Lost Apostles a fascinating look into the early years of the LDS Church

 

Signature has a Mormon history book, "The Lost Apostles: Forgotten Members of Mormonism's Original Quorum of Twelve," that provides a valuable look at the early years of Mormonism. Authors William Shepard and H. Michael Marquardt outline characteristics of the original apostles. They were mostly frontier men, chosen for their candor, stamina, independence, testimonies and personalities. These 12 were not administrators; they were young action-oriented men, sent out with virtually no assistance to study during the day, preach at night and try to baptize enough new members to form a small branch. If they were rejected, they left the "unbelievers" with a curse. If an apostle encountered a comely, unattached young woman, it was not uncommon for him to marry her, enjoy a quick honeymoon, and then go back to the mission, with a young wife waiting for his return.

The "Lost Apostles" are John Boynton, Lyman Johnson, his brother Luke Johnson, Thomas Marsh, the first president of the 12, William Smith, brother to the church's founder, and William McLellin. To those with at least an acquaintance of Mormon history, perhaps only Boynton and Lyman Johnson are historical strangers, no more than pictures in a church almanac. They are the two who managed to divorce themselves emotionally from Mormonism. Of the others, two -- Marsh and Luke Johnson -- returned to the now-Utah church, one, McLellin, skipped from Mormon offshoot to offshoot, never content, and William Smith, the legitimate rogue of the outfit, was finally allowed into the reorganized LDS church led by his nephew, ... so long as he behaved himself.

"Lost Apostles," is most interesting when it details the passions, strife, successes, setbacks, celebrations and violence that characterized Mormonism's growth in the 1830s, prior to the emigration to Nauvoo. As Joseph Smith moved the Mormons into the frontier, there were inevitable clashes between the unified newcomers and the older settlers, who didn't cotton to a large new voting bloc roiling the land. A lack of tact and propensity toward violence from both sides inevitably led to outnumbered Mormons being forced out. These exoduses were conducted under duress, in dangerous situations, and innocents died. Although the apostles were supposed to be separate from administrative duties, in reality they were not. They were often caught in the conflicts, internal and external, that roiled Mormonism.

What led most of the "lost apostles" from Mormonism was the 1838-1839 years in Ohio and Missouri. Besides the increasing violence, which became deadly, church leaders made the common mistake of wanting to get rich quick. They started an "anti-bank," due to not being able to get a charter, and created their own money (this could be done 180 years ago). During a brief real estate bubble, investors imagined themselves rich. The bubble broke, sellers and investors wanted their money, and the "currency" of the financial institution became worthless. As the authors detail, there's nothing like disputes over money to destroy harmony. Boynton, the Johnson brothers, McLellin, and later Marsh, left the church during this period. Other prominent church leaders who left were Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris and David Whitmer. Others who came close to long-time estrangement include apostles Parley P. Pratt, his brother Orson Pratt, and Orson Hyde. William Smith, a product of nepotism, clung to the quorum due to his familial relationship. However, after Joseph Smith was murdered in 1844, his thuggish behavior was not tolerated much longer.

There is a paradox in this account. All of these men witnessed what they believed were heavenly manifestations, they believed that Jesus Christ had blessed them through revelation and assigned them to be apostles.So why was the quorum shattered by greed and violence in only several years? The authors do note that despite disagreements that flared into violence, all of the men were either cordial to, or even confidantes toward one another for the rest of their lives. They were generally kind to the members of the faith they had left. Even John Boynton, who became a celebrated physician and inventor in the mid-1800s, took time out of a tour to visit his old friends in Salt Lake City. Boynton was a man who made pains to avoid mention of his youthful adventure with Mormonism, but decades later, was drawn to reminiscing with his old companions. The short answer to the paradox is that most of the early leaders of the "Mormonites" retained their belief in the Book of Mormon, as well as the early appeal that it was a book designed to usher in the return of Christ, within a generation. Their reasons for leaving, or being forced out via excommunication, were probably close to what the loquacious McLellin often said; in their opinion, the leaders, Joseph Smith, etc., became corrupted, and fell short of the principles they believed the church required.

The "Lost Apostles" is a sympathetic account of the six, but not hagiographies. The commitment to Mormonism that drove these men to be early-Mormon historical figures is acknowledged. Most of the book covers various episodes of Mormon history as the apostles related to them. Late in the book the apostles' lives post-1844 (Smith's death) are covered. As a scholarly offering of Mormon history, it's another of a series of books, including biographies of Parley P. Pratt and Brigham Young, that are part of an ongoing process of shedding "teddy bear" accounts of Mormon history with more detailed, accurate, and fulfilling, "grizzly bear" accounts. The book contains a few 1830s' journalistic accounts of the apostles' missionary efforts that are fascinating to read.

