Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lamanite

Surprising Statment By Emma Smith About Joseph

Recommended Posts

I have been digging through Nauvoo Polygamy (Smith, 2008) and came across a statement attributed to Emma that I had never read nor heard of before.

Emma told Joseph W. Coolidge, administrator of the Smith estate, that "Joseph had abandoned plurality of wives before his death." When Coolidge, himself a polygamist, contradicted her assertion, Emma showed that she would no longer remain mute on this topic and reportedly shot back: "Then he was worthy of the death he died." [emphasis added] Ibid. pg. 238

The source for the quotation is Joseph F. Smith, Diary, Aug. 28, 1870, in Van Wagoner, Sidney Rigdon, 306n30.

I'm not a professional historian and am not sure how to accurately break this quote down. I've tried to take some cues from information released from the JSPP team on how they classify sources. (see Life on Gold Plates) So I'm wondering if I've included all the relevant factors when evaluating this quote.

  • My first concern is the length of time that has lapsed.
  • It is not a primary source so I've considered that. I'm not even sure how the information was transmitted and through whom.
  • I doubt Emma authorized and dictated the quote to Coolidge, so again an issue of provenance. (From the source I listed below who was the original source? Coolidge?)
  • I'm not sure how to determine the closeness of the relationship between Emma, Joseph, and Coolidge. Anyone know what their relationship was like in Nauvoo?

Anyway, that's where I'm at with this thing. With all the empathy I possess I think I can appreciate how Emma might have been feeling around that time in Nauvoo, and I think it's pretty well documented how she felt about polygamy. However, this quote seems to be an extreme expression that I can't say matches my beliefs about who I think Emma was and what her feelings were towards Joseph.

So yes I am working from an already biased perspective.

Big UP!

Lamanite

Edited by Lamanite

Share this post


Link to post

That's a really interesting quote! I agree though that it has some issues, especially considering that Emma is to have stated at other times that JS never practiced polygamy, right? Added onto all the other issues with second hand quotes, we also have to consider how believable Emma is herself as a source.

Tough stuff. But that's what makes history so awesome!

Share this post


Link to post

Why surprising?

We've known for many, many years that Emma fudged in her interview with JSIII, taking the position that JSJr neither practiced nor taught Section 132, leading JSIII and the Re-Orgs to take the official position, both in court and elsewhere, that both polygyny and related [temple] content of Nauvoo Mormonism were either BY lies or evidence that JSJr was a fallen prophet.

The Re-Orgs fairly recently [as such things are measured] gave up on the "JSJr never practiced nor taught polygyny" cant. Can't speak to whether either the branches in revolt or the CofC still flirt with the notion of fallen prophethood.

But, really, how can you expect Emma to talk about polygyny after BY and the rest left? Do you really expect her to want to open up that can of worms? Be kind to the poor woman.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe Emma was a little bitter about God telling her this...?

54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.

If she didn't have a testimony of polygamy (or section 132), and shortly thereafter Joseph died, she may have assumed Joseph's death was some sort of repudiation of Section 132? :unknw:

Edited by cinepro

Share this post


Link to post

Why surprising?

We've known for many, many years that Emma fudged in her interview with JSIII, taking the position that JSJr neither practiced nor taught Section 132, leading JSIII and the Re-Orgs to take the official position, both in court and elsewhere, that both polygyny and related [temple] content of Nauvoo Mormonism were either BY lies or evidence that JSJr was a fallen prophet.

The Re-Orgs fairly recently [as such things are measured] gave up on the "JSJr never practiced nor taught polygyny" cant. Can't speak to whether either the branches in revolt or the CofC still flirt with the notion of fallen prophethood.

But, really, how can you expect Emma to talk about polygyny after BY and the rest left? Do you really expect her to want to open up that can of worms? Be kind to the poor woman.

Oh I'm not being critical of her at all. At an emotional level my heart aches for her from the beginning to the end. My issue I guess is that although she struggled with Polygamy, I have always maintained that she and Joseph had an almost fairytale type of love and commitment despite polygamy. But a statement like this kind of challenges my romantic notions.

Big UP!

