What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Discussions toward a better understanding of LDS doctrine, history, and culture. Discussion of Christianity, religion, and faith in general is welcome.
User avatar
John Hamer
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 9:23 pm
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Post by John Hamer » Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:01 pm

My source for Sidney Rigdon's placement at #11 in the Council of Fifty is D. Michael Quinn "The Mormon Hierarchy" Vol. 1., p. 523. The recently published minutes might give further light, but I don't have a copy here.

User avatar
moksha
Posts: 558
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 4:22 am

Re: What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Post by moksha » Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:10 am

Sometimes you wonder whether the leadership succession was basically a successful coup on the part of Brigham Young or was in the Reformed Egyptian words of the Moroni a fait accompli. That idea of saying Brigham took on the countenance of Joseph during a speech was machiavellian in its inspiration.
Good faith does not require evidence, but it also does not turn a blind eye to that evidence. Otherwise, it becomes misplaced faith.
-- Moksha

JustCurious
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 12:35 pm

Re: What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Post by JustCurious » Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:26 pm

John Hamer wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:01 pm
My source for Sidney Rigdon's placement at #11 in the Council of Fifty is D. Michael Quinn "The Mormon Hierarchy" Vol. 1., p. 523. The recently published minutes might give further light, but I don't have a copy here.
I just had a lengthy discussion with my source. He told me the following:

1. From March 10, 1844 - June 27, 1844, Sidney Rigdon was indeed listed as #11, and Brigham Young as #23.
2. The next recorded list of members of the Fifty spans the period of Feb 4, 1845 - July 23, 1867. Sidney is not on this list, and Brigham is listed as #1.
3. This leaves a gap in the record, spanning from June 27, 1844 to Feb 4, 1845. Sometime within this gap time period, Sidney was dropped from the Council.
4. He is not aware of any specific record that indicates exactly *when* Sidney was dropped from the Council, but he *believes* it happened right after Joseph's death. He believes the Council convened and kicked Sidney out, probably early August of 1844.

He also said that indeed the list of Council members was typically listed chronologically, by age of the members, but that listing order did not necessarily correspond to any specific authority any of them had within the Council.

Note also, that Brigham was not sustained as President of the Church until December 27, 1847, and yet the official Fifty minutes had him listed as #1 on Feb 4, 1845 (two and a half years earlier).

I think I am going to stand with what I said earlier (a few posts above). Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think so. :-)

User avatar
John Hamer
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 9:23 pm
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Post by John Hamer » Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:57 pm

I guess I'm not sure what you're arguing. Regarding the succession, the only standing in the Fifty that matters is the ranking prior to Joseph Smith's death.

The February 4, 1845 record you cite is not from the Council of Fifty in the early church (i.e., during Joseph Smith's lifetime), but is already occurring in the emerging Brighamite faction of the church, i.e., the church faction that Brigham is controlling as acting church president, even though he is not yet been able to maneuver the people around him to sustain him as actual president of his faction of the church. As such, the 1845 meeting is not a meeting of the Council of Fifty, it a meeting of the Twelvite or Brighamite Council of Fifty. What the Brighamite Fifty say or do has no bearing on church succession, since from all non-Brighamite perspectives, it is already in apostasy.

That Sidney Rigdon was not on this new Brighamite Council of Fifty's roles is no surprise, considering that Rigdon had already relocated church headquarters to Pittsburgh and excommunicated the various people on the rolls of the Brighamite Fifty. Since the 1845 Brighamite Fifty meeting was conducted by excommunicates (from Rigdon's perspective), its actions have no bearing on the true Kingdom of God on Earth from the perspective of Rigdonites, for example.

In other words, it's a matter of perspective. If you privilege Brigham Young's perspective, it's no wonder you imagine that Brigham Young had a superior claim in the Fifty.

User avatar
deacon blues
Posts: 264
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:37 am

Re: What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Post by deacon blues » Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:18 pm

I thought the standing high council was the high council of the Nauvoo Stake, not the council of fifty.
God is Love. God is Truth

User avatar
John Hamer
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 9:23 pm
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Post by John Hamer » Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:33 pm

deacon blues wrote:
Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:18 pm
I thought the standing high council was the high council of the Nauvoo Stake, not the council of fifty.
Yes, you're correct. The topic has shifted in the course of the discussion on this thread.

JustCurious
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 12:35 pm

Re: What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Post by JustCurious » Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:25 pm

John Hamer wrote:
Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:57 pm
In other words, it's a matter of perspective. If you privilege Brigham Young's perspective, it's no wonder you imagine that Brigham Young had a superior claim in the Fifty.
Yep. I realize I have been speaking from the Brighamite perspective. And that it is not the CoC perspective, nor is it the Rigdonite perspective.

But, aren't most of the people on this forum coming from the Brighamite perspective?

I'm glad to make your acquaintance here, though. I have often had questions that I wondered about from the CoC perspective. Maybe I should start another thread with those? Seems I have already highjacked this thread away from it's original. Sorry for that.

User avatar
moksha
Posts: 558
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 4:22 am

Re: What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

Post by moksha » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:01 pm

Image
Traveling High Council logo
Good faith does not require evidence, but it also does not turn a blind eye to that evidence. Otherwise, it becomes misplaced faith.
-- Moksha

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests