FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Books/One Nation Under Gods/Chapter 7"
(→531n48 (PB)) |
(→531n48 (PB)) |
||
Line 186: | Line 186: | ||
{{:Question: Did Joseph own 144 acres of land in Kirtland?}} | {{:Question: Did Joseph own 144 acres of land in Kirtland?}} | ||
− | ====531n48 (PB)==== | + | ====531n48 (PB) - Was Isaac McWithy brought before the church's High Council on charges of "insolence" after refusing to sell his land to Joseph Smith for $3000?==== |
− | {{ | + | {{IndexClaimItemShort |
+ | |title=One Nation Under Gods | ||
|claim= | |claim= | ||
− | + | Was Isaac McWithy brought before the church's High Council on charges of "insolence" after refusing to sell his land to Joseph Smith for $3000? | |
− | |||
− | |||
|authorsources= | |authorsources= | ||
*{{HC1|vol=2|start=446}} | *{{HC1|vol=2|start=446}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
+ | *[[../../Notable omissions#531|Notable omissions: Isaac McWithy tried for insolence]] | ||
{{:Question: Was Isaac McWithy brought before the High Council on charges of "insolence" because he refused to sell his land to Joseph Smith for $3000?}} | {{:Question: Was Isaac McWithy brought before the High Council on charges of "insolence" because he refused to sell his land to Joseph Smith for $3000?}} | ||
Revision as of 12:28, 7 December 2014
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Response to claims made in "Chapter 7: Woe In Ohio"
Claims made in "Chapter 6: No rest for the Righteous" | A FAIR Analysis of: One Nation Under Gods A work by author: Richard Abanes
|
Claims made in "Chapter 8: Big Trouble In Little Missouri" |
Smith decided to solve his economic dilemma by establishing a bank for the purpose of land speculation.
—One Nation Under Gods, p. 135. (paperback edition)
127 epigraph, 527n1 (PB) - David Whitmer said that Joseph Smith claimed that "[s]ome revelations are of God: some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil"
The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:
David Whitmer said that Joseph Smith claimed that "[s]ome revelations are of God: some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil"Author's sources:
- David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, 31.
- DC 46꞉7
FAIR's Response
Question: How does David Whitmer's account of the attempt to sell the Book of Mormon copyright compare to those of the eyewitnesses?
Whitmer's account is at variance in several ways with Hiram Page’s account
Whitmer's account is at variance in several ways with Hiram Page’s account. Whitmer gets the destination city in Canada wrong (he says Toronto, the other accounts, and the revelation itself, say Kingston) and he did not correctly identify all of the participants (he identified Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery, while Page noted Joseph Knight and Josiah Stowell). Note that the text of the revelation itself finally clears up the issue of exactly who the revelation was directed to,
...it Pleaseth me that Oliver Cowderey Joseph Knight Hyram Page
e& Josiah Stowel shall do my work in this thing...
Page, an eyewitness, makes no mention at disappointment in Joseph Smith, nor is there any mention of a "false prophecy"
Page also makes no mention or even a hint at disappointment in Joseph Smith, nor is there an accusation that the trip was based upon a "false prophecy," so naturally no subsequent "revelation" is noted by Page explaining the mission’s failure.
In Whitmer’s 1887 account we learn for the first time of the supposed post-mission revelation where Joseph Smith is told that some revelations are from God, some from devils, some from men. This account is in all likelihood a fabrication. Unlike his consistent, life-long statements concerning the witness of the Gold Plates, this account, which is probably a second-hand retelling of events 57 years after their occurrence, suddenly appears and is wrong on several of the documentable facts, as well as being inconsistent with the first-hand testimony of Hiram Page, given 40 years earlier than Whitmer and by comparison much closer to the actual event.
Question: How did Latter-day Saint scholars respond to the attempt to sell the Book of Mormon copyright prior to Page's letter coming to light?
