Don Bradley Discussing Emma Smith

[smac97]

This came out two weeks ago:

Very much worth a watch, though it's long (1 hr 45 min).  For those not so inclined, here is a Grok summary:

Quote

This episode of Let’s Get Real (hosted by Stephen Jones) features historian Don Bradley exploring the life, character, and legacy of Emma Smith. The central aim is to treat Emma as a full person rather than a premise in arguments about polygamy, succession, or Church history. Understanding Emma, Bradley argues, is essential to understanding Joseph Smith himself, because she knew him more closely and for longer than anyone else during his prophetic career.

Emma’s Early Life and Character

Emma grew up in a more isolated, rural area of Pennsylvania than Joseph did, yet she was notably better educated than most people around her, including Joseph. As a child (around age 10), she went into the woods to pray specifically for her father’s salvation; her father overheard her and was converted. She brought a pre-existing, serious relationship with God and Jesus Christ into the Restoration rather than acquiring it from the Church. Bradley compares this to his own mother’s conversion experience.

Despite her educational advantages, Emma showed no pride. She accepted Joseph as a suitor even though her father considered him unsuitable, demonstrating humility and spiritual discernment.

Emma’s View of Joseph’s Character and Prophetic Calling

Emma’s assessment of Joseph is one of the most significant elements of the conversation. Bradley emphasizes that Emma never wavered in her conviction that Joseph was a true prophet of God. She knew him intimately—his strengths, weaknesses, unpolished speech, limited formal education, and human flaws—yet she remained uncompromising in her testimony of his prophetic calling.

Key points from Emma’s perspective:

• She recognized that the revelations and the Book of Mormon text Joseph dictated were far beyond his natural abilities. As his first scribe and closest observer, she heard him produce complex, theologically rich material that she knew he could not have created on his own.
• Despite Joseph’s grammatical struggles, lack of formal education, and rough edges, Emma did not look down on him. Coming from a more educated background herself, she still chose him, defended him, and sustained him.
• She described him as sincere. Even in later years, when she disagreed with certain practices (most notably plural marriage), she continued to affirm that he was a genuine prophet. Her doubts or struggles were never about whether he was a fraud; they were about specific teachings or the personal cost of those teachings.
• Emma’s faith in Joseph was not based on dramatic shared visions. She did not claim to have seen the plates or angels in the same way others did. Instead, her conviction rested on the consistent spiritual witness she received and on the observable gap between Joseph’s natural capacity and the work he produced.

Bradley notes that this makes Emma’s testimony particularly powerful: the person who knew Joseph’s limitations best still testified that he was called of God.

Why Emma Did Not Go West

Bradley and the host discuss both practical and providential reasons:

• Emma inherited crushing debts that Joseph had personally assumed on behalf of the Church.
• She felt responsible to protect Joseph’s remains from possible desecration.
• She held stewardship over important Nauvoo properties (the Mansion House, the Nauvoo House, and an interest in the Kirtland Temple). By remaining and carefully maintaining them across generations, those sites were preserved and eventually returned to the Church.
• Drawing on insights from Emma’s great-great-granddaughter Gracia Jones, Bradley suggests divine providence may have been at work. If Emma and her sons had emigrated to Utah, the Church might have developed a stronger Smith-family dynastic character. Their staying behind helped keep the Church focused on Jesus Christ rather than on the Prophet’s bloodline.

Emma’s Broader Legacy

• She served as the first scribe in the Book of Mormon translation and was told by the angel that her presence was necessary for Joseph to obtain the plates.
• She selected many of the hymns still found in the Church’s hymnbook.
• As founding president of the Relief Society, she established its enduring emphasis on charity (“Charity never faileth”).
• She was the first woman in this dispensation to receive the endowment and then officiated in giving those ordinances to other women, creating a line of authority that continues today.

Overall Message Emma modeled a quiet, non-spectacular, enduring discipleship. She did not require visions or the spotlight to remain faithful. Her clear-eyed assessment of Joseph—knowing his human limitations while still testifying of his prophetic calling—stands as one of the most compelling contemporary witnesses to the Restoration. The hosts encourage viewers to see the hand of God in her life, just as Emma herself prayed to be able to do.

At about 1:21 Don addresses situations in which some critics have "tried to use Emma," or "co-opt{ing} her" as being on their "side."  A Grok summary of that bit:

Quote

In this portion of the conversation, Don Bradley addresses how critics and various groups have long treated Emma Smith less as a real person and more as a useful argument or symbol.

