|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{Main Page}}
| + | #REDIRECT[[Alleged whitewashing of polygamy in Church history]] |
| − | <onlyinclude>
| |
| − | ==Question: Did Wilford Woodruff criticize assistant Church Historian Andrew Jenson's decision to publish the names of those who were married to Joseph Smith because he wanted to hide the fact that Joseph was married to other women?==
| |
| − | ===Jenson’s material, coming when it did, could have put members in danger===
| |
| − | | |
| − | {{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS-Long}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | Jenson’s material, coming when it did, could have put members in danger. But G.D. Smith makes it appear that Woodruff was trying to hide the practice of plural marriage in 1887. <ref>{{CriticalWork:Smith:Nauvoo Polygamy|pages=446}}</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===What is not explained or acknowledged is that Woodruff’s paramount concern was not to hide history or deny plural marriage===
| |
| − | | |
| − | George D. Smith writes that Jenson's article “appeared on the down-side slope of the historical peak in polygamy . . . [and] Woodruff complained to Jenson.” G. D. Smith quotes Woodruff to the effect that “we do not think it a wise step to give these names to the world at the present time in the manner in which you have done. . . . Advantage may be taken of their publication and in some instances, to the injury, perhaps, of families or relatives of those whose names are mentioned” (p. 447).<ref>G. D. Smith cites Richard S. Van Wagoner, ''Mormon Polygamy: A History'', 2nd ed. (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), 135, which includes a letter from Wilford Woodruff to Andrew Jenson, 6 August 1887.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | What is not explained or acknowledged is that Woodruff’s paramount concern was not to hide history or deny plural marriage (the Manifesto was three years in the future: polygamy was hardly a secret).
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Woodruff likely feared the very real risk of spies and government agents using the information to prosecute members of the church===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Rather, Woodruff likely feared the very real risk of spies and government agents using the information to prosecute members of the church. At this period, women were jailed for refusing to testify against husbands; hundreds of men were in hiding or in prison. “Words are inadequate to convey the feelings of those times—the hurts to individuals and families, to the church. . . . Families were torn apart, left to provide as best they could.”<ref>S. George Ellsworth, “Utah’s Struggle For Statehood,” ''Utah Historical Quarterly'' 31/1 (Winter 1963): 66.</ref>
| |
| − | </onlyinclude>
| |
| − | {{endnotes sources}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| | | | |
| | <!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE --> | | <!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE --> |
| | [[es:Pregunta: ¿Wilford Woodruff criticó la decisión de asistente historiador Andrew Jenson de publicar los nombres de los que estaban casados con Joseph Smith porque quería ocultar el hecho de que José estaba casado con otras mujeres?]] | | [[es:Pregunta: ¿Wilford Woodruff criticó la decisión de asistente historiador Andrew Jenson de publicar los nombres de los que estaban casados con Joseph Smith porque quería ocultar el hecho de que José estaba casado con otras mujeres?]] |
| | [[Category:Questions]] | | [[Category:Questions]] |
