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 "Brigham Young"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|S= | |S= | ||
|L1=Teachings of Brigham Young | |L1=Teachings of Brigham Young | ||
| − | |L2= | + | |L2=Criticisms of Brigham Young |
|L3= | |L3= | ||
|L4= | |L4= | ||
Revision as of 19:15, 14 April 2019
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Brigham Young
Jump to Subtopic:
Brigham Young was the second president of the Church, and the successor to Joseph Smith. He supervised the Saints' exodus from Illinois, and their escape from the United States.
He led the settlement into the Salt Lake valley area of what is now Utah. As territorial governor for a time, and leader of the predominant faith during a period of relative isolation, few Church leaders have impacted its members as thoroughly in so many domains of life.
To view articles about Brigham Young, click "Expand" in the blue bar:
Teachings |
|
History |
|
Race |
|
Critics |
FAIR links |
|
Online |
|
Video |
|
Navigators |
Criticisms of Brigham Young
Jump to Subtopic:
- Brigham Young's Adam-God theory
- Brigham Young's personal beliefs
- Brigham Young and Joseph Smith's First Vision
- Brigham Young's involvement in Freemasonry
- Brigham Young and the Word of Wisdom
- Response to Passing the Heavenly Gift: Claims about Brigham Young and apostles not being witnesses of Christ
- Prosecution of the Mountain Meadows Massacre
Teachings |
|
History |
|
Race |
|
Critics |
Was Brigham Young a Mason?
Yes. Brigham Young, along with many other men in Nauvoo, joined the Masons at Joseph Smith's encouragement
Photo of Brigham Young. The Masonic symbol of compass and square is clearly visible in the pin he wears. Matthew B. Brown notes that "Brigham may have worn the [Masonic] pin [visible in some photographs] in order to remind other Americans that he was part of a brotherhood that was bound by oath to look after its own (see Wilford Woodruff Journal, 19 August 1860)."[1]
Yes. Brigham Young, along with many other men in Nauvoo, joined the Masons at Joseph Smith's encouragement.
When the Latter-day Saints occupied Nauvoo, Illinois, in the year 1842, there were approximately four thousand residents inside the city limits (twelve thousand by 1844),1 but only thirty people in the general area had membership in the Masonic fraternity. Among this small group were such notable men as Hyrum Smith (the Prophet’s brother), Heber C. Kimball (an Apostle), John Smith (the Prophet’s uncle), Newel K. Whitney (a bishop), and George Miller (another bishop)....
There is no evidence that Joseph Smith played a direct role in trying to get a Masonic lodge established among the Saints, though it must be admitted that the Masons adhered to principles that would have been especially attractive to the leader of a frequently (and recently) persecuted people. "Freemasonry is one of the strongest binding contracts that exists between man and man," said Elder John Taylor of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.10 And according to Apostle and Master Mason Heber C. Kimball, a member of that society could expect other Masons to step forward in time of need to render assistance. These fraternal brothers were expected to be faithful to each other "in every case and under every circumstance, the commission of crime excepted."....
[On] 7 April 1842 [Joseph attended the] initiation of Brigham Young.
[On] 9 April 1842 [Joseph attended the further] initiation of Samuel Smith, William Smith, Brigham Young, and Willard Richards.[2]
Was Brigham Young a "33rd degree" Mason?
No. Brigham Young was a Mason, but was not a 33rd degree Mason
No. Brigham Young was a Mason, but was not a 33rd degree Mason (technically an auxiliary degree of the Scottish Rite). It would have been impossible for Brigham Young to become such, since that degree was first introduced in Illinois masonic lodges (the only lodges to which Brigham had access prior to the exodus to Utah) in 1857, long after Brigham's departure. (The 33 degree did not become formalized in the Untied States until the early 1850's with the work of Albert Pike and Dr. Albert G. Mackey.)
