Emma

[Sheelah]

This article here was posted over on MADB and the following is the last paragraph in it:

Kennedy is dedicated to expanding public understanding of Emma Smith's legacy. He also wants to help her descendants know who she was and why she made the choices she did. While many revere her memory, he said, others have taken stories about her out of context and painted her to be someone she was not. "It's like passing the telephone message along — it always gets distorted." "Emma does not want sympathy," Kennedy said. "Empathy, maybe, but not sympathy. Having Latter-day Saints concerned about her salvation (in the afterlife)" is ironic, he said, adding both she and her husband "had their calling and election made sure (meaning their salvation is assured). The last I recall, you have to commit murder to lose that."

I know that Joseph had his election and calling made sure, but I find no evidence of Emma's in the Doctrine and Covenants. I could have missed it, I looked through searches and didn't see anything. My question is, did Emma has hers made sure before Joseph died? And if so, where it is found.

This is the second time that I've seen this brought up. The first was on the old Deseret Book message board before it got shut down and I never got an answer to this. If its not true, I'm wondering what is causing people to say this.

I'm not looking for this to point any fingers at Emma as I have a great respect and admiration for her.

[tubaloth]

I don't recall hearing this either. But when one sits down and thinks about it, it could be possible. I would think in most cases where some bodies calling and election is made sure it is because they have obeyed every covenant given to them. This includes Eternal Marriage. I would think this is the logic that is followed. That because Joseph Smith got his calling and election made sure that would have to assume that Emma got it also. I don't know if I have read anything about Emma but I think Elder McConkie might have a quote about how gaining the calling and election made sure both in the marriage covenant have to have it? Just guessing.

[Sheelah]

Well, I'm still undecided on it, especially when I read quotes such as this:

Having one's calling and election made sure is not attained easily. Speaking of this, the Prophet Joseph Smith taught that "When the Lord has thoroughly proved [a person], and finds that the [person] is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the [person] will find his[/her] calling and election made sure" (TPJS, p. 150). (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, Vol. 1, Calling and Election)

I'm also not totally sold on the "That because Joseph Smith got his calling and election made sure that would have to assume that Emma got it also" because it is possible for one half to be blessed in ways the other might not if they don't endure. However, quite possibly this could be why some people assume that she had hers made sure while in this life too which is all I'm curious about. I truly know that she is and will be with Joseph through eternity.

[Still_Small_Voice]

I wonder if Emma went a bit insane after Joseph was murdered. She endured so much hardship in her life. I feel for her because she suffered so much in this life. If all the hardship that happened to her was placed on me, I would probably go insane.

[cgrant]

According to D&C 131 one needs both the revelation and the ordinance to know that one is saved. Whether she received the revelation or not is the question; the ordinance she received 28 September 1843. I like Emily Partridge Smith's view: "After these many years I can truly say; poor Emma, she could not stand polygamy but she was a good woman and I never wish to stand in her way of happyness [sic] and exaltation. I hope the Lord will be merciful to her, and I believe he will. It is an awful thought, to contemplate misery of a human being. If the Lord will my heart says let Emma come up and stand in her place" (Emily D. P. Young, "Incidents," 4 November 1883).

[imported_Elphaba]

I wonder if Emma went a bit insane after Joseph was murdered. She endured so much hardship in her life. I feel for her because she suffered so much in this life. If all the hardship that happened to her was placed on me, I would probably go insane.

Emma actually went on to lead a fairly content life after Joseph's murder. Of course it wasn't easy, especially immediately after his death as she desperately grieved for him. Their love for each other was real, though it had been sorely tested because of his participation in polygamy. Emma tried very hard to accept the principle, but in the end just could not do it.

There is some evidence Joseph was going to rescind the practice of polygamy mainly because it was causing the Church's image to be so tarnished, but also to save his marriage. However, it cannot be verified and so should be taken as a possibility only.

Another great hardship for her immediately after Joseph’s murder was her struggle with Brigham Young, fighting for what she believed was rightfully hers. During Joseph's life all of his documents, titles, monies, etc. were used to take care of his family as well as the Church. He had never separated the two.

Therefore, upon his death Emma insisted she had a right to a portion of these items as she needed them to raise her family. Brigham insisted all of it belonged to the Church and demanded she turn it over. She refused, and an already tense relationship turned into an animosity that lasted for the rest of their lives.

However, Emma was an incredibly strong, and strong-willed, woman. She made a life for her and her sons in Nauvoo that at first was difficult but eventually was comfortable. She also met and was courted by Lewis Bidamon, who was an affectionate man who appears to have made Emma very happen.

