Shocking Omission From Church History Makes Me Angry

KevinG · September 15, 2012

I can understand why Saints sometimes get angry or feel betrayed when a piece of history is reported inaccurately or omitted from our lessons. Of course we cannot teach everything in every lesson and the church curricula focuses on the basics of the Gospel. We also know that the LDS Church is uniquely rich in history because we are a journal keeping and history keeping people. We have also grown up in the light of the 19-21st century giving us unprecedented volumes of history of our early years unlike other major religions.

This brings me to one fact that I learned that was dubious at best. I believed if for many years and didn't doubt it. Finally when I read Bushman's account with all reports and context I was shocked that I had swallowed it whole and it altered me perceptions of an important early figure in Church history.

The story was that Emma had pushed a pregnant Eliza Snow down the stairs of her home and caused her to miscarry. It left bad feelings about Emma and portrayed a picture of contention among the sisters.

But when I found out the reports were all second hand. Eliza didn't miss a day of teaching school during her supposed miscarriage. And those who were there in the home first hand did not report or believe the rumor I was angered, my faith in that particular report made me fell betrayed.

I now have a great deal of trouble believing critics of Mormonism without having first researched and verified their claims because they are prone to omit important details that put the history in a more complete light as opposed to one sided information designed to promote faith in their view.

I no longer have as much faith in the critics of the LDS Church.

I get it.

Edited September 15, 2012 by KevinG

Tacenda · September 15, 2012

I can understand why Saints sometimes get angry or feel betrayed when a piece of history is reported inaccurately or omitted from our lessons. Of course we cannot teach everything in every lesson and the church curricula focuses on the basics of the Gospel. We also know that the LDS Church is uniquely rich in history because we are a journal keeping and history keeping people. We have also grown up in the light of the 19-21st century giving us unprecedented volumes of history of our early years unlike other major religions.
This brings me to one fact that I learned that was dubious at best. I believed if for many years and didn't doubt it. Finally when I read Bushman's account with all reports and context I was shocked that I had swallowed it whole and it altered me perceptions of an important early figure in Church history.
The story was that Emma had pushed a pregnant Eliza Snow down the stairs of her home and caused her to miscarry. It left bad feelings about Emma and portrayed a picture of contention among the sisters.
But when I found out the reports were all second hand. Eliza didn't miss a day of teaching school during her supposed miscarriage. And those who were there in the home first hand did not report or believe the rumor I was angered, my faith in that particular report made me fell betrayed.
I now have a great deal of trouble believing critics of Mormonism without having first researched and verified their claims because they are prone to omit important details that put the history in a more complete light as opposed to one sided information designed to promote faith in their view.
I no longer have as much faith in the critics of the LDS Church.
I get it.

It was probably started during a conversation in a VT'g visit, you know how women gossip! Just kidding..I think.

KevinG · September 15, 2012

It was probably started during a conversation in a VT'g visit, you know how women gossip! Just kidding..I think.

Funny! The problem really is that gossip became history and important viewpoints were omitted. I really believed that Emma had harmed someone for years. I understood why she would be angry if she believed Eliza was married to her husband and everyone has bad moments, but later I found it is likely that these were vicious rumors and gossip.

My point in posting this message is to show I get the anger and feeling of betrayal.

However we must be careful in what telling of history we put our faith in. We must be even more careful to put our faith in God and not his human servants.

Tacenda · September 15, 2012

Funny! The problem really is that gossip became history and important viewpoints were omitted. I really believed that Emma had harmed someone for years. I understood why she would be angry if she believed Eliza was married to her husband and everyone has bad moments, but later I found it is likely that these were vicious rumors and gossip.
My point in posting this message is to show I get the anger and feeling of betrayal.
However we must be careful in what telling of history we put our faith in. We must be even more careful to put our faith in God and not his human servants.

You mean you aren't perfect and have had feelings of anger and betrayel? Give me a high five brotha! Thanks for admitting you're human, it helps those of us that think we must be evil apostates or something!

Calm · September 15, 2012

The story was that Emma had pushed a pregnant Eliza Snow down the stairs of her home and caused her to miscarry. It left bad feelings about Emma and portrayed a picture of contention among the sisters......
I no longer have as much faith in the critics of the LDS Church.

Unfortunately it is not only the critics that have promoted this rumour though I haven't heard negative comments about Emma in church for a long, long time. Edited September 15, 2012 by calmoriah

MormonMason · September 16, 2012

Some of those "rumor" accounts have their basis in fact or can be supported with additional evidence. For instance, one of the rumor accounts in Dr. Wyl's Mormon Portraits has Joseph Smith wandering the streets of Nauvoo drunk and very noisy about it. We can discount that. We can accept that as a man with a moment of weakness. OR, we can look to other accounts to substantiate it and/or explain it.

