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 (→72) |
m |
||
Line 106: | Line 106: | ||
||''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 428: | Line 430: | ||
||"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. |
*[See above.] | *[See above.] | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 438: | Line 441: | ||
|| | || | ||
*GD Smith wants to rehabilitate Bennett as a source, while glossing over the problems. | *GD Smith wants to rehabilitate Bennett as a source, while glossing over the problems. | ||
− | |||
|| | || | ||
*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. | ||
− | * | + | || |
− | + | * No source provided. | |
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 470: | Line 474: | ||
*GD Smith implies that sexuality was involved in this polyandrous marriage. | *GD Smith 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}} |
|| | || | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 485: | Line 489: | ||
||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 GD Smith 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!! | ||
− | |||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 496: | Line 501: | ||
||"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. GD Smith 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. | ||"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. GD Smith 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 508: | Line 514: | ||
*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 516: | Line 522: | ||
||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 525: | Line 531: | ||
|| | || | ||
*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 538: | Line 544: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
+ | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Buell}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 546: | Line 553: | ||
*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}} | |
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 556: | Line 563: | ||
*[[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] | *Compton considered it improbable that Joseph and Presendia would have found time together during the brief window opportunity after his release from prison in Missouri (Sacred Loneliness, 670, 673)." [Note continues below] | ||
− | * | + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} |
− | |||
*This slight nod toward an opposite point of view is inadequate, however. G. D. Smith does not mention and hence does not confront the strongest evidence. Compton’s argument against Joseph’s paternity does not rest just on a “narrow window” of opportunity but on the fact that Brodie seriously misread the geography required by that window. It is not merely a question of dates. Brodie would have Joseph travel west from his escape near Gallatin, Davies County, Missouri, to Far West in order to meet Lucinda, and then on to Illinois toward the east. This route would require Joseph and his companions to backtrack while fleeing from custody in the face of an active state extermination order. Travel to Far West would also require them to travel near the virulently anti-Mormon area of Haun’s Mill, along Shoal Creek. Yet by April 22 Joseph was in Illinois, having been slowed by traveling “off from the main road as much as possible” “both by night and by day.” This seems an implausible time for Joseph to be conceiving a child. Furthermore, it is evident that Far West was evacuated by other church leaders, “the committee on removal,” and not under the Prophet’s direction. Joseph did not regain the Saints until reaching Quincy, Illinois, contrary to Brodie’s misreading. Timing is the least of the problems with G. D. Smith’s theory. | *This slight nod toward an opposite point of view is inadequate, however. G. D. Smith does not mention and hence does not confront the strongest evidence. Compton’s argument against Joseph’s paternity does not rest just on a “narrow window” of opportunity but on the fact that Brodie seriously misread the geography required by that window. It is not merely a question of dates. Brodie would have Joseph travel west from his escape near Gallatin, Davies County, Missouri, to Far West in order to meet Lucinda, and then on to Illinois toward the east. This route would require Joseph and his companions to backtrack while fleeing from custody in the face of an active state extermination order. Travel to Far West would also require them to travel near the virulently anti-Mormon area of Haun’s Mill, along Shoal Creek. Yet by April 22 Joseph was in Illinois, having been slowed by traveling “off from the main road as much as possible” “both by night and by day.” This seems an implausible time for Joseph to be conceiving a child. Furthermore, it is evident that Far West was evacuated by other church leaders, “the committee on removal,” and not under the Prophet’s direction. Joseph did not regain the Saints until reaching Quincy, Illinois, contrary to Brodie’s misreading. Timing is the least of the problems with G. D. Smith’s theory. | ||
Despite Brodie’s enthusiasm, few other authors have included Oliver on their list of possible children. With so many authors ranged against him, G. D. Smith ought not to act as if Compton’s analysis is merely about dates. Within note. | Despite Brodie’s enthusiasm, few other authors have included Oliver on their list of possible children. With so many authors ranged against him, G. D. Smith ought not to act as if Compton’s analysis is merely about dates. Within note. | ||
Line 584: | Line 590: | ||
*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 592: | Line 598: | ||
||"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 640: | Line 649: | ||
||"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}} | |
| | | | ||
====92==== | ====92==== | ||
Line 658: | Line 670: | ||
||"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 675: | Line 691: | ||
||"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}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | |
Revision as of 07:06, 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.'" |
|
| ||||
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." |
|
| ||||
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. |
|
| ||||
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). |
|
| ||||
54 |
"What interested me most was how Smith went about courting…these women." |
|
| ||||
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." |
|
| ||||
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. | ||||||
55 |
"Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls…." |
| |||||
55 |
"He assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctionied but were demanded by heaven and fulfilled the ethereal principle of 'restoration.'" |
|
| ||||
56 |
"There may have been even more wives and plural children." |
|
| ||||
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." |
|
| ||||
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” |
|
| ||||
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 Smith 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 insuinuate 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 acuse 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." |
|
| ||||
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. GD Smith 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. |
Despite Brodie’s enthusiasm, few other authors have included Oliver on their list of possible children. With so many authors ranged against him, G. D. Smith ought not to act as if Compton’s analysis is merely about dates. Within note. 80 n. 63 [Note continued from above]….There is no DNA connection (). Compton does find it 'unlikely, though not impossible, that Joseph Smith was the actual father of' John Hiram, Presendia's seventh chld during her marriage to Buell and born in November 1843 (Sacred Loneliness, 124, 670–71). New wiki article? Joseph as father of Prescenda Buell's children? SMITH FARMS He makes no mention in the main text that Oliver’s paternity has been definitively ruled out by DNA testing. This admission is confined to a footnote, and its impact is minimized by its placement. After noting Compton’s disagreement with the main text’s suggestion that Oliver might be Joseph’s son, G. D. Smith writes, “There is no DNA connection,” and cites a Deseret News article. He immediately follows this obtuse phrasing with a return to Compton, who finds it “‘unlikely, though not impossible, that Joseph Smith was the actual father of another Buell child,’ John Hiram, Presendia’s seventh child during her marriage to Buell and born in November 1843” (p. 80 n. 63). Thus the most salient fact—that Joseph is certainly not Oliver's father—is sandwiched between a vicarious discussion with Compton about whether Oliver or John could be Joseph’s sons. Since G. D. Smith knows there is definitive evidence against Joseph’s paternity in Oliver’s case, why mention the debate at all only to hide the answer in the midst of a long endnote? Within note. |
|||||
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." |
|
| ||||
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. |
| |||||
108 |
"Sarah Pratt told…Wyl…'There was an old Woman called Durfee…to keep her quiet, he admitted her to the secret blessings of celestial bliss—she boasted here in Salt Lake of having been one of Joseph Smith's wives." He follows Compton in misreading the Wyl data. Richard Anderson and Scott Faulring argue that In Sacred Loneliness misleads the reader by claiming that “Sarah Pratt mentions that she heard a Mrs. Durfee in Salt Lake City profess to have been one of Smith’s wives.” But this changes the actual report of Sarah’s comments on Mrs. Durfee: “I don’t think she was ever sealed to him, though it may have been the case after Joseph’s death. . . . At all events, she boasted here in Salt Lake of having been one of Joseph’s wives.” |
|
| ||||
110-111 |
"When Napoleon invaded Egypt in 1798 and exposed the world to then-indecipherable ancient writings, Europe and the United States became fascinated with Egyptian artifacts. Egyptian hieroglyphics, ike the origin of Native American tribes, were mysteries of the times, sometimes regarded as clues to Indian Origins." |
|
|||||
111 |
"This is not to suggest that Smith necessarily visited the library…." |
|
|||||
111 |
"…but from the age of ten…to about age twenty-two (December 1827) when he began dictating the Book of Mormon, published accounts of Napoleon and his foray into Egypt would have been available in books, periodicals, and possibly tracts." |
|
| ||||
110 – 111 n. 150 |
[Of the Chandler papyri] Joseph "translated some of the hieroglyphics by means of his white seer stone to produce 'an alphabet…[and] grammar of the Egyptian language' through July 1835." |
|
| ||||
112 |
A scholar in 1823 "rightly concluded that these American [Indian] symbols 'appear to have had little or nothing in common with those of the Egyptians.'" |
|
| ||||
112 |
"As we consider Joseph Smith's new religious texts in early 1842, we should review what was known of the language of ancient Egyptian, not only in 1823 when Smith began to anticipate the Book of Mormon's 'reformed Egyptian records,' but later in the 1830s and 1840s when he prepared his second Egyptian scripture, the Book of Abraham." |
|
|||||
112 |
"Joseph Smith… [made] the association of Native American pictographs with 'reformed Egyptian.'" |
|
| ||||
112 |
"Smith's association of these unrelated cultures [Egypt and the New World] simply reflected the prevailing misperceptions of the pre- to mid-nineteenth century." |
|
| ||||
113 |
"The first ancient scripture Smith presented since the Book of Mormon was the Book of Abraham." |
|
| ||||
113 n. 157 |
The JST "altered over 3,400 verses but left the deities singular and in a Trinitarian format." |
|
| ||||
114 |
"The prophet coalesced astronomy, biblical mystery, ancient Egyptian writing, and Masonic ritual into portentous ceremony for his followers." |
|
| ||||
114 |
"The spring of 1842 was also the time when John C. Bennett began to separate himself from Smith…." |
|
| ||||
116 |
Marinda Johnson "met Joseph while he was retranslating the Bible with Sidney Rigdon in her parents' home in 1831." |
|
| ||||
117-118 |
Orson Hyde "was reportedly 'furious'" with Joseph's plural marriage doctrine. |
|
| ||||
119 |
"[A]fter [John C. Bennett's] disagreement with Smith, the record of his celestial marriages was apparently expunged." |
|
| ||||
119 |
"Smith told Bennett he could not withdraw from the church because he had been 'disfellowshipped' two weeks before on May 11. This apparent backdating was an attempt to discredit Bennett." |
|
| ||||
122 |
"In Bennett's first letter…he reported that Smith 'attempted to seduce Miss Nany Rigdon,'…." |
|
|||||
123-125 |
Bennett's version of the Sarah Pratt episode |
| |||||
129-134 |
Emma Smith pushing Eliza Snow down the stairs |
|
|||||
131-132 |
"…historian Fawn M. Brodie thought the documentation was strong enough to include it in her biography of Smith." |
|
| ||||
131 n. 195 |
Smith cites the BYU Studies on Emma and Eliza, but does not disclose that those authors find that the story is not plausible. |
|
| ||||
132 |
Smith cites Newel and Avery, Mormon Enigma without acknowledging or engaging their arguments against the story of Emma and Eliza. |
|
| ||||
133 |
"Most convincing of all is to think that these stories [about Emma] were circulating widely and Eliza never bothered to clarify or refute them." |
|
| ||||
137 |
"The History of the Church reports the day's activities…without a hint of a wedding" to Sarah Ann Whitney. |
| |||||
138 |
"Three weeks after the wedding, Joseph took steps to spend some time with his newest bride." |
|
| ||||
139 |
"In an extraordinary move, the Nauvoo City Council issued an ordinance limiting the power of state courts and claiming the right to review and dismiss future writs." |
|
| ||||
142 |
"It was the ninth night of Joseph's concealment, and Emma had visited him three times, written him several letters, and penned at least one letter on his behalf…For his part, Joseph's private note about his love for Emma was so endearing it found its way into the official church history. In it, he vowed to be hers 'forevermore.' Yet within this context of reassurance and intimacy, a few hours later the same day, even while Joseph was still in grave danger and when secrecy was of the utmost urgency, he made complicated arrangements for a visit from his fifteenth plural wife, Sarah Ann Whitney." |
|
|||||
142-143 |
"Smith urged his seventeen-year-old bride to 'come to night' and 'comfort' him—but only if Emma had not returned….Joseph judiciously addressed the latter to 'Brother, and Sister, Whitney, and &c." |
|
|||||
147 |
"Invites Whitneys to visit, Sarah Ann to 'comfort me' if Emma not there. Invitation accepted." |
|
| ||||
147–154 |
Nancy Rigdon episode |
|
|||||
149 |
[Sidney Rigdon] "was in many ways a mentor to Joseph." |
|
| ||||
149 |
Sidney Rigdon "was not someone Joseph felt comfortable approaching to ask for his daughter's hand in polygamy. So Joseph appealed to the young woman directly." |
|
| ||||
149 |
"For some reason, Marinda [Johnson Hyde] stayed [in the same house as] Apostle Willard Richards, whose wife, Jennetta, was in Massachusetts….Although the two may have lived in separate parts of the building…their living arrangements seemed to be an open scandal." |
|
| ||||
154 |
"…both Nancy [Rigdon] and Martha [Brotherton] were…isolated in a locked room during the persuasive effort." |
|
| ||||
155 |
"As if Sarah Ann Whitney's liaison were not enough…another marriage took place…." |
|
|