B.H. Roberts expressed doubt as to the accuracy of the story, and suggested that David Whitmer may not have recalled all of the details correctly
The letter from 1848 by Hiram Page was not publically available until the 20th Century. As a result, various LDS responses to the accounts by Whitmer and McLellin of necessity must explain why the apparent anomalous revelation does not make Joseph Smith a fallen prophet. Such was the case when B.H. Roberts expressed doubt as to the accuracy of the story, and suggested that David Whitmer may not have recalled all of the details correctly, yet went on to address the claim anyway. Roberts concluded:
Does that circumstance vitiate his claim as a prophet? No; the fact remains that despite this circumstance there exists a long list of events to be dealt with which will establish the fact of divine inspiration operating upon the mind of this man Joseph Smith. The wisdom frequently displayed, the knowledge revealed, the predicted events and the fulfilment thereof, are explicable upon no other theory than of divine inspiration giving guidance to him. [1]
As it happens, the passage of time and the uncovering of additional information has vindicated that confidence.
127-8, 528n5 (PB) - Did Joseph say that "[f]ifty-six years should wind up the scene" before the second coming of Jesus Christ?
The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:
Did Joseph say that "[f]ifty-six years should wind up the scene" before the second coming of Jesus Christ?Author's sources:
- History of the Church, 2:182. Volume 2 link
- History of the Church, 5:336. Volume 5 link
FAIR's Response
128-9, 528n10 (PB) - Were the revelations published in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants "amended, added to, excised, and in some cases assigned different historical settings"?
The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:
Were the revelations published in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants "amended, added to, excised, and in some cases assigned different historical settings"?Author's sources: H. Michael Marquardt, The Joseph Smith Revelations: Text & Commentary, xv.
FAIR's Response
Question: Who made the changes to the Doctrine and Covenants?
The First Presidency of the Church made the changes to the Doctrine and Covenants
The Saints have never believed in inerrant prophets or inerrant scripture. The editing and modification of the revelations was never a secret; it was well known to the Church of Joseph's day, and it has been discussed repeatedly in modern Church publications, as well as extensive studies in Masters' and PhD theses at BYU.
If Joseph could receive the Doctrine and Covenants by revelation, then he could also receive revelation to improve, modify, revise, and expand his revelatory product. The question remains the same—was Joseph Smith a prophet? If he was, then his action is completely legitimate. If he was not, then it makes little difference whether his pretended revelations were altered or not.
Richard Lloyd Anderson wrote:
First Presidency members were assigned to compile "the items of the doctrine" of the Church from the standard works, including "the revelations which have been given to the Church up to this date or shall be, until such arrangement is made" (Kirtland High Council Minute Book, 24 September 1834; also cited in History of the Church, 2:165. Volume 2 link). This resolution might suggest the correction of former wording through revelation. [The revised D&C was] issued in August 1835 with a 17 February 1835 preface signed by the Prophet, Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon, and Frederick G. Williams, the revision committee. [2]
Thus, the First Presidency of the time supervised the revisions.
Question: What changes were made to the Doctrine and Covenants?
Changes made to the Doctrine and Covenants were 1) Grammar and spelling. 2) Added material or expansion. 3) Text removed or reworked. 4) Expressions altered
Grammar and spelling changes
Many changes involved matters of grammar, spelling, and the like. (These examples all taken from one article in the Ensign. Those interested in further examples can see the Further Reading section below. [3]
We have found the following errors in the commandments, as printed: fortieth chapter, tenth verse, third line, instead of ‘corruptible,’ put ‘corrupted.’ Fourteenth verse of the same chapter, fifth line, instead of ‘respector to persons,’ put ‘respector of persons.’ Twenty-first verse, second line of the same chapter, instead of ‘respector to,’ put ‘respector of.’ Fourty-four chapter, twelfth verse, last line, instead of ‘hands’ put ‘heads.’ [4]
Added material or expansions
Some other changes added material which had been gleaned from advancements in Church organization or later revelations, or expanded upon ideas within the original text:
Book of Commandments | Doctrine and Covenants |
---|---|
3:2—Remember temperance, patience, humility, diligence, ask and ye shall receive, knock and it shall be opened unto you: Amen. | D&C 4:6–7—Remember faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, brotherly kindness, godliness, charity, humility, diligence. Ask and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. Amen. (1835 edition, 31:2.) |
