The Blood in Their Veins provides a fascinating history of the Kimballs

 

Review by Doug Gibson

I must say, immediately, that if you are one who pursues Mormon history, particularly its first century, "The Blood in Their Veins: The Kimballs, polygamy, and the Shaping of Mormonism," by Andrew Kimball, Signature Books, 2025, is a must have. (Amazon link here.)

It encompasses the extremely large family that early Mormon leader Heber C Kimball and spouse Vilate created with their marriage, conversion, embrace of polygamy, and journey to Utah. This is not a faith-promoting let's-leave-out-the-uncomfortable-bits books of the type that used to be the norm within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

But its honesty and candor provide a greater benefit. Readers will feel much affection and admiration for  these pioneers of the faith. We grieve with the hardships and tragedies they endured. The resilence and devotion to the early Mormon faith nearly all -- depicted in the book -- strived for is inspiring. And their weaknesses and frailities can provide empathy.

Told through diaries, journals, letters, newspaper accounts, and other historical ledgers, "The Blood in Their Veins ..." underscores how difficult times were then. Regular occurrences were infants, and mothers, dying at birth. Nature was more cruel than it is today; toddlers regularly died in accidents; injured and sick adults would linger and die from illnesses and accidents not fatal today. Both Heber and Vilate died within months of each other. Heber from the effects of a buggy accident.

His death did not lead to wealth. His large family, while possessed of an historical prominence, did not enjoy material success, or at times even comfort. Sons went into various tasks, including farming an icy section of Cache County, Utah. Others attempted to be salesmen or business entrepreneurs. Others served as writers, farmhands, scribes, municipal government employees, laborers. 

A liability of polygamy was an inability for parents to devote time to their many children, or husbands to devote time for wives. We read how Heber was respected but often away on church assignments. His death, long before anticipated, resulted in having children and wives thrust into inconvenient life situations. 

Dozens of the Kimball family members are profiled. Some of the more interesting characters are Helen Mar Whitney, married to Joseph Smith at 14. She endured near-fatal illness to marry Horace Whitney and bear 11 children. Only six survived. She was a survivor of depression and frequent poor health. Her defense of the church and polgamy made her well known and highly esteemed in Utah. Daughter Alice Kimball, another survivor, endured a criminally loathsome husband and eventually married Church President Joseph F. Smith.

The diaries and letters in the books cover other issues besides polygamy. Readers will learn more about the 19th century practice of church "adoptions" in which members would attach themselves, as part of a spiritual family, to prominent church leaders. Also is detailed accounts of kidnappings of Mormons by Native Americans. Although these conflicts invariable escalated to bloodshed at times, sometimes ransoms would be paid to release the hostages.

Kimball sons were marrying wives long past the Wilfred Woodruff era and church leaders were both aware and sometimes participants. The book later details the gradual real elimination of polygamy in the early 20th century that led to prominent excommunications.

Missions to Europe and the southern United States are in the book. The dangers for missionaries in the deep U.S. south is described. One Kimball son who presided over the U.S. southern mission was eased out of his position because he preached a too austere lifestyle for the missionaries. Requirements included no pocket money and a rule that they had to beg a place to sleep every night.

The handcart rescues in 1856 are covered. The "Dream Mine" hoax, and its temptations, is covered. Squabbles with press, including the Salt Lake Tribune, rabidly anti-Mormon back then, are part of the book. 

I enjoyed detailed sections on J. Golden Kimball, the general authority known for his wit and candor, and apostle Orson F. Whitney. J. Golden's section is a bit bittersweet as we learn he dealt with depression, a tough often contrary family, and his brother Sol, who was frankly at times a control freak who bullied family members for monies to preserve the Kimball home and the family legacy. Yet J. Golden in this book is portrayed as a survivor, one who despite his feelings of frustration and inadequacy, worked hard to fulfill his church responsibilites.

One passage interesting to readers is when apostle Wilfred Woodruff assures Kimball son Abraham that he will represent the family in temporal and spiritual matters. But Woodruff is not -- then -- the prophet. Abe isn't convinced he's the family leader until Church Prophet John Taylor decrees it.

Orson F. Whitney was for a while a believer in reincarnation. This concerned church leaders. However, after a booster of the offbeat doctrine that Orson admired suddenly died, he cooled on the subject, and eventually became a church apostle.

Alcoholism was a problem for many of the Kimball sons. It's a reminder that the Word of Wisdom, while a doctrine in that era, was not practiced by many members considered observant. Kimball son William, who was one of the leaders on the 1856 handcart rescues, struggled with alcoholism and periods of rebellion to principles he was taught.

But I want to stress to readers to not look down on these saints. They were resilient, endured much, and overcame more. God is a much more merciful deity than some portray him as. I admire the Kimball family and their rich legacy in the church. This book is a realistic tribute to the family.

Review: Joseph White Musser: A Mormon Fundamentalist

 

Review by Doug Gibson

Polygamy sects in more modern times are full of negative reports. Girls being beaten by parents who want to marry much older men, young marriagable men cast out, becoming "lost boys" because the gray beards living the "principle" want young wives, murders the past couple of generations between rival groups; not to mention the more recent capture and incarceration of Warren Jeffs for multiple felonies.

It's interesting to read a short biography, Joseph White Musser: A Mormon Fundamentalist, Cristina M. Rosetti, 2024, University of Illinois Press. (Here's an Amazon link.) The book, Rosetti notes, is "For the Mormons who call Joseph W. Musser a prophet." It is a mostly favorable biography, not without good reason. Musser, born into a polygamous family in 1872, grew up well into adulthood within a church and Utah culture that considered polygamous unions as a key toward exaltation, or the highest perch in the afterlife. Musser had commuications, some personal, with apostles, stake presidents and others who fervently believed in polgamy; events that occurred well after the Manifestos that purpotedly ended polygamy. In fact, Musser claims in his autobiography that LDS Church President Lorenzo Snow invited him to marry his first plural wife in 1899, well after the First Manifesto. It's accepted today that plural marriage continued after the Woodruff Manifesto, including among apostles.

But after the second Manifesto in 1904, delivered by Church President Joseph F. Smith, Rosetti notes that a trajectory of evdents occurred that would eventually lead to Musser's excommunication and expulsion from the Utah's church's acceptance. He would lose his job and the fidelity of some of his wives. Most of his children did not embrace polygamy. But Musser stayed committed to polygamy and proudly took on the mantle of Mormon fundamentalist. He edited and wrote essays in more than one publication, primarily Truth. He achieved top ecclesiastical status as a polygamous leader, and was imprisoned for a short time after the Short Creed raid of the 1940s. That's ironic because his father, Amos, was jailed in the mid 1880s. As Rosetti notes, for the same crime as his son.

Musser never wavered from his beliefs, despite the material and familial dysfunction it caused. Rosetti notes that late in his life he had concerns about the autocratic rule of polygamous leader Leroy Johnson. This dysfunctional leadership would eventually lead to the modern evil of Warren Jeffs. But Musser is revered today by nearly all Mormon fundamentalists as a prophet, and his articles and pamphlets still read with devout interest. He also penned an autobiography.

