What happened to the standing high council in Zion?

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

Shower thought this morning.

It seems early on in the church during the Ohio/Missouri era, Joseph had kind of a theo-democracy thing going on with checks and balances over leaders like the US Republic. Common Consent was taken seriously as a democratic vote, and there was a set of leaders equal in authority to the Q12. This was the "standing" high council. The Q12 was known as the "travelling" high council. This standing high council was to be located in the center place of zion or church HQ. The two presiding high councils when combined are supposed to equal the authority of the first presidency. So you had some form of checks and balances between governing bodies.

After the succession crisis and establishment of the Utah branch of the church, the standing high council basically withered away and disappeared. I wonder if this body had continued, how differently the Utah church governance would look today. I also wonder if Brigham purposefully let that body diminish in authority so he and the other apostles could have unanswered power in Utah. I certainly haven't seen any revelations declaring the standing high council disbanded.

More reading:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presiding_high_council

[Just This Guy]

According to the Wiki you posed, the Standing High Council was dissolved when they were expelled from Missouri in 1838.

Originally, the standing high council, under the direction of the First Presidency, was in a de facto supervisory role over the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, which was a traveling high council with jurisdiction only outside of Zion or its stakes. For example, in 1838, when vacancies arose in the traveling high council, it was the standing high council at Far West, Missouri, that voted on and filled the vacancies. Later, as the traveling high council evolved and began to be known as the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, it acquired equal status with the standing high council. When the standing high council was dissolved after church members were expelled from Missouri, the high council organized at the new church headquarters in Nauvoo, Illinois, where it continued to function as the presiding high council of the church, overseeing appeals from high councils in outlying stakes.

I think that consolidation of power was more happening under JSJ. BY took what was there and ran withit.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

According to the Wiki you posed, the Standing High Council was dissolved when they were expelled from Missouri in 1838.

Originally, the standing high council, under the direction of the First Presidency, was in a de facto supervisory role over the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, which was a traveling high council with jurisdiction only outside of Zion or its stakes. For example, in 1838, when vacancies arose in the traveling high council, it was the standing high council at Far West, Missouri, that voted on and filled the vacancies. Later, as the traveling high council evolved and began to be known as the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, it acquired equal status with the standing high council. When the standing high council was dissolved after church members were expelled from Missouri, the high council organized at the new church headquarters in Nauvoo, Illinois, where it continued to function as the presiding high council of the church, overseeing appeals from high councils in outlying stakes.

I think that consolidation of power was more happening under JSJ. BY took what was there and ran withit.

It was dissolved in Missouri after the expelling of the Saints due to the Mormon war and reestablished in Nauvoo and also briefly in the early Utah territory where its purpose was changed and relevancy eliminated. I'm just curious where the revelation is that implemented those changes.

After the 1844 succession crisis, high councils developed differently in the various denominations of the Latter Day Saint movement. In the LDS Church, which was composed of those who recognized Brigham Young and the apostles as the rightful successor to Smith, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles gained ascendancy and the standing high council diminished in authority, eventually disappearing completely. Post-exodus to Utah, the standing high council was established in a limited capacity as part of the central Salt Lake Stake, but it only served as a ratifying body for priesthood quorums in other stakes. An LDS Church Sunday School manual from 1980 states: “The Salt Lake Stake functioned more or less as a center stake that gave direction and guidance and had jurisdiction over other stakes. When quorum leaders in outlying areas needed new officers they sent a list of nominees to the Salt Lake Stake.” [6] Of this arrangement, the manual states that “the function of stake organizations … had not been adequately defined for the maximum strength of the overall Church organization.”[6]

How convenient!

[RubinHighlander]

Kind of like the revelations that instituted the hard-core WoW in the 20's, the one that said blacks can't hold the priesthood, that 10% of gross income is tithing, that polygamy is no longer a thing and the one that said kids of gay parents can't participate in ordinances? Do you even revelate bro?

[moksha]

If only the Standing High Council had voted its members to all be Seers, Prophets, and Revelators, it would not have been dismissed so easily.

