- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
MisterCurie wrote:
All of the real Mormon history books I have read recognize that Bennett was a bad character and are skeptical…You can make a case for it, for sure. But I think if you start from scratch, drop all assumptions, and weigh the evidence, it comes out in Joseph’s favor. Basically you have people who say JS did practice p. and people who say he didn’t. Then you have a whole host of other evidence. I maintain that the DNA evidence is strong. 33 wives and they can’t round up 1 kid?
Think how easy it is to prove BY practiced p. Everyone else involved admitted it. In some cases even before it was accepted doctrine. Why not JS? Notice that the people accusing JS are polygamists themselves. I wonder if there are there any people innocent of polygamy, with first hand knowledge of JS that accuse him?
Well, I hope you end up with a copy of JSFP to read. It sound like you’ll at least enjoy reading it.
JSFP wrote:
[Affidavit of Matilda J. Nyman]Nauvoo, May 21, 1842.
During this spring Chauncy L. Higbee, kept company with me from time to time, and, as I have since learned, wickedly deceitfully, and with lies in his mouth, urged me vehemently to yield to his desires; that there could be no wrong in having sexual intercourse with any female that could keep the same to herself;—most villianously and lyingly stating that he had been so instructed by Joseph Smith, and that there was no sin where there was no accuser:—Also vowing he would marry me. Not succeeding, he, on one occasion, brought one, who affirmed that such intercourse was tolerated by the heads of the Church. I have since found him also to be a lying conspirator against female virtue and chastity, having never received such teachings from the heads of the church; but I was at the time partially influenced to believe in consequence of the source from whom I received it.
I yielded and become subject to the will of my seducer, Chauncey L. Higbee: and having since found out to my satisfaction, that a number of wicked men have conspired to use the name of Joseph Smith, or the heads of the Church, falsely and wickedly to enable them to gratify their lusts, thereby destroying female innocence and virtue, I repent before God and my brethren and ask forgiveness.
I further testify that I never had any personal acquaintance with Joseph Smith and never heard him teach such doctrines as Higbee, stated either directly or indirectly.
Matilda J. Nyman.
State of Illinois, ss
City of Nauvoo.
There are several women who wrote statements saying more or less the same thing with regard to Bennett and Higbee. The entire Relief Society, something like 1000 women (including Eliza R. Snow) signed a statement too around this time denying that church leaders taught polygamy publicly or privately.Higbee confessed too. JSFP wrote:
Affidavit of C. L. HigbeeState of Illinois
City of Nauvoo
Personally appeared before me Daniel H. Wells, an alderman of said city, C. L. Higbee, who being duly sworn according to law, deposeth and saith, that he never was taught anything in the least contrary to the strictest principles of the gospel or of virtue, of the laws of God or of man, under any circumstances or upon any occasion, either directly or indirectly, in word or deed by Joseph Smith, and that he never knew said Smith to countenance any improper conduct whatever, either in public or in private, and that he never did teach me in private or public that an illicit intercourse with females was under any circumstances justifiable and that he never knew him so to teach others.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 17th day of May 1842. Daniel H. Wells, Alderman. (Affidavits and Certificates, August 31, 1842)
Of course you can hold to the theory that the confessions were false. But I thought it would be interesting to post them.
allquieton wrote:Valoel,
I can see why it might be better to leave the whole thing alone. And why to some people the matter is irrelevant. But to me it’s important just to know the truth. Also, if JS did not practice polygamy, it clears up a lot of other things, such as screwy teachings by BY.
I also find it reassuring that the Founder of the church at least was not corrupt. It gives more weight to the BoM.And it lets you know something about how God operates with regard to the Church. I’ve found this whole discussion fascinating. Tickles the nascent historian in me.
I don’t think the prophet’s potential corruption is such a great fulcrum, though. If he was not corrupt, then
great– seeing someone master the iron rod can sometimes inspire us to hold more tightly ourselves. But if he was corrupt, then the imperfect and struggling human in me can easier relate to him, he becomes less ‘fairy tale’ and more ‘fellow journeyman.’ I mean, we’re ALL flawed, even some of our favorite gospel icons (Peter, Moses, Solomon… why not JS?). The difficulty for me was first thinking JS was incorruptible then learning that maybe he wasn’t. That disillusionment can be hard. But if a prophet is corrupted, generally speaking, it need not diminish his mission, his intention, or his utility in the eyes of God.
And the BofM – I think that thing truly fell out of heaven, and the fact that the prophet may have been very much less than perfect (like me) makes the miracle more astonishing.
So, again, I love the discussion, and hope it keeps on going. But the conclusion doesn’t carry much weight for me. Either way, God’s in it.
Quote:Quote:JSFP wrote:Affidavit of C. L. Higbee
State of Illinois
City of Nauvoo
Personally appeared before me Daniel H. Wells, an alderman of said city, C. L. Higbee, who being duly sworn according to law, deposeth and saith, that he never was taught anything in the least contrary to the strictest principles of the gospel or of virtue, of the laws of God or of man, under any circumstances or upon any occasion, either directly or indirectly, in word or deed by Joseph Smith, and that he never knew said Smith to countenance any improper conduct whatever, either in public or in private, and that he never did teach me in private or public that an illicit intercourse with females was under any circumstances justifiable and that he never knew him so to teach others.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 17th day of May 1842. Daniel H. Wells, Alderman. (Affidavits and Certificates, August 31, 1842)
Quote:Thanks for the discussion guys. I just want to add my two-cents worth. The infamous Quaker Preacher, Elisas Hicks (whom I reverence) believed that it was wrong for governments to strictly regulate marriage including polygamy. Some of my favorite (and in my opinion most spiritual) ministers of the day preached polygamy before JS. They told of the countless number of abandoned, former mistresses, who died of in poverty. Often stricken with the dreaded syphilis, of which there was no cure, these women had virtually no hope of ever being married and raising families. This was a great social issue of the day and many ministers, interested in social justice for women, took up the cause. Oh course, my favorite all-time advocate for marriage rights was non other than Gandhi. Gandhi spoke with courage at the concept that the British would come and make, “bastards” out of their children and adulteresses out of their wives. The concept of monogamy threatened the very fabric of Indian society.
Then there was Kenya. The Kenyan men often had two or more wives and lived in very stable, secure, structured family environments. When Christian missionaries arrived in Kenya, they baptized some of the men, but insisted that they abandon their wives and small children, allowing them to keep only one wife. Hundreds of women were left alone, children were abandoned, social structures were thrown into chaos.
Smith let men keep their wives and children – not just for time, but for time and all of eternity.
So, who was right?
allquieton wrote:
Notice that the people accusing JS are polygamists themselves. I wonder if there are there any people innocent of polygamy, with first hand knowledge of JS that accuse him?
What type of person, exactly, do you believe to be a credible witness of polygamy? Polygamists, apparently don’t count, because they are biased (I assume this includes the many women who claim to have married JS, but later entered other polygamous relationships.) “Apostates” don’t count because they were out to get JS? It seems only RLDS sources count because they claim JS was a prophet, but didn’t enter into polygamy? One must remember that if JS was practicing polygamy and someone did not want to enter into it, they would likely be labeled an apostate. Such is the case with William Law, publisher of the Expositer, which JS destroyed because it accused him of polygamy and setting up a theocracy, the destruction of which lead to the trials of JS that resulted in his murder. History suggests that William Law had first hand knowledge of polygamy, but refused to believe it was of God.
In the Nauvoo Expositer, he published:
Quote:We all verily believe, and many of us know of a surety, that the religion of the Latter Day Saints, as originally taught by Joseph Smith, which is contained in the Old and New Testaments, Book of Covenants, and Book of Mormon, is verily true; and that the pure principles set forth in those books, are the immutable and eternal principles of Heaven, and speaks a language which, when spoken in truth and virtue, sinks deep into the heart of every honest man.–Its precepts are invigorating, and in every sense of the word, tend to dignify and ennoble man’s conceptions of God and his atributes. It speaks a language which is heard amidst the roar of Artillery, as well as in the silence of midnight: it speaks a language understood by the incarcerated spirit, as well as he who is unfettered and free; yet to those who will not see, it is dark, mysterious, and secret as the grave.
We believe that all men, professing to be the ministers of God, should keep steadily in view, the honor and glory of God, the salvation of souls and the amelioration of man’s condition: and among their cardinal virtues ought to be found those of faith, hope, virtue and charity; but with Joseph Smith, and many other official characters in the Church, they are words without any meanings attached–words as ornaments; exotics nurtured for display; virtues which, throwing aside the existence of a God, the peace, happiness, welfare, and good order of society, require that they should be preserved pure, immaculate and uncorroded.