As Rosetti notes, Musser was influenced by Lorin C. Wooley, another polygamist leader. He attended the Wooley School of the Prophets, which included teachings that Adam was our God and that he had three wives. As Musser's writing grew, he was another voice for several polygamous beliefs: that the Priesthood was more powerful than both the church and its leaders; that the conventional Mormon's belief in tithing was sinful, and did not represent a true law of consecration that would provide equally to all; and, also, that Mormonism's third prophet, John Taylor, had a received a revelation in 1886 that commanded the church never to give up polygamy.

These beliefs compiled by Rosetti in the book underscore why Mormon fundamentalism will likely never go away. It has its history. It has its revelations. It has its modern-day prophets. Musser fully believed that one day the world will be saved by a high council of polygamous leaders.

Only one chapter is dedicated to Musser's life. The rest of the books focuses on Musser's doctrinal writings and key tenants of Mormon fundamentalism. Shortly before his death, Musser was deemed "patriarch in the high priesthood" among polygamist largely lead by a chiropracter, Rulon Allred. Musser died in 1954. Rosetti appropriately notes his death as such: "In a time of significant change in the LDS Church, Mussers's life is an exemplary account of a Mormon who disagreed with the church's response to modernization."

B.H. Roberts biography provides an interesting review of his public life

 

Review by Doug Gibson

John Sillito, professor emeritus of libraries at Weber State University in my home city of Ogden, Utah, has done a really impressive job with "B.H. Roberts: A Life in the Public Arena," Signature, 2021. Its nearly 600 pages make for an interesting biography read, a turn-pager, rare for a book with so much information packed into it.

Although the subject's personal life is not Sillito's primary topic, it is emotional, at times heart-tugging, to read of the young B.H. Roberts, with a father gone and a mother far away in Utah, living a neglected life in England, badly treated by church members who were supposed to be caring well for him while his mother tried to get him to Utah territory.

He finally got to "Zion," walking most of the way with only his sister. When he arrived, he found his mother in another slowly failing marriage. The result was a rougher adolescence that a young man needed, and it likely contributed to a recurring problem with alcoholism, and depression that Roberts dealt with through his life.

Roberts, though, was determined to succeed, and sought an education, graduating from Deseret College. He thrived within the late 18th century LDS church, hierarchy, becoming a member of the First Council of the Seventy, and eventually marrying member Sarah Louisa Smith, a native of Centerville, Utah. 

He later took a second wife, Celia Dibble. Smith and Dibble bore him 15 children.

Roberts was sent on dangerous prostlyting missions, when it really was without purse or script, and threats from the opposition could be deadly. When LDS missionaries were murdered in the deep southern United States, Roberts showed great courage in treking into the dangerous locations, and undercover, retrieving the bodies for proper burial.

Sillito's research is impressive. He's combed archives, letters, transcripts, newspapers and more to present a picture of Roberts, a devout Latter-day Saint, clearly a leader, a great public speaker, researcher and organizer, and a sometimes rebel who clashed with powerful colleagues in the LDS hierarchy. 

Roberts was an active liberal in a time when many of his peers were on the opposite side, preferring to align with business interests. Roberts, disagreed, and found himself in spats with among others, Joseph F. Smith, and Utah's first senator, Reed Smoot. 

Roberts occasional bouts with alcoholism were tolerated by his ecclesiastical leaders, but the closest he came to official church discipline was due to politics, when he and another Democrat, apostle Moses Thatcher, clashed over the LDS hierarchy wanting greater say on members' political activities. Roberts' enthusiastic desire to run for U.S. Congress met with disapproval. They wanted Roberts to back a sort of manifesto that would allow church leaders to approve runs for political office.

Roberts, believing he had been forthright about his political aspirations, offered to leave his leadership callings. He was furious over what he regarded as unfair criticism directed at him. The situation for a time appeared to be untenable for either side.

For a time Roberts shunned church hierarchy, but eventually he was persuaded to accept their concerns without sacrificing his personal political beliefs. 

It's interesting that church leaders spent a lot time talking with Roberts, working to persuade him. It underscores his importance as a leader, missionary, spokesman and writer, Consider how another internal dissident, apostle MosesThatcher was treated. For similar reasons, Thatcher was dropped from the Quorum of the Twelve.

It's entertaining to read of Utah's early days of politics. Sentiment among voters was fluid, moving back and forth, just like today (nationally, not Utah). Interestingly, Roberts for a while opposed women's suffrage, and suffered politically for it. He also opposed high tariffs, which put him at odds with much of elite Utahns of that time.

Sillito does not avoid Roberts' racist views, which he expressed publicly. He was a creature of his times, and was echoing sentiments which were believed and practiced through the LDS Church in those times. 

Roberts was eventually elected to the U.S. Congress, despite having three wives and having been jailed for polygamy. After long hearings, and dreadful national press, Roberts failed to be seated, although he did later receive some badly needed back pay for while he was in Washington. This is my favorite part of Sillito's biography. Roberts was very naive that he could -- as a polygamist -- persuade Congress to seat him, but it shows both his tenacity, and intellectual ability, that he gave it a fight.

As mentioned, Roberts was married three times. His third marriage may have been after the Manifesto. Roberts seems to have partially neglected his earlier wives, particularly his first, preferring to spend most of the time with third wife, Dr. Margaret Curtis Shipp. This particularly caused tension with his first wife, discord that continued even after her death, in which her family made it clear to Roberts he was not welcome at her funeral.

Sillito writes of an incident in which the multi-married Roberts, several years after the Manifesto, appeares to have a serious crush on a young single Mormon woman, Leah Dunford. Sillito provides letters which provide fascinating reading. Nothing eventually happened. Any romance died in embryo. The whole event seems a bit kitschy, except that the young lady, already more or less engaged, was encouraged by her mother, Susa Young Gates, to accept Roberts' interest. These passages underscore the long time it took to deflate the toxic culture of polygamy.

Roberts, despite his 60 years, admirably became a U.S. Army Chaplain and served overseas during World War I. He later served as president of the Eastern States Mission, overseeing mission strategies that are still in use today.

Diabetes caused a physical collapse and after his mission tenure ended in 1927 -- third wife Margaret Shipp died during his mission -- he spent his last years with the Seventies before eventually succumbing to complications of diabetes in 1933. Before he died he suffered a bout of serious depression, what Roberts called the "black dog," when diabetes led to partial foot amputation. When Roberts died in late September of 1933, he was living with his sole living spouse, Celia.

Despite these challenges, Roberts stayed active in the public arena. He represented the LDS Church at the World Parliament of Religions, where he had been snubbed 40 years earlier. This time he was praised by parliament participants. Very late in his life, he was politically active, standing up for Utah miners he believed were being exploited by business interests. 