In this case, there is an event where Joseph Smith swigged alcohol in his mouth, got his clothing dirty and poured the alcoholic beverage all over him. He then went out, staggering, tripping and falling upon the ground, and began yelling on his way to the Maid of Iowa, where a group of new converts were located and were just coming in. He made a scene on board in front of the new converts to test them (they did not know it was a test) and stormed his way into the cabin of his partner to state that he was not going to pay him back for a loan, and so forth. Upon closing the door, Joseph stood up and began speaking to the man normally. He asked him how he did in his act and then thanked him for being faithful in spite of what he had seen beforehand. Joseph was not really drunk but a lot of people around Nauvoo thought that he was.

I can see how that rumor about Joseph being drunk in the streets of Nauvoo got started because by what he did to test the new saints he started that rumor himself.

The same can be said about the "rumor" about Emma being so angry that she pushed Eliza down the steps. Whether or not the miscarriage part is true or not, the pushing event may well have been. Brigham Young insisted that Emma tried to poison Joseph twice because she was so angry at him those times (Brigham Young was present and heard the conversation between Emma and Joseph and Joseph's direct, verbal accusations against Emma), but Joseph never mentioned anything about it in his history, only that he was poisoned.

There is also the personal letter of Joseph to the Whitneys, where Joseph tells that family that they cannot be safe if Emma is around. The daughter of the family was a plural wife of Joseph Smith. Joseph was so concerned that someone might find the letter that he asked the family to burn it after reading it. They didn't follow the instruction and so we have the letter today.

Yes, I know that some have tried to interpret the letter in some other way but the easiest reading is that for a time Emma was a bit unbalanced and that certain people could not be safe around her, particularly if it were known that they were plural wives of Joseph. Joseph said that they could not be safe. He did not say or worry that people might follow Emma if she was around, etc.

Your anger may have been misplaced, contra Tippetts and Newell.

Edited September 16, 2012 by MormonMason

DavidB · September 16, 2012

However we must be careful in what telling of history we put our faith in. We must be even more careful to put our faith in God and not his human servants.

Great statement, and I share the sentiment. I think such a sentiment has been my inoculation to many things about the Church.

smac97 · September 16, 2012

Here is a prior discussion on this topic:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/48485-did-emma-really-kick-eliza-snow-down-the-stairs/

Thanks,

-Smac

why me · September 16, 2012

What we see in lds history are people making or creating rumors. If among the lds saints, these rumors can be benign. If among the exmormons who left the church at that time, these rumors can be malignant. Those who wish to continue to doubt tend to rely on the exmormon rumor mill. Then they themselves spread the rumor via the Internet.

I expect no perfection from any member now and then. Rumors are apart of the human character and if it is a negative rumor, it can be very destructive, we see this now in our time and we see it then in that time.

Stargazer · September 16, 2012

Unfortunately it is not only the critics that have promoted this rumour though I haven't heard negative comments about Emma in church for a long, long time.

Well, so have I, but I am having trouble recalling this particular story. It is perhaps not as widespread as you might think.

urroner · September 16, 2012

I think that Davis Bitton said it well here about testimonies and history:

I Don't Have a Testimony of the History of the Church

I was also at the FAIR conference when he talked about it. It's on youtube.

Bart Burk · September 16, 2012

Can we believe anything that was said regarding polygamy?

Eliza being pushed down the stairs:

http://restorationbookstore.org/articles/nopoligamy/jsfp-vol1/chp9.htm

This is from Price's book, "Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy".

cesc101 · September 16, 2012

Here is a prior discussion on this topic:
http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/48485-did-emma-really-kick-eliza-snow-down-the-stairs/
Thanks,
-Smac

Thanks for pulling that thread out...

Freedom · September 16, 2012

I read through a sunday school manual used by a local protestant church, it mentioned nothing of the rapes, murders, incest, and deception from their history. It totally glossed over the story of Lot, Davids fall, and a number of other disturbing events. There was no mention of the now infamous talking donkey, no mention of Pauls murderous past, the list goes on and on. One is left with the impression that they are trying to sugar coat their religion for their unsuspecting new converts. I suspect that once the new lambs find out the truth, they will start to leave in droves.

