|
POLYGAMY
Section 132 of the Utah Doctrine and Covenants has been attributed to Joseph and was included in Utah’s D&C when the section on monogamy was removed in the 1870’s. If Section 132 of the Utah Doctrine and Covenants was truly a revelation from God and brought forth through the prophet Joseph Smith, then Joseph would have to have been a charlatan, a liar, and a hypocrite. We believe that he was none of these and Chapter IV of Brother Willard Smith’s book would convince and allow any honest saint to separate the truth from fiction and place the authorship of Section 132 where it belongs as the invention of Brigham Young and associates. JOSEPH SMITH; WHO WAS HE? DID HE TEACH OR PRACTICE POLYGAMY? A book written by Willard J. Smith This book was first published by Glad Tidings Publishers of Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1899. In 1904 a second edition was published by Herald House of Lamoni, Iowa. There is no record that a copyright was ever secured, and if it had been, it would now be expired. As a result, this work has fallen permanently into the public domain. This book was re-published by Liahona Research, a Missionary Ministry of South Crysler Restoration Branch, 16101 Salisbury Road, Independence, Missouri 64050. We wish to share with you Chapter Five of his book. Quote: “We will now take up that so-called revelation of July 12, 1843, for the purpose of examining a few points in it, which seem to us to prove that Joseph Smith was in no way responsible for it, had nothing to do with it, or any knowledge of it. I will, therefore, quote the first four paragraphs of it in order to notice a few things contained therein. They are as follows: 1. Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines— 2. Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter. 3. Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same. 4. For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory. The reader will please bear in mind that Brigham Young said on the twenty-ninth day of August, 1852, that Joseph Smith before he died had more than one wife, and that this was known to the world; also that Wilford Woodruff, president of the Mormon Church, claims that Joseph Smith taught the doctrine of polygamy in 1841 and 1842. This latter claim is quite generally made by the Brighamites, and their boast to-day is that some of the wives that were sealed to Joseph Smith as early as in 1841 are still living in Salt Lake City. To one unacquainted with the inward corruptions of Brighamism, and unaware that it is held to be a virtue to lie to uphold the priesthood, the above would have considerable weight in establishing the claim that Joseph was thus implicated. But hold a moment! In this revelation God is represented as saying to Joseph: “Therefore prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions I am about to give unto thee.” Now we submit for consideration the thought that if God instructed him to prepare his heart to receive and obey the instructions, etc., then Joseph’s heart had not previously been prepared for the same, neither had he yet obeyed, nor embraced it, nor in any way previously received it; and the natural and logical inference from the reading of the revelation itself is that such a thing as polygamy was averse to his religious ideas; hence the Lord is exhorting him to get ready for a change in this matter; to prepare his heart to receive and obey that which he now contemplated revealing to him, and this logically knocks the props from under the Brighamite assertion that Joseph Smith taught and practiced polygamy prior to July 12, 1843. But Elder B. H. Roberts, as also Joseph F. Smith, tells us that “the principle of plural marriage was first revealed to Joseph Smith in 1831,” and that “in 1841 the Prophet introduced the practice of this principle into the Church by taking unto himself plural wives. He also taught the principle to a number of leading elders and they obeyed it.” Either this revelation wherein the Lord is represented as counseling Joseph to prepare his heart to receive and obey the doctrine of polygamy is a fraud, or else B. H. Roberts and Joseph F. Smith testify falsely, as they declare that Joseph had already accepted and indorsed polygamy by ?taking unto himself plural wives” in 1841. If the latter statement is true, what a blunder the Lord made when giving that revelation! For, according to the revelation, God had either forgotten all this, or else he had not been appraised of the fact of Joseph’s heart having been already prepared to hear anything in favor of polygamy, and that he had, years before that time, entered into the practice of it, and had introduced it into the Church, and “a number of the leading elders” had also “obeyed