There's a lot of Roberts that interests me that Sillito omits, such as his writing (I love his novella Corianton), much of his family life, his opinions on the Book of Mormon, and a lot of ecclesiastical details. But that's OK; those issues have been covered in depth. We have a very satisfying biography of a great man's public life. His talents and his flaws are covered. To sum up, Sillito provides a book that shows readers why Roberts had such an impact on the 18th and 19th century LDS church, and why he was a popular church leader, speaker and politician. His influence extended well beyond Utah and Mormonism during his lifetime. 

(The Kindle version of B.H. Roberts: A Life in the Public Arena is only $8.99 as of the above date)

Nauvoo City Council’s minutes of 1840s provide chaos, contention and lies

 

Originally published, in slightly different form, in January 2012 in StandardBlogs

---

The Nauvoo City Council and High Council minutes from 1839 to 1845, when accessible, were recorded. Signature Books, with the assistance of historian John Dinger, published almost a decade ago the minutes, along with notes, and they’re just plain fascinating for enthusiasts of history. Without spin, they lay out the controversy that swirled in Nauvoo prior to Joseph Smith’s murder and the LDS exodus west.

The documents lend credence to the belief that the then-secret doctrine of polygamy sparked much of the contention that roiled Nauvoo. Many of those associated with the anti-Smith publication, the Nauvoo Expositor, were accused of using polygamy as an excuse to commit adultery. In the city council meeting of June 8, 1844, Hyrum Smith is cited as claiming that Joseph Smith’s revelation on polygamy, read to the Nauvoo High Council on Aug. 12, 1843, “was in answer to a question concerning things which transpired in former days & had no reference to the present time.” 

As curiously noted, “Hyrum Smith married four plural wives in 1843.” It’s clear that Hyrum Smith had rationalized that it was OK to mislead. Also, on page 255 of the Nauvoo City Council minutes, the LDS prophet, and Nauvoo mayor, Joseph Smith, supports Hyrum’s incorrect words, saying that he had not preached the doctrine in public or private.

From reading the various minutes and notes commentary, polygamy was used as a cudgel in a conflict between the Smiths and their enemies, such as William Law, Wilson Law, Robert and Charles Foster, Chauncey and Francis Higbee, Sylvester Emmons, and others. These accusations were often judged in the non-secular, but equally powerful, Nauvoo High Council meetings. On May 24, 1842, “Chancy” Higbee was excommunicated by the high council after being judged guilty of adultery and for teaching “the doctrine that it was right to have free intercourse with women if it was kept secret …” Higbee, the minutes report, claimed “that Joseph Smith autherised (sic) him to practice these things.”

Other accusations used to discredit critics included counterfeiting, stinginess, and plots to kill Joseph Smith. The final accusation was probably closest to the truth, as the violence that was commonplace in that era made lynching and murder a real possibility. The City Council minutes note how the Smiths used Nauvoo civil law to construct a habeus corpus statute so far-reaching that it could blunt any attempt to have Smith or others extradited to Missouri or anywhere outside of Nauvoo. In fact, Smith used habeus corpus to initially avoid arrest for trashing the Nauvoo Expositor press.

The city council debate that preceded the Nauvoo police’s destruction of the Expositor press as a “nuisance” is very interesting. Anger from past atrocities against Mormons, notably the Haun’s Mill massacre, were used as rationales to destroy the Expositor’s press. Interestingly, one Nauvoo councilman, Benjamin Warrington, opposed destroying the press. He wanted to give the editors time to stop publishing and assess them a $3,000 fine.

Both Smiths spoke in opposition to Warrington’s proposal, Hyrum adding that he doubted the publishers had the money to pay the fine. Those in favor of the press’ destruction cited ” Blackwater’s Commentaries on the Laws of England,” a reference book widely used in that era. Nauvoo city attorney and councilman George P. Stiles used “Blackwater” as evidence, “{saying a} Nuisance is any thing {that} disturbs the peace of {the} community.”

The destruction of the Expositor began before the city council meeting authorizing the act had finished. As are most decisions made in haste and with excessive emotion, it backfired, increasing the danger to Joseph Smith and others. An attempt to use Nauvoo’s liberal habeus corpus law to escape legal heat failed, and to protect Nauvoo from armed mobs, Joseph and Hyrum agreed to be jailed in Carthage, Ill. Assurances of safety from a feckless governor, Thomas Ford, failed, and history records that both Smiths were murdered by a mob.

The Nauvoo City Council minutes after the Smiths’ murders are interesting. There is little of the anger or bluster that was part of the meeting that sanctioned the press’ destruction. It’s muted, and frankly reflects the shock and despair that must have surrounded Nauvoo and church members at the loss of their prophet. Much of the minutes cover discussion on how much the city must renumerate the Nauvoo Expositor for the destruction of its property. Hiram Kimball was assigned the task of dealing with the renumeration.

Also, it’s clear that city leaders were concerned that the mobs that had killed the Smiths were still eager to attack Nauvoo. The council endorsed pleas by Governor Ford and others to avoid violent reprisals.

“The Nauvoo City and High Council Minutes” is a massive, indispensable treasure trove of Mormon history in Illinois. Some accounts were amusing; one recounts a man brought for church discipline because he sold his wife for her weight in catfish!

-- Doug Gibson

Mormonism, secularism cited as sin within USA by late 19th century Protestant America

---

At the 2013 Mormon History Association gathering, in Layton, Utah, there was a discourse delivered by Leigh Eric Schmidt, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis. Schmidt, who is not a member of the Mormon Church, delivered a fascinating address titled, “Mormons, freethinkers and the limits of toleration.” It primarily dealt with how Mormonism, as well as atheism and proponents of secularism, were received by a late-19th century America that was dominated by Protestantism.

In that era, Schmidt explained, freethinkers and Mormons were, of course, miles apart in ideas. The coalition of freethinkers included atheists, agnostics, critics of organized religion, and critics of the era’s rigid sexual mores. Mormons, on the other hand, followed a rigid ecclesiastical authority and professed to follow strong morals. But there was that polygamy thing, which in an era of Protestantism and Republicanism, was considered as libertine and immoral. An example — in 1887, Schmidt said, Mormonism, secularism and atheism were proclaimed as “sin within (the) land” by Presbyterian leaders.

To sum up, 120-plus years ago, atheists and Mormons were both outcasts, oddities to be gawked at by most, and pursued and prosecuted by the more zealous advocates of a approved religious-state.  As Schmidt noted, two separate pieces of legislation, the Edmunds-Tucker Act and the Comstock Act, were in essence “religious tests” for both public comportment as well as “fitness” tests to run for public office. The former was directed at Mormons, the latter politically active freethinkers. Both fell outside of boundaries of American Christianity drawn by Protestants.

In his discourse, Schmidt included an overview of two prominent secularists of that era — Robert Ingersoll and D.M. Bennett — and recapped their visits to Utah as well as their viewpoints on Mormonism. For Ingersoll, who regarded secularism as the best religion — Ingersoll idealized the moral, secular family spending time together in the home on Sundays — Mormonism was an abomination. As Schmidt noted, the conservative freethinker regarded the Utah religion as “horrible” and founded on ignorant superstition.  Ingersoll, Schmidt added, was a monogamist and was not sympathetic to the LDS Church’s persecution by the government.