We most solemnly and sincerely declare, God this day being witness of the truth and sincerity of our designs and statements, that happy will it be with those who examine and scan Joseph Smith’s pretensions to righteousness; and take counsel of human affairs, and of the experience of times gone by. Do not yield up tranquilly a superiority to that man which the reasonableness of past events, and the laws of our country declare to be pernicious and diabolical. We hope many items of doctrine, as now taught, some of which, however,
are taught secretly, and denied openly,(which we know positively is the case,) and others publicly, considerate men will treat with contempt; for we declare them heretical and damnable in their influence, though they find many devotees. How shall he, who has drank of the poisonous draft, teach virtue? In the stead thereof, when the criminal ought to plead guilty to the court, the court is obliged to plead guilty to the criminal. We appeal to humanity and ask, what shall we do? Shall we lie supinely and suffer ourselves to be metamorphosed into beasts by the Syren tongue? We answer that our country and our God require that we should rectify the tree. We have called upon him to repent, and as soon as he shewed fruits meet for repentance, we stood ready to seize him by the hand of fellowship, and throw around him the mantle of protection; for it is the salvation of souls we desire, and not our own aggrandizement. We are earnestly seeking to explode the vicious principles of Joseph Smith, and those who practice the same abominations and whoredoms; which we verily know are not accordant and consonant with the principles of Jesus Christ and the Apostles; and for that purpose, and with that end in view, with an eye single to the glory of God, we have dared to gird on the armor, and with god at our head, we most solemnly and sincerely declare that the sword of truth shall not depart from the thigh, nor the buckler from the arm, until we can enjoy those glorious privileges which nature’s God and our country’s laws have guarantied to us–freedom of speech, the liberty of the press, and the right to worship God as seemeth us good.–We are aware, however, that we are hazarding every earthly blessing, particularly property, and probably life itself, in striking this blow at tyranny and oppression: yet notwithstanding, we most solemnly declare that no man, or set of men combined, shall, with impunity, violate obligations as sacred as many which have been violated, unless reason, justice and virtue have become ashamed and sought the haunts of the grave, though our lives be the forfeiture.
Many of us have sought a reformation in the church, without a public exposition of the enormities of crimes practiced by its leaders, thinking that if they would hearken to counsel, and shew fruit meet for repentance, it would be as acceptable with God, as though they were exposed to public gaze,
“For the private path, the secret acts of men, If noble, far the noblest of their lives.”
but our petitions were treated with contempt; and in many cases the petitioner spurned from their presence, and particularly by Joseph, who would state that if he had sinned, and was guilty of the charges we would charge him with, he would not make acknowledgment, but would rather be damned; for it would detract from his dignity, and would consequently ruin and prove the overthrow of the Church. We would ask him on the other hand, if the overthrow of the Church was not inevitable, to which he often replies, that we would all go to Hell together, and convert it into a heaven, by casting the Devil out; and says he, Hell is by no means the place this world of fools suppose it to be, but on the contrary, it is quite an agreeable place; to which we would now reply, he can enjoy it if he is determined not to desist from his evil ways; but as for us, and ours, we will serve the Lord our God! It is absurd for men to assert that all is well, while wicked and corrupt men are seeking our destruction, by a perversion of sacred things; for all is not well, while whordoms and all manner of abominations are practiced under the cloak of religion. Lo! the wolf is in the fold, arrayed in sheep’s clothing, and is spreading death and devastation among the saints: and we say to the watchmen standing upon the walls, cry aloud and spare not, for the day of the Lord is at hand — a day cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate. It is a notorious fact, that many females in foreign climes, and in countries to us unknown, even in the most distant regions of the Eastern hemisphere, have been induced, by the sound of the gospel, to forsake friends, and embark upon a voyage across waters that lie stretched over the greater portion of the globe, as they supposed, to glorify God, that they might thereby stand acquitted in the great day of God Almighty. But what is taught them on their arrival at this place? — They are visited by some of the Strikers, for we know not what else to call them, and are requested to hold on and be faithful, for there are great blessings awaiting the righteous; and that God has great mysteries in store for those who love the Lord, and cling to brother Joseph. They are also notified that brother Joseph will see them soon, and reveal the mysteries of Heaven to their full understanding, which seldom fails to inspire them with new confidence in the Prophet, as well as a great anxiety to know what God has laid up in store for them, in return for the great sacrifice of father and mother, of gold and silver, which they gladly left far behind, that they might be gathered into the fold, and numbered among the chosen of God. — They are visited again, and what is the result? They are requested to meet brother Joseph, or some of the Twelve, at some insulated point, or at some particularly described place on the bank of the Mississippi, or at some room, which wears upon its front — Positively NO admittance. The harmless, inoffensive, and unsuspecting creatures, are so devoted to the Prophet, and the cause of Jesus Christ, that they do not dream of the deep-laid and fatal scheme which prostrates happiness, and renders death itself desirable, but they meet him, expecting to receive through him a blessing, and learn the will of the Lord concerning them, and what awaits the faithful follower of Joseph, the Apostle and Prophet of God, when in the stead thereof, they are told, after having been sworn in one of the most solemn manners, to never divulge what is revealed to them, with a penalty of death attached, that God Almighty has revealed it to him, that