After the First Presidency, the (Presiding) Nauvoo High Council was the church's chief non-travelling legislative and judicial council. Nauvoo Stake President William Marks was president of the High Council at the time. Smith's widow, Emma urged Marks to succeed Smith as President and Trustee-in-Trust of the church, but Marks supported the claims of Rigdon.

The Quorum of the Twelve were originally ordained to be traveling ministers and had been delegated leadership of outlying areas of the world in which no "stakes" — local congregations — were established. By revelation, the Twelve, as a body, had authority equal to the First Presidency, the Presiding High Council, and the Quorum of Seventy. However, the "twelve apostles have no right to go into Zion or any of its stakes where there is a regular high council established, to regulate any matter pertaining thereto".

[deacon blues]

If only the Standing High Council had voted its members to all be Seers, Prophets, and Revelators, it would not have been dismissed so easily.

After the First Presidency, the (Presiding) Nauvoo High Council was the church's chief non-travelling legislative and judicial council. Nauvoo Stake President William Marks was president of the High Council at the time. Smith's widow, Emma urged Marks to succeed Smith as President and Trustee-in-Trust of the church, but Marks supported the claims of Rigdon.

The Quorum of the Twelve were originally ordained to be traveling ministers and had been delegated leadership of outlying areas of the world in which no "stakes" — local congregations — were established. By revelation, the Twelve, as a body, had authority equal to the First Presidency, the Presiding High Council, and the Quorum of Seventy. However, the "twelve apostles have no right to go into Zion or any of its stakes where there is a regular high council established, to regulate any matter pertaining thereto".

What's the source of this quote, Moksha? It's very interesting.

[Hagoth]

Short answer: Brigham Young did to the High Council what he recommended as the appropriate treatment for interracial marriages.

[moksha]

What's the source of this quote, Moksha? It's very interesting.

It is from the article on the Succession Crisis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Successio ... ay_Saints)

[JustCurious]

At the time of the Missouri exodus, the reason Brigham did away with the "Standing High Council", and instead deferred to the "Traveling High Council", is because they as a group were commencing to "travel", and would no longer be "standing".

This is pretty easy to comprehend.

However, the next questions now are... "why was the Standing High Council not reimplemented once the Saints reached the Salt Lake valley, and why is it not a Standing High Council that chiefly governs the church at this time, but it is instead continuing to be governed by the Traveling High Council"?

I think that's the curious thing now.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

At the time of the Missouri exodus, the reason Brigham did away with the "Standing High Council", and instead deferred to the "Traveling High Council", is because they as a group were commencing to "travel", and would no longer be "standing".

This is pretty easy to comprehend.

However, the next questions now are... "why was the Standing High Council not reimplemented once the Saints reached the Salt Lake valley, and why is it not a Standing High Council that chiefly governs the church at this time, but it is instead continuing to be governed by the Traveling High Council"?

I think that's the curious thing now.

Agreed. And it turns out it was implemented in Utah territory for a time, but its primary purpose was only ratifying lower stake decisions and ordinations. It was never seen as being equal in authority or having oversight equal to the twelve as indicated in section 107. Eventually it was seen as superfluous and unnecessary and was quietly disbanded (without revelation being canonized about it shutting down).

[2bizE]

The quorum of the 70 was also equal in power to the q12. See DC 107 23-25. The Q12 could not make any decisions that were not approved by the Q70. This was a power struggle that BY did not want, so essentially he demoted the Q70 to be a lesser quorum. This changed the power structure of the church.

Here is an interesting research study on the 70s.

https://www.google.com/urlsa=t&source=w ... xyIOzPtTRw

[JustCurious]

The quorum of the 70 was also equal in power to the q12. See DC 107 23-25. The Q12 could not make any decisions that were not approved by the Q70. This was a power struggle that BY did not want, so essentially he demoted the Q70 to be a lesser quorum. This changed the power structure of the church.

Here is an interesting research study on the 70s.

https://www.google.com/urlsa=t&source=w ... xyIOzPtTRw

No, the Q12 are not subject to the 70's. Never have been, and never were intended to be.