4:2—...and he has a gift to translate the book, and I have commanded him that he shall pretend to no other gift, for I will grant him no other gift. | D&C 5:4 And you have a gift to translate the plates; and this is the first gift that I bestowed upon you; and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift until my purpose is fulfilled in this; for I will grant unto you no other gift until it is finished. (1835 edition, 32:1) |
4:4— … and to none else will I grant this power, to receive this same testimony among this generation. | D&C 5:14—And to none else will I grant this power, to receive this same testimony among this generation, in this the beginning of the rising up and coming forth of my church out of the wilderness—clear as the moon, and fair as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners. (1835 edition, 32:3.) |
6:1—And the Lord said unto me, John, my beloved, what desirest thou? | D&C 7:1—And the Lord said unto me: John, my beloved, what desirest thou? For if you shall ask what you will, it shall be granted unto you. (1835 edition, 33:1.) |
24:14—And that he gave unto the children of men commandments, that they should love and serve him the only being whom they should worship. | D&C 20:19—And gave unto them commandments that they should love and serve him, the only living and true God, and that he should be the only being whom they should worship. (1835 edition, 2:4.) |
24:32— … to administer the flesh and blood of Christ according to the scriptures. | D&C 20:40–41—And to administer bread and wine—the emblems of the flesh and blood of Christ—
And to confirm those who are baptized into the Church, by the laying on of the hands for the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost, according to the scriptures. (1835 edition, 2:8.) |
24:35—The elders are to conduct the meetings as they are led by the Holy Ghost. | D&C 20:45—The elders are to conduct the meetings as they are led by the Holy Ghost, according to the commandments and revelations of God. (1835 edition, 2:9.) |
44:26— … and they shall be laid before the bishop of my church, and two of the elders, such as he shall appoint and set apart for that purpose. | D&C 42:31— … and they shall be laid before the bishop of my church and his counselors, two of the elders, or high priests, such as he shall appoint or has appointed and set apart for that purpose. (1835 edition, 13:8.) |
44:29—And the residue shall be kept in my storehouse to administer to the poor and needy, as shall be appointed by the elders of the church and the bishop. | D&C 42:34—Therefore, the residue shall be kept in my storehouse, to administer to the poor and the needy, as shall be appointed by the high council of the church, and the bishop and his council. (1835 edition, 13:10.) |
51:6— … as is appointed to him by the bishop and elders of the church, according to the laws and commandments. | D&C 48:6— … as is appointed to him by the presidency and the bishop of the church, according to the laws and commandments. (1835 edition, 64:2.) |
53:41—Wherefore I am in your midst; and I am the good Shepherd. | D&C 50:44—Wherefore, I am in your midst, and I am the good shepherd, and the stone of Israel. He that buildeth upon this rock shall never fall. (1835 edition, 18:8.) |
65:30—Behold now it is called today, and verily it is a day of sacrifice, and a day for the tithing of my people. | D&C 64:23—Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice, and a day for the tithing of my people. (1835 edition, 21:5.) |
Text removed or reworked
A few revelations removed text, or altered the expression of an idea with a new phrasing or approach:
Book of Commandments | Doctrine and Covenants |
---|---|
Chapter 4:5–6—And thus, if the people of this generation harden not their hearts, I will work a reformation among them, and I will put down all lyings, and deceivings, and priest-crafts, and envyings, and strifes, and idolatries, and sorceries, and all manner of iniquities, and I will establish my church, like unto the church which was taught by my disciples in the days of old. And now if this generation do harden their hearts against my word, behold I will deliver them up unto satan, for he reigneth and hath much power at this time, for he hath got great hold upon the hearts of the people of this generation: and not far from the iniquities of Sodom and Gomorrah, do they come at this time: and behold the sword of justice hangeth over their heads, and if they persist in the hardness of their hearts, the time cometh that it must fall upon them. | D&C 5:19—For a desolating scourge shall go forth among the inhabitants of the earth, and shall continue to be poured out from time to time, if they repent not, until the earth is empty, and the inhabitants thereof are consumed away and utterly destroyed by the brightness of my coming. (1835 edition, 32:3.) |
4:8— … but if he will go out and bow down before me … |
D&C 5:24— … but if he will bow down before me … (1835 edition, 32:5.) |
16:13—Wherefore, I command you by my name, and by my Almighty power, that you repent. | D&C 19:15—Therefore I command you to repent. (1835 edition, 44:2.) |
16:22—And I command you, that you preach nought but repentance; and show not these things, neither speak these things unto the world. | D&C 19:21—And I command you that you preach naught but repentance, and show not these things unto the world until it is wisdom in me. (1835 edition, 44:2.) |
