Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Nauvoo Polygamy/Chapter 2"

m (71)
m (top: Bot replace {{FairMormon}} with {{Main Page}} and remove extra lines around {{Header}})
 
(190 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{FAIRAnalysisHeader
+
{{Main Page}}
|title=[[../../]]
+
{{H1
|author=George D. Smith
+
|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Nauvoo Polygamy/Chapter 2
|noauthor=
+
|H=Response to claims made in "Chapter 2" (pp. 52-80)
|section=[[../|Index of Claims]], Chapter 2
+
|S=
|previous=[[../Chapter 1|Chapter 1]]
+
|L1=
|next=[[../Chapter 3|Chapter 3]]
+
|T=[[../../|Nauvoo Polygamy: "... but we called it celestial marriage"]]
|notes=
+
|A=George D. Smith
 +
|<=[[../Chapter 1a|Chapter 1 (pp. 26-51)]]
 +
|>=[[../Chapter 2a|Chapter 2 (pp. 81-155)]]
 
}}
 
}}
__NOTOC__
+
<!-- INSERT CHART HERE -->
===Claims made in "Chapter 2: Comfort me now"===
+
<onlyinclude>
{{BeginClaimsTable}}
+
{{H2
|
+
|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Nauvoo Polygamy/Chapter 2
====53====
+
|H=Response to claims made in Nauvoo Polygamy, "Chapter 2" (pp. 52-158)
||[Joseph] "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'"
+
|S=
||
+
|L1=Response to claim: 53 - the author notes that Joseph "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window'"
*{{InternalContradiction|p. 65}}
+
|L2=Response to claim: 53 - "The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: 'My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now'"
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
+
|L3=Response to claim: 53 - "Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier.  Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome"
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
+
|L4=Response to claim: 54 - “Did Sarah Ann keep this rendezvous on that humid summer night? Unfortunately, the documentary record is silent"
 +
|L5=Response to claim: 54 - The author states that what interested him the most was how Joseph "went about courting…these women"
 +
|L6=Response to claim: 55 - When polygamy was officially abandoned in 1890, that "what previously had been called 'celestial marriage' was subtly redefined to specify something new
 +
|L7=Response to claim: 55 - "Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls"
 +
|L8=Response to claim: 55 - "Joseph "assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctioned but were demanded by heaven"
 +
|L9=Response to claim: 56 - "There may have been even more wives and plural children"
 +
|L10=Response to claim: 63 - "conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure"
 +
|L11=Response to claim: 65 - "when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there"
 +
|L12=Response to claim: 65 - "One of the instrumental people in the inauguration of plural marriage was John Bennett"
 +
|L13=Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett was Joseph Smith's "closest confident"
 +
|L14-Response to claim: 65 - Joseph was "sharing power" with John C. Bennett
 +
|L15=Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett spoke out against Joseph "and was soon stripped of his offices and titles"
 +
|L16=Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett and Joseph each "accused the other of immoral behavior"
 +
|L17=Response to claim: 65 - While some of John C. Bennett's claims "may have been exaggerations, much of what he reported can be confirmed by other eyewitness accounts"
 +
|L18=Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett "cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal"
 +
|L19=Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett "had an ambitious but colorful background"
 +
|L20=Response to claim: 66-67 - John C. Bennett "was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions"
 +
|L21=Response to claim: 68 - Joseph is merely “feigning impartiality” before going on to practice “undemocratic block voting"
 +
|L22=Response to claim: 69 - Joseph was apparently "undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett
 +
|L23=Response to claim: 69 - John C. Bennett was Assistant President of the Church
 +
|L24=Response to claim: 69 - John C. Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church
 +
|L25=Response to claim: 70 - Joseph Smith and John C. Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842)
 +
|L26=Response to claim: 70 - There seemed to be "no office or honor within reach" that Joseph Smith "did not hasten to grant to" John C. Bennett
 +
|L27=Response to claim: 70 - "Zina Huntington, who married Henry Jacobs instead but then reconsidered seven months later in response to Joseph's restated interest"
 +
|L28=Response to claim: 70-71 - "Joseph soon after married Zina's sister, Presendia, who was also already married"
 +
|L29=Response to claim: 71 - "Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah"
 +
|L30=Response to claim: 72 - Orson Pratt eventually accepted Joseph's explanation "that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman"
 +
|L31=Response to claim: 72 - "Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself"
 +
|L32=Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842
 +
|L33=Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett was excommunicated from the Church in "retaliation"
 +
|L34=Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett claimed that his excommunication was postdated to May 11 to appear that it had occurred before his resignation
 +
|L35=Response to claim: 73 - "It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters"
 +
|L36=Response to claim: 73 - "In the spring of 1842, the two men quarreled and Smith had Bennett excommunicated"
 +
|L37=Response to claim: 75 - Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage"
 +
|L38=Response to claim: 75 - "In the context of having just married a pregnant wife" Joseph's "words acquire added meaning: 'If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you….'"
 +
|L39=Response to claim: 75 - Joseph's diary and the ''History of the Church'' do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife"
 +
|L40=Response to claim: 77 - "Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph...she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry"
 +
|L41=Response to claim: 77 - Brigham Young advised Henry Jacobs "to find a wife who could be his eternal partner"
 +
|L42=Response to claim: 78 - Brigham Young said that "if a woman can find a man holding the keys of the priesthood with higher power and authority than her husband, and he is disposed to take her"
 +
|L43=Response to claim: 79 - Presendia Buell is claimed to have "displayed an affinity for mystical religious experiences as one of the women who began speaking and singing in tongues"
 +
|L44=Response to claim: 79 - Presendia Buell "did not take the prophet's advice" to leave for Illinois while he was in Liberty Jail "prior to his escape from jail on April 16.  Nine months later, on January 31, 1841, she gave birth to a son Oliver"
 +
|L45=Response to claim: 80 n. 63 - "There is no DNA connection" between Joseph Smith and Oliver Buell
 +
}}
 +
</onlyinclude>
 +
 
 +
==Response to claim: 53 - the author notes that Joseph "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window'"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=
 +
Referring ''again'' to the Whitney letter, the author notes that Joseph "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'"
 +
|authorsources=<br>
 +
*Smith, Letter to "Brother and Sister [Newel K.] Whitney, and &c.," Nauvoo, Illinois, Aug. 18, 1842, Church Archives, Salt Lake City.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|
 +
|mistake=The author commonly exploits the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(literary_and_historical_analysis) presentist fallacy] in the matter of Joseph's wives' ages. The author also contradicts himself on p. 65: "Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window...."
 +
}}
 +
{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 +
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 +
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Age_wives}}
 +
*[[../../Use_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Use of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*Smith commonly exploits the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(literary_and_historical_analysis) presentist fallacy] in the matter of Joseph's wives' ages.
 
*[[Polygamy book/Age of wives|Age of wives]]
 
 
*[[../../Presentism]]
 
*[[../../Presentism]]
||
+
{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith write a "love letter" to his plural wife Sarah Ann Whitney to request a secret rendezvous?}}
*Smith, Letter to "Brother and Sister [Newel K.] Whitney, and &c.," Nauvoo, Illinois, Aug. 18, 1842, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City.
+
{{:Question: How do critics of the Church portray Joseph Smith's letter to the Whitney family as a "love letter"?}}
 +
{{:Question: What was the real purpose of the letter written by Joseph Smith to the parents of Sarah Ann Whitney?}}
 +
 
 +
==Response to claim: 53 - "The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: 'My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now'"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=
 +
{{AuthorQuote|The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: "My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now."}}
 +
|authorsources=
 +
*Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|
 +
|mistake=Joseph is speaking '''to all three Whitneys''', and the author again distorts the letter as at the beginning of the book.
 +
}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Age_wives}}
+
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Whitney letter]]
|-
+
*[[../../Use_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Use of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
|
 
====53====
 
||The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: "My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now."
 
||
 
*Joseph is speaking to all three, and the author again distorts the letter as at the beginning of the book.
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
 
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
||
+
 
*Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842.
+
==Response to claim: 53 - "Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier.  Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier.  Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome," and he pleaded with Sarah Ann to visit him under cover of darkness.  After all, they had been married just three weeks earlier.}}
 +
|authorsources=<br>
 +
#Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|Loaded language trying to make Joseph appear sexually voracious and insensitive to Emma. As stated in the letter, the reason for the visit was to perform ordinances.
 +
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
|-
+
}}
|
+
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Whitney letter]]
====53====
+
*[[../../Use_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Use of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
||"Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier.  Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome," and he pleaded with Sarah Ann to visit him under cover of darkness.  After all, they had been married just three weeks earlier.
 
||
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language|Loaded language]] trying to make Joseph appear sexually voracious and insensitive to Emma.
 
*As stated in the letter, the reason for the visit was to perform ordinances.
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
 
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 +
 +
==Response to claim: 54 - “Did Sarah Ann keep this rendezvous on that humid summer night? Unfortunately, the documentary record is silent"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim={{AuthorQuote|“Did Sarah Ann keep this rendezvous on that humid summer night? Unfortunately, the documentary record is silent.” But “the letter survives to illuminate the complexity of Smith’s life in Nauvoo."}}
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|The documentary record is not silent, however, as to why Joseph sought a visit with his plural wife and her parents: to “tell you all my plans . . . [and] to git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c.”
 +
*Small wonder that Joseph didn’t want a hostile Emma present while trying to administer what he and the Whitneys regarded as sacred ordinances. And, it is unsurprising that he considered a single private room sufficient for the purposes for which he summoned his plural wife and her parents.
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
||
 
*Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842.
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
|-
+
}}
|
+
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Whitney letter]]
====54====
+
*[[../../Use_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Use of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
||“Did Sarah Ann keep this rendezvous on that humid summer night? Unfortunately, the documentary record is silent.” But “the letter survives to illuminate the complexity of Smith’s life in Nauvoo” (p. 54).
 
||
 
*The documentary record is not silent, however, as to why Joseph sought a visit with his plural wife and her parents: to “tell you all my plans . . . [and] to git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c.”
 
*Small wonder that Joseph didn’t want a hostile Emma present while trying to administer what he and the Whitneys regarded as sacred ordinances. And, it is unsurprising that he considered a single private room sufficient for the purposes for which he summoned his plural wife and her parents.
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
 
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
+
 
||
+
==Response to claim: 54 - The author states that what interested him the most was how Joseph "went about courting…these women"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=The author states that what interested him the most was how Joseph "went about courting…these women."
 +
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
+
}}
|-
+
{{misinformation|There is no evidence that Joseph did any courting.  He often used intermediaries.
|
+
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Womanizing and romance}}
====54====
+
}}
||"What interested me most was how Smith went about courting…these women."
 
||
 
*No evidence that Joseph did any courting.  He often used intermediaries.
 
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*[[../../Assumptions and presumptions]]
 
*[[../../Assumptions and presumptions]]
||
+
 
*No source provided.
+
==Response to claim: 55 - When polygamy was officially abandoned in 1890, that "what previously had been called 'celestial marriage' was subtly redefined to specify something new==
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Womanizing and romance}}
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
|-
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
|
+
|claim=It is claimed that when polygamy was officially abandoned in 1890, that "what previously had been called 'celestial marriage' was subtly redefined to specify something new: marriage performed in LDS temples for this life and for an expected eternal afterlife."
====55====
+
|authorsources=
||"When [polygamy] was officially abandoned in 1890, what previously had been called 'celestial marriage' was subtly redefined to specify something new: marriage performed in LDS temples for this life and for an expected eternal afterlife."
 
||
 
*Need wiki article on this claim.
 
*Should link too to the FANNY ALGER AFFAIR or MARRIAGE wiki, which has the raw material for the answer (but one must expand into the Utah period).
 
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|The claimed "redefinition" was present from the very beginning of plural marriage.  The emphasis changed:
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Necessary_for_salvation}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Necessary_for_salvation}}
|-
+
}}
|
+
*[[Polygamy_book/Introduction_of_the_eternal_marriage|Plural marriage vs. celestial marriage in the beginning]]
====55====
+
*[[Polygamy/Requirement for exaltation]]
||Plural marriage had been a key principle of Mormon exaltation; but by adaption, celestial marriage was still said to be required, only now it meant monogamy rather than polygamy.
+
 
||
+
<!-- ====55====
*[[Polygamy a requirement for exaltation]]
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=Plural marriage is claimed to have originally been a "key principle" of exaltation, "but by adaption, celestial marriage was still said to be required, only now it meant monogamy rather than polygamy."
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy/Requirement for exaltation]]
 +
|authorsources=
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Necessary_for_salvation}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Necessary_for_salvation}}
|-
+
}} -->
|
+
 
====55====
+
==Response to claim: 55 - "Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls"==
||"Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls…."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls…."}}
||
+
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|This is pure assumption by the author. He notes elsewhere that Joseph never even recorded anything about his plural marriages, much less anything about "secret liaisons with women and girls."
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Womanizing and romance}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Womanizing and romance}}
|-
+
}}
|
 
====55====
 
||"He assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctioned but were demanded by heaven and fulfilled the ethereal principle of 'restoration.'"
 
||
 
*Does not tell us that Joseph had the women get their OWN witness.
 
*[[Divine manifestations to plural wives and families]]
 
*Women could and did turn Joseph down with no consequences.
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Did women turn Joseph down]]
 
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
||
+
 
 +
==Response to claim: 55 - "Joseph "assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctioned but were demanded by heaven"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=The author notes that Joseph "assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctioned but were demanded by heaven and fulfilled the ethereal principle of 'restoration.'"
 +
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
|-
+
}}
|
+
{{misinformation|The author does not tell us that Joseph had the women get their OWN witness. Women could and did turn Joseph down with no consequences.
====56====
+
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
||"There may have been even more wives and plural children."
+
}}
||
+
*[[Polygamy/Divine manifestations to plural wives and families]]
*Anything ''might'' have happened.  The author provides no evidence.
+
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Did women turn Joseph down]]
*This is the [[Logical_fallacies#Appeal_to_probability|fallacy of probability]].
+
 
||
+
==Response to claim: 56 - "There may have been even more wives and plural children"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=The author assumes that "[t]here may have been even more wives and plural children."
 +
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
|-
+
}}
|
+
{{propaganda|Anything ''might'' have happened.  The author provides no evidence. This is the [[Logical_fallacies#Appeal_to_probability|fallacy of probability]].
====57====
+
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Fallacy of probability}}
||''History of the Church'' says nothing about Nauvoo on the day of Louisa Beaman's marriage to Joseph.
+
}}
||
+
 
*[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]]
+
<!-- ====57====
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=The author notes that ''History of the Church'' says nothing about Nauvoo on the day of Louisa Beaman's marriage to Joseph.
 +
}}
 +
*[[Church history/Censorship and revision]]
 
*[[../../Censorship]]
 
*[[../../Censorship]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
||
+
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}}
|-
+
}} -->
|
+
==Response to claim: 63 - "conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure"==
====63====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure."}}
*The author provides no such evidence save his repeated distortion of the Whitney letter.
+
|authorsources=
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|This is pure assumption on the part of the author&mdash;he provides no such evidence save his own repeated representation of the Whitney letter.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
|-
+
}}
|
+
 
====65====
+
==Response to claim: 65 - "when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there"==
||“when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts”
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*{{InternalContradiction|The invitation was to Sarah and her parents}}
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|“when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts.”}}
 +
|authorsources=
 +
*No citation given
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|The letter was addressed to Sarah's parents, not to Sarah.
 +
}}
 +
*{{InternalContradiction|p. 55: The invitation was to Sarah and her parents&mdash;[Joseph] "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'"}}
 
*[[../../Contradictions]]
 
*[[../../Contradictions]]
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
+
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Whitney letter]]
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
+
*[[../../Use_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Use of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
||
 
*No citation given
 
*{{HistoricalError}}
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 65 - "One of the instrumental people in the inauguration of plural marriage was John Bennett"==
====65====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"One of the instrumental people in the inauguration of plural marriage was John [C.] Bennett…."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=The author claims that "[o]ne of the instrumental people in the inauguration of plural marriage was John [C.] Bennett…."
*A huge leap, presuming that Bennett's adulteries were ever sanctioned by Joseph, or had anything to do with plural marriage.
+
|authorsources=
 +
No sources provided
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|The is a huge assumption on the part of the author, presuming that Bennett's adulteries were ever sanctioned by Joseph, or had anything to do with plural marriage.
 +
}}
 
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]  
 
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]  
||
 
*Author's opinion.
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
 
====65====
 
||"…in 1841 [Bennett] functioned as perhaps Joseph Smith's closest confident."
 
||
 
*Ignores that Joseph began to distrust him for cause long before their public rupture.
 
||
 
  
 +
==Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett was Joseph Smith's "closest confident"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=The author notes that in 1841, John C. Bennett was Joseph Smith's "closest confident." {{attn}}
 +
|authorsources=
 
* No source provided.
 
* No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|The author ignores the fact that Joseph began to distrust Bennett for cause long before their public rupture.
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====65====
+
==Response to claim: 65 - Joseph was "sharing power" with John C. Bennett==
||Joseph was "sharing power" with Bennett
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*Bennett's power was mainly secular.  He did little in the religious realm.  Joseph had wanted to be relieved of temporal responsibilities, and Bennett was available.
+
|claim=It is claimed that Joseph was "sharing power" with Bennett.
 +
|authorsources=
 +
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|Bennett's power was mainly secular.  He did little in the religious realm.  Joseph had wanted to be relieved of temporal responsibilities, and Bennett was available.
 +
}}
 
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
||
+
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 +
 
 +
==Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett spoke out against Joseph "and was soon stripped of his offices and titles"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=It is claimed that in 1842, John C. Bennett spoke out against Joseph "and was soon stripped of his offices and titles."
 +
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
+
}}
|-
+
{{misinformation|Bennett was guilty of serial immoralities, and had been disciplined on multiple occasions.  He only "spoke out" once he learned that he was to be stripped of membership in the Church. The author has cause and effect reversed, perhaps because he doesn't want us to know of the overwhelming evidence of Bennett's guilt.
|
+
}}
====65====
 
||"In the spring of 1842, Bennett spoke out against Smith and was soon stripped of his offices and titles."
 
||
 
*Bennett was guilty of serial immoralities, and had been disciplined on multiple occasions.  He only "spoke out" once he learned that he was to be stripped of membership in the Church.
 
*The author has cause and effect reversed, perhaps because he doesn't want us to know of the overwhelming evidence of Bennett's guilt.
 
 
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
||
 
*No source provided.
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett and Joseph each "accused the other of immoral behavior"==
====65====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"Each accused the other of immoral behavior."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=It is claimed that John C. Bennett and Joseph each "accused the other of immoral behavior."
*Bennett was accused by far more people, over a far greater length of time, of "immoral behavior." Many of his accusers were not LDS and had nothing to do with the Mormons. 
+
|authorsources=
*Bennett only began to accuse Joseph once his own crimes were repeatedly revealed.
 
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|Bennett was accused by far more people, over a far greater length of time, of "immoral behavior."  Many of his accusers were not LDS and had nothing to do with the Mormons. Bennett only began to accuse Joseph once his own crimes were repeatedly revealed.
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 65 - While some of John C. Bennett's claims "may have been exaggerations, much of what he reported can be confirmed by other eyewitness accounts"==
====65====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"While some of his claims may have been exaggerations, much of what he reported can be confirmed by other eyewitness accounts."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=The author attempts to rehabilitate John C. Bennett by claiming: "While some of his claims may have been exaggerations, much of what he reported can be confirmed by other eyewitness accounts."
*Many of Bennett's claims are clearly false.
+
|authorsources=
*The author uses Bennett uncritically, and naively.
 