I'll conclude the review with brief recaps of the six apostles and how their lives ended:

John Boynton: Like Lyman Johnson, he was one of two apostles able to shed Mormonism. He became a legitimate celebrity of the 19th century, with inventions, 4,000 lectures and fame as a naturalist doctor. His ultimately unsuccessful marriage to a much younger woman in 1865 was illustrated in Harper's Weekly. He died in 1879 in Syracuse, N.Y.

Lyman Johnson: He stayed close to the roots of Mormonism, and was involved in legal cases of interest to the church in the 1840s. Cordial to his former apostles, he never returned to the LDS church. Tragically, he died Dec. 20, 1859, when the frozen Mississippi River broke while he and another man were crossing on a sled. He had just rented a nearby hotel to run.

Luke Johnson: Even as an excommunicated member, Johnson, as a marshal, helped the Smiths escape from lawmen seeking the Mormon prophet. In 1846, he returned to membership in the church. He emigrated to Utah, where his skills as a dentist helped the pioneers. In Utah, he assumed a respected standing west of Salt Lake City, but was passed over when a spot in the Quorum of the Twelve opened. He died in July 1861, somewhat broken by the recent murder of his son. His younger wife, America, outlived him by 39 years and is buried in Ogden.

Thomas Marsh: Many Mormons know Marsh through the myth of him "leaving the church due to his wife's fight with another sister member over milk strippings." That is nonsense. Marsh left the church in Far West, Mo., because he opposed the violence of some church members' retaliation against anti-Mormons. He testified against the church in hearings. Some blame Marsh's testimony for the extermination order against Mormons issued by Missouri Gov. Lilburn W. Boggs. When, almost 20 years later, Marsh, poverty-stricken, in ill health, abandoned by his wife, and virtually friendless, requested to be admitted to the Utah church, it was granted. Marsh died in Ogden, a pauper, on Jan. 25, 1865. Despite his return to Mormonism, Brigham Young and other church leaders frequently mocked Marsh in his last years, even when he was on the stand with them preparing to deliver a penitent lecture. This cruel behavior indicates that the circumstances of Marsh's apostasy must have had bitter roots.

William McLellin: Thanks to his legacy of diaries, McLellin is a well-traveled figure in Mormon history. Considered a learned but temperamental man, McLellin, perhaps engaging in historical license, created a history of himself joining a church of pure christianity, anchored by the Book of Mormon, without priesthood, apostles, etc. The mercurial McLellin, who lived a very long life, stayed in contact with his former colleagues, frequently reproving them. He joined several offshoots of Mormonism, often as a leader, but eventually became disenchanted and would leave each, usually within several months. He died in 1883.

William Smith: As the authors note, Smith was a legacy apostle, chosen over Phineas Young because brother Joseph Smith requested William. Although the authors note that William Smith was devoted to his brother's church, he was a scoundrel. He was a lecher, a chronic adulterer, a man who enjoyed the company of criminals, and was easily capable of abandoning a wife and young children. He skipped to many offshoots of Mormonism, only to be thrown out of the groups as soon as his character was revealed. In the later years of his life, Joseph Smith III, first president of the Reorganized LDS Church, allowed a chastened William to lecture about his father's early years, but kept his uncle on a very tight leash. William Smith died on Nov. 13, 1893, a few days after catching cold during an RLDS speaking engagement.

-- Doug Gibson

This post was originally published at StandardNET

A Mormon dissident in Nauvoo - The Writings of Oliver H. Olney

Review by Doug Gibson

Until recently, not many interested in Mormon history knew of Oliver H. Olney. Now, at least 170 years after his death, we can peruse the writings and life of a Nauvoo-era church member-turned-critic.

We are not even sure when this Mormon dissident in Nauvoo died. Probably about 1847 or 1848; and he'd left the city by then, says Dr. Richard G. Moore of BYU's Religious Studies Center. Moore merits respect for spending nearly a decade reading, deciphering, studying and editing Olney's writings, which are stored at Yale University. The result is "The Writings of Oliver H. Olney: April 1842 to February 1843 -- Nauvoo, Illinois," Greg Kofford Books, Salt Lake City, 2019. (Amazon link is here.)

It makes for interesting but very tough reading; Olney was mostly a poor writer. A few examples of his writings, which dominates the book, will be shared later. I have read the book once and watched a conversation with the author twice (link below in paragraph). Key historical nuggets are Olney's  knowledge and opinions of polygamy in Nauvoo, and plans of the church moving West. Olney was no major player in Nauvoo, and his ruminations on these issues, to me, indicate they were talked about in the city in greater detail earlier than history has assumed.