Lamanite

Share this post


Link to post

The problem may not reside with Emma, but perhaps between Joseph Coolidge and Joseph F Smith. In playing the game telephone, especially after some years may have passed, it is quite common for accounts to not be recorded exactly as they happened. Joseph F Smith would have been looking for evidence that supported Joseph Smith as a polygamist, and Coolidge's account may have given it to him, or something close enough for him to write down as such.

When we consider JFS' treatment of his uncle Joseph Smith as an infallible person, and the rancor between the sons of Joseph and of Hyrum (especially when JS3 buried Hyrum without JFS' permission), it is possible both sides were looking for whatever evidence they could find to show their side was correct.

Share this post


Link to post

Here's the context of the quote:

I had an interview with Jos. W. Coolidge an old "mormon", he told me some very interesting incidents of older times, the days of Nauvoo, one was this - he visited Emma Smith, wife of the Prophet Joseph, at Nauvoo. She remarked to him that Joseph had abandoned plurality of wives before his death, he replied that he thought not; she insisted that he had, Coolidge insisted that he had not, for he "knew better", "then", said she, "he was worthy of the death he died" and became very angry which ended the conversation. Joseph Smith had sealed more than wife to Jos. W. Coolidge, and he "knew" as he said, what he spoke. I record this as the testimony of a man who has not been with the Church for more than 20 years.

https://dcms.lds.org/view/action/ieViewer.do?from_proxy=true&dps_pid=IE149791&dps_dvs=1344974108060~455&dps_pid=IE149791&change_lng=en (images 73 and 74).

To me it sounds like an outburst from someone that had been provoked about a sensitive topic.

Share this post


Link to post

I had heard this before and this has been discussed from fairly early times as I recall, though perhaps not widely or openly. I believe this is just one of many of the types of things Emma said and did that put emnity between Brigham Young and herself. I believe that several of the apostles called her an out right liar. And Joseph Smith .... before he died ... said "Emma may well go to hell -- but I will go in also and snatch her out" or words to that effect.

Share this post


Link to post

Why give up the romantic notion? Anger can be another facet of love. Emma was obviously deeply hurt, so lashed out when the issue resurfaced.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, the quote is shocking. And I think Emma probably said it (or something like it). But I don't think she meant it. She was "very angry" according to the account. Emma was still grieving Joseph, and anger (and denial) often accompany grief. Emma loved Joseph and hated polygamy. She believed, perhaps naively, that Joseph had abandoned the doctrine of polygamy before his death. This thought had comforted her. To be suddenly confronted with the possibility that she'd been deceived probably unleashed a flood of strong emotions—anger, hurt, resentment, grief, love, hate, perhaps fear too—prompting her anguished response. But whatever harsh words she may have had for her slain husband on that occasion, she died calling his name. And Joseph always regarded her as "the choice of [his] heart." When one of his wives once complained to him about Emma, the Prophet, it is said, "turned to her and said 'If you desire my love you must never speak evil of Emma'" (see Lucy M. Wright, "Emma Hale Smith," Women's Exponent 30, no. 8, p. 59).

Share this post


Link to post

The Re-Orgs fairly recently [as such things are measured] gave up on the "JSJr never practiced nor taught polygyny" cant. Can't speak to whether either the branches in revolt or the CofC still flirt with the notion of fallen prophethood.

The RLDS church, atleast some of its membership who did their history homework, began to reject the belief that JSJr never practiced polygamy in early as the start of the 20th century. Roger Launius, Don Compier and Bob Mesle have talked about this on occasion.

IIRC, the Restoration Branches reject the idea that JSJr was a fallen prophet. Community of Christ also denies JSJr fallen prophethood. Though they take a much different approach to their opinion concern JSJr than that of the Restoration Branches.

Share this post


Link to post

Why give up the romantic notion? Anger can be another facet of love. Emma was obviously deeply hurt, so lashed out when the issue resurfaced.

I guess when taken in conjunction with everything else that was said and done during that chapter in Josephs and Emma's relationship it seems that maybe Emma was hurt beyond repair. At least that was my initial response to the quote. And I'm just being honest with myself when I allow for complete empathy for Emma and her unimaginable situation. And following those lines of honest evaluation I may come to the conclusion that by that point in time she may have been pushed past her limits. I think one could make a pretty good argument based on the historical record for this scenario. Conversely, one could certainly make a compelling case for the opposite.

