The William Clayton Deception

Thanks to everyone for your input.  A couple of you asked about William Clayton and his purported records regarding polygamy originating with Joseph Smith.  For example, Janet wrote: 
 

"I have read your Blog, 'Confessions of an Elder' and find it very interesting and intriguing.  I would love to know how you reconcile William Clayton’s diary where he says Joseph Smith told him that he was privileged to have all the wives he wanted and that Joseph married Margaret Moon to William, she being his 2nd wife.   It is his diary that is used as proof that Joseph did teach these things in secret.  If you have a rebuttal or explanation, I would love to hear it.  I have been bothered many years by this mess and personally would absolutely love it if Joseph’s name could be cleared from the 'Celestial Marriage doctrine.'"

 

The short answer to your question is simple – William Clayton is a despicable liar. 

Together, William Clayton and Brigham Young fabricated D&C Section 132 and falsely claimed that Joseph revealed the doctrine.  Supposedly, William Clayton was the lone scribe and surviving witness to the circumstances and writing of Section 132.  However, D&C Section 132 was produced eight years after Joseph’s death and was in Clayton’s (not Joseph’s) handwriting.  There is no court in the world that would allow that piece of “evidence” into a courtroom.  If William Clayton fabricated D&C Section 132, which has to be a pretty big damn sin in the eyes of God, then he most assuredly fabricated his journal entries which were written long after Joseph’s death. 

As I indicated before, falsifying records was VERY common with Brigham Young and his followers.  On April 1, 1845, Brigham Young admittedly recorded the following:  "I commenced revising the History of Joseph Smith at Brother Richard's office:  Elder Heber C. Kimball and George A. Smith were with me."

Willard Richards wrote in Joseph Smith’s diary that Joseph “gave instructions to try those who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives . . . Joseph forbids it and the practice thereof.  No man shall have but one wife.” 

Historian Van Wagoner commented:  “When incorporating Smith’s journal into the History of the Church, church leaders, under Brigham Young’s direction, deleted ten key words from this significant passage and added forty-nine others so that it now reads:  “Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives; for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise.” 

Charles W. Penrose, a member of the First Presidency, admitted that after Joseph Smith’s death some changes were made in the official record “for prudential reasons.”

Personal journal entries were also falsified.  No affidavits, sworn statements, or journal entries, including William Claytons’, were made during the life of Joseph Smith showing that Joseph Smith was engaged in polygamy.  The journal entries, including Helen Mar Kimball’s, were written many years later.  For example, Mary Lightner’s (an alleged plural wife of Joseph Smith) affidavit was published by historian Fawn Brodie, who wrote:  “Curiously, [Mary Lightner] makes no mention of her marriage to Joseph in her autobiography . . .”

When D&C Section 132 was introduced (under VERY questionable circumstances) into the D&C, Section 101 was altered.  Section 101 (1835 edition) formerly stated:  "Inasmuch as this church has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy; we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband."  That part just had to be removed.

I ask you to ponder the following two questions.

Do you believe William Clayton? 

Clayton said that on July 12, 1843, when Joseph Smith fully revealed D&C Section 132, for the inane purpose of convincing Emma of the truth of polygamy, Joseph just happened to ask Clayton to act as Joseph’s scribe (no one ever explained why Joseph would need a scribe) and create the original copy of the purported revelation, even though Joseph supposedly said he was about to write the revelation down.   

According to Clayton:

"Joseph then said, 'Well, I [i.e., Joseph] will write the revelation and we will see.'  He then requested me to get paper and prepare to write.  Hyrum very urgently requested Joseph to write the revelation by means of the Urim and Thummim, but Joseph, in reply, said he did not need to, for he knew the revelation perfectly from beginning to end.  Joseph and Hyrum then sat down, and Joseph commenced to dictate the Revelation on Celestial Marriage, and I wrote it, sentence by sentence, as he dictated." 

Before Hyrum (and Joseph apparently) took the "revelation" (in Clayton's handwriting) to Emma, Clayton fortuitously  and inexplicably caused Joseph C. Kingsbury, the store clerk for Bishop Whitney, to make a second copy of the revelation (of course, this never happened at any other time).  It is the supposed Kingsbury copy that exists today.

Emma supposedly became so upset about the doctrine, in Clayton's handwriting, that she seized it from Hyrum and tossed it into a fire.  It was just so fortunate that Clayton had created a second copy – I guess some would claim that it was a miracle. 

Now here’s the really crazy part.  The revelation was so unimportant that Brigham put the Kingsbury copy into his desk drawer and forgot about it.  Strangely, Joseph and Hyrum both never mentioned the Section 132 revelation or Emma’s destruction of the original copy. 