Schmidt related an interesting 1877 account in which Ingersoll, a frequent traveling lecturer, spoke at the federal courthouse in Salt Lake City. During the lecture, Ingersoll praised the virtues of families and the proper raising of children. In an interesting contrast, notes Schmidt, the anti-Mormon Salt Lake Tribune proclaimed the lecture as an attack on polygamy. However, the Mormon Church-owned Deseret News “loved the speech,” said Schmidt, and wondered in its coverage why Schmidt often referred to domestic life in Utah as prostitution. The remarks were probably ironic, since the editors were certainly aware of Ingersoll’s harsh views on polygamy.

As for D.M. Bennett, the founder of the periodical “The Truth Seeker,” he was a far more radical secularist than Ingersoll. Bennett was also an advocate of free love. His efforts led to his arrest and conviction under the Comstock law. He served 13 months in prison.  As the masthead of “The Truth Seeker” noted, it was “Devoted to: science, morals, free thought, free discussions, liberalism, sexual equality, labor reform, progression, free education and whatever tends to elevate and emancipate the human race.” Conversely, the masthead also noted that religion tended to produce the opposite.

Schmidt noted that Bennett, also a traveling lecturer, visited Salt Lake City often. He also spoke in Ogden. Utah charmed him, and he wrote about his visits in a travel guide he published. He spoke warmly of its Mormon inhabitants, even publicly expressing his opinion that Protestants had no right to criticize Mormons, adding that the residents of Utah were more moral than their critics. However, Bennett was careful to remind his readers that his comments should not be interpreted as approval for Mormon theology. In my opinion, Bennett may have felt empathy for Mormon men jailed for polygamy, as he had experienced the same for his advocacy of morals that were criminally prosecuted.

Schmidt also talked more about the secular publication, “The Truth Seeker,” and its off and on empathy with the Utah Mormons. The famous secular cartoonist, Watson Heston, drew cartoons that included Mormons as being persecuted by mainstream Christianity of that era. In fact, one of his “Truth Seeker” cartoons, “An Example of Christian Consistency,” was reprinted in an 1896 Mormon missionary magazine in Tennessee, Schmidt told the audience. (Although I can’t find a copy of the cartoon “An Example of Christian Consistency,” below is another cartoon from Heston, “The Amusement of the Saints in Heaven,” that offers readers a look at his style.)

However, Heston was no fan of the Utah Mormons, Schmidt said. He was a particularly harsh opponent of polygamy, seeing it as a threat to American womanhood. In fact, Heston’s conservative secularism eventually moved him away from “The Truth Seeker.”

It was an interesting lecture from Schmidt. In fact, I just bought one of his books via Amazon (1). As the secularist movement radicalized and began advocating moral issues at odds with most of America in the late 19th century, its influence waned and adherents moved away, to liberal churches or to the secular Sunday afternoons in the family hearth so treasured by Ingersoll.

Still, as Schmidt noted in his lecture, there were secular activists of that era who saw the potential for a “probable but meaningful alliance” between freethinkers and Mormons. The time frame for this was the latter half of the 19th century, when both were despised by chief opinion-makers.

Ironically, as the 20th century began, Mormonism began a slow but consistent march toward conformity, conservatism and traditionalism while organized freethinker movements became more radical and its organized number declined.

One wonders if events will ever transpire to bring the twain — Mormons and freethinkers — together as allies.

-- Doug Gibson

-- Originally posted at StandardBlogs.

1) The Schmidt book I purchased is “Heaven’s Bride: The Unprintable Life of Ida C. Craddock, American Mystic, Scholar, Sexologist, Martyr and Madwoman,” Basic Books, 2010. Buy it here.

100-plus years ago, Utah, Mormon Church sold lots of magazines for publishers

I read a Rolling Stones piece on the Kingston polygamy family. It’s a breathless piece. The subject is described as “America’s most twisted crime family.” (You can read it at http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/inside-the-order-one-mormon-cults-secret-empire-20110615.) Today’s polygamists are a muckraker’s dream, just as the current Mormon Church was 100-plus years ago. At the 2011 Mormon History Association meeting, a small “keepsake” book — courtesy of historians Michael Paulos and Kenneth L. Cannon II — was offered. “Cartoonists and Muckrakers: Selected Media Images of Mormonism During the Progressive Era” featured excerpts from 100-plus-year-old muckraking pieces against the Utah Mormons, those purveyors of polygamy, once paired with slavery as the “twin relics of barbarisms.”

Rolling Stone’s piece has nothing on these pieces. Here’s a sample of early 20th century progressive journalism as directed against The LDS Church and its chief henchman, its president, Joseph F. Smith:

• Cosmopolitan Magazine, No. 50, March, 1911, “Viper on the Hearth” — a three-part series: “The name of the viper — I take it from the mouth of the viper — is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. It lies coiled on the country’s hearthstone, and on;y asks time to grow and collect a poison and a strength to strike. … True, the Mormon himself had place in my mind for what he was and is — one who prefers lust’s substance to love’s shadow and would sooner wallow than dream; but it was not until my visit to Salt Lake City that he and his religion dawned upon me for the national threat they really are …” (The author, Alfred Henry Lewis, was the most celebrated writer in America at that time). Lewis described the LDS prophet Joseph F. Smith as an evil mastermind over a weak-willed, easy-to-lead U.S. senator, fellow Mormon, Reed Smoot.

• McClure’s Magazine, in its January, 1911 article, “The Mormon Revival of Polygamy,” described the LDS church President Joseph F. Smith in this hyperbolic manner as a man who had revitalized polygamy to Utah two decades after the manifesto. It reads: “Even before 1901 polygamous households had been reestablished on a considerable scale, but with the succession of Joseph F. smith to the presidency of the church the restoration of old conditions became practically open. … All of Brigham’s successors have been mild-mannered souls, but President Smith is a man of violent passions; one could easily imagine him torturing heretics or burning witches to advance the kingdom of God.” (The writer of this piece was Burton J. Hendrick, who later in his career would win three Pulitzer prizes).

• Pearson’s Magazine ran a three-part expose on Mormonism beginning in the September 1910 issue. It was titled, “The Political Menace of the Mormon Church” and dealt with Smith, polygamy, and the church’s political power and wealth. It was penned by Richard Barry, a famous war correspondent of that era. An excerpt: “These 375,000 people have more political power than any million in the United States because they are a unit. There is little secession among them from the will of their leader. … This political force, compact, unreasoning, unpatriotic, unAmerican, has a curious character, at once sinister and serene. It is the backbone of the Mormon empire, which is an echo from the time that antedates the Christian era.”

It’s very interesting to read these examples of muckraking articles against the Mormon Church.