Key points he makes:

• People frequently reduce Emma to a premise in debates rather than engaging her as a complex historical figure. The most common questions—“Why didn’t she go west?” and “Didn’t she deny that Joseph practiced polygamy?”—are rarely asked out of genuine curiosity about her. Instead, they are deployed to support predetermined conclusions (usually that Joseph was a fraud, that polygamy was a later invention, or that the Utah church departed from Joseph’s original teachings).
• Because Emma was Joseph’s wife, the first woman endowed in this dispensation, the founding Relief Society president, and someone who never left the Church or was excommunicated, her choices carry heavy rhetorical weight. Critics therefore have strong incentive to claim her. If they can present Emma as having rejected the Church (that went west) or as having flatly denied plural marriage, it becomes a powerful weapon against Latter-day Saint truth claims.
• Bradley notes that this is similar to how the Three Witnesses are sometimes used: their later distance from the Church is highlighted while their lifelong testimony of the Book of Mormon is downplayed. With Emma the effect is even stronger because of her unique proximity to Joseph.
• The result is a distorted picture. Emma’s actual motives for staying in Nauvoo (financial stewardship, protection of Joseph’s remains, care for her children, and the practical realities she inherited) are often ignored or minimized. Likewise, the nuance in her statements about plural marriage—her lifelong affirmation that Joseph was a true prophet, even while she struggled with or opposed the practice—is frequently flattened into a simple “Emma said Joseph never practiced polygamy.”
• Bradley emphasizes that when we turn Emma into an argument, we lose the actual woman: her deep pre-existing Christian faith, her humility despite superior education, her quiet but firm testimony of the Book of Mormon and of Joseph’s prophetic calling, and her lifelong pattern of charity and sacrifice.

In short, the chapter argues that critics (and sometimes defenders) have appropriated Emma for rhetorical purposes, and that recovering her as a full person—rather than a debating point—gives a clearer and more faithful understanding of both Emma and Joseph.

I appreciate this effort to bring Emma into discussion, into being the topic of discussions.  Not just in relation to Joseph, but in her own right.

Any thoughts about Don's points?  What is your overall assessment of Emma?  What did she leave behind that has value to you?

Thanks,

-Smac

[AnchoredinChrist]

35 minutes ago, smac97 said:

If they can present Emma as having rejected the Church (that went west)

Um, she did:

"Sister Emma, in speaking of the condition of the Church after her husband’s death, said to me, “I was threatened by Brigham Young because I opposed and denounced his measures and would not go west with them. At that time, they did not know where they were going themselves, but he told me that he would yet bring me prostrate to his feet.”                                                (Early History of the Reorganization, Apostle Edmund C. Briggs, pp. 88, 93-95)

She says she opposed and denounced Brigham Young, so I see that as her rejecting "the Church (that went west)," without her acting to abandon her beliefs:

"Q.—It has been stated sometimes that you apostatized at Father's death, and joined the Methodist Church. What do you say to this?             
"A.—I have been called apostate; but I have never apostatized, nor forsaken the faith I at first accepted; but was called so because I would not accept their new—fangled notion."
                                                                                                  (Joseph Smith [III]. —The Saints' Herald, vol. 26, pp. 289, 290. 
                                                               RLDS History of the Church 3:353-358; The Saints Advocate 2:49-52, October 1879)

35 minutes ago, smac97 said:

or as having flatly denied plural marriage

She did that too:
 

"At one time my husband came to me and asked me if I had heard certain rumors about spiritual marriages, or anything of the kind; and assured me that if I had, that they were without foundation; that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise." (1 October 1879 - "Last Testimony of Sister Emma," Saint's Herald, Vol. 26, No 19 p. 289.)

43 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The result is a distorted picture. Emma’s actual motives for staying in Nauvoo (financial stewardship, protection of Joseph’s remains, care for her children, and the practical realities she inherited) are often ignored or minimized. 

If she opposed and denounced Brigham Young, why would she have wanted to follow him anywhere? She never gave "financial stewardship, protection of Joseph's remains, care for her children, or the practical realities she inherited" as reasons for not following the Church west, but opposing and denouncing Brigham Young, being threatened by him, not accepting a "new-fangled notion" from the new leadership (whom she voted against in the succession crisis), and her views that they didn't know where they were going themselves. Not to mention that Brigham Young unceremoniously disfellowshipped her less than three months after Joseph Smith died.

48 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Likewise, the nuance in her statements about plural marriage—her lifelong affirmation that Joseph was a true prophet, even while she struggled with or opposed the practice—is frequently flattened into a simple “Emma said Joseph never practiced polygamy.”

"...that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise." (1 October 1879 - "Last Testimony of Sister Emma," Saint's Herald, Vol. 26, No 19 p. 289.)

I'm pretty sure this is her saying that he never practiced it.

Did they even include any of these super relevant quotes from her in this video?