Here's an analogy:

President Trump is the commander-in-chief of the entire US Military. The military consists of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard. Each of those branches has their own Chief of Staff, so there are five Chief's of Staff. Each Chief of Staff is over their own respective branch of the military, and the five Chief of Staff's (taken as a group) together are over the entire military. The President is over the five Chief of Staff's.

It's a classical top-down authority structure. This structure exists everywhere. In the LDS Church, the Quorum of the Twelve *together* hold the same authority as the First Presidency, and as a group they can function to manage the affairs of the entire church in the absence of the First Presidency. Those periods of time have occurred numerous times in Church history, and are known as "Apostolic Interregnums". The first Apostolic Interregnum occurred when Joseph Smith was killed, and lasted almost four years before Brigham Young was sustained as the next president.

Similarly, the First Quorum of Seventy as a group can function to manage the affairs of the entire church in the absence of both the First Presidency and the Quorum of Twelve.

It's a classical top-down authority structure. Nothing special going on here.

[John Hamer]

The Standing High Council continues to exist, and since the early 20th century it's been back in Zion at Community of Christ headquarters in Independence, Missouri.

http://www.cofchrist.org/standing-high-council

[Hagoth]

The Standing High Council continues to exist, and since the early 20th century it's been back in Zion at Community of Christ headquarters in Independence, Missouri.

http://www.cofchrist.org/standing-high-council

We Brighamites are so narrowminded. Great response John!

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

The Standing High Council continues to exist, and since the early 20th century it's been back in Zion at Community of Christ headquarters in Independence, Missouri.

http://www.cofchrist.org/standing-high-council

We Brighamites are so narrowminded. Great response John!

What about the council of Fifty, did the COC keep that around? It seems you guys kept all the good stuff and left the embarrassing structures to us.

[JustCurious]

What about the council of Fifty, did the COC keep that around? It seems you guys kept all the good stuff and left the embarrassing structures to us.

John Hamer, as CoC Historian, will know better than I on many of the things I am about to say. He can correct me on any errors he spots below regarding the CoC:

"****************
I don't think the Council of Fifty is associated with any part of the history of the CoC (formerly RLDS).

When Joseph was killed, as you know the church split into two primary branches: (1) the "Brighamite" branch, and (2) the branch that became the genesis of the RLDS (which later morphed to become the CoC). Those that went the RLDS path believed that rightful succession to the church belonged with the literal posterity of Joseph Smith, whereas those that followed Brigham did so based on other reasons. The first of those reasons is simple... they were following others of whom they trusted, and they might not have otherwise even understood why it should be Brigham to lead the church. There were quite a few in that category. These are the individuals that I would term the "innocently ignorant".

But there was another group that followed Brigham for other reasons. Many of them knew of the Council of Fifty, and realized that of the surviving members within that council, Brigham had the highest seniority. They also understood the position of that council, as I described in a post on the 1st page of the following thread:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1116

And it is based on Brigham's seniority within the Council of Fifty that they followed him (see note #1). If those who followed the RLDS branch had similarly believed in, or practiced, the concept behind the Council of Fifty, then I conclude they also would have followed Brigham. But they did not. Hence, I conclude that the Council of Fifty is not a meaningful part of the history of the CoC.

John Hamer, am I right?

But, not-withstanding the above, there were definitely others even among the Traveling High Council (the "Twelve Apostles") who would not recognize Brigham's seniority based on his position in the Council of Fifty. Most notable of those I would say would be Parley Pratt. For example, at one point when Brigham and Parley "butted heads", Parley told Brigham (paraphrased): "you are not at my head-- I am subject only to a majority decision of the quorum of 12". This statement makes it clear that Parley differed in his beliefs regarding the Cof50. But there were many who followed Brigham *because* of Brigham's seniority in that council. But none of the RLDS branch did.

John Hamer can correct me on any misrepresentations of the CoC here.
"*****************
Note #1: If succession were to be determined solely by seniority in the Traveling High Council of Twelve, a strong argument can be made that Sidney Rigdon had the better claim than Brigham Young. The LDS Church makes what I consider to be apologetic maneuverings to overcome those arguments-- perhaps the LDS church is right, and perhaps not. But as I review the data, I personally think that many followed Brigham because of his seniority in the Council of Fifty, as I described above.