Alan · September 16, 2012

I can understand why Saints sometimes get angry or feel betrayed when a piece of history is reported inaccurately or omitted from our lessons. Of course we cannot teach everything in every lesson and the church curricula focuses on the basics of the Gospel. We also know that the LDS Church is uniquely rich in history because we are a journal keeping and history keeping people. We have also grown up in the light of the 19-21st century giving us unprecedented volumes of history of our early years unlike other major religions.
This brings me to one fact that I learned that was dubious at best. I believed if for many years and didn't doubt it. Finally when I read Bushman's account with all reports and context I was shocked that I had swallowed it whole and it altered me perceptions of an important early figure in Church history.
The story was that Emma had pushed a pregnant Eliza Snow down the stairs of her home and caused her to miscarry. It left bad feelings about Emma and portrayed a picture of contention among the sisters.
But when I found out the reports were all second hand. Eliza didn't miss a day of teaching school during her supposed miscarriage. And those who were there in the home first hand did not report or believe the rumor I was angered, my faith in that particular report made me fell betrayed.
I now have a great deal of trouble believing critics of Mormonism without having first researched and verified their claims because they are prone to omit important details that put the history in a more complete light as opposed to one sided information designed to promote faith in their view.
I no longer have as much faith in the critics of the LDS Church.
I get it.

It has also been shown that accounts of so-called witnesses to this event are untrue as the layout of the house made it impossible to see what they claim to have seen from where they claim to have been.

No wonder Emma refused to go west and discouraged her boys too.

Like I have said before; Emma was right when she said she was misrepresented; she was right when she said she never saw what we call D&C 132; and she was right when she said Joseph had nothing to do with polygamy. She never lost her faith.

Bill “Papa” Lee · September 16, 2012

Unfortunately it is not only the critics that have promoted this rumour though I haven't heard negative comments about Emma in church for a long, long time.

Emma has earned her salvation in so many ways.

MormonMason · September 16, 2012

Can we believe anything that was said regarding polygamy?
Eliza being pushed down the stairs:
http://restorationbo...p-vol1/chp9.htm
This is from Price's book, "Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy".

There are several problems with the above linked page, not the least of which is that there is plenty of textual evidence of the practice of plural marriage, even in the early RLDS faith tradition to which Price adhered. And, there is the pesky matter of that private stylometric analysis of Doctrine and Covenants 132 that I have mentioned elsewhere. Section 132 bears the word print of Christ, the very wordprint that can be found in other sections of the Doctrine and Covenants published by the LDS Church, prior to the 1840s.

There is the evidence of the Far West Record, too, for in that volume one can see Oliver Cowdery's charge of "adulterous affair" between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger. He had a problem with things he knew about (being "intrusted with things") but was unable to practice himself at the time. The rumors began to fly even in Kirtland about plural marriage because some claimed to have been aware of it. Oliver Cowdery waited until Joseph was away to present and get inserted into the Doctrine and Covenants a document denying the "crime of polygamy" and the Church's stance of allowing only one wife. There would have been no need for trying to do that if the charges of polygamy had not been flying about as a result of something that was happening in Kirtland.

There is also the unpublished 1831 revelation regarding the marrying of Lamanites given and presented to men who were already married, which was given during the Kirtland Period. Ezra Booth knew about that revelation but it did not dawn on him what that entailed when he first mentioned it in a newspaper. Eyewitnesses discussed this revelation and stated that Joseph Smith told them that there would come a time when men would have more than one wife the same as ancient men in the Bible did. Remember, even though it did not dawn onhim right away at the time the revelation was given, Ezra Booth confirmed the existence of the revelation that some of the men should marry Lamanite women. And, again, some of the men to whom the revelation was addressed were already married at the time the revelation was given.

And, even various leaders of the CoC (formerly RLDS) finally came out and admitted that it happened after seeing all of the evidence that is available, and that it was not very important an issue. I have read some of this stuff. I would not recall the titles of the works at the present time, however.

But, in addition to this, the first edition and issue of The True Latter-Day-Saints' Herald also had published testimony to the effect that it was practiced. It flatly admitted that Joseph Smith practiced it but that he "abhorred and repented of this iniquity before his death" but was still "destroyed" for being misled into practicing it in the first place (The True Latter-Day Saints' Herald, vol. 1 [January 1860]: no. 1, p. 9). There are some other interesting statements I have read in that first issue of the first volume relating to that as well but I do not have access to my copy for the next few weeks, as I am away from it as I write this. And, then, people in the RLDS movement afterward started going into denial mode about it for many years. The title you link above was written during that time of denial.

