Zina and Her Men

[FlaviusHambonius]

A couple of years ago I stumbled on a article on fairlds.org called 'Zina and her Men: An Examination of the Changing Marital State of Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs Smith Young'

To put it mildly at the time I read it I found it so bizzare that I wasn't really quite sure what to think. To be honest there was some anger and a little disgust in the way this story all came down. I can't say that I really got over the bewilderment of this entire saga, but as time goes on you tend to dismiss things a little from your mind as the days and months and years go by, or at least I did. I finally probably chalked it up to something of a higher order that I couldn't fully comprehend or so the saying goes.

At the time I made copies for both of my sisters to read who both had become active and involved with the church as of recent years and have strong testimonies. They didn't have much to say other than they thought it a little bizarre and sad--as I did.

Fast forward a couple of years-- I was at work a few days ago and ran into a freind who is very active in the church, actually in my ward (I have been inactive for several years) and the two of us started chatting and I was kidding him about how he doesn't let the grass grow under his feet ( he was divorced a couple of years ago and dates many, and I mean many LDS women from various LDS sites) and somehow this subject came up about some of Joseph Smith's Polyandrous or 'spiritual sealings'.

Anyway I told him about this story (what I could remember) and he said to get him a copy and I did and I have not seen him in a few days to see what he thought.

In the meantime I got myself another copy and read it again and I must say as I read it I still shake my head in disbelief.

Some are familiar with this story and some are not.

I started to write the nutshell version, but it was turning out to long, so rather I'm providing an encapsulated version provided by the author (Allen L. Wyatt) of the article from FAIR from a poster on this issue from FAIR.

He wrote:

Let me provide just one example of critisism stated by a poster on the FAIR message boards:

That marriage [of Henry and Zina] started their life and family together. Not long after starting, however, Joseph Smith wedged himself in as a third wheel--that bothers me, but at least Henry and Zina were still able to live and have children together. Then Bro. Brigham comes along, and "one-ups" Joseph by taking Henry's wife and sons as his "property," and then to add insult to injury, sends Henry on a far away mission so he can't cause any problems when Brigham and Zina start to cohabit at Winter Quarters. Hopefully this better explains why I am so disturbed by Joseph's and Brigham's treatment of Zina and Henry. (Author goes on to say--As shall be seen, nothing is ever as simple as black and white as critics like to presume--hence starts the story of her marriage to Henry Jacobs.

My question of concern is why in the world was Henry Jacobs not allowed to be sealed for time and eternity to his own wife and two children??????

I hope some of you will read the article, it's about 14 pages long and a page turner. If anything give it the old Evelyn Wood speedread.

I hope some people will give some input to this issue-- and no I am not Anti-LDS, in fact I tried among just a handful (small handfull) to try and stand up for issues concerning Mormonism to a great extent on Shawn McCraney's 'Born Again Mormon' web-site (the forum has been dropped awhile back) we sure had a few wing-dingers at times.

Here's the link to the article:

Zina and Her Men

Thanks,

HB

[Honor]

Someone very close to me sent me this article a few months ago. Over those months she studied quite a bit about early churc history and has slowly lost her testimony of Joseph Smith and is falling away from the church. I don't know what to do to help her. She's more interested in these kinds of things than I am. I don't want to be blind and just turn away from it, but I have a feeling that it would cause confusion with my own beliefs. The only thing I keep coming back to is that the church is either true or it's not, and if it's not, I've got a lot more confusion and questions than if it's true. I've always been one to be satisfied knowing that I don't know everything and that a loving Heavenly Father does, but I know that the questions about all this stuff can weigh heavily on the mind. No answers for you, but you're certainly not alone in your thoughts on all this.

[Moksha]

I was thinking about Bathsheba taking a bath where King David could see her. I doubt Zina did anything like this, but there certainly seems to be a repeat of that theme, complete with Henry Jacobs in the role as Uriah the Hittite.