she should be his (Joseph’s) Spiritual wife; for it was right anciently, and God will tolerate it again: but we must keep those pleasures and blessings from the world, for until there is a change in the government, we will endanger ourselves by practicing it — but we can enjoy the blessings of Jacob, David, and others, as well as to be deprived of them, if we do not expose ourselves to the law of the land. She is thunder-struck, faints, recovers, and refuses. The Prophet damns her if she rejects. She thinks of the great sacrifice, and of the many thousand miles she has traveled over sea and land, that she might save her soul from pending ruin, and replies, God’s will be done, and not mine. The Prophet and his devotees in this way are gratified. The next step to avoid public exposition from the common course of things, they are sent away for a time, until all is well; after which they return, as from a long visit. Those whom no power or influence could seduce, except that which is wielded by some individual feigning to be a God, must realize the remarks of an able writer, when he says, “if woman’s feelings are turned to ministers of sorrow, where shall she look for consolation?” Her lot is to be wooed and won; her heart is like some fortress that has been captured, sacked abandoned, and left desolate. With her, the desire of the heart has failed — the great charm of existence is at an end; she neglects all the cheerful exercises of life, which gladen the spirits, quicken the pulses, and send the tide of life in healthful currents through the veins. Her rest is broken. The sweet refreshment of sleep is poisoned by melancholy dreams; dry sorrow drinks her blood, until her enfeebled frame sinks under the slightest external injury. Look for her after a little while, and you find friendship weeping over her untimely grave; and wondering that one who but so recently glowed with all the radiance of health and beauty, should so speedily be brought down to darkness and despair, you will be told of some wintry chill, of some casual indisposition that laid her low! But no one knows of the mental malady that previously sapped her strength, and made her so easy a pray to the spoiler. She is like some tender tree, the pride and beauty of the grove — graceful in its form, bright in its foliage, but with the worm praying at its heart; we find it withered when it should be most luxuriant. We see it drooping its branches to the earth, and shedding leaf by leaf until wasted and perished away, it falls in the stillness of the forest; and as we muse over the beautiful ruin, we strive in vain to recollect the blast or thunder-bolt that could have smitten it with decay. But no one knows the cause except the foul fiend who perpetrated the diabolical deed. Our hearts have mourned and bled at the wretched and miserable condition of females in this place; many orphans have been the victims of misery and wretchedness, through the influence that has been exerted over them, under the cloak of religion and afterwards, in consequence of that jealous disposition which predominates over the minds of some, have been turned upon a wide world, fatherless and motherless, destitute of friends and fortune; and robbed of that which nothing but death can restore. Men solace themselves by saying the facts slumber in the dark caverns of midnight. But Lo! it is sudden day, and the dark deeds of foul fiends shall be exposed from the house-tops. A departed spirit, once the resident of St. Louis, shall yet cry aloud for vengeance. It is difficult — perhaps impossible — to describe the wretchedness of females in this place, without wounding the feelings of the benevolent, or shocking the delicacy of the refined; but the truth shall come to the world. The remedy can never be applied, unless the disease is known. The sympathy, ever anxious to relieve, cannot be felt before the misery is seen. — The charity that kindles at the tale of wo, can never act with adequate efficeiency, till it is made to see the pollution and guilt of men, now buried in the death-shades of heathenism. — Shall we then, however painful the sight, shrink from the contemplation of their real state? We answer, we will not, if permitted to live. As we have before stated, it is the vicious principles of men we are determined to explode. It is not that we have any private feelings to gratify, or any private pique to settle, that has induced us to be thus plain; for we can respect and love the criminal, if there is any hope of reformation: but there is a point beyond which forbearance ceases to be a virtue. . . . Inasmuch as we have for years borne with the individual follies and iniquities of Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, and many other official characters in the Church of Jesus Christ, (conceiving it a duty incumbent upon us so to bear,) and having labored with them repeatedly with all Christian love, meekness and humility, yet to no effect, feel as if forbearance has ceased to be a virtue, and hope of reformation vain; and inasmuch as they have introduced false and damnable doctrines into the Church, such as a plurality of Gods above the God of this universe, and his liability to fall with all his creations;
the plurality of wives, for time and eternity, the doctrine of unconditional sealing up to eternal life, against all crimes except that of sheding innocent blood, by a perversion of their priestly authority, and thereby forfeiting the holy priesthood, according to the word of Jesus: “If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch and is withered, and men gather them and cast them into the fire, and they are burned,” St. John, xv. 6. “Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God, he that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, hath both the Father and the Son; if there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed, for he that bideth him God speed is a partaker of his evil deeds;” we therefore are constrained to denounce them as apostates from the pure and holy doctrines of Jesus Christ.. . . AFFIDAVITS.