Now, back to the rumor account. I fully understand what rumors do and I think that there was a genuine kernel of truth to the story that got expanded over time with additional details. Mental breakdown can do some awful things to a person. Emma had been through a lot during this time, including losing children of her own. Some people just 'snap' and go off the deep end for a time.

But, in any case, Emma was an unsafe person to be around in 1842-1843, particularly if you were suspected of being part of a plural marriage with Joseph. Joseph flatly wrote in a personal letter that the Whitney family could not be safe if Emma were around, but that they would be perfectly safe if she weren't. He wasn't worried about them being followed. He was worried about them not being safe if Emma was around.

That, in my view, lends support to the initial kernel of the stairs story because it was during this same period of time that the stairs incident is supposed to have occurred. People do survive falling and often have little to no ill effects after a fall in a narrow stairwell. It all depends upon the fall and what parts of the body hit what on the way down.

The miscarriage part may or may not have been true. The initial versions of the story mentioned nothing about that. Additionally, so far as I am aware, Eliza Snow was not in the habit of speaking badly about anyone, particularly current leadership in the Church, so I am not surprised that something like this would not be mentioned in her journal she may have worried about someone else reading after she was gone. I am also not surprised that she would not mention the marriage in her diary of the time. People who began the practice of "the principle" were asked not to discuss it with others or mention it anywhere. Some kept that advice. Some didn't.

In any case, we may certainly believe certain things about plural marriage because there is a lot of documentation on that and because even the RLDS (now CoC) admitted in the beginning that it had been practiced before they went into denial mode over it for over a hundred years. They went so far as to perjure themselves in court during the Temple Lot Case, too. It did occur and Joseph Smith was involved from the beginning.

Edited September 16, 2012 by MormonMason

MormonMason · September 16, 2012

It has also been shown that accounts of so-called witnesses to this event are untrue as the layout of the house made it impossible to see what they claim to have seen from where they claim to have been.
No wonder Emma refused to go west and discouraged her boys too.
Like I have said before; Emma was right when she said she was misrepresented; she was right when she said she never saw what we call D&C 132; and she was right when she said Joseph had nothing to do with polygamy. She never lost her faith.

Are you aware of the account of what happened when Emma's sons returned home after doing missionary work among the Mormons of Utah? I do not have access to the source at the moment but I recall what happened. They were confronted by all the documentary evidence which Brigham Young was all too glad to present to them. They went home and confronted Emma about it. Not long afterward, one of the sons (I do not at the moment recall which one; I can't at the moment recall whether it was David or Alexander but I remember it was not Joseph III) ended up in an asylum.

Also, consult The True Latter-Day Saints' Herald, Vol.1, No. 1. Read the entire original issue very carefully. It flatly admits to Joseph's practice of plural marriage and gives that as the reason why the Lord destroyed him or allowed him to be killed, even though he (as the paper described it) "abhorred and repented of this iniquity before his death." I am serious about that. It has also been reprinted by critics of the Church a number of times as well so I am sure you can easily find a copy for around $2.50 USD or so.

Edited September 16, 2012 by MormonMason

MormonMason · September 16, 2012

Emma has earned her salvation in so many ways.

Perhaps. Joseph loved her a lot. That much is certain. He stated that he would be willing to go to hell for her. That is a love that is quite powerful.

Edited September 16, 2012 by MormonMason

Bill “Papa” Lee · September 16, 2012

Perhaps. Joseph loved her a lot. That much is certain. He stated that he would be willing to go to hell for her. That is a love that is quite powerful.

I would hope the way men feel about their wives.

MormonMason · September 16, 2012

I would hope the way men feel about their wives.

I love my wife but, having experienced the pains of hell as a youth (because I kept bugging the Lord about it so I could truly understand to a small degree what he went through; I will never do that again), I do not think I could bring myself to go there for her if she went there.

Calm · September 16, 2012

Any wife that loved her husband wouldn't want that for him no matter what it meant to her.

Edited September 16, 2012 by calmoriah

why me · September 16, 2012

Perhaps. Joseph loved her a lot. That much is certain. He stated that he would be willing to go to hell for her. That is a love that is quite powerful.

Joseph wrote a beautiful letter to emma from prison before he was murdered. I think that they had a good relationship to the end. And that was the problem. There love continued regardless of setbacks caused by polygamy.