Even though Joseph and Hyrum both knew the original bearing Clayton's handwriting had been burnt by Emma, Joseph and Hyrum were simply unconcerned with making the revelation known to everyone else (think about it . . . they lived for almost another year – and yet never mentioned it anywhere).  Then eight years after Joseph’s death, Brigham happened to find the Kingsbury copy (of Clayton's dictation) in Brigham’s long forgotten desk drawer and finally but dutifully released it to the members.  Of course, Brigham had to also simultaneously but quietly amend Section 101's prohibition of polygamy as the "rule of marriage" (since that was such an unimportant matter – it didn’t require any formal revelation to amend it). 

Or do you believe Emma Smith? 

Emma vehemently denied until her death, even under oath, ever seeing Section 132.  Emma said she never saw or burned a copy of the document as claimed by Brigham Young and William Clayton.  Emma loved and defended Hyrum until the day that she died (even naming her son Hyrum as well). 

 

Up to this time, I have been relatively kind to those that believe Young and Clayton.  After writing this, I have to say rather forcefully, that anyone who believes Clayton’s and Young’s preposterous story, which has every telltale sign of a deliberate lie and fabrication, over Emma’s defense is gullible.  Because Young and Clayton fabricated Section 132 to support their abominable and adulterous polygamous practice while falsely claiming that Joseph revealed it (pretty much one of the biggest sins I have heard of), Brigham Young and William Clayton deserve to forever be known as contemptible liars of the highest magnitude.

For further investigation, see the following link:

 

http://restorationbookstore.org/articles/nopoligamy/jsfp-visionarticles/hsfp.htm. 

Part 10 - A Case for Joseph Smith; A Case Against Polygamy

A Case for Joseph Smith; A Case Against Polygamy

Part 10

(Please start on Part 1:  http://www.confessionsofanelder.blogspot.com/2012/06/case-for-joseph-smith-case-against.html)

Ether 3:12:  “And he answered: Yea, Lord, I know that thou speakest the truth, for thou art a God of truth, and canst not lie.”

2 Nephi 33:6:  “I glory in plainness; I glory in truth; I glory in my Jesus, for he hath redeemed my soul from hell.”


Jacob 2:27-28:  "Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;

For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women.  And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts."

3 Nephi 16:10:  "And thus commandeth the Father that I should say unto you: At that day when the Gentiles shall sin against my gospel, and shall reject the fulness of my gospel, and shall be lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people of the whole earth, and shall be filled with all manner of lyings, and of deceits, and of mischiefs, and all manner of hypocrisy, and murders, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, and of secret abominations; and if they shall do all those things, and shall reject the fulness of my gospel, behold saith the Father, I will bring the fulness of my gospel from among them."

CONCLUSION

There are essentially three alternative views of Joseph Smith:

LDS Doctrinal View

Joseph had approximately thirty-four wives but was commanded to enter into these reluctant polygamous marriages by the Lord.  Joseph married Fannie Alger in early 1833 at the age of sixteen and Helen Mar Kimball at the age of fourteen.  The marriages were likely sexual.[1]  Although polygamy (including a marriage between a 37 year old Joseph and a 14 year old girl and the adulterous marriage of Joseph to ten women who were already married) is under today’s standards highly deplorable and should result in immediate excommunication, the Lord ultimately determines what is right and wrong and the doctrine of polygamy is sometimes right (D&C 132) and sometimes wrong (Book of Mormon). 

Joseph and the other leaders in the Church repeatedly lied about polygamy only in order to protect the Church from its many enemies.  Lying and obfuscation about polygamy is permitted by God.  Because D&C 101 was added to further conceal the sacred doctrine of polygamy, it had to be removed once contradictory D&C 132 was added.  Brigham Young was a tremendous Prophet, Seer, and Revelator as is Thomas S. Monson today.  Although polygamy has always been a stifling cloud on the progress of the Church, it was a necessary doctrine brought through the “restoration of all things” and to raise a “righteous seed.”

Anti-Mormon View

Joseph Smith (and his successors) was a lecherous fiend (no better than Warren Jeffs) who sexually exploited young teenage girls and repeatedly lied and caused others to lie about these crimes.  (Yes – polygamy was a crime under the laws of the states in which Joseph practiced polygamy.)  Furthermore, Joseph conspired to burn down a newspaper that had printed true reports of Joseph’s ignominy for which he was rightly thrown in prison.  Any person who can hold up Joseph Smith as a great religious man is either insane, highly brainwashed, and/or of debase moral character.  Although the polygamous "facts" surrounding Joseph Smith are undisputed by the LDS Church, the LDS Church actively conceals its immoral past and now falsely pretends that the Church has no association with polygamy.  

Revisionist View

Brigham Young and several other influential leaders, including Dr. John Bennett, in the Church secretly engaged in adulterous and polygamous practices which originated with the conversion of the polygamous Cochranites who first began the practice (as early as 1818-1819 the Cochranites were referring to “spiritual wivery”).  Brigham Young visited the Cochranites alone[2] in violation of the rules set forth in the Doctrine and Covenants.  See D&C 52:10; 60:8; 61:35; 75:30–36.  Brigham concealed his polygamy and undisputed adultery (e.g., Cochranite Augusta Adams Cobb married Brigham in 1843 but was still married to her first husband until 1847) from Joseph Smith but developed a strong following with other apostles close to Joseph Smith (especially among the converted Cochranites). 