it;” as the revelation represents the giver of it as saying practically: “Joseph, I am about to reveal to you something new –a new and everlasting covenant—and you must under penalty of damnation, prepare your heart to receive and obey that which I am about to reveal.” We emphasize the thought that if the Lord was about to reveal to Joseph the doctrine of polygamy on the 12th of July, 1843, then B. H. Roberts and Joseph F. Smith—both of whom are polygamous Mormon elders—have told a falsehood in stating that “the principle of plural marriage was first revealed to Joseph Smith in 1831.” If God made known or revealed the doctrine of plural marriage to Joseph Smith in 1831, then this so-called revelation which is claimed was given unto him on the twelfth day of July, 1843, could not have been a revelation unto him at that time, as it was revealed unto him years and years before—ever since 1831. To “reveal” means to unveil; to make known; to disclose. And the purported revelation of July 12, 1843, says: “For behold! I reveal unto you [to Joseph Smith] a new and everlasting covenant.” If the revelation was given in 1843, then they who testified that it was revealed in 1831 are branded by it as false witnesses, as they themselves accept of the revelation of 1843 as being an inspired document sent direct from the courts of glory; and, as we have seen, God is therein represented as saying: “I am about to give unto you”—Joseph Smith—a revelation of my will concerning polygamy; “and if ye abide not” this beautiful (?) system, “then are ye damned.” It could not have been made known to him before, as the word “about,” as used in this connection, signifies: A nearness to the performance of some act; as “Paul was about to open his mouth.” –Acts 17:14; or, “They were about to flee out of the ship.”—Acts 27: 30. And as the act specified as about, or near to be performed, was the revealing, or making known, the doctrine of polygamy—that God looked upon it with favor—it proves conclusively that if God was the author of that revelation, then he had never before revealed the doctrine to Joseph. And if by inspired counsel Joseph was told to prepare his heart to receive and also to obey the doctrine of polygamy, he is thereby exonerated from the charge of having practiced polygamy prior to the reception of the revelation of 1843. Brigham therefore, stands condemned of lying by this abortive revelation, the authorship of which they have sought to fasten upon Joseph Smith; and unless they present some more plausible story regarding Joseph Smith being the author of that fraudulent document which was first “burned up,” then for nine years ‘locked up’ in Brigham’s sacred desk with a ‘patent lock’ before it was sent forth on its mission of sin and iniquity, we shall be constrained to say to Brigham Young and his coadjutors: You lying rascals! Joseph Smith never saw that revelation; but you yourselves manufactured it for personal convenience to gratify your own hearts. If therefore, this abortive revelation of Brigham Young shows that Joseph Smith at the time it is claimed the revelation was received (July 12, 1843), had not accepted of the system of plural marriage, what importance can we attach to the testimony of those people who affirm that he was practicing it at that time, and had, by precept and example, been teaching it to the leading elders of the Church for years? On the other hand, if he “taught the principle to a number of the leading elders and they obeyed it,” as affirmed by Elders Roberts and Smith, then what will we do with the statement of Brigham Young which he publicly made the twenty-ninth day of August, 1852—which we quoted in a previous chapter—that: “That doctrine has not been practiced by the elders”? Some one has certainly lied concerning this affair; and we pause to ask, Who is it; Brigham Young? Or is it Joseph F. Smith and Brigham H. Roberts? Or are they all guilty of lying? But, says one, does not that revelation, a little further along, show that Joseph Smith had other wives than Emma? Well, paragraph fifty-two says: And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith receive all those that have been given to my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me. But hold! This statement of Joseph having already had other women given to him contradicts paragraphs three and four which we have already quoted. You see, the lord of this polygamous revelation was rather short-sighted, and accordingly got things mixed up. Unfortunately for him, his memory was somewhat impaired, as he had doubtless forgotten when dictating paragraph fifty-two, implicating Joseph with already existing polygamous relations, that in paragraphs three and four he had told him to prepare his