[John Hamer]

There were lots of members of the Council of Fifty that emerged as factional leaders in addition to Brigham Young. Rigdon was a member, as was Alpheus Cutler and Lyman Wight, both of whom led their own "Kingdom" factions and made their claims based on membership in the Council. Wight recognized Joseph III's right to lead the church and his descendants as well as Cutlers joined the Reorganization.

Just Curious is correct that as far as Community of Christ was/is concerned, the Fifty didn't have anything to do with church succession. Church succession according to Community of Christ was governed by the Doctrine & Covenants as constitution of the church. Historically, the operative verse for us was D&C 43:1b-2a, which is LDS D&C 43:3-4:

And this ye shall know assuredly—that there is none other appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations until he be taken, if he abide in me. But verily, verily, I say unto you, that none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him; for if it be taken from him he shall not have power except to appoint another in his stead.

There were multiple occasions when Joseph Smith Jr. gave special blessings to his son Joseph III indicating he would eventually lead the church, the last of these special blessings was Joseph's final act before leaving Nauvoo to give himself up in Carthage. Community of Christ's succession argument is that this blessing constituted appointment of the successor according to scripture. No scripture, meanwhile states that in the death of the president of the high priesthood, the president of the Twelve shall succeed.

Although members of the Council of Fifty (William Marks, William Smith, etc) joined the Reorganization, the church never had any interest in reconstituting the body.

[JustCurious]

There were lots of members of the Council of Fifty that emerged as factional leaders in addition to Brigham Young. Rigdon was a member, as was Alpheus Cutler and Lyman Wight, both of whom led their own "Kingdom" factions and made their claims based on membership in the Council.

But I'm pretty sure that Brigham was the senior member of those you list. I once researched this... don't know where my references are, though. So I could be wrong.

[John Hamer]

But I'm pretty sure that Brigham was the senior member of those you list. I once researched this... don't know where my references are, though. So I could be wrong.

No, other than Joseph Smith, the Council of Fifty membership was based on age. Alpheus Cutler was #4, William Marks was #10, Sidney Rigdon was #11, Lyman Wight was #16, and Brigham Young was #24.

After Brigham Young's coup d'etat, he convened the Council of Fifty in Nauvoo and took Joseph Smith's place as #1, but his actual rank was in the middle of the pack.

[JustCurious]

But I'm pretty sure that Brigham was the senior member of those you list. I once researched this... don't know where my references are, though. So I could be wrong.

No, other than Joseph Smith, the Council of Fifty membership was based on age. Alpheus Cutler was #4, William Marks was #10, Sidney Rigdon was #11, Lyman Wight was #16, and Brigham Young was #24.

After Brigham Young's coup d'etat, he convened the Council of Fifty in Nauvoo and took Joseph Smith's place as #1, but his actual rank was in the middle of the pack.

Interesting.

At Sidney's trial, Heber Kimball is oft quoted as having said that Sidney Rigdon did not have any authority except what he receives from the Church, and that more than thirty men held a higher priesthood authority than Sidney. This seems a clear implication that the Fifty were considered to be a higher governing body than even what was contained in the church. And I think a few more references to this exists.

If those references are correct, then Sidney would not have been considered to be a member of the Fifty at that particular point in time. He would have only had the authority he received from the church, and no other authority.

I know that the membership in the Fifty varied over time, and their positions also varied over time. I also think it is possible that their "seniority" might have been something other than age-based.

Curious.

And, of course, as you confirmed, none of this seems to have anything to do with CoC.

EDITED TO ADD: I just spoke with a friend on the phone, and asked him about this. He said his research showed the actual number of men considered by many to have higher priesthood authority than Sidney at that point of time was 32. I asked him for his references, and he replied that his computer was down, but he'd get the references to me sometime later. He also told me that Heber's quote can be found in the Millennial Star, on or around Sept 15, 1844.