It is important to understand the nature of the appellate bodies in Masonry. While a 33 degree mason might sound impressive, in fact such a person hold no more authority in Masonry than does the typical Master Mason (3rd degree). The appellate bodies are under the control of the Grand Lodge of a state or territory and a Grand Lodge is made up of all the Master Mason in that state or territory. The highest office any Mason can hold is that of Grand Master of a Grand Lodge and the only requirement to be elected to that office is to be a Master Mason. Therefor the highest degree that any Mason can hold is that of Master Mason (3rd Degree). The appellate degrees are appendages to that degree and not "higher" degrees as they are sometimes presented.[3]
Masonry in Utah
Utah territory had no lodge until 1872. Such a lodge would have been a prerequisite for any Scottish Rite appellate body to be formed.
While there were at least two abortive attempts to form a Grand Lodge in the territory by the Mormons, one by means of an application to the United Grand Lodge of England which seems to have been lost and never reached that body and another made to a Grand Lodge in Mexico which was rejected. Masonry by and large was not practiced by the Mormon population in Utah in Brigham Young's day. Indeed, the Grand Lodge of Utah was not formed until 1874 and it then imposed a ban on Mormons being members. This even precluded Mormon Masons from other jurisdictions from visiting Utah lodges. This would continue in some form until 1984.
Thus, it would have not have been possible for Brigham Young to have received the 33 degree designation while in Utah. Given that the 33 degree is an honorary designation (that is, it is given by the vote of others holding the degree) it would seem unlikely in the extreme that such an honor would have been given to Brigham who, at the time, was generally held in low regard. Likewise, the Mormons in general were viewed with disdain by the general population of Americans, and the above-mentioned hostility of the Grand Lodge of Utah towards Mormons also makes claiming that Young was honored in this way implausible.
Perhaps most telling of all is there is no documentary evidence of Brigham Young ever receiving such a degree either from the Northern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite of which the Grand Lodge of Illinois is a member or in the Southern Jurisdiction of which the Grand Lodge of Utah is governed. While in the early years of those rites some record keeping was lost or not well kept by the mid-19th century when Brigham Young would have been able to receive such a degree the records of both jurisdictions are very complete. Those records are silent in this matter.[4]
Teachings |
|
History |
|
Race |
|
Critics |
Did Brigham Young violate the Word of Wisdom by using snuff, tobacco, and tea?
Brigham indicated that his use of tobacco was medicinal
The Word of Wisdom was not enforced as rigorously, or with the same requirements, in Brigham Young's day. Many speakers emphasized the Lord's patience in this matter, as applied to both leaders and members. The Word of Wisdom was not the strict test of fellowships that it is for the modern member.
But, some of the events with which the critics wish to shock the modern member probably have nothing to do with the Word of Wisdom at all. They are concerned about medical practice, not the social or recreational use of substances. The critics' tactics are akin to pointing out slyly that President Kimball used morphine—while not mentioning the fact that the morphine was prescribed for cancer pain by a physician. The choices made by the nineteenth century saints and leaders should be seen in their historical context, not ours.
Critics count on "presentism"—they hope readers will judge historical figures by the standards of our day, instead of their day.
Some forbidden substances were seen as having a medicinal use
Critics also fail to point out that the fact that some forbidden substances were seen as having a medicinal use, for which the Saints were free to use them. Brigham indicated that this was the case with his tobacco use:
It is our right and privilege to live so that we may attain to this, so that we may sanctify our hearts before the Lord, and sanctify the Lord God in our hearts, but it is not my privilege to drink liquor, neither is it my privilege to eat tobacco. Well, bro. Brigham, have you not done it? Yes, for many years, but I ceased its habitual practice. I used it for toothache; now I am free from that pain, and my mouth is never stained with tobacco. It is not my privilege to drink liquor nor strong tea and coffee although I am naturally a great lover of tea. Brethren and sisters, it is not our privilege to indulge in these things, but it is our right and privilege to set an example worthy of imitation. [5]
Strange as it seems, tobacco was seen as a medication for some conditions in Brigham's time. (To learn more about medical beliefs and the Word of Wisdom substances, see here.)
Critical sources |
|
Why did Brigham Young build a whiskey distillery in Utah?