[Dale]

Remember Henry in 1846 had witnessed Brigham Youngs sealing to Zina for time. He also accepted the previous 1844 sealing to his wife without objection. Neither him, nor his wife objected to it. Unless one wishes to propose they thought they were play acting they knew full well Brigham Young was claiming rights to eventually co-habit with Zina in time.

When he agreed to that sealing Henry had given Brigham Young power to be with Zina at Winter Quarters. It had nothing to do with Henry being sent on the mission. I doubt he was sent on the mission so he would not be a problem for Zina or Brigham Young.

With the children when Zina and Henry agreed to the sealing they both thought his marriage to her gave her no eternal reward. So her and her kids by her own belief had to be sealed to someone other than Henry. Henry once accepted this belief himself, or would not have agreed to the marriage to Brigham Young.

I am not LDS but Community of Christ (formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day saints.)

[Jenamarie]

Remember Henry in 1846 had witnessed Brigham Youngs sealing to Zina for time. He also accepted the previous 1844 sealing to his wife without objection. Neither him, nor his wife objected to it. Unless one wishes to propose they thought they were play acting they knew full well Brigham Young was claiming rights to eventually co-habit with Zina in time.

When he agreed to that sealing Henry had given Brigham Young power to be with Zina at Winter Quarters. It had nothing to do with Henry being sent on the mission. I doubt he was sent on the mission so he would not be a problem for Zina or Brigham Young.

With the children when Zina and Henry agreed to the sealing they both thought his marriage to her gave her no eternal reward. So her and her kids by her own belief had to be sealed to someone other than Henry. Henry once accepted this belief himself, or would not have agreed to the marriage to Brigham Young.

I am not LDS but Community of Christ (formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day saints.)

Ya, if the husband was present for the Sealings, how could it have been "sneaking" for Joseph and Brigham to be Sealed to her and claim her as a wife?

Sometimes I think we put too much emphasis on how "perfect" a Prophet has to be. They can't do anything controversial or against what feels "right" to us, or else that must mean they're not really a Prophet. The Lord's Annointed have been doing strange things, and sometimes even screwing up royally, since practically the beginning of time.

How many people have lost their Testimony in Joseph because of this story, but still believe the Bible with the examples of King David and Bathsheba (who wasn't a Prophet, but was annointed by the Lord to be King), or Noah getting so smashing drunk that he didn't know it was his own daughters he was sleeping with?

[Dale]

With Zina and Joseph Smith i do not see any relationship. To me her sealing to him was in name only. D.&C. 132 requires that a marital vow to Henry would be ended at death, or in the future for some other reason. I see this type of polyandry with Joseph Smith to be platonic in nature. I see no valid reason to think she thought it proper to live with him, or have his children in Nauvoo. Because her sealing to Joseph Smith gave her celebrity status some of her statements exaggerate her relationship with Joseph Smith.

Unless i am satisfied Joseph Smith had Henry, or Zina violate their marital vows why should the sealing other me? With Brigham Young if Henry and Zina in this life at some point agreed to end their vows Henry should not have been surprised.

Edited June 18, 2008 by Dale

[Moksha]

Because her sealing to Joseph Smith gave her celebrity status some of her statements exaggerate her relationship with Joseph Smith.

Did it punch up her celebrity status to be with Brigham as well?

It is a good thing all the Presidents after Brigham Young were older gentlemen, so an endless round of platonic explanations would not be needed for them.

[FlaviusHambonius]

There seems to be no real evidence one way or the other as to whether Henry knew beforehand of Zina's sealing to Joseph Smith. The article states that there is disagreement among authors and scholars as to this issue and that it seems obvious that Henry would have known sometime after the fact, but for many the more tantalizing question is whether he knew beforehand. It seems there is conflicting reports on both sides--but no concrete evidence for either.