Currently, I sit at my computer and feel completely comfortable choosing the "romantic" ending for Joseph and Emma whether or not the historical record supports it. Sometimes the blue pill suits my needs just fine.

Big UP!

Lamanite

Share this post


Link to post

These types of quotes cause problems because it is so difficult to understand context. We can make all kinds of excuses or suppositions as to why Emma may have said it or something similar IF she said it at all. It may have been misquoted. There is too much that we do not know, but what is certain is that it will be misused by some in order to achieve their own agenda or support their own feelings.

I have often heard the refrain from critics that Mormons cannot run from their history. Unfortunately, what "history" we have is so little understood and what is factual is difficult to determine.

Share this post


Link to post

And so did Gerald Lund when he wrote "The Work and the Glory" saga.

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately, what "history" we have is so little understood and what is factual is difficult to determine.

Creating a picture of reality through historical evidence is fraught with challenges. Objective history is a myth. To a greater or lesser degree we are all affected by our own experience when approaching history. I think even more so when dealing with religious texts. That being said, our (Mormon) religious history is so new and well documented (comparatively speaking) that I think we can present historical records without inserting ourselves unnecessarily into the narrative.

For example I am extremely grateful for the rich historical record we have of the Prophet Joseph. From the mundane daily experience to his expansive revelations we are blessed with a record of both.

Big UP!

Lamanite

Share this post


Link to post

The RLDS church, atleast some of its membership who did their history homework, began to reject the belief that JSJr never practiced polygamy in early as the start of the 20th century. Roger Launius, Don Compier and Bob Mesle have talked about this on occasion.

IIRC, the Restoration Branches reject the idea that JSJr was a fallen prophet. Community of Christ also denies JSJr fallen prophethood. Though they take a much different approach to their opinion concern JSJr than that of the Restoration Branches.

Having lived here in Indep. Mo. my entire 55 yrs....I would have to disagree with the comment that " the Restoration Branches reject the idea that JSJr was a fallen prophet. Community of Christ also denies JSJr fallen prophethood".

My personal experience has demonstrated to me that the opposite is in fact the truth. Many, if not most... of my Restorationist/CoC/Remnant church friends do in fact believe JSjr was a "fallen Prophet". However, when speaking to them these days they temper that sentiment by using this characterization of the Prophet when they say.."during the Nauvoo period...Joseph lost his spirtitual edge".

Share this post


Link to post

I would believe Emma would say something like this. According to Brigham Young she tried to poison Joseph twice. I can see her thinking herself justified in doing it and thinking that way. According to Joseph Smith himself, in a personal letter to the Whitneys, people weren't safe around him when Emma was around during the times that she was most upset about plural marriage. I fully believe the story that Emma pushed Eliza Snow out the door and down the front steps based upon anecdotal evidence like this. By themselves, the stories would be doubtful in my mind. But, given the fact that Joseph Smith himself wrote in a personal letter warning that people involved in a plural marriage to Joseph could not be safe if Emma is around, makes the anecdotal stories more believable.

Edited by MormonMason

Share this post


Link to post

I fully believe the story that Emma pushed Eliza Snow out the door and down the front steps based upon anecdotal evidence like this.

After reading Bushman's research into this incident I found myself doubting it ever happened and was quite angry Emma was convicted by second hand rumors. Those who lived in the house told a different story of Emma.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know if she said it, but I do know that people will say things they regret and don't really feel in the heat of anger. In the conversation Coolidge relates, he was contradicting her and pressing the issue of a subject which was very upsetting to her.

The reference is an entry in Joseph F. Smith's diary in about 1870. He is apparently referring to an event that Coolidge related to him that happened in 1846--when Coolidge related it to Joseph F. is not mentioned, but I'm sure it was not at the time it happened as Joseph F. was only about 8 years old in 1846.

More likely Coolidge related it years later and memories can be sketchy and deceiving, so I'll give Emma the benefit of the doubt that the sentiment he claims she expressed (and Joseph F. wrote down in his diary years later) is not what she actually said or even felt. I know that Emma loved Joseph very much, but their marriage was not without serious difficulties from poverty, persecutions, instability, as well as her husband's polygamous relationships.

edited to add; 1870, the time when Joseph F. put this in his diary was during a time when blackening Emma's character was encouraged and that could have coloured Coolidge's memory of the event as well.