[Calm]

8 hours ago, AnchoredinChrist said:

Did they even include any of these super relevant quotes from her in this video?

Good question, especially if this just isn’t AI interpretation but what they said in the video:  “the central aim is to treat Emma as a full person”.  (Can’t give you rep points yet)

Edited 19 hours ago by Calm

[Calm]

8 hours ago, smac97 said:

Emma showed no pride.

Arrogance would be a better word here I am guessing.  Someone with no pride wouldn’t talk back or stick up for themselves, compromise all the time, etc.  Pride can be healthy, arrogance is the dysfunctional form of pride, imo.  Self-respect, self confidence, dignity, high self esteem are positive forms of pride. 

I view Emma as having pride, great pride in some things…it helped her find value in the sacrifices she chose to make and were demanded of her by circumstances.  I would say she respected/had pride in herself, Joseph, their relationship, their family, God, and Joseph’s mission.  

[Calm]

9 hours ago, smac97 said:

Even in later years, when she disagreed with certain practices (most notably plural marriage), she continued to affirm that he was a genuine prophet. Her doubts or struggles were never about whether he was a fraud; they were about specific teachings or the personal cost of those teachings.

So what do they conclude she saw these teachings as since it seems at times she rejected them as revelation?

[Calm]

9 hours ago, smac97 said:

She held stewardship over important Nauvoo properties

Because she fought for them, correct?  In part, because she did not want them to be in Brigham’s control from what I understand, but also as an inheritance for her and Joseph’s children…

[smac97]

16 hours ago, AnchoredinChrist said:

Quote

If they can present Emma as having rejected the Church (that went west)

Um, she did:

"Sister Emma, in speaking of the condition of the Church after her husband’s death, said to me, “I was threatened by Brigham Young because I opposed and denounced his measures and would not go west with them. At that time, they did not know where they were going themselves, but he told me that he would yet bring me prostrate to his feet.” (Early History of the Reorganization, Apostle Edmund C. Briggs, pp. 88, 93-95)

She says she opposed and denounced Brigham Young,

Thank you for your response.  She says she "opposed and denounced" Brigham Young about "his measures."  To what do you think she was referring here?

16 hours ago, AnchoredinChrist said:

so I see that as her rejecting "the Church (that went west),"

I can understand and appreciate that perspective, even if I do not fully share it. From later on in the interview:

Quote

Question. What of the truth of Mormonism?

Answer. I know Mormonism to be the truth; and believe the Church to have been established by divine direction. I have complete faith in it. 

Her beef with Brigham Young may have influenced her perspective about whether "the Church (that went west)," the group led by the individual with whom she had substantial personal, financial and religious disagreements, amounted to the "Mormonism" of which she spoke in 1879.  For herself, she separated the two.  For myself, I think the Church as now constituted and led by Pres. Oaks is the same one that Joseph founded in 1830.  

My assessment is that the “measures” Emma most consistently opposed were plural marriage (polygamy) and, secondarily, Brigham Young’s leadership claims and the associated financial/property decisions after Joseph’s death. Her perspective on Brigham became strongly negative.  From FAIR:

Quote

Why did Emma Smith and Brigham Young dislike one another?

The animosity between Brigham Young and Emma had multiple grounds: personal, religious, and financial.
...
The animosity between Brigham Young and Emma had multiple grounds: personal, religious, and financial. Brigham, for all his strengths, had little patience for anyone who would betray the prophet, which he perceived Emma doing on multiple levels.
...
Following Joseph's murder, Emma refused to go west with the Saints. She seems, among other things, to have been worried about providing for her children, as well as protecting them from the violence which had claimed Joseph. Emma and Brigham also disagreed about which parts of Joseph's estate were personal property, and which belonged to the Church.

Brigham also doubtless considered Emma dishonest and a liar because she continued to insist that her husband had never taught the doctrine of plural marriage

Brigham also doubtless considered Emma dishonest and a liar because she continued to insist that her husband had never taught the doctrine of plural marriage. So adamant was Emma on this point that the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints held it as an article of faith, and Emma's children never accepted the idea that Joseph had instituted plural marriage. Given that Brigham was blamed by Emma for being the inventor of plural marriage, he probably felt rather ill-used by her. Brigham, after all, saw Emma as fighting against the man Brigham revered as the Prophet, and he knew that Emma knew that Joseph taught plural marriage.

Finally, Brigham was Joseph's successor, and Emma challenged that succession by supporting her son, Joseph Smith III, as the 'proper' leader, and as one who would not teach the hated doctrine of polygamy (which Emma falsely claimed Brigham had foisted on the Church).