Of course the sealing for time to Brigham Young as husband and wife, this was done in the presence of Henry and Zina's father, William D. Huntington and John D. Lee.

This was done one week prior to leaving Nauvoo and Zina was heavy with child at the time--her second child--FATHERED by HENRY JACOBS--who would be born 7 weeks later.

Of course now that Joseph Smith was dead, then according to the levirate marriage that was restored by JS--states that if a faithful blood relative was not available to marry the widow then "a worthy church brother could act in his behalf" But apparently there is a problem with the levirate marriage in the case of Zina because Henry would have been considered "a worthy brother" and already married to Zina--could not his marriage to her been viewed as fullfilling the law? NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!! WHY? Because Joseph had asked the Twelve to look after his plural wives-- and poor old Henry just didn't happen to be one of the twelve AND THEN Zina gets to pick which Apostle--I guess if you get your pick of the litter to coin a phrase you might as well aim high---Unbelievable!

It seems from what I read that early on that Zina and Henry were happy for the most part, despite I'm sure struggles and trials and tribulation, like the rest of the saints, but for me as of now anyway to think their was no coersion is to have your head stuck in the sand, but thats just my opinion.

So after three rejections from Zina to Josephs advances to be his 'spiritual wife' only later to be sealed to Joseph (after being told about the Joseph-Angel-lose his POSITION and the church won't move forward Angel--told to her by her brother Dimick) after being married to Henry--Joseph is martyred and had asked the twelve to look after his plural wives--Zina is starstruck and picks Bro. Brigham--Henry witnesses the sealing of the wife he dearly loves to another man (not just any man mind you) Is sent off on a mission while he is deathly il--right after his wife and children have been hi-jacked from him (my opinion)--OH and by the way Henry, while your out on your mission, it might be a good idea to go wife hunting--when you have a few spare moments--because your now ex-wife and your children will be living with me---Good Luck Henry and come pay us a visit some time.

This story REEEEEKS and I wont say like what.

I'm approaching 50 years of age-- was born into the covenant--have been around Mormonism all my life and around all types of LDS from all walks of life, so even though it may sound like I'm trying to stir the bowl, I'm not--I am seeking some different insights or angles on this issue, as it greatly disturbs me-- I've already drank the milk as a child---give me some meat, like a big Porterhouse steak, and we'll throw the bones to the dogs.

Perhaps this topic is mute for most--I do realize it's hard to leave 'Pleasantville' at times.

Thanks for the Posts so far, I really appriciate them.

HB

[Dale]

Todd Compton who wrote In Sacred Lonliness admitted himself some of Joseph Smiths plural marriages were platonic in nature. With Helen Mar Kimball and Patty Sessions he admits that. So why does sexuality have to be included in Zina's marriage to Joseph Smith? Yet Todd Compton based on his unfounded speculation wrote , "judging from Smith's other marriages, sexuality was probably included." (ISL, pg.82) And i would say his use of the word "other" is a strecth as we can only judge from some examples in his marriages. These some examples tell us nothing about what happened in this marriage as truth be told he knows nothing about that.

We do know from 1844 until Winter Quarters there was no sexuality between Joseph Zina Huntington and Brigham Young. (ISL, pages 91,92) That was true even though he had been sealed to Zina with Henry, and Zina's happy consent in 1844, and 1846 when they had a Temple completed enough to do that. (ISL, pages 84,86)

The platonic sealing explanation only works easily for a certain amount of Joseph Smiths plural marriages. In cases of a claim being made by the woman itself i would prefer instead to discuss the merits of that claim. But yes indeed plural marriages were happening in Nauvoo where women were not involved with the men. There is no evidence she was co-erced into breaking her vows with Henry. At most she was talked into participating into a meaningless for time ceremony. And she went back after the ceremony and re-mained faithful to Henry as as his wife.