The cancer of polygamy spread among the members of the Church.  After learning of the spread of polygamy in the Church, Joseph, Hyrum, and others assiduously attempted to rid the Church of polygamy and published many statements, communications, and official declarations to such effect (including D&C 101).  Joseph even sued Chauncey Higbee in the State of Illinois for slander.  Chauncey had claimed that Joseph was secretly teaching polygamy.  Unfortunately, Joseph and Hyrum were murdered before they could eradicate polygamy from the Church (largely as a result from the lies of polygamy).  In retrospect, Joseph’s biggest mistake may have been that he did not try to destroy polygamy more overtly (most likely to keep the Church from further splitting or as a result from the decentralized nature of the LDS Church at that time).[3] 

Because his polygamy was largely unknown and denied, Brigham Young eventually won the leadership of the Church by his strong persuasive and leadership skills (in fact he won because he argued for a decentralized Church).  Eventually, Brigham Young and other Church leaders rewrote Church history to create the impression that Joseph Smith was the first polygamous leader in the Church.  Brigham Young and his followers removed the verse in D&C 101 that denounced polygamy and altered other statements from Joseph Smith showing the Church’s opposition to polygamy.  D&C 132 was added under highly questionable circumstances.  Without question, D&C 132 was a complete fabrication. 

Many of the polygamous wives of Brigham Young and other leaders later claimed to be former wives of Joseph Smith, but were likely under pressure from their husbands to make the fallacious claims.  However, not one person has been proven through DNA testing to be a direct descendant of Joseph Smith outside Joseph’s marriage to Emma.  Emma and Joseph's children always maintained that Joseph Smith was innocent of polygamy. 

The false doctrine of polygamy has hindered the progression of the Church and will continue to stain its progression.  The leaders of the current LDS Church likely know of the Church’s sordid past and have prosecuted polygamy with full force ever since, but will not reveal the truth since it would injure their claim to an unbroken path of leadership.  Notwithstanding the many lies and cover-up by the Church, much of the truth is readily accessible if you will open your eyes and put forth the effort to see it.

Richard and Pamela price poignantly wrote:  “There is no halfway ground.  Either Joseph Smith was true and clean, open and above board . . . or else he was a hypocrite and a fraud through and through, as his enemies claim.  The Utah Mormons cannot long continue seriously to contend that he was a real prophet of God, and a good man, yet blowing hot in private and cold in public, a monogamist in the pulpit and press and a polygamist in his home . . . Joseph’s grandson, Elbert, was correct when he said that Joseph was either monogamous, or he was a hypocrite and a fraud.  Joseph’s writings, and the fact that he had no polygamous children, are proofs that he was not a polygamist.  The LDS Church’s position is based upon the theory that Joseph was a hypocrite – that he denounced polygamy in public and practiced it in private.  This is indeed a fragile foundation for the Mormon Church, considering that Joseph was a bold man who never hesitated to proclaim all the doctrines of the gospel, regardless of the opposition.”  P. 108-109.

 

Weighing the Evidence

Scriptural Denouncements Against Polygamy (Book of Mormon and D&C 101)
Falsification of the Record and Doctrine by the LDS Church
Joseph's and Other Church Leader's Repeated and Vehement Denouncements Against Polygamy; testimony of Joseph's family
		Scriptural Support of Polygamy (Old Testament, D&C 132)
No Child Proven through DNA Evidence to be a Descendant of any Professed Polygamous Wife of Joseph Smith		After-the-fact Affidavits and Testimonies from LDS Polygamists that Joseph Smith First Introduced Polygamy
Reformist		LDS Church

Beyond a reasonable doubt, (1) Joseph Smith never introduced polygamy, but was a victim of a polygamous doctrinal conspiracy led by Dr. John C. Bennett, William Law, Brigham Young (and the converted Cochranites), (2) the evidence in support of Joseph Smith’s monogamy strongly outweighs the claims of the LDS Church, (3) Brigham Young led the effort to falsify Joseph's history and introduced the fradulent Section 132 in order to invent the claim that Joseph was the founder of polygamy, and (4) Joseph made every effort to publicly and privately proclaim his innocence regarding polygamy and even brought a lawsuit against Chauncey Higbee for slander (which would have clearly been against Joseph's self-interest).

 For much more research and expertise, please read (free online):

Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy

by

Richard and Pamela Price

http://restorationbookstore.org/jsfp-index.htm

Or purchase the book at:

http://restorationbookstore.org/mm5/merchant.mvc?