24:11—Which book was given by inspiration and is called the book of Mormon, and is confirmed to others by the ministering of angels. | D&C 20:10—which was given by inspiration, and is confirmed to others by the ministering of angels … (1835 edition, 2:2.) |
44:55–57—Thou shalt contract no debts with the world, except thou art commanded. And again, the elders and bishop, shall counsel together, and they shall do by the direction of the Spirit as it must needs be necessary. There shall be as many appointed as must needs be necessary to assist the bishop in obtaining places for the brethren from New York, that they may be together as much as can be, and as they are directed by the Holy Spirit; and every family shall have a place, that they may live by themselves.—And every church shall be organized in as close bodies as they can be; and this for a wise purpose;—even so. Amen. | These verses were omitted. (1835 edition, 13.) |
Expression altered
Book of Commandments | Doctrine and Covenants |
---|---|
Chapter 7:3—Now this is not all, for you have another gift, which is the gift of working with the rod: behold it has told you things: behold there is no other power save God, that can cause this rod of nature, to work in your hands, for it is the work of God. | D&C 8:6–8—Now this is not all thy gift; for you have another gift, which is the gift of Aaron; behold, it has told you many things; Behold, there is no other power, save the power of God, that can cause this gift of Aaron to be with you. Therefore, doubt not, for it is the gift of God; and you shall hold it in your hands, and do marvelous works; and no power shall be able to take it away out of your hands, for it is the work of God. (1921 edition, 8:6–8.) |
Question: What are the reasons for the changes to the Doctrine and Covenants?
The Doctrine and Covenants was changed in order to correct errors or mistakes due to the human process of writing down revelations, as well as integrate new revelatory material
Wrote Elder Marlin K. Jensen in 2009:
One of Joseph Smith’s tasks in reviewing the manuscripts prior to their publication was to “correct those errors or mistakes which he may discover by the Holy Spirit.” Joseph knew from experience that the human process of writing down revelations, copying them into manuscript books, and then passing them through various hands in preparation for publication inevitably introduced unintentional errors. Sometimes changes were required to clarify wording. Occasionally, later revelations would supersede or update previously received revelations, necessitating the editing of documents to alter previous versions. Various other changes were also made from time to time. Most of these, such as dividing the text into verses or clarifying meaning, did not involve substantive corrections.
Joseph seemed to regard the manuscript revelations as his best efforts to capture the voice of the Lord condescending to communicate in what Joseph called the “crooked, broken, scattered, and imperfect language” of men." The revealed preface to the published revelations also seems to express this principle: “I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language” (D&C 1꞉24).
Joseph and his associates were appointed by the actions of Church conferences to prepare the revelations for publication by correcting the texts. Recent analysis of both manuscript revelation books reveals how and when many of the changes were made. For example, some changes were made before selected items were published in Missouri, while others were made in Ohio before the 1835 publication of the Doctrine and Covenants.
One common example involves changes made by Sidney Rigdon. He often changed the language in the revelations from the biblical “thee,” “thy,” and “thine” to the modern “you,” “your,” and “yours.” Many of these changes were later reversed. He also corrected grammar and changed some of the language to clarify and modify words and meaning.
In a few cases, more substantive changes were made as revelations were updated for the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants. For example, section 20 was originally received in 1830, before much of the leadership structure of the Church as we know it today was revealed to Joseph Smith. By 1835 Joseph had organized many offices and quorums by revelation. To include this newly revealed ecclesiastical order, several text changes and additions were incorporated into section 20. Our current verses 65–67 on ordaining men to priesthood offices, for instance, had been revealed after the 1833 publication and were subsequently added to the 1835 publication.
Joseph Smith reviewed many of his associates’ editorial changes and made slight alterations in his own hand before A Book of Commandments was published in 1833. He made additional changes, including adding surnames to individuals mentioned in the revelations, just before the Doctrine and Covenants was published in 1835.
Sometime around 1834–35 in Kirtland, Ohio, Revelation Book 2 was used for the preparation of the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, and all but eight items in the manuscript book were published in that 1835 volume. In contrast, just three of the revelations copied into the book were published in A Book of Commandments in 1833. Two of the manuscript book’s revelations were first published in the 1844 Doctrine and Covenants.