With the Levirate idea of a worthy brother asking in his behalf do we know Joseph smith restored that? Could a worthy brother consents to give up his rights? If the wording was really could it was not would. The polygamy revelation as far as i can tell does not say anything about it being improper for Brigham Young to marry Zina after Joseph Smith's death.

D.&C.132 prevents a woman from having two husbands where marital relations were shared at the same time as adultury.(132:41) Zina understood that so stated in a June 20th 1847 letter. (ISL, pages 91,92) At that time only did she feel her marriage to Henry was over. Prior to that time she felt as long as the marriage to Henry was in effect she had to be totally faithful to him. Unless one wishes to argue she held plural beliefs contrary to D.&C. 132 she felt her marriage to Henry had to be over.

What is your documentation for Joseph Smith asking the twelve to marry his wives?

Edited June 19, 2008 by Dale

[FlaviusHambonius]

Just to follow up from my first post:

Why was Henry denied to be sealed to the love of his life and children?

Any thoughts to why 'this Angel' that appeared to Joseph was so pressed to threaten Josephs life and that the Church could not go forward unless he gets Zina sealed to him, and disregard Henry and his possible exaltation with his companion and children?

Why was Zina the 'chosen' one--especially since she's married to a man already?

Why not a single woman?

Was it a test of obedience for Zina?

Could it have been ambition to reach celebrity status or at least great security?

Could it have been a David and Bathsheba theme as Moksha pointed out?

After all, like Jenamarie said "The Lord's Annointed have been doing strange things, and sometimes even screwing up royally, since practically the beginning of time."

After all, there's still many in the church that still think Joseph was just married to Emma.

[Moksha]

[FlaviusHambonius]

Dale,

The referance about Joseph requesting the Quoram to marry and take care of his widows and in some cases Joseph Smith's plural wives were given the choice of the twelve as their husbands for time, to give them the full honor and protection of marriage with an apostle is a quote from Zina's grandaughter--Susa Young Gates--under 'Levirate Marriage' from the link I posted-- that quote comes from the book 'Plurality, Patriarchy and the Preistess: Zina D.H. Young's Nauvoo Marriages" by Martha Sonntag Bradley and Mary Brown Firmage Woodward according to the reference provided in the article.

Also, Todd Compton reports that "many of Smith's widows did mary members of the Twelve. Brigham married between seven and nine of them; [Heber C. Kimball] married approximately eleven. He then recounts that other members of the twelve and other prominent Church leaders married seven or more of Joseph's plural widows.

Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), 83----Looks like it's in your book!

It's almost 12:30 my time and I have to get up at 3:30 and work a 10 hr day. Beddy by time--

HB

[Dale]

I tried to edit my post to try and deal with your concerns better.

It is my understanding he was said to have felt God had commanded her to take her as a plural prior to her accepting Henry's proposal. (ISL, pg.80) If that were the case the idea God Henry's position as husband should be partially dis-regarded. A decision was made that it was improper for Joseph Smith to live with Zina as his wife, or have children in life with her. With D.&C. 132 clearly teaching until the vows between someone like Zina and Henry was over as adultury i see that as evidence Joseph Smith was innocent of that type of polyandry. (132:41-44)

And it requires Henry to be guilty of adultuy before she could be released from her vows with him. (132:43-44) I see no bases for the idea Joseph Smith taught as revelation Henry could be released from her vows with Zina unless it be for adultury. (D&C 132;Matthew 19) Brigham Young may have had his own idea if Henry consented to the eventual ending of his vows with Zina it was properly done. But this would have to be based on private revelation he got on whether he should be sealed to Zina or not.

I happen to hold Joseph Smith would have only taught Henry and Zina what was in verses 41-44. I have speculated the strong anti-polyandry message of the document was for the benifit of people like Henry. It requires before Joseph Smith would have power to take her away from Henry that he be guilty of adultury. Why include a teaching that would expose his behavior with Zina and Henry? They would have known Joseph Smith already did it and that contrary to the revelation. If i were Joseph Smith he would if guilty of that behavior left anti-polyandry stuff out of the revelation. (132:41-44,61-63)

----------------

With the Joseph Smith was innocent of polygamy position it requires much explanation. Joseph Smith 3rd in the Saint's Herald, and Smma Smith privately admitted women were sealed to her husband for the eternity. But they held the earthly parts of the claims were untrue.