-- Doug Gibson

Originally published in 2011 at StandardNET (blogs)

Polygamy was no Mormon harem, but it tore at marriages and hearts

(Originally published at StandardNET in 2011)

I spent some time re-reading the late Richard S. Van Wagoner’s excellent book, “Mormon Polygamy: A History.” The 19th century tales of harems and never-ending teenage-girl hunting were, of course, lies to excite Eastern U.S. readers. Polygamy was a contradictory doctrine, and extremely dysfunctional. Brigham Young once said that he wished it wasn’t a doctrine, but later also raged that those who disbelieved in polygamy — and even monogomous LDS men — were in danger of damnation. And polygamy led to divorce among LDS elite leaders in numbers that would shock today. According to Van Wagoner, more than 50 marriages of LDS leaders ended in divorce in the mid 19th century.

Indeed, two early wives of LDS apostle brothers, Orson and Parley Pratt, gave their husbands the heave-ho for their enthusiastic embrace of polygamy, and for marrying young, teenage brides. And not every faithful LDS elder with a feisty wife was brave enough to try polygamy. Van Wagoner recounts the tale of one husband who abandoned plans to take a plural wife after his wife informed him that she had received a revelation from God directing her to shoot any spare wife who darkened the family doorstep.

As Van Wagoner writes, though, there was a somber paradox to polygamy, particularly for faithful LDS women who reluctantly embraced the doctrine as a commandment of God yet suffered personal heartache and financial pain due to their husband’s extracurricular wives. Emmeline Blanche Wells, early Mormon women’s leader and feminist, wrote publicly that polygamy “gives women the highest opportunities for self-development, exercise of judgment, and arouses latent faculties, making them truly cultivated in the actual realities of life, more independent in thought and mind, noble and unselfish.” In her private journal, though, Wells despaired of how polygamy had robbed her of the love of her husband, Daniel H. Wells, member of the church’s first presidency.

Emmeline wrote, “O, if my husband could only love me even a little and not seem to be perfectly indifferent to any sensation of that kind. He cannot know the cravings of my nature; he is surrounded with love on every side, and I am cast out.”

“He is surrounded with love on every side, and I am cast out,” is an appropriate indictment of polygamy, and no doubt a reason that it has long been discarded by the LDS Church.

As Van Wagoner recalls, another LDS women leader, physician Dr. Martha Hughes Cannon, the first female state senator in the U.S., yearned in her personal letters for one husband who would be hers only to cherish. Despite these yearnings, she clung to her LDS faith in “the Principle.” Martha wrote her husband, Angus, that only her divine knowledge of the sacred principle of plural marriage made it bearable to endure. Nevertheless, Martha also wrote this scolding to Angus: “How do you think I feel when I meet you driving another plural wife about in a glittering carriage in broad day light? (I) am entirely out of money ...” 

For Emmeline Wells, there was a sort of happy ending that was denied many others. As Van Wagoner recounts, in his final years, her frail and aging husband, Daniel, seeking tender care and companionship, returned to Emmeline’s home and side, after mostly ignoring her for 40 years. In her eyes, that probably counted as a blessing due after decades of suffering.

Despite lurid tales and even the teenage bride races, sex was a distant reason for polygamy. It was the result of an odd doctrine, now mostly forgotten in the LDS Church, that taught that the more wives and children one accumulated on earth would increase one’s post-life eternal influence and kingdoms. Yet, one will rarely hear that explanation today.

-- Doug Gibson

Charles Shuster Zane was a fair judge Mormons loved to hate

Ever heard of Utah territorial Chief Justice Charles Shuster Zane? He’s one of those fascinating footnotes in history. Appointed in 1884 to administer justice in Utah, the New Jersey Quaker was a respected Illinois lawyer who rubbed shoulders in the same circles that Abraham Lincoln inhabited. Zane was a circuit judge when appointed to the Utah bench by President Chester A. Arthur. 

His tenure was stormy. The dominant Latter-day Saints disliked Zane because he thoroughly enforced the laws against polygamy. He imprisoned men and polygamous wives that he discovered were living “the Principle.” Zane also was heard to publicly proclaim polygamy an abomination. The judge was enforcing the Edmunds law, which was designed to go after Utah Mormons on the polygamy issue. 

According to an article on Zane in the fall 1966 issue of Utah Historical Quarterly, then-BYU professor Thomas G. Alexander cited the following negative assessment of Zane from LDS historians B.H. Roberts and Orson F. Whitney: “Judge Zane ... will stand classed ... in that history as sharing in responsibility for the cruelty and injustice of that regime, which marks the saddest period of Utah’s history. ... Judge Zane never divorced himself from his deepseated prejudice and vindictiveness against ... [the Mormon] offenders and their religious faith, ... his object was the overthrow of Mormonism as a religion.”

Those are harsh words, and they come from Roberts’ “Comprehensive History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” and Whitney’s “History of Utah.” But they’re also not true. In his Utah Historical Quarterly article, Alexander takes a long look at Zane’s judicial philosophy while in Utah, and discovers a tough but fair judge who was scrupulously following the law. In other words, Zane was not the judicial activist many Mormons had hoped would look the other way at laws designed to hamper their religious beliefs.

In fact, Zane made many lower-profile decisions that helped the Mormon church, which was constantly facing nuisance lawsuits from the energetic anti-Mormon “gentile” faction of Utah, which had as its mouthpiece “The Salt Lake Tribune.” For example, Zane ruled in favor of local, Mormon public schools receiving tax monies, rejecting lawsuits that they sectarian schools that taught treason. Zane was a big believer in public education, and the rights of local communities to make educational decisions. 

Also, Zane resisted efforts by gentiles in Utah to swing elections through malicious efforts. He sided with the People’s Party, an LDS party, in its accusation that members of the gentile Liberal Party had tried to stuff ballots in an 1890 school election. In fact, Zane even allowed, over gentile objections, voting by Mormon men who had engaged in obviously sham “spiritual divorces” from their polygamous wives. That shows a lot of tolerance for the Mormon religious mores.

In fact, when Zane finally jailed men and polygamous wives, it was only after every effort to prosecute, or resolve, the situation, had been attempted. There’s no doubt that Zane’s judicial decrees ailed many prominent Utah Mormons. Zane had the — perhaps — misfortune of assuming the bench when enforcement of the anti-polygamy laws was at its most intense. And he was determined to obey the letter of the law. Alexander adds that whenever a guilty plea came in, Zane was likely to fine, rather than jail the polygamist.

Another ruling, disliked by the LDS majority, was Zane’s decision to allow lawyers to question Mormons on naturalization, or citizenship, protests. As Alexander notes, this was a big issue as the Mormons were energetic missionaries overseas and the converts migrated to Utah. However, Zane did offer the Mormons an olive branch by requiring that the district attorney question prospective citizens, rather than anti-Mormon lawyers, explains Alexander.

After the 1890 Manifesto against polygamy, Zane’s attitude on the practice became more relaxed. Alexander recounts that he accepted the promise by LDS Church President Wilford W. Woodruff and later published an article in Forum magazine where he stated, according to Alexander, “that the Mormon problem (polygamy) was at an end because the Mormons had resolved to obey the law.”