---

[1] In total, thirteen LDS women who claimed to be married to Joseph Smith swore in court affidavits that they also had sexual relations with him.  Accordingly, if you believe their story that they were married Joseph, then you must also believe that the polygamous relationships were sexual.  However, if you believe as I do that these women were lying, it makes clear sense as to why no child has been proven to be a result of Joseph’s purported polygamous relationships.  See http://www.i4m.com/think/history/joseph_smith_sex.htm.  See also:  “Partly to maintain secrecy, Joseph could not have spent much time with [Louisa] Beaman or any of the women he married.  He never gathered his wives into a household – as his Utah followers later did – or accompanied them to public events.  Close relationships were further curtailed by business.  Joseph had to look after Emma and the children, manage the Church, govern the city, and evade the extradition officers from Missouri.  As the marriages increased, there were fewer and fewer opportunities for seeing each wife.  Even so, nothing indicates that sexual relations were left out of plural marriages.” Richard Lyman Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 438-39.  See also:  “Meanwhile, the Prophet, with Louisa Beeman and my sister Delcena, had it agreeable arranged with Sister Almera, and after a little instruction she stood by the Prophet’s side and was sealed to him as a wife, by Brother Clayton; after which the Prophet asked me to take my sister to occupy number ‘10’ in his Mansion home during her stay in the city.  But as I could not long be absent from my home and business, we soon returned to Ramus, where on the 15th of May, some three weeks later, the Prophet again came and at my house occupied the same room and bed with my sister, that the month previous he had occupied with the daughter of the late Bishop Partridge, as his wife.” Benjamin F. Johnson, Letter to George S. Gibbs, 1903, cited in E. Dale LeBaron, “Benjamin Franklin Johnson:  Colonizer, Public Servant, and Church Leader” (M.A. thesis, Brigham Young University, 1967). 

[2] “The council also decided that Elder Brigham Young should travel alone it being his own choice . . . and that there should be a general conference held in Saco, in the state of Maine, on the 13th day of June, 1834.”  Times and Seasons 6 [November 1, 1845]: 1022–1023.

[3] For example, Joseph Smith wrote:  “[Dr. Bennett] had not been long in Nauvoo before he began to keep company with a young lady, one of our citizens; and she being ignorant of his having a wife living, gave way to his addresses, and became confident, from his behavior towards her, that he intended to marry her; and this he gave her to understand he would do.  I, seeing the folly of such an acquaintance, persuaded him to desist; and, on account of his continuing his course, finally threatened to expose him if he did not desist.  This, to outward appearance, had the desired effect, and the acquaintance between them was broken off.”  Times and Seasons 3 [July 1, 1842]: 839.  See also, John Taylor’s (editor) reference with respect to Francis Higbee, the editor explained:

“Here follows testimony which is too indelicate for the public eye or ear; and we would here remark, that so revolting, corrupt, and disgusting has been the conduct of most of this clique, that we feel to dread having any thing to do with the publication of their trials; we will not however offend the public eye or ear with a repetition of the foulness of their crimes any more.  Id. at 538–539.

Part 9 - A Case for Joseph Smith; A Case Against Polygamy

 A Case for Joseph Smith; A Case Against Polygamy

Part 9

(Please start on Part 1:  http://www.confessionsofanelder.blogspot.com/2012/06/case-for-joseph-smith-case-against.html)

 “He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.” - Joseph Smith (from the History of the Church, Volume 1, Chapters 1 through 5)

Polygamy did not initially start in the LDS Church, but came from a religious sect known as the Cochranites, led by Jacob Cochran.  Many of the Cochranites accepted the LDS Church and were brought into the LDS Church, comprising a substantial portion of the Church.  Unfortunately, the Cochranites doctrine regarding polygamy was secretly adopted by Brigham Young and others close to Joseph Smith.  There was no mention of polygamy in the Church until the Cochranites were converted.

Even if you are LDS, chances are you have never heard of the Cochranites, yet the Cochranites converts formed a large part of the LDS Church.  When the first LDS missionaries arrived among the Cochranites in Saco, Main, 1832, they found the Cochranites to be extremely receptive to the message of the restoration.  Accustomed as they already were to following in the traditions of the ancient patriarchs, it was not difficult for them to accept the message that the ancient church of Christ had been restored with all its gifts.  

As described below, the Cochranite stronghold was such a fruitful place for converts that the young Church of Christ held a conference in Saco in 1834.  Nine of the twelve apostles were in attendance.  Furthermore, Brigham Young later visited the Cochranites several times as a missionary alone and later married Cochranite Augusta Cobb (who was still married and had seven children)[1] – clear evidence of Brigham’s adultery and in violation of the Article on Marriage which recognized marriages outside of the covenant as lawful.   The High Council met at Kirtland on February 20, 1834, its record states:

“The council also decided that Elder Brigham Young should travel alone it being his own choice . . . and that there should be a general conference held in Saco, in the state of Maine, on the 13th day of June, 1834.”  Times and Seasons 6 [November 1, 1845]: 1022–1023 (emphasis added).

