In 1845, William Smith, Mormon apostles waged war in the LDS press

 

Originally published in 2013 at StandardBlogs

There’s an interesting article in the summer 2013 issue of the “Journal of Mormon History.” Christine Elyse Blythe has contributed a long article on the tenure of William Smith as church patriarch. William is generally considered in LDS history as a kind of “bad boy” of the Smiths, a “legacy apostle” who survived in the church while elder brother Joseph Smith was alive but was eventually kicked out of the church after he died.

There’s a lot of history in the article, “William Smith’s Patriarchal Blessings and Contested Authority in the Post-Martyrdom Church,” but what caught my interest was an intramural newspaper feud over who was best to lead the church a year after Joseph Smith had been murdered. William Smith, despite already shaky relationships with Brigham Young and the Quorum of the 12 Apostles, was named Presiding Patriarch of the LDS Church. It was a lucrative gig for Smith. Besides the high authority of being the church patriarch, William earned a buck per patriarchal blessing, according to Blythe. That doesn’t sound like much, but after 300 blessings over six months, William had earned roughly what a full-time laborer of that era would earn over half a year.

(I digress here to tell readers that receiving a patriarchal blessing is a rite of passage for faithful Latter-day Saints. Those born into an active LDS family usually receive a blessing, from a local patriarch, at the age of 15 or 16. The blessings are considered revelation from God. Indeed, many blessings are described as part of blessings one received in the pre-existence prior to birth. The blessings also provide a relationship to the recipient of their place in the House of Israel.)

In Smith’s time, the presiding patriarch of the LDS Church was considered an elite leader, comparable in rank to an apostle or prophet. Hyrum Smith had preceded William Smith as patriarch. As Blythe recounts, a careful reading of many of William Smith’s patriarchal blessings include words from Smith that assigned him as the LDS leader with the highest authority. As Blythe writes, “… in a blessing given to William A. Beebe, the patriarch concluded: ‘by the highest authority in the church of God I seal thee up to eternal life ...’ This phrase, ‘highest authority in the church’ appeared six times in William’s patriarchal blessings in just over one month.”

Patriarchal blessings, while recorded, are considered personal, and — as Blythe notes — it’s possible the subtle hints in William Smith’s blessings did not get much notice. However, William Smith made his intentions public with an essay in the LDS Church newspaper “Times and Seasons.” In the essay, “Patriarchal,” Blythe notes that William Smith cast himself as “a living martyr,” worthy of continuing in the same high, prophetic place in the post-martyrdom church as his slain brothers, Joseph and Hyrum.

William Smith’s essay was boosted by a testimonial to his claims by W.W. Phelps, an assistant editor at “Times and Seasons.” Phelps, who eventually followed Brigham Young to Utah, wrote that William is “governed by the spirit of the living God.” As Blythe notes, that phrase suggested an autonomy for Smith as patriarch. That was not a trial balloon that the LDS church’s leadership wanted out there.

So, as Blythe notes, Apostle John Taylor penned a rebuttal in the very next issue in the “Times and Seasons.” What Taylor focused on was the debate over whether William Smith was the “patriarch over the church” or “patriarch to the church.” Taylor was direct and to the point in letting church members know the answer. He wrote: “We have been asked, ‘Does not patriarch over the whole church’ place Brother William Smith at the head of the whole church as president? Ans. No. Brother William is not patriarch over the whole church; but patriarch TO the church, and as such he was ordained. The expression ‘over the whole church,’ is a mistake made by W.W. Phelps.”

Taylor, who of course was speaking for Brigham Young and the rest of the Quorum, made it clear what pecking order William Smith had to follow to remain in the Mormon faith. Nevertheless, William Smith remained in the church a while longer. Blythe notes that he gave nine “second blessings” as patriarch, an indicator that the publicity in “Times and Seasons” had boosted his claim.

But it was a matter of time before William Smith and the LDS Church, under Young and the Apostles, would have a divorce. Blythe relates that later in 1845, William Smith trumpeted a claim from Lucy Mack Smith, his mother, that she had had a revelation, with God saying “Thy son William he shall have power over the Churches …” and “… The presidency of the Church belongs to William ...” Soon afterward, Lucy Mack Smith clarified the “revelation,” saying it was just for her family. Around that time, William Smith threatened to leave the Mormons and take all the Smiths with him, adds Blythe. Smith later retracted that threat as well. By August, as Blythe notes, William Smith was complaining that “There seems to be a severe influence working against me and the Smith family in this place.”