Subsequent editing changes through the 1981 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants involved occasional word changes, but the major substantive changes occurred under the Prophet Joseph’s guidance for the 1835 edition.[5]
129, 529n14-15 (PB)
Claim
- Did Joseph break Ohio law by marrying Newel Knight to "undivorced Lydia G. Baily," despite having no license to perform marriages in Ohio?
Author's source(s) - D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power (Signature Books, 1994), 88..
- The author's claim is false: No law was broken, and marriage certificates were issued by the state of Ohio; no license was required to perform marriages, since any religious leader had a right to perform marriages in Ohio.
- Ohio marriages illegal?
129, 529n17 (PB)
Claim
- Did Joseph perform marriages for people who had not obtained marriage licenses from the State of Ohio?
- Does History of the Church claim that instead, they were only married "according to the rules and regulations of the Church of the Latter-day Saints?"
Author's source(s) - History of the Church, 2:377–378. Volume 2 link
- Misrepresentation of source: Joseph gave couples marriage certificates?
- The author's claim is false: Ohio marriages illegal?
129, 529n16 (PB) - Was Kirtland, as Fawn Brodie claimed, "full of converts who had left behind them spouses who could not be persuaded to join the church?"
The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:
Was Kirtland, as Fawn Brodie claimed, "full of converts who had left behind them spouses who could not be persuaded to join the church?"Author's sources: Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945), 183. ( Index of claims )
FAIR's Response
The author includes a direct, attributed quote from Brodie's book, however, this upon examining the source one finds that this is only Brodie's own opinion—She does not provide a source to back up this claim.
529n16 (PB) - "LDS leaders/counselors commonly encourage divorce when the spouse of a faithful Mormon forsakes the faith"
The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:
- Author's quote: Disruptions of the family unit and marriage break-ups are often seen among religious groups termed "cults."
- Author's quote: [E]x-Mormons have reported that LDS leaders/counselors commonly encourage divorce when the spouse of a faithful Mormon forsakes the faith."
Author's sources: No sources provided for this claim.
FAIR's Response
- The author's claim is false: Church leaders do not advise divorce under these circumstances.
- Note that the author takes the opportunity to classify the Church as a "cult" based upon this supposition.
- Loaded and prejudicial language
130, 530n22 (PB)
Claim
- Did Levi Lewis claim that Joseph tried to seduce Eliza Winters in 1830?
Author's source(s) - Levi Lewis, Susquehanna Register, May 1, 1834 reprinted in Howe, Mormonism Unvailed, 268.
131, 530n23-24 (PB) - Were Latter-day Saint men encouraged to take plural wives "of the Lamanites and Nephites" in order to make them "white, delightsome and just?"
The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:
Were Latter-day Saint men encouraged to take plural wives "of the Lamanites and Nephites" in order to make them "white, delightsome and just?"Author's sources:
- Marquardt, 375.
- Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), 210.( Index of claims )
FAIR's Response
Reports that the Lamanites were to become "white and delightsome" through polygamous marriage
Jump to details:
- Question: Did the Church suppress a revelation given to Joseph Smith in 1831 which encouraged the implementation of polygamy by intermarriage with the Indians in order to make them a “white and delightsome” people?
- Question: Was Ezra Booth commanded to take a wife from among the Indians?
132 (PB)
Claim
- Author's quote: "Although Smith never took any Lamanites as wives, he did begin establishing what would gradually become a fairly large harem of young girls and women taken from his flock of 'white and delightsome' disciples."
Author's source(s) - No source provided.
132, 530-531n29-36 (PB) - Joseph's first polyamous marriage was with Fanny Alger
The author(s) of One Nation Under Gods make(s) the following claim:
Joseph's first polyamous marriage was with Fanny Alger.Author's sources:
- Andrew Jenson, 233.
- Benjamin F. Johnson, letter to George S. Gibbs, 1903.
- Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), 6-7.
- Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 31-34. ( Index of claims )
FAIR's Response
What do we know about Joseph Smith's first plural wife Fanny Alger?
There are no first-hand accounts of the relationship between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger
One of the wives about whom we know relatively little is Fanny Alger, Joseph's first plural wife, whom he came to know in early 1833 when she stayed at the Smith home as a house-assistant of sorts to Emma (such work was common for young women at the time). There are no first-hand accounts of their relationship (from Joseph or Fanny), nor are there second-hand accounts (from Emma or Fanny's family). All that we do have is third hand (and mostly hostile) accounts, most of them recorded many years after the events.
