Joseph Smith wasn’t actually a Polygamist…

I can’t help but wonder how much BY slandered JS to assert his position as president of the church. I wonder if the legend that BY’s voice sounded like JS when he took over is made up just to make him look good. I think I remember reading somewhere that that was just a misinterpretation of an honest record, but it could very well be pro-BY propaganda. Unfortunately, the modern church has every incentive to defend BY because it sort of depends on him being a prophet for its own legitimacy. Even when that means accepting lies (or at least unproven allegations) about Joseph Smith…

There are some gems from BY, but once you look at polygamy, the priesthood ban, and tithing politics, it honestly makes me want to have nothing to do with him and it’s a shame my CS degree bears his name. OTOH, It was a legitimately good school despite all the honor code politics and the dog and pony show known as Provo culture.

I just wonder if the Community of Christ is the actual true church… Y’know. If there is such a thing.

I believe that the Church (under BY) in the early Utah period did rewrite history in some respects to make it seem like the succession was all but obvious and the migration to Utah was foretold.

I do not believe that BY manufactured evidence of the polygamy of JS. There are just too many written records and first person remembrances. BY was a man to be feared but he had his enemies. Even when people escaped his reach and traveled around speaking ill of BY, I do not recall anyone claiming that they were forced to lie in attributing this doctrine to JS.

JS was passionate and mercurial, full of confidence and dreams. He created what became a billion-dollar self perpetuating organization from the backwoods of the American frontier.

What does it mean to be a prophet? Does it mean to have premonitions of the future? (JS was not very good at predicting the future) Does it mean producing new scripture? (JS and Mohammed are both pretty prolific in this category.) Is there a certain level of righteousness that is a prerequisite? Suppose MLK was a prophet. Would he be less of a prophet because he was unfaithful to his wife?

In some ways the very traits that made JS great also made him terrible. He refused to be trammeled and confined to the well worn traditions, creeds, institutions, and arguments of the day. Instead of just picking a side and being content with his lot in life, he created something new – a new religion was born and there was collateral damage. Similarly, JS refused to be trammeled and confined by traditional standard of marriage and monogamy and playing by someone else’s rules. He looked at the ancient patriarchs and asked how they could practice polygamy and still be righteous before God. JS created something new – a new form of marriage was born and there was collateral damage.

In the end, I don’t really know. I wasn’t there and anyone with an agenda can fabricate a historical record. All we have to go on is history written by the church, which could very well be fabricated or embellished. There were plenty of contemporary accusations about Joseph Smith having multiple wives. Maybe he did. But if he really was secretly married to Fanny Alger and had sex with her, he did a damn good job at hiding it. OTOH, I find it highly suspicious that Section 132 didn’t surface until 8 years after Joseph’s death.

I suppose I don’t need Joseph Smith to not be a polygamist for his teachings to be valuable. I just don’t think it’s all that consistent with what I know and I personally find that the narrative that “factually” ties him down as a secret polygamist is dubious, whereas the fact that Brigham Young was a polygamist is unquestionably indisputable. But I haven’t looked at primary sources, so I can easily be wrong.

There have been a few threads over the years that have discussed this article. Here’s one:

http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4986

Here’s a quote from another thread that touched on whether D&C 132/Polygamy originated with JS:

Well, JS was the author of polygamy, if not of Sec 132. Nauvoo-era polygamy was very different from Utah-era polygamy, but they were both polygamy. My opinion is that it is impossible to truly understand JS’s motives. It’s easy to assume sex, because that’s what most men would want out of it. But then there is that pesky problem with JS not having any children other than with Emma. There are plenty of other possible motives that are less uncomfortable. BY’s motivation was probably to follow the doctrine with exactness; thus resulting in the institutionalization of polygamy.

132? Hard to tell, but it is certainly based on concepts from JS. That JS produced a revelation, and taught it privately, and had multiple wives was attested to by the Nauvoo Expositor. Is 132 that revelation? Possibly. Is it the original wording of that revelation? Maybe. I have my doubts, as I outlined earlier.