Unfortunately, years into the marriage, Bidamon did have an affair which resulted in a child. However, I believe Emma's reaction to this shows her kind and loving character at its best, as she took in the child to raise as her own.

One other thing I believe was a mistake on Emma's part is that she denied Joseph's polygamy to everyone who asked about it, including her own sons, who suffered for it. They grew up believing their father had not been a polygamist, yet when they went searching for the truth it was a blow to them to discover otherwise. Joseph Smith III, the eventual leader of The Reorganized COJCOLDS suffered greatly over the issue. Emma never budged.

Emma is absolutely my favorite heroine in the establishment of the Church. When I was a child I would hear how she and Joseph loved each other, but after that there seemed to be a taboo against mentioning her name. Today, I believe the Church is making an effort to acknowledge her contributions, which were considerable and often miraculous. This makes me very glad as she faced every obstacle with courage and faith, including her life after Joseph.

Elphaba

[imported_Elphaba]

According to D&C 131 one needs both the revelation and the ordinance to know that one is saved. Whether she received the revelation or not is the question; the ordinance she received 28 September 1843. I like Emily Partridge Smith's view: "After these many years I can truly say; poor Emma, she could not stand polygamy but she was a good woman and I never wish to stand in her way of happyness [sic] and exaltation. I hope the Lord will be merciful to her, and I believe he will. It is an awful thought, to contemplate misery of a human being. If the Lord will my heart says let Emma come up and stand in her place" (Emily D. P. Young, "Incidents," 4 November 1883).

Actually, Emma received the "second anointing" on September 28, 1843. She was part the "Quorum of the Anointed" where, for a brief time in the history of the church, 1838 to 1844, both women and men had a governing hand in the Church.

I rarely use Wikipedia for a reference, but it is explained so well in this case I went ahead and used a portion of it:

LDS Church leaders often connect this ordinance with a statement by Peter in his second Epistle. In 2 Peter 1:10, he talks about making one's "calling and election sure," and further remarks, "We have also a more sure word of prophecy" (2 Peter 1:19). Joseph Smith, Jr. referenced this process in saying, "When the Lord has thoroughly proved [a person], and finds that the [person] is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the [person] will find his[/her] calling and election made sure".

The Second Anointing is given only to married couples. A few scholars have argued that because of this women who receive the Second Anointing, in which they are anointed queens and priestesses, are ordained to the "fulness of the priesthood" the same as their husbands. These scholars feel that Joseph Smith may have considered these women to have, in fact, received the power of the Priesthood (though not necessarily a specific Priesthood office).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What this means is at the time Joseph and Emma were sealed together and received their second anointings, they believed their exaltaton was ensured, no matter what happened.

Elphaba

[mnn727]

I personally have a very hard time with "calling and election made sure" just as I have problems with "once saved always saved" - both pose the same theological problem

[Sheelah]

finds that the [person] is determined to serve Him at all hazards

This is why I have a hard time with it for Emma. Plural marriage was her undoing, it was something she struggled against and as was mentioned she denied afterwards. She is not someone that to me epitomizes "calling and election made sure." Good thing its not me doing the judging.

I don't have a problem with the concept in general, although I don't feel there are many that actually get it confirmed on them while in this life, to be striving for it is the goal though.

[cgrant]

Actually, ...

I'm not sure about what "Actually" is suppose to mean here. Nothing in my previous post is incorrect.

Having an ordinance performed does not guarantee that the ordinance is valid eternally. It takes the seal of heaven to make it so. Hence, some have received it because of who they were (i.e., personal connections) and not what they were (i.e., fully worthy of the ordinance). In Emma's case, it is unclear to us whether the ordinance was or will yet be ratified by revelation. There is simply no such revelation on record (there are, however, for Joseph and others). Joseph's warning seems pertinent here: "Take heed both before and after obtaining the more sure word of Prophecy" (Ehat & Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, 208).

[imported_Elphaba]

I'm not sure about what "Actually" is suppose to mean here. Nothing in my previous post is incorrect.

"Actually" is an adverb 1.in fact: used to emphasize that something really is so or really exists, e.g. when it may be hard to believe or when it contrasts with what has already been said (emphasis mine) The bolded part is how I meant it in our conversation.

Are you familiar with the "second anointings"? These are much different that the ordinances you receive in the temple today, and in fact, rarely is a married couple given the chance to take a "second anointing" in our modern Church, though it is believed that Church presidents have been given their second anointing.

