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.
Joseph Smith/Character
| Answers portal |
| Joseph Smith, Jr. |
|
 RESOURCES
|
|---|
|
|
|
|
 PERSPECTIVES
|
 MEDIA
|
| OTHER PORTALS
|
Joseph Smith's character
Criticism
- Critics claim that Joseph Smith was a disreputable person.
To see citations to the critical sources for these claims, click here
Response
Brigham Young once said:
The history of Joseph and Mary is given to us by their best friends, and precisely as we will give the history of the Prophet Joseph...But let his enemies give his character, and they will make him out one of the basest men that ever lived. Let the enemies of Joseph and Mary give their characters to us, and you would be strongly tempted to believe as the Jews before.17
It becomes immediately clear upon reading McKeever and Johnson's chapter that Joseph is being made out to be "one of the basest men that ever lived." Hence, the authors' position on Joseph is clear and it is should be evident that this book is really not about providing introductory or truthful information about the LDS faith or its leaders as its entry level "101" title hints.
A Boston Bee reporter wrote after interviewing Joseph:
I could not help noticing that he dressed, talked and acted like other men, and in every respect appeared exactly the opposite of what I had conjured up in my imagination a prophet [to be].18
Clearly, Joseph is not what McKeever and Johnson imagine a prophet to be either. Was Joseph perfect? No; he never said he was. What he did say of himself was, "Although I do wrong, I do not the wrongs that I am charged with doing; the wrong that I do is through the frailty of human nature, like other men. No man lives without fault."19 Confirming this statement, B.H. Roberts said that Joseph Smith:
...claimed for himself no special sanctity, no faultless life, no perfection of character, no inerrancy for every word spoken by him. And as he did not claim these things for himself, so can they not be claimed for him by others; for to claim perfection for him, or even unusual sanctity, would be to repudiate the revelations themselves which supply the evidence of his imperfections, whereof, in them, he is frequently reproved.
Joseph Smith was a man of like passions with other men; struggling with the same weaknesses; subjected to the same temptations; under the same moral law, and humiliated at times, like others, by occasionally, in word and conduct, falling below the high ideals presented in the perfect life and faultless character of the Man of Nazareth.
But though a man of like passions with other men, yet to Joseph Smith was given access to the mind of Deity, through the revelations of God to him; and likewise to him was given a divine authority to declare that mind of God to the world.20
McKeever and Johnson ask their reader if Joseph can be accepted as a prophet if his behavior was sometimes less than what we expect of our political leaders. Such a comparison is dangerously absurd, as expectations of our political leaders are often times less than they should be when that leader is seemingly doing a good job. While many political leaders are embroiled in self-created scandal and affairs that they feel forced to lie about, they yet remain in their positions and profit from their scandal long after leaving office. Joseph, in comparison, confessed his faults, was never found guilty of any crime, never profited financially from his claims, and was put to death. According to McKeever and Johnson's formula, the reader will have little trouble accepting Joseph as a prophet when compared to many such described political leaders.
Opposite the cover-up practices employed by those politicians guarding their careers, Joseph was open and direct, saying to his accusers:
Being of very tender years, and persecuted by those who ought to have been my friends... I was left to all kinds of temptations; and mingling with all kinds of society, I frequently fell into many foolish errors, and displayed the weakness of youth, and the foibles of human nature; which, I am sorry to say, led me into divers temptations, offensive in the sight of God. In making this confession, no one need suppose me guilty of any great or malignant sins. A disposition to commit such was never in my nature. But I was guilty of levity, and sometimes associated with jovial company, etc., not consistent with that character which ought to be maintained by one who was called of God as I had been. But this will not seem very strange to any one who recollects my youth, and is acquainted with my native cheery temperament.21
Continuing this theme in a letter to Oliver Cowdery, the Prophet said,
...during this time, as is common to most, or all youths, I fell into many vices and follies; but as my accusers are, and have been forward to accuse me of being guilty of gross and outrageous violations of the peace and good order of the community, I take the occasion to remark that, though as I have said above, 'as is common to most, or all youths, I fell into many vices and follies,' I have not, neither can it be sustained, in truth, been guilty of wronging or injuring any man or society of men; and those imperfections to which I allude, and for which I have often had occasion to lament, were a light, and too often, vain mind, exhibiting a foolish and trifling conversation. This being all, and the worst, that my accusers can substantiate against my moral character, I wish to add that it is not without a deep feeling of regret that I am thus called upon in answer to my own conscience, to fulfil a duty I owe to myself, as well as to the cause of truth, in making this public confession of my former uncircumspect walk, and trifling conversation and more particularly, as I often acted in violation of those holy precepts which I knew came from God. But as the 'Articles and Covenants,' of this Church are plain upon this particular point, I do not deem it important to proceed further. I only add, that I do not, nor never have, pretended to be any other than a man 'subject to passion,' and liable, without the assisting grace of the Savior, to deviate from that perfect path in which all men are commanded to walk.22
Regardless of such ridiculous and absurd comparisons the authors seek to make, Joseph was only lacking character in the opinion of those that misunderstood him and opposed his efforts in restoring the Church. The recorded details and testimonies from firsthand accounts as to Joseph's good character cannot be ignored and certainly must be looked at by anyone serious in their study of Mormonism. What McKeever and Johnson fail to portray is a simple man who recognized the saving grace of Christ for his errors and sought to further the cause of righteousness.
If McKeever and Johnson believe a prophet must be without fault to be called as such, they no doubt have trouble with other servants of Christ. Paul for example, would not have been called to be an Apostle after his participation in the persecution of Christians and role in the martyrdom of Stephen.23 Christ never said he only wanted perfect servants to do His work. Indeed, Christ's penchant for selecting men such as this show that He came not to call saints, but sinners. The authors clearly have trouble relating to the difficult journey through which the rest of us mere mortals progress.