For me, Olney is the subject of Moore's book, more so than an account of life in 1842 Nauvoo. Other than one recollection that he was a strong man, picturing him is difficult. Trying to grasp his motivations, beliefs, his change, his candor, pride, and why he changed is the challenge. He seems a fascinating man with an impressive early LDS Church history. Yet he gradually became an obsessed, sometimes delusional Mormon apostate. Moore shares what we know of his life in a well-researched introduction. (I also urge readers to watch this interview with Moore at a Greg Kofford Books lecture series).

He married Alice Mary Johnson in 1820 and they were baptized about 11 years later. Alice was the sister of early LDS apostles Luke and Lyman Johnson. In the 1830s, Olney led the teacher's quorum in Kirtland, Ohio, and is listed as an elder and seventy in church records. His family moved to Missouri and later fled to Nauvoo. The Olney couple must have valued their dedication and sacrifices for the young church and its prophet, Joseph Smith.

The death of his wife, Alice, in the summer of 1841 must have broke Olney. As Moore notes, Olney was in Connecticut, likely on a mission. That's a harsh situation in which to learn your spouse has died. When he returned to Nauvoo, he changed from, by appearances, a devoted follower of the church hierarchy to harsh critic. Olney publicized his harsh revelations and criticisms, with a predictable result. He had his membership taken away in early-mid 1842, in a court led by the soon-to-be-discovered scoundrel John C. Bennett. Olney was slammed in the church newspaper Times and Seasons as one peddling revelations and preferring darkness and evil deeds, writes Moore.

But he was not the average, stereotypical dissident. His criticisms were of a populist nature. Olney was displeased by what he saw as an elite hierarchy of church leaders living off the hard work and sacrifice of poorer members. Furthermore, he charged these leaders with hypocrisy and sinful behavior, such as elitism, greed and polygamy. He believed that the interest in Masonry, and the new Relief Society, were also part of the elitism.

Moore adds Olney was later charged with stealing from Joseph Smith's store. According to Moore, he confessed, citing his poverty as an excuse. He escaped from incarceration, and as Moore adds, there's no record of the case resolution. It's a mystery that Olney continued to live close to a year longer in Nauvoo, attending Mormon meetings, and even marrying again, to a devout LDS woman named Phoebe Wheeler. Despite being out and about, Olney claimed his presence in Nauvoo was dangerous for him. Perhaps he lacked the means to leave. He was so poor that he wasn't always able to take care of his two daughters.

He also believed he would lead the church to repentance and restore its glory. He claimed heavenly visits with the Prophet Elijah and his wife, Jesus Christ, a group of heavenly beings, the "Ancients of Days," and even the slain early LDS apostle, David Patten. He must have known Patten in Missouri, talked with him and was likely impressed by him.

 Although he never collected any wealth, he claimed he would be led to riches to support his efforts. He also claimed God would rise him as a great leader after he reformed the church. Although he was a harsh critic of polygamy, Olney seems to contradict himself, claiming that God would provide him up to 60 women to be female companions and assist him. One of those women, Moore notes, was his future wife, Phoebe.

Here is a fragment of Olney's writing in April of 1842 indicating his disapproval of Joseph Smith: "... I see many by by Joseph directed he said by the Othoroty of the Father and son but I said in my hart he lied but we read that the sin of ignorance is to be winked at so it is not laid to his charge Altho I could a told him long since of his standing before God that had no more power with him than any other man ..."

From July, 1842, Olney describes his experience with the "Ancients of Days." "... They have put things in commotion that will cause a Revolution in this and foren lands Much is adoing that speaks of a savior That died that has taken a stand on the Earth A spirit of confusion discord disunion is the theme from this time forth But the time has ariven, That much is adoing to prepare for the coming of the son of man as he is soon a comming In power and Glory ... Dark shades must be removed in honour of the Savior ..."

In August of 1842, Olney expresses his frustration with a church he believes is corrupt. After citing examples such as The Danites and John C. Bennett and other, unnamed church leaders, he writes: "... I have looked for their good deeds but they keep out of my sight or they have known that comes to light ... (Moore adds in a note that Olney probably meant "none,' not "known".)

In January of 1843, his disillusionment is near completion: "I again feel it my duty to write of a party that Is highly exalted for Piety and fame They have much a going and saying that looks to me strange for people that profess to be men of God As I am daily with them I am inclined to say that if they ever had wisdom it is flead ..."

Olney wrote songs and poetry. Late in his life he published two small books, anti-Mormon tracts on the absurdity of Mormonism and evil of spiritual wifery. Letters are included, one of encouragement allegedly by William Smith, church patriarch at the time, and soon to be excommunicated. Both books are included in "The Writings of Oliver H. Olney." They seem to have been edited; there's far more coherence in these than in other, more spontaneous writings.