However, in Joseph's day, second anointings were common amongst the Church's elite. It was one more way for Joseph to ensure an eternal familial relatonship amongst those he considered his truest and bravest members of his burgeoning church.

What this "second anointing" does is, like I said above, ensure one's exaltation, no matter what happens in their lives.

I think it is extremely important to understand that when we say Emma received her second anointing on September 28, 1843, Joseph also received his second anointing at the same time. This is really a significant event in Church history yet the only members who know about it are usually those who are interested in the Church's history, and I assure you, the Quorum of he Anointed is a fascinating subject for we historians. :)

I admt I am not sure what revelation you speak of, and would really appreciate it if you'd let me know. If there is something historically inaccurate about my understanding of the Quorum of the Twelve and the second anointings, it is important to me to know about it, as I've researched it fairly extensively and am committed to understanding it completely. If this includes a revelation, I'd gladly take that information as well.

Obviously, Joseph played a pivotal role in Emma's receiving her second anointing, and the entire Council believed she was now an exalted Queen and a Priestess who would be exalted in heaven. The same went for all of the other couples who were members of the council.

Additionally, there are extant records of the Quorum meetings, including Emma and Joseph's sealings, and Emma's second anonting. The following is an excellent articile about the Second Anointing.

Second Anointing

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Having an ordinance performed does not guarantee that the ordinance is valid eternally. It takes the seal of heaven to make itba so. Hence, some have received it because of who they were (i.e., personal connections) and not what they were (i.e., fully worthy of the ordinance). In Emma's case, it is unclear to us whether the ordinance was or will yet be ratified by revelation. There is simply no such revelation on record (there are, however, for Joseph and others). Joseph's warning seems pertinent here: "Take heed both before and after obtaining the more sure word of Prophecy" (Ehat & Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, 208).

I do not doubt this is true. I am only relating what the Quorum of the Anointed believed during its existance. I have no opinion on its effacacy. I do know, from the minutes taken, that they believed they had received the priesthood of the highest power, which assured them their exaltation. I have no opinion as to whether this is true or not. However, I notice your quote is written by Andrew Ehat, who has done extensive research into the second anointings; therefore, I take your reference very seriously. I have not seen this paragraph before, but I do believe it is reliable, and I plan on following up on it. I am very glad you posted it. I can say Ehat's description of the historical events mirror what I have provided here, as he is one of my sources.

I admit I find The Quorum of the Anointed one of the most fascinating pieces of LDS history and am surprised at how few LDS know about it. There's much more to tell about it than just all of the second anointings given. It was a unique part of LDS history.

Elphaba

Edit: I initially wrote this post late at night when I was tired. When I came back today, after a good night's rest, I was appalled at the typos, and more imortantly, the lack of detail I had written. Therefore, I have gone over the post and made changes to better explain the second anointing, clarifications when needed, and deleteed the run-on paragraphs to be more concise and readable. At least I hope I have. So, if you have read this before noon, 10/10, you probably should read it again, as there have been a few major changes, for which I apologize.

E.

[HiJolly]

I personally have a very hard time with "calling and election made sure" just as I have problems with "once saved always saved" - both pose the same theological problem

I think they are different in this way: We have ordinances that we perform in the Church, such as baptism, confirmation (Gift of the Holy Ghost), Priesthood ordination, Temple Endowment & Sealings, and so forth. These are done outwardly, physically, by Church representatives who have been given Church authority for those Church members who have ostensibly met the requirements. But we're not perfect in the running of the Church.

The ordinations that we give/perform in this manner are preperatory work, the 'John' or Elias, for the 'true' embuement or endowment of the blessing. The marriage is not eternal until the Holy Spirit of Promise 'seals' the Sealing. That sort of thing.

So there is the outer ordinance, and the inner fulfillment of the ordinance, in every case. IMO.

HiJolly

[imported_Elphaba]

I just thought I’d put this out there. It’s from this Dialogue article I recommended. Each time I read that article I comprehend one more layer of the “Quorum of the Anointed,” and the “second anointing” that I had before. (I can't get the article to go to page 1, so you'll have to scroll backwards. Sorry.)