Edited by alter idem

Share this post


Link to post

And so did Gerald Lund when he wrote "The Work and the Glory" saga.

You do realize that it is a work of fiction? Right? So often I find some confuse fiction such as this for reality.

Share this post


Link to post

You do realize that it is a work of fiction? Right? So often I find some confuse fiction such as this for reality.

Most definitely it was fiction based on facts and he would reference them at the end of each chapter.

Share this post


Link to post

You do realize that it is a work of fiction? Right? So often I find some confuse fiction such as this for reality.

I credit Brother Lund with writing a ripping yarn that probably taught more people about the early Saints than dozens of dry institute manuals. I enjoyed them immensely and they led to my wanting to know more of the dry but factual history of the Saints.

I remember back in the 90s when the series first came out we had someone quote an incident from the book as an example in Sunday School. It was understood that this was an historical fiction account but it was mildly amusing to the teacher. He scored his points at the end of class when he said "remember to read the assignment for next week. Our readings will be from gospel of "the Work and the Glory" volume ___ chapter ___."

The class burst into laughter including the brother who shared the fictional example.

Edited by KevinG

Share this post


Link to post

According to Joseph Smith himself, in a personal letter to the Whitneys, people weren't safe around him when Emma was around during the times that she was most upset about plural marriage...But, given the fact that Joseph Smith himself wrote in a personal letter warning that people involved in a plural marriage to Joseph could not be safe if Emma is around, makes the anecdotal stories more believable.

But that could be interpreted as Emma being followed by his enemies in order to find him as wasn't he in hiding at the time?

Eliza never mentioning the incident with Emma and being at school teaching IIRC supposedly the next day after a miscarriage lead me to believe that it was a rumour....

Edited by calmoriah

Share this post


Link to post

I credit Brother Lund with writing a ripping yarn that probably taught more people about the early Saints than dozens of dry institute manuals. I enjoyed them immensely and they led to my wanting to know more of the dry but factual history of the Saints.

I remember back in the 90s when the series first came out we had someone quote an incident from the book as an example in Sunday School. It was understood that this was an historical fiction account but it was mildly amusing to the teacher. He scored his points at the end of class when he said "remember to read the assignment for next week. Our readings will be from gospel of "the Work and the Glory" volume ___ chapter ___."

The class burst into laughter including the brother who shared the fictional example.

