more than 20 years ago) the church continued to run and the membership saw no difference except for speaking by the FP. We sometimes use the term Q15 here, and in reality that’s an appropriate term for how it works – the church is not ruled by a dictator who speaks to God on his own, rather it is ruled by committee and any revelation is received collectively.
I agree with this DJ, and like the stability we now have in leadership succession. It seems to be working alright.
SamBee wrote:
There is a simple pragmatic reason for it – it stops infighting, quarrels and schisms within the leadership to a large degree.
I agree. That is one of the positives, since we know how human nature works, it is a decent approach.I get the impression God is kind of saying…”It’s OK. I can work with anyone that is pure in heart, despite any weaknesses.” Even Moses needed some help being propped up when strength was waning.
As we learn in the book of Omni…some prophets dutifully pass on the work even if they are not in a position to add much or change much. They are still prophets.
TSM has added much over the years…even if now he isn’t able to, he is still a prophet. The work goes on. I don’t sense a change despite his individual circumstance. The church rolls on. I am glad there isn’t drama, fanfare, or panic. Next person steps up, and on we go. God can work with anyone.
SilentDawning wrote:I wish there was a way of letting them leave the presidency voluntarily so THEN, the succession in the presidency can take over to determine who is next.
Well, what would happen if a prophet did say he wanted to step down? Is he the only LDS without agency to decline to continue in a calling?
For that matter, what would happen if he simply opposed his own sustaining vote at Conference? Or answered no to the “do you sustain…” question at his next TR interview?
As a small side note – I miss President Hinckley, President Monson, and President Faust. Their friendship oozed into their teamship. I think it was good for the overall church. I like the present team, I just miss the one before them, too.
We can return to the OP.
I just read (sorry no link as it was in Facebook and I can’t find it now) that Hugh B. Brown suggested that their be a mandatory retirement age. He would be about the first to be retired if this had gone into effect. It was 10 years later when they implemented for the 70. mom3 wrote:
As a small side note – I miss President Hinckley, President Monson, and President Faust. Their friendship oozed into their teamship. I think it was good for the overall church.
Quick note of trivia interesting only to me, probably. There have only been two cases where the entire FP was made up of the current Church President and two future Church Presidents. The first time was under ETB, when GBH and TSM were counselors and the second was right after, when HWH was President and GBH and TSM were counselors.NightSG wrote:Well, what would happen if a prophet did say he wanted to step down? Is he the only LDS without agency to decline to continue in a calling?
Interesting question. I think he could step down, just like the Pope did, if he thought it was for the best, for whatever reason.I do not thing the other apostles would say, “You aren’t allowed to do that”.
And as Sambee pointed out, we have a system that is stable, so stepping down doesn’t break the system.
It could be done. I just can’t imagine when it would ever happen.
I read an interesting (and cynical) analysis on another forum. While we all love Eyring and Uchtdorf, they have a really low chance of ever becoming the Prophet due to their ages, and being where they sit in the order. Their only power lays with them remaining in the FP. But Nelson, Oaks and Holland each have a really high chance. So the power lays with them, and they have their groups in the 12 and 70 following them, looking to get bootstrapped up the chain when they sit in the number one chair. Ballard and Hales have little chance, so no power. And those younger 70’s playing the long game are hooking their wagon to Bednar.
Quote:On Own Now – Quick note of trivia interesting only to me, probably. There have only been two cases where the entire FP was made up of the current Church President and two future Church Presidents. The first time was under ETB, when GBH and TSM were counselors and the second was right after, when HWH was President and GBH and TSM were counselors.
It is part of the bromance between GBH and TSM that I double love. I don’t think it will ever happen again quite the same way and for such a long stretch. It’s also why I believe TSM may be very lonely. He is the only one left.
Quote:Sheldon – I read an interesting (and cynical) analysis on another forum. While we all love Eyring and Uchtdorf, they have a really low chance of ever becoming the Prophet due to their ages, and being where they sit in the order. Their only power lays with them remaining in the FP.
But Nelson, Oaks and Holland each have a really high chance. So the power lays with them, and they have their groups in the 12 and 70 following them, looking to get bootstrapped up the chain when they sit in the number one chair. Ballard and Hales have little chance, so no power. And those younger 70’s playing the long game are hooking their wagon to Bednar.
I actually share that cynicism as well. You can catch it in brief statements made etc. Bednar came out of the gate stronger on the GC when he and Uchtdorf were called. It really wasn’t until Uchtdorf became a member of the FP that anyone gave his words much thought. I for one don’t want to lose that. Which puts me in a tough spot. I ache for President Monson. As I mentioned above the guy is all alone, all his friends, his wive and who knows who else have left this life. His body has reached capacity and yet I believe we need the balance and weight of Eyring and Uchtdorf desperately. I never am sure where to vote my heart on this.
NightSG wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:I wish there was a way of letting them leave the presidency voluntarily so THEN, the succession in the presidency can take over to determine who is next.
Well, what would happen if a prophet did say he wanted to step down? Is he the only LDS without agency to decline to continue in a calling?
For that matter, what would happen if he simply opposed his own sustaining vote at Conference? Or answered no to the “do you sustain…” question at his next TR interview?
Then make it a determination of a pair of doctors as to whether it is best for the prophet’s well being if he continues. That takes it out of the hands of the Q12 except to have a 2/3 vote that a doctor’s opinion is necessary….
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.