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/Nauvoo Polygamy/Chapter 2"
m |
m |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
||[Joseph] "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'" | ||[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}} | *{{InternalContradiction|p. 65}} | ||
− | *Age | + | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] |
+ | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
+ | *[[../../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]] | ||
|| | || | ||
*Smith, Letter to "Brother and Sister [Newel K.] Whitney, and &c.," Nauvoo, Illinois, Aug. 18, 1842, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City. | *Smith, Letter to "Brother and Sister [Newel K.] Whitney, and &c.," Nauvoo, Illinois, Aug. 18, 1842, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Age_wives}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 25: | Line 34: | ||
||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 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 again | + | *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"]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
+ | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842. | *Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 37: | Line 52: | ||
*As stated in the letter, the reason for the visit was to perform ordinances. | *As stated in the letter, the reason for the visit was to perform ordinances. | ||
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
+ | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842. | *Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 46: | Line 67: | ||
*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.” | *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. | *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—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
+ | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 54: | Line 82: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No evidence that Joseph did any courting. He often used intermediaries. | *No evidence that Joseph did any courting. He often used intermediaries. | ||
− | * | + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] |
− | * | + | *[[../../Mind reading]] |
+ | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Assumptions and presumptions]] | ||
|| | || | ||
− | *No source provided. | + | *No source provided. |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Womanizing and romance}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 67: | Line 98: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Necessary_for_salvation}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 73: | Line 105: | ||
|| | || | ||
*[[Polygamy a requirement for exaltation]] | *[[Polygamy a requirement for exaltation]] | ||
− | || | + | || |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Necessary_for_salvation}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 82: | Line 115: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Womanizing and romance}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
====55==== | ====55==== | ||
− | ||"He assured the women and their families that such unions were not only | + | ||"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. | *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. | + | *Women could and did turn Joseph down with no consequences. |
+ | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Did women turn Joseph down]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
Line 97: | Line 133: | ||
||"There may have been even more wives and plural children." | ||"There may have been even more wives and plural children." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | *Anything might have happened. | + | *Anything ''might'' have happened. The author provides no evidence. |
− | * | + | *This is the [[Logical_fallacies#Appeal_to_probability|fallacy of probability]]. |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Fallacy of probability}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====57==== | ====57==== | ||
||''History of the Church'' says nothing about Nauvoo on the day of Louisa Beaman's marriage to Joseph. | ||''History of the Church'' says nothing about Nauvoo on the day of Louisa Beaman's marriage to Joseph. | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]] |
− | * | + | *[[../../Censorship]] |
− | || | + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} |
+ | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 115: | Line 155: | ||
||"As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure." | ||"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. |
− | |||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 124: | Line 164: | ||
||“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” | ||“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” | ||
|| | || | ||
+ | *{{InternalContradiction|The invitation was to Sarah and her parents}} | ||
*[[../../Contradictions]] | *[[../../Contradictions]] | ||
− | * | + | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] |
− | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | + | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] |
− | *{{ | + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] |
+ | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
+ | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No citation given | *No citation given | ||
+ | *{{HistoricalError}} | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 136: | Line 182: | ||
|| | || | ||
*A huge leap, presuming that Bennett's adulteries were ever sanctioned by Joseph, or had anything to do with plural marriage. | *A huge leap, 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]] |
− | |||
|| | || | ||
− | *Author's opinion. | + | *Author's opinion. |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====65==== | ====65==== | ||
||"…in 1841 [Bennett] functioned as perhaps Joseph Smith's closest confident." | ||"…in 1841 [Bennett] functioned as perhaps Joseph Smith's closest confident." | ||
Line 147: | Line 194: | ||
*Ignores that Joseph began to distrust him for cause long before their public rupture. | *Ignores that Joseph began to distrust him for cause long before their public rupture. | ||
|| | || | ||
+ | |||
+ | * No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====65==== | ====65==== | ||
||Joseph was "sharing power" with Bennett | ||Joseph was "sharing power" with Bennett | ||
|| | || | ||
*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. | *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]] |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 162: | Line 214: | ||
|| | || | ||
*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. | *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]] |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 174: | Line 227: | ||
*Bennett only began to accuse Joseph once his own crimes were repeatedly revealed. | *Bennett only began to accuse Joseph once his own crimes were repeatedly revealed. | ||
|| | || | ||
− | *No source provided. | + | *No source provided. |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 181: | Line 235: | ||
|| | || | ||
*Many of Bennett's claims are clearly false. | *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. | *The things which Bennett can "confirm" are mostly things like names of people Joseph married. | ||
*Bennett also clearly forged some material from others. | *Bennett also clearly forged some material from others. | ||
|| | || | ||
− | *No source provided. | + | *No source provided. |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 191: | Line 246: | ||
||"Even though his statements must be weighed critically, he cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal." | ||"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. |
*Much of what he writes, after analysis, must be dismissed as fabrication or exaggeration, however. | *Much of what he writes, after analysis, must be dismissed as fabrication or exaggeration, however. | ||
*Even anti-Mormon authors warned of Bennett's problems: | *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." | **"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. |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 212: | Line 268: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided | *No source provided | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 217: | Line 274: | ||
||"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. | ||"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. |
*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. | *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: | *Bennett had secular influence, but relatively little to do with religious matters in Nauvoo: | ||
Line 223: | Line 280: | ||
|| | || | ||
*Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 56. | *Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 56. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====68==== | ====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” | ||
Line 230: | Line 289: | ||
*Block voting is not undemocratic—many interest groups vote en masse for candidates which will meet their needs. | *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. | *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]] |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Bloc voting}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====69==== | ====69==== | ||
||"Undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett, Joseph "named Bennett Assistant President of the Church." | ||"Undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett, Joseph "named Bennett Assistant President of the Church." | ||
Line 240: | Line 301: | ||
*Joseph knew from personal experience that "it is no uncommon thing for good men to be evil spoken against," and did nothing precipitous. | *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." | *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." | ||
− | || | + | || |
+ | * No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====69==== | ====69==== | ||
||Bennett was Assistant President of the Church | ||Bennett was Assistant President of the Church | ||
Line 250: | Line 314: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====69==== | ====69==== | ||
||Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church. | ||Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church. | ||
Line 259: | Line 325: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====70==== | ====70==== | ||
||Smith and Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842) | ||Smith and Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842) | ||
Line 270: | Line 338: | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
*{{HistoricalError}} | *{{HistoricalError}} | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====70==== | ====70==== | ||
||There seemed to be no office or honor within reach that Smith did not hasten to grant to Bennett. | ||There seemed to be no office or honor within reach that Smith did not hasten to grant to Bennett. | ||
Line 278: | Line 348: | ||
*He was also never made an apostle. | *He was also never made an apostle. | ||
|| | || | ||
− | *No source provided | + | *No source provided. |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====70==== | ====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." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | *Zina said the Lord told her what to do | + | *Zina said the Lord [[Plural_marriage_spiritual_manifestations#Zina_Huntington|told her what to do]]. |
− | |||
*[[Joseph Smith and polyandry]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polyandry]] | ||
+ | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====70-71==== | ====70-71==== | ||
||"Seemingly impatient, 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." | ||
Line 296: | Line 369: | ||
*[[../../Mind reading]] | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
*[[Joseph Smith and polyandry]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polyandry]] | ||
+ | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====71==== | ====71==== | ||
||"Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah." | ||"Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *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. |
− | * | + | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] |
− | || | + | || |
+ | *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…." | ||"Whatever 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]] | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
Line 320: | Line 399: | ||
|| | || | ||
*"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]] |
+ | || | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====71==== | ====71==== | ||
||"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…." | ||"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…." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *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]] | ||
|| | || | ||
+ | * No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====72==== | ====72==== | ||
||"Eventually Orson 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." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *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. |
+ | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
Line 341: | Line 428: | ||
||"Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself." | ||"Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *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 (Bushman | + | *Bennett was also involved in operating a prostitution ring and house of ill repute in Nauvoo (Bushman, ''Rough Stone Rolling, 411). |
− | *[ | + | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] |
+ | || | ||
+ | * No source provided | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====72==== | ====72==== | ||
||"Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842." | ||"Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842." | ||
|| | || | ||
*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." | *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." | ||
+ | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] | ||
|| | || | ||
− | *Andrew Smith, Saintly Scoundrel, 86–89. | + | * Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89. (Note that The author does not properly represent the source's contents.) |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====72==== | ====72==== | ||
||"In retaliation, church leaders apparently excommunicated him on May 25…." | ||"In retaliation, church leaders apparently excommunicated him on May 25…." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *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. | *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. 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. | *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. | ||
+ | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] | ||
|| | || | ||
*{{HistoricalError}} | *{{HistoricalError}} | ||
*Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89. | *Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====72==== | ====72==== | ||
||"…Bennett claimed [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." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | + | {{GDS-See also|1|119}} for the author acting 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. |
+ | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] | ||
*Bennett's biographer wrote: | *Bennett's biographer wrote: | ||
Line 376: | Line 474: | ||
:"According to Bennett, three of the signatories were not in Nauvoo on that date…. | :"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). | + | :"[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. | *Andrew Smith, Saintly Scoundrel, 86–89. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====73==== | ====73==== | ||
||"Up until early 1842, Smith and Bennett seemed to be on good terms." | ||"Up until early 1842, Smith and Bennett seemed to be on good terms." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *Joseph was aware of Bennett's problems by 1841 at least. |
+ | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] | ||
*[See above.] | *[See above.] | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 395: | Line 495: | ||
||"It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters." | ||"It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *The author wants to rehabilitate Bennett as a source, while glossing over the problems. |
− | * | + | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
====73==== | ====73==== | ||
− | ||"In the spring of 1842, the two men | + | ||"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. | *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. | *Bennett was given the chance to resign, and did so. | ||
*Further disclosure to the high council led to Bennett's exposure and excommunication. | *Further disclosure to the high council led to Bennett's exposure and excommunication. | ||
− | *[ | + | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] |
− | || | + | || |
+ | * No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
====75==== | ====75==== | ||
− | ||Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet | + | ||Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage." |
|| | || | ||
*{{InternalContradiction|compare p. 81}} | *{{InternalContradiction|compare p. 81}} | ||
− | |||
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
+ | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
Line 423: | Line 526: | ||
====75==== | ====75==== | ||
− | ||"In the context of having just married a pregnant wife, [Joseph's] words acquire added meaning: 'If you will not | + | ||"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. |
− | |||
*He tries to prejudice the reader by pointing out that Zina was pregnant when she and Henry approved her sealing to Joseph. | *He tries to prejudice the reader by pointing out that Zina was pregnant when she and Henry approved her sealing to Joseph. | ||
− | * | + | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} |
|| | || | ||
+ | *''History of the Church'' 4:445. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 435: | Line 538: | ||
||The Smith diary or History of the Church do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife." | ||The Smith diary or 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. | + | *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 imply that there ''might be'' evidence of "conjugal contacts." |
+ | *[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Censorship]] | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}} | ||
+ | |||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 443: | Line 550: | ||
||When [Henry] Jacobs returned in June [1844] "he found Zina accompanying Joseph to private meetings involving Masonic-like handshakes, oaths, and special clothing." | ||When [Henry] Jacobs returned in June [1844] "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}} |
+ | || | ||
*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==== | ====77==== | ||
− | ||"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. | + | ||"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. |
|| | || | ||
+ | *The image which this gives of Joseph "taking away" Henry's children is inflammatory and probably misleading. | ||
*[[The_Law_of_Adoption]] | *[[The_Law_of_Adoption]] | ||
− | * | + | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} |
− | |||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo Polygamy:See also:Taking away families}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 466: | Line 575: | ||
*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. | *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. | *Besides being hostile, this source has numerous problems which make it implausible. | ||
− | * | + | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
Line 474: | Line 583: | ||
||Henry's subsequent life is not discussed by Smith, 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}} |
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *No source provided. |
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 483: | Line 592: | ||
|| | || | ||
*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." | *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." | ||
− | * | + | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} |
− | |||
|| | || | ||
*Brigham Young, "A few words of Doctrine," Oct 8, 1861, LDS Archives. | *Brigham Young, "A few words of Doctrine," Oct 8, 1861, LDS Archives. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo Polygamy:See also:October 8 1861}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 496: | Line 605: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 504: | Line 614: | ||
*Smith disguises the fact that DNA evidence has proved that Oliver was not Joseph's son. | *Smith disguises the fact that DNA evidence has proved that Oliver was not Joseph's son. | ||
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]] | ||
− | * | + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} |
− | + | || | |
− | + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}} | |
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
====80 n. 63==== | ====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. | + | ||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 and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]] | *[[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] | + | *[[Joseph_Smith_and_polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia Buell|Children by Presendia Buell?]] |
− | + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | |
− | + | || | |
+ | * See left column | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | ====80 n. 63==== | ||
+ | ||[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] | ||
+ | || | ||
*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. | *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. | |
− | + | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]] | |
− | + | *[[Joseph_Smith_and_polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia Buell|Children by Presendia Buell?]] | |
− | + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | |
+ | || | ||
+ | * See left column | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}} | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | ====80 n. 63==== | ||
+ | || | ||
+ | [Note continued from above]"….There is no DNA connection (Carrie A. Moore, “DNA tests rule out 2 as Smith descendants,” ''Deseret Morning News'', 10 November 2007). 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)." | ||
+ | || | ||
+ | The author 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? | ||
+ | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages]] | ||
+ | *[[Joseph_Smith_and_polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia Buell|Children by Presendia Buell?]] | ||
+ | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
+ | * See left column | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====81==== | ====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." | ||"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. | *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 | + | *[[../../Mind reading]] |
− | * | + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====81==== | ====81==== | ||
||"This [see above] applied to Zina…." | ||"This [see above] applied to Zina…." | ||
Line 542: | Line 673: | ||
*Henry Jacobs was present at the sealing to Zina. Henry knew of Joseph's plural proposal to Joseph before their marriage. | *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}} | *{{InternalContradiction|compare p. 75}} | ||
− | * | + | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
Line 550: | Line 681: | ||
||"The History of the Church makes no mention of the second Huntington nuptial…." | ||"The History of the Church makes no mention of the second Huntington nuptial…." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]] |
+ | *[[../../Censorship]] | ||
+ | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 568: | Line 702: | ||
||"From the inception of plural marriage, Smith demanded confidentiality from those whom he taught the principle." | ||"From the inception of plural marriage, Smith demanded confidentiality from those whom he taught the principle." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | |||
*[[Lying_for_the_Lord%3F]] | *[[Lying_for_the_Lord%3F]] | ||
− | * | + | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy#Hiding the Truth?|Joseph Smith and polygamy—Hiding the truth?]] |
− | |||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | *''History of the Church'' 4:479; Woodruff Journals 2:143. |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Lying}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====85==== | ====85==== | ||
||"…Smith evidently adapted and redefined [elements] from the Masonic rituals and incorporated [them] as part of the unfolding Mormon temple ceremonies." | ||"…Smith evidently adapted and redefined [elements] from the Masonic rituals and incorporated [them] as part of the unfolding Mormon temple ceremonies." | ||
Line 590: | Line 724: | ||
*[See also p. 75 above.] | *[See also p. 75 above.] | ||
*No "blood penalties" were associated with plural marriage. | *No "blood penalties" were associated with plural marriage. | ||
− | *Prejudicial language, in which | + | *Prejudicial language, in which The author tries to make the endowment seem foreign, strange and alienating. |
|| | || | ||
*Author's opinion. | *Author's opinion. | ||
Line 598: | Line 732: | ||
||"There is no mention of [Joseph's sealing to Agnes Smith] in the History of the Church." | ||"There is no mention of [Joseph's sealing to Agnes Smith] in the History of the Church." | ||
|| | || | ||
− | * | + | |
+ | *[[Censorship_and_revision_of_LDS_history]] | ||
+ | *[[../../Censorship]] | ||
+ | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
− | *No source | + | *No source provided. |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 608: | Line 746: | ||
*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." | *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." | ||
*Newel and Avery, Mormon Enigma, 346 have likewise seen the "mistress" label as "an embellishment by either Sarah Pratt or W. Wyl." | *Newel and Avery, Mormon Enigma, 346 have likewise seen the "mistress" label as "an embellishment by either Sarah Pratt or W. Wyl." | ||
− | * | + | *The author provides none of this perspective. |
|| | || | ||
*Wyl, Mormon Portraits, 60. | *Wyl, Mormon Portraits, 60. | ||
Line 616: | Line 754: | ||
||"As usual, the History of the Church made no mention of Sylvia [Sessions Lyon] on February 8, 1842…." | ||"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}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 625: | Line 767: | ||
|| | || | ||
*[[Joseph_Smith_and_polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages]] | *[[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. | + | *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}} | *{{CriticalWork:Compton:Sacred Loneliness|pages=180–81}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====103==== | ====103==== | ||
||"Typically, [Joseph] never mentioned his marriage to Patty [Sessions] on paper…." | ||"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. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Censorship}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 642: | Line 788: | ||
|| | || | ||
*[[Swedenborg_and_three_degrees_of_glory]] | *[[Swedenborg_and_three_degrees_of_glory]] | ||
− | |||
− | |||
*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). | *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? | *Surely any world-view was somewhat compatible with the Mormons', but what about Cleveland's views were more compatible than, say, other Christians? | ||
Line 650: | Line 794: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====106==== | ====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." | ||"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." | ||
Line 655: | Line 800: | ||
*[[Swedenborg_and_three_degrees_of_glory]] | *[[Swedenborg_and_three_degrees_of_glory]] | ||
*Three degrees in heaven is a Biblical notion, it did not originate with Swedenborg or Joseph Smith. | *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. | + | *It is not clear what Swedenborg's "affinity" between spouses has to do with LDS plural marriage. |
− | |||
− | |||
|| | || | ||
*Author's speculation. | *Author's speculation. | ||
+ | *Emanuel Swedenborg, ''Heaven and Hell'', trans. George F. Dole (West Chester, Pa.: Swedenborg Foundation, 2002), 18–32. | ||
+ | *CHECK THIS SOURCE! | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====106==== | ====106==== | ||
||"John [Cleveland]'s continued willingness to host LDS events indicated a likely compatibility of beliefs." | ||"John [Cleveland]'s continued willingness to host LDS events indicated a likely compatibility of beliefs." | ||
Line 669: | Line 815: | ||
**Perhaps he respected the Mormons for what he had seen of them personally? | **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. | **Perhaps he respected his wife's desire to practice her own faith, despite not sharing it. | ||
− | || | + | || |
+ | * No source provided. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====106==== | ====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.'" | ||"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]] | *[[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. | *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). | + | *"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. | + | *Sarah Cleveland to August Lyman, 1847, John Lyman Smith Collection, L. Tom Perry Special Collections, cited by Compton, ''In Sacred Loneliness'', 284. |
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |||
====106==== | ====106==== | ||
||Besides Cleveland (see above) other polyandrous husbands became more bitter against the Church. | ||Besides Cleveland (see above) other polyandrous husbands became more bitter against the Church. | ||
Line 689: | Line 838: | ||
*[[Joseph_Smith_and_polyandry/Book_chapter]] | *[[Joseph_Smith_and_polyandry/Book_chapter]] | ||
*As shown above, Cleveland was not bitter about the Church or Joseph during Joseph's lifetime. | *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 | + | *No other examples are given. It is not clear to whom The author is referring. |
+ | || | ||
+ | * No source provided. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
{{EndClaimsTable}} | {{EndClaimsTable}} |
Revision as of 08:54, 23 December 2008
Chapter 1 | A FAIR Analysis of: Criticism of Mormonism/Books A work by author: George D. Smith
|
Chapter 3 |
Claims made in "Chapter 2: Comfort me now"
Page | Claim | Response | Author's sources |
---|---|---|---|
53 |
[Joseph] "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'" |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) Ages of wives (edit) |
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." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
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. |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
54 |
“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). |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
54 |
"What interested me most was how Smith went about courting…these women." |
|
Womanizing & romance (edit) |
55 |
"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." |
|
Necessary for salvation? (edit) |
55 |
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. |
Necessary for salvation? (edit) | |
55 |
"Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls…." |
Womanizing & romance (edit) | |
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.'" |
|
|
56 |
"There may have been even more wives and plural children." |
|
Fallacy of probability (edit) |
57 |
History of the Church says nothing about Nauvoo on the day of Louisa Beaman's marriage to Joseph. |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
63 |
"As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
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, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts” |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
65 |
"One of the instrumental people in the inauguration of plural marriage was John [C.] Bennett…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"…in 1841 [Bennett] functioned as perhaps Joseph Smith's closest confident." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
Joseph was "sharing power" with Bennett |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"In the spring of 1842, Bennett spoke out against Smith and was soon stripped of his offices and titles." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"Each accused the other of immoral behavior." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"While some of his claims may have been exaggerations, much of what he reported can be confirmed by other eyewitness accounts." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"Even though his statements must be weighed critically, he cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"Bennett had an ambitious but colorful background." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
66-67 |
"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. |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
68 |
“Joseph” is merely “feigning impartiality” before going on to practice “undemocratic block voting” |
|
Bloc voting (edit) See NOTE on bloc voting |
69 |
"Undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett, Joseph "named Bennett Assistant President of the Church." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
69 |
Bennett was Assistant President of the Church |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
69 |
Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church. |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
70 |
Smith and Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842) |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
70 |
There seemed to be no office or honor within reach that Smith did not hasten to grant to Bennett. |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
70 |
"Zina Huntington, who married Henry Jacobs instead but then reconsidered seven months later in response to Joseph's restated interest." |
|
|
70-71 |
"Seemingly impatient, Joseph soon after married Zina's sister, Presendia, who was also already married." |
|
|
71 |
"Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
71 |
"Whatever the accuracy of the quotes [i.e., Bennett's claims] the two men [Orson and Joseph] quarrelled…." |
|
|
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…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
71 |
"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…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
72 |
"Eventually Orson accepted Joseph's explanation that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman." |
|
|
72 |
"Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
72 |
"Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
72 |
"In retaliation, church leaders apparently excommunicated him on May 25…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
72 |
"…Bennett claimed [his excommunication] was postdated to May 11 to appear that it had occurred before his resignation." |
|
for the author acting as if this claim of Bennett's is established fact.
John C. Bennett (edit) |
73 |
"Up until early 1842, Smith and Bennett seemed to be on good terms." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
73 |
"It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
73 |
"In the spring of 1842, the two men quarreled and Smith had Bennett excommunicated…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
75 |
Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage." |
|
|
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….'" |
|
|
75 |
The Smith diary or History of the Church do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
75 |
When [Henry] Jacobs returned in June [1844] "he found Zina accompanying Joseph to private meetings involving Masonic-like handshakes, oaths, and special clothing." |
|
|
77 |
"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. |
|
Sealing takes away families? (edit) |
77 |
"Some sources say [Brigham] Young advised [Henry Jacobs] to find a wife who could be his eternal partner." |
|
|
77 |
Henry's subsequent life is not discussed by Smith, perhaps because it would provide insight into why Zina chose to remain with Brigham. |
|
|
78 |
"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." |
|
Brigham Young's 8 October 1861 talk (edit) |
79 |
Presendia Buell "displayed an affinity for mystical religious experiences as one of the women who began speaking and singing in tongues…." |
|
Presendia Buell (edit) |
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]….." |
|
Presendia Buell (edit) |
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).[Note continues below] |
|
|
80 n. 63 |
[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] |
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.
|
Presendia Buell (edit) |
80 n. 63 |
[Note continued from above]"….There is no DNA connection (Carrie A. Moore, “DNA tests rule out 2 as Smith descendants,” Deseret Morning News, 10 November 2007). 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)." |
The author 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?
|
Presendia Buell (edit) |
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." |
|
|
81 |
"This [see above] applied to Zina…." |
|
|
82 |
"The History of the Church makes no mention of the second Huntington nuptial…." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
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." |
| |
84 |
"From the inception of plural marriage, Smith demanded confidentiality from those whom he taught the principle." |
Hiding polygamy (edit) | |
85 |
"…Smith evidently adapted and redefined [elements] from the Masonic rituals and incorporated [them] as part of the unfolding Mormon temple ceremonies." |
| |
85 |
"The [temple] vows of secrecy and threats of blood penalties intensified the mysterious rites of celestial marriage…." |
|
|
88 |
"There is no mention of [Joseph's sealing to Agnes Smith] in the History of the Church." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
92 |
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." |
|
|
99 |
"As usual, the History of the Church made no mention of Sylvia [Sessions Lyon] on February 8, 1842…." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
100 |
"During these years as Windsor's wife, Sylvia reportedly bore Smith a child in 1844…." |
|
|
103 |
"Typically, [Joseph] never mentioned his marriage to Patty [Sessions] on paper…." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
105 |
Sarah Cleveland's husband "was a Swedenborgian, embracing a world view compatible with that of Mormons." |
|
|
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." |
|
|
106 |
"John [Cleveland]'s continued willingness to host LDS events indicated a likely compatibility of beliefs." |
|
|
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.'" |
|
|
106 |
Besides Cleveland (see above) other polyandrous husbands became more bitter against the Church. |
|
|