*The things which Bennett can "confirm" are mostly things like names of people Joseph married.
 
*Bennett also clearly forged some material from others.
 
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|Many of Bennett's claims are clearly false. The author uses Bennett uncritically, and naively. The things which Bennett can "confirm" are mostly things like names of people Joseph married. Bennett also clearly forged some material from others.
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett "cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal"==
====65====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"Even though his statements must be weighed critically, he cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=Yet more attempt to make Bennett a credible witness: "Even though his statements must be weighed critically, he cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal."
*The author never does this weighing for us.
+
|authorsources=
*Much of what he writes, after analysis, must be dismissed as fabrication or exaggeration, however.
 
*Even anti-Mormon authors warned of Bennett's problems:
 
**"There is, no doubt, much truth in Bennett's book…but no statement that he makes can be received with confidence."
 
||
 
 
*Author's opinion.
 
*Author's opinion.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|The author never does this weighing for us. Much of what Bennett writes, after analysis, must be dismissed as fabrication or exaggeration, however. Even anti-Mormon authors warned of Bennett's problems:
 +
<blockquote>
 +
"There is, no doubt, much truth in Bennett's book…but no statement that he makes can be received with confidence." <ref>T. B. H. Stenhouse, ''The Rocky Mountain Saints : A Full and Complete History of the Mormons....'' (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1878 [1873]), 184 note.</ref>
 +
</blockquote>
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett "had an ambitious but colorful background"==
====65====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"Bennett had an ambitious but colorful background."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=The author claims that "Bennett had an ambitious but colorful background."
*This hides a mountain of evidence about Bennett's pre-LDS behavior, including:
+
|authorsources=
**repeatedly using others' names to fraudulently support the establishment of medical colleges
+
*No source provided
**selling bogus medical diplomas
+
}}
**selling bogus diplomas in other fields (e.g., law)
+
{{propaganda|This hides a mountain of evidence about Bennett's pre-LDS behavior, including:
**lying and misrepresentation
+
*repeatedly using others' names to fraudulently support the establishment of medical colleges
**serial adulteries and infidelities.
+
*selling bogus medical diplomas
**Abandonment of wife and children
+
*selling bogus diplomas in other fields (e.g., law)
 +
*lying and misrepresentation
 +
*serial adulteries and infidelities
 +
*abandonment of wife and children
 +
}}
 
*[[John C. Bennett]]
 
*[[John C. Bennett]]
||
 
*No source provided
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 66-67 - John C. Bennett "was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions"==
====66-67====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"Writing on March 23, 1846, Bennett claimed to have known 'Joseph better than any other man living for at least fourteen months!'….Bennett was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions.
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"Writing on March 23, 1846, Bennett claimed to have known 'Joseph better than any other man living for at least fourteen months!'….Bennett was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions.}}
*The author here accepts Bennett uncritically.
+
|authorsources=
*Despite his claim, he was never part of the inner circle which received the highest temple ordinances introduced by Joseph.  Bennett and Rigdon "were conspicuously absent"  when Joseph Smith spoke to those who would be among the first to receive the full endowment necessary "to finish their work and prevent imposition" by Satan.
 
*Bennett had secular influence, but relatively little to do with religious matters in Nauvoo:
 
*"Thus, the considerable embarrassment to Joseph Smith and Mormonism which some have inferred from Bennett's alleged duping of the Mormons is cast in a new light because Bennett himself so effectively refutes his own claim that he was a close confidant of Joseph Smith.  Unwittingly, Bennett indisputably demonstrates that he was neither directly involved with the endowment, eternal marriage, nor plural marriage—the most significant private theological developments during Bennett's stay in Nauvoo.
 
||
 
 
*Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 56.
 
*Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 56.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|The author here accepts Bennett uncritically. Despite his claim, he was never part of the inner circle which received the highest temple ordinances introduced by Joseph.  Bennett and Rigdon "were conspicuously absent"  when Joseph Smith spoke to those who would be among the first to receive the full endowment necessary "to finish their work and prevent imposition" by Satan.  Bennett had secular influence, but relatively little to do with religious matters in Nauvoo:
 +
<blockquote>
 +
"Thus, the considerable embarrassment to Joseph Smith and Mormonism which some have inferred from Bennett's alleged duping of the Mormons is cast in a new light because Bennett himself so effectively refutes his own claim that he was a close confidant of Joseph Smith.  Unwittingly, Bennett indisputably demonstrates that he was neither directly involved with the endowment, eternal marriage, nor plural marriage—the most significant private theological developments during Bennett's stay in Nauvoo. <ref>Andrew F. Ehat, "Joseph Smith's Introduction of Temple Ordinances and the 1844 Mormon Succession Question," (Master's Thesis, Brigham Young University, 1981), 40.</ref>
 +
</blockquote>
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====68====
+
==Response to claim: 68 - Joseph is merely “feigning impartiality” before going on to practice “undemocratic block voting"==
||“Joseph” is merely “feigning impartiality” before going on to practice “undemocratic block voting”
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*Block voting is not undemocratic—many interest groups vote en masse for candidates which will meet their needs.
+
|claim=The author claims that Joseph is merely “feigning impartiality” before going on to practice “undemocratic block voting.”
*Joseph was not feigning when he said, "We care not a fig for a Whig or Democrat….We shall go for our friends." (p. 68)  He was indicating that party made no difference to the Saints; what mattered is who would agree to defend them.
+
|authorsources=
 +
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|Block voting is not undemocratic—many interest groups vote ''en masse'' for candidates which will meet their needs. Joseph was not feigning when he said, "We care not a fig for a Whig or Democrat….We shall go for our friends." (p. 68)  He was indicating that party made no difference to the Saints; what mattered is who would agree to defend them.
 +
}}
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
||
 
*No source provided.
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Bloc voting}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Bloc voting}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====69====
+
==Response to claim: 69 - Joseph was apparently "undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett==
||"Undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett, Joseph "named Bennett Assistant President of the Church."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*Joseph knew from personal experience that "it is no uncommon thing for good men to be evil spoken against," and did nothing precipitous.
+
|claim=The author notes that Joseph was apparently "undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett, and proceeded to name him Assistant President of the Church.
*The accusations against Bennett gained credence when Joseph learned of his attempts to persuade a young woman "that he intended to marry her."  Joseph dispatched Hyrum Smith and William Law to make inquiries, and in early July 1841 he learned that Bennett had a wife and children living in the east.  Non-LDS sources confirmed Bennett's infidelity: one noted that he "heard it from almost every person in town that [his wife] left him in consequence of his ill treatment of her home and his intimacy with other women."  Another source reported that Bennett's wife "declared that she could no longer live with him…it would be the seventh family that he had parted during their union."
+
|authorsources=
||
 
 
* No source provided.
 
* No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{information|Joseph knew from personal experience that "it is no uncommon thing for good men to be evil spoken against," and did nothing precipitous. The accusations against Bennett gained credence when Joseph learned of his attempts to persuade a young woman "that he intended to marry her."  Joseph dispatched Hyrum Smith and William Law to make inquiries, and in early July 1841 he learned that Bennett had a wife and children living in the east.  Non-LDS sources confirmed Bennett's infidelity: one noted that he "heard it from almost every person in town that [his wife] left him in consequence of his ill treatment of her home and his intimacy with other women."  Another source reported that Bennett's wife "declared that she could no longer live with him…it would be the seventh family that he had parted during their union."
 +
</blockquote>
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} 
|-
 
|
 
  
====69====
+
==Response to claim: 69 - John C. Bennett was Assistant President of the Church==
||Bennett was Assistant President of the Church
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*Presentism.
+
|claim=It is noted that John C. Bennett was Assistant President of the Church.
*Sidney Rigdon, a counsellor in the First Presidency, was frequently ill.  On April 8, "John C. Bennett was presented, with the First Presidency, as Assistant President until President Rigdon's health should be restored."  Modern readers should be cautious in projecting the role of the current First Presidency on Joseph's day.  In the modern Church, the First Presidency is almost always composed of two apostles who have extensive experience in ecclesiastical affairs called to serve with the President.  In Joseph's day, this was not the case.  Most of Joseph's counsellors in the First Presidency were to betray his trust, including Jesse Gause, Frederick G. Williams, Sidney Rigdon, William Law and John C. Bennett. While some of these counsellors received keys, Bennett did not.    None were apostles prior to their call.
+
|authorsources=
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{information|Sidney Rigdon, a counselor in the First Presidency, was frequently ill.  On April 8, "John C. Bennett was presented, with the First Presidency, as Assistant President until President Rigdon's health should be restored."  Modern readers should be cautious in projecting the role of the current First Presidency on Joseph's day.  In the modern Church, the First Presidency is almost always composed of two apostles who have extensive experience in ecclesiastical affairs called to serve with the President.  In Joseph's day, this was not the case.  Most of Joseph's counselors in the First Presidency were to betray his trust, including Jesse Gause, Frederick G. Williams, Sidney Rigdon, William Law and John C. Bennett. While some of these counselors received keys, Bennett did not.  None were apostles prior to their call.
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 +
*[[../../Presentism]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====69====
+
==Response to claim: 69 - John C. Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church==
||Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church.
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*[This is not stated baldly, but some readers might be confused.]
+
|claim=It is claimed that John C. Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church.
*With few exceptions, Bennett "played little role in church conferences.  There might have been an unofficial division of labor between Bennett and Smith.  Smith handled church affairs; Bennett took the lead in secular matters."
+
|authorsources=
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|[This is not stated baldly, but some readers might be confused.] With few exceptions, Bennett "played little role in church conferences.  There might have been an unofficial division of labor between Bennett and Smith.  Smith handled church affairs; Bennett took the lead in secular matters."
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====70====
+
==Response to claim: 70 - Joseph Smith and John C. Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842)==
||Smith and Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842)
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*[See also p. 73 below] Bennett was confronted with the charges mentioned above in the summer of 1841.
+
|claim=The author claims that Joseph Smith and John C. Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842).
*When confronted with these charges, Bennett broke down and confessed.  Emma's nephew, Lorenzo D. Wasson, claimed to have been upstairs and heard Joseph "give J. C. Bennett a tremendous flagellation for practicing iniquity under the base pretence of authority from the heads of the church."  Claiming to be mortified at the idea of public censure, Bennett took poison in a suicide gesture, but recovered.
+
|authorsources=
*[See also p. 119]
 
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
*{{HistoricalError}}
+
}}
 +
{{misinformation|Bennett was confronted with the charges mentioned above in the summer of 1841. When confronted with these charges, Bennett broke down and confessed.  Emma's nephew, Lorenzo D. Wasson, claimed to have been upstairs and heard Joseph "give J. C. Bennett a tremendous flagellation for practicing iniquity under the base pretence of authority from the heads of the church."  Claiming to be mortified at the idea of public censure, Bennett took poison in a suicide gesture, but recovered.
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====70====
+
==Response to claim: 70 - There seemed to be "no office or honor within reach" that Joseph Smith "did not hasten to grant to" John C. Bennett==
||There seemed to be no office or honor within reach that Smith did not hasten to grant to Bennett.
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*This is false: Bennett was never inducted into the "Quorum of the Anointed"—those who were receiving the temple endowment from Joseph (see above, p.66-67).
+
|claim=It is claimed that there seemed to be "no office or honor within reach that Smith did not hasten to grant to Bennett."
*He was also never made an apostle.
+
|authorsources=
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{disinformation|This is false: Bennett was never inducted into the "Quorum of the Anointed"—those who were receiving the temple endowment from Joseph (see above, [[../Chapter_2#66-67|66-67]]). He was also never made an apostle.
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====70====
+
==Response to claim: 70 - "Zina Huntington, who married Henry Jacobs instead but then reconsidered seven months later in response to Joseph's restated interest"==
||"Zina Huntington, who married Henry Jacobs instead but then reconsidered seven months later in response to Joseph's restated interest."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*Zina said the Lord [[Plural_marriage_spiritual_manifestations#Zina_Huntington|told her what to do]].
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"Zina Huntington, who married Henry Jacobs instead but then reconsidered seven months later in response to Joseph's restated interest."}}
*[[Joseph Smith and polyandry]]
+
|authorsources=
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
+
*No source provide
||
+
}}
*No source provided.
+
{{information|Zina said the Lord [[Plural_marriage_spiritual_manifestations#Zina_Huntington|told her what to do]].
|-
+
}}
|
+
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Zina and Henry Jacobs|Zina and Henry Jacobs]]
 +
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Polyandry]]
 +
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}.
  
====70-71====
+
==Response to claim: 70-71 - "Joseph soon after married Zina's sister, Presendia, who was also already married"====
||"Seemingly impatient, Joseph soon after married Zina's sister, Presendia, who was also already married."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=
 +
{{AuthorQuote|"Seemingly impatient, Joseph soon after married Zina's sister, Presendia, who was also already married."}}
 +
|authorsources=
 +
No source provided.
 +
}}
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
*[[Joseph Smith and polyandry]]
 
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
||
+
{{:Question: What did the husband of Presendia L. Huntington know about her sealing to Joseph Smith for eternity?}}
 +
 
 +
==Response to claim: 71 - "Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah"==
 +
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=The author notes that "Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah."
 +
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
|-
+
}}
|
+
{{misinformation|The author does not tell us that Sarah and Bennett were probably having an affair, as witnessed by LDS and non-LDS witnesses, and a plausible time-line.
 
+
}}
====71====
+
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
||"Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah."
+
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
||
+
<!-- ====71====
*The author does not tell us that Sarah and Bennett were probably having an affair, as witnessed by LDS and non-LDS witnesses, and a plausible time-line.
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=It is notes that "[w]hatever the accuracy of the quotes [i.e., Bennett's claims] the two men [Orson and Joseph] quarrelled…."
 +
}}
 +
*The author here avoids the necessity of dealing with the problems in Bennett's account.
 
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
||
+
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
+
}} -->
|-
 
|
 
  
====71====
+
<!-- ====71====
||"Whatever the accuracy of the quotes [i.e., Bennett's claims] the two men [Orson and Joseph] quarrelled…."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*Smith here avoids the necessity of dealing with the problems in Bennett's account.
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"…the important aspect of this incident is that it tells us less about Bennett's motive in recalling this dispute and more about Orson's willingness to support his wife over his religious leader…."}}
||
+
}}
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====71====
 
||"…the important aspect of this incident is that it tells us less about Bennett's motive in recalling this dispute and more about Orson's willingness to support his wife over his religious leader…."
 
||
 
 
*"Recalling" assumes that Bennett's account is truthful, and not fabricated.  This has not been demonstrated.
 
*"Recalling" assumes that Bennett's account is truthful, and not fabricated.  This has not been demonstrated.
||
+
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 +
|authorsources=
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
}} -->
|
 
  
====71====
+
<!-- ==Response to claim: 71 - The author concludes that Joseph believed that Sarah Pratt "had been wrong to reject him—and that she had failed the test"==
||"However, Joseph concluded that she had been wrong to reject him—and that she had failed the test. The defiance she exhibited ultimately led to alienation with her husband…."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*The author again says nothing about Sarah and Bennett's affair, which probably had something to do with her "alienation."
+
|claim=The author concludes that Joseph believed that Sarah Pratt "had been wrong to reject him—and that she had failed the test. The defiance she exhibited ultimately led to alienation with her husband…."
||
+
|authorsources=
 
* No source provided.
 
* No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|The author again says nothing about Sarah and Bennett's affair, which probably had something to do with her "alienation."
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
}} -->
|
 
  
====72====
+
==Response to claim: 72 - Orson Pratt eventually accepted Joseph's explanation "that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman"==
||"Eventually Orson accepted Joseph's explanation that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*The author does not tell us that Orson eventually believed Sarah and Bennett had misled him, saying he was first informed by "a wicked source, from those disaffected, but as soon as he learned the truth he was satisfied." He presents no evidence for what explanation Joseph gave Orson, or what Orson believed.
+
|claim=The author notes that Orson Pratt eventually accepted Joseph's explanation "that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman."
||
+
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
|-
+
}}
|
+
{{misinformation|The author does not tell us that Orson eventually believed Sarah and Bennett had misled him, saying he was first informed by "a wicked source, from those disaffected, but as soon as he learned the truth he was satisfied." <ref>George L. Mitton and Rhett S. James, "A Response to D. Michael Quinn's Homosexual Distortion of Latter-Day Saint History," ''FARMS Review of Books'' 10/1 (1998): footnote 70, citing T. Edgar Lyon, "Orson Pratt—Early Mormon Leader," (M.A. diss., University of Chicago, 1932), 31.  See also ''Millennial Star'' 40 (16 December 1878): 788.</ref> He presents no evidence for what explanation Joseph gave Orson, or what Orson believed.
====72====
+
}}
||"Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself."
+
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
||
+
 
*The author is here presuming that Bennett imitated Joseph.
+
==Response to claim: 72 - "Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself"==
*Bennett was also involved in operating a prostitution ring and house of ill repute in Nauvoo (Bushman RSR, 411).
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself."}}
 +
|authorsources=
 
* No source provided
 
* No source provided
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|The author is here presuming that Bennett imitated Joseph. Bennett was also involved in operating a prostitution ring and house of ill repute in Nauvoo. <ref>{{nc}}</ref>
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====72====
+
==Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842==
||"Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*In fact, Bennett was forced to resign by Joseph, who wrote to the Church recorder: "be so good as to permit Bennett to withdraw his name from the Church record, if he desires to do so, and this with the best of feelings towards…General Bennett."
+
|claim=The author claims that John C. Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842.
||
+
|authorsources=
 
* Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89. (Note that The author does not properly represent the source's contents.)
 
* Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89. (Note that The author does not properly represent the source's contents.)
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation| In fact, Bennett was forced to resign by Joseph, who wrote to the Church recorder: "be so good as to permit Bennett to withdraw his name from the Church record, if he desires to do so, and this with the best of feelings towards…General Bennett." <ref>Bennett, ''History of the Saints'', 40–41.</ref>
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====72====
+
==Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett was excommunicated from the Church in "retaliation"==
||"In retaliation, church leaders apparently excommunicated him on May 25…."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*This was not in retaliation, since Joseph had pushed for Bennett's resignation.
+
|claim=It is claimed that Bennett was excommunicated from the Church in "retaliation."
*A high council trial of Chauncey Higbee concluded on May 24, at which it became clear that Higbee had been seducing women under Bennett's direction.
+
|authorsources=<br>
*Bennett was told that his withdrawal from the Church would be made public.  Bennett once more begged for mercy, claiming that public exposure would distress his mother.  Joseph again deferred a public announcement, and Bennett would soon also make confession to the Nauvoo Masonic Lodge.  Weeping, Bennett pleaded for leniency, with Joseph as his advocate.  Even Joseph's patience had an end, however.  It soon became clear that still other members had used Bennett's arguments to seduce women—his excommunication was made public on 15 June.  The Masonic Lodge published Bennett's crimes the next day.  His Nauvoo reputation in tatters, Bennett left and began plotting his revenge.  
+
#Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89.
||
+
}}
*{{HistoricalError}}
+
{{misinformation|This was not in retaliation, since Joseph had pushed for Bennett's resignation. A high council trial of Chauncey Higbee concluded on May 24, at which it became clear that Higbee had been seducing women under Bennett's direction. Bennett was told that his withdrawal from the Church would be made public.  Bennett once more begged for mercy, claiming that public exposure would distress his mother. <ref>{{HoC1|vol=5|num=18}}</ref>   Joseph again deferred a public announcement, and Bennett would soon also make confession to the Nauvoo Masonic Lodge.  Weeping, Bennett pleaded for leniency, with Joseph as his advocate. <ref>Smith, ''History of the Church'', 5:18 (26 May 1842).</ref>   Even Joseph's patience had an end, however.  It soon became clear that still other members had used Bennett's arguments to seduce women—his excommunication was made public on 15 June.  The Masonic Lodge published Bennett's crimes the next day. <ref>{{RSR1|start=461}}; see ''Times and Seasons'' 3/15 (15 June 1842): 830;  Smith, ''History of the Church'', 5:32.</ref>   His Nauvoo reputation in tatters, Bennett left and began plotting his revenge.  
*Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89.
+
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====72====
+
==Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett claimed that his excommunication was postdated to May 11 to appear that it had occurred before his resignation==
||"…Bennett claimed [his excommunication] was postdated to May 11 to appear that it had occurred before his resignation."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
{{GDS-See also|1|119}} for Smith acting as if this claim of Bennett's is established fact.
+
|claim=John C. Bennett claimed that his excommunication was postdated to May 11 to appear that it had occurred before his resignation.
*The author mischaracterizes his source, and does not tell us that Bennett's claim was false.
+
|authorsources=
*Bennett's biographer wrote:
+
*Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89.
 +
}}
 +
*{{GDS-See also|2a|119}}
 +
{{misinformation|''(The author later acts as if this claim of Bennett's is established fact.)''
 +
*The author mischaracterizes his source, and does not tell us that Bennett's claim was false. Bennett's biographer wrote:
  
 
:"On May 11 Smith and several others signed a statement to disfellowship Bennett….
 
:"On May 11 Smith and several others signed a statement to disfellowship Bennett….
Line 465: Line 579:
  
 
:"[However] William Law, one of the signatories…testified that he signed it on the evening of May 11.  Some four or five days later Law had a conversation with Bennett 'and intimated to him that such a thing was concluded upon.'…The best explanation for this matter is that Joseph Smith had the disfellowship document drawn up on May 11  Those who were in Nauvoo were asked to sign it….As others returned to the city, they added their names."  (Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86, 100).
 
:"[However] William Law, one of the signatories…testified that he signed it on the evening of May 11.  Some four or five days later Law had a conversation with Bennett 'and intimated to him that such a thing was concluded upon.'…The best explanation for this matter is that Joseph Smith had the disfellowship document drawn up on May 11  Those who were in Nauvoo were asked to sign it….As others returned to the city, they added their names."  (Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86, 100).
||
+
}}
*Andrew Smith, Saintly Scoundrel, 86–89.
+
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
 
|
 
  
====73====
+
==Response to claim: 73 - "It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters"==
||"Up until early 1842, Smith and Bennett seemed to be on good terms."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*Joseph was aware of Bennett's problems by 1841 at least.
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters."}}
*[See above.]
+
|authorsources=
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|The author wants to rehabilitate Bennett as a source, while glossing over the problems.
 +
}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 73 - "In the spring of 1842, the two men quarreled and Smith had Bennett excommunicated"==
====73====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=The author notes that "[i]n the spring of 1842, the two men quarreled and Smith had Bennett excommunicated…."
*The author wants to rehabilitate Bennett as a source, while glossing over the problems.  
+
|authorsources=
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
+
}}
|-
+
{{misinformation|Joseph and Bennett did not "quarrel"—evidence of further seduction and infidelity by Bennett came to light. Bennett was given the chance to resign, and did so. Further disclosure to the high council led to Bennett's exposure and excommunication.
|
+
}}
====73====
+
*[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]]
||"In the spring of 1842, the two men quarreled and Smith had Bennett excommunicated…."
 
||
 
*Joseph and Bennett did not "quarrel"—evidence of further seduction and infidelity by Bennett came to light.
 
*Bennett was given the chance to resign, and did so.
 
*Further disclosure to the high council led to Bennett's exposure and excommunication.
 
||
 
* No source provided.
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 75 - Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage"==
====75====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage."
 +
|authorsources=
 +
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda}}
 
*{{InternalContradiction|compare p. 81}}
 
*{{InternalContradiction|compare p. 81}}
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
  
====75====
+
==Response to claim: 75 - "In the context of having just married a pregnant wife" Joseph's "words acquire added meaning: 'If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you….'"==
||"In the context of having just married a pregnant wife, [Joseph's] words acquire added meaning: 'If you will not acuse me, I will not accuse you….'"
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*History of the Church 4:445.
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"In the context of having just married a pregnant wife, [Joseph's] words acquire added meaning: 'If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you….'"}}
*The author implies that sexuality was involved in this polyandrous marriage.
+
|authorsources=
*He tries to prejudice the reader by pointing out that Zina was pregnant when she and Henry approved her sealing to Joseph.
+
*''History of the Church'' 4:445.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|The author implies that sexuality was involved in this polyandrous marriage. He tries to prejudice the reader by pointing out that Zina was pregnant when she and Henry approved her sealing to Joseph.
 +
}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
||
+
 
|-
+
==Response to claim: 75 - Joseph's diary and the ''History of the Church'' do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife"==
|
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
====75====
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||The Smith diary or History of the Church do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife."
+
|claim=It is noted that Joseph's diary and the ''History of the Church'' do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife."
||
+
}}
*There is no evidence anywhere for any conjungal contact.
+
{{propaganda|There is no evidence ''anywhere'' for any conjungal contact. The author has repeatedly mentioned that a given event is not recorded in the ''History of the Church'', and so can here imply that there ''might be'' evidence of "conjugal contacts," but the Smith diary and ''History'' are hiding it.  There is no evidence, period.
||
+
}}
*No source provided.
+
*[[Church history/Censorship and revision]]
|-
+
*[[../../Censorship]]
|
+
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}}
====75====
+
 
||When [Henry] Jacobs returned in June [1844] "he found Zina accompanying Joseph to private meetings involving Masonic-like handshakes, oaths, and special clothing."
+
<!-- ====75====
||
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language|Prejudicial language]], in which The author tries to make the endowment seem foreign, strange and alienating.
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=The author claims that when Henry Jacobs returned from his mission in June 1844 that "he found Zina accompanying Joseph to private meetings involving Masonic-like handshakes, oaths, and special clothing."
 +
}}
 +
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language|Prejudicial language]], in which the author tries to make the endowment seem foreign, strange and alienating.
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
||
+
|authorsources=
 
*MORE…. Zina D.H. Young, Journal, "June 5, 6, 7, 8, 9," 1844, Zina Card Brown Collection; see Bradley and Woodward, Four Zinas, 124.
 
*MORE…. Zina D.H. Young, Journal, "June 5, 6, 7, 8, 9," 1844, Zina Card Brown Collection; see Bradley and Woodward, Four Zinas, 124.
 
*CHECK THIS SOURCE!!
 
*CHECK THIS SOURCE!!
|-
+
}} -->
|
 
  
====77====
+
==Response to claim: 77 - "Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph...she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry"==
||"Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph, the theology of 'sealing' meant that in the next life she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry. The author gives no evidence for this.  It may be that some early sealings (especially polyandrous ones) were intended to bind families to each and Joseph in salvation in the next world.
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*The image which this gives of Joseph "taking away" Henry's children is inflammatory and probably misleading.
+
|claim={{AuthorQuote|"Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph, the theology of 'sealing' meant that in the next life she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry."}}
*[[The_Law_of_Adoption]]
+
|authorsources=
 +
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{propaganda|The author gives no evidence for this.  It may be that some early sealings (especially polyandrous ones) were intended to bind families to each and Joseph in salvation in the next world. The image which this gives of Joseph "taking away" Henry's children is inflammatory and probably misleading.
 +
}}
 +
*[[Polygamy/The Law of Adoption]]
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
||
 
*No source provided.
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo Polygamy:See also:Taking away families}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo Polygamy:See also:Taking away families}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 77 - Brigham Young advised Henry Jacobs "to find a wife who could be his eternal partner"==
====77====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"Some sources say [Brigham] Young advised [Henry Jacobs] to find a wife who could be his eternal partner."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=The author claims that "[s]ome sources say [Brigham] Young advised [Henry Jacobs] to find a wife who could be his eternal partner."
*This from a single source (not "sources") and comes from a virulently anti-Mormon work, William Hall, Abominations of Mormonism Exposed (Cincinnati: I. Hart & Co., 1852), 43–44.
+
}}
*Besides being hostile, this source has numerous problems which make it implausible.
+
{{propaganda|This from a single source (not "sources") and comes from a virulently anti-Mormon work, William Hall, ''Abominations of Mormonism Exposed'' (Cincinnati: I. Hart & Co., 1852), 43–44. Besides being hostile, this source has numerous problems which make it implausible.
 +
}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
||
+
}}
*No source provided.
+
<!-- ====77====
|-
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
|
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
====77====
+
|claim=Henry's subsequent life is not discussed by the author, perhaps because it would provide insight into why Zina chose to remain with Brigham.
||Henry's subsequent life is not discussed by Smith, perhaps because it would provide insight into why Zina chose to remain with Brigham.
+
}}
||
 
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
||
+
|authorsources=
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
|-
+
}} -->
|
+
==Response to claim: 78 - Brigham Young said that "if a woman can find a man holding the keys of the priesthood with higher power and authority than her husband, and he is disposed to take her"==
====78====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||"Brigham explained that 'if a woman can find a man holding the keys of the priesthood with higher power and authority than her husband, and he is disposed to take her, he can do so, otherwise she has got to remain where she is.  In either of these ways of sep[a]ration, you can discover, there is no need for a bill of divorcement."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=Brigham Young said that "if a woman can find a man holding the keys of the priesthood with higher power and authority than her husband, and he is disposed to take her, he can do so, otherwise she has got to remain where she is.  In either of these ways of sep[a]ration, you can discover, there is no need for a bill of divorcement."
*Smith omits key parts of Brigham's recorded discourse: "…if a man magnifies his priesthood, observing faithfully his covenants to the end of his life, all the wives and children sealed to him, all the blessings and honors promised to him in his ordinations and sealing blessings are immutably and eternally fixed; no power can wrench them from his possession. You may inquire, in case a wife becomes disaffected with her husband, her affections lost, she becomes alienated from him and wishes to be the wife of another, can she not leave him? I know of no law in heaven or on earth by which she can be made free while her husband remains faithful and magnifies his priesthood before God and he is not disposed to put her away, she having done nothing worthy of being put away."
+
|authorsources=<br>
 +
#Brigham Young, "A few words of Doctrine," Oct 8, 1861, LDS Archives.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|The author omits key parts of Brigham's recorded discourse: "…if a man magnifies his priesthood, observing faithfully his covenants to the end of his life, all the wives and children sealed to him, all the blessings and honors promised to him in his ordinations and sealing blessings are immutably and eternally fixed; no power can wrench them from his possession. You may inquire, in case a wife becomes disaffected with her husband, her affections lost, she becomes alienated from him and wishes to be the wife of another, can she not leave him? I know of no law in heaven or on earth by which she can be made free while her husband remains faithful and magnifies his priesthood before God and he is not disposed to put her away, she having done nothing worthy of being put away."
 +
}}
 +
*[[Primary sources/Brigham Young 8 October 1861 discourse on plural marriage|Brigham Young 8 October 1861 discourse on plural marriage]]
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
||
 
*Brigham Young, "A few words of Doctrine," Oct 8, 1861, LDS Archives.
 
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo Polygamy:See also:October 8 1861}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo Polygamy:See also:October 8 1861}}
|-
+
 
|
+
==Response to claim: 79 - Presendia Buell is claimed to have "displayed an affinity for mystical religious experiences as one of the women who began speaking and singing in tongues"==
====79====
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||Presendia Buell "displayed an affinity for mystical religious experiences as one of the women who began speaking and singing in tongues…."
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||
+
|claim=Presendia Buell is claimed to have "displayed an affinity for mystical religious experiences as one of the women who began speaking and singing in tongues…."
*Speaking in tongues is not a form of "mysticism."
+
|authorsources=
*This language is inaccurate, alienating, and prejudicial.
 
||
 
 
*No source provided.
 
*No source provided.
 +
}}
 +
{{misinformation|Speaking in tongues is not a form of "mysticism." This characterization is inaccurate, alienating, and prejudicial.
 +
}}
 +
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}}
|-
 
|
 
====79====
 
||Presendia "did not take the prophet's advice [to leave for Illinois while he was in Liberty Jail] prior to his escape from jail on April 16.  Nine months later, on January 31, 1841, she gave birth to a son Oliver.  Later that year [she went to Illinois]….."
 
||
 
*The main text clearly implies that Joseph was the father of Prescendia's son Norman.  Else, why mention that "nine months later" she had a child, with no further comment?
 
*Smith disguises the fact that DNA evidence has proved that Oliver was not Joseph's son.
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
||
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}}
 
|-
 
|
 
====80 n. 63====
 
||Fawn Brodie pointed out that Oliver was born at least a year after Presendia's husband left the church and that Oliver had the angular features and high forehead of the Smith line (No Man Knows, 2989ff, 301, 460.
 
||
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]]
 
*Compton considered it improbable that Joseph and Presendia would have found time together during the brief window opportunity after his release from prison in Missouri (Sacred Loneliness, 670, 673)." [Note continues below]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*This slight nod toward an opposite point of view is inadequate, however. G. D. Smith does not mention and hence does not confront the strongest evidence. Compton’s argument against Joseph’s paternity does not rest just on a “narrow window” of opportunity but on the fact that Brodie seriously misread the geography required by that window. It is not merely a question of dates. Brodie would have Joseph travel west from his escape near Gallatin, Davies County, Missouri, to Far West in order to meet Lucinda, and then on to Illinois toward the east. This route would require Joseph and his companions to backtrack while fleeing from custody in the face of an active state extermination order.  Travel to Far West would also require them to travel near the virulently anti-Mormon area of Haun’s Mill, along Shoal Creek.  Yet by April 22 Joseph was in Illinois, having been slowed by traveling “off from the main road as much as possible”  “both by night and by day.”  This seems an implausible time for Joseph to be conceiving a child. Furthermore, it is evident that Far West was evacuated by other church leaders, “the committee on removal,” and not under the Prophet’s direction. Joseph did not regain the Saints until reaching Quincy, Illinois, contrary to Brodie’s misreading.  Timing is the least of the problems with G. D. Smith’s theory.
 
Despite Brodie’s enthusiasm, few other authors have included Oliver on their list of possible children.  With so many authors ranged against him, G. D. Smith ought not to act as if Compton’s analysis is merely about dates. Within note.
 
80 n. 63 [Note continued from above]….There is no DNA connection ().  Compton does find it 'unlikely, though not impossible, that Joseph Smith was the actual father of' John Hiram, Presendia's seventh chld during her marriage to Buell and born in November 1843 (Sacred Loneliness, 124, 670–71). New wiki article? [[Joseph as father of Prescenda Buell's children?]]
 
  
SMITH FARMS
+
==Response to claim: 79 - Presendia Buell "did not take the prophet's advice" to leave for Illinois while he was in Liberty Jail "prior to his escape from jail on April 16. Nine months later, on January 31, 1841, she gave birth to a son Oliver"==
 
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
He makes no mention in the main text that Oliver’s paternity has been definitively ruled out by DNA testing. This admission is confined to a footnote, and its impact is minimized by its placement. After noting Compton’s disagreement with the main text’s suggestion that Oliver might be Joseph’s son, G. D. Smith writes, “There is no DNA connection,” and cites a Deseret News article. He immediately follows this obtuse phrasing with a return to Compton, who finds it “‘unlikely, though not impossible, that Joseph Smith was the actual father of another Buell child,’ John Hiram, Presendia’s seventh child during her marriage to Buell and born in November 1843” (p. 80 n. 63). Thus the most salient fact—that Joseph is certainly not Oliver's father—is sandwiched between a vicarious discussion with Compton about whether Oliver or John could be Joseph’s sons. Since G. D. Smith knows there is definitive evidence against Joseph’s paternity in Oliver’s case, why mention the debate at all only to hide the answer in the midst of a long endnote?
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
Within note.
+
|claim=It is claimed that Presendia Buell "did not take the prophet's advice [to leave for Illinois while he was in Liberty Jail] prior to his escape from jail on April 16. Nine months later, on January 31, 1841, she gave birth to a son Oliver. Later that year [she went to Illinois]….."
||
+
|authorsources=
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}}
|-
+
}}
|
+
{{propaganda|The main text clearly implies that Joseph was the father of Prescendia's son Norman. Else, why mention that "nine months later" she had a child, with no further comment? The author disguises the fact that DNA evidence has proved that Oliver was not Joseph's son.  
 
+
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]]
====81====
 
||"Occasionally, as King David did with Uriah the Hittite, Smith sent the husband [of potential polyandrous marriage partners] away on a mission which provided the privacy needed for a plural relationship to flower."
 
||
 
*Unmentioned—but perhaps not unimplied—is the fact that David had already committed adultery with Bathsheba, and sought to have her husband killed so he could marry her (see 2 Samuel 11). This metaphor imputes motives to Joseph where no textual evidence exists.
 
*Mind reading
 
*SMITH FARMS
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====81====
 
||"This [see above] applied to Zina…."
 
||
 
*Henry Jacobs was present at the sealing to Zina.  Henry knew of Joseph's plural proposal to Joseph before their marriage.
 
*{{InternalContradiction|compare p. 75}}
 
*{{Wyatt-Zina}}
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====82====
 
||"The History of the Church makes no mention of the second Huntington nuptial…."
 
||
 
*[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]]
 
*[[../../Censorship]]
 
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
||
 
*No source provided.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}}
 
|-
 
|
 
====82====
 
||a Buell child being sealed to a proxy for Joseph with “wording [that] hints that it might have been Smith’s child….It is not clear…which of her children it might have been."
 
||
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]]||
 
*SMITH FARMS
 
*New wiki article? [[Joseph as father of Prescenda Buell's children]]
 
*There is no evidence that this child was Joseph's.
 
*Oliver Huntington Journal, Nov 14, 1884, USHS; see Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 140, 673.
 
|-
 
|
 
====84====
 
||"From the inception of plural marriage, Smith demanded confidentiality from those whom he taught the principle."
 
||
 
*[[Plural marriage/Secrecy]]
 
*[[Lying_for_the_Lord%3F]]
 
*I don't think we have an article on this specifically in the wiki (first one).
 
*My paper here could be cannibalized.
 
||
 
*HC 4:479; Woodruff Journals 2:143.
 
|-
 
|
 
====85====
 
||"…Smith evidently adapted and redefined [elements] from the Masonic rituals and incorporated [them] as part of the unfolding Mormon temple ceremonies."
 
||
 
*[[Temple endowment and Freemasonry]]
 
||
 
*No source given.
 
|-
 
|
 
====85====
 
||"The [temple] vows of secrecy and threats of blood penalties intensified the mysterious rites of celestial marriage…."
 
||
 
*[[Penalties_in_the_endowment]]
 
*[See also p. 75 above.]
 
*No "blood penalties" were associated with plural marriage.
 
*Prejudicial language, in which The author tries to make the endowment seem foreign, strange and alienating.
 
||
 
*Author's opinion.
 
|-
 
|
 
====88====
 
||"There is no mention of [Joseph's sealing to Agnes Smith] in the History of the Church."
 
||
 
  
*[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]]
+
<!-- ====80 n. 63====
*[[../../Censorship]]
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
 +
|claim=Fawn Brodie pointed out that Oliver was born at least a year after Presendia's husband left the church and that Oliver had the angular features and high forehead of the Smith line (''No Man Knows'', 2989ff, 301, 460).[Note continues below]
 +
}}
 +
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]]
 +
*[[Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia Buell|Children by Presendia Buell?]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
||
+
|authorsources=
*No source provided.
+
* See left column
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}}
+
}} -->
|-
+
<!-- ====80 n. 63====
|
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
====92====
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
||Sarah Pratt reported in 1886 that Lucinda had told her nearly forty-five years earlier in 1842: "Why[,] I am his [Smith's] mistress since four years."
+
|claim=[Continued from above] Compton considered it improbable that Joseph and Presendia would have found time together during the brief window opportunity after his release from prison in Missouri (Sacred Loneliness, 670, 673)."[Note continues below]
||
+
}}
*Compton notes that this statement is "antagonistic, third-hand, and late" (In Sacred Loneliness, 650).  It seems implausible that Harris would admit to being a "mistress."
+
* The problems are [[Joseph_Smith_and_polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia Buell|far greater]] than "finding time together."
*Newel and Avery, Mormon Enigma, 346 have likewise seen the "mistress" label as "an embellishment by either Sarah Pratt or W. Wyl."
+
*[[Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]]
*The author provides none of this perspective.
 
||
 
*Wyl, Mormon Portraits, 60.
 
|-
 
|
 
====99====
 
||"As usual, the History of the Church made no mention of Sylvia [Sessions Lyon] on February 8, 1842…."
 
||
 
 
 
*[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]]
 
*[[../../Censorship]]
 
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
||
+
|authorsources=
*No source provided.
+
* See left column
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}}
+
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}}
|-
+
}} -->
|
 
====100====
 
||"During these years as Windsor's wife, Sylvia reportedly bore Smith a child in 1844…."
 
||
 
*[[Joseph_Smith_and_polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages]]
 
*G. D. Smith ignores Brian C. Hales, “The Joseph Smith–Sylvia Sessions Plural Sealing: Polyandry or Polygyny?” Mormon Historical Studies 9/1 (Spring 2008): 41–57, which argues that Sylvia considered herself divorced prior to marrying Joseph polygamously, contrary to evidence misread by Compton.
 
||
 
*{{CriticalWork:Compton:Sacred Loneliness|pages=180–81}}
 
|-
 
|
 
====103====
 
||"Typically, [Joseph] never mentioned his marriage to Patty [Sessions] on paper…."
 
||
 
*[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]]
 
*[[../../Censorship]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}}
 
|-
 
|
 
====105====
 
||Sarah Cleveland's husband "was a Swedenborgian, embracing a world view compatible with that of Mormons."
 
||
 
*[[Swedenborg_and_three_degrees_of_glory]]
 
*[See also below.]
 
*(this article needs work).
 
*These needs more argument than Smith gives it.  It is not clear how being a Swedenborgian would predispose Cleveland to accept a modern prophet, new scripture, and restored priesthood authority (for example).
 
*Surely any world-view was somewhat compatible with the Mormons', but what about Cleveland's views were more compatible than, say, other Christians?
 
||
 
*Biography of Sarah Maryetta Kingsley, LDS Archives.
 
|-
 
|
 
====106====
 
||"John Cleveland's Swedenborgian faith might have helped prepare Sarah for some of Joseph's teachings.  Like Smith, followers of Emanuel Swedenborg conceived of a pre-existent life, 'eternal marriage' for couples who had a true 'affinity' for each other, and a three-tiered heaven that required marriage for admission to the highest level."
 
||
 
*[[Swedenborg_and_three_degrees_of_glory]]
 
*Three degrees in heaven is a Biblical notion, it did not originate with Swedenborg or Joseph Smith.
 
*It is not clear what Swedenborg's "affinity" between spouses has to do with LDS plural marriage.
 
*Emanuel Swedenborg, Heaven and Hell, trans. George F. Dole (West Chester, Pa.: Swedenborg Foundation, 2002), 18–32.
 
*CHECK THIS SOURCE!
 
||
 
*Author's speculation.
 
|-
 
|
 
====106====
 
||"John [Cleveland]'s continued willingness to host LDS events indicated a likely compatibility of beliefs."
 
||
 
*There are other options:
 
**Perhaps Cleveland was simply a tolerant man?
 
**Perhaps he respected the Mormons for what he had seen of them personally?
 
**Perhaps he respected his wife's desire to practice her own faith, despite not sharing it.
 
||
 
|-
 
|
 
====106====
 
||"Like some of the other husbands of women who agreed to marry the prophet, John Cleveland nevertheless became 'more and more bitter towards the Mormons.'"
 
||
 
*[[Joseph_Smith_and_polyandry/Book_chapter#Sarah_Kingsley_Howe_Cleveland]]
 
*The author does not tell the reader that this difficulty did not occur until after Joseph's death, and the Saints had gone west.  He neglects to point out that Compton noted that even six months before Joseph's death, Sarah's husband was "very friendly and frequently visited the Prophet." (Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 281). 
 
*Thus, the implication that Joseph's plural marriage caused problems for Cleveland is not sustained by the evidence.
 
*The author also does not tell us that one version of Sarah's decision to remain behind instead of going to Utah tells us:
 
*"Brigham Young and council…counciled her to stay with her Husband as he was a good man, having shown himself kind ever helping those in need, although for some reason his mind was darkened as to the Gospel. She obey[ed] the council and stayed with her Husband, and was faithfull and true to her religion and died a faithfull member of the Church…." (Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 283).
 
||
 
*Sarah Cleveland to August Lyman, 1847, John Lyman Smith Collection, L. Tom Perry Special Collections, cited by Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 284.
 
|-
 
|
 
====106====
 
||Besides Cleveland (see above) other polyandrous husbands became more bitter against the Church.
 
||
 
*[[Joseph_Smith_and_polyandry/Book_chapter]]
 
*As shown above, Cleveland was not bitter about the Church or Joseph during Joseph's lifetime.
 
*No other examples are given.  It is not clear to whom The author is referring.||
 
|-
 
|
 
====108====
 
||"Sarah Pratt told…Wyl…'There was an old Woman called Durfee…to keep her quiet, he admitted her to the secret blessings of celestial bliss&mdash;she boasted here in Salt Lake of having been one of Joseph Smith's wives." He follows Compton in misreading the Wyl data. Richard Anderson and Scott Faulring argue that In Sacred Loneliness misleads the reader by claiming that “Sarah Pratt mentions that she heard a Mrs. Durfee in Salt Lake City profess to have been one of Smith’s wives.”  But this changes the actual report of Sarah’s comments on Mrs. Durfee: “I don’t think she was ever sealed to him, though it may have been the case after Joseph’s death. . . . At all events, she boasted here in Salt Lake of having been one of Joseph’s wives.”
 
||
 
*If anything these data argue that Durfee was aware of and involved in promoting and teaching plural marriage but was not necessarily sealed to Joseph in life.
 
*SMITH FARMS article
 
*DISTORTION of SOURCE
 
||
 
*Wyl, Mormon Portraits, 54.
 
|-
 
|
 
====110-111====
 
||"When Napoleon invaded Egypt in 1798 and exposed the world to then-indecipherable ancient writings, Europe and the United States became fascinated with Egyptian artifacts.  Egyptian hieroglyphics, ike the origin of Native American tribes, were mysteries of the times, sometimes regarded as clues to Indian Origins."
 
||
 
*"Joseph Smith had grown up…during the time when public interest in the enigmatic Egyptians was burgeoning.  The Manchester, New York, rental library, within five miles of the Smith family farm, had acquired a volume on Napoleon."
 
*Joseph and Egyptian, etc.
 
||
 
|-
 
|
 
====111====
 
||"This is not to suggest that Smith necessarily visited the library…."
 
||
 
*Joseph Smith and the Manchester (New York) Library," BYU Studies 22 (Summer 1982): 333-56.
 
*So why mention it if not to give that impression?  It is irrelevant to Joseph Smith's thought or career.
 
*CHECK SOURCE
 
||
 
|-
 
|
 
====111====
 
||"…but from the age of ten…to about age twenty-two (December 1827) when he began dictating the Book of Mormon, published accounts of Napoleon and his foray into Egypt would have been available in books, periodicals, and possibly tracts."
 
||
 
*[[Fallacy of possibility]]
 
*Joseph and Egyptian, etc.
 
*Smith offers us only speculation, with no evidence that Joseph paid any attention to such matters.
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====110 – 111 n. 150====
 
||[Of the Chandler papyri] Joseph "translated some of the hieroglyphics by means of his white seer stone to produce 'an alphabet…[and] grammar of the Egyptian language' through July 1835."
 
||
 
*[[Kirtland_Egyptian_Papers]]
 
*The author here acts as if a highly debated matter is settled.  It is not at all clear that Joseph's seer stone was used "to produce" the alphabet and grammar. Rather, the alphabet and grammar may have been an attempt by some (possibly including Joseph) to 'reverse-engineer' a translation of Egyptian from the divine translation given of the Book of Abraham.
 
||
 
*History of the Church 2:235-36, 238.
 
|-
 
|
 
====112====
 
||A scholar in 1823 "rightly concluded that these American [Indian] symbols 'appear to have had little or nothing in common with those of the Egyptians.'"
 
||
 
*[[Hebrew_and_Native_American_languages]]
 
*This is of no relevance to Joseph Smith unless we are to assume that Joseph taught that American writing could be used to illuminate ancient Egyptian. The Book of Mormon explicitly rejects any such idea, saying that "we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and ''altered by us'', according to our manner of speech…. ''none other people knoweth our language''; and because that none other people knoweth our language, therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof" ({{s||Mormon|9|31,34}}).
 
*The author should also consider consulting scholarship more recent than 1823 if he wishes to know whether there are any links between Old World and New World languages.
 
||
 
*Thomas Young, An Account of Some Recent Discoveries in Hieroglyphic Literature and Egypitan Antiquities (London: John Murray, 1823).
 
|-
 
|
 
====112====
 
||"As we consider Joseph Smith's new religious texts in early 1842, we should review what was known of the language of ancient Egyptian, not only in 1823 when Smith began to anticipate the Book of Mormon's 'reformed Egyptian records,' but later in the 1830s and 1840s when he prepared his second Egyptian scripture, the Book of Abraham."
 
||
 
*The author is again presuming that studies of ancient Egyptian would have had any relevance for the Book of Mormon records&mdash;yet the Book of Mormon explicitly says they would not.
 
||
 
|-
 
|
 
====112====
 
||"Joseph Smith… [made] the association of Native American pictographs with 'reformed Egyptian.'"
 
||
 
*What evidence is there of this?
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====112====
 
||"Smith's association of these unrelated cultures [Egypt and the New World] simply reflected the prevailing misperceptions of the pre- to mid-nineteenth century."
 
||
 
*Joseph's scriptural texts associated only a small group from the Old World with the New.  His 1842 scriptures had nothing at all to do with the New World.
 
*That Joseph's own personal opinions may have reflected his time is irrelevant, unless we presume at the outset (as The author does) that the Book of Mormon was a fabrication by Joseph.  If it was not, then his personal views are irrelevant.
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====113====
 
||"The first ancient scripture Smith presented since the Book of Mormon was the Book of Abraham."
 
||
 
*This claim is false.  Joseph had also produced a Book of Moses and a Book of Enoch (begun June 1830) as part of his revision of the King James Bible.  These materials, however, did not rely on a modification of any extant Bible text.
 
*See: Nibley link: http://farms.byu.edu/publications/transcripts/ ?id=75
 
*http://farms.byu.edu/publications/transcripts/ ?id=71
 
*http://farms.byu.edu/publications/books.php? bookid=53
 
*We don't have any Enoch wiki stuff, actually…..
 
*Maybe a new link instead?
 
||
 
*{{HistoricalError}}
 
|-
 
|
 
====113 n. 157====
 
||The JST "altered over 3,400 verses but left the deities singular and in a Trinitarian format."
 
||
 
*[[Godhead_and_the_Trinity]]
 
*Since the original Bible has no Nicene Trinitarian format, it would be difficult to Joseph to leave it there.
 
*If The author does not mean a Nicene Trinity, then it would be strange for Joseph to alter it, since the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham all teach a non-Nicene trinitarianism.
 
*The Book of Moses ({{s||Moses|1|3,6,13,24,32-33}}, {{s||Moses|2|1}}, {{s||Moses|4|2-3,28}}) also described the distinction between Father and Son in non-Nicene terms, as did the Enoch material ({{s||Moses|5|57}}, {{s||Moses|6|51-52,57,59,66}}, {{s||Moses|7|27,39}}), long pre-dating the Book of Abraham (Summer-Winter 1830).
 
*Joseph was also teaching a non-Nicene Trinitarianism long before 1842:
 
*[[1830 statement about seeing "God"]]
 
*[[Only one Personage appears in the 1832 account]]
 
*[[Lack of contemporary Father and Son vision until 1838?]]
 
*The author wants to display an evolution in Joseph's views, but he has not done the necessary legwork.  He merely presumes, rather than demonstrates.
 
||
 
*Quinn, Mormon Hierarchy: Origins, 620.
 
|-
 
|
 
  
====114====
+
==Response to claim: 80 n. 63 - "There is no DNA connection" between Joseph Smith and Oliver Buell==
||"The prophet coalesced astronomy, biblical mystery, ancient Egyptian writing, and Masonic ritual into portentous ceremony for his followers."
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
||
+
|title=Nauvoo Polygamy
*Oy vey.  Lots to say here….
+
|claim=".There is no DNA connection (Carrie A. Moore, “DNA tests rule out 2 as Smith descendants: scientific advances prove no genetic link,” ''Deseret Morning News'', 10 November 2007). Compton finds it "unlikely, though not impossible, that Joseph Smith was the actual father" of John Hiram, born November 1843; Presendia's last child during her marriage to Norman Buell. (Sacred Loneliness, 124, 670–71)."
||
+
}}
*No source provided.
+
{{disinformation|The author makes no mention in the main text that Oliver’s paternity has been definitively ruled out by DNA testing. What is the point of the long discussion about the possibility of Oliver being Joseph's son, when we know that he ''can't'' be?
|-
+
}}
|
+
*[[Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia Buell|Children by Presendia Buell?]]
====114====
 
||"The spring of 1842 was also the time when John C. Bennett began to separate himself from Smith…."
 
||
 
*[[John C. Bennett]]
 
*Bennett did not separate himself, Joseph forced Bennett out because of his crimes.
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
*{{HistoricalError}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====116====
 
||Marinda Johnson "met Joseph while he was retranslating the Bible with Sidney Rigdon in her parents' home in 1831."
 
||
 
*[See also p. 31, 44 above.]
 
*The author again does not tell us that Marinda testified against the version of Joseph's mobbing which he pushes on p. 44.
 
*See Smith FARMS, Marinda Nancy Johnson.
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====117-118====
 
||Orson Hyde "was reportedly 'furious'" with Joseph's plural marriage doctrine.
 
||
 
*SMITH FARMS
 
*Cites Ann Eliza Young, but fails to tell the reader there are three other versions, each of which is different and hostile.
 
*Ann Eliza’s report of anger is also suspect. In the material cited by G. D. Smith, she describes Hyde “in a furious passion” because “he thought it no harm for him to win the affection of another man’s wife, . . . but he did not propose having his rights interfered with even by the holy Prophet whose teachings he so implicitly followed.”  Yet Orson did not begin practicing plural marriage until after he knew of Marinda’s sealing to Joseph.
 
*Despite the hostile reports of Orson Hyde’s anger, there are no contemporary accounts of problems between Orson and Joseph, who repeatedly dined with the Hydes following Orson’s return from Palestine.
 
*While it is possible that his initial reaction was heated, this perspective derives entirely from authors writing scandalous exposés of the Mormons long after the fact.
 
||
 
*Ann Eliza Young, Wife Number Nineteen, 324–26.
 
|-
 
|
 
====119====
 
||"[A]fter [John C. Bennett's] disagreement with Smith, the record of his celestial marriages was apparently expunged."
 
||
 
*[[John C. Bennett]]
 
*The author is arguing from negative evidence—he claims that the absence of any record of Bennett's "marriages" is proof that the Church or Joseph suppressed them!
 
*He is presuming that Bennett's "marriages" were at one time sanctioned by Joseph.  All the evidence indicates that Joseph was upset whenever Bennett's behavior came to his attention.
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====119====
 
||"Smith told Bennett he could not withdraw from the church because he had been 'disfellowshipped' two weeks before on May 11.  This apparent backdating was an attempt to discredit Bennett."
 
||
 
*Smith has mentioned this before.  He has now adopted Bennett's version completely, with no hint that there is more to the story.
 
*[Already addressed above, see pp. 65, 70, 72-73.]
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
*{{HistoricalError}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====122====
 
||"In Bennett's first letter…he reported that Smith 'attempted to seduce Miss Nany Rigdon,'…."
 
||
 
*GLS Bennett Chapter #3 Bennett to Sangamo Journal, June 27, 1842.
 
||
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====123-125====
 
||Bennett's version of the Sarah Pratt episode
 
||
 
*Smith Bennett Chapter #2
 
||
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====129-134====
 
||Emma Smith pushing Eliza Snow down the stairs
 
||
 
*Eliza Snow pregnant
 
*GLS FARMS Paper
 
||
 
|-
 
|
 
====131-132====
 
||"…historian Fawn M. Brodie thought the documentation was strong enough to include it in her biography of Smith."
 
||
 
*Fawn Brodie's evidentiary standard was often depressingly low.  She was certain that Oliver Buell was Joseph's son (based on photographic evidence) but DNA evidence has resoundingly refuted her.
 
||
 
*{{CriticalWork:Brodie:No Man Knows|pages=470–71}}
 
|-
 
|
 
====131 n. 195====
 
||Smith cites the BYU Studies on Emma and Eliza, but does not disclose that those authors find that the story is not plausible.
 
||
 
*"“But where are we? Faced with a folk legend, with genuine documents that tell no tales, and dubious ones that contradict themselves and the contemporary accounts, perhaps it is best for us to respond as we must to many paradoxes of our history: consider thoughtfully and then place all the evidence carefully on the shelf, awaiting further documentation, or the Millennium, whichever should come first." – citation at right.
 
||
 
*Maureen Ursenbach Beecher et al., “Emma and Eliza and the Stairs,” BYU Studies 22/1 (Fall 1982): 86–96.
 
|-
 
|
 
====132====
 
||Smith cites Newel and Avery, Mormon Enigma without acknowledging or engaging their arguments against the story of Emma and Eliza.
 
||
 
*The statement that Eliza carried Joseph’s unborn child and lost it [due to an attack by Emma] is brought into question by Eliza’s own journal. While her Victorian reticence probably would have precluded mention of her own pregnancy, if she were indeed carrying Joseph’s child, other evidence in the journal indicates that she may not have been pregnant. Eliza’s brother Lorenzo indicated that by the time she married Joseph, she was “beyond the condition of raising a family.” Also if she was “heavy with child” as the Rich account states, she would not have been teaching school, for even legally married women usually went into seclusion when their pregnancies became obvious. Eliza continued to teach school for a month after her abrupt departure from the Smith household. Her own class attendance record shows that she did not miss a day during the months she taught the Smith children, which would not have been probable had she suffered a miscarriage.
 
||
 
*Newell and Avery, Mormon Enigma, 134.
 
|-
 
|
 
====133====
 
||"Most convincing of all is to think that these stories [about Emma] were circulating widely and Eliza never bothered to clarify or refute them."
 
||
 
*Uncorrected rumor or gossip is more convincing than the absence of diary or behavioral evidence for a pregnancy as outlined by Newel and Avery (see previous)? If I do not rebut an unfounded rumor, does this mean I give it my consent? This seems a strange standard. Joseph and the members of the church tried to rebut the rumors spread by the Hurlburt-Howe affidavits, yet G. D. Smith treats them as valuable insights. The Saints, it seems, are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====137====
 
||"The History of the Church reports the day's activities…without a hint of a wedding" to Sarah Ann Whitney.
 
||
 
*[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]]
 
*[[../../Censorship]]
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====138====
 
||"Three weeks after the wedding, Joseph took steps to spend some time with his newest bride."
 
||
 
*Again, The author fails to acknowledge that Joseph wanted Sarah Ann and her parents with her.
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
 
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
||
+
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}}
*No source provided.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====139====
 
||"In an extraordinary move, the Nauvoo City Council issued an ordinance limiting the power of state courts and claiming the right to review and dismiss future writs."
 
||
 
*[[Nauvoo city charter]]
 
||
 
*Roberts, ''Comprehensive History'' 2:468-69.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Nauvoo city charter}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====142====
 
||"It was the ninth night of Joseph's concealment, and Emma had visited him three times, written him several letters, and penned at least one letter on his behalf…For his part, Joseph's private note about his love for Emma was so endearing it found its way into the official church history.  In it, he vowed to be hers 'forevermore.'  Yet within this context of reassurance and intimacy, a few hours later the same day, even while Joseph was still in grave danger and when secrecy was of the utmost urgency, he made complicated arrangements for a visit from his fifteenth plural wife, Sarah Ann Whitney."
 
||
 
*Joseph’s behavior is then pictured as callous toward Emma and also as evidence of an almost insatiable sexual hunger.
 