heart to “receive and obey the instructions” which he was “about to give” or “reveal” unto him. This polygamous revelation certainly bears the marks of deception and fraud,--this paragraph itself branding the whole thing as a clumsy imposition. For with what degree of consistency could the Lord tell him to prepare his heart to “receive and obey” the doctrine of polygamy, which he was “about to reveal” unto him, if he at that very moment knew all about that doctrine, and had already embraced it, and had received unto himself a half dozen or more concubines, or spiritual wives, represented in paragraph fifty-two as holy women who were “virtuous and pure” before God? What a refined, elevating and exalted (?) idea of purity and virtue is maintained in this pretended inspiration! If the Lord was about to reveal unto Joseph, on July 12, 1843, the principle, or doctrine of polygamy, then, as we have seen, it could not have been made known to him as the mind and will of God prior to that time; for had it so been made known before that time, it would not at that time have been a revelation to him for the reception of which he would need special preparation of heart. Hence, if Joseph had marital relations with other women than his lawful wife, Emma, prior to the 12th of July, 1843, he was guilty of adultery, and thus a transgressor of God’s law. The scholar and orator of Mormonism, Orson Pratt, in his public defense of the doctrine of polygamy as published in the Seer, at Washington, District of Columbia, acknowledges that to have had more than one wife at the time prior to the 12th of July, 1843, would have been a violation of the law of God as obtaining in the Church; and the persons so violating the law, or principle of monogamy would have been guilty of adultery; hence, if Joseph lived with other women as his wives prior to that time, he would in no way be and exception to the rule; and no matter by whom those women were given to hem, that would not change the matter so long as the monogamic principle or rule was in force; the law not having been repealed, the transgressor thereof would be an adulterer. But, notwithstanding God has said: “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” and “Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shall cleave unto her and none else; and he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit; and if he repents not he shall be cast out,” (which was the law obtaining until Joseph Smith’s death.—See Doctrine and Covenants 42:7.) Yet this bungling thing, called a revelation, contradicts all this, and sanctions adultery as pure and holy by affirming that those women with whom Joseph had previously lived, who were given to him to be his wives, were all pure, virtuous, and holy before God. Mark it well: If Joseph held marital relations with any other woman than his lawful wife, Emma, prior to the receiving of that so-called revelation (or at any time thereafter) he was guilty of adultery; and if God gave that revelation of 1843, as he is represented by Brighamism to have done, then he sanctioned adultery as committed by Joseph with those women with whom he had lived as his wives prior to the time said revelation was given, and indorsed those concubines who had taken the place of Joseph’s lawful and honorable wife, Emma, as creatures of supernatural grace and favor, and pronounced upon their heads the benediction of divine favor, saying: “Emma, it’s all right;” you must “receive all those that have been given to my servant Joseph,” for notwithstanding they have been your husband’s companions in lust, still they are so nice, and so much to be admired because, as any one can see, they are “virtuous and pure before me!” Who is so blind as not to see that the god of this revelation virtually offers a premium on crime? Improper intercourse between the sexes is condoned, by the above, and the participants therein approbated as virtuous and pure before God! But sometimes said by the enemies of the Church, that Joseph had already entered into polygamy, secretly, and that this purported revelation was gotten up by him as a necessity in order to excuse him in his guilt, which was becoming very apparent, and, hence, in order to throw a degree of sanctity around his polygamic practice, he dodged under the cover of a pretended revelation. Let us see if this is a just criticism or rendering of facts. And in order that we may the more readily get hold of the matter, I quote one or two more paragraphs from this pretended revelation. Paragraphs 34 and 61 read as follows:
