"Live by the lamp of their own conceit"

[_Rollo Tomasi]

(2) BKP (by marriage: his wife is a direct descendant of Apostle Luke Johnson), (4) Oaks (related to Martin Harris),

I think these two are a huge stretch to include as royalty because of these ancestors.

I don't think so. Sometimes it's just as effective to marry into 'royalty' as it is to be born into it. As for Oaks, he's very proud of his connection to Martin Harris, and mentions it frequently. Face it, modern Mormons (at least in Utah) have always held their pioneer and early saint ancestors in extremely high esteem. It means a great deal in Utah (and in the Church).

[_Rollo Tomasi]

A problem that hasn't been demonstrated.

I think it has.

Just a few days ago, a retired Slavic Languages colleague was telling me about a visit by Elder Scott, of the Twelve, to the mission he presided over in Russia some years back. They had planned some sightseeing for Elder Scott during the intervals between meetings, but Elder Scott wanted to meet with the members. My friend remarked that Elder Scott spent many hours sitting backwards in a chair patiently answering basic questions about the Church and its doctrine that might just as easily have been posed to a green missionary. This sort of thing is, from what I've seen, not uncommon.

But yet rank & file members are instructed not to write and never to disclose what a GA says at their stake conferences.

As I've said, [Eyring] comes from a collateral line of your "Mormon royalty." (It's scarcely to be wondered at, incidentally, that a son of the eminent chemist Henry Eyring who, himself born in Princeton, earned a doctorate at Harvard and achieved tenure at Stanford while serving faithfully in the Church, might stand out a bit and exhibit some unusual qualities within the Latter-day Saint community.)

Being the nephew of SWK doesn't hurt, either.

And Pres. Monson recently named his daughter as a quasi-GA (to one of the gen'l presidencies), and Eyring's 38-year old son was recently named an Area Authority Seventy.

You're stretching with those.

Just demonstrates that nepotism is alive and well at Church headquarters.

You're stretching again.

Do you honestly think Allen Packer would be a GA if his dad weren't Boyd? Nepotism is alive and well, and that ain't no stretch.

Harris died 133 years ago, holding no position in the Church. How many living relatives does he have today? I don't know. How many of them have served as General Authorities? I don't know, but I'm guessing few, if any.

Hyrum Smith died 164 years ago, but that doesn't stop Russell Ballard from rambling on and on about him whenever he gets the chance.

Do you really seriously imagine that the fact that Dallin Oaks is a fairly distant relative of Martin Harris played any role at all in his call to the Twelve ....

Don't know, but it is what it is.

... let alone that it was a more important factor than the abilities he demonstrated as a Supreme Court clerk, acting dean of the University of Chicago law school, local Church leader (he didn't it's true, serve as a bishop or stake president, but he did serve as a counselor in a stake presidency in Chicago), author of books and studies on Mormonism and Mormon history, president of BYU, and justice of the Utah Supreme Court?

I still find it interesting that with such a resume, he somehow skipped over bishop, stake president, and mission president (as well as a full-time mission, choosing instead to marry at 19 after his freshman year at BYU).

When he was growing up as a son of the widowed Stella Oaks in Provo, I wonder if anybody deferred to him as a prince of "Mormon royalty"? My bet is, No.

His father, a doctor, was well known and well regarded.

There's no doubt Martin Harris is an important part of Dallin Oaks' life. For example, in March 2007, the Church News reported:

Martin Harris might not have thought much about the leather wallet that, according to family tradition, he used to carry $3,000 to the printer's shop to pay for the Book of Mormon's maiden publication. But for Brother Harris' descendants and Church members alike, that simple billfold is a priceless artifact. It's a well-worn symbol of sacrifice that memorializes the faith of an imperfect man who would witness the divine origin of the Book of Mormon and play a pivotal role in that book's first printing.

Now millions will be able to examine that symbol and learn its lessons. On March 23, Martin Harris' wallet was donated to the Church by its owner's great-great-grandson, Russell Martin Harris, at the Museum of Church History and Art. Elder Dallin H. Oaks, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve and a direct descendent of Martin Harris' brother, Emer Harris, accepted the wallet on the Church's behalf.

"This is a very significant artifact — the wallet Martin Harris used to carry the money to pay the printer," said Elder Oaks, who added that the wallet's authenticity has been established. "It's been in the family for several generation and we're thrilled to have it in the collections of the Church.

At April 1999 Gen'l Conference Dallin Oaks gave a talk entitled, "The Witness: Martin Harris."

But your 43% is dubious.

Not at all.