Richard Bushman writes of the poisoning accusation:

Quote

Through the late fall and winter of 1843 and 1844, Joseph and Emma's relationship broke down only once. During Sunday dinner on November 5, Joseph became ill, rushed to the door, and vomited so violently that he dislocated his jaw. "Every symptom of poison," Richards noted in Joseph's diary. That night at the prayer meeting, Richards, wrote in code that Joseph and Emma did not dress in the usual special clothing, a sign they were too much at odds to participate. The next day, Richards wrote that Joseph was "busy with domestic concerns." Years later, in the anti-Emma atmosphere of Utah, Brigham Young spoke of a meeting where Joseph accused his wife of slipping poison into his coffee. Brigham interpreted Emma's refusal to answer as an admission of guilt.. Though there probably was an argument, the poisoning accusation was unfounded. Joseph was susceptible to vomiting anyway. He had even dislocated his jaw while vomiting once before; and five weeks after the 1843 dinner episode, he was sick again, vomiting more violently than ever. During this last bout, Joseph said gratefully, "My wife waited on me."

Brigham and Emma did not agree on the disposition of Joseph's estate

Furthermore, Brigham and Emma did not agree on the disposition of Joseph's estate. Illinois law at the time held that no church could hold more than ten acres of property, and so much of the church's properties were held in Joseph's name. At the same time, much of the Church's debt was held by Joseph as a private citizen—thus, Emma was liable for Joseph/the Church's debts, but had a less clear claim on the Church's lands that Joseph held as Trustee-in-Trust.

Emma's repudiation/denial of Joseph's plural marriages contravene the great weight of historical evidence.

Brigham Young's accusation of poisoning was, as Bro. Bushman put it, "unfounded."

Both Emma and Brigham did tremendous things to advance the Lord's work.  And both of them had substantial flaws in their behavior and temperament as well.  Hence the value of the Atonement in their - and our - lives.

Also, what are your thoughts about this statement attributed to Emma?

Quote

Question. What of the truth of Mormonism?

Answer. I know Mormonism to be the truth; and believe the Church to have been established by divine direction. I have complete faith in it. In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us.

The question, I suppose, is what she thought of to be "Mormonism" at this point in time.  She was 74 when she was interviewed by her son, and had suffered challenges and tribulations far worse than anything most of us will encounter.  Also, her inconsistent approach to polygamy was well-known.  Her conflict about it was deep-seated.  From FAIR:

Quote

Question: How did Emma Hale Smith react to Joseph's practice of plural marriage?

Emma was aware of Joseph's plural marriage and sometimes gave permission, but did much to try and thwart it

Emma was aware of plural marriage; it is not clear at exactly what point she was made aware, partly due to there being relatively few early sources on the matter. Emma was generally opposed to the practice of plural marriage, and did much to try and thwart it. There were times, however, when Emma gave permission for Joseph's plural marriages, though she soon changed her mind.^[1] Emma was troubled by plural marriage, but her difficulties arose partly from her conviction that Joseph was a prophet:

Zina Huntington remembered a conversation between Elizabeth [Davis] and Emma [Smith] in which Elizabeth asked the prophet’s wife if she felt that Joseph was a prophet. Yes, Emma answered, but I wish to God I did not know it.^[2]

Emma did teach her children that Joseph had never taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and blamed its introduction on Brigham Young

Emma never denied Joseph's prophetic calling; she did, however, teach her children that Joseph had never taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and blamed its introduction on Brigham Young. Torn between two certitudes—her conviction of Joseph's prophetic calling, and her hatred of plural marriage—Emma had difficult choices to make for which we ought not to judge her.

But, the critics ought to let all of Emma speak for herself—she had a great trial, but also had great knowledge. That she continued to support Joseph's calling and remain with him, despite her feelings about plural marriage, speaks much of her convictions. As she told Parley P. Pratt years later:

I believe he [Joseph] was everything he professed to be.^[3]

Allen J. Stout: "from moments of passionate denunciation [Emma] would subside into tearful repentance and acknowledge that her violent opposition to that principle was instigated by the power of darkness"

Allen J. Stout, who served as a bodyguard for Joseph, recounted a conversation he overheard in the Mansion House between Joseph and his tormented wife. A summary of his account states that "from moments of passionate denunciation [Emma] would subside into tearful repentance and acknowledge that her violent opposition to that principle was instigated by the power of darkness; that Satan was doing his utmost to destroy her, etc. And solemnly came the Prophet's inspired warning: 'Yes, and he will accomplish your overthrow, if you do not heed my counsel.'"^[4]

Emma Smith: "The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it

Emma's inner conflict was also dramatized in another report:

Maria Jane Johnston, who lived with Emma as a servant girl, recalled the Prophet's wife looking very downcast one day and telling her that the principle of plural marriage was right and came from Heavenly Father. "What I said I have got [to] repent of," lamented Emma. "The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it."^[5]