I read the Work ant the Glory too. I thought it was great fiction but did realize Brother Lund did use artistic license to make it a good read.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By SouthernMo
      The timeline and reasons of how the idea of polygamy evolved into practice is perplexing.  It is causing me doubt how scriptures are to be obeyed, and how to trust the revelatory process.  Let's look at the pattern Joseph Smith followed:
      March 1830 - Joseph Smith publishes the Book of Mormon (supposedly scripture) which contains commandments from God.  The only discussion of polygamy is found in Jacob 2, which clearly condemns the practice.  However, there is a provision given for exceptions: only to 'raise up seed' if God commands it.
      The Gospel Topics Essay on Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo states that "After receiving a revelation commanding him to practice plural marriage, Joseph Smith married multiple wives and introduced the practice to close associates."  The only revelation I know of on polygamy came in July 1843 (D&C 132), yet Joseph Smith had married 22 (by some count) additional wives by July 1843.
      2 Big Questions:
      1. What revelation did Joseph Smith receive (per the mentioned Gospel Topic Essay) before the D&C 132 revelation that told him to practice polygamy, despite the Book of Mormon's 1830 prohibition (with exception)?
      2. In light of the Jacob 2:30 provision for the allowance of polygamy to "raise up seed unto me..." why are there no (known) children that emerged from Joseph Smith's plural wives?  Joseph apparently did not use polygamy to 'raise up seed.'
    • By Bernard Gui
      In Helaman 13, Samuel the Lamanite gives dire prophetic warnings to the Nephites from the walls of Zarahemla. He predicts their destruction will come in 400 years as the result of wickedness, rejecting the Prophets,  pride, and seeking after wealth. He warns, 
      Then he says, 
      Two questions:
      1. Is anyone aware of other literary references to such notions as slippery treasure, tools, swords, etc., especially in the Early Moden English time period?
      2. This is often used by BoM critics as evidence Joseph Smith was writing from his experience with the treasure-seeking atmosphere in early 19th-century upstate New York. Does the EModE theory that Joseph was not the author of the BoM text but was reading someone else’s words, whatever their source, resolve this issue?
    • By HappyJackWagon
      I want to respond to a couple of statements made by Julianne from the now closed "Weed" thread, because she absolutely nails it. She is spot on and I think the discussion at this level needs to occur before any progress can be made on the SSM issue.
      She wrote...
      Speaking as a straight, white, man, I recognize that I come to the traditional church teachings of priesthood, sealing, polygamy/polyandry, and SSM from a certain privileged position. The church's teachings and practices benefit me and they always have. Even though there is little to no evidence for how celestial families will actually be organized and function in the CK I used to think I had it all figured out. Obviously, I thought, marriage is essential to have legal physical intimacy which is necessary for creating offspring with one or multiple wives. Yet there is no firm teaching about how spirits are created. Are they born like a baby is born into mortality? There is no evidence or teaching for that, but it is widely assumed. That assumption then justifies polygamy while discrediting polyandry and even SSM. After all, if the entire purpose is to create spirit offspring and it is thought that it happens in a way similar to creating biological offspring, then it makes sense. But that is ALL based on assumptions.
      Based on these assumptions many are willing to condemn others to lives (and possibly even an eternity) of loneliness.
      So (we) don't even know what the afterlife looks like. It is unknown. Yet we think (we) have enough information to condemn and judge others, and since most of us come at it from positions of privilege, we are in the position to enforce our dogma upon the less privileged. The church is not unique in behaving this way. It is how society has always worked. But recognizing the assumptions for what they are and being humble about how much we really don't know, can help society improve.
      Julianne also stated...
      How can one categorically dismiss SSM when there is little to nothing known about family organization in the next life, even regarding a variety of heterosexual family organizations. Which sealings will be valid? Polygamy/polyandry? Only those which benefit men? Who are the children sealed to? There is a lot of "The Lord will work it out" mentality, which is fine because it acknowledges a lack of understanding and knowledge. The problem comes when one then loses all humility and attempts to define how family relationships will or will not work for other people. I agree with Julianne that the polygamy/polyandry topic is closely tied to the SSM topic and must be ironed out.
      So maybe this can be a thread that can be commented on instead of derailing other threads when this subject comes up.
       
      *Julianne, I hope I didn't misunderstand or misrepresent you. I really appreciated where you were trying to take the discussion.
    • By DBMormon
      Knowing the background of the Lucy Walker story (if you don't, I can not emphasize enough the need to understand the story - resources below), I am curious how those who both know the story and who are faithful to the restoration and Church authority answer the following question.
      Do you take the position that Joseph deceived Lucy Walker about God commanding him to take her as a plural wife, or do you subscribe to a God whose morality has him commanding a man in a father/daughter dynamic to change his relationship with this 16 year old girl living in his home effectively as his foster daughter into a husband/wife dynamic? I am also open to other perspectives that hold some other ground but wood tool answers will not be acceptable in this post (have faith, God will work it out on the other side, go pray about it and get your own answer knowing people get competing answers)
      The question is not how does someone other than yourself come down or arrive at a perspective on this question but rather where do you personally come down on this question. I am deeply hoping that you wont avoid all-together or avoid using the mechanism that you know by the spirit that the Church is true hence you don't concern yourself with such conundrums. Instead what is your personal take on this historical issue.
      While this historical story has been largely ignored, I think it is the most important story in all of Mormonism. bigger than the Book of Abraham, bigger than Helen Mar Kimball and Fanny Alger, bigger than first vision accounts, and Race and Priesthood.
      http://www.mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2017/12/premium-lucy-walker-spiritual-experiences/
      http://www.yearofpolygamy.com/tag/lucy-walker-smith/
      http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/23-LucyWalker.htm
      http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/plural-wives-overview/lucy-walker/
×
×
  • Create New...