William Law said the polygamy revelation copy he saw in Nauvoo were two or three pages foolscap. (Kingsbury copy) James Whitead said the copy he saw was a page of foolscap.(Bishop Whitney copy)Scholars cite them on that, but leave out a significant detail. And that detail is both men said the revelation published in 1852 was an altered forgery. James Whithead denied William Laws claim it allowed for polygamy in the here and now. He said the LDS published version was similar to the one Bishop Whitney showed him at winter Quarters, but changed to sanction the Apostles polygamy.

Some RLDS have suggested William Laws reputed Nauvoo journal might be an edited forgery. I know this because i am one of the few who have suggested it. In his journal he claims the polygamy revelation he wrote was 10 pages. It would have had to have been smaller size paper as foolscap in the copies were large size paper. If the copy was that small would the original need to be 10 pages? I did find a 10 page revelation in W. Wyl's Mormon Portraits. I have entertained the idea he edited his journal and looked at the same document and counted out 10 pages. But that would if my speculation is right date the July 12th 1843 referance to being made post Nauvoo. The document is used to back up some of the testimony of a few of the key wives who made statements in Utah.

I do not have access to the 1852 published polygamy revelation, or the 1876 D.&C. My guess was W. Wyl exactly re-produced the document from the 1876 D.&C.

But if the journal was edited he could have added as many apocryphal stories as he wished about Joseph Smith and polygamy.

I am well aware of the letters, affidavits, journal entries,ect implicating Joseph Smith in polygamy. And i am still open to enjoying the historic RLDS position Joseph Smith was innocent of polygamy. I hate to confess he was a polygamist based on his being platonically sealed to women other than Emma.

In regards to the affidavits it is felt we can prove the testimony of the earthly wives false. And some Community of Christ members do not feel he had children with plural wives which goes to his legal innocence. a lot of scholars cite from the Temple Lot case to prove Joseph Smiths guilt. What is alway's left out is Judge Philips decision went against the key plural wives in question. Two of the women Lucy Walker and Melissa Willes had appeared before him in person and his decision went against their claims. Scholars who cite the case no doubt leave out what embarasses their witnesses testimonies.

But whether documents were, or were not forgeries i leave more up to historians. My testimony is in Jesus Christ not whether Joseph Smith was free of living with the wives. And i prefer to discuss the merits of the claims than accuse anyone who is dead of lying unless i know it.

Edited June 19, 2008 by Dale

[HiJolly]

I attended the FAIR conference where this talk was given. It motivated me to read Compton's book. I was less than thrilled with all the editorializing in Compton's book, yet it was a fascinating read, cover to cover.

I have to make a disclaimer here: I have studied polygamy for many years, first discovering Joseph's multiple marriages in the 1970's. 3 of my 4 grandparents grew up in polyg homes, and the 4th grew up with the rest in the Mexican Polygamous colonies (Pacheco, to be precise). I have printed transcripts of the oral history records from the Charles Redd Center for Western Studies at BYU from my ancestors and relatives; I have journals; I have family stories passed down through the generations.

So I am not a novice at this. Nor am I a scholar. I despise remembering (or even noting) names & dates. I realize this dims my ability to converse with other folks on this topic, but my purpose has never been to convince anybody of anything, but simply to understand things myself. I feel that I have succeeded. :)

Just to follow up from my first post:

Why was Henry denied to be sealed to the love of his life and children?

Cool user name! The question is, WHO denied him this, if anyone? Do you know, or are you guessing?