Why would Brigham be traveling alone to visit the polygamous Cochranites in violation of the Lord’s direction in the Doctrine and Covenants that missionaries should always travel in pairs? 

Polygamy, as eventually adopted by the LDS Church under Brigham Young, first originated with the Cochranites.  According to Wikipedia (Jacob Cochran):

                “Jacob Cochran (also Cochrane, 1782-1836) was a non-denominational preacher born in Enfield, New Hampshire, USA who founded the Cochranites in Saco, Maine.  Cochranite worship is said to have resembled Shakerism, but which also practiced a new doctrine called spiritual wifery.  Cochranism may have influenced the Mormon doctrines of plural marriage and the United Order, as well as the free love practice called complex marriage once favored by the Oneida Community . . . .

Cochran has been called a ‘John the Baptist’ for Mormonism by Saco Valley historian G.T. Ridlon because so many Cochranites were among those who converted to Mormonism and moved west.  Although the Cochranites practiced a type of “spiritual wifery” [Note:  this is the same term used by Joseph Smith in condemning polygamy] which sanctioned multiple female partners for each man in the group, their doctrines did not include the precept of ‘eternal marriage,’ and thus differed slightly from Utah Mormon polygamy.

Latter Day Saint historical sources indicate that LDS Church missionaries were laboring successfully to make converts among Maine’s Cochranites as early as 1832:  at the Church conference held in Saco, Maine on August 21, 1835, at least seven of the newly ordained apostles were in attendance [including Brigham Young].  John C. Bennett, a leading Mormon who was excommunicated, is credited with introducing the Cochranite term spiritual wifery to Mormonism.  Bennett’s version of the multiple female partners practice appears to have more closely resembled Jacob Cochran’s doctrine than it did the precept of polygamy alleged to exist among the Latter Day Saints.”  (Emphasis added).

Although the Cochranites vanished from the history books by the end of the decade, they hadn’t really disappeared.  They had simply been folded into the LDS Church, selling their farms and shops and moving to Kirtland and eventually Nauvoo, bringing their polygamous families and teachings with them.

The similarities between the Cochranites and the LDS Church are noteworthy:

1.       Cochran used the term “spiritual wives” just as the Utah polygamists did;

2.       Cochran claimed that permission to practice polygamy must come through revelation to the leader, just as in the LDS Church’s theology;

3.       The leader’s permission was required before spiritual wifery could be practiced;

4.       “Assigning of wives” was practiced in both systems;

5.       Exchanging of wives was sometimes practiced by both (e.g., it is claimed that Joseph had ten wives that were married – six of which were married to active members);

6.       Oaths of secrecy were a requirement of Cochranism, and are still a part of the LDS temple ordinances;

7.       The “Garden of Eden” ceremony was practiced by Cochran.

What is of particular interest is the fact that Samuel Smith and Orson Hyde wrote against the Cochranites’ polygamous activities.  Orson Hyde’s Journal, dated October 11, 1832, read:

“[P]reached to a congregation of Cochranites who gave liberty; told them again to repent and go up to Zion, and we lifted our cry in the Spirit, and I hope some of them will go; but they had a wonderful lustful spirit, because they believe in a “Plurality of wives” which they call spiritual wives, knowing them not after the flesh but after the spirit, but by the appearance they knew one another after the flesh.”  (Emphasis added).

Orson Hyde was clearly denouncing polygamy, yet Joseph had purportedly revealed polygamy on July 17, 1831.[2]  Why would Samuel Smith condemn the practice of  “plurality of wives” when Joseph was supposedly preaching the doctrine as necessary for salvation?

Brigham Young’s Faulty Memory

Brigham declared “the doctrine” of polygamy was revealed to him in a vision and revelations while in England.  (There is strong testimony that Brigham was committing adultery in England.[3])  Brigham wrote:

“While we were in England, (in 1839 and 40), I think the Lord manifested to me by vision and his Spirit things [concerning polygamy] that I did not then understand.  I never opened my mouth to any one concerning them, until I returned to Nauvoo; Joseph had never mentioned this; there had never been a thought of it in the Church that I ever knew anything about at that time, but I had this for myself, and I kept it to myself.  And when I returned home, and Joseph revealed those things to me, then I understood the reflections that were upon my mind while in England. But this (communication with Joseph on the subject) was not until after I had told him what I understood—this was in 1841.  The revelation [Section 132 in the Utah Doctrine and Covenants] was given in 1843, but the doctrine was revealed before this.  Deseret News, July 1, 1874.[4]

This statement by Brigham is very important because:

1.       He admits that polygamy was not a doctrine of the Church before 1839 or 1840: “There had never been a thought of it in the Church.”  This destroys the LDS Church’s official teachings that polygamy was even thought of as a Church doctrine as early as 1831;

2.       According to Brigham, Joseph had never even mentioned polygamy as a doctrine before 1841; and

3.       It was Brigham Young who first developed the dogma of polygamy—and that he claimed he did so by Divine manifestations and by a vision.