The tenure of Zane was an example of a judge diligently following the law in a rugged, still frontier-like territory and angering both sides. Because the high-profile cases went against the majority Mormons, he was vilified long after his death in 1915. It would be fascinating to read a more in-depth look at his tenure as Utah territory’s chief justice.

--- Doug Gibson

-- Originally published at StandardNET

Mormon Church's snub at 1893 fair was bitter setback

Originally published at StandardBlogs/Standard-Examiner

Eighteen ninety-three was heralded as the end of the frontier era as the world gathered in Chicago to celebrate civilization. 

For the Mormon Church, still mostly hidden from America, tucked into Utah, it represented for church leaders an opportunity to garner international respect in its quest for statehood. That dream would take a few more years, but in 1893, church leaders — and its ambassador, B.H. Roberts — would find its efforts to rub shoulders with the world’s religions firmly snubbed.

It would be a bitter defeat for Roberts, and also underscore the ironic closed-mindedness of a religious hierarchy that gathered in Chicago to allegedly celebrate tolerance.

Yet, while the LDS faith was shunted aside at the Chicago gathering, the secular attractions of Utah were more warmly received. The territory was greeted with interest and admiration, and provided a coveted spot at the Chicago fair.

The secret was avoiding the still-pesky religion and its association with polygamy. Historian Konden R. Smith writes of the Columbian Exposition of 1893 and its distinct treatments of the LDS Church and the Utah territory in the Journal of Mormon History article, “The Dawning of a New Era: Mormonism and the World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893.” It’s a reminder that the church’s interest in public relations is not a recent development — it goes well back into its founding century.

The Parliament of Religions at the Chicago fair, which Smith claims “received more media attention and applause than any of the other congresses,” was designed to gather faiths with “brotherly sympathies any who are groping, blindly, after God.” Nevertheless, the Mormons — who Smith says expected to be invited — “were deliberately excluded.”

The church's connection to polygamy were considered by parliament organizers as a “disturbing element,” and not fit for the congress.

Letters from the church's First Presidency were ignored by organizers, Not giving up. Church President Wilford Woodruff sent young general authority B.H. Roberts to Chicago to lobby for inclusion.

After six weeks or so of lobbying for the October religions parliament, “the increasingly annoyed Parliament's managers” asked Roberts to pen “a statement of its (the LDS Church's) faith and achievements.”

The invitation came with no guarantee that the statement would be delivered by Roberts in Chicago, or even read by anyone, but Roberts believed that the invitation guaranteed him a prominent spot at the Parliament.

What eventually occurred was an offering for Roberts to speak in an obscure hall in the Scientific Section” of the fair. Roberts, comprehending that he was being shunted away from a chance to proclaim his religion,” was very bitter, and remained so for decades. He rejected the offer, and later called it a rejection by the Parliament.

Indeed, in September, the Mormon Church was officially rejected by the Parliament. Even its previous offer of submitting Roberts' paper was rescinded after expo-goers reacted with outrage, hissing and boos to Mohammed Alexander Russell Webb's defense of polygamy while reading his paper, “The Spirit of Islam.” As Smith writes, “Webb said: ‘Polygamy is no curse. A man can be a good, honest gentleman and yet be a polygamist. But I do not accept him as such if he be a sensualist.' At this point, the crowd erupted in hisses and cries of ‘Shame!' and ‘No, no: stop him.'”

It was clear that the Mormon Church, while “officially” having “renounced” polygamy in 1893, was still too much like the FLDS Church is regarded today to be included among the world's religions.

However, Smith points out that while the 1893 Parliament of Religions claimed to be inclusive, it championed a traditional evangelical North America Christianity viewpoint. Even without the polygamy problem, the Mormon Church's claim of being the restored true Gospel of Jesus Christ, was not a popular message to the parliament.

The Chicago Herald newspaper, in comments that were later re-published in the Deseret News, did criticize the parliament for yanking Roberts at the last minute. The Mormon historian's remarks were later published in his book, “Defense of the Faith.” Smith notes that Robert's arguments included his claim that “Mormonism had the answer for many of the current problems plaguing Christianity, including the growing disaffection toward Christianity and the challenge of growing secularism.” As Smith adds, Roberts' theme — that the Mormons were the Kingdom of God — directly contradicted the professed purpose of the parliament.

Thus ended the LDS Church effort to influence the Chicago World's Fair. As mentioned, however, the Utah territory — three years from statehood — was better received.

(The Smith paper referred to here is from his doctoral dissertation. An earlier version was published in The Journal of Mormon History.)

American Polygamy history focuses on fundamentalist Mormons

Review by Doug Gibson

I wonder how many members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are aware of a statement in 1886, preserved in writing, from LDS Prophet John Taylor. In part it reads, "Thus sayeth the Lord: All commandments that I give must be obeyed by those calling themselves by my name unless they are revoked by me or by my authority, and how can I revoke an everlasting covenant, for I the Lord am everlasting and my everlasting covenants cannot be abrogated nor done away with, but they stand forever."

I had never heard of that statement by Taylor before reading "American Polygamy: A History of Fundamentalist Mormon Faith," by Craig L. Foster and Marianne T. Watson, The History Press, 2019. (Buy it here or via Amazon here.) The authors have diverse backgrounds. Foster is an LDS historian. Watson, also an historian, is wife in a polygamous family. With others plural marriage wives, she was a contributor to the book, "Voices In Harmony."

Taylor's words, uttered 134 years ago in Centerville, Utah, is a foundation of polygamists' argument for maintaining an earthly belief long shed by the LDS Church. Within polygamous circles it's regarded as a revelation. To the LDS Church it's not a revelation. To the owner of the home where it occurred, John Woolley, it was a revelation. Both he and his son, Lorin, were prominent leaders and advocates of polygamy, an ordinance believers regard as essential to achieve the highest glory in the afterlife. As Foster and Watson note, the Woolleys claimed that both Joseph Smith and Jesus Christ were with Taylor when he was given that counsel.

Just before John Woolley died in 1928, his son Lorin claimed that both he and his father met with resurrected beings Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith Sr., Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, John Taylor and Joseph F. Smith. Shortly after that event, a "Priesthood Council" was formed of prominent polygamists, designed to preside over continuation of the movement. As the others note, these presiding councils oversaw polygamous groups lived and tried to keep the safe from law enforcement.

American Polygamy covers a lot of ground in -- allowing for photos and footnotes -- about 200 pages of text. I recommend it. It is a fascinating -- and often sympathetic -- account of roughly 130 years of fundamentalist polygamy. Despite the 1890 Manifesto, polygamy continued for at least a generation within the LDS Church, with opposition to the practice slowly getting more serious by church leaders. Foster and Watson include accounts of patriarchs and apostles eventually being kicked out of the church for continuing to participate in plural marriage ordinances after its became a liability within the LDS Church. By the time of President Heber J. Grant's leadership, LDS church officials actively assisted law enforcement in tracking down polygamists.