But good grief. Do you seriously suppose that the fact that his wife is a direct descendent of Luke Johnson, who resigned from the Council of the Twelve and from the Church in 1837 at the age of thirty (though he was rebaptized in 1846 and ultimately came West, where he died as a bishop near Tooele) propelled Boyd K. Packer to the apostleship?

I never said any such thing. I simply pointed out his connection (through marriage) to Mormon royalty.

Do you really imagine that L. Tom Perry was called to the Twelve because of the potency of his relationship with his uncle, Alma Sonne?

No idea, but the connection is fact.

And I'd like a bit more data regarding Elder Cook. How close a relationship to Spencer Kimball? How many other men share that same degree of kinship? How close a relationship to Heber C. Kimball (d. 1868, as, many think, the most married man in American or even Western history)? How many thousand men share that same degree of kinship?

Cook is the great-great grandson of Heber C. Kimball. Cook's great-grandfather, David Patten Kimball, and SWK's father, Andrew Kimball, were brothers (sons of Heber).

[_Rollo Tomasi]

If the Brethren cared what the People think, the Brethren would implement Harmony's demands.

Give 'em time -- the Brethren are nothing if not slooooow when it comes to progress.

[_Daniel Peterson]

A problem that hasn't been demonstrated.

I think it has.

I think it hasn't.

Being the nephew of SWK doesn't hurt, either.

Plausibly pointing out that being the nephew of SWK doesn't hurt doesn't go very far toward justifying the insinuation that it substantially helped.

nepotism is alive and well at Church headquarters. . . . Nepotism is alive and well

I find it odd, and perhaps telling, that appointing a child to a relatively unglamorous but potentially quite demanding Church position is viewed as conferring some sort of reward or perk upon that child.

Do you honestly think Allen Packer would be a GA if his dad weren't Boyd?

I haven't the foggiest idea. I don't know him. Do you?

I don't find it surprising that a deeply committed father would have a deeply committed son.

I still find it interesting that with such a resume, he somehow skipped over bishop, stake president, and mission president (as well as a full-time mission, choosing instead to marry at 19 after his freshman year at BYU).

He served in a stake presidency in Chicago already in his thirties, and was president of BYU by age thirty-nine. Lots of active young men missed out on missions in the early 1950s. The Church wasn't calling all that many during that period, partially because of the draft and the Korean War (1950=1953).

When he was growing up as a son of the widowed Stella Oaks in Provo, I wonder if anybody deferred to him as a prince of "Mormon royalty"? My bet is, No.

His father, a doctor, was well known and well regarded.

That's a very different matter. Physicians are often well-known and respected even today, with all our cynicism -- and that was probably much more true of 1950s small-town America than it would be now. But that has little or nothing to do with whether they're married to distant relatives of fairly well-known people.

Cook is the great-great grandson of Heber C. Kimball.

One of thousands, I would guess. He had sixty-five children.

Cook's great-grandfather, David Patten Kimball, and SWK's father, Andrew Kimball, were brothers (sons of Heber).

Wow. I think you've just found the smoking gun.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Plausibly pointing out that being the nephew of SWK doesn't hurt doesn't go very far toward justifying the insinuation that it substantially helped.

He was still part of the royalty -- to the degree it helped or didn't help his move of the ladder, I don't know.

I find it odd, and perhaps telling, that appointing a child to a relatively unglamorous but potentially quite demanding Church position is viewed as conferring some sort of reward or perk upon that child.

Outside the Zion Curtain it isn't, but inside it's a very big deal.

I haven't the foggiest idea [re Allen Packer].

I don't either, but the connection between him and the current president of the 12 couldn't be closer.

I don't find it surprising that a deeply committed father would have a deeply committed son.

Me neither. Perhaps this also explains Richard Hinckley's elevation during his father's tenure. And I'm certain this was the reason JFS-1 called his son, Hyrum, to be an apostle just one week after JFS-1 became Church president. Nepotism had nothing to do with it, of course.

He served in a stake presidency in Chicago already in his thirties, and was president of BYU by age thirty-nine. Lots of active young men missed out on missions in the early 1950s. The Church wasn't calling all that many during that period, partially because of the draft and the Korean War (1950=1953).

True, but he wasn't drafted (he joined the Nat'l Guard or the Reserves) and his unit was never sent to Korea. Still, I don't think the Church turned down his application (I don't think he filled out one), and he sure got married awfully young (I think his wife was 17 or 18).

But that has little or nothing to do with whether they're married to distant relatives of fairly well-known people.

But I bet folks were aware he was related to one of the Three Witnesses.

One of thousands, I would guess. He had sixty-five children.