However, in another account Brigham Young placed the revelation to Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith in 1829 while translating the Book of Mormon.  Brigham Young, quoted in Charles L. Walker, “Diary,” (Harold B. Lee Library, BYU, 1855–1902), 25–26. 

Most scholars have rejected this early date.  Brigham was not even a member at this time, so he would have heard such a story second-hand at best, and may well have misunderstood the timing.  There is nothing in the Book of Mormon that portrays plural marriage positively, so there is little which would inspire Joseph and Oliver to ask questions about it, and such questioning seems to have been a prerequisite to Joseph and Oliver’s early revelations on baptism, the priesthood, and other matters.  The journal which records the 1829 date may be in error, since there is another, earlier record in which Brigham Young opines that Joseph had the plural marriage revelation “as early as in the year 1831.”  Journal History, 26 August 1857; cited by Hyrum Leslie Andrus, Doctrines of the Kingdom (Salt Lake City, Utah: Desert Book Co., 1999), 489n436.

So when was it Brigham?  1829, 1831, 1843 (as stated in Section 132) or between 1839 and 1840?  Brigham’s faulty memory is evidence of false testimony. 

The Book of Mormon Prohibits Polygamy

Mosiah 11:1-2: 

“1. And now it came to pass that Zeniff conferred the kingdom upon Noah, one of his sons; therefore Noah began to reign in his stead; and he did not walk in the ways of his father.

2. For behold, he did not keep the commandments of God, but he did walk after the desires of his own heart.  And he had many wives and concubines.  And he did cause his people to commit sin, and do that which was abominable in the sight of the Lord.  Yea, and they did commit whoredoms and all manner of wickedness.”  (Emphasis added).

Jacob 1:15:

“And now it came to pass that the people of Nephi, under the reign of the second king, began to grow hard in their hearts, and indulge themselves somewhat in wicked practices, such as like unto David of old desiring many wives and concubines, and also Solomon, his son.”  (Emphasis added).

Jacob 2:23-30:

“23. But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes.  For behold, thus saith the Lord:  This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms[5], because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.

24. Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

25. Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.

26. Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.

27. Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord:  For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;

28. For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women.  And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

29. Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.

30. For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.”[6]  (Emphasis added).

Jacob 3:5:

“Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.”

The LDS Church has some evidence in support of its claim that Joseph Smith revealed polygamy.  However, the affidavits and claims in support of the LDS Church’s position were written well after Brigham Young had assumed leadership and moved the Church to Salt Lake City, Utah.  Further, most of the “wives” of Joseph Smith who made the allegations were in polygamous relationships under the control of Brigham Young and other leaders of the Church.     

To be fair, the LDS Church has many after-the-fact affidavits that support its allegation that Joseph Smith first revealed polygamy, including statements made by prominent LDS leaders and others, such as Brigham Young, Orson Pratt, Orson Hyde, Williams W. Phelps, Joseph F. Smith, Joseph B. Noble[7], Lyman E. Johnson, William Law, William Clayton, Lorenzo Snow, Lucy Walker Kimball, Joseph C. Kingsbury, Helen Mar Kimball (Whitney), David Fullmer, Newel K. Whitney, Eliza Snow, et al., and are found in the Journal of Discourses[8], Historical Record[9], and History of the Church. 

However, these affidavits and statements were written many years after the death of Joseph Smith and were all (as far as I can tell) written by polygamists and/or followers of Brigham Young, i.e., individuals with a very biased view on the subject.  No affidavits or journal entries were made during the life of Joseph Smith showing that Joseph Smith was engaged in polygamy.  The journal entries, including Helen Mar Kimball’s, were written many years later.  For example, Mary Lightner’s (an alleged plural wife of Joseph Smith) affidavit was published by historian Fawn Brodie, who wrote:

“Curiously, she [Mary Lightner] makes no mention of her marriage to Joseph in her autobiography . . . but on February 8, 1902, when eighty-four years old, she swore to an affidavit that said in part:  ‘I was sealed to Joseph Smith, the Prophet, by commandment. In the spring of 1831, the Savior appeared and commanded him to seal me up to everlasting life, gave me to Joseph to be with him in his Kingdom . . . . In 1834 he was commanded to take me for a wife.  I was a thousand miles from him.  He got afraid.  The angel came to him three times, the last time with a drawn sword and threatened his life.  I did not believe.  If God told him so, why did he not come and tell me?  The angel told him I should have a witness.  An angel came to me—it went through me like lightning—I was afraid.  Joseph said he came with more revelation and knowledge than Joseph ever dare reveal.  Joseph said I was his before I came here and he said all the Devils in Hell should never get me from him.  I was sealed to him in the Masonic Hall, over the old brick store by Brigham Young in February 1842 . . .” Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 443–444 (emphasis added).

Why did these purported wives of Joseph Smith fail to mention, in their personal journals or otherwise, their marriages to Joseph Smith until many years after Joseph’s death?