I felt these quotes addressed some of the issues a few of you brought up before. I don’t have an agenda--I just thought you might think they were interesting. Elphaba

Heber C. Kimball explained to a Nauvoo Temple audience on December 21, 1945, “You have been anointed to be kings and priests, but you have not been ordained to it yet, and you have got to get it by being faithful.” This concept was mentioned again by George Q. Cannon in 1883: “. . . in the washing that takes place in the first endowment, they are washed that they might become clean from the blood of this generation . . . In the same way that are ordained to be Kings and Priest--that ordinance does not make them . . . Kings and Priests. If hey fully received of another endowment [i.e., the second anointing], a fullness of that power, and the promises are fulfilled in the [bestowal of the power upon them.” (Salt Lake [City] School of the Prophets Minute Book, typescript entry for August 2, 1883, original in LDS Church Archives; emphasis in original)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I thought this fit in well with mnn727’s and cgrants’ comments, and I would say it is not as clear cut as I previously believed. Everything I have read about the second anointing, and I maintain it has been quite a lot, indicates once you have had it, your exaltation is assured. Now I am not so sure.

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following is a good example of why I find this, historically, so fascinating. And while later prophets have provided clear cut explanations of what the second anointing is and how rarely it is used today, mnm727 and cgrant are correct that it is not valid without the person’s deep faith and commitment to God and the Church.

However, when Joseph restored the second anointing to the Church, they didn’t look at it the same way, and it's definitely one the most fascinating pieces of LDS history to me, for many reasons that I won't go into at this time. From the Dialogue article:

In a sense the institution of this “higher ordinance” [second anointing] was the logical next step. The previous twelve years of pronouncements, sealings, and anointing “unto eternal life” guaranteed a status that, according to Joseph’s 1843 teachings, was subservient to that of the gods. From the perspective of these teachings, even the Nauvoo endowment administered to members of the “Holy Order” (what I’ve been calling the “Quorum of the Anointed“) simply provided that the men who received it would live in the celestial kingdom as angels and servants. Until 1843, women had been excluded from these ordinances, possibly because of Joseph Smith’s personal reluctance, Emma Smith’s rejection of polygamy, John C. Bennett’s lurid expose’, and/or the apostasy and subsequent reconciliation of Orson and Sarah Pratt over polygamy. However, Doctrine & Covenants 131 and 132 indicated that this exclusion deprived the men (who had received the previous ordinances) of the highest kingdom of glory--godhood. The higher ordinances was necessary to confirm the revealed promises of ‘kingly powers” (I.e., godhood) received in the endowment’s initiatory ordinances. Godhood was therefore the meaning of this higher ordinances, or second anointing, for the previously revealed promises in Doctrine and Covenants 132:19-26 implicitly referred not to those who had been sealed in celestial marriage but to those who had been sealed and ordained “kings and priests,” “queens and priestesses” to God. Such individuals would necessarily have received the “second anointing”; “Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is an excellent example of how the second anointing, or the “higher ordinance,” evolved into such an important ritual. During this time in the Church, Joseph taught the select elite members of it’s importance and how critical it was. He explained it was only these members who had received the second endowments and lived this higher law that would dwell with Christ in the top-most layer of the Celestial Kingdom.

The second anointing also gave the members powers no one else had, such as choosing when to die, and having angels at their beck and call. I find that fascinating.

The Quorum of the Anointed was very short-lived--late 1830s to early 1840s. Joseph was extremely inclusive whereas Brigham was not.

In conclusion, I find your questions about Emma to be valid, yet ultimately unanswerable. She never lost her faith in the Church, though she did join the RLDS church when her son became the President. And if you read her biography, Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, which I imagine many of you have, you get a better idea of why she did not go to Utah. Her reasons were sound, and I know I would have done exactly what she did.

But she always remained the incredibly kind and generous person she had always been. I believe I have already mentioned how she took in her husband’s son from an affair, and she treated him like her own. Her life was so full of a heartache we will never know, and she did suffer from some depression. But her strength was phenomenal.

In case you can’t tell, Emma is a hero to me.

Elphaba

[mnn727]

I think they are different in this way: We have ordinances that we perform in the Church, such as baptism, confirmation (Gift of the Holy Ghost), Priesthood ordination, Temple Endowment & Sealings, and so forth. These are done outwardly, physically, by Church representatives who have been given Church authority for those Church members who have ostensibly met the requirements. But we're not perfect in the running of the Church.

The ordinations that we give/perform in this manner are preperatory work, the 'John' or Elias, for the 'true' embuement or endowment of the blessing. The marriage is not eternal until the Holy Spirit of Promise 'seals' the Sealing. That sort of thing.

So there is the outer ordinance, and the inner fulfillment of the ordinance, in every case. IMO.