So is Russell Ballard (when it comes to JFS-1), or probably any GA who has a polygamist GA in the background.

Wow. I think you've just found the smoking gun.

Just pointing out Cook's connection to SWK, which you asked me to do.

[_Daniel Peterson]

He was still part of the royalty

That has never been in dispute here.

to the degree it helped or didn't help his move of the ladder, I don't know.

An excellent point.

Outside the Zion Curtain it isn't, but inside it's a very big deal.

I live in Utah.

Relatively few here can name all of the Twelve. I don't know any who can name all of Seventy, let alone all of the auxiliary presidencies and boards.

I'm certain this was the reason JFS-1 called his son, Hyrum, to be an apostle just one week after JFS-1 became Church president. Nepotism had nothing to do with it, of course.

Actually, in that case and in others that you might have mentioned, I think kinship was an important factor. But not, I believe, for the dishonorable reason you suggest. (It is relevant, I think, that the apostleship is a very different office than that of a Seventy, involving the fulness of the priesthood keys.)

That, however, is a matter of faith.

I bet folks were aware he was related to one of the Three Witnesses.

Maybe. Maybe not.

I take it that you have no evidence to offer.

One of thousands, I would guess. He had sixty-five children.

So is Russell Ballard (when it comes to JFS-1), or probably any GA who has a polygamist GA in the background.

Another excellent point.

Just pointing out Cook's connection to SWK, which you asked me to do.

It's not very much, really.

Most of the Utah membership of the Church is probably related to some Church leader or another, to some degree or another.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I'm certain this was the reason JFS-1 called his son, Hyrum, to be an apostle just one week after JFS-1 became Church president. Nepotism had nothing to do with it, of course.

Actually, in that case and in others that you might have mentioned, I think kinship was an important factor.

One man's kinship is another's nepotism.

I take it that you have no evidence to offer.

No more than you.

Most of the Utah membership of the Church is probably related to some Church leader or another, to some degree or another.

Earlier you were pointing out how many current GA's have no relation to Church leaders. Which is it?

[_Daniel Peterson]

One man's kinship is another's nepotism.

That's right. It's a matter of the observer's attitude.

An observer who wants to view it negatively can do so.

I take it that you have no evidence to offer.

No more than you.

It's your insinuation, not mine.

Most of the Utah membership of the Church is probably related to some Church leader or another, to some degree or another.

Earlier you were pointing out how many current GA's have no relation to Church leaders. Which is it?

I never said that they had no relation whatsoever to Church leaders. (Both you and I are very, very distantly related to Genghis Khan and St. Francis of Assisi.) That's an impossible standard within a Church that is still fairly small and that was much, much smaller two or three generations ago.

I just don't think that being married to a descendent of the third cousin twice-removed of the great-great-grandfather of an 1830s Seventy makes one a Mormon aristocrat.

[_harmony]

When I said "Mormon Royalty", I wasn't thinking of nepotism (although I can see how a case can be made for several of the Brethren, since appointing sons and daughters to high positions seems to be a time-honored practice, even if I just learned of it today). I was thinking of the whole DUP/ancestor worship thing, trying to establish connections no matter how obscure with the founders of the faith.

I was at Women's Conference a few years ago and one of my friends wanted to attend a session where an elderly lady gave some insight into what her grandfather had been like. Her grandfather was Heber J Grant (If I recall correctly). That's the first time I'd ever heard the term "Mormon Royalty". My friend was in awe of being in the same room as "Mormon Royalty". I was offended, both by the hero worship of the women in that room, and by the implied message that converts were less.

Now, it looks like Rollo has established a tendency for those Brethren who actually can establish a connection to the founding fathers to publicize that connection, somewhat to Daniel's chagrin.

People who are connected with Mormon Royalty are proud of it... and those who aren't are reminded often of their lack. (See Rollo's comments above). This is the kind of "culture" I'd like to see squashed and squashed hard from the GC pulpit. Being reminded of my lack of familial connections to the founders repeatedly by my local ward family every summer when we bring out the ancestor worship in July is bad enough; being reminded of it by my leaders from the GC pulpit is an insult. I am a convert. There are thousands, if not millions, like me. Without me and people like me, this church dies. Yet I have my nose rubbed in the fact that I am a first-generation member, that I am somehow LESS because I have no connection to the founders, by my leaders?

See my #6 on the list. That is what I was getting at, in the beginning.

[_Trevor]

Although my ancestors all crossed the plains before the completion of the railroad, I have no lineal ancestors who were among the Book of Mormon witnesses, members of the 12, the First Presidency, or their families, etc. Am I really that much of a rarity?