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. WM. LAW. (emphasis mine)
That’s a good point MC, and I think William Law is only one example of a devoted follower who could not accept polygamy and therefore became “apostate” while attributing the teaching to JS. What about Oliver Cowdery calling the Alger relationship an affair? Personally I think there is too much contemporary evidence (journals written at the time, during JS’s life) supporting his teaching of polygamy to try to discredit the whole thing. My opinion.
Quote:allquieton wrote:
Notice that the people accusing JS are polygamists themselves. I wonder if there are there any people innocent of polygamy, with first hand knowledge of JS that accuse him?
What type of person, exactly, do you believe to be a credible witness of polygamy? Polygamists, apparently don’t count, because they are biased (I assume this includes the many women who claim to have married JS, but later entered other polygamous relationships.) “Apostates” don’t count because they were out to get JS? It seems only RLDS sources count because they claim JS was a prophet, but didn’t enter into polygamy? One must remember that if JS was practicing polygamy and someone did not want to enter into it, they would likely be labeled an apostate. Such is the case with William Law, publisher of the Expositer, which JS destroyed because it accused him of polygamy and setting up a theocracy, the destruction of which lead to the trials of JS that resulted in his murder. History suggests that William Law had first hand knowledge of polygamy, but refused to believe it was of God.
I agree with Mister Curie on this one. Polygamy before Utah (which was outside the jurisdiction of the US) was a conspiracy. It could not have been practiced openly. Therefore, only initiates were aware of it. That means the only “witnesses” were:– participants who believed in it (the faithful). These would have kept their mouths shut until told it was safe to speak openly about it.
– initiates who left the practice (“apostates” and generally excommunicated). These would have witnessed plenty, but would be very biased and partial, even vengeful.
– those close enough to its practitioners to be aware of it, but not initiated either because they were unwilling to participate or not trusted enough to be initiated (William Law and/or Oliver Cowdery). This limits their ability to witness what was going on and also renders their accounts somewhat biased against it. They may have also believed that JS was a prophet, while condemning these acts; the “fallen prophet” motif.
The RLDS were particularly devoted to debunking that JS was polygamous because it 1) bolstered their claim that BY was apostate, and 2) reinforced that Emma’s sons were the only legitimate heirs to the role of prophet (remember that they believed in a male-lineage, father-son succession).
allquieton wrote:
Tradition says JS wrote 132, but evidence suggests BY wrote it.
What is the evidence that BY wrote 132?
My previous quote from the Nauvoo Expositor provides some evidence contemporary to the time that the revelation later known as D&C:132 was written by JS. Here, published before JS was martyred, is an account that there was a purported revelation proclaiming polygamy was of God, which is attributed to JS. The description by William Law sounds similar to 132. This description was given before BY would have written any supposed revelation that he could claim was from JS.
Quote:AFFIDAVITS.
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.
WM. LAW.
It is possible that the “doctrinal” portion of D&C 132 were added after the death of JS. This is according to an interview with William Law. He said he was interested to see the published version because it was so much longer than the original he had read in Nauvoo. Quote:Q “You returned the revelation to Hyrum?”