*Yet again, The author does not acknowledge that Joseph wants all the Whitneys there.
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
 
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
||
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
|-
 
|
 
  
====142-143====
+
{{endnotes sources}}
||"Smith urged his seventeen-year-old bride to 'come to night' and 'comfort' him—but only if Emma had not returned….Joseph judiciously addressed the latter to 'Brother, and Sister, Whitney, and &c."
 
||
 
*Despite mentioning (finally!) that the letter is addressed to all three Whitneys, Smith continues to insist that Sarah Ann is the one who is to "come" and "comfort" him.
 
*He here (p. 143) reproduces the letter's full text (having used it at least four times to push his reading of Joseph needing Sarah to "comfort" him), but does not address the reason why Joseph sought a visit with his plural wife and her parents: to “tell you all my plans . . . [and] to git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c.”
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
 
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
*Small wonder that Joseph didn’t want a hostile Emma present while trying to administer what he and the Whitneys regarded as sacred ordinances. And, it is unsurprising that he considered a single private room sufficient for the purposes for which he summoned his plural wife and her parents.
 
*Smith commonly exploits the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(literary_and_historical_analysis) presentist fallacy] in the matter of Joseph's wives' ages.
 
*[[Polygamy book/Age of wives|Age of wives]]
 
*[[../../Presentism]]
 
||
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Age_wives}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====147====
 
||"Invites Whitneys to visit, Sarah Ann to 'comfort me' if Emma not there.  Invitation accepted."
 
||
 
*Having just reproduced the letter, Smith again insists that Sarah Ann is the one to "comfort" Joseph, even though the letter says nothing of the sort.
 
*Smith does not indicate how he knows the invitation was accepted.
 
*We do know that the Whitneys were sealed in eternal marriage three days later.    But, The author does not tell us that either.
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
 
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
|-
 
|
 
 
 
====147–154====
 
||Nancy Rigdon episode
 
||
 
*Smith Chapter #3 on Bennett
 
||
 
|-
 
|
 
====149====
 
||[Sidney Rigdon] "was in many ways a mentor to Joseph."
 
||
 
*What evidence is there of this?  Joseph was always in charge and always the senior partner, though he was happy to make use of Rigdon's skills as an orator.
 
*Joseph had published the Book of Mormon and had the Church well established before Rigdon appeared.  He did not need Sidney to "mentor" him at all.
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====149====
 
||Sidney Rigdon "was not someone Joseph felt comfortable approaching to ask for his daughter's hand in polygamy.  So Joseph appealed to the young woman directly."
 
||
 
*Mind reading
 
*See Chapter #3 on Bennett
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====149====
 
||"For some reason, Marinda [Johnson Hyde] stayed [in the same house as] Apostle Willard Richards, whose wife, Jennetta, was in Massachusetts….Although the two may have lived in separate parts of the building…their living arrangements seemed to be an open scandal."
 
||
 
*Maybe wiki this?
 
||
 
*HoC 4:467
 
*Bennett, History of the Saints, 241; [error! The correct page is 243 for the claim of scandal.]
 
*Ebenezer Robinson, The Return (Oct 1890): 347 [actually most is on p. 346].
 
*(Did he copy these from Van Wagoner, Sidney Rigdon, who uses the same page numbers?)
 
|-
 
|
 
====154====
 
||"…both Nancy [Rigdon] and Martha [Brotherton] were…isolated in a locked room during the persuasive effort."
 
||
 
*While Nancy and Martha may well have been approached about plural marriage, it is unlikely that they were locked in rooms or confined against their will.  One RLDS author argues:
 
*"The records show that Martha changed her story. As Hyrum reported to the Conference, at first she had told that she was locked in a room for days. But since that was such a ridiculous, unbelievable story, she changed it in her St. Louis affidavit to read that Brigham locked her in Joseph's office for only "about ten minutes."
 
*"It would have been impossible for Martha to have been imprisoned in any room in the Red Brick Store without it being detected. In fact, she could not have gone up and down the stairs and from room to room without being observed by many. The store was a small, two-story building, and Joseph's office was only about ten feet square. Since dozens of people came to the store daily, her calls for help would have been heard. Martha had but one witness—John Bennett, who asserted in the Sangamo Journal for July 15, 1842, "She was locked up ... I saw her taken into the accursed room."
 
*"If Martha's story had been true, there would have been many witnesses, because Joseph' s store was the hub of activity in Nauvoo. People came to the store to buy everything from food to footwear. The store building also housed the headquarters for the Church and the city. There, the people paid their tithing and taxes, and conducted banking and real estate business. The store was alive with people by day and by night, for it was also in constant use as a civic and religious center…."
 
*One suspects Bennett's influence in this part of the story, since Bennett would likewise claim Joseph locked him in a room.  In Bennett's case, the story is absurd and contradicted by a non-LDS eyewitnesses.
 
*SMITH Bennett Chapter #2.
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
|-
 
|
 
====155====
 
||"As if Sarah Ann Whitney's liaison were not enough…another marriage took place…."
 
||
 
*The author persists with Sarah Ann Whitney and "liaison."
 
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]]
 
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources&mdash;Letter to Whitneys]]
 
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]]
 
*[[../../Mind reading]]
 
*[[../../Romance]]
 
*{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}}
 
||
 
*No source provided.
 
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}}
 
{{EndClaimsTable}}
 

Latest revision as of 13:14, 13 April 2024

Contents

Response to claims made in "Chapter 2" (pp. 52-80)



A FAIR Analysis of: Nauvoo Polygamy: "... but we called it celestial marriage", a work by author: George D. Smith

Response to claims made in Nauvoo Polygamy, "Chapter 2" (pp. 52-158)


Jump to details:


Response to claim: 53 - the author notes that Joseph "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window'"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

Referring again to the Whitney letter, the author notes that Joseph "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'"

Author's sources:
  • Smith, Letter to "Brother and Sister [Newel K.] Whitney, and &c.," Nauvoo, Illinois, Aug. 18, 1842, Church Archives, Salt Lake City.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The mistake: The author commonly exploits the presentist fallacy in the matter of Joseph's wives' ages. The author also contradicts himself on p. 65: "Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window...."

Gregory L. Smith, A review of Nauvoo Polygamy:...but we called it celestial marriage by George D. Smith. FARMS Review, Vol. 20, Issue 2. (Detailed book review) Whitney "love letter" (edit)

Ages of wives (edit)

Articles about Plural marriage
Doctrinal foundation of plural marriage
Introduction of plural marriage
Plural marriage in Utah
End of plural marriage

Sarah Ann Whitney




The age of Joseph Smith's wives.

Summary: How old were Joseph Smith's plural wives?

Divine manifestations to plural wives and families

Summary: Many members who were taught about plural marriage were initially reluctant or appalled; many reported miraculous divine manifestations convincing them of the truth of the doctrine.

Did Joseph Smith write a "love letter" to his plural wife Sarah Ann Whitney to request a secret rendezvous?

On 18 August 1842, Joseph Smith wrote a letter to the parents of Sarah Ann Whitney, who had become his plural wife three weeks earlier, asking them to visit him while he was in hiding.

Critics of the Church would have us believe that this is a private, secret "love letter" from Joseph to Sarah Ann, however, Joseph wrote this letter to the Whitney's, addressing it to Sarah's parents. The "matter" to which he refers is likely the administration of ordinances rather than the arrangement of some sort of private tryst with one of his plural wives. Why would one invite your bride's parents to such an encounter? Joseph doesn't want Emma gone because he wants to be alone with Sarah Ann—a feat that would be difficult to accomplish with her parents there—he wants Emma gone either because she is opposed to plural marriage (the contention that would result from an encounter between Emma and the Whitney's just a few weeks after Joseph's sealing to Sarah Ann would hardly be conducive to having the spirit present in order to "git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads"), or because she may have been followed or spied upon by Joseph's enemies, putting either Joseph or the Whitneys in danger.

The Prophet was in hiding as a result of the assassination attempt that had been made on Missouri governor Lilburn Boggs

On the 16th of August, 1842, while Joseph was in hiding at the Sayer's, Emma expressed concern for Joseph's safety. She sent a letter to Joseph in which she noted,

There are more ways than one to take care of you, and I believe that you can still direct in your business concerns if we are all of us prudent in the matter. If it was pleasant weather I should contrive to see you this evening, but I dare not run too much of a risk, on account of so many going to see you. (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, p.109)

It is evident that there was concern on Emma's part that Joseph's hiding place would be discovered because of all the people visiting Joseph, particularly if they were in the company of Emma

Joseph wrote the next day in his journal,

Several rumors were afloat in the city, intimating that my retreat had been discovered, and that it was no longer safe for me to remain at Brother Sayers'; consequently Emma came to see me at night, and informed me of the report. It was considered wisdom that I should remove immediately, and accordingly I departed in company with Emma and Brother Derby, and went to Carlos Granger's, who lived in the north-east part of the city. Here we were kindly received and well treated." (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, pp. 117-118)

The next day, while in hiding at the Granger's, Joseph wrote a letter to three members of the Whitney family inviting them to come visit him

The letter is addressed to "Brother and Sister Whitney, and &c." Scholars agree that the third person referred to was the Whitney's daughter Sarah Ann, to whom Joseph had been sealed in a plural marriage, without Emma's knowledge, three weeks prior. The full letter, with photographs of the original document, was published by Michael Marquardt in 1973,[1] and again in 1984 by Dean C. Jessee in The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith.[2] The complete text of the letter reads as follows (original spelling has been retained):

Nauvoo August 18th 1842

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams; for my feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us, that the time of my abscence from you seems so long, and dreary, that it seems, as if I could not live long in this way: and <if you> three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me; now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile, for you know I foretold you of these things. I am now at Carlos Graingers, Just back of Brother Hyrams farm, it is only one mile from town, the nights are very pleasant indeed, all three of you come <can> come and See me in the fore part of the night, let Brother Whitney come a little a head, and nock at the south East corner of the house at <the> window; it is next to the cornfield, I have a room inti=rely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect safty, I <know> it is the will of God that you should comfort <me> now in this time of affliction, or not at[ta]l now is the time or never, but I hav[e] no kneed of saying any such thing, to you, for I know the goodness of your hearts, and that you will do the will of the Lord, when it is made known to you; the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater frendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I <will> tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me, I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont dont fail to come to night. I subscribe myself your most obedient, <and> affectionate, companion, and friend.

Joseph Smith

Some critics point to this letter as evidence the Joseph wrote a private and secret "love letter" to Sarah Ann, requesting that she visit him while he was in seclusion. Others believe that the letter was a request to Sarah Ann's parents to bring their daughter to him so that he could obtain "comfort," with the implication that "comfort" involved intimate relations.

How do critics of the Church portray Joseph Smith's letter to the Whitney family as a "love letter"?

Critical treatments of the letter: Was this a "love" letter to Sarah Ann?

Did Joseph Smith write a private and secret "love letter" to Sarah Ann Whitney? Was this letter a request to Sarah Ann's parents to bring her to Joseph? Was Joseph trying to keep Sarah Ann and Emma from encountering one another? Certain sentences extracted from the letter might lead one to believe one or all of these things. Critics use this to their advantage by extracting only the portions of the letter which support the conclusions above. We present here four examples of how the text of the letter has been employed by critics in order to support their position that Joseph was asking the Whitney's to bring Sarah Ann over for an intimate encounter. The text of the full letter is then examined again in light of these treatments.

Critical presentation #1

Consider the following excerpt from a website that is critical of the Church. Portions of the Whitney letter are extracted and presented in the following manner:

... the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty. ... Only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater friendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I will tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. ... I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont, dont fail to come to night, I subscribe myself your most obedient, and affectionate, companion, and friend. Joseph Smith.
—’’Rethinking Mormonism’’, "Did Joseph Smith have sex with his wives?" (Web page)

This certainly has all of the elements of a secret "love letter:" The statement that it would not be safe if Emma were there, the request to "burn this letter as soon as you read it," and the stealthy instructions for approaching the house. The question is, who was this letter addressed to? The critics on their web site clearly want you to believe that this was a private letter to Sarah Ann.

Critical presentation #2

Here is the way that Van Wagoner presents selected excerpts of the same letter. In this case, at least, he acknowledges that the letter was addressed to "the Whitney’s," rather than Sarah, but adds his own opinion that it "detailed [Joseph’s] problems in getting to see Sarah Ann without Emma's knowledge:"

My feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us ... if you three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me, now is the time to Afford me succor ... the only thing to be careful is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safety.
—Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History, 48.

Critical presentation #3

This version, presented by George D. Smith, presents excerpts from the letter which makes it sound like Joseph was absolutely lusting for the company of Sarah Ann. Smith even makes Napoleon Bonaparte a Joseph Smith doppelgänger by quoting a letter from the future Emperor to Josephine of their first night together:

"I have awakened full of you. The memory of last night has given my senses no rest. . . . What an effect you have on my heart! I send you thousands of kisses—but don’t kiss me. Your kisses sear my blood" (p. xi). George Smith then claims that a "young man of ambition and vision penned his own letter of affection to a young woman. It was the summer of 1842 when thirty-six-year-old Joseph Smith, hiding from the law down by the Mississippi River in Illinois, confessed:"

Smith then compares the excerpts from Napoleon's letter above to portions of the Whitney letter:

My feelings are so strong for you . . . come and see me in this my lonely retreat . . . now is the time to afford me succour . . . I have a room intirely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect saf[e]ty, I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me.
—George D. Smith, "Nauvoo Polygamy: We Called It Celestial Marriage," Free Inquiry [Council for Secular Humanism] 28/3 (April–May 2008): 44–46.

Critical presentation #4

Finally, we have a version which acknowledges the full contents of the letter...but only after presenting it in the manner described above numerous times. The author eventually provides the full text of this letter (150 pages after its comparison with Napoleon). Since there are no extant "love letters" from Joseph Smith to any of his plural wives, the mileage that the author of Nauvoo Polygamy..."but we called it celestial marriage" extracts from the single letter to the Whitney's is simply astounding:

  • "[i]t was eleven years after the Smiths roomed with the Whitneys that Joseph expressed a romantic interest in their daughter, as well." (p. 31)
  • "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'" (p. 53)
  • "Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier. Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome," and he pleaded with Sarah Ann to visit him under cover of darkness. After all, they had been married just three weeks earlier. (p. 53)
  • "As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure." (p. 63)
  • "when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts." (p. 65)
  • "Three weeks after the wedding, Joseph took steps to spend some time with his newest bride." (p. 138)
  • "It was the ninth night of Joseph's concealment, and Emma had visited him three times, written him several letters, and penned at least one letter on his behalf…For his part, Joseph's private note about his love for Emma was so endearing it found its way into the official church history. In it, he vowed to be hers 'forevermore.' Yet within this context of reassurance and intimacy, a few hours later the same day, even while Joseph was still in grave danger and when secrecy was of the utmost urgency, he made complicated arrangements for a visit from his fifteenth plural wife, Sarah Ann Whitney." (p. 142)
  • "Smith urged his seventeen-year-old bride to 'come to night' and 'comfort' him—but only if Emma had not returned….Joseph judiciously addressed the letter to 'Brother, and Sister, Whitney, and &c." (p. 142-143)
  • "Invites Whitneys to visit, Sarah Ann to 'comfort me' if Emma not there. Invitation accepted." (p.. 147)
  • "As if Sarah Ann Whitney's liaison were not enough…another marriage took place…." (p. 155)
  • "summer 1842 call for an intimate visit from Sarah Ann Whitney…substantiate[s] the intimate relationships he was involved in during those two years." (p. 185)
  • "his warning to Sarah Ann to proceed carefully in order to make sure Emma would not find them in their hiding place." (p. 236)
  • "Just as Joseph sought comfort from Sarah Ann the day Emma departed from his hideout…." (p. 236)
  • "Elizabeth [Whitney] was arranging conjugal visits between her daughter, Sarah Ann, and [Joseph]…." (p. 366)

One must assume that this is the closest thing that the author could find to a love letter, because the "real" love letters from Joseph to his plural wives do not exist. The author had to make do with this one, despite the fact that it did not precisely fit the bill. With judicious pruning, however, it can be made to sound sufficiently salacious to suit the purpose at hand: to "prove" that Joseph lusted after women.

The full story

In contrast to the sources above, Compton actually provides the complete text of the letter up front, and concludes that "[t]he Mormon leader is putting the Whitney's in the difficult position of having to learn about Emma's movements, avoid her, then meet secretly with him" and that the "cloak-and-dagger atmosphere in this letter is typical of Nauvoo polygamy." [3]

What parts of the Whitney letter do the critics not mention?

As always, it is helpful to view the entire set of statements in content. Let's revisit the entire letter, this time with the selections extracted by the critics highlighted:

Nauvoo August 18th 1842

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams; for my feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us, that the time of my abscence from you seems so long, and dreary, that it seems, as if I could not live long in this way: and <if you> three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me; now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile, for you know I foretold you of these things. I am now at Carlos Graingers, Just back of Brother Hyrams farm, it is only one mile from town, the nights are very pleasant indeed, all three of you come <can> come and See me in the fore part of the night, let Brother Whitney come a little a head, and nock at the south East corner of the house at <the> window; it is next to the cornfield, I have a room inti=rely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect safty, I <know> it is the will of God that you should comfort <me> now in this time of affliction, or not at[ta]l now is the time or never, but I hav[e] no kneed of saying any such thing, to you, for I know the goodness of your hearts, and that you will do the will of the Lord, when it is made known to you; the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater frendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I <will> tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me, I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont dont fail to come to night. I subscribe myself your most obedient, <and> affectionate, companion, and friend.

Joseph Smith

So, let’s take a look at the portions of the letter that are not highlighted.

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

The letter is addressed to "Brother and Sister Whitney." Sarah Ann is not mentioned by name, but is included as "&c.," which is the equivalent of saying "and so on," or "etc." This hardly implies that what follows is a private "love letter" to Sarah Ann herself.