To this day, the LDS Church has not produced even a single word, in a sermon, lecture, statement, newspaper or LDS Church publication printed during the life of Joseph Smith, wherein Joseph, by word or deed, endorsed polygamy.

Also, none of the marriages show up on the then official current records of the Church, in violation of the Lord’s commandment that a record be kept (“The clerk of every church should keep a record of all marriages solemnized in his branch.”).  For further refutation of the above false claims and statements, which are too detailed to include herein, please see Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy: How Men Nearest the Prophet Attached Polygamy to His Name in Order to Justify Their Own Polygamous Crimes found at http://restorationbookstore.org/jsfp-index.htm. 

Moreover, combined with the fact that not one descendant of Joseph Smith (outside of his relationship with Emma) has been found through DNA evidence, the proven fact that Brigham Young fraudulently altered official Church history in support of his allegations, I find the evidence propounded by the Church dubious.  See Richard Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy:  A History, p. 303.  In short, based on the evidence, I believe that Brigham Young, and the polygamist followers of Brigham Young, lied about the origins of polygamy in order to maintain their authority and the polygamous doctrines they espoused. 

The Secret Doctrine

In response to these claims, the LDS Church has argued that plurality of wives was revealed as a “secret” doctrine as proven by a “large collection of affidavits” written long after Joseph’s death.  According to B.H. Roberts:

“It is to be observed first of all that this principle of plural marriage had to be introduced secretly, firstly, because of the traditions and prejudices of the saint themselves; and, secondly, because of the advantage that their enemies surrounding them would have over the church if once the doctrine was publicly proclaimed.  This enforced secrecy, which a reasonable prudence demanded, gave rise to apparent contradictions between the public utterance of leading brethren in the church and their having a plurality of wives under the new marriage law.”  Comprehensive History of the Church, vol. ii, pp. 103-4 (emphasis added).

B.H. Roberts further went on to say that the confusion and statements against polygamy resulted from Joseph and other leaders of the LDS Church who reproved the unsanctioned polygamy of the orient and the unauthorized polygamy of John C. Bennett.  For example, according to Parley P. Pratt, “The spiritual wife doctrine of J. C. Bennett and numerous other apostates, is as foreign from the real principles of the church as the devil is from God, or as sectarianism is from Christianity.”  Id. p. 104 (note 16).

Is the LDS Church correct?  Were the “apparent contradictions” only a result of a disagreement as to the form of polygamy and nothing more?   Joseph Smith vehemently and repeatedly preached against and denounced polygamy, without any qualification, even after Joseph was supposedly engaged in polygamous relationships.  In addition, not one child has been discovered through DNA or other evidence to be the polygamous child of Joseph Smith even though Emma bore him nine.[10]  The evidence does not support the LDS Church’s position.

Please continue to Part 10 (http://www.confessionsofanelder.blogspot.com/2012/06/case-for-joseph-smith-case-against_8755.html)

---

[1] In 1847, Henry Cobb sued Augusta Cobb for divorce.

[2] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_Latter_Day_Saint_polygamy.

^[3] On August 24, 1891, Seventy Thomas Stafford wrote a letter to Seventy Gomer R. Wells telling of improper conduct which he had witnessed on the part of Brigham Young, both in England and in Nauvoo.  Stafford wrote:

“But I am fully convinced, as I was then, that Brigham (Young), was in adultery in Manchester, England, in the fall, winter and spring of 1840 and 1841.  Elizabeth Mayer is the person with whom Brigham was then committing adultery.  My reasons are these:  We lived next door to her, under the same roof . . . . This Elizabeth Mayer had a father and a brother who were gardners; they took their dinners, as they worked a long piece from home.  After they had left for work, Brigham would step into the house, she would then lock the door and pull down the blinds and curtains, which to me was strange.  He never came to see our folks, although not five steps apart; and when he left he was always in a hurry, and she never came to the door with him when he was leaving.  This same thing occurred in Nauvoo with a woman and Brigham. Her name was Greenough; her son was about my age, was always driven out when Brigham came, the door was shut and the curtains lowered.  I was puzzled to know why he acted so, if he had a good heart, and was engaged in the business of teaching the truth, why drive the boy out? Why not come also and see my mother, only a few steps apart?  I am now, and was then, satisfied that he was in adultery, in Manchester, England. The seeds of polygamy was sown, and Brigham the sower . . . . I was present at a meeting in a grove [at Nauvoo], about three weeks before Joseph and Hyrum were murdered, when Joseph made a public statement in the presence of three thousand people, that polygamy was being practiced secretly by some; that it had crept into the church secretly and must be put down speedily or the church would be driven from Nauvoo.   I am satisfied that Joseph was not in favor of it (polygamy) at all.  Would swear to all I have stated.”  R. C. Evans, Autobiography of Elder R. C. Evans, 334–335.