The 1944 law enforcement raids on polygamous groups in Utah and Short Creek, Arizona (1944) and Short Creek in 1953, are covered in detail by the authors. Whatever revulsion readers may personally feel for polygamy, those affected were badly mistreated, having their constitutional rights abused. Families were forced apart. On anecdote recalls how trauma over the raids led to the death of an 84-year-old fundamentalist.

The raids, coordinated for maximum press coverage, boomeranged for law enforcement. Even 50 years later, the authors note, the Texas raids on a polygamous community was also predicated on incorrect intelligence, although later information uncovered resulted in FLDS leader Warren Jeffs being convicted of child sex crimes that will keep him in prison for life.

There's sadness in the history of fundamentalist Mormonism. The personal accounts of their suffering, both social and legal, men thrown in jail and prison, children separated from parents, one can't read these accounts without being affected. We should regret the institutional efforts against modern polygamists as much as we do those same efforts against early members of the LDS Church.

Yet, fundamentalist Mormonism also has a history of dysfunction, exploitation and other criminal behavior. The authors devote considerable space to the crimes and continued poisoned legacies of mass murderer Ervil LeBaron and pedophile and sadist Warren Jeffs. They are the two main "villains" of the book. But they are also extreme examples of significant problems that still plague fundamentalist Mormonism..

Polygamy by necessity has been isolated, with its followers pursued by law enforcement and forced to rely to a fault on either a council of leaders, or a sole leader. Foster and Watson note that disagreement within modern polygamous movements often focused on the amount of control male leaders, or a single male leader, had over the agency of followers. Control can be so pervasive that marriages are arranged. That's another debate that can occur in polygamy -- are spouses allowed to find each other? In some instances they are not allowed any say in marriage, or forced into marriage as children. This leads to tragic, criminal actions where, as noted in the book, 13-year-old girls are raped and another teenager is beaten by her father because she doesn't want to be forced to marry her uncle and have regular sex with him. One can't help wondering how much of this type of abuse still goes unpunished.

Not surprisingly, the movement has split into different factions, some with thousands, some with large single-family units. Today there is polygamy mass entertainment in the form of reality shows, talk shows, or fictionalized television. In recent years, the authors note the irony of same-sex marriage acceptance helping polygamy become less of a taboo and more accepted. Consenting adults should not be denied the right to live within polygamy. Society is moving that way.

The biggest strength of American Polygamy is it provides a human face to the sacrifices, suffering, and re-appraisals of those who sincerely believe in what is often called "The Principle." And it addresses openly some of the dysfunction of polygamy. More important than the histories of major families, Woolley, Barlow, Johnson, Allred, Jessop, Jeffs, Kingston, etc., are the personal accounts of followers, including woman and children. One may never accept polygamy as a principle but still respect the faith and commitment of those who live a still-shunned lifestyle with humility and charity.

It's interesting to wonder if fundamentalist Mormonism will stay at consistent numbers through this century or dissipate to near extinction by 2100. Author Watson provides optimistic anecdotal evidence that young polygamist women will stay in the faith. But I think all religions face skepticism from large percentages of young adults. Fundamentalist Mormonism, still tethered to 19th century mores and doctrines, has its work cut out to remain attractive to ensuing generations.

Did an angel with a drawn sword force Joseph Smith to start polygamy?

In his biography of Joseph Smith, “Rough Stone Rolling,” author Richard Lyman Bushman relates a popular Mormon legend/history regarding the Mormon prophet and his embrace of polygamy. He writes, “By delaying plural marriage, Joseph risked provoking God’s wrath. Mary (Elizabeth) Rollins Lightner, one of his plural wives, later said Joseph told her about the pressure he was under. ‘The angel came to me three times between the year of ’34 and ’42 and said I was to obey the principle or he would [s]lay me.’ Others told the story with an additional detail: the angel held a drawn sword.”

The would-be “destroying angel” that prompted Joseph Smith to get moving on polygamy is one of those “legends” that I heard from parents and others growing up as a young Latter-day Saint. I had always assumed it was another legend, such as the White Horse Prophecy, that gets passed around so often that it achieves a false legitimacy. However, there seems to be enough persons aware of this claim that it should be placed above folklore status.

In the book, “Nauvoo Polygamy, but we called it celestial marriage,” author George D. Smith adds to Bushman’s account with one caveat. He reports that Smith’s plural wife, Rollins Lightner, also included the drawn sword in her story. From “Nauvoo Polygamy,” D. Smith repeats a statement Rollins Lightner made in 1902, claiming Joseph Smith told her he had been commanded to marry her as far back as 1834, but had resisted, until, as she related “the Angel came to him three times, the last time with a drawn Sword and threatened his life.”

Rollins Lightner, quite reasonably, relates that she asked Smith “if God told him So, why did he not come and tell me [?]” Apparently, Rollins Lightner did have what she regarded as an angelic visitation. She said, “”… and an Angel came to me, it went through me like lightning.” The pair were married in 1842.

LDS historian Brian C. Hales, who has done a lot of research into polygamy and the early Mormon Church, cites LDS Apostle Erastus Snow as a supporting source that Joseph Smith felt his life was in danger if he did not implement polygamy. Hales writes, “Erastus Snow claimed that Joseph had ‘to plead on his knees before the Angel for his Life.” (Hales’ research lists many persons who were told, either secondhand or by Smith, of the angels’ visits and displeasure. The earliest account he has is 1854.)

If, as most historians believe, Fanny Alger was Joseph Smith’s first plural wife, there was several-years time of “foot-dragging” before the Mormon prophet began to implement polygamy. As Hales and other historians note, not-surprising opposition to the practice by Smith’s lawful wife, Emma, probably was the strongest reason for Smith’s reluctance. Emma Smith had reportedly kicked servant Alger out of the Smith home. Although reports are that she attempted to understand and countenance her husband’s polygamous efforts during the Nauvoo period, she was never able to accept it. After her husband’s murder, a key reason for her refusal to follow Brigham Young with most of the Saints to the Rocky Mountains was due to polygamy.

Bushman brings up another reason that Smith may have been reluctant to embrace polygamy. It was that skeptics of new religions tended to look for dysfunctional sexual behaviors as a reason to condemn the churches or movements. Bushman writes, “From the … sixteenth century to the camp meetings of the nineteenth, critics expected sexual improprieties from religious enthusiasts. Marital experiments by contemporary radical sects increased the suspicions. … With old barriers coming down, people were on the lookout for sexual aberrations.”

Joseph Smith was certainly smart enough to realize how Mormons would be if the young church embraced polygamy. He also, it is virtually universally acknowledged by historians, loved his wife Emma deeply and was loathe to do anything that would hurt her. These conflicts must have disturbed him.

The idea that lust motivated Joseph Smith’s desire for polygamy may satisfy his most severe critics, but the historical record does not support it. A wait of several years after the failed union with Fanny Alger shows reluctance for the practice, not desire. One need not believe that Joseph Smith pleaded before an angel with a sword to acknowledge that. The doctrine of plural marriage, as Smith and other early Mormon leaders understood it, was essential to increase eternal families, and one’s glory in the after-life. It’s likely that many of Smith’s plural marriages, particularly the ones that involved plural marriages to women already married, were sexless and intended only for the afterlife.