Could this have been an appeal to Sarah's parents to bring her to Joseph? In Todd Compton's opinion, Joseph "cautiously avoids writing Sarah's name." [4] However, Joseph stated in the letter who he wanted to talk to:

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams;

Joseph wants to talk to "you three," meaning Newel, Elizabeth and Sarah Ann.

What was the real purpose of the letter written by Joseph Smith to the parents of Sarah Ann Whitney?

The one portion of the letter in which Joseph actually gives a reason for this meeting is often excluded by critics

Interestingly enough, the one portion of the letter in which Joseph actually gives a reason for this meeting is often excluded by critics:

..one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me...

According to Richard L. Bushman, this may have been "a reference perhaps to the sealing of Newel and Elizabeth in eternal marriage three days later." [5] Compton adds, "This was not just a meeting of husband and plural wife, it was a meeting with Sarah's family, with a religious aspect.[6]

Joseph needed to have the company of friends who supported him

In addition to the stated purpose of the meeting, Joseph "may have been a lonely man who needed people around him every moment." [7] Consider this phrase (included in Van Wagoner's treatment, but excluded by the others):

...it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am al[l]ied, do love me, now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile. (emphasis added)

These are not the words of a man asking his secret lover to meet him for a private tryst—they are the words of a man who wants the company of friends.

"...when Emma comes then you cannot be safe"

So, what about Emma? The letter certainly contains dire warnings about having the Whitney's avoid an encounter with Emma. We examine several possible reasons for the warning about Emma. Keep in mind Emma's stated concern just two days prior,

If it was pleasant weather I should contrive to see you this evening, but I dare not run too much of a risk, on account of so many going to see you. (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, p.109)

Joseph wished to discuss and/or perform a sealing ordinance that Emma had not yet received

Joseph had been sealed to Sarah Ann three weeks before without Emma's knowledge.[8] Joseph may have wished to offer a sealing blessing to Newel and Elizabeth Whitney at this time. Given Joseph's indication to the Whitneys that he wished to "git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads," and the fact that Emma herself was not sealed until she consented to the doctrine of plural marriage nine months later, Joseph may have felt that Emma’s presence would create an uncomfortable situation for all involved—particularly if she became aware of his sealing to Sarah Ann.

Joseph wished to avoid involving his friends in case he were found by those looking for him

If Joseph was in hiding, he had good reason to avoid being found (hence the request to burn the letter that disclosed his location). He would also not want his friends present in case he were to be found. Anyone that was searching for Joseph knew that Emma could lead them to him if they simply observed and followed her. If this were the case, the most dangerous time for the Whitney's to visit Joseph may have been when Emma was there—not necessarily because Emma would have been angered by finding Sarah Ann (after all, Emma did not know about the sealing, and she would have found all three Whitney's there—not just Sarah Ann), but because hostile men might have found the Whitney's with Joseph. Note that Joseph's letter states that "when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible." Joseph wanted the Whitneys to avoid observation by anyone, and not just by Emma.

See Biography:
A biography of Sarah Ann Whitney may be viewed on Brian and Laura Hales' website "josephsmithspolygamy.org".


Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources


Notes

  1. Michael Marquardt, 1973 pamphlet "The Strange Marriages of Sarah Ann Whitney to Joseph Smith the Mormon Prophet, Joseph C. Kingsbury, and Heber C. Kimball," George Albert Smith Family Papers, Manuscript 36, Box 1, Early Smith Documents, 1731-1849, Folder 18, in the Special Collections, Western Americana, Marriott Library, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (source). The original is in the Church Archives.
  2. Dean C. Jessee, The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, [original edition] (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book, 1984), 539–540. ISBN 0877479747. GL direct link
  3. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 350. ( Index of claims )
  4. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 349. ( Index of claims )
  5. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.
  6. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 350. ( Index of claims )
  7. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.
  8. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.


References

Articles about Plural marriage
Doctrinal foundation of plural marriage
Introduction of plural marriage
Plural marriage in Utah
End of plural marriage

Sarah Ann Whitney




The age of Joseph Smith's wives.

Summary: How old were Joseph Smith's plural wives?

Divine manifestations to plural wives and families

Summary: Many members who were taught about plural marriage were initially reluctant or appalled; many reported miraculous divine manifestations convincing them of the truth of the doctrine.

Did Joseph Smith write a "love letter" to his plural wife Sarah Ann Whitney to request a secret rendezvous?

On 18 August 1842, Joseph Smith wrote a letter to the parents of Sarah Ann Whitney, who had become his plural wife three weeks earlier, asking them to visit him while he was in hiding.

Critics of the Church would have us believe that this is a private, secret "love letter" from Joseph to Sarah Ann, however, Joseph wrote this letter to the Whitney's, addressing it to Sarah's parents. The "matter" to which he refers is likely the administration of ordinances rather than the arrangement of some sort of private tryst with one of his plural wives. Why would one invite your bride's parents to such an encounter? Joseph doesn't want Emma gone because he wants to be alone with Sarah Ann—a feat that would be difficult to accomplish with her parents there—he wants Emma gone either because she is opposed to plural marriage (the contention that would result from an encounter between Emma and the Whitney's just a few weeks after Joseph's sealing to Sarah Ann would hardly be conducive to having the spirit present in order to "git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads"), or because she may have been followed or spied upon by Joseph's enemies, putting either Joseph or the Whitneys in danger.

The Prophet was in hiding as a result of the assassination attempt that had been made on Missouri governor Lilburn Boggs

On the 16th of August, 1842, while Joseph was in hiding at the Sayer's, Emma expressed concern for Joseph's safety. She sent a letter to Joseph in which she noted,

There are more ways than one to take care of you, and I believe that you can still direct in your business concerns if we are all of us prudent in the matter. If it was pleasant weather I should contrive to see you this evening, but I dare not run too much of a risk, on account of so many going to see you. (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, p.109)

It is evident that there was concern on Emma's part that Joseph's hiding place would be discovered because of all the people visiting Joseph, particularly if they were in the company of Emma

Joseph wrote the next day in his journal,

Several rumors were afloat in the city, intimating that my retreat had been discovered, and that it was no longer safe for me to remain at Brother Sayers'; consequently Emma came to see me at night, and informed me of the report. It was considered wisdom that I should remove immediately, and accordingly I departed in company with Emma and Brother Derby, and went to Carlos Granger's, who lived in the north-east part of the city. Here we were kindly received and well treated." (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, pp. 117-118)

The next day, while in hiding at the Granger's, Joseph wrote a letter to three members of the Whitney family inviting them to come visit him

The letter is addressed to "Brother and Sister Whitney, and &c." Scholars agree that the third person referred to was the Whitney's daughter Sarah Ann, to whom Joseph had been sealed in a plural marriage, without Emma's knowledge, three weeks prior. The full letter, with photographs of the original document, was published by Michael Marquardt in 1973,[1] and again in 1984 by Dean C. Jessee in The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith.[2] The complete text of the letter reads as follows (original spelling has been retained):

Nauvoo August 18th 1842

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams; for my feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us, that the time of my abscence from you seems so long, and dreary, that it seems, as if I could not live long in this way: and <if you> three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me; now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile, for you know I foretold you of these things. I am now at Carlos Graingers, Just back of Brother Hyrams farm, it is only one mile from town, the nights are very pleasant indeed, all three of you come <can> come and See me in the fore part of the night, let Brother Whitney come a little a head, and nock at the south East corner of the house at <the> window; it is next to the cornfield, I have a room inti=rely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect safty, I <know> it is the will of God that you should comfort <me> now in this time of affliction, or not at[ta]l now is the time or never, but I hav[e] no kneed of saying any such thing, to you, for I know the goodness of your hearts, and that you will do the will of the Lord, when it is made known to you; the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater frendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I <will> tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me, I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont dont fail to come to night. I subscribe myself your most obedient, <and> affectionate, companion, and friend.

Joseph Smith

Some critics point to this letter as evidence the Joseph wrote a private and secret "love letter" to Sarah Ann, requesting that she visit him while he was in seclusion. Others believe that the letter was a request to Sarah Ann's parents to bring their daughter to him so that he could obtain "comfort," with the implication that "comfort" involved intimate relations.

How do critics of the Church portray Joseph Smith's letter to the Whitney family as a "love letter"?

Critical treatments of the letter: Was this a "love" letter to Sarah Ann?

Did Joseph Smith write a private and secret "love letter" to Sarah Ann Whitney? Was this letter a request to Sarah Ann's parents to bring her to Joseph? Was Joseph trying to keep Sarah Ann and Emma from encountering one another? Certain sentences extracted from the letter might lead one to believe one or all of these things. Critics use this to their advantage by extracting only the portions of the letter which support the conclusions above. We present here four examples of how the text of the letter has been employed by critics in order to support their position that Joseph was asking the Whitney's to bring Sarah Ann over for an intimate encounter. The text of the full letter is then examined again in light of these treatments.

Critical presentation #1

Consider the following excerpt from a website that is critical of the Church. Portions of the Whitney letter are extracted and presented in the following manner:

... the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty. ... Only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater friendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I will tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. ... I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont, dont fail to come to night, I subscribe myself your most obedient, and affectionate, companion, and friend. Joseph Smith.
—’’Rethinking Mormonism’’, "Did Joseph Smith have sex with his wives?" (Web page)

This certainly has all of the elements of a secret "love letter:" The statement that it would not be safe if Emma were there, the request to "burn this letter as soon as you read it," and the stealthy instructions for approaching the house. The question is, who was this letter addressed to? The critics on their web site clearly want you to believe that this was a private letter to Sarah Ann.

Critical presentation #2

Here is the way that Van Wagoner presents selected excerpts of the same letter. In this case, at least, he acknowledges that the letter was addressed to "the Whitney’s," rather than Sarah, but adds his own opinion that it "detailed [Joseph’s] problems in getting to see Sarah Ann without Emma's knowledge:"

My feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us ... if you three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me, now is the time to Afford me succor ... the only thing to be careful is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safety.
—Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History, 48.

Critical presentation #3

This version, presented by George D. Smith, presents excerpts from the letter which makes it sound like Joseph was absolutely lusting for the company of Sarah Ann. Smith even makes Napoleon Bonaparte a Joseph Smith doppelgänger by quoting a letter from the future Emperor to Josephine of their first night together:

"I have awakened full of you. The memory of last night has given my senses no rest. . . . What an effect you have on my heart! I send you thousands of kisses—but don’t kiss me. Your kisses sear my blood" (p. xi). George Smith then claims that a "young man of ambition and vision penned his own letter of affection to a young woman. It was the summer of 1842 when thirty-six-year-old Joseph Smith, hiding from the law down by the Mississippi River in Illinois, confessed:"

Smith then compares the excerpts from Napoleon's letter above to portions of the Whitney letter:

My feelings are so strong for you . . . come and see me in this my lonely retreat . . . now is the time to afford me succour . . . I have a room intirely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect saf[e]ty, I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me.
—George D. Smith, "Nauvoo Polygamy: We Called It Celestial Marriage," Free Inquiry [Council for Secular Humanism] 28/3 (April–May 2008): 44–46.

Critical presentation #4

Finally, we have a version which acknowledges the full contents of the letter...but only after presenting it in the manner described above numerous times. The author eventually provides the full text of this letter (150 pages after its comparison with Napoleon). Since there are no extant "love letters" from Joseph Smith to any of his plural wives, the mileage that the author of Nauvoo Polygamy..."but we called it celestial marriage" extracts from the single letter to the Whitney's is simply astounding:

  • "[i]t was eleven years after the Smiths roomed with the Whitneys that Joseph expressed a romantic interest in their daughter, as well." (p. 31)
  • "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'" (p. 53)
  • "Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier. Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome," and he pleaded with Sarah Ann to visit him under cover of darkness. After all, they had been married just three weeks earlier. (p. 53)
  • "As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure." (p. 63)
  • "when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts." (p. 65)
  • "Three weeks after the wedding, Joseph took steps to spend some time with his newest bride." (p. 138)
  • "It was the ninth night of Joseph's concealment, and Emma had visited him three times, written him several letters, and penned at least one letter on his behalf…For his part, Joseph's private note about his love for Emma was so endearing it found its way into the official church history. In it, he vowed to be hers 'forevermore.' Yet within this context of reassurance and intimacy, a few hours later the same day, even while Joseph was still in grave danger and when secrecy was of the utmost urgency, he made complicated arrangements for a visit from his fifteenth plural wife, Sarah Ann Whitney." (p. 142)
  • "Smith urged his seventeen-year-old bride to 'come to night' and 'comfort' him—but only if Emma had not returned….Joseph judiciously addressed the letter to 'Brother, and Sister, Whitney, and &c." (p. 142-143)
  • "Invites Whitneys to visit, Sarah Ann to 'comfort me' if Emma not there. Invitation accepted." (p.. 147)
  • "As if Sarah Ann Whitney's liaison were not enough…another marriage took place…." (p. 155)
  • "summer 1842 call for an intimate visit from Sarah Ann Whitney…substantiate[s] the intimate relationships he was involved in during those two years." (p. 185)
  • "his warning to Sarah Ann to proceed carefully in order to make sure Emma would not find them in their hiding place." (p. 236)
  • "Just as Joseph sought comfort from Sarah Ann the day Emma departed from his hideout…." (p. 236)
  • "Elizabeth [Whitney] was arranging conjugal visits between her daughter, Sarah Ann, and [Joseph]…." (p. 366)

One must assume that this is the closest thing that the author could find to a love letter, because the "real" love letters from Joseph to his plural wives do not exist. The author had to make do with this one, despite the fact that it did not precisely fit the bill. With judicious pruning, however, it can be made to sound sufficiently salacious to suit the purpose at hand: to "prove" that Joseph lusted after women.

The full story

In contrast to the sources above, Compton actually provides the complete text of the letter up front, and concludes that "[t]he Mormon leader is putting the Whitney's in the difficult position of having to learn about Emma's movements, avoid her, then meet secretly with him" and that the "cloak-and-dagger atmosphere in this letter is typical of Nauvoo polygamy." [3]

What parts of the Whitney letter do the critics not mention?

As always, it is helpful to view the entire set of statements in content. Let's revisit the entire letter, this time with the selections extracted by the critics highlighted:

Nauvoo August 18th 1842

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams; for my feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us, that the time of my abscence from you seems so long, and dreary, that it seems, as if I could not live long in this way: and <if you> three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me; now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile, for you know I foretold you of these things. I am now at Carlos Graingers, Just back of Brother Hyrams farm, it is only one mile from town, the nights are very pleasant indeed, all three of you come <can> come and See me in the fore part of the night, let Brother Whitney come a little a head, and nock at the south East corner of the house at <the> window; it is next to the cornfield, I have a room inti=rely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect safty, I <know> it is the will of God that you should comfort <me> now in this time of affliction, or not at[ta]l now is the time or never, but I hav[e] no kneed of saying any such thing, to you, for I know the goodness of your hearts, and that you will do the will of the Lord, when it is made known to you; the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater frendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I <will> tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me, I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont dont fail to come to night. I subscribe myself your most obedient, <and> affectionate, companion, and friend.

Joseph Smith

So, let’s take a look at the portions of the letter that are not highlighted.

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

The letter is addressed to "Brother and Sister Whitney." Sarah Ann is not mentioned by name, but is included as "&c.," which is the equivalent of saying "and so on," or "etc." This hardly implies that what follows is a private "love letter" to Sarah Ann herself.

Could this have been an appeal to Sarah's parents to bring her to Joseph? In Todd Compton's opinion, Joseph "cautiously avoids writing Sarah's name." [4] However, Joseph stated in the letter who he wanted to talk to:

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams;

Joseph wants to talk to "you three," meaning Newel, Elizabeth and Sarah Ann.

What was the real purpose of the letter written by Joseph Smith to the parents of Sarah Ann Whitney?

The one portion of the letter in which Joseph actually gives a reason for this meeting is often excluded by critics

Interestingly enough, the one portion of the letter in which Joseph actually gives a reason for this meeting is often excluded by critics:

..one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me...

According to Richard L. Bushman, this may have been "a reference perhaps to the sealing of Newel and Elizabeth in eternal marriage three days later." [5] Compton adds, "This was not just a meeting of husband and plural wife, it was a meeting with Sarah's family, with a religious aspect.[6]

Joseph needed to have the company of friends who supported him

In addition to the stated purpose of the meeting, Joseph "may have been a lonely man who needed people around him every moment." [7] Consider this phrase (included in Van Wagoner's treatment, but excluded by the others):

...it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am al[l]ied, do love me, now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile. (emphasis added)

These are not the words of a man asking his secret lover to meet him for a private tryst—they are the words of a man who wants the company of friends.

"...when Emma comes then you cannot be safe"

So, what about Emma? The letter certainly contains dire warnings about having the Whitney's avoid an encounter with Emma. We examine several possible reasons for the warning about Emma. Keep in mind Emma's stated concern just two days prior,

If it was pleasant weather I should contrive to see you this evening, but I dare not run too much of a risk, on account of so many going to see you. (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, p.109)

Joseph wished to discuss and/or perform a sealing ordinance that Emma had not yet received

Joseph had been sealed to Sarah Ann three weeks before without Emma's knowledge.[8] Joseph may have wished to offer a sealing blessing to Newel and Elizabeth Whitney at this time. Given Joseph's indication to the Whitneys that he wished to "git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads," and the fact that Emma herself was not sealed until she consented to the doctrine of plural marriage nine months later, Joseph may have felt that Emma’s presence would create an uncomfortable situation for all involved—particularly if she became aware of his sealing to Sarah Ann.

Joseph wished to avoid involving his friends in case he were found by those looking for him

If Joseph was in hiding, he had good reason to avoid being found (hence the request to burn the letter that disclosed his location). He would also not want his friends present in case he were to be found. Anyone that was searching for Joseph knew that Emma could lead them to him if they simply observed and followed her. If this were the case, the most dangerous time for the Whitney's to visit Joseph may have been when Emma was there—not necessarily because Emma would have been angered by finding Sarah Ann (after all, Emma did not know about the sealing, and she would have found all three Whitney's there—not just Sarah Ann), but because hostile men might have found the Whitney's with Joseph. Note that Joseph's letter states that "when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible." Joseph wanted the Whitneys to avoid observation by anyone, and not just by Emma.

See Biography:
A biography of Sarah Ann Whitney may be viewed on Brian and Laura Hales' website "josephsmithspolygamy.org".


Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources


Notes

  1. Michael Marquardt, 1973 pamphlet "The Strange Marriages of Sarah Ann Whitney to Joseph Smith the Mormon Prophet, Joseph C. Kingsbury, and Heber C. Kimball," George Albert Smith Family Papers, Manuscript 36, Box 1, Early Smith Documents, 1731-1849, Folder 18, in the Special Collections, Western Americana, Marriott Library, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (source). The original is in the Church Archives.
  2. Dean C. Jessee, The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, [original edition] (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book, 1984), 539–540. ISBN 0877479747. GL direct link
  3. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 350. ( Index of claims )
  4. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 349. ( Index of claims )
  5. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.
  6. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 350. ( Index of claims )
  7. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.
  8. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.


References

Articles about Plural marriage
Doctrinal foundation of plural marriage
Introduction of plural marriage
Plural marriage in Utah
End of plural marriage

Sarah Ann Whitney




The age of Joseph Smith's wives.

Summary: How old were Joseph Smith's plural wives?

Divine manifestations to plural wives and families

Summary: Many members who were taught about plural marriage were initially reluctant or appalled; many reported miraculous divine manifestations convincing them of the truth of the doctrine.