A “Yes, I did. I was astonished to see in your book that the revelation was such a long document. I remember DISTINCTLY that the original given me by Hyrum was MUCH SHORTER. It covered not more than two or three pages of foolscap. The contents are substantially the same, but there was not that theological introduction. The thing consisted simply in the command of doing it, and that command was restricted to the High Priesthood and to virgins and widows. But as to Joseph, himself, the Lord’s chosen servant, it was restricted to virgins only, to clean vessels, from which to procure a pure seed to the Lord.”
I do not believe that JS intended for polygamy to be a doctrine of exaltation the way it was turned into. I have read “Joseph Fought Polygamy” before and found it facinating. It nearly convinced me he had no part in it. But, then when you read more about all the stuff going on it starts to fall into place. I’m sure he really did practice it. I don’t think he had much time to sleep around, though.
No children were left that we have been able to find, so far. This is a witness to me that it was not “to raise up seed” to the Lord. Anyway, rumors swirled around Nauvoo that Bennett was helping women rid themselves of unwanted pregnancies (not something I care to think about or believe). Some people claim that women were sent away when they became pregnant.
People did know some methods for avoiding pregnancy back then. Some of the women he married were even pregnant at the time, so no chance of impregnating them. With infant mortality rates so high, it is possible that those few children who dies could have been his. We will never know.
There is an unpublished/canonized revelation that JS received that directed the leaders of the church to take wives from among the “Lamanites.” This would have meant polygamy. It was intended to make the Native Americans “white and delightsome.” The revelation doesn’t say anything about sealing or ordinances or exaltation that I can remember.
Quote:“This unpublished 17 July 1831 revelation was described three decades later in an 1861 letter from W.W. Phelps to Brigham Young quoting Joseph Smith: `It is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity, may become white, delightsome and just.’ In the 8 December 1831 Ohio Star, Ezra Booth wrote of a revelation directing Mormon elders to marry with the `natives'” (Sunstone, November 1993, footnote #5, pg. 52).
I believe in Joseph Fought Polygamy it sites a reference in BY’s journal where he claims he knew the truthfulness of polygamy before it had been revealed to him by JS. He also went on a mission ALONE to an area on the East Coast where polygamy or bigamy was practiced. Sorry if someone already mentioned this. I don’t believe that BY was repulsed by polygamy or ever longed for his grave over it. The D&C has many mentions and warning to men for lust, adultery, coveting neighbor’s wife, etc. This was obviously an issue for a lot of these men…maybe women too.
just me wrote:It is possible that the “doctrinal” portion of D&C 132 were added after the death of JS. This is according to an interview with William Law. He said he was interested to see the published version because it was so much longer than the original he had read in Nauvoo.
Quote:Q “You returned the revelation to Hyrum?”
A “Yes, I did. I was astonished to see in your book that the revelation was such a long document. I remember DISTINCTLY that the original given me by Hyrum was MUCH SHORTER. It covered not more than two or three pages of foolscap. The contents are substantially the same, but there was not that theological introduction. The thing consisted simply in the command of doing it, and that command was restricted to the High Priesthood and to virgins and widows. But as to Joseph, himself, the Lord’s chosen servant, it was restricted to virgins only, to clean vessels, from which to procure a pure seed to the Lord.”
I wonder if the version passed along for others to read didn’t have the portion that was addressed to Emma. It would make sense that JS would remove that portion when passing the “revelation” along to others. I think JS was pressuring his wife into accepting polygamy with the “revelation”, but I don’t think he wanted to publicly shame her or let others know she was having a difficult time with the revelation. Removing the parts directed at Emma would certainly make it shorter.
just me wrote:No children were left that we have been able to find, so far. This is a witness to me that it was not “to raise up seed” to the Lord. Anyway, rumors swirled around Nauvoo that Bennett was helping women rid themselves of unwanted pregnancies (not something I care to think about or believe). Some people claim that women were sent away when they became pregnant.
People did know some methods for avoiding pregnancy back then. Some of the women he married were even pregnant at the time, so no chance of impregnating them. With infant mortality rates so high, it is possible that those few children who dies could have been his. We will never know.
It is certainly true that the infant mortality rate was quite high. In reading “In Sacred Loneliness” I’ve been struck with how often children died. I suppose it was quite common back then. In the beginning, JS seemed to choose married women. And with 30+ wives, it would have been difficult to get the timing right to get them pregnant, particularly with trying to keep it hidden from general knowledge.