Whiskey was seen as having a medicinal use
Critic charge that this was hypocritical, thus encouraging others to violate the Word of Wisdom.The Word of Wisdom was not enforced as rigorously, or with the same requirements, in Brigham Young's day. Many speakers emphasized the Lord's patience in this matter, as applied to both leaders and members.
But, some of the events with which the critics wish to shock the modern member probably have nothing to do with the Word of Wisdom at all. They are concerned about medical practice or other legitimate uses, not the social or recreational use of substances. The choices made by the nineteenth century saints and leaders should be seen in their historical context, not ours.
Whiskey had legitimate uses—for medication, for the cleaning of wounds, and for the cleaning of the body
Critics also fail to point out that the fact that some forbidden substances were seen as having a medicinal use, for which the Saints were free to use them. Said Brigham:
When there was no whisky to be had here, and we needed it for rational purposes, I built a house to make it in. When the distillery was almost completed and in good working order, an army was heard of in our vicinity and I shut up the works I did not make a gallon of whisky at my works, because it came here in great quantities, more than was needed. I could have made thousands of dollars from my still, which has ever since been as dead property. [6]
Whiskey could have legitimate uses—for medication, for the cleaning of wounds, and for the cleaning of the body. Furthermore, the application of the Word of Wisdom did not necessarily require complete abstinence, as Brigham taught on another occasion:
I have no fellowship for men who are guilty of breaking the Sabbath, of drinking spirituous liquors to excess.... [7]
This message was echoed elsewhere:
- Brigham Young
- "You have read that piece of excellent advice called the "Word of Wisdom." I shall not say you must obey it; you can read it over again and refresh your memories, and I give the privilege to the Elders of Israel to cease using tobacco, and if they will not cease using it, then raise it; and then, also, to cease using spirituous liquors to excess....If you will cease drinking spirituous liquors you will thereby be benefited individually and benefit the community. A man who indulges in any habit that is pernicious to the general good in its example and influence, is not only an enemy to himself but to the community so far as the influence of that habit goes. A man who would not sacrifice a pernicious habit for the good it would do the community is, to say the least of it, lukewarm in his desires and wishes for public and general improvement. Tobacco is not good for man; spirituous liquor is not good for a beverage, but in many cases it is good for washing the body." [8]
- Heber C. Kimball
- "If any of you have been in the practice of drinking spirituous liquors to excess cease at once the wicked and destructive practice." [9]
- Erastus Snow
- "If a person having a strong desire for stimulants, such as spirituous liquors, tea, coffee, tobacco, opium, &c., that stimulate the nervous system to excess, and continues to gratify this appetite, will soon destroy the elasticity of his nervous system, and become like a bow that is often bent almost to breaking....We must neither indulge in excessive eating, excessive drinking, nor in excessive working, whereby to overtax our physical energies or our nervous system. [10]
- Joseph F. Smith
- We do not want these things here; but we are not supreme; we cannot govern as we would wish. Not that we desire to rule with an iron hand, oppressively. It would not be oppression to me, for the Proper authorities to say,—"You Shall not take intoxicating liquors; you shall neither manufacture nor drink them, for they are injurious to your body and mind," nor would it be to any Saint,—but what oppression it would be to a certain class! Yet I hope to see the day when, within the pale of the kingdom of God, no man will be allowed to take intoxicating liquor; and make—I was acing to say, a beast of himself. But I do not name it, rather to make a degraded man of himself. Beasts would not degrade themselves as men do. The habits of the brutes are decent in the eyes of God and angels when compared with the conduct of drunken, debauched men, who pollute mind and body by the commission of every species of vice and crime. I want to see the day when no man in the midst of this people will be allowed to touch intoxicating drink to become drunken.
- Do the "Mormons" drink it? Yes, to their shame, disgrace and the violation of their covenants, some of them do; and while on this subject I will say that no one supposes for a moment that a confirmed and unrepentant drunkard will ever be permitted within the gates of the celestial city. We all understand this, but I want to bear my testimony that those who prostitute mind and body by the debasing use of intoxicating drinks and the crimes and evils to which it leads will never have part in the celestial kingdom. "But," says one, "did not some of the ancients get 'boozy' once in a while?" If they did they had to repent of it. I do not excuse them any more than I would you or myself, for taking a course of this kind. Yet God sees as we cannot [p.285] see. He takes all things into consideration, He does not judge partially as we are liable to do. When He places a man in the balance He weights him righteously, but when we judge a man we are apt to judge un-righteously, because we are not omniscient. But what necessity is there for a healthy person to take intoxicating liquor? Does it ever do him any good? No, never. But does it never do any good to use liquor? I do not say that. When it is used for washing the body according to the revelations God has given, and when absolutely necessary if used with wisdom for sickness, it may do good, but when it is used to the extent that it destroys reason and judgment it is never used with impunity. All who thus use it then violate an immutable law, the penalty of which must inevitably follow the transgressor. It is against this practice that I am speaking. If there be any guilty of it here this afternoon, and I have no doubt there are, I wish them to take warning (italics added, underline is emphasis in original). [11]
- Franklin D. Richards
- I am not asleep to, nor unaware of the fact that many of us coming from the world have brought with us a deep craving for spirituous liquors, and for other things which are not good for us, but which we may have dabbled in to gratify a wicked appetite. Parents afflicted with these propensities ought to take warning not to breed them into the natures of their children, and if possibly they have done so, to use diligence to preserve them from being thrown in the way of temptation until they come to years of understanding, judgment and firmness of purpose, which will enable them to practice self-denial, and live as men of God. These are matters that need to be looked after. [12]
Brigham was prepared to produce a limited amount for such uses—the Saints were isolated in Utah and had to either produce or import everything they needed. He was not pleased, however, at the influx of whiskey and attendant over-use which accompanied the U.S. army.
Critical sources |
|
Why did Brigham Young instruct members of the Church to grow tobacco in Utah?
Since Brigham realized that a considerable sum was being spent annually on tobacco he preferred that these funds remain within the territory to foster further economic growth and self-sufficiency
Since Brigham realized that a considerable sum ($60-80,000 in 1861 dollars) was being spent annually on tobacco (at least a small part of which was used for medicinal purposes in the 19th century) he preferred that these funds remain within the territory to foster further economic growth and self-sufficiency, rather than disappearing into eastern markets.
The Word of Wisdom was enforced differently in the 19th century than today
The Word of Wisdom was enforced differently in the 19th century than today. It was not the strict test of fellowships that it is for the modern member.
Leonard Arrington (later Church Historian) described how difficulties with the U.S. federal government, and the Saints' relative isolation, led them to adopt a program of economic self-sufficiency. Simply put, Brigham and other leaders wanted to conserve the Saints' cash, and preferred to make or grow anything which they consumed locally:
The self-sufficiency program which followed the Utah War and the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861 led Mormon leaders to greatly expand the southern colonies
The self-sufficiency program which followed the Utah War and the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861 led Mormon leaders to greatly expand the southern colonies. In October 1861, 309 families were called to go south immediately to settle in what would now be called "Utah's Dixie". They represented a variety of occupations and were instructed to go in an organized group and "cheerfully contribute their efforts to supply the Territory with cotton, sugar, grapes, tobacco, figs, almonds, olive oil and such other useful articles as the Lord has given us, the places for garden spots in the south to produce." Brigham Young specifically desired them to produce the territorial supply of tobacco—so as to eliminate "paying to outsiders from sixty to eighty thousand dollars annually for that one article—and also wine: for the Holy Sacrament, for medicine, and for sale to "outsiders."[13]
The Word of Wisdom was not enforced as rigorously, or with the same requirements, in Brigham Young's day. Many speakers emphasized the Lord's patience in this matter, as applied to both leaders and members.
Brigham Young was the second president of the Church, and the successor to Joseph Smith. He supervised the Saints' exodus from Illinois, and their escape from the United States.
He led the settlement into the Salt Lake valley area of what is now Utah. As territorial governor for a time, and leader of the predominant faith during a period of relative isolation, few Church leaders have impacted its members as thoroughly in so many domains of life.
To view articles about Brigham Young, click "Expand" in the blue bar:
Teachings |
|
History |
|
Race |
|
Critics |
FAIR links |
|
Online |
|
Video |
|
Navigators |
Did Brigham Young attempt to suppress and destroy all copies of Lucy Mack Smith's Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith?
Editing history of Lucy's biography
Lavina Fielding Anderson recounts the history of Lucy's biography:
The project, which began in the winter of 1844-45, ended almost exactly a year later with the creation of two finished manuscripts (in addition to the rough draft). One of the finished manuscripts stayed in Nauvoo with Lucy and eventually came into possession of Orson Pratt, an LDS apostle, who took it with him to England and published it in 1853. It generated considerable controversy; and Brigham Young, twelve years after the fact, ordered the Saints to deliver up their copies to be destroyed. A “corrected” edition was published, but not until 1901-03, first serially by the Improvement Era and then as a compilation. This project was authorized by Young’s third successor, Lorenzo Snow, and implemented by his fourth, who also happened to be Lucy’s grandson, Joseph F. Smith. Meanwhile, the second finished copy had gone to Utah where it now reposes in the Historian’s Office. [14]
Dan Vogel notes:
Once published, Smith's Biographical Sketches was suppressed by Brigham Young, who condemned it as inaccurate, ordered its destruction, and instructed church historians to begin working on a corrected version. Young's concern centered on Smith's favorable portrayal of her son William, whom Young disliked (see Bushman 1984, 194, n. 4; Shipps 1985, 91-107). Pratt issued a statement in 1855 claiming that he believed Lucy's manuscript 'was written under the inspection of the Prophet [Joseph Smith]; but from evidences since received, it is believed that the greater part of the manuscripts did not pass under his review, as there are items which are ascertained to be incorrect' (Deseret News 5 [21 March 1855]: 16) [15]
Brigham Young did attempt to destroy all copies of Lucy Mack Smith's Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith, but we do not have enough information to know the reason why
Critics assume, in the absence of information, that it was because there was information which would embarrass the Church.
Brigham Young began to complain about errors in Lucy's history almost as soon as it was published in 1855. He assigned George A. Smith and Elias Smith to begin working on corrections in 1856; Elias was still working on them in 1866. It was published by President Joseph F. Smith in 1902, based on the corrections by GAS and Elias Smith. It is not known exactly what the changes were that were made, nor do we know the relationship of the 1954 edition mentioned in the letter to the original or to the 1902 version (Preston Nibley edited a version, but we are not sure if it is the one mentioned or not). Orson Pratt himself pointed out that he had erred in suggesting the manuscript had been completed prior to the death of Joseph Smith.
Brigham's response was unusual, both for being out of all proportion to the actual errors that existed and for coming principally more than a decade later. Anderson suggests that his reaction had much more to do with the rift between Pratt and Young than with the contents of history itself.
Anderson also notes that,
[T]he main differences between Lucy’s 1844-45 rough draft and Pratt’s 1853 publication are omissions and additions...About 10 percent of Lucy’s original material was omitted, much of it personal family references and Lucy’s original preface." [16]
The revisions were apparently made to transform Lucy's history from a personal family history and center it more on Joseph Smith, Jr. and the Church. There were several main changes between Lucy's rough draft and the version published by Orson Pratt.
- Lucy's preface, in which she introduces herself, was omitted.
- The story of Lucy's father, Solomon Mack was omitted.
- The story of Lucy's illness in 1802-1803 was revised.
- Lucy’s reference to folk magic was omitted in Orson Pratt's version. Lucy originally stated "… Let not my reader suppose that because I shall pursue another topic for a season that we stopt our labor and went <at> trying to win the faculty of Abrac drawing Magic circles or sooth saying to the neglect of all kinds of buisness [sic]."
Joseph Smith and folk magic or the occult
Summary: he Smith family, like many of their social class and time, believed in the efficacy of what has been called "folk magic." They and many others did not regard this as part of the "occult," or as something inconsistent with their Christian culture.Lucy Mack Smith on "faculty of Abrac" and "magic circles"
Did Brigham Young insert the reference to Joseph's First Vision into Lucy Mack Smith's history?
Brigham Young did not insert the reference to Joseph Smith's First Vision into Lucy's book—this was done by Orson Pratt
The irony of this claim is that the usual critical argument is that Brigham never mentioned the First Vision...yet critics want to claim that he inserted this reference into Lucy's history? You can't have it both ways.
Joseph initially treated the First Vision as private experience with respect to his family. His only response to his mother at the time is recounted in his 1838 history:
When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.” (JS-H 1꞉20)
Joseph's immediate family's first intimation of what was happening with Joseph was the first visit of Moroni rather than the First Vision.
The first vision account was in the 1853 publication by Orson Pratt, but it was not in the original manuscript version of 1845 that was not published; Pratt's version was based on a later version by Martha Coray. Pratt included it the story of the First Vision anyway, because he knew it belonged there. Vogel notes the difference between the 1845 manuscript and the 1853 edition, both of which are printed side-by-side in Early Mormon Documents: "Here (pp. 74-78) the 1853 edition inserts a lengthy excerpt from Joseph's history in the Times and Seasons 3 (15 March 1842): 727-28; and 3 (1 April 1842): 748-49, regarding the Palmyra revival and an 1820 vision of the Father and Son."
Orson Pratt picked up a copy of Lucy's manuscript on his way to England. He published it there in 1853, with the First Vision account in it (perhaps added by Pratt, but not by Brigham). In 1855, Brigham Young began objecting to some of the material in the book. In 1865 he officially censored it. Joseph F. Smith notes,
It was disapproved by President Young, on August 23, 1865, and the edition was suppressed or destroyed." (iii). “Subsequently, a committee of revision was appointed by President Young, consisting of President George A. Smith and Judge Elias Smith, cousins of the Prophet, men personally familiar with the family, and thoroughly conversant with Church history. They were instructed carefully to revise and correct the original work throughout, which they did, reporting their labors to President Brigham Young, to his entire satisfaction. The revised and only authentic copy thus prepared and reported upon was retained by President George A. Smith, and shortly after his death, September 1, 1875, it was committed to my keeping, where it has remained until now” [17]
He then appointed George A. Smith, and Elias Smith, to go through the book, making corrections and revisions. This is the work that was published in 1902 by Joseph F. Smith. Therefore is is highly unlikely that Brigham Young had anything at all to do with the inclusion of the first vision account.
If Brigham Young had included it, this would would ruin the critics' argument that Brigham never mentioned the First Vision. Brigham Young actually had nothing to do with the publication of Lucy's book—Orson Pratt did, and Brigham didn't like it.
Note that critics also claim that Brigham Young taught only that an angel came: a strange claim to make while insisting that Brigham never spoke of the First Vision at all.
Was the Prophet's mother Lucy Mack Smith silent about Joseph's history?
Joseph's mother was not silent about Joseph's history, and there is nothing in Lucy's history (either the 1845 manuscript or the 1853 edition) which prove that the First Vision did not occur
In fact, Joseph's reaction to Lucy's desire to obtain comfort in church following Alvin' death in 1823 is completely consistent with the First Vision having occurred prior to that time.
Critics try to prove that the silence of Joseph's mother and siblings prove that the First Vision did not take place, and is a later fabrication by Joseph, and not well known to the early members of the church. The Wikipedia article on the First Vision, for example, states that almost none of the first generation of members knew of it or spoke of it, and only in the second generation did it become well known. We know that Lucy was working on her manuscript in 1844-5 period. Note the following references—particularly the one from Wandle Mace.
1845—Lucy Mack Smith, to William Smith, January 23, 1845
“People are often enquiring of me the particulars of Joseph’s getting the plates, seeing the angels at first and many other things which Joseph never wrote or published. I have told over many things pertaining to these matters to different persons to gratify their curiosity indeed have almost destroyed my lungs giving these recitals to those who felt anxious to hear them. I have now concluded to write down every particular as far as possible and if those who wish to read them will help me a little they can have it all in one piece to read at their leisure".... [18][NOTE: see below, November “Extract from letters”, Jemima Hough]
1845—Extracts from Letters, Millennial Star 6. 10 (November 1, 1845): 153.