[4] In contrast, according to the LDS Church’s institute manual:  “It is clear that the Prophet Joseph Smith received section 132 before it was recorded but delayed making it known. The Prophet knew the Lord’s will on plural marriage within the new and everlasting covenant probably as early as 1831 (see History of the Church, 5:xxix). In March 1843 he spoke to William Clayton of eternal marriage. In July of that year, he was discussing the doctrine with his brother Hyrum in William Clayton’s presence when Hyrum said, “If you will write the revelation on celestial marriage, I will take it and read it to Emma, and I believe I can convince her of its truth, and you will hereafter have peace.” (History of the Church, 5:xxxii).”  See http://institute.lds.org/manuals/doctrine-and-covenants-institute-student-manual/dc-in-131-132.asp.

[5] For example, Orson Pratt gave the initial sermon which announced polygamy as a doctrine, which he delivered in the Tabernacle, in Salt Lake City, August 29, 1852, entitled “Celestial Marriage.” Orson declared:  ‘[A]mong them are many spirits that are more noble, more intelligent than others, that were called the great and mighty ones, reserved until the dispensation of the fulness of times . . . . This is the reason why the Lord is sending them here, brethren and sisters; they are appointed to come and take their bodies here . . . . Then is it not reasonable, and consistent that the Lord should say unto His faithful and chosen servants . . . take unto yourselves more wives?”  Journal of Discourses 1 [1854]: 62–63.

[6] The LDS Church interprets this verse as follows:  “For if I will, saith the Lord of hosts, raise up [righteous] seed [or people] unto me, I will command my people [to practice polygamy]: otherwise [if the Lord does not give the commandment to practice polygamy], they shall hearken unto these things [Jacob’s instruction to not practice it].” This interpretation makes this passage completely out of harmony with all the rest of Jacob’s revelation against polygamy.  The better interpretation of the passage shows that it is definitely monogamous, and that it is in harmony with all the rest of the revelation which the Lord gave through Jacob.  It is: “For if I will, saith the Lord of hosts, raise up [righteous] seed unto me, I will command my people [the Lord will be their commander—He will give them commandments to obey]: otherwise [if the Lord is not their commander; or they do not obey His commandments], they shall hearken unto these things [they shall practice the sins of polygamy].” 

[7] On June 26, 1869 (twenty-five years later) Joseph B. Noble (the first man who purportedly had the first child from a plural wife) claimed that on April 5, 1841, he “married or sealed Louisa Beaman to Joseph Smith, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, according to the order of celestial marriage revealed to the said Joseph Smith.” First, Louisa was Mr. Noble’s sister and she later married Brigham Young as a plural wife (and had five sons with Brigham as opposed to zero from Joseph).  Second, the claim that Ms. Beaman had been married to Joseph first originated with the despicable Dr. John Bennett in 1842, which Joseph denied.  Bennett wrote:  “In concluding this subject, however, I will semi-state two or more cases, among the vast number, where Joe Smith was privately married to his spiritual wives—in the case of Mrs. A**** S****, by Apostle Brigham Young; and in that of Miss L***** B***** [Louisa Beaman], by Elder Joseph Bates Noble.”  John C. Bennett, The History of the Saints; or, An Expose of Joe Smith and Mormonism [Boston: Leland & Whiting, 1842], 256.  The story of the sword carrying angel appeared much later.  Finally, LDS Church leaders state Louisa Beaman was married to Joseph on April 5, 1841, even though she was not baptized until two years later – on May 11, 1843 (see Millennial Star 21: 75). 

[8] E.g., Journal of discourses, vol. iii., p. 266.  “It has been claimed, chiefly by the sons of the Prophet Joseph Smith, and the founders of what is known as the ‘Reorganized Church of Latter-day Saints’ that Joseph Smith never introduced either the doctrine or the practice of the plurality of wives in the church; but the evidence is overwhelmingly against this contention . . . . there is a large collection of affidavits upon the subject in the files of the Historian’s Office, Salt Lake City, a number of which – ten in all – are published in the Historical Record, together with many less formal statements and evidences.  Some of the affidavits and statements are from women who were married to Joseph Smith, and some by those who performed the ceremonies (Historical Record, Jenson, pp. 219-234), and other persons whose relationship to Nauvoo events gave them exceptional opportunities to know the truth of the matters whereof they testified.”  Cited by A Comprehenive History of the Church, Century One, Vol. II, B.H. Roberts (1965), p. 103, note 15.

[9] In May 1887, almost forty-three years after Joseph Smith's death, the LDS Church published sixteen pages of affidavits and testimonies in the Historical Record.

[10] How this fact fits within the LDS Church claim that Joseph revealed polygamy as part of a “righteous seed” theory (see Jacob 1:30 and D&C 132) is unexplained.  For example, some have argued that maybe Joseph never had sexual relationships with his plural wives out of respect to Emma.  However, Brigham Young certainly had 57 children by at least sixteen different wives.  Why the difference?  Also, if these marriages were asexual, wouldn’t Joseph have proclaimed the same.