Did Joseph Smith write a "love letter" to his plural wife Sarah Ann Whitney to request a secret rendezvous?

On 18 August 1842, Joseph Smith wrote a letter to the parents of Sarah Ann Whitney, who had become his plural wife three weeks earlier, asking them to visit him while he was in hiding.

Critics of the Church would have us believe that this is a private, secret "love letter" from Joseph to Sarah Ann, however, Joseph wrote this letter to the Whitney's, addressing it to Sarah's parents. The "matter" to which he refers is likely the administration of ordinances rather than the arrangement of some sort of private tryst with one of his plural wives. Why would one invite your bride's parents to such an encounter? Joseph doesn't want Emma gone because he wants to be alone with Sarah Ann—a feat that would be difficult to accomplish with her parents there—he wants Emma gone either because she is opposed to plural marriage (the contention that would result from an encounter between Emma and the Whitney's just a few weeks after Joseph's sealing to Sarah Ann would hardly be conducive to having the spirit present in order to "git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads"), or because she may have been followed or spied upon by Joseph's enemies, putting either Joseph or the Whitneys in danger.

The Prophet was in hiding as a result of the assassination attempt that had been made on Missouri governor Lilburn Boggs

On the 16th of August, 1842, while Joseph was in hiding at the Sayer's, Emma expressed concern for Joseph's safety. She sent a letter to Joseph in which she noted,

There are more ways than one to take care of you, and I believe that you can still direct in your business concerns if we are all of us prudent in the matter. If it was pleasant weather I should contrive to see you this evening, but I dare not run too much of a risk, on account of so many going to see you. (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, p.109)

It is evident that there was concern on Emma's part that Joseph's hiding place would be discovered because of all the people visiting Joseph, particularly if they were in the company of Emma

Joseph wrote the next day in his journal,

Several rumors were afloat in the city, intimating that my retreat had been discovered, and that it was no longer safe for me to remain at Brother Sayers'; consequently Emma came to see me at night, and informed me of the report. It was considered wisdom that I should remove immediately, and accordingly I departed in company with Emma and Brother Derby, and went to Carlos Granger's, who lived in the north-east part of the city. Here we were kindly received and well treated." (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, pp. 117-118)

The next day, while in hiding at the Granger's, Joseph wrote a letter to three members of the Whitney family inviting them to come visit him

The letter is addressed to "Brother and Sister Whitney, and &c." Scholars agree that the third person referred to was the Whitney's daughter Sarah Ann, to whom Joseph had been sealed in a plural marriage, without Emma's knowledge, three weeks prior. The full letter, with photographs of the original document, was published by Michael Marquardt in 1973,[1] and again in 1984 by Dean C. Jessee in The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith.[2] The complete text of the letter reads as follows (original spelling has been retained):

Nauvoo August 18th 1842

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams; for my feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us, that the time of my abscence from you seems so long, and dreary, that it seems, as if I could not live long in this way: and <if you> three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me; now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile, for you know I foretold you of these things. I am now at Carlos Graingers, Just back of Brother Hyrams farm, it is only one mile from town, the nights are very pleasant indeed, all three of you come <can> come and See me in the fore part of the night, let Brother Whitney come a little a head, and nock at the south East corner of the house at <the> window; it is next to the cornfield, I have a room inti=rely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect safty, I <know> it is the will of God that you should comfort <me> now in this time of affliction, or not at[ta]l now is the time or never, but I hav[e] no kneed of saying any such thing, to you, for I know the goodness of your hearts, and that you will do the will of the Lord, when it is made known to you; the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater frendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I <will> tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me, I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont dont fail to come to night. I subscribe myself your most obedient, <and> affectionate, companion, and friend.

Joseph Smith

Some critics point to this letter as evidence the Joseph wrote a private and secret "love letter" to Sarah Ann, requesting that she visit him while he was in seclusion. Others believe that the letter was a request to Sarah Ann's parents to bring their daughter to him so that he could obtain "comfort," with the implication that "comfort" involved intimate relations.

How do critics of the Church portray Joseph Smith's letter to the Whitney family as a "love letter"?

Critical treatments of the letter: Was this a "love" letter to Sarah Ann?

Did Joseph Smith write a private and secret "love letter" to Sarah Ann Whitney? Was this letter a request to Sarah Ann's parents to bring her to Joseph? Was Joseph trying to keep Sarah Ann and Emma from encountering one another? Certain sentences extracted from the letter might lead one to believe one or all of these things. Critics use this to their advantage by extracting only the portions of the letter which support the conclusions above. We present here four examples of how the text of the letter has been employed by critics in order to support their position that Joseph was asking the Whitney's to bring Sarah Ann over for an intimate encounter. The text of the full letter is then examined again in light of these treatments.

Critical presentation #1

Consider the following excerpt from a website that is critical of the Church. Portions of the Whitney letter are extracted and presented in the following manner:

... the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty. ... Only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater friendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I will tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. ... I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont, dont fail to come to night, I subscribe myself your most obedient, and affectionate, companion, and friend. Joseph Smith.
—’’Rethinking Mormonism’’, "Did Joseph Smith have sex with his wives?" (Web page)

This certainly has all of the elements of a secret "love letter:" The statement that it would not be safe if Emma were there, the request to "burn this letter as soon as you read it," and the stealthy instructions for approaching the house. The question is, who was this letter addressed to? The critics on their web site clearly want you to believe that this was a private letter to Sarah Ann.

Critical presentation #2

Here is the way that Van Wagoner presents selected excerpts of the same letter. In this case, at least, he acknowledges that the letter was addressed to "the Whitney’s," rather than Sarah, but adds his own opinion that it "detailed [Joseph’s] problems in getting to see Sarah Ann without Emma's knowledge:"

My feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us ... if you three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me, now is the time to Afford me succor ... the only thing to be careful is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safety.
—Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History, 48.

Critical presentation #3

This version, presented by George D. Smith, presents excerpts from the letter which makes it sound like Joseph was absolutely lusting for the company of Sarah Ann. Smith even makes Napoleon Bonaparte a Joseph Smith doppelgänger by quoting a letter from the future Emperor to Josephine of their first night together:

"I have awakened full of you. The memory of last night has given my senses no rest. . . . What an effect you have on my heart! I send you thousands of kisses—but don’t kiss me. Your kisses sear my blood" (p. xi). George Smith then claims that a "young man of ambition and vision penned his own letter of affection to a young woman. It was the summer of 1842 when thirty-six-year-old Joseph Smith, hiding from the law down by the Mississippi River in Illinois, confessed:"

Smith then compares the excerpts from Napoleon's letter above to portions of the Whitney letter:

My feelings are so strong for you . . . come and see me in this my lonely retreat . . . now is the time to afford me succour . . . I have a room intirely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect saf[e]ty, I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me.
—George D. Smith, "Nauvoo Polygamy: We Called It Celestial Marriage," Free Inquiry [Council for Secular Humanism] 28/3 (April–May 2008): 44–46.

Critical presentation #4

Finally, we have a version which acknowledges the full contents of the letter...but only after presenting it in the manner described above numerous times. The author eventually provides the full text of this letter (150 pages after its comparison with Napoleon). Since there are no extant "love letters" from Joseph Smith to any of his plural wives, the mileage that the author of Nauvoo Polygamy..."but we called it celestial marriage" extracts from the single letter to the Whitney's is simply astounding:

  • "[i]t was eleven years after the Smiths roomed with the Whitneys that Joseph expressed a romantic interest in their daughter, as well." (p. 31)
  • "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'" (p. 53)
  • "Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier. Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome," and he pleaded with Sarah Ann to visit him under cover of darkness. After all, they had been married just three weeks earlier. (p. 53)
  • "As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure." (p. 63)
  • "when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts." (p. 65)
  • "Three weeks after the wedding, Joseph took steps to spend some time with his newest bride." (p. 138)
  • "It was the ninth night of Joseph's concealment, and Emma had visited him three times, written him several letters, and penned at least one letter on his behalf…For his part, Joseph's private note about his love for Emma was so endearing it found its way into the official church history. In it, he vowed to be hers 'forevermore.' Yet within this context of reassurance and intimacy, a few hours later the same day, even while Joseph was still in grave danger and when secrecy was of the utmost urgency, he made complicated arrangements for a visit from his fifteenth plural wife, Sarah Ann Whitney." (p. 142)
  • "Smith urged his seventeen-year-old bride to 'come to night' and 'comfort' him—but only if Emma had not returned….Joseph judiciously addressed the letter to 'Brother, and Sister, Whitney, and &c." (p. 142-143)
  • "Invites Whitneys to visit, Sarah Ann to 'comfort me' if Emma not there. Invitation accepted." (p.. 147)
  • "As if Sarah Ann Whitney's liaison were not enough…another marriage took place…." (p. 155)
  • "summer 1842 call for an intimate visit from Sarah Ann Whitney…substantiate[s] the intimate relationships he was involved in during those two years." (p. 185)
  • "his warning to Sarah Ann to proceed carefully in order to make sure Emma would not find them in their hiding place." (p. 236)
  • "Just as Joseph sought comfort from Sarah Ann the day Emma departed from his hideout…." (p. 236)
  • "Elizabeth [Whitney] was arranging conjugal visits between her daughter, Sarah Ann, and [Joseph]…." (p. 366)

One must assume that this is the closest thing that the author could find to a love letter, because the "real" love letters from Joseph to his plural wives do not exist. The author had to make do with this one, despite the fact that it did not precisely fit the bill. With judicious pruning, however, it can be made to sound sufficiently salacious to suit the purpose at hand: to "prove" that Joseph lusted after women.

The full story

In contrast to the sources above, Compton actually provides the complete text of the letter up front, and concludes that "[t]he Mormon leader is putting the Whitney's in the difficult position of having to learn about Emma's movements, avoid her, then meet secretly with him" and that the "cloak-and-dagger atmosphere in this letter is typical of Nauvoo polygamy." [3]

What parts of the Whitney letter do the critics not mention?

As always, it is helpful to view the entire set of statements in content. Let's revisit the entire letter, this time with the selections extracted by the critics highlighted:

Nauvoo August 18th 1842

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams; for my feelings are so strong for you since what has pased lately between us, that the time of my abscence from you seems so long, and dreary, that it seems, as if I could not live long in this way: and <if you> three would come and see me in this my lonely retreat, it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am alied, do love me; now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile, for you know I foretold you of these things. I am now at Carlos Graingers, Just back of Brother Hyrams farm, it is only one mile from town, the nights are very pleasant indeed, all three of you come <can> come and See me in the fore part of the night, let Brother Whitney come a little a head, and nock at the south East corner of the house at <the> window; it is next to the cornfield, I have a room inti=rely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect safty, I <know> it is the will of God that you should comfort <me> now in this time of affliction, or not at[ta]l now is the time or never, but I hav[e] no kneed of saying any such thing, to you, for I know the goodness of your hearts, and that you will do the will of the Lord, when it is made known to you; the only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater frendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I <will> tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me, I close my letter, I think Emma wont come tonight if she dont dont fail to come to night. I subscribe myself your most obedient, <and> affectionate, companion, and friend.

Joseph Smith

So, let’s take a look at the portions of the letter that are not highlighted.

Dear, and Beloved, Brother and Sister, Whitney, and &c.—

The letter is addressed to "Brother and Sister Whitney." Sarah Ann is not mentioned by name, but is included as "&c.," which is the equivalent of saying "and so on," or "etc." This hardly implies that what follows is a private "love letter" to Sarah Ann herself.

Could this have been an appeal to Sarah's parents to bring her to Joseph? In Todd Compton's opinion, Joseph "cautiously avoids writing Sarah's name." [4] However, Joseph stated in the letter who he wanted to talk to:

I take this oppertunity to communi[c]ate, some of my feelings, privetely at this time, which I want you three Eternaly to keep in your own bosams;

Joseph wants to talk to "you three," meaning Newel, Elizabeth and Sarah Ann.

What was the real purpose of the letter written by Joseph Smith to the parents of Sarah Ann Whitney?

The one portion of the letter in which Joseph actually gives a reason for this meeting is often excluded by critics

Interestingly enough, the one portion of the letter in which Joseph actually gives a reason for this meeting is often excluded by critics:

..one thing I want to see you for is <to> git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c. you wi will pardon me for my earnest=ness on <this subject> when you consider how lonesome I must be, your good feelings know how to <make> every allowance for me...

According to Richard L. Bushman, this may have been "a reference perhaps to the sealing of Newel and Elizabeth in eternal marriage three days later." [5] Compton adds, "This was not just a meeting of husband and plural wife, it was a meeting with Sarah's family, with a religious aspect.[6]

Joseph needed to have the company of friends who supported him

In addition to the stated purpose of the meeting, Joseph "may have been a lonely man who needed people around him every moment." [7] Consider this phrase (included in Van Wagoner's treatment, but excluded by the others):

...it would afford me great relief, of mind, if those with whom I am al[l]ied, do love me, now is the time to afford me succour, in the days of exile. (emphasis added)

These are not the words of a man asking his secret lover to meet him for a private tryst—they are the words of a man who wants the company of friends.

"...when Emma comes then you cannot be safe"

So, what about Emma? The letter certainly contains dire warnings about having the Whitney's avoid an encounter with Emma. We examine several possible reasons for the warning about Emma. Keep in mind Emma's stated concern just two days prior,

If it was pleasant weather I should contrive to see you this evening, but I dare not run too much of a risk, on account of so many going to see you. (History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.6, p.109)

Joseph wished to discuss and/or perform a sealing ordinance that Emma had not yet received

Joseph had been sealed to Sarah Ann three weeks before without Emma's knowledge.[8] Joseph may have wished to offer a sealing blessing to Newel and Elizabeth Whitney at this time. Given Joseph's indication to the Whitneys that he wished to "git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads," and the fact that Emma herself was not sealed until she consented to the doctrine of plural marriage nine months later, Joseph may have felt that Emma’s presence would create an uncomfortable situation for all involved—particularly if she became aware of his sealing to Sarah Ann.

Joseph wished to avoid involving his friends in case he were found by those looking for him

If Joseph was in hiding, he had good reason to avoid being found (hence the request to burn the letter that disclosed his location). He would also not want his friends present in case he were to be found. Anyone that was searching for Joseph knew that Emma could lead them to him if they simply observed and followed her. If this were the case, the most dangerous time for the Whitney's to visit Joseph may have been when Emma was there—not necessarily because Emma would have been angered by finding Sarah Ann (after all, Emma did not know about the sealing, and she would have found all three Whitney's there—not just Sarah Ann), but because hostile men might have found the Whitney's with Joseph. Note that Joseph's letter states that "when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible." Joseph wanted the Whitneys to avoid observation by anyone, and not just by Emma.

See Biography:
A biography of Sarah Ann Whitney may be viewed on Brian and Laura Hales' website "josephsmithspolygamy.org".


Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources


Notes

  1. Michael Marquardt, 1973 pamphlet "The Strange Marriages of Sarah Ann Whitney to Joseph Smith the Mormon Prophet, Joseph C. Kingsbury, and Heber C. Kimball," George Albert Smith Family Papers, Manuscript 36, Box 1, Early Smith Documents, 1731-1849, Folder 18, in the Special Collections, Western Americana, Marriott Library, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (source). The original is in the Church Archives.
  2. Dean C. Jessee, The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, [original edition] (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book, 1984), 539–540. ISBN 0877479747. GL direct link
  3. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 350. ( Index of claims )
  4. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 349. ( Index of claims )
  5. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.
  6. Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 350. ( Index of claims )
  7. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.
  8. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 473.


References

Response to claim: 53 - "The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: 'My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now'"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: "My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now."

Author's sources: *Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The mistake: Joseph is speaking to all three Whitneys, and the author again distorts the letter as at the beginning of the book.

Whitney "love letter" (edit)

Response to claim: 53 - "Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier. Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier. Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome," and he pleaded with Sarah Ann to visit him under cover of darkness. After all, they had been married just three weeks earlier.

Author's sources:
  1. Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

Loaded language trying to make Joseph appear sexually voracious and insensitive to Emma. As stated in the letter, the reason for the visit was to perform ordinances.
  • Gregory L. Smith, A review of Nauvoo Polygamy:...but we called it celestial marriage by George D. Smith. FARMS Review, Vol. 20, Issue 2. (Detailed book review)

Whitney "love letter" (edit)

Response to claim: 54 - “Did Sarah Ann keep this rendezvous on that humid summer night? Unfortunately, the documentary record is silent"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: “Did Sarah Ann keep this rendezvous on that humid summer night? Unfortunately, the documentary record is silent.” But “the letter survives to illuminate the complexity of Smith’s life in Nauvoo."

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The documentary record is not silent, however, as to why Joseph sought a visit with his plural wife and her parents: to “tell you all my plans . . . [and] to git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c.”
  • Small wonder that Joseph didn’t want a hostile Emma present while trying to administer what he and the Whitneys regarded as sacred ordinances. And, it is unsurprising that he considered a single private room sufficient for the purposes for which he summoned his plural wife and her parents.
  • Gregory L. Smith, A review of Nauvoo Polygamy:...but we called it celestial marriage by George D. Smith. FARMS Review, Vol. 20, Issue 2. (Detailed book review)

Whitney "love letter" (edit)

Response to claim: 54 - The author states that what interested him the most was how Joseph "went about courting…these women"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author states that what interested him the most was how Joseph "went about courting…these women."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

There is no evidence that Joseph did any courting. He often used intermediaries.

Womanizing & romance (edit)

Response to claim: 55 - When polygamy was officially abandoned in 1890, that "what previously had been called 'celestial marriage' was subtly redefined to specify something new

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is claimed that when polygamy was officially abandoned in 1890, that "what previously had been called 'celestial marriage' was subtly redefined to specify something new: marriage performed in LDS temples for this life and for an expected eternal afterlife."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The claimed "redefinition" was present from the very beginning of plural marriage. The emphasis changed:

Necessary for salvation? (edit)

  • See also ch. Preface: xiv
  • See also ch. 1: 6
  • See also ch. 2: 55
  • See also ch. 6: 356


Response to claim: 55 - "Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls…."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

This is pure assumption by the author. He notes elsewhere that Joseph never even recorded anything about his plural marriages, much less anything about "secret liaisons with women and girls."

Womanizing & romance (edit)

Response to claim: 55 - "Joseph "assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctioned but were demanded by heaven"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author notes that Joseph "assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctioned but were demanded by heaven and fulfilled the ethereal principle of 'restoration.'"

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The author does not tell us that Joseph had the women get their OWN witness. Women could and did turn Joseph down with no consequences.

Response to claim: 56 - "There may have been even more wives and plural children"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author assumes that "[t]here may have been even more wives and plural children."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

Anything might have happened. The author provides no evidence. This is the fallacy of probability.

Fallacy of probability (edit)

  • See also ch. 2: 56
  • See also ch. 2a: 111


Response to claim: 63 - "conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

This is pure assumption on the part of the author—he provides no such evidence save his own repeated representation of the Whitney letter.

Whitney "love letter" (edit)


Response to claim: 65 - "when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: “when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts.”

Author's sources: *No citation given

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The letter was addressed to Sarah's parents, not to Sarah.

Whitney "love letter" (edit)

Response to claim: 65 - "One of the instrumental people in the inauguration of plural marriage was John Bennett"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author claims that "[o]ne of the instrumental people in the inauguration of plural marriage was John [C.] Bennett…."