Emma Smith: "I desire a fruitful, active mind, that I may be able to comprehend the designs of God, when revealed through his servants without doubting"

Emma asked Joseph for a blessing not long before he went to Carthage. Joseph told her to write the best blessing she could, and he would sign it upon his return. Wrote Emma:

I desire with all my heart to honor and respect my husband as my head, ever to live in his confidence and by acting in unison with him retain the place which God has given me by his side...I desire the spirit of God to know and understand myself, I desire a fruitful, active mind, that I may be able to comprehend the designs of God, when revealed through his servants without doubting.^[6]

When I consider Emma's statements about polygamy, Brigham Young, the "Church" (the one that went West), and the translation of the Book of Mormon, and so on, I consider it in the context of her life and circumstances, her perspective and knowledge and information, and her foibles and weaknesses, and also in light of Mormon 9:31 ("Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.").

16 hours ago, AnchoredinChrist said:

without her acting to abandon her beliefs:

"Q.—It has been stated sometimes that you apostatized at Father's death, and joined the Methodist Church. What do you say to this?             
"A.—I have been called apostate; but I have never apostatized, nor forsaken the faith I at first accepted; but was called so because I would not accept their new—fangled notion."
                                                                                                  (Joseph Smith [III]. —The Saints' Herald, vol. 26, pp. 289, 290. 
                                                               RLDS History of the Church 3:353-358; The Saints Advocate 2:49-52, October 1879)

I wonder if the "new-fangled notion" was plural marriage, and if plural marriage had become, for her, a dealbreaker in terms of the authority of the Church led west by Brigham Young.

16 hours ago, AnchoredinChrist said:

Quote

or as having flatly denied plural marriage

She did that too:

"At one time my husband came to me and asked me if I had heard certain rumors about spiritual marriages, or anything of the kind; and assured me that if I had, that they were without foundation; that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise." (1 October 1879 - "Last Testimony of Sister Emma," Saint's Herald, Vol. 26, No 19 p. 289.)

Again, Emma's approach to polygamy was inconsistent, with her acknowledging and accepting it at times and denouncing and attempting to thwart it at others.  From the above link:

• "Allen J. Stout, who served as a bodyguard for Joseph, recounted a conversation he overheard in the Mansion House between Joseph and his tormented wife. A summary of his account states that 'from moments of passionate denunciation [Emma] would subside into tearful repentance and acknowledge that her violent opposition to that principle was instigated by the power of darkness; that Satan was doing his utmost to destroy her, etc. And solemnly came the Prophet's inspired warning: "Yes, and he will accomplish your overthrow, if you do not heed my counsel."'"
• "Maria Jane Johnston, who lived with Emma as a servant girl, recalled the Prophet's wife looking very downcast one day and telling her that the principle of plural marriage was right and came from Heavenly Father. 'What I said I have got [to] repent of,' lamented Emma. 'The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it.'"
• "At one time my husband came to me and asked me if I had heard certain rumors about spiritual marriages, or anything of the kind; and assured me that if I had, that they were without foundation; that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise."

What are we to make of the inconsistency?  For me, I think claiming that Emma "flatly denied plural marriage" is a half-truth that needs context and clarification.

16 hours ago, AnchoredinChrist said:

If she opposed and denounced Brigham Young, why would she have wanted to follow him anywhere? She never gave "financial stewardship, protection of Joseph's remains, care for her children, or the practical realities she inherited" as reasons for not following the Church west, but opposing and denouncing Brigham Young, being threatened by him, not accepting a "new-fangled notion" from the new leadership (whom she voted against in the succession crisis), and her views that they didn't know where they were going themselves. Not to mention that Brigham Young unceremoniously disfellowshipped her less than three months after Joseph Smith died.

"...that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise." (1 October 1879 - "Last Testimony of Sister Emma," Saint's Herald, Vol. 26, No 19 p. 289.)

I'm pretty sure this is her saying that he never practiced it.

Well, yes.  Her sons reported that statement in 1879.  We have other historical sources indicating that she had at times accepted the principle of plural marriage ("The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it.").

So did Emma accept the principle of plural marriage or not?  A "flat" answer either way does not seem to work.

16 hours ago, AnchoredinChrist said:

Did they even include any of these super relevant quotes from her in this video?

No.  But then, they also did not include the "super relevant quotes" above (e.g., "'The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it.'").

The YouTube video was not, I think, intended to be an exhaustive analysis of Emma's particularized statements about any given topic, but rather an assessment of her life overall.  Indeed, I think Don Bradley was speaking against the idea of using Emma "a premise in arguments about polygamy, succession, or Church history," but rather treating her "as a full person."