Any thoughts to why 'this Angel' that appeared to Joseph was so pressed to threaten Josephs life and that the Church could not go forward unless he gets Zina sealed to him, and disregard Henry and his possible exaltation with his companion and children?

Too much editorializing in this question. You are upset in behalf of a man that is probably not upset. Why?

Why was Zina the 'chosen' one--especially since she's married to a man already?

Why not a single woman?

Good question. Who 'chose'? Was it Joseph? Was it God? What is your evidence for either choice? How can you tell? Please note the truth of this quote:

"A conclusion is the place where you get tired of thinking"

-- Arthur Bloch

Was it a test of obedience for Zina?

I don't doubt it; yet only Zina could answer that question.

Could it have been ambition to reach celebrity status or at least great security?

Possible. Can we righteously judge such a thing? I doubt it.

Could it have been a David and Bathsheba theme as Moksha pointed out?

No, though there is a very basic similarity, it breaks down at the very outset, to my mind.

After all, like Jenamarie said "The Lord's Annointed have been doing strange things, and sometimes even screwing up royally, since practically the beginning of time."

Are you personally included in the tendency to the "screwing up royally" thing? Me too. Ergo, no room to criticize anyone else, even a prophet...

After all, there's still many in the church that still think Joseph was just married to Emma.

Yup, my Mother among them. I think she'll still be admitted to the Celestial Kingdom, if she can learn to forgive. She's still working on that one.

HiJolly

[FlaviusHambonius]

HiJolley,

I enjoyed the Arther Bloch quote: "A conclusion is the place where you get tired of thinking".

I think you hit it on the head, because after too much thinking about this Zina subject is that the conclusion I have come to is indeed that I have done too much thinking, and your right I was always putting myself in Henry's shoes and my perspective as to how I would most probably act-- and I hope that would be, to never give consent on releasing the woman I love and my kids like it was just another day at the office--but then again I wasn't in Henry's shoes and of course it will be between The Lord, Zina, Joseph, Brigham and Henry.

I have had to drink massive amount of water to aid in my throbbing head over this stuff, :lol:but the story is of no value one way or the other to me as of now-- after trying to absorb this info and decifer things into my interpretation of what happened etc. has been enough to tide me over for a day or two.

I think you were right, I was being angry in behalf of another man-- which is totally unproductive and silly and doesn't accomplish anything other than to rile myself up.

I enjoyed your comment that 'your purpose has never been to convince anybody of anything--but simply to understand things myself' --- sounds like good sound wisdom to me.

Thanks for the comments--it's sounds like your definitly an authority on Polygamy--I'll know who to go to if I have a question:cool:

HB

Edited June 20, 2008 by FlaviusHambonius

[Dale]

I see some of Todd Compton's commentary in his book fiction. He mentions what he terms a "cryptic entry" in Zina's diary. It has her Husband Henry in trouble over something. My guess is on May 5th 1845 Henry knew Brigham Young was planning at some point to replace him as husband to Zina. Zina was expressing willingness to do what Brigham Young told her to do. (ISL, pg. 85)

With the Levirate idea Henry not Brigham Young should be sealed to Joseph Smith presents a misunderstanding of the system. In Ruth 4 a kinsman who had primary legal right to marry Ruth gave up that right to Boaz. So instead of Ruth marrying that kinsman she maried Boaz instead. With Henry voluntarily giving that right up to Brigham Young via the sealings he agreed to he gave up his right like the kinsman did. It is not correct for Todd Compton to assume Brigham Young was wrong in sidestepping Henry since he was a member in good standing. (ISL, pg.84)

Another point where i feel he is wrong is his assumption that Zina being merely sealed to Joseph Smith would get her a greater glory.(ISL, pg.84) It was really her continued obedience to prophetic guidance and that would be in the LDS view Brigham Young. LDS have to think Brigham Young was commanded by God to be sealed to Zina. And with that he felt he had to get Zina and Henry's consent to proceed with the sealing for time.