But here is text from the June 7, 1844 Nauvoo Expositor:

William Law: “I hereby certify that Hyrum Smith did, (in his office) read to me a certain written document, which he said was a revelation from God, he said that he was with Joseph when it was received. He afterwards gave me the document to read, and I took it to my house, and read it, and showed it to my wife, and returned it next day. The revelation (so called) authorized certain men to have more wives than one at a time, in this world and in the world to come. It said this was the law, and commanded Joseph to enter into the law.-And also that he should administer to others. Several other items were in the revelation, supporting the above doctrines.”

Jane Law: “I certify that I read the revelation referred to in the above affidavit of my husband, it sustained in strong terms the doctrine of more wives that one at a time, in this world, and in the next, it authorized some to have to the number of ten, and set forth that those women who would not allow their husbands to have more wives than one should be under condemnation before God.”

Austin Cowles: “In the latter part of the summer, 1843, the Patriarch, Hyrum Smith, did in the High Council, of which I was a member, introduce what he said was a revelation given through the Prophet; that the said Hyrum Smith did essay to read the said revelation in the said Council, that according to his reading there was contained the following doctrines; 1st the sealing up of persons to eternal life, against all sins, save that of sheding innocent blood or of consenting thereto; 2nd, the doctrine of a plurality of wives, or marrying virgins; that “David and Solomon had many wives, yet in this they sinned not save in the matter of Uriah.” This revelation with other evidence, that the aforesaid heresies were taught and practiced in the Church; determined me to leave the office of first counselor to the president of the Church at Nauvoo [ie, first counselor to Nauvoo Stake President, William Marks], inasmuch as I dared not teach or administer such laws.”

Joseph wasn’t a polygamist in the classic sense, because he didn’t live openly with multiple wives, but he married multiple women (or was sealed to multiple women while alive), so he was, technically, a polygamist. That much is indisputable, imo.

Everything else is up for debate, and I am cool with that. People see what they want to believe, and I am cool with that, even as some of what people see truly bothers me.

Yes, but 1835 Section 101 was written and presented as a policy not a revelation. It was placed in the end-matter of the D&C after a section titled “Appendix” and right before Section, you guessed it, 102, which was a declaration of the views of the Church on governments and laws. Not saying it wasn’t significant, but just saying that it wasn’t on the same level as the other sections, which were presented as revelations.

Section 101 was adopted by the Church committee in charge of publishing the D&C, and importantly, it was adopted by the vote of those present, which did not include Joseph Smith, who was on Church business in the East. The presiding officers were Oliver Cowdery and Sydney Rigdon. See History of the Church, Vol 2, pg 243. Would JS have voted for it? I don’t know. But he didn’t vote, so I believe the content of the section is dubious. JS could have removed it later, but that likely would have served to fan the flames of anti-polygamy… It is clearly written as a policy document. First sentence: “According to the custom of all civilized nations, marriage is regulated by laws and ceremonies: therefore we believe, that all marriages of this church of Christ of Latter Day Saints, should be solemnized in a public meeting…”. Later portions talk about how marriages are to be recorded and how to deal with marriages prior to involvement with the Church. IMO, OC and SR, two staunch anti-polygamists, were trying to force JS’s hand away from Polygamy.

I have cobbled together a list of polygyny justifications/explanations/reasons from JS or sources close to him.

Polygyny Justifications of JS

1. God commands it: “God said thou shalt not kill, at another time he said thou shalt utterly destroy…that which is wrong under one circumstance, may be and often is, right under another…Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is…although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire.” RSR p. 441 “I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise. “TPJS p. 256, 324

2. The ancient patriarchs practiced it (apparently without divine condemnation).

3. To fashion a righteous generation on the eve of the Second Coming: “The Lord has revealed to me that it is his will that righteous men shall take righteous women, even a plurality of wives, that a righteous race may be sent forth upon the earth preparatory to the ushering in of the millennial reign of our Redeemer.” RSR p. 326, Jacob 2:24-30