Thank you for taking time to share your thoughts.  

-Smac

Edited 11 hours ago by smac97

[smac97]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

Quote

Even in later years, when she disagreed with certain practices (most notably plural marriage), she continued to affirm that he was a genuine prophet. Her doubts or struggles were never about whether he was a fraud; they were about specific teachings or the personal cost of those teachings.

So what do they conclude she saw these teachings as since it seems at times she rejected them as revelation?

I'm not sure they reach a conclusion one way or another (BTW, what you are quoting is not me, but the Grok summary).

The "at times" seems to be an important part of your question.  I think Emma went through terrible trials throughout much of her life.  I surmise that by 1879, her hostility against polygamy had come to affect her perspective on it.   Her 1879 statement about Joseph's polygamy ("At one time my husband came to me and asked me if I had heard certain rumors about spiritual marriages, or anything of the kind; and assured me that if I had, that they were without foundation; that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent."), must be construed in light of the clear and extensive evidence we now have that Joseph did introduce the concept and practice of plural marriage.

Emma's 1879 statement is dated, but not the statement within it which she attributes to Joseph ("At one time..."). Per the Hales:

Quote

In Kirtland, Ohio, in the 1830s­­—probably 1835 or early 1836—­he experienced his first brief plural relationship with Fanny Alger, who was providing domestic help in the Smith household.

The Prophet slowly introduced plural marriage to select members beginning in late 1840. Joseph Smith’s first polygamous marriage in Nauvoo occurred on April 5, 1841.

During the next seventeen months, Joseph was sealed to more than a dozen plural wives. A few other men and women were also invited to participate in the practice, although he never openly taught the principle.

By the end of August 1842, Joseph Smith discontinued plural marriages for a period of five months, undoubtedly due to the influences of dissenter John C. Bennett. The Prophet resumed marrying polygamously in February of 1843. He was sealed to more than a dozen plural spouses during the next ten months—bringing the total to more than thirty.

It appears that many of these plural unions, perhaps as many as half, were eternity-only sealings that did not involve conjugal relations.

By the time of the Prophet’s death on June 27, 1844, an additional twenty-nine other Nauvoo men had married a total of fifty-one plural wives.

Assuming there is some accuracy to Emma's statement, we don't know when in the above timeline it happened.  The reference to John C. Bennett is interesting.  The Hales wrote a good article, "John C. Bennett's Spiritual Wifery." A summary:

Quote

In late 1840, John C. Bennett arrived in Nauvoo to join the Latter-day Saints and advance the cause of the Latter-day Saints. He was quickly elected Nauvoo Mayor and appointed an assistant to the First Presidency. By summer of 1842, his situation drastically changed having been accused of practicing “spiritual wifery,” which had nothing to do with Joseph Smith’s private teachings of celestial plural marriage. Spiritual wifery was little more than illicit sexual relations kept secret. Bennett soon left the Saints and immediately published several over-the-top accusations against Joseph. His antics created a momentary pause in the spread of secret plural marriage and created confusion among believers.

I have wondered, but not really investigated, whether by 1879 Emma, who despised even the religious practice of plural marriage introduced by Joseph Smith, had come to conflate it with the illicit "spiritual wifery" depredations arising from John C. Bennett's behaviors.  A few thoughts along these lines:

1. Strong negative association with the term: “Spiritual wifery” / “spiritual wife system” was publicly and scandalously tied to Bennett’s conduct in 1842. Joseph, Hyrum, Emma (in Relief Society), and other leaders repeatedly denounced it. The phrase carried a strong connotation of unauthorized, illicit sexual behavior.
2. Emma’s deep and longstanding opposition: Emma opposed plural marriage during Joseph’s lifetime (with only brief, reluctant periods of acquiescence) and rejected it completely afterward. She taught her children that Joseph never practiced or taught it and blamed its introduction on Brigham Young and others. Over 35 years, her rejection hardened into a clear, consistent public position.
3. Time and memory: The 1879 interview occurred 35+ years after the events. Memory can be reconstructive. It is not uncommon for people to simplify or merge related but distinct painful experiences over decades, especially when they already view both negatively.
4. Rhetorical and religious incentives: Emma was aligned with the Reorganized Church tradition, which rejected polygamy and taught that it originated after Joseph’s death. Framing any form of “spiritual” or plural marriage as something Joseph himself rejected (and associating it with the disreputable Bennett episode) fit the narrative she and her sons maintained.
5. Language in the 1879 statement itself: Emma does not carefully distinguish categories. She groups “polygamy,” “spiritual wives,” and “spiritual marriages/wifery” together and issues a blanket denial that Joseph taught or practiced any of it. This is consistent with conflation.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited 11 hours ago by smac97

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Her beef with Brigham Young may have influenced her perspective about whether "the Church (that went west)," the group led by the individual with whom she had substantial personal, financial and religious disagreements, amounted to the "Mormonism" of which she spoke in 1879.  For herself, she separated the two.  For myself, I think the Church as now constituted and led by Pres. Oaks is the same one that Joseph founded in 1830.  