I see no basis for his idea Henry and "Zina probably expected to continue living with each other throughout the rest of their lives."(ISL, pg.85) We do not know what they expected as we are not in the know on such matters. My guess is that they were not as ignorant as some think they were.

With Zina i hate to almost confess her as a plural wife of Joseph Smith. To me if she was never involved with Joseph Smith in mortality she was not his wife as Emma was. I have formed an opinion only if she felt it right to live with Joseph Smith, or have his children should she be dignified with plural wife recognition. If she exaggerated her platonic marriage with Joseph Smith into something more i consider her statements in that regard untrue. I just do not consider her being sealed to Joseph Smith the same as her being his mortal wife.

I have proposed a legal idea i am pondering. I have proposed if she had the understanding the time wording in the ceremony was meaningless for time it was legally meaningless. I use the illustration of a person who signs a contract agreeing to pay someone a large sum of mone. It might look like a legal contract but if you throw in the print payment not due until the afterlife the contract is legally worthless. If Zina had a similar understanding which i see likely her marriage to Joseph Smith was legally a pretend marriage. Contrary to what she thought she never illegally married Joseph Smith if i am right.

Anyway i am proposing a loophole to the Illinois and U.S. anti-polygamy laws not previously considered. The U.S. Supreme court only had outlawed marriages where the couple knew they would be involved at that time. They never decided a constitutional issue of whether a couple could marry as long as they thought the marriage would not go into effect until the afterlife. Such an arrangement would not violate civil law because it does not have the couple make an arrangement that goes into effect at the time of the ceremony. It might well be a protected part of religious practice to do such if they added what to the law would be non-sensical understandings.

In my study certain criteria must take place in order for a marriage to be considered a marriage under the law. In one instance this man was accused of polygamy for a 2nd marriage he had participated in. I can't remember the particulars, but the court found the guy had never really married the woman. A certain legal criteria for her being his wife was not properly done so the court withdrew the polygamy charge. It was true he had married her, but the court decided it could not recognize her marriage to the guy.

In the Temple Lot case Judge Phillips was legally unimpressed with the claims in the affidavits, LDS witnesses. So he did not recognize Joseph Smith guilty of polygamy. He did not say some of the women could not have been involved with Joseph Smith. He just felt whatever polygamy ceremonies Joseph Smith participated in they were not proveable as real marriages. Even if i am wrong about my constitutional issue Joseph Smith's plural marriages do not meet the criteria of real marriages under the law. The judge pointed to lack of children, and some the same LDS witnesses denying Joseph Smith a polygamist as invalidating their statements. Because of the contradictory statements those witnesses had perjured themselves which was why these claims did not survive the legal situation. They had signed published cards in Nauvoo denying Joseph smith was a polygamist.

I do not claim expertise on this subject. My trick is to buy the books mark them up and make notes. I have written many notes in my copy of In Sacred Lonliness for example. I also keep a notebook where i make notes where i did not have room in my book. Sometimes new thoughts present themselves. I read the same books many times.

Edited June 20, 2008 by Dale

[Justice]

Remember the story about Heber C. Kimball and his daughter and wife?

The very last detail where Joseph told Heber the Lord accepted Heber's faithfulness and that he could keep his wife for eternity, and then sealed them, might be a sign of passing the test, where possibly Henry did not. Only the Lord knows.

I wonder if this was a pattern to test the "faithful" at their word where Polygamy was concerned. I also can't help but wonder what would have happened if Heber C. would have failed the test? Possibly it, too, would have ended much like this story did.

Since it is a discontinued practice, and one that is foreign to us, it's really difficult to know what is expected of those who were invited to participate.

Maybe it means that Henry didn't qualify for eternal life as Heber C. did.

A lot to speculate on here. Certainly nothing to doubt whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet in this story. Especially since historians can't really agree on what is fact, and they don't know all the details of what was said to Henry.