Unfortunately, this lack of reliable and extensive historical detail leaves much room for critics to claim that Joseph Smith had an affair with Fanny and then later invented plural marriage as way to justify his actions which, again, rests on dubious historical grounds. The problem is we don't know the details of the relationship or exactly of what it consisted, and so are left to assume that Joseph acted honorably (as believers) or dishonorably (as critics).
There is some historical evidence that Joseph Smith knew as early as 1831 that plural marriage would be restored, so it is perfectly legitimate to argue that Joseph's relationship with Fanny Alger was such a case. Mosiah Hancock (a Mormon) reported a wedding ceremony; and apostate Mormons Ann Eliza Webb Young and her father Chauncery both referred to Fanny's relationship as a "sealing." Ann Eliza also reported that Fanny's family was very proud of Fanny's relationship with Joseph, which makes little sense if it was simply a tawdry affair. Those closest to them saw the marriage as exactly that—a marriage.
Did Joseph Smith marry Fanny Alger as his first plural wife in 1833?
Joseph Smith met Fanny Alger in 1833 when she was a house-assistant to Emma
Joseph Smith came to know Fanny Alger in early 1833 when she stayed at the Smith home as a house-assistant to Emma. Neither Joseph nor Fanny ever left any first-hand accounts of their relationship. There are no second-hand accounts from Emma or Fanny's family. All that we do have is third hand accounts from people who did not directly observe the events associated with this first plural marriage, and most of them recorded many years after the events.
Joseph said that the "ancient order of plural marriage" was to again be practiced at the time that Fanny was living with his family
Benjamin F. Johnson stated that in 1835 he had "learned from my sister’s husband, Lyman R. Sherman, who was close to the Prophet, and received it from him, 'that the ancient order of Plural Marriage was again to be practiced by the Church.' This, at the time did not impress my mind deeply, although there lived then with his family (the Prophet’s) a neighbor’s daughter, Fannie Alger, a very nice and comely young woman about my own age, toward whom not only myself, but every one, seemed partial, for the amiability for her character; and it was whispered even then that Joseph loved her."[6]
Joseph asked the brother-in-law of Fanny's father to make the request of Fanny's father, after which a marriage ceremony was performed
Mosiah Hancock discusses the manner in which the proposal was extended to Fanny, and states that a marriage ceremony was performed. Joseph asked Levi Hancock, the brother-in-law of Samuel Alger, Fanny’s father, to request Fanny as his plural wife:
Samuel, the Prophet Joseph loves your daughter Fanny and wishes her for a wife. What say you?" Uncle Sam says, "Go and talk to the old woman [Fanny’s mother] about it. Twill be as she says." Father goes to his sister and said, "Clarissy, Brother Joseph the Prophet of the most high God loves Fanny and wishes her for a wife. What say you?" Said she, "Go and talk to Fanny. It will be all right with me." Father goes to Fanny and said, "Fanny, Brother Joseph the Prophet loves you and wishes you for a wife. Will you be his wife?" "I will Levi," said she. Father takes Fanny to Joseph and said, "Brother Joseph I have been successful in my mission." Father gave her to Joseph, repeating the ceremony as Joseph repeated to him.[7]
How could Joseph and Fanny have been married in 1831 if the sealing power had not yet been restored?
There is historical evidence that Joseph Smith knew as early as 1831 that plural marriage would be restored
There is historical evidence that Joseph Smith knew as early as 1831 that plural marriage would be restored. Mosiah Hancock (a Mormon) reported a wedding ceremony in Kirtland, Ohio in 1833.
Apostate Mormons Ann Eliza Webb Young and her father Chauncery both referred to Fanny's relationship as a "sealing." Ann Eliza also reported that Fanny's family was very proud of Fanny's relationship with Joseph, which makes little sense if it was simply a tawdry affair. Those closest to them saw the marriage as exactly that—a marriage.
Joseph and Fanny's marriage was a plural marriage, not an eternal marriage
Some have wondered how the first plural marriages (such as the Alger marriage) could have occurred before the 1836 restoration of the sealing keys in the Kirtland temple (see D&C 110). This confusion occurs because we tend to conflate several ideas. They were not all initially wrapped together in one doctrine:
- plural marriage - the idea that one could be married (in mortality) to more than one woman: being taught by 1831.