To active Mormons, and others who read all the church’s scriptures, the God described in the Doctrine and Covenants is, at least in verbal rhetoric, similar to the God of the Old Testament. Frankly, it’s not that difficult to picture a god of that temperament sending an angel with a sword to “persuade” Joseph Smith to start polygamy.

Nevertheless, whether the angel is a part of Mormon history, or just part of Mormon lore, will always be debated. Church leaders invited that discussion in 1934, when LDS apostle Melvin J. Ballard, wrote, “The statement … concerning the angel appearing with the drawn sword is not a matter that is in our own church history. While it may be all true, the church has not pronounced it authentic nor has it contradicted it.” (Hales, “Joseph Smith’s Polygamy Volume 1a)

Of course, that was during a time that the LDS Church leadership was slowly pursuing a more modern, accommodating church that would assimilate well with the rest of the world. Almost 50 years earlier, a period where the church was still embracing polygamy, Hales writes, “Future apostle Orson F. Whitney, grandson of Heber C. Kimball and son of Joseph Smith’s plural wife Helen Mar Kimball Whitney, apparently believed the story genuine. His 1888 biography of Heber C. Kimball includes this statement:

‘A grand and glorious principle had been revealed, and for years had slumbered in the breast of God’s Prophet, awaiting the time when, with safety to himself and the Church, it might be confided to the sacred keeping of a chosen few. That time had now come. An angel with a flaming sword descended from the courts of glory and, confronting the Prophet, commanded him in the name of the Lord to establish the principle so long concealed from the knowledge of the Saints and of the world — that of plural knowledge.’

I don’t know how many persons today believe in, or even know of, the alleged angel that threatened Joseph Smith to marry other women, but it clearly merits inclusion as a part of LDS Church history.

-- Doug Gibson

-- Originally published at StandardBlogs

Oliver Cowdery’s ‘Article on Marriage’ embarrassed the LDS Church in its polygamy heyday

During its first several decades, LDS Church leaders included an “Article on Marriage” in the faith’s Doctrine and Covenants. Penned by early church leader Oliver Cowdery, it stated, in part, “Inasmuch as this church of Christ 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, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again.”

It sounds pretty simple, albeit a bit clumsy in the wording. Some have surmised that the slight difference in the words “man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband.” kind of leaves an out for a man to have many “one wife-es” but for a woman, “but one husband.” But that’s all speculation.

For more than two generations, Cowdery’s Article on Marriage was entrenched as part of the Doctrine and Covenants, although not considered a revelation. However, its inclusion turned into a public relations embarrassment for the LDS Church after it publicly embraced polygamy. After sons of Emma Smith, and others traveled to Utah, they used the Cowdery Article on Marriage as evidence that polygamy was an invention of Brigham Young, and not Joseph Smith. ( It seems quaint now to contemplate that 140 years ago missionaries from the RLDS Church were energetically denying that Joseph Smith was a polygamist.)

LDS Church leaders finally eliminated the Cowdery Article on Marriage from the Doctrine and Covenants — it was Section 101 and Section 109 in distinct editions — and Section 132 became the church’s theological defense of polygamy. Church leaders, who were at that time claiming that Smith had first mentioned polygamy as far back as 1832, also took a long-delayed swipe at Cowdery, claiming that he had abused confidence imposed on him by Joseph Smith by having the Article on Marriage inserted into the Doctrine and Covenants without Smith’s approval.

Here’s an example of the let’s-blame-Cowdery explanation from Joseph F. Smith in 1878:

“To put this matter more correctly before you, I here declare that the principle of plural marriage was not first revealed on the 12th day of July, 1843. It was written for the first time on that date, but it had been revealed to the Prophet many years before that, perhaps as early as 1832. About this time, or subsequently, Joseph, the Prophet, intrusted this fact to Oliver Cowdery; he abused the confidence imposed in him, and brought reproach upon himself, and thereby upon the church by ‘running before he was sent,’ and ‘taking liberties without license,’ so to speak, hence the publication, by O. Cowdery, about this time, of an article on marriage, which was carefully worded, and afterwards found its way into the Doctrine and Covenants without authority. This article explains itself to those who understand the facts, and is an indisputable evidence of the early existence of the knowledge of the principle of patriarchal marriage by the Prophet Joseph, and also by Oliver Cowdery.”

Cowdery was an easy target, having been dead for more than 25 years. He was excommunicated by church leaders in the late 1830s, largely as a result of the church’s internal dissent following a failed financial institution in Kirtland, Ohio. Cowdery, at the time, also criticized Joseph Smith’s relationship with Fanny Alger, a teen servant girl who is assumed to have been Smith’s first plural wife. That relationship failed once Emma Smith, Joseph’s wife, ended it.

It’s tempting to regard the 1835 Article on Marriage as a response to the Smith, Alger failed relationship, but that’s likely not true. Brian C. Hales, an excellent historian (his books on LDS polygamy are a must-read), has looked as several potential scenarios for what prompted the Article on Marriage. Reactions to Joseph’s sexual behavior, or even Oliver’s, as a catalyst to the Article on Marriage’s inclusion, don’t stand up well to historical scrutiny. Hales writes that the Marriage Article “instead was designed to establish that Christian monogamy was a law they had already established and that infractions of this law were seriously disciplined.”

Under this theory, the early Mormons’ theology of having “all things in common,” was interpreted by gossips or enemies as evidence that the Mormons practiced “free love,” such as sharing of spouses.  That needed to be stopped. Hales quotes John L. Brooke, a chronicler of folk manifestations in early 19th century America, who wrote: “Among the non-Mormons in Ohio there were suspicions that the community of property dictated in the ‘Law of Consecration’ included wives.”

So after all is said and done, the 1870s controversy over the Article of Marriage seems more public relations than a defense for or against polygamy. After Smith’s failed effort with Alger, the prophet was publicly silent on polygamy for several years. The 1835 Article on Marriage seems to be simply a reaffirmation by the new religion of traditional beliefs on marriage and chastity, designed to quell rumors that the new church was immoral.

As mentioned, Oliver Cowdery became the scapegoat for the Marriage Article’s inclusion, a curious charge that fails to explain why the article remained as church scripture for 40-plus years. My supposition is, as mentioned, that church leaders saw its subject as clarifying the Law of Consecration, and not polygamy.

As for Cowdery, he was not a bitter apostate and in the early 1840s sporadic efforts to have him rebaptized began, championed chiefly by Phineas Young, brother to Brigham Young. Although those efforts were put on the back-burner while the church moved West, eventually, in 1848, Cowdery was rebaptized. Although he had made plans to move to Utah and was asked by Brigham Young to lobby for the church in Washington D.C., Cowdery’s health was declining rapidly as 1850 approached. He died on March 3, 1850, at the home of David Whitmer, in Richmond, Mo. He was only 43.

-- Doug Gibson

-- Originally published at StandardBlogs