34. God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises. 61. And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood--if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else. I have italicized some words to draw especial attention to them. You will notice from these quotations that if a married man desires to take a second wife, or more, the consent of the first wife must first be obtained, otherwise it would be illegal: for “Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife, because this was the law.” And, “If any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent,” then the way is clear according to the revelation. Now, as the instruction given here is that in order to take a second wife, the consent of the first wife must be obtained; and as Sarah is referred to as an example, as she gave Hagar to Abraham to wife, and all this “because it was the law,” we have counsel, law, and example—according to this revelation—making it obligatory, in order to make a number two a valid wife, that the consent of the first wife be obtained first; and she—the first wife—must give the second wife in marriage to her husband, “because this is the law.” We will, therefore ask Sister Emma—Joseph Smith’s acknowledged and legal wife—whether or not she gave her consent to his having any other wife than herself, and whether or not she gave any other woman to him? To which, in answer, she emphatically declares: I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, either spiritual or otherwise. . . . No such thing as polygamy, or spiritual wifery, was taught, publicly or privately, before my husband’s death, that I have now, or ever had any knowledge of. . . . There was no revelation on either polygamy or spiritual wives. This looks a little suspicious. There is something wrong somewhere. Either Sister Emma has misrepresented the facts, or this purported revelation has been gotten up by some other parties, after Joseph’s death, who have made him their scape-goat to bear away the odium of its creation and existence. We have already seen that not one syllable can be found in any of the sermons, lectures, revelations or public speeches of Joseph Smith, hinting at such a base, soul-destroying system; but much can be shown over his authentic signature condemnatory of polygamy; and this fact bears up the statement of Sister Emma, as diamond truth, that she was Joseph Smith’s first, last, and only wife, and stamps that so-called revelation of 1843 as an infamous document gotten up, doubtless, by Brigham Young and his colleagues, who, eight years after Joseph was killed—having paved the way with their spiritual wife doctrine, have entered, with ghoulish mendacity the grave of the honored dead, and attempted to fasten the responsibility of their corrupt system on the man who was chosen of God as a leader of his people—one who always set his face as a flint against adultery, polygamy, concubinage, and lust. There is not one line in all the writings of Joseph Smith that is opposed to the strictest principles of morality and virtue. He ever taught that liars, thieves, murderers, adulterers, whoremongers, and all evil-doers would most certainly be punished of God for these sins; but this bungling revelation which seeks to justify and legalize prostitution and whoredom, and which Brigham Young and his compeers seek to saddle onto Joseph Smith, teach4es that if a man will only engage in and practice polygamy, he is then at liberty to commit almost any crime and still be justified. Though he should swear like a pirate, or steal like a raven, or commit adultery every day; or if he should rob, cheat, and defraud his fellow man, or do any manner of evil save that of shedding innocent blood—human blood, but innocent blood, which, of course, means that they should not kill each other—still he would be a pleasant child, and would come forth in the resurrection of the pure and the just in the morning of the first resurrection, and enter the celestial portals of eternal peace to companionate with the Savior, Peter, and Paul, and all the ancient apostles, prophets, patriarchs, and seers, and dwell in the presence of God while the years of eternity are rolling by. Lest some might think this statement to be an exaggerated one, I quote from paragraph 26 of this so-called revelation: 26. Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man marry a wife according to my word, and they are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, according to mine appointment, and he or she shall commit any sin or transgression of the new and everlasting covenant whatever, and all manner of blasphemies, and if they commit no murder wherein they shed innocent blood, yet they shall come forth in the first resurrection, and enter into their exaltation; but they shall be destroyed in the flesh, and shall be delivered unto the buffetings of Satan unto the day of redemption, saith the Lord God.