Furthermore, as I mentioned previously, the only current DNA method that has been able to definitively prove paternity only works for male descendants through an all-male lineage from JS. That certainly narrows down the number of people that can be tested as being descended from JS.
Some thoughts: Okay, I will read more about William Law. Just for starters though, he said a bunch of screwy things about Joseph. That JS was trying to poison him and have Indians kill him. Also he said Emma was in on the polygamy thing and that she was a mean course woman. He said a lot of things like this that don’t agree with the usual story. Also he started his own church and the two Higbee bros. were among the first to join–these are the two that confessed to seducing women and blaming it on JS. Which the women also testified to. None of this disproves Law’s claim–but none of it looks very good for him either.
I used to believe the JS polygamy story whole heartedly (though it never did sit well with me). One of the reasons I was convinced otherwise is b/c there is so much relevant history that I was never aware of. The polygamous Cochranites that we sent missionaries to, the outright confessions by people that they invented the lie about JS secretly practicing polygamy, Joseph’s many public denials of polygamy. These are just a few of many.
Hawkgirl, the argument that JS had to keep polygamy secret is weak I think. For starters the Cochranites taught it openly. Then there was the Peacemaker author, Udney Hay Jacob, who before he joined the church, wrote a pro-polygamy book, and even sent it to the President to try to get it published. There may have been others nearby openly practicing polygamy too.
Also, if Joseph intended to introduce polygamy eventually, you might think he would try to soften it up and sell it instead of preaching loudly against it. Also, Joseph Smith wrote an awful lot. Journals, letters, etc. Why is there nothing in his handwriting about polygamy. Or even hinting at it.
One more thing–if he was as shady as some maintain, I would expect to be able to detect something screwy that he wrote. I’ve read writings from known religious frauds, false prophets, etc. They all tend to say screwy things that don’t make sense, or at least slip in something screwy into an argument that does make sense. I don’t get this from Joseph either. What I have read of Joseph’s journals indicates reasonable sounding surprise and shock at the accusations against him, and at the conduct of others.
Well, MisterCurie, I appreciate you digging up the William Law statement. I will read more about it. At the same time, after having read a comprehensive, well documented case against JS polygamy I need more than one (or 2 or 3) evidences to reject it. It sounds like you also are not willing to change your view based on a few evidences that there is a possible alternate explanation for. So I hope you do read JSFP. And I guess I will stay open to hearing the opposing viewpoint.
Oh, with the Section 132 revelation. Apparently it is in BY’s handwriting. And BY stated that the original was destroyed by Emma, but luckily he had the only surviving copy. Fishy, if you ask me. Also, he waited until 1876 to put it in the D+C replacing the Section 101 Article on Marriage (which specifically denies polygamy and preaches monogamy).
Dear Alliquieton, Hey, why can’t you just be grateful for all of JS super, extreme, catastrophic mess-ups.
I live in Salt Lake City, and my home faces the most majestic, beautiful mountain range one can imagine. My faith in Deity is forever cemented by their matchless glory. Yes, yes, I know they were formed by an earthquake, a horrible, earth-shattering, upheaval, but there they stand. The very weakness that broke the earth, created the rocks upon which I stand.
JS was arguable the most ridiculously inexperienced, fellow the Lord could have chosen. Oliver Cowdery was 24, David Witmer 25 and JS was just 25. These guys would have done better to start a rock-band than a church. Of all of the mess-ups, JS had to have been the worst. A born dreamer, JS never rooted himself in reality the way that Whitmer and Cowdery did. Just think about it, the Saints were settled in Kirtland, Ohio until the collapse of the Kirtland Safety Society Bank. JS had to flee Kirtland else his creditors would have lynched him. Missouri, don’t even get me started. David Whitmer, was President of the Church in Missouri. When JS came, he caused such a stir that all three members of the Missouri first presidency wanted him corrected. Even Oliver Cowdery accused him of unspeakable things. Everyone who charged him with sin was excommunicated and the church fell into chaos. The Mormons were exterminated.
Finally, the Saints arrived in Illinois. The Lord just kept pushing the Saints further and further west, closer and closer and closer to the mouth of the Platte River. The Platte River, that grand river that crosses the continent. God knew that if the Saints could somehow reach the Platte River, they would have a path, a path that would lead them West toward the Rocky Mountains. JS got us to the river. He got us there.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.