The secret, in my opinion, of discovering Olney's populism, and his apostasy, lie in his admiration of President Andrew Jackson, and his probable deep reliance on his wife, Alice. Moore comments on both Jackson and Alice in the book and the online lecture. Alice Olney received a very reverent obituary from Eliza R. Snow. It's highly likely that she was a source of strength to her husband, and a widely admired church sister. Oliver and Alice had survived a lot of persecution, and it's easy to see Olney reaching to his wife to strengthen his faith. Her death, coupled with poverty and perhaps internal anger at his current state and exclusion from higher levels of the faith, gradually exiled Olney from the church.

His Jacksonian political beliefs, placing the common man as an opponent of wealthy, elite interests, respecting the Constitution, living a good, honest life, and not exploiting others for greed, would provide him sustenance as he moved from a church that he believed was corrupted. As an American Jacksonian, Olney would resist any situation in which he believed he was being discriminated against. Here is a portion of a poem Olney wrote about Jackson that is published in the book:

"... He soon took an honourable station
To defend a free Constitution
With weapons of war He moved in array
Against those that did oppose
The American wrights
He honoured his station
At home and abroad
By being honest valient
Upwright and Prudent. ..."

During his above-mentioned lecture, Moore offers another motivation for Olney's apostasy. "Olney wants the Kirtland church," he said. He adds that wanting "the Kirtland church" was shared by many members who became disillusioned with the church's history in Missouri and Nauvoo. The idea that "Nauvoo was a bad place" was shared by Olney who likely idealized what he saw as an earlier, more pure, uncontaminated church.

It's likely that academics and Mormon history buffs (I am among the latter) are perhaps the only people who will read "The Writings of Oliver H. Olney." But I hope it sells well, and gets in many libraries. I recall scholar Maxine Hanks, in a recent Dialogue, urging people to respect everyone's faith journey. It's possible that Olney's faith journey was not inappropriate given his life history, sacrifices and trials. I hope we can learn more about him. That's unlikely; but I can hope that he's at peace and loved by a deity who understands why he felt it important to take a shift away from the norm in 1842.

Early Mormon grudge against President Van Buren lasted a long time

Mormons believe that the higher level of salvation, or exaltation, a person earns after their time on Earth determines the extent of their power and responsibilities throughout eternity. Temple ceremonies on earth are connected to the Mormon view of the hereafter. As can be expected, energetic Mormons have done temple work for just about all of the U.S. presidents and even founding fathers. For a long time, there was one key exception: the eighth U.S. president, Martin Van Buren. (See above in this Matthew Brady photograph)

Although it wasn’t true, I was told as a child by more than one adult LDS Church member that temple ceremonies had not been performed for President Van Buren as punishment for his deliberate betrayal to the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith and the early LDS church members. And indeed, Smith was very bitter when, on a visit to Washington D.C. in 1839, President Van Buren emphatically rejected the young church’s pleas to allow church members to settle peacefully in Missouri or at least be paid for their losses at the hands of that state’s anti-Mormon mobs. In early 1840, Smith met again with Van Buren, who uttered these LDS-iconic words: “...your cause is just, but I can do nothing for you.

Although the incident — to Van Buren — was probably one of many minor annoyances a president had to deal with, to the early, clannish, persecuted Saints, Van Buren became the scapegoat, or at least symbol, of what members perceived as indifference and mistreatment from the federal government. Before he died, Smith said that Van Buren “was not as fit as my dog, for the chair of state; for my dog will make an (effort) to protect his absurd and insulted master ...” Later, when the LDS members moved to Utah, then-Prophet Brigham Young condemned Van Buren from the pulpit.

The rumor that Van Buren never had his temple work done probably started in 1877, when then-Prophet Wilford Woodruff oversaw most of the U.S. presidents’ temple work but deliberately left out Van Buren, and 15th U.S. president, James Buchanan, who sent the U.S. Army to Utah in 1857.

In an interesting irony — according to the book, “Presidents and Prophets,” by Michael K. Winder — despite Woodruff’s actions, Van Buren, who died in 1862, had actually been baptized for the dead in the Salt Lake City Endowment House in 1876. However, it was not until 1938, during the tenure of then-Prophet Heber J. Grant, that Van Buren received his full temple endowments. Buchanan had received his six years prior. Still, the long feelings of enmity toward Van Buren that church leaders cultivated for scores of years was strong enough to last well into the latter half of the 20th century.

It’s difficult for people who are not members of the LDS Church to understand the fuss over posthumous baptisms and temple work, but the importance attached to these ordinances by members are part of what makes the LDS Church unique and contributes to the still-quirky image of my faith 180 years after its founding..

-- Doug Gibson

-- Originally published at StandardNET in 2010.