“I believe that the time now has come that when changes are thought to be necessary in organizations they will be easier made than they have been in the past. We have been imbued with the thought that if we were appointed to a position we were to fill it until the Lord released us by death, but I have an idea that now it will be honorable to ask to be relieved of duties that it is not possible for us to fill.
“I want you to teach in your organizations, both stakes and wards, that this organization is greater than any individual, and that while we love and honor and respect individuals with all our hearts, when, in the opinion of the Priesthood, it is wise to make changes, so doing will be best.”
– Clarissa Smith Williams, newly sustained General Relief Society President, 1921
Was it the tradition that Relief Society presidents served for life? Emma Smith was obviously released, but I don’t know if they considered her release as honorable in the 1920s. If Clarissa Smith Williams was just being installed, I take it that it was her predecessor who was released earlier than expected. But did all of the others serve until the end?
If a quick search of Wikipedia can be trusted, Eliza R. Snow, Zina D.H. Young, and Bathsheba W. Smith all served for life, and Emmeline B. Wells (Williams’ predecessor) nearly so. Wells was released in 1921, about three weeks before her death. I imagine there were probably some people who needed to be told that there was nothing dishonorable or disrespectable about the earlier-than-expected change.
Men who served decades-long terms as bishops or stake presidents sometimes felt they were under suspicion of wrongdoing when they were released. While some may have felt relieved at a release, I think this is one of the major and underappreciated changes between the frontier and modern eras of church history.
Maybe this is one of the few areas where local practice “trickles up” to the general level. In the post-war era, we got used to bishops and stake presidents serving for a standard period. According to LDS.org, it took until the late 1979s to reach the point the presidency of the 70 could be rearranged or given emeritus status. In the late 1980s, they could finally call general authorities for a standard limited time (Seventies, 5 years).
Will we ever reach a point that patriarchs or –gasp– apostles could be given emeritus status or released honorably for a reason other than death? The multi-generational trend says yes, but I see no evidence that it will happen in my lifetime.
My grandfather was released as president of the Snowflake Stake in 1950 or 51. In a letter advising him of his approaching release–at the next stake conference–the First Presidency went to great lengths to assure him that he should not draw any negative inferences from the release, etc., etc.
I don’t know if patriarchs are “released,” but they are relieved of their duties when old age and failing health make it impossible. A new patriarch was called in our stake a few years ago, even though the previous patriarch is still alive, and I don’t remember that he was released.
I can confirm what Mark B. has said about Patriarchs, although I forget the terms used. For many years the stake patriarch was my family’s home teacher. When age made it difficult to fulfill his calling another patriarch took his place. The new patriarch had been patriarch in another stake, then moved into our stake and was “inactive” as the patriarch for several years.
Patriarch is a priesthood office rather than a calling, so they aren’t ever released as patriarch, just as patriarch to a particular stake. Even when not acting as the stake patriarch I remember hearing they were still able to get permission to give patriarchal blessings to family members.