4. For “greater glory”: “The first commandment was to ‘Multiply’ and the Prophet taught us that Dominion & power in the great future would be commensurate with the number of ‘wives, children & friends’ that we inherit here and that our great mission to earth was to organize a nucleus of Heaven to take with us. To the increase of which there would be no end.”…”When the family organization was revealed from heaven- the patriarchal order of God, and Joseph began, on the right hand and the left, to add to his family, what a quaking there was in Israel.” In Sacred loneliness p. 10-11 “Joseph’s kingdom grew with the size of his family, and those bonded to that family would be exalted with him.” JS reportedly said “I know that I shall be saved in the Kingdom of God. I have the oath of God upon it and God cannot lie. All that he gives me I shall take with me for I have that authority and that power conferred upon me.” In Sacred Loneliness. The purpose was “to create a network of related wives, children, and kinsmen that would endure into the eternities…Like Abraham of old, Joseph yearned for familial plentitude.” RSR p 439-440, D & C 132:55 “If your [husband] and you should be alone by the side of such a king as Abraham or Solomon with all his queens and their numerous servants and waiting maids in courtly livery, would he not look like a mere rushlight by the side of such suns, or rather would he be seen at all! I should almost fear that your [husband] would be taken for a servant, and you for a waiting maid; or if they should, in the galaxy and splendor of 144,00 such suns as Solomon, happen to see you and your [husband] with a king’s coronet upon his head, they might think him short of wedding garments, or that the selfishness of his wife had stinted his growth to such an insignificant, crab-tree size! Besides, a Queen to him that has his hundreds of wives in eternity, with children as numberless as the stars of heaven, would receive intelligence, wealth, honour, children, and dominion, in some measure proportioned to the exaltations of her husband and king; while your [husband], not having much to look after besides you, could not demand the same measure of wealth, honour, and dominion, because he could use upon you and your little family but a small pittance of what pertains to one moving in a wider and far more exalted sphere. Your intelligence, and that of your children, could not rise higher than the intelligence of your husband. Consequently, you must see yourself and your husband, and your children, continually outstripped in intelligence by all others around you. Your social circle must consequently be very limited at home. And your offspring not be as numerous. The motive which would lead you to retain your husband exclusively to yourself, would contribute to make you comparatively unfruitful, and also vitiate the mental and bodily functions of your offspring, and sow the seeds of death and mortality in their systems… Hence I see the wisdom of God in not tolerating any such system [as monogamy] among the celestial worthies who are to be kings and queens unto God for ever…. God has determined to bestow His greatest blessings upon the liberal order, and only very stinted favours upon the narrow, contracted order [of monogamy] which you seem to desire. In the former order your children are all the lawful heirs of thrones and kingdoms, and in your favourite order they are only the heirs of servile inferiority.” Millennial Star 1853 Nelly & Abby

5. Pre-mortal commitments: “Joseph said I was his, before I came here. He said all the Devils in Hell should never get me from him.” JS had been told to marry Mary, “or suffer condemnation- for I (Mary) was created for him before the foundation of the Earth was laid.” In Sacred Loneliness, also “thou made a covenant with one of thy kindred spirits to be thy guardian angel while here in mortality, also with two others, male and female spirits, that thou wouldst come and take a tabernacle through their lineage, and become one of their offspring. You also choose a kindred spirit whom you loved in the spirit world … to be your be head, stay, husband, and protector on the earth, and to exalt you in the eternal worlds. All these were arranged.” The Origin and Destiny of Women, John Taylor. Said Asael Smith, Grandfather of the Prophet, “I believe God hath created the persons for each other, and that Nature will find its own.” The Family of Joseph Smith p 16

A major theme is that reasons 3, 4, & 5 are no longer consistent with our theology in the Modern Church. We have evolved out theology and polygamy is a relic of a previous time and belief system. The only reasons that still kinda fit are #2 Jacob and others were polygamists and #1 God commanded JS for what purpose we know not. (as an aside that has also been the church stance on the priesthood ban for the last 40ish years – God commanded it for what purpose we know not. [though the essay on Race and the Priesthood does go a long way to helping understand the context of the time and that it could have been cultural racism and limited understanding of gospel expansiveness.])