⚖️ The Day the Kingdom Forked — What the 1844 Succession Crisis Still Teaches Us
⚖️ The Day the Kingdom Forked — What the 1844 Succession Crisis Still Teaches Us
If you sit in an LDS Church class today, you’ll often hear the story like this:
“Joseph and Hyrum died. Brigham Young stepped in. The saints followed without wavering.”
It’s clean. It’s tidy. And it’s not how it happened.
The truth? Joseph’s death in 1844 triggered years of confusion, rival claims, bitter disputes, and heartbreak. Many were left wondering who — if anyone — truly held the keys.
From that day forward, the Restoration splintered into rival camps — each certain they were carrying the torch.
It’s a pattern the Book of Mormon warned us about, and one the Nemenhah Records describe in haunting detail: when the stewards fall asleep at their post, ambitious men take the helm.
💥 A Death That Changed Everything
The official record says Joseph and Hyrum died at the hands of an Illinois mob.
But even in Joseph’s day, insiders whispered that all was not as it seemed. The timing, the access, and the immediate scramble for control point to a possibility many won’t touch:
More than likely, there were those within — men already hungry for power — who were glad to see the way cleared.
And once the dust settled, the victors wrote the history.
If that sounds bold, remember: my own studies, and others far older than mine, show the pattern. In every age, when the Lord’s anointed is removed, there are those waiting in the wings… ready to reshape the story, and the kingdom, in their own image.
📜 A Leadership Vacuum with Many “Answers”
Historian D. Michael Quinn identified eight possible succession routes Joseph Smith himself had hinted at or used:
First Presidency counselor — Sidney Rigdon’s claim.
Special appointment by Joseph — used by others to justify authority.
Associate president — an office that died with Joseph.
Presiding patriarch — William Smith’s attempt.
Council of Fifty — Joseph’s political and spiritual council.
Quorum of the Twelve — Brigham Young’s eventual path.
Presiding priesthood councils — less centralized, more communal.
Smith family lineage — dynastic succession.
The absence of a clear, codified plan meant every option had at least some precedent. Which meant… every claimant could point to Joseph’s own words or actions for support.
⛓ Rigdon vs. Young — and the Myth That Followed
Sidney Rigdon proposed himself as the “guardian” of the church.
Brigham Young, returning from his British mission, used his position, people skills, and the symbolic backdrop of the Nauvoo Temple to rally support.
On August 8, 1844, both men presented their claims.
Later stories tell of a miraculous “transfiguration” — Brigham looking and sounding exactly like Joseph Smith. But no contemporary account confirms it. The earliest tellings appear years later, as the memory was shaped to fit the narrative.
👩👦 Emma Smith and the Smith Family
Emma opposed Young, not just for personal reasons, but because of the new direction — polygamy, property disputes, and centralization of power.
Her brother-in-law William tried to assert leadership as Presiding Patriarch, but he, too, was excommunicated.
The Book of Mormon and the Nemenhah both remind us:
“When the leaders covet power more than peace, Zion is driven into the wilderness.”
🌊 Aftermath — Utah, Polygamy, and the Exodus West
By late 1847, Brigham Young secured the presidency — but the fractures never healed.
In Utah, when polygamy was publicly introduced years later, hundreds of Saints walked away, many of them heading west to California.
Some left quietly; others left in organized wagon trains. And disturbing evidence has emerged that at least one of those trains was entirely massacred before reaching safety.
The schism that began in 1844 kept echoing, reshaping lives for decades.
🔍 Lessons for the True Remnant
Ambiguity invites ambition. Joseph’s lack of a fixed succession plan meant the strongest personality — not necessarily the truest steward — took the lead.
Context matters. Brigham’s return from Britain, his Nauvoo Temple backdrop, and the apostles’ support were as important as theology.
Myths can cement power. The “transfiguration” story shows how sacred memory can be reshaped to justify authority.
Family voices matter — but can be sidelined. Emma’s resistance, rooted in both faith and conscience, shows how women’s warnings are often ignored in times of upheaval.
Schism is part of our story. The Nemenhah say the Lord will still work with the industrious and organized — even after they’ve fallen from the fullness — but warns that only those who hear His voice will find their way back to Zion.
History can be rewritten. The “smooth transition” narrative taught today is far from the turbulent reality.
📖 Scripture Echoes
Book of Mormon: Alma 51 & 3 Nephi 6 — warning that pride and contention over leadership destroy the unity of the people.
Nemenhah Records: Tsihohnayah Ahkehkthihm 14 — “The people who first received the restoration fell away, yet the Lord used them for their strength in building, but not for their authority.”
Bible: 1 Samuel 8 — Israel choosing a king for security, only to be burdened by his rule.
Ether 8: Secret combinations destroying the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries.
🕊 The Real Question for Us
The 1844 crisis isn’t just dusty history. It’s the moment when the Restoration took a fork in the road:
One path led toward a church as an institution.
The other toward Zion as a living covenant.
The True Remnant’s choice is the same today as it was then:
Do we follow the strongest voice in the crowd…
…or the still small voice that never leads astray?
Comments