Sister Jemima Hough, June 5, 1845, says… “Mother Smith spends much of her time in relating to visitors an account of the rise and progress of the church, which is highly interesting.”
1845 General Conference, October 8, 1845, Times and Seasons 6. 16 (November 1, 1845): 1013-4.
[also in DHC 7. 470-72; Searle, 378]
“Mother Lucy Smith, the aged and honored parent of Joseph Smith, having expressed a wish to say a few words to the congregation, she was invited upon the stand. She spoke at considerable length and in an audible manner, so as to be heard by a large portion of the vast assembly…. She gave notice that she had written her history, and wished it printed before we leave this place….”
1845 Wandle Mace Autobiography, typescript, BYU Special Collections, 45-6
[File Diary Wandle Mace] [dictated to his wife, ends with departure from Nauvoo, 1846] [Born Feb. 19, 1809]
Almost as soon as the father [Joseph Smith, Sr.] and mother [Lucy Smith] of the Prophet Joseph Smith set their feet upon the hospitable shore of Illinois, I became acquainted with them. I frequently visited them and listened with intense interest as they related the history of the rise of the Church in every detail.
With tears they could not withhold, they narrated the story of the persecution of their boy, Joseph, which commenced when he was about fourteen years old, or from the time the angel first visited him. Not only was the boy, Joseph, persecuted but the aged father was harassed and imprisoned on false charges until finally driven from Missouri in the depth of winter he contracted disease from exposure, from which he never recovered.
In these conversations, mother [Lucy] Smith, as she was familiarly called, related much of their family history. She told how their family would all be seated around the room while they all listened to Joseph with the greatest interest as he taught them the pure principles of the gospel as revealed to him by the angels, and of his glorious vision of the Father and the Son, when the father said to him as he pointed to his companion, "This is my beloved Son, hear Him." (emphasis added)
Wiki links |
|
Print |
|
Editions of Lucy's History (by date of publication) |
|
Navigators |
Critical sources |
|
Notes
- ↑ Matthew B. Brown, Exploring the Connection Between Mormons and Masons (American Fork, UT: Covenant, 2009), Kindle edition, location:2259-2260n109..
- ↑ Matthew B. Brown, Exploring the Connection Between Mormons and Masons (American Fork, UT: Covenant, 2009), Kindle edition, location:896-1013.
- ↑ Greg Kearney, "The Message and the Messenger: Latter-day Saints and Freemasonry," (FAIR conference address, 2005) FAIR link
- ↑ Greg Kearney, "The Message and the Messenger: Latter-day Saints and Freemasonry," (FAIR conference address, 2005) FAIR link
- ↑ Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 12:29.
- ↑ Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 10:206.
- ↑ Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 6:319.
- ↑ Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 10:202.
- ↑ Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses 7:348.
- ↑ Erastus Snow, Journal of Discourses 7:353.
- ↑ Joseph F. Smith, Journal of Discourses 14:284-285.
- ↑ F.D. Richards, Journal of Discourses 24:328.
- ↑ Leonard J. Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom : an economic history of the Latter-day Saints, 1830–1900, reprint, (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2005 [1958]), 216.
- ↑ Lavina Fielding Anderson (ed.), Lucy's Book: A Critical Edition of Lucy Mack Smith's Family Memoir on Signature Books website.
- ↑ Dan Vogel, "Lucy Smith history, 1845," (editorial note), Early Mormon Documents 1:227.
- ↑ Lavina Fielding Anderson (ed.), Lucy's Book: A Critical Edition of Lucy Mack Smith's Family Memoir on Signature Books website.
- ↑ History of the Prophet Joseph by his Mother Lucy Smith as Revised by George A. Smith and Elias Smith (SLC, Utah: Improvement Era 1902). 296 pages. [Flake 8084] Introduction was written by Joseph F. Smith, and was dated October 8, 1901., p. iii-iv.
- ↑ Lucy Smith, Lucy's Book: Critical Edition of Lucy Mack Smith's Family Memoir, edited by Lavina Fielding Anderson and Irene M. Bates, (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 2001), 88. ISBN 1560851376.