Smith left the Mormons, was excommunicated and, like many other Mormon leaders who didn’t go to Utah, hopscotched among different branches of Mormonism. He tried a position with the James J. Strang “Strangites,” and later started his own church for a while, and had an alliance with the Lyman Wight branch in Texas. All that ended and improbably, William Smith was rebaptized as a Mormon in 1860. That failed to last as well. Eventually, Smith became a member of the Reorganized LDS church. Although the uncle tried to persuade his nephew, church leader Joseph Smith III to make him an apostle or presiding patriarch, he was unsuccessful. William Smith died in 1893.

The very short intramural newspaper battle between Smith, a sort of populist threat to the church led by Young and the apostles, and the rebuttal by John Taylor, which more or less ended Smith’s effort to become a Mormon leader, is fascinating to me as a journalist. Try to imagine today’s prominent Latter-day Saints waging a public relations battle — against each other — in “The Mormon Times,” “Church News,” or “The Ensign.”

It would never happen, of course. But it did 168 years ago, and it must have made for eager reading by Latter-day Saints.

Another excellent source for William Smith’s short tenure as LDS church patriarch is the summer 1983 issue of “Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought.”

-- Doug Gibson

Jimmy Stewart’s other Christmas film -- 40 years of Mr. Krueger's Christmas

    Most of the world associates the actor Jimmy Stewart and Christmas with the marvelous Frank Capra film, “It’s a Wonderful Life.”  And that is a classic tale, with everyman George Bailey learning, at his most depressed hour, how much a town needs him.

     But there is another Jimmy Stewart Christmas movie, “Mr. Krueger’s Christmas,” made by the Mormon Church in 1980. (Watch the film here) It used to be a fixture on TV stations across the nation during the holidays.  It is not an advertisement for the Mormon Church.  Rather, it’s a story of an elderly widower’s optimism and faith that carries him through life, particularly during times such as Christmas, when loneliness can be heightened.

     Stewart, who gives a great performance, plays Willie Krueger, an elderly widower who lives alone with a cat in the basement of an apartment house where he serves as janitor.  We don’t know anything about Mr. Krueger’s past, other than he is a widower and alone this Christmas Eve.  Mr. Krueger is a bit of a Walter Mitty character.  He likes to daydream.  His daydreams are mostly childlike.  He listens to the Mormon Tabernacle Choir on an LP and imagines conducting it.  He peers through a glass shop window at a fancy suit and imagines himself wearing it at a fancy function.  I’m sure most of us have similar daydreams.

    Just as Mr. Krueger is settling in for a lonely Christmas night, he hears carolers outside.  Pleasantly surprised, he shouts from the basement for them to join him for a cup of hot chocolate.  The carolers, who appear well off, are leery of Mr. Krueger, not in a mean way as much as a condescending “this is an odd, old guy” way.  Mr. Krueger excitedly prepares for their visit but they merely stand at his door, sing a song and leave.  All except for a little girl, Clarissa, who wanders into the small home and leaves her mittens.  This paves the way for a second encounter between Mr. Krueger and the carolers.

     I won’t give away the ending except to say that before the reunion there is a deeply moving daydream where Mr. Krueger, looking at a baby Jesus nativity piece, imagines he is at the birth of Christ.  He kneels before the baby Jesus and thanks his Savior for always loving him, no matter if he deserved it or not.  He thanks Jesus for being with him when his wife died and for reminding him to be compassionate to a lonely, cantankerous neighbor.

     This is a powerful scene that establishes Christ’s love – and its power to raise our spirits no matter what – as the main theme of Mr. Krueger’s Christmas.  In fact, it makes the final scene with the carolers seem almost an afterthought.  Mr. Krueger, we learn, can maintain his optimism, his childlike charity and love, no matter what life throws at him.

     Again, there is no proselytizing for the Mormon Church in this film.  That broadens its appeal and certainly helped more people see it.  It’s very popular on the Internet Movie Database, with an 8.0 rating out of a 10 high score.

     The 26-minute film has mostly disappeared from television.  Some people say it is hard to find.  In Utah, a quick trip to Seagulls or Deseret Book will find it easily. (That may not be so easy anymore. Deseret Book does not appear to sell the film today. Ebay has a lot of copies for sale.)  In 2005, it was re-released on DVD with a remastered musical score and sent to Ensign magazine subscribers.  My copy of it comes with three other LDS-filmed shorts, including the moving four-minute short, “The Nativity,” that recounts Christ’s birth.