Early on June 27, 1844, in Carthage Jail, Joseph Smith wrote in a hasty letter to Emma Smith: “I am very much resigned to my lot, knowing I am justified and have done the best that could be done. Give my love to the children and all my friends … ; and as for treason, I know that I have not committed any, and they cannot prove one appearance of anything of the kind, so you need not have any fears that any harm can happen to us on that score. May God bless you all. Amen.”8

Joseph and Emma continued to endure separations, loneliness, and fear, particularly during the days leading to the final scene in Carthage. Joseph wrote the last letters of their surviving correspondence. On June 23, 1844, as Joseph sought safety across the river against the gathering fury of a determined mob, he promised Emma, “If God ever opens a door that is possible for me, I will see you again.” His hope, he explained, was to “get to the city of Washington”²² to seek relief for the Latter-day Saints.

But this was not to be. Two days later, having returned to Nauvoo, where he was arrested and taken to Carthage, the always-solicitous Joseph assured his wife that “when the truth comes out, we have nothing to fear.”²³ Even on the ill-fated day of June 27, 1844, Joseph again wrote reassuringly to Emma. “There is one principle which is eternal,” he declared. “It is the duty of all men to protect their lives and the lives of their households whenever necessity requires, and no power has a right to forbid it. Should the last extreme arrive [meaning his death], but I anticipate no such extreme,” he emphatically assured her, “but caution is the parent of safety.” His final request of Emma was to “give my love to the children and all my friends. … May God bless you all.”²⁴

And thus their correspondence ended. The history books show the complexities in the lives of these two extraordinary people. But it is the private conversations of their letters to one another that convey the deep human dimension of their relationship. Though the surviving letters are few in number, they reveal the abiding love and concern Joseph and Emma felt for one another and their children, their unwavering faith in God’s overruling hand, and their commitment to fulfill the monumental mission to which they had been appointed. And finally, their letters vividly portray the personal struggles and sacrifices such commitment exacted.

https://www.lds.org/...-smith?lang=eng

Edited September 16, 2012 by why me

cassieblanca · September 16, 2012

I now have a great deal of trouble believing critics of Mormonism without having first researched and verified their claims because they are prone to omit important details that put the history in a more complete light as opposed to one sided information designed to promote faith in their view.
I no longer have as much faith in the critics of the LDS Church.

I feel the same way. I have no faith whatsoever in the critics of the LDS church. I have been LDS all my life, and during the past 10+ years I have had numerous in-depth conversations with critics of the church. I have had many, many experiences with "cognitive dissonance," or what my dad refers to as "yikes" moments. But each time I hear something against the church, I study it out for myself to find out either if it is true (many times it was either completely false or a distorted version of the truth -- to make the church bad), or if it was important in determining whether the church is true or not. I discovered that all of those "shocking" things that critics like to use to "disprove" our church are either incorrectly represented, or else are not relevant to the question of the truth of the church. My testimony now is much, much stronger than it was before ever conversing with LDS critics. They had no idea they were helping me build my faith in the LDS church.

cassieblanca · September 16, 2012

However we must be careful in what telling of history we put our faith in. We must be even more careful to put our faith in God and not his human servants.

I wish more people would do this. I had a conversation with a born-again Christian last week about personal revelation. I was talking about finding out if something is true by praying about it and asking God to help us know. She insisted that we are to judge a book, not by prayer, but by what's contained in it. She insisted that her faith is in the Bible and in other Christian ministers whose faith is only in the Bible. I said, why only the Bible and not the source of the Bible?! And what is the point in believing in a powerful but loving Heavenly Father but not being willing to ask him to help you find and understand the truth? And so many people leave the church because they're shocked by finding out something that Joseph Smith or Brigham Young did or said. It's not THEIR church - it's the Lord's, and it is the Lord in whom our faith should lie. When I read the B of M and prayed to know if it was true, the Lord knew all the "shocking" history of the church when he answered my prayer - even though I did not. Now I know the history (well... not all of it...) and I am still asking if the Book of Mormon is true - and the Lord is still telling me yes.

Sign In

Shocking Omission From Church History Makes Me Angry

Recommended Posts

KevinG

Tacenda

KevinG

Tacenda

Calm

MormonMason

DavidB

smac97

why me

Stargazer

urroner

Bart Burk

cesc101

Freedom

Alan

Bill “Papa” Lee

MormonMason

MormonMason

MormonMason

Bill “Papa” Lee

MormonMason

Calm

why me

cassieblanca

cassieblanca

Recently Browsing 0 members

Similar Content

Another One Bites the Dust 1 2 3 4 5

Advice on a request from my bishop

Changing Paradigms- A Must-Read Essay About Faith Crisis 1 2 3

Why Are We Such Brittle Christians? 1 2 3 4 13

Terryl Givens Vs. Alister Mcgrath On Doubt 1 2 3 4

Activity

Browse