My assessment is that the “measures” Emma most consistently opposed were plural marriage (polygamy) and, secondarily, Brigham Young’s leadership claims and the associated financial/property decisions after Joseph’s death. Her perspective on Brigham became strongly negative.  From FAIR:

But it seems clear she rejected BY's claims to lead the church and rejected plural marriage. Isn't the church she claimed to adhere to the one we now call The Community Of Christ? And she rejected the Church that you believe is the one Joseph founded. Also, how much can we trust Emma. She denied that Joseph introduced and practice plural marriage, yet as you note, the historical records supports the position the Joseph was indeed the one responsible for introducing plural marriage. So how can we trust her?

[smac97]

36 minutes ago, Teancum said:

But it seems clear she rejected BY's claims to lead the church and rejected plural marriage.

Yes.  Likely for a variety of reasons.

36 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Isn't the church she claimed to adhere to the one we now call The Community Of Christ?

Pretty much.  See here:

Quote

Church. In 1860, Emma affiliated with the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (later renamed Community of Christ). Her son Joseph Smith III became president of the Reorganized Church at its founding in 1860, with his brother Alexander Hale Smith as his counselor.

The RLDS/COC folks believe theirs is the legitimate successor to the Church organized by Joseph Smith in 1830.

The Latter-day Saints believe that the Church instituted in 1830 has no "successor," and instead has continued to exist from 1830 to today.

Reasonable minds can disagree about such things.

I wonder if Emma's beliefs would align with those of the CoC, particularly as pertaining to the Book of Mormon.

36 minutes ago, Teancum said:

And she rejected the Church that you believe is the one Joseph founded.

Well, she rejected plural marriage.  And she had substantial disagreements with Brigham Young.  And she was geographically isolated from the Church led by Brigham Young.  

36 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Also, how much can we trust Emma.

As much as we can trust any historical figure.  We work with the evidence at hand, and make reasoned conclusions based thereon.

I think Emma's utter repudiation/denial of plural marriage originating with Joseph taints her credibility as a historical source on that specific issue, since the evidence of Joseph's involvement in polygamy is pretty much beyond dispute.  However, pretty much everything else about which she spoke are matters of opinion or belief or both, or matters about which she was a percipient witness.  

For example, her statements about the Plates are corroborated by other witnesses.  Do you "trust Emma" on that point?  If not, why not? 

Looking at the totality of her life, would you characterize Emma as a good person?  An honest one?

36 minutes ago, Teancum said:

She denied that Joseph introduced and practice plural marriage, yet as you note, the historical records supports the position the Joseph was indeed the one responsible for introducing plural marriage. So how can we trust her?

For the same reason we trust, or do not trust, everyone who has ever lived since Jesus Christ: Because she was human, and hence had foibles and weaknesses and errors, just like all of us, but she also had strengths and virtues and was a percipient witness to many things.

Again, I am curious as to your perspective on the Plates.  Do you "trust her" insofar as her statements about the Plates are corroborated by the other witnesses?

I appreciate your input.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited 10 hours ago by smac97

[Calm]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

wonder if Emma's beliefs would align with those of the CoC, particularly as pertaining to the Book of Mormon.

I doubt it if we are talking about her then beliefs and the current doctrines and not about her being given a chance to learn the development and reasons for the changes.

Same with the Restored Church though.  Neither are excellent matches for how doctrine was understood in Joseph’s time, which I assume is the set of beliefs Emma most likely possessed, whether she accepted up to Kirtland and no further or she also accepted some, many or all at some time of the innovations of Nauvoo.

But I don’t see that as a negative, but to be expected.

Change to me is a sign of possible continuing revelation, which to me is an essential sign of God’s Church.

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

As much as we can trust any historical figure.  We work with the evidence at hand, and make reasoned conclusions based thereon.

I think how much trust would depend in part on the time of the references.   By 1879, it seems she is willing to present the history in ways that most appeal to her, which to me makes anything she says problematic.  If she is willing to alter stuff on plural marriage, why not other stuff.

But that doesn’t mean to me we should automatically label earlier material as untrustworthy. We should be looking at factors likely contributing to her choice to misrepresent, go with the more ideal image, seeing when they occurred and look at the rest of what she in the time/context, compare those to what we know elsewhere to see how we might use her comments with care.