HiJolly

Yes, but there's that old "enduring to the end" clause. President Faust (if anyones election and calling should have been made sure it was his) started many of his conference talks with requests for prayers that he be able to endure to the end. God may know if we will endure to the end, however to me the doctrine of "calling and election" infringes on our freedom to choose (ie agency)

[cgrant]

I am very aware of the sources on this subject. It is indeed fascinating. And sacred. I don't post too much about it, though I am happy to read, collect, and ponder all I can. My point is merely that an ordinance, even this one, does not assure exaltation. The only thing that can--ultimately--is God. (cf. JST Gen. 14:25-40). It cannot come by the will of man, only by the will of God. Therefore, even if a man, such as the President of the Church, were to desire to give it to a loved one, without the seal of heaven it is of no force.

I think Joseph's explanation of this dual-nature of the sealing is as inspired and thorough as can be: "The more sure word of prophecy means a man's knowing that he is sealed up unto eternal life, by [1.] revelation and the spirit of prophecy, [2.] through the power of the Holy Priesthood [the ordinance]" (D&C 131:5). Both the revelation and the ordinance are required. And I don't think it matters in which order.

In Emma's case, we know the date of the ordinance (thanks to Ehat's research). Whether she has or will receive the seal of the Holy Spirit of promise (cf. D&C 132:19) is the question. I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt, but it also would not surprise me if she had not qualified for the blessing in mortality (thank goodness that's not the end of our story). Her struggle with plural marriage gives me pause. It was why Joseph waited so long to finish restoring the temple ordinances.

[Sheelah]

Thank you, cgrant, that's just what how I needed to hear it.

[Gaia]

This article here was posted over on MADB and the following is the last paragraph in it:

I know that Joseph had his election and calling made sure, but I find no evidence of Emma's in the Doctrine and Covenants. I could have missed it, I looked through searches and didn't see anything. My question is, did Emma has hers made sure before Joseph died? And if so, where it is found.

This is the second time that I've seen this brought up. The first was on the old Deseret Book message board before it got shut down and I never got an answer to this. If its not true, I'm wondering what is causing people to say this.

I'm not looking for this to point any fingers at Emma as I have a great respect and admiration for her.

GAIA:

Hi There, Sheela --

What you're looking for is not in the D&C, it's in the records of what was (during the Nauvoo period) called the "Anointed Quorum" or "Holy Order" --

Joseph and Emma became the first couple to receive the Second Anointing (by which they BOTH made their Calling and Election Sure, and thus received the Second Comforter) or "Fullness of the Priesthood."

By this ceremony they were each "anointed & ordained to the highest & holiest order of the priesthood."

PLEASE NOTE: "EACH anointed and ordained", NOT just the husband, Joseph.

("Meetings of the Anointed Quorum- Journalizings," 28 Sept 1843; also slightly different entry in Joseph Smith diary, 28 Sept 1843, in Faulring, "An American Prophet's Record" p 412.)

I hope that helps --

Blessings --

~Gaia

[Gaia]

This is why I have a hard time with it for Emma. Plural marriage was her undoing, it was something she struggled against and as was mentioned she denied afterwards. She is not someone that to me epitomizes "calling and election made sure." Good thing its not me doing the judging.

I don't have a problem with the concept in general, although I don't feel there are many that actually get it confirmed on them while in this life, to be striving for it is the goal though.

GAIA:

Joseph was reputed to have said that if necessary, he would go to hell to help redeem Emma.....

[Pa Pa]

If not she should have!

[Kate]

One day I was troubled with the whole Emma thing. My family was gone and I spent hours reading, pondering, talking to Heavenly Father....I felt almost felt as Enos must have on the mountain all day praying. I REALLY wanted to understand her and all that happened after Joseph was martyred. When the day was over, I felt as though I had literally been inside her heart and head. I cried with her and for her with all that she endured. I felt her love for Joseph...and her love for Heavenly Father. What was even more beautiful is that I felt the love that Heavenly Father felt for her. It was as if He wanted me to know that she is loved and just fine. We just can't judge. We weren't there. Only the Lord knows what was in her heart.

Thank you Elphaba for your posts.

~Kate

[Juliann]

Emma actually went on to lead a fairly content life after Joseph's murder. Of course it wasn't easy, especially immediately after his death as she desperately grieved for him.

Emma had a very hard life after Joseph's death which "content" does not describe. In some way she had to deny Jospeph and the church in order to survive in Nauvoo after the War of Nauvoo. She had to run a hotel, a daughter ran off with a man from the circus, returning later in life to die...but not to be with Emma. She had to put a son in a mental institution and we all know what those places were like. Her second husband betrayed her and there were continual problems with the church that she established. This is not a life of content.

If anyone had a calling and election made sure...it was Emma. I'm not even sure why that would matter, actually. She was sealed to Joseph and she is with Joseph.