These statements, with many others contained in that pretended revelation of July 12, 1843, are so opposed to and at variance with all the teachings of Joseph Smith as found in his writings and public speeches throughout his entire life-work, that one is forced, if even approximating fairness or force of logic, to abandon as altogether untenable the idea that he had anything to do with that revelation, or that he had any knowledge of it. Another point to which I call attention is, that pretended revelation makes Joseph Smith ask the Lord wherein he “justified Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; as also Moses, David, and Solomon,” in their acceptation and practice of polygamy. But Joseph Smith was not a fool. He knew there was not one scrap of evidence anywhere in the Bible to show that either Isaac or Moses were polygamists. He knew that the Bible declares that “Esau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Elon the Hittite; which were grief of mind [or bitterness of spirit] unto Isaac and to Rebekah.”—Genesis 26: 34, 35. He also knew that God had declared that “David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me saith the Lord;” and that God called it a “crime.” He had also declared, as elsewhere quoted in this book, that the doctrine of having “a community of wives” is an “abomination in the sight of God;” and yet that bungling revelation of Brigham Young’s manufacture which he and his party seek to palm off upon Joseph Smith as a pretext for them to persist in their transgression, has Joseph asking God wherein he justified Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Moses, David and Solomon touching the principle and doctrine of their having had many wives. Oh, Consistency! Consistency! Thy name is not Brighamism. Joseph Smith’s whole life-work, as also the dying testimony of the Elect Lady—his “beloved Emma”—throws the lie in the teeth of Brighamism, and proves that that pretended revelation of 1843 was the abortive child of Brigham Young; and that Joseph Smith was as far from giving such a blasphemous, fraudulent document to the Church or to the world as a revelation from God as the farthest fixed star is from a gambler’s lamp at midnight. He never saw nor heard of that creature of infamy which was attributed to him by Brigham Young on the twenty-ninth day of August 1852. Another point to which I direct attention is the statement made in the fourth paragraph of this pretended revelation which makes the Lord to say: “For, behold! I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned,” etc. This statement alone is strong presumptive evidence that Joseph Smith never had that sham revelation, as it clashes with the revelations given to the Church by him, and is opposed to his teachings first, last, and all the time. The “new and everlasting covenant” had been given unto the Church years previous to 1843, the giving of which was but a recommitment of the divine plan, or gospel of Christ. Joseph Smith believed and taught that the “new and everlasting covenant” which was offered to the human family by Jesus Christ, and of which Paul speaks in Galatians 4:21-31 and Hebrews 8: 6-13, had been broken, in consequence of which a universal apostasy had obtained, thereby necessitating a restoration of the gospel plan, or new covenant, that the bride, the Lamb’s wife, might make herself ready, as declared by Apostle John. The new and everlasting covenant has ever been, and ever will be the only gospel plan, as “it is the power of God unto salvation”; therefore, let us briefly examine Joseph’s teaching regarding the new and everlasting covenant. In March, 1831, Joseph gave to the Church the following as a revelation from God:
Hearken, O ye people of my church, and ye elders, listen together, and hear my voice, while it is called today, and harden not your hearts; for verily I say unto you that I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the light and the life of the world; a light that shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not. I came unto my own, and my own received me not; but unto as many as received me gave I power to do many miracles and to become the sons of God, and even unto them that believed on my name gave I power to obtain eternal life. And even so I have sent mine everlasting covenant into the world, to be a light to the world, and to be a standard for my people and for the Gentiles to seek to it, and to be a messenger before my face to prepare the way before me.—Doctrine and Covenants 45:2 Again: wherefore I say unto you, that I have sent unto you mine everlasting covenant, even that which was from the beginning, and that which I have promised I have so fulfilled, and the nations of the earth shall bow to it;--Doctrine and Covenants 49:2 Once more: And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received, which vanity and unbelief hath brought the whole church under condemnation. And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all; and they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written, that they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father's kingdom, otherwise there remaineth a scourge and a judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion.— Doctrine and Covenants 83:8 I have italicized some words in these quotations to call attention to them. The new and everlasting covenant had been given to the Church through Joseph Smith years before the polygamic revelation ever saw the light; and it is declared to be, in the revelations above quoted, “A standard for my [Christ’s] people” to which “the nations of the earth shall bow.” This, therefore, destroys the claim made in the polygamic revelation that it is a new and everlasting covenant designed of God to damn everybody who reject it. The new and everlasting covenant had already been given to the Church, and declared to be “even that which was from the beginning;” and this new and everlasting covenant enjoined the doctrine of monogamy—or the having of but one companion in wedlock at the same time; and it is also therein specifically declared that the nations of the earth shall bow to this covenant; and because they had “treated lightly” this covenant they were “under condemnation,” and should so remain until they should “repent and remember the new covenant” which God had given them, “not only to say but to do according to that which I [God] have written. -END-
|