Author's sources: No sources provided

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The is a huge assumption on the part of the author, presuming that Bennett's adulteries were ever sanctioned by Joseph, or had anything to do with plural marriage.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett was Joseph Smith's "closest confident"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author notes that in 1841, John C. Bennett was Joseph Smith's "closest confident."  [ATTENTION!]

Author's sources: * No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The author ignores the fact that Joseph began to distrust Bennett for cause long before their public rupture.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 65 - Joseph was "sharing power" with John C. Bennett

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is claimed that Joseph was "sharing power" with Bennett.

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

Bennett's power was mainly secular. He did little in the religious realm. Joseph had wanted to be relieved of temporal responsibilities, and Bennett was available.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett spoke out against Joseph "and was soon stripped of his offices and titles"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is claimed that in 1842, John C. Bennett spoke out against Joseph "and was soon stripped of his offices and titles."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

Bennett was guilty of serial immoralities, and had been disciplined on multiple occasions. He only "spoke out" once he learned that he was to be stripped of membership in the Church. The author has cause and effect reversed, perhaps because he doesn't want us to know of the overwhelming evidence of Bennett's guilt.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett and Joseph each "accused the other of immoral behavior"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is claimed that John C. Bennett and Joseph each "accused the other of immoral behavior."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

Bennett was accused by far more people, over a far greater length of time, of "immoral behavior." Many of his accusers were not LDS and had nothing to do with the Mormons. Bennett only began to accuse Joseph once his own crimes were repeatedly revealed.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 65 - While some of John C. Bennett's claims "may have been exaggerations, much of what he reported can be confirmed by other eyewitness accounts"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author attempts to rehabilitate John C. Bennett by claiming: "While some of his claims may have been exaggerations, much of what he reported can be confirmed by other eyewitness accounts."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

Many of Bennett's claims are clearly false. The author uses Bennett uncritically, and naively. The things which Bennett can "confirm" are mostly things like names of people Joseph married. Bennett also clearly forged some material from others.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett "cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

Yet more attempt to make Bennett a credible witness: "Even though his statements must be weighed critically, he cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal."

Author's sources: *Author's opinion.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The author never does this weighing for us. Much of what Bennett writes, after analysis, must be dismissed as fabrication or exaggeration, however. Even anti-Mormon authors warned of Bennett's problems:

"There is, no doubt, much truth in Bennett's book…but no statement that he makes can be received with confidence." [1]

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 65 - John C. Bennett "had an ambitious but colorful background"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author claims that "Bennett had an ambitious but colorful background."

Author's sources: *No source provided

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

This hides a mountain of evidence about Bennett's pre-LDS behavior, including:
  • repeatedly using others' names to fraudulently support the establishment of medical colleges
  • selling bogus medical diplomas
  • selling bogus diplomas in other fields (e.g., law)
  • lying and misrepresentation
  • serial adulteries and infidelities
  • abandonment of wife and children

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 66-67 - John C. Bennett "was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "Writing on March 23, 1846, Bennett claimed to have known 'Joseph better than any other man living for at least fourteen months!'….Bennett was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions.

Author's sources: *Smith, Saintly Scoundrel, 56.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The author here accepts Bennett uncritically. Despite his claim, he was never part of the inner circle which received the highest temple ordinances introduced by Joseph. Bennett and Rigdon "were conspicuously absent" when Joseph Smith spoke to those who would be among the first to receive the full endowment necessary "to finish their work and prevent imposition" by Satan. Bennett had secular influence, but relatively little to do with religious matters in Nauvoo:

"Thus, the considerable embarrassment to Joseph Smith and Mormonism which some have inferred from Bennett's alleged duping of the Mormons is cast in a new light because Bennett himself so effectively refutes his own claim that he was a close confidant of Joseph Smith. Unwittingly, Bennett indisputably demonstrates that he was neither directly involved with the endowment, eternal marriage, nor plural marriage—the most significant private theological developments during Bennett's stay in Nauvoo. [2]

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 68 - Joseph is merely “feigning impartiality” before going on to practice “undemocratic block voting"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author claims that Joseph is merely “feigning impartiality” before going on to practice “undemocratic block voting.”

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

Block voting is not undemocratic—many interest groups vote en masse for candidates which will meet their needs. Joseph was not feigning when he said, "We care not a fig for a Whig or Democrat….We shall go for our friends." (p. 68) He was indicating that party made no difference to the Saints; what mattered is who would agree to defend them.

Bloc voting (edit)

  • See also ch. 1: 2
  • See also ch. 2: 68
  • See also ch. 4: 292–293

See NOTE on bloc voting

Response to claim: 69 - Joseph was apparently "undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author notes that Joseph was apparently "undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett, and proceeded to name him Assistant President of the Church.

Author's sources: * No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is based upon correct information - The author is providing knowledge concerning some particular fact, subject, or event

Joseph knew from personal experience that "it is no uncommon thing for good men to be evil spoken against," and did nothing precipitous. The accusations against Bennett gained credence when Joseph learned of his attempts to persuade a young woman "that he intended to marry her." Joseph dispatched Hyrum Smith and William Law to make inquiries, and in early July 1841 he learned that Bennett had a wife and children living in the east. Non-LDS sources confirmed Bennett's infidelity: one noted that he "heard it from almost every person in town that [his wife] left him in consequence of his ill treatment of her home and his intimacy with other women." Another source reported that Bennett's wife "declared that she could no longer live with him…it would be the seventh family that he had parted during their union."

</blockquote>

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 69 - John C. Bennett was Assistant President of the Church

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is noted that John C. Bennett was Assistant President of the Church.

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is based upon correct information - The author is providing knowledge concerning some particular fact, subject, or event

Sidney Rigdon, a counselor in the First Presidency, was frequently ill. On April 8, "John C. Bennett was presented, with the First Presidency, as Assistant President until President Rigdon's health should be restored." Modern readers should be cautious in projecting the role of the current First Presidency on Joseph's day. In the modern Church, the First Presidency is almost always composed of two apostles who have extensive experience in ecclesiastical affairs called to serve with the President. In Joseph's day, this was not the case. Most of Joseph's counselors in the First Presidency were to betray his trust, including Jesse Gause, Frederick G. Williams, Sidney Rigdon, William Law and John C. Bennett. While some of these counselors received keys, Bennett did not. None were apostles prior to their call.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 69 - John C. Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is claimed that John C. Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church.

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

[This is not stated baldly, but some readers might be confused.] With few exceptions, Bennett "played little role in church conferences. There might have been an unofficial division of labor between Bennett and Smith. Smith handled church affairs; Bennett took the lead in secular matters."

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 70 - Joseph Smith and John C. Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842)

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author claims that Joseph Smith and John C. Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842).

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

Bennett was confronted with the charges mentioned above in the summer of 1841. When confronted with these charges, Bennett broke down and confessed. Emma's nephew, Lorenzo D. Wasson, claimed to have been upstairs and heard Joseph "give J. C. Bennett a tremendous flagellation for practicing iniquity under the base pretence of authority from the heads of the church." Claiming to be mortified at the idea of public censure, Bennett took poison in a suicide gesture, but recovered.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 70 - There seemed to be "no office or honor within reach" that Joseph Smith "did not hasten to grant to" John C. Bennett

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is claimed that there seemed to be "no office or honor within reach that Smith did not hasten to grant to Bennett."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is false

This is false: Bennett was never inducted into the "Quorum of the Anointed"—those who were receiving the temple endowment from Joseph (see above, 66-67). He was also never made an apostle.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 70 - "Zina Huntington, who married Henry Jacobs instead but then reconsidered seven months later in response to Joseph's restated interest"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "Zina Huntington, who married Henry Jacobs instead but then reconsidered seven months later in response to Joseph's restated interest."

Author's sources: *No source provide

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is based upon correct information - The author is providing knowledge concerning some particular fact, subject, or event

Zina said the Lord told her what to do.

Response to claim: 70-71 - "Joseph soon after married Zina's sister, Presendia, who was also already married"==

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "Seemingly impatient, Joseph soon after married Zina's sister, Presendia, who was also already married."

Author's sources: No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Question: What did the husband of Presendia L. Huntington know about her sealing to Joseph Smith for eternity?

Presendia's husband Norman left the Church, and since she was unable to be sealed for eternity to her earthly husband, she was sealed to Joseph Smith instead

Presendia Huntington was married to Norman Buell when she was sixteen years old. Both Presendia and Norman originally joined the Church, but Norman later left it while Presendia remained a believing member. Since she was unable to be sealed for eternity to her earthly husband, she was sealed to Joseph Smith instead. Presendia's 1881 biography notes her husband's rejection of the Church as the reason she decided to be sealed to Joseph Smith for eternity,

I was maried to Norman Buell Jan 6th 1827. both joined the Church in in [sic] Kirtland Geauga Co Ohio he left the church in Mo in 1839 the Lord gave me strength to stand alone & keep the faith amid heavy persecution in 1841 I entered into the new & everlasting Covenant was sealed to Joseph Smith the Prophet & Seer & to the best of my ability I have honored Plural Marriage never speking one word against the principal. [3]

An affidavit signed by Presendia on May 1, 1869 states:

Be it remembered that on this first day of May A.D. 1869 personally appeared before me Elias Smith Probate Judge for Said County Presenda Lathrop Huntington \Kimball/ who was by me Sworn in due form of law and upon her oath saith, that on the eleventh day of December A.D. 1841, at the City of Nauvoo, County of Hancock State of Illinois, She was married or Sealed to Joseph Smith, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints by Dimick B. Huntington, a High-Priest in Said Church, according to the laws of the Same regulating Marriage; in the presence of Fanny Maria Huntington. [4]

See Biography:
A biography of Presendia L. Huntington may be viewed on Brian and Laura Hales' website "josephsmithspolygamy.org".

Response to claim: 71 - "Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author notes that "Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The author does not tell us that Sarah and Bennett were probably having an affair, as witnessed by LDS and non-LDS witnesses, and a plausible time-line.

John C. Bennett (edit)


Response to claim: 72 - Orson Pratt eventually accepted Joseph's explanation "that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author notes that Orson Pratt eventually accepted Joseph's explanation "that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The author does not tell us that Orson eventually believed Sarah and Bennett had misled him, saying he was first informed by "a wicked source, from those disaffected, but as soon as he learned the truth he was satisfied." [5] He presents no evidence for what explanation Joseph gave Orson, or what Orson believed.

Response to claim: 72 - "Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself."

Author's sources: * No source provided

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The author is here presuming that Bennett imitated Joseph. Bennett was also involved in operating a prostitution ring and house of ill repute in Nauvoo. [6]

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author claims that John C. Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842.

Author's sources: * Andrew Smith, Saintly Scoundrel, 86–89. (Note that The author does not properly represent the source's contents.)

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

In fact, Bennett was forced to resign by Joseph, who wrote to the Church recorder: "be so good as to permit Bennett to withdraw his name from the Church record, if he desires to do so, and this with the best of feelings towards…General Bennett." [7]

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett was excommunicated from the Church in "retaliation"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is claimed that Bennett was excommunicated from the Church in "retaliation."

Author's sources:
  1. Andrew Smith, Saintly Scoundrel, 86–89.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

This was not in retaliation, since Joseph had pushed for Bennett's resignation. A high council trial of Chauncey Higbee concluded on May 24, at which it became clear that Higbee had been seducing women under Bennett's direction. Bennett was told that his withdrawal from the Church would be made public. Bennett once more begged for mercy, claiming that public exposure would distress his mother. [8] Joseph again deferred a public announcement, and Bennett would soon also make confession to the Nauvoo Masonic Lodge. Weeping, Bennett pleaded for leniency, with Joseph as his advocate. [9] Even Joseph's patience had an end, however. It soon became clear that still other members had used Bennett's arguments to seduce women—his excommunication was made public on 15 June. The Masonic Lodge published Bennett's crimes the next day. [10] His Nauvoo reputation in tatters, Bennett left and began plotting his revenge.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 72 - John C. Bennett claimed that his excommunication was postdated to May 11 to appear that it had occurred before his resignation

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

John C. Bennett claimed that his excommunication was postdated to May 11 to appear that it had occurred before his resignation.

Author's sources: *Andrew Smith, Saintly Scoundrel, 86–89.

FAIR's Response

  • See also ch. 2a: 119

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

(The author later acts as if this claim of Bennett's is established fact.)
  • The author mischaracterizes his source, and does not tell us that Bennett's claim was false. Bennett's biographer wrote:
"On May 11 Smith and several others signed a statement to disfellowship Bennett….
"According to Bennett, three of the signatories were not in Nauvoo on that date….
"[However] William Law, one of the signatories…testified that he signed it on the evening of May 11. Some four or five days later Law had a conversation with Bennett 'and intimated to him that such a thing was concluded upon.'…The best explanation for this matter is that Joseph Smith had the disfellowship document drawn up on May 11 Those who were in Nauvoo were asked to sign it….As others returned to the city, they added their names." (Andrew Smith, Saintly Scoundrel, 86, 100).

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 73 - "It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The author wants to rehabilitate Bennett as a source, while glossing over the problems.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 73 - "In the spring of 1842, the two men quarreled and Smith had Bennett excommunicated"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author notes that "[i]n the spring of 1842, the two men quarreled and Smith had Bennett excommunicated…."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

Joseph and Bennett did not "quarrel"—evidence of further seduction and infidelity by Bennett came to light. Bennett was given the chance to resign, and did so. Further disclosure to the high council led to Bennett's exposure and excommunication.

John C. Bennett (edit)

Response to claim: 75 - Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

Response to claim: 75 - "In the context of having just married a pregnant wife" Joseph's "words acquire added meaning: 'If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you….'"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "In the context of having just married a pregnant wife, [Joseph's] words acquire added meaning: 'If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you….'"

Author's sources: *History of the Church 4:445.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The author implies that sexuality was involved in this polyandrous marriage. He tries to prejudice the reader by pointing out that Zina was pregnant when she and Henry approved her sealing to Joseph.

Response to claim: 75 - Joseph's diary and the History of the Church do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is noted that Joseph's diary and the History of the Church do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife."

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

There is no evidence anywhere for any conjungal contact. The author has repeatedly mentioned that a given event is not recorded in the History of the Church, and so can here imply that there might be evidence of "conjugal contacts," but the Smith diary and History are hiding it. There is no evidence, period.

Censorship of Church History (edit)


Response to claim: 77 - "Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph...she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

 Author's quote: "Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph, the theology of 'sealing' meant that in the next life she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The author gives no evidence for this. It may be that some early sealings (especially polyandrous ones) were intended to bind families to each and Joseph in salvation in the next world. The image which this gives of Joseph "taking away" Henry's children is inflammatory and probably misleading.

Sealing takes away families? (edit)

  • See also ch. 2: 77
  • See also ch. 3: 234

Response to claim: 77 - Brigham Young advised Henry Jacobs "to find a wife who could be his eternal partner"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

The author claims that "[s]ome sources say [Brigham] Young advised [Henry Jacobs] to find a wife who could be his eternal partner."

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

This from a single source (not "sources") and comes from a virulently anti-Mormon work, William Hall, Abominations of Mormonism Exposed (Cincinnati: I. Hart & Co., 1852), 43–44. Besides being hostile, this source has numerous problems which make it implausible.

}}

Response to claim: 78 - Brigham Young said that "if a woman can find a man holding the keys of the priesthood with higher power and authority than her husband, and he is disposed to take her"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

Brigham Young said that "if a woman can find a man holding the keys of the priesthood with higher power and authority than her husband, and he is disposed to take her, he can do so, otherwise she has got to remain where she is. In either of these ways of sep[a]ration, you can discover, there is no need for a bill of divorcement."

Author's sources:
  1. Brigham Young, "A few words of Doctrine," Oct 8, 1861, LDS Archives.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The author omits key parts of Brigham's recorded discourse: "…if a man magnifies his priesthood, observing faithfully his covenants to the end of his life, all the wives and children sealed to him, all the blessings and honors promised to him in his ordinations and sealing blessings are immutably and eternally fixed; no power can wrench them from his possession. You may inquire, in case a wife becomes disaffected with her husband, her affections lost, she becomes alienated from him and wishes to be the wife of another, can she not leave him? I know of no law in heaven or on earth by which she can be made free while her husband remains faithful and magnifies his priesthood before God and he is not disposed to put her away, she having done nothing worthy of being put away."

Brigham Young's 8 October 1861 talk (edit)

  • See also ch. 2: 78
  • See also ch. 8: 541

Response to claim: 79 - Presendia Buell is claimed to have "displayed an affinity for mystical religious experiences as one of the women who began speaking and singing in tongues"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

Presendia Buell is claimed to have "displayed an affinity for mystical religious experiences as one of the women who began speaking and singing in tongues…."

Author's sources: *No source provided.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

Speaking in tongues is not a form of "mysticism." This characterization is inaccurate, alienating, and prejudicial.

Presendia Buell (edit)

Response to claim: 79 - Presendia Buell "did not take the prophet's advice" to leave for Illinois while he was in Liberty Jail "prior to his escape from jail on April 16. Nine months later, on January 31, 1841, she gave birth to a son Oliver"

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

It is claimed that Presendia Buell "did not take the prophet's advice [to leave for Illinois while he was in Liberty Jail] prior to his escape from jail on April 16. Nine months later, on January 31, 1841, she gave birth to a son Oliver. Later that year [she went to Illinois]….."

Author's sources: Presendia Buell (edit)

FAIR's Response

{{propaganda|The main text clearly implies that Joseph was the father of Prescendia's son Norman. Else, why mention that "nine months later" she had a child, with no further comment? The author disguises the fact that DNA evidence has proved that Oliver was not Joseph's son.


Response to claim: 80 n. 63 - "There is no DNA connection" between Joseph Smith and Oliver Buell

The author(s) of Nauvoo Polygamy make(s) the following claim:

"….There is no DNA connection (Carrie A. Moore, “DNA tests rule out 2 as Smith descendants: scientific advances prove no genetic link,” Deseret Morning News, 10 November 2007). Compton finds it "unlikely, though not impossible, that Joseph Smith was the actual father" of John Hiram, born November 1843; Presendia's last child during her marriage to Norman Buell. (Sacred Loneliness, 124, 670–71)."

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is false

The author makes no mention in the main text that Oliver’s paternity has been definitively ruled out by DNA testing. What is the point of the long discussion about the possibility of Oliver being Joseph's son, when we know that he can't be?

Presendia Buell (edit)


Notes

  1. T. B. H. Stenhouse, The Rocky Mountain Saints : A Full and Complete History of the Mormons.... (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1878 [1873]), 184 note.
  2. Andrew F. Ehat, "Joseph Smith's Introduction of Temple Ordinances and the 1844 Mormon Succession Question," (Master's Thesis, Brigham Young University, 1981), 40.
  3. Presenda Huntington Kimball, “Biographical Sketch,” 1881, MS 742, CHL, first copy page 2 and variant copy page 2. off-site
  4. Joseph F. Smith affidavit books, CHL 1:7. off-site
  5. George L. Mitton and Rhett S. James, "A Response to D. Michael Quinn's Homosexual Distortion of Latter-Day Saint History," FARMS Review of Books 10/1 (1998): footnote 70, citing T. Edgar Lyon, "Orson Pratt—Early Mormon Leader," (M.A. diss., University of Chicago, 1932), 31. See also Millennial Star 40 (16 December 1878): 788.
  6. [citation needed]
  7. Bennett, History of the Saints, 40–41.
  8. Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957). Volume 5 link
  9. Smith, History of the Church, 5:18 (26 May 1842).
  10. Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 461.; see Times and Seasons 3/15 (15 June 1842): 830; Smith, History of the Church, 5:32.