Things like this don't really bother me because I know that Joseph saw into heaven, and it appears some of what he learned by doing so bothered even him.

Edited June 22, 2008 by Justice

[Dale]

I think Heber was exaggerating a bit. I doubt he meant to say Joseph Smith wanted his wife for time. It is more likely he wanted to be sealed to her just for eternity. D.&C. 132 treats as adultury taking a wife vowed to another man. Though it would permit him being sealed to Heber's wife in a marriage that was to start when Heber's marriage to her ended at death.

Todd Compton who wrote in Sacred Lonliness feels that Helen and Josephsmith never shared marital relations. So i doubt Joseph Smith was proposing anything improper with Heber's wife. But in the zeal to give testimony they may have said stuff that gave unintentionally misleading impressions about Joseph Smiths doings in Nauvoo.

We do know D.&C. 132 purportedly represents the teaching that Henry would have known well by the time Brigham Young took over as husband to Zina. And Zina knew that as long as she was under a vow to Henry she could not be with Brigham Young. At about the time she co-habitated with Brigham Young she wrote in a letter something about he marriage to Henry ending. She never felt it proper to be with any other man than Henry until she felt released from her vows to Henry.

We may not know what he knew at the beginning. But we do know he had time for several years of instruction about the rules governing the practice of plural marriage. It is very unlikely Zina would have accepted co-habiting with Brigham Young is she knew in 1844 that any co-habitation with Brigham Young would be adultury. More likely to me Zina and Henry both knew that Brigham Young taught that if a husband gave his consent to release a wife from her vow she could co-habit with her without the new husband and wife being guilty of adultury.

--------------

The possible only evidence of improper relations between Joseph Smith and married women is children. FAIRMormon has this article going over the status of these claims at the moment. The article is entitled Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages.

Joseph Smith and polygamy/Children of polygamous marriages - FAIRMormon

None of Henry Jacobs kids were Joseph Smiths. DNA studies have ruled our Joseph Smith as the father of Zebulon.

With Sylvia Sessions i have proposed i feel she felt Josephine Lyon was a step-daughter of Joseph Smith. Lucy Walker had married Heber Kimball after Joseph Smiths death. She had the suggested understanding her and Heber's eight kids would be Josephs in the resurrection. So i think Sylvia may have similarly thought a biological daughter of her husband was Josephs kid by virtue of the sealing. That she did not differentiate between that type of fatherhood and biological paternity. If the author of the article is right DNA research on the claim is ongoing, but slowed down because "the Y chromosome evidence of paternal lineage is not present in females."

Edited June 22, 2008 by Dale

[Justice]

All Joseph asked of Heber is that first he be sealed to his daughter, then his wife. Heber did not fully understand this thing Joseph was asking. It is safe to assume that Heber felt Joseph was asking Heber to give up his daughter and then later his wife to him. That's why it was a test. Heber had to take Joseph at his word because of the incident with his daughter.

I'm not talking about improper relationships. I am talking about a possible test. And, I'm suggesting that maybe that's all this other event was, with some exaggerated stories coming from both sides. It's a known fact that Joseph did test several brethren with this thing. Many did not pass. All I'm saying is it's possible that this was a test very much like was the pattern.

[Dale]

I understand where you are coming from. I wish i could go back in time and question the individuals involved in the events. It is hard to tell what is or is not exaggeration reading history. My guess was if he understood Joseph's Anti-polyandry teachings he would know taking his wife in mortality was wrong. The only way a test would work is if he go so little instruction he fell for it.

I am not familiar with the other tests on other men. I may have read something in my books on it but missed it.

To me an affair with a married woman not released from her vow would be adultury.

------------

I frequently check the recent changes at the FAIR Wiki. And i noticed a chapter on polyandry and Joseph Smith. It had a section in the chapter on Zina. They are planning a book that i hope will go to press soon.

Edited June 27, 2008 by Dale