She died in April, 1879.  Interview was in early February.  Do we know anything about the state of her health, both physical or mental?  She wouldn’t be the first senior who truly believed her own version of history in the last years of her life, even with that version obviously being wrong (My grandmother, for example, insisted her husband’s name was Leroy and Roy was his nickname even when confronted, Leroy was the middle name of one of her sons, arrived at by combining her name that started with Le with Roy most likely).  Sometimes dementia is obvious, but lots of times seniors are very convincing that they are representing things correctly.

Edited 9 hours ago by Calm

[AnchoredinChrist]

Expounding on my own opinion and beliefs of what happened would require their own thread, so I won't do that here, maybe I'll write about it this weekend. For now I'll just say that I think proper historical practice for a 1 hour 45 minute video of Emma Smith would be to prioritize her own contemporary words over the many-years-later words of others.

[smac97]

23 minutes ago, Calm said:

I think how much trust would depend in part on the time of the references.   By 1879, it seems she is willing to present the history in ways that most appeal to her, which to me makes anything she says problematic.  If she is willing to alter stuff on plural marriage, why not other stuff.

I wonder if she was "willing to alter stuff on plural marriage" because she was personally so troubled by it.  She wanted to create a narrative that conformed to her preferences on that subject.  Perhaps notably, her sons stated that they "apologized to our mother for putting the questions respecting polygamy and plural wives, as we felt we ought to do."  Even decades later, the topic was very painful to her.  I don't know that she had a motive to substantively depart from the truth as to other matters in her life. 

23 minutes ago, Calm said:

But that doesn’t mean to me we should automatically label earlier material as untrustworthy. We should be looking at factors likely contributing to her choice to misrepresent, go with the more ideal image, seeing when they occurred and look at the rest of what she in the time/context, compare those to what we know elsewhere to see how we might use her comments with care.

She died in April, 1879.  Interview was in early February.  Do we know anything about the state of her health, both physical or mental?

See here:

Quote

In 1842, Emma was elected as the first president of the Relief Society and helped many of the needy and poor. After Joseph’s death, Emma chose not to follow the Saints to Utah. Her chronic ill health and years of deprivation and hard work, in addition to her widowhood, probably contributed to her decision to stay behind.

See here:

Quote

Her health failed rapidly in April 1879. Her children rallied to her side the evening of April 29, 1879. Her son Alexander recalled hearing his mother call, "Joseph, Joseph, Joseph," before her death. Joseph Smith III reported seeing his mother extend her left arm and hearing her say, "Joseph! Yes, yes, I'm coming."18 Emma Smith died at 4:20 a.m. on April 30, 1879, in Nauvoo at the age of 74. 

Thanks,

-Smac

[webbles]

I listened to the video and Don made a few really interesting points about Emma and polygamy.

One was that a few years before her birth, a pastor in her family's community was kicked out of the congregation for preaching an immoral practice from the Bible.  Don has another historian friend who hypothesizes that could have been polygamy (any other immoral practice in the Bible?).  If it was, that would mean she grew up in a community that had a bad experience with polygamy and would have colored her own view of it.

The other point is that Jacob (in Jacob 2) mentions a revelation from Lehi telling the Lehites to not practice polygamy.  That revelation is not recorded anywhere in the Book of Mormon.  But it could have been in the lost Book of Lehi.  And Emma would have likely been the transcriber for it (as she was the first transcriber for Joseph).  That would have also had an impact on her view of polygamy.

23 hours ago, AnchoredinChrist said:

"...that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise." (1 October 1879 - "Last Testimony of Sister Emma," Saint's Herald, Vol. 26, No 19 p. 289.)

I'm pretty sure this is her saying that he never practiced it.

Did they even include any of these super relevant quotes from her in this video?

A paraphrase of that quote was in the video.  Around the 1:10:00 mark.  Also a few other quotes from her against polygamy were also mentioned.  Don makes an interesting point around this.  He points out how Joseph told William Clayton to burn or bury the records of the Council of Fifty.  He says that is an indication that Joseph tried to hide/destroy things that could be damaging to him.  And many of the stories about the burning of the Section 132 have Joseph burning the section, not Emma.  So, Don proposes that Joseph did burn the paper to ensure that it wouldn't fall in the wrong hands and get him killed.  And Emma saw that and misunderstood that to mean that Joseph was giving up polygamy (similar to how William Marks also believed that).  And so Emma was trying to follow his wishes and example by denying polygamy after his death because he was giving up.  She also had seen what it did to her husband (polygamy was a main reason he was killed) and she didn't want the same thing to happen to her sons.  So she would deny it to her sons to ensure they didn't follow their father's lead.