- eternal marriage - the idea that a man and spouse could be sealed and remain together beyond the grave: being taught by 1835.
- "celestial" marriage - the combination of the above two ideas, in which all marriages—plural and monogamous—could last beyond the grave via the sealing powers: implemented by 1840-41.
Thus, the marriage to Fanny would have occurred under the understanding #1 above. The concept of sealing beyond the grave came later. Therefore, the marriage of Joseph and Fanny would have been a plural marriage, but it would not have been a marriage for eternity.
Perhaps it is worth mentioning that priesthood power already gave the ability to ratify certain ordinances as binding on heaven and earth (D&C 1:8), that the sealing power was given mention in earlier revelations such as Helaman 10:7, and that the coming of Elijah and his turning of the hearts of children and fathers was prophesied in 3 Nephi 25:5-6. This supports the view that it is unlikely that Joseph was just making up the sealing power and priesthood power extemporaneously to justify getting married to Fanny and having sexual relations with her.
Did some of Joseph Smith's associates believe that he had an affair with Fanny Alger?
Oliver Cowdery perceived the relationship between Joseph and Fanny as a "dirty, nasty, filthy affair"
Some of Joseph's associates, most notably Oliver Cowdery, perceived Joseph's association with Fanny as an affair rather than a plural marriage. Oliver, in a letter to his brother Warren, asserted that "in every instance I did not fail to affirm that which I had said was strictly true. A dirty, nasty, filthy affair of his and Fanny Alger's was talked over in which I strictly declared that I had never deserted from the truth in the matter, and as I supposed was admitted by himself."[8]
Gary J. Bergera, an advocate of the "affair" theory, wrote:
I do not believe that Fanny Alger, whom [Todd] Compton counts as Smith’s first plural wife, satisfies the criteria to be considered a "wife." Briefly, the sources for such a "marriage" are all retrospective and presented from a point of view favoring plural marriage, rather than, say, an extramarital liaison…Smith’s doctrine of eternal marriage was not formulated until after 1839–40. [9]
There are several problems with this analysis. While it is true that sources on Fanny are all retrospective, the same is true of many early plural marriages. Fanny's marriage has more evidence than some. Bergera says that all the sources about Fanny's marriage come "from a point of view favoring plural marriage," but this claim is clearly false.
Even hostile accounts of the relationship between Joseph and Fanny report a marriage or sealing
For example, Fanny's marriage was mentioned by Ann Eliza Webb Young, a later wife of Brigham Young's who divorced him, published an anti-Mormon book, and spent much of her time giving anti-Mormon, anti-polygamy lectures. Fanny stayed with Ann Eliza's family after leaving Joseph and Emma's house, and both Ann Eliza and her father Chauncey Webb [10] refer to Joseph's relationship to Fanny as a "sealing." [11] Eliza also noted that the Alger family "considered it the highest honor to have their daughter adopted into the prophet's family, and her mother has always claimed that she [Fanny] was sealed to Joseph at that time." [12] This would be a strange attitude to take if their relationship was a mere affair. And, the hostile Webbs had no reason to invent a "sealing" idea if they could have made Fanny into a mere case of adultery.
It seems clear, then, that Joseph, Fanny's family, Levi Hancock, and even hostile witnesses saw their relationship as a marriage, albeit an unorthodox one. The witness of Chauncey Webb and Ann Eliza Webb Young make it untenable to claim that only a later Mormon whitewash turned an affair into a marriage.
Categories:
- Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
- Church of Jesus Christ
- FAIR
- Mormon
- Mormonism
- LDS Church
- Subpages
- Mormonism Unmasked
- Nauvoo Polygamy
- No Man Knows My History
- One Nation Under Gods
- The Changing World of Mormonism
- Questions All Mormons Should Ask Themselves
- Watchman Fellowship
- Questions
- Navbox
- Navigation
- Brian Hales website link
- To learn more box
- American Massacre
- Letter to a CES Director
- Mormon America: The Power and the Promise
- MormonThink
- Wikipedia
- Becoming Gods
- Mormonism 101
- Misspelled words to be checked against sources