A fascinating post over at BCC today reported the discovery of the 1841 legal incorporation document of the Church. The poster, John Hamer, says the following:
According to Joseph’s sworn statement, “I was elected Sole Trustee for said Church to hold my office during life (my successors to be the first Presidency of said Church).” In other words, in the event of Joseph’s death, his legal successor was the quorum of the First Presidency. When Joseph died three years later on June 27, 1844, the sole surviving member of the First Presidency was Sidney Rigdon. (At the time, President Rigdon was actively campaigning as Joseph’s vice presidential running mate in the 1844 US Presidential election.)
Historians often say, “Joseph left no clear successor” and that “there were a number of competing succession options,” which had equal or nearly equal merit. However, as this document indicates, Joseph did have a legal successor — at least as far as the trusteeship for the church corporation and property was concerned. I think it may be time for us to begin to admit that Joseph did leave an obvious successor: Sidney Rigdon. What Joseph did not leave was an acceptable successor. Because Sidney was opposed to polygamy and because he had become erratic (as he would soon prove as head of his own short-lived church organization), his leadership was unacceptable to an inner core of Nauvoo’s elite.
Although the rivals who emerged to challenge Sidney — Brigham Young, James Strang, William Smith, David Whitmer and ultimately Joseph Smith III — had inferior succession claims, their leadership was viewed by most of the Saints as much more palatable. Poor Sidney.
I was just reading again today Craig Criddle's paper entitled, "Sydney Rigdon: Creating the Book of Mormon," which deals with the very complicated relationship between Joseph Smith and Sydney Rigdon.
According to Criddle, Sydney believed he should have been the spokesman and revelator for the church, Joseph was just supposed to be the translator. Sydney felt he had been cheated out of his rightful position by the more charismatic Joseph.
Criddle's paper is very interesting reading, and as you know, promotes the Spaulding theory of Book of Mormon authorship. Maybe if Sydney had not have been so against polygamy he might have succeeded Joseph. Maybe not - there were others who wanted the power.
Coca Cola wrote:I was just reading again today Craig Criddle's paper entitled, "Sydney Rigdon: Creating the Book of Mormon," which deals with the very complicated relationship between Joseph Smith and Sydney Rigdon.
According to Criddle, Sydney believed he should have been the spokesman and revelator for the church, Joseph was just supposed to be the translator. Sydney felt he had been cheated out of his rightful position by the more charismatic Joseph.
Criddle's paper is very interesting reading, and as you know, promotes the Spaulding theory of Book of Mormon authorship. Maybe if Sydney had not have been so against polygamy he might have succeeded Joseph. Maybe not - there were others who wanted the power.
Probably not, Joseph stated in front of the congregation that his son was to be his successor.
If I remember right at other times he chose Hyrum and Oliver as his successors.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Coca Cola wrote:I was just reading again today Craig Criddle's paper entitled, "Sydney Rigdon: Creating the Book of Mormon," which deals with the very complicated relationship between Joseph Smith and Sydney Rigdon.
According to Criddle, Sydney believed he should have been the spokesman and revelator for the church, Joseph was just supposed to be the translator. Sydney felt he had been cheated out of his rightful position by the more charismatic Joseph.
Criddle's paper is very interesting reading, and as you know, promotes the Spaulding theory of Book of Mormon authorship. Maybe if Sydney had not have been so against polygamy he might have succeeded Joseph. Maybe not - there were others who wanted the power.
Probably not, Joseph stated in front of the congregation that his son was to be his successor.
What do we have that would stand up in court making that evident?
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
Coca Cola wrote:I was just reading again today Craig Criddle's paper entitled, "Sydney Rigdon: Creating the Book of Mormon," which deals with the very complicated relationship between Joseph Smith and Sydney Rigdon.
According to Criddle, Sydney believed he should have been the spokesman and revelator for the church, Joseph was just supposed to be the translator. Sydney felt he had been cheated out of his rightful position by the more charismatic Joseph.
Criddle's paper is very interesting reading, and as you know, promotes the Spaulding theory of Book of Mormon authorship. Maybe if Sydney had not have been so against polygamy he might have succeeded Joseph. Maybe not - there were others who wanted the power.
Probably not, Joseph stated in front of the congregation that his son was to be his successor.
What do we have that would stand up in court making that evident?
Sworn testimonies in the Temple Lot case by those that followed Brigham Young and those that didn't follow him. It stood up in that court case.
The Nehor wrote:If I remember right at other times he chose Hyrum and Oliver as his successors.
I'm not sure about Oliver, but (according to William Clayton) in one of Joseph's sermons, he said that Hyrum received the office of prophet to the church through birthright. If I recall correctly, Willard Richards recorded a similar statement from the sermon (i.e. that Joseph wasn't going to prophecy anymore and Hyrum was going to be the prophet). It may have been in the same sermon, or a later one, but he also said that he was going to become a priest and then a king (leaving the post of prophet).
If needed, I can hunt down citations for the above (as this is from memory, and might not be completely accurate).
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
Coca Cola wrote:I was just reading again today Craig Criddle's paper entitled, "Sydney Rigdon: Creating the Book of Mormon," which deals with the very complicated relationship between Joseph Smith and Sydney Rigdon.
According to Criddle, Sydney believed he should have been the spokesman and revelator for the church, Joseph was just supposed to be the translator. Sydney felt he had been cheated out of his rightful position by the more charismatic Joseph.
Criddle's paper is very interesting reading, and as you know, promotes the Spaulding theory of Book of Mormon authorship. Maybe if Sydney had not have been so against polygamy he might have succeeded Joseph. Maybe not - there were others who wanted the power.
Probably not, Joseph stated in front of the congregation that his son was to be his successor.
What do we have that would stand up in court making that evident?
Sworn testimonies in the Temple Lot case by those that followed Brigham Young and those that didn't follow him. It stood up in that court case.
Interesting stuff. I didn't know that.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning