|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | <!-- Needs rework - G Smith
| + | {{nw}} |
| − | | |
| − | {{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}} | |
| − | {{PolygamyPortal}}
| |
| − | =Was Joseph sealed to other wives prior to being sealed to Emma?=
| |
| − | =={{Criticism label}}==
| |
| − | Critics contend that although Emma Hale Smith was Joseph's first wife, that Joseph was sealed to other wives before being sealed to Emma. The assumption follows that Emma was not in a position to consent to Joseph's other marriages, since she was not longer the "first wife."
| |
| − | | |
| − | {{CriticalSources}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | =={{Conclusion label}}==
| |
| − | *Emma, being the first wife, was always the one whose consent Joseph needed to seek in order to marry other wives. Emma was ''never'' placed in a secondary position relative to any other wife.
| |
| − | *Although Emma may not have been the first of Joseph's wives to be sealed to him, she ''was'' considered to be an "elect lady" by the Lord, and was the first to experience ''unconditional'' sealing to her spouse.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == ==
| |
| − | {{Response label}}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | There are a number different question to be examined:
| |
| − | *What consent was required from the first wife for a husband to marry an additional wife?
| |
| − | *What relationship does obtaining such permission have with being sealed?
| |
| − | *How did Joseph institute the sealing ordinance within the Church?
| |
| − | *Was it necessary for those already married to make a new marriage covenant?
| |
| − | *Was Emma the first wife to be "sealed" to Joseph?
| |
| − | *What ordinances related to marriage did Emma receive before any other woman?
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===What consent was required from the first wife for a husband to marry an additional wife?===
| |
| − | The revelation now contained in D&C 132 was given specifically for Emma's benefit, and it lays out the requirements for a husband to take an additional wife.
| |
| − | | |
| − | {{s||DC|132|61}} and {{s||DC|132|65}}:
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | 61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified;...
| |
| − | <br><br>
| |
| − | 65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take Hagar to wife.
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The "law of Sarah" can thus be summarized as follows:
| |
| − | | |
| − | #If the Lord commands the husband to take another wife, he must seek consent from the first wife.
| |
| − | #If the first wife is given the chance and properly taught the law, and then she refuses to accept it, then the husband is no longer required to seek her consent.
| |
| − | | |
| − | So how did Emma react to this? It is well known that Emma, understandably, had an extremely difficult time accepting plural marriage. At times she supported it, and at other times she rejected it. At one point, Emma even used her position as president of the Relief Society to [[Joseph Smith/Prophecies/Queens to pay respect to Relief Society within ten years|oppose her husband's plural marriages]]. Sometimes Joseph was able to obtain Emma's consent for additional marriages, but often he could not approach her on the subject, and therefore married other women without Emma's knowledge.
| |
| − | | |
| − | {{SeeAlso|Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Emma Smith|l1=Emma's attitude toward plural marriage}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===What relationship does obtaining such permission have with being sealed?===
| |
| − | It should be noted that the "law of Sarah" has nothing to do with being sealed—It only pertains to the requirement of the husband to obtain the consent of the first wife before he obtains another. Therefore, if Joseph were ''sealed'' to other wives prior to being sealed to Emma, none of these other wives were in any position to give consent in Emma's place. Emma, being the first wife, was always in the position of being the one from whom Joseph needed to seek consent.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===How did Joseph institute the sealing ordinance within the Church?===
| |
| − | Joseph Smith began to assert his legal rights and ecclesiastical authority to perform marriages in the mid 1830s. While Joseph gave superior spiritual blessings in comparison to ceremonies performed by Justices of the Peace or clergy from other religions, he did not nullify all prior marriages or insist that all couples remarry. {{ref|byustudies.39.4}} {{ref|hodges1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | Although the weddings that Joseph publicly performed in 1835-36 are not explicit about marriage for eternity, in private he taught this to a carefully select group about the possibilities, notably W.W. Phelps. Phelps wrote an 1835 letter to his wife:
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | "A new idea, Sally, if you and I continue faithful to the end, we are certain to be one in the Lord throughout eternity; this is one of the most glorious consolations we can have in the flesh." {{ref|halos1}}
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Beyond a few sources and late reminiscences, it is not known to what extent Joseph Smith worked this "new idea" referred to by Phelps into private ceremonies that he participated or officiated in (including his own plural marriage) prior to a sealing ceremony with Emma on May 28, 1843.
| |
| − | | |
| − | When one begins delving into the nature of Joseph Smith's plural marriages, it is important to note that Joseph publicly used or taught about his sealing keys to bind individuals to him or to give groups assurance that they were sealed to eternal life. One such example comes from Mary Lightner reporting an 1830 gathering:
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | "He has given all of you to me and has sealed you up to everlasting life that where he is, you may be also."
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | In the minutes of an Oct. 25, 1831 meeting in Far West:
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | "Br. Joseph Smith jr. said that the order of the High-priesthood is that they have power given them to seal up the Saints unto eternal life. And said it was the privilege of every Elder present to be ordained to the High priesthood."
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | When Joseph Smith taught about the sealing power of Elijah and the power it confers upon family members to help save one another he was still avoiding publicly teaching about eternal marriage. {{ref|keller1}} The point then is that "sealing" groups so that they could continue to enjoy each other's company in the Celestial Kingdom could occur in other ways. The groups who received a promise of eternal life could be as large as a whole congregation in the 1830s or as small as an extended family in the 1843 sermon.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Was Emma the first wife to be "sealed" to Joseph?===
| |
| − | Joseph began practicing marriage sealings for eternity in April 1841 when he was sealed to Louisa Beaman. {{ref|bergera}} He was sealed to Emma on 28 May, 1843. So why was Emma not the first to be sealed?
| |
| − | | |
| − | First, it goes without saying that Emma being pronounced through revelation as an "elect lady" (i.e. one whose calling and election had been made sure) had been a recipient of such an assurance well before receiving an additional assurance in a marriage context.
| |
| − | | |
| − | It likely was a matter of priority that new plural wives (such as Sarah Whitney) made a covenant involving marriage for eternity before legally married first wives (in Joseph's case, Emma) were reassured blessings they had already received in a different context. It is best to avoid getting into the speculative game of trying to guess how much Emma knew when about plural marriage and whether she was slighted in her relationship with Joseph Smith if other women were actually sealed to Joseph first.
| |
| − | | |
| − | It is possible that Joseph Smith put on hold plans to initiate women with the endowment (which lays the proper framework for eternal marriage). His addresses to the Relief Society shortly after organizing it in Mar. 1842 with Emma at its head signaled his intentions. Joseph wanted to honor Emma as the first female recipient so she could in turn officiate for other women. However, as previously noted, Emma [[Joseph Smith/Prophecies/Queens to pay respect to Relief Society within ten years|used the Relief Society to oppose her husband's plural marriages]]. So in an important sense, part of the delay of 14 or 18 months was likely either because she refused Joseph's invitation or because Joseph did not feel like he could extend an invitation knowing what her reaction would be. It is best to avoid guessing which scenario is more likely.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Devery S. Anderson, Gary James Bergera note,
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | On May 28, Joseph Smith and James Adams were sealed to their spouses, Emma Hale Smith and Harriet Denton Adams. This was an important moment, as Emma Smith, much like Hyrum, had opposed her husband's teachings on plural marriage; yet prior to her sealing, she would have had to reconcile herself to the doctrine, a requirement for all hoping to receive the ordinance. {{ref|anderson.bergera}}
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | It wasn't until late May 1843 that Hyrum Smith became a convert to plural marriage and helped temporarily calm Emma down so that her spiritual progress could be attended to. Hyrum acted as a mediator between May and September, including coaxing Joseph to write down the plural marriage revelation now contained in D&C Section 132. Note that this revelation came ''after'' Emma was the first woman of this dispensation to be married for eternity in the setting of Joseph's proto-temple ordinance group. Likewise in September 1843, she was the first female to be endowed and receive the seal that unconditionally cemented her marriage covenants that D&C 132:7 speaks of (see also [[Second anointing]]).-->
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Was it necessary for those already married to make a new marriage covenant?===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Taking the above mentioned considerations into account, for the general membership, there was no urgency for already legally married couples to make a new or modified marriage covenant that added blessings (rather than nullified the prior vows) until the Nauvoo temple was completed after Joseph's death. Even among the legally married couples in the select group that Joseph Smith taught the concept of eternal marriage to, there was no urgency to formalize that promise with a new marriage rite until much later.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===What ordinances related to marriage did Emma receive before any other woman?===
| |
| − | | |
| − | A full appreciation of what being married for time and eternity really meant awaited three other milestones for which Emma was honored as not only to be ''first'' of Joseph's wives to experience, but the ''first woman of this dispensation'' to experience. {{ref|ehat1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Married in an Anointed Quorum setting (28 May 1843) {{ref|bergera2}}
| |
| − | * Initiated (endowed) (28 Sept. 1843)
| |
| − | * Marriage unconditionally sealed (28 Sept. 1843)
| |
| − | | |
| − | =={{Endnotes label}}==
| |
| − | #{{note|byustudies.39.4}}See M. Scott Bradshaw, "Joseph Smith’s Performance of Marriages in Ohio," Brigham Young University Studies 39/4 (2000) {{link|url=http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/byustudies&CISOPTR=4413&REC=5}}
| |
| − | #{{note|hodges1}}Blair Hodges's summary of Kathleen Flake's Arrington lecture regarding Methodist liturgy. {{link|url=http://www.lifeongoldplates.com/2009_09_27_archive.html}}
| |
| − | #{{note|halos1}}See: "W. W. Phelps to Sally, May 26, 1835", ''Saints Without Halos'' (website) {{link|url=http://www.saintswithouthalos.com/w/wwp_sally_350526.phtml#js}}
| |
| − | #{{note|keller1}}"Funeral Sermon delivered at the Nauvoo temple site on August 13, 1843." {{link|url=http://www.boap.org/LDS/Parallel/1843/13Aug43.html}}
| |
| − | #{{note|bergera}}Gary James Bergera, "The Earliest Eternal Sealings for Civilly Married Couples Living and Dead," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 35 (Fall 2002): 41-66.
| |
| − | #{{note|anderson.bergera}}Devery S. Anderson, Gary James Bergera, Editors. ''Joseph Smith's Quorum of the Anointed, 1842-1846: A Documentary History''; See also Ehat, "Introduction of Temple Ordinances," 74-75.
| |
| − | #{{note|ehat1}}Ehat, "Introduction of Temple Ordinances," p. 63 and Table 2 p. 102-3
| |
| − | #{{note|bergera2}}Gary James Bergera, "The Earliest Eternal Sealings for Civilly Married Couples Living and Dead," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 35 (Fall 2002): 41-66.
| |
| − | {{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[fr:Joseph Smith/Polygamy/Emma Smith/Sealing]] -->
| |