     If you haven’t seen this film in more than a few years, hunt it down.  It’s worth another viewing.  In a press conference when the film was released, Stewart, succinct and to the point, summed up why he did the film:

     “I liked the script.  I liked the message.  I thought it was time we needed something like this.”

--

This review from long ago (10-plus years) did not even survive in Google Wayback. Glad we had a copy of the Standard Works page to transcribe and bring back Cal Grondahl's wonderful cartoon. (In the early Standard Works days, the cartoons were black and white.) Happy 40th anniversary for this iconic film. I last recall Mr. Krueger's Christmas being promoted at least 15 years ago. We were handed DVDs at church during a Christmas service. But today, I'm sure a healthy number of people watch the film during December.

--- Doug Gibson

--- Originally published at StandardBlogs

Review: Exploring Mormon Thought - God's Plan to Heal Evil

It's difficult to blend the "good news" of the Gospel of Christ with evil. Evil is the opposite of righteousness. Yet it will not discriminate the wicked from the faithful. Evil can cause us to doubt our creator's divinity, his powers and his consistency. Its residual effects can lead to permanent discouragement, bitterness, and apostasy. 

In contrast, others can use their faith to endure evil, and even strengthen their beliefs.

How can we explain evil? Or more so, how can we place evil in a plan of a benevolent God? Blake T. Ostler, author of the Exploring Mormon Thought series for Greg Kofford Books, has written the fourth volume, "God's Plan to Heal Evil," 2020, Salt Lake City. (Here are purchase links to Greg Kofford Books and Amazon.)

Examples of evil include the murder of a young child, senseless deaths due to accidents, and examples of disease causing lives to end prematurely. As a father who helplessly held his infant son as he died -- due to an imperfect heart -- soon after birth, I can understand this as evil. Evil moves from a theory to be discussed to a unique, deeply personal experience, when one suffers from it.

Ostler addresses this question: how powerful can God be if he allows evil? All of us have heard the phrase, "it's God's will." Or we have heard that "God respects natural law," so evil has to occur. These are well-meaning arguments that anyone who has experienced will hear. But are they are inconsistent statements, more platitudes than explanations? 

God's power may only be persuasive, and not definitive. If so, prayer is essential.

But how consistent is God if he allows countless innocents to suffer evil while sparing others the same fate through "miracles?" Some miracles are related in the Scriptures; others by well-meaning but insensitive individuals thanking God for providing a miracle that spared them death or other adversity. The question can develop: why are they favored, and not me or my family? Is that really God's plan?

Ostler's solution to these seeming inconsistencies -- which he does not regard as reasons to doubt God -- is to turn evil into love. As followers of the Gospel who are on a path to becoming like God, we must learn "the kind of love that commands us to love our enemies." We need to repay evil with love, the author asserts. It's part of our life-on-earth contract that we consent to suffer the consequences of evil and work to turn the adversity into love. 

Ostler writes: "... we must elicit love both for and from those who carry out such evils ..." He uses Christ's Sermon on the Mount as an example of this theology. "... Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; ..." 

God wants us to have a fulfilling and challenging life, Ostler writes. We are asked to progress spiritually through life. Turning evil into love is a challenge, but -- as the author notes -- we have divine assistance. Angels are on earth, ready to help us achieve the spiritual strength necessary to heal evil and turn it into a positive spiritual force.

This concept reminds me of C.S. Lewis' book, "The Great Divorce,' in which "The Teacher," guiding the narrator through his tour to the outskirts of heaven, says: "They say of some temporal suffering, 'No future bliss can make up for it,' not knowing that Heaven, once attained, will work backwards and turn even that agony into a glory."

Turning "agony into a glory" captures the theme of Ostler's "God's Plan to Heal Evil." Placing that theme in the context of Mormonism provides an opportunity for that to be accomplished on earth. Learning to love like God loves is part of our learning process toward divinity.

A final note: There is a lot of valuable information in "God's Plan to Heal Evil." I recommend it. But be patient with the writing. It is dense, thick writing, to a fault. I fear that may stifle readers. But persevere through the text; perhaps limit reading to 10, 20 pages a day. And buy a dictionary. It's worth the read.

--- Doug Gibson