Jane Manning James, Black Member Mentioned In New Essay

[ALarson]

As I just posted in another thread, I had a discussion at our ward activity the other night with about 10 other active members regarding the most recent essay.  One of them stated that he'd looked up a couple of the names mentioned in the "Race and the Priesthood" essay.  

 

One of the names was Jane Manning James and here is the part that mentions her:

 

Even after 1852, at least two black Mormons continued to hold the priesthood. When one of these men, Elijah Abel, petitioned to receive his temple endowment in 1879, his request was denied. Jane Manning James, a faithful black member who crossed the plains and lived in Salt Lake City until her death in 1908, similarly asked to enter the temple; she was allowed to perform baptisms for the dead for her ancestors but was not allowed to participate in other ordinances.¹²

 

My fellow ward member went on to tell us that what he found out about Jane Manning was extremely upsetting to him.  He learned that she was denied her request to be sealed to Joseph Smith as his daughter (Emma and Joseph had offered this to her back in Nauvoo), but she was allowed to be sealed to Joseph as his eternal servant in the Celestial Kingdom.

 

I have to believe that this was also a result of the times and beliefs back then.  Does anyone know if Jane has now been sealed to Joseph as his daughter?

 

In doing a brief search, I found this regarding the Jane:

 

Jane Elizabeth Manning James was born September 22, 1822 in Fairfield County, Conneticut. She was born a free woman, certainly a precious status to anyone that could already see the precursors of civil war. She became a member of the LDS church in 1841, and  in 1843 traveled with her family to the meeting place of the saints, Nauvoo, Illinois. In describing her journey to Nauvoo, Jane said, "Our feet cracked open and bled until you could see the whole prints of our feet with blood on the ground." How sweet it must have felt to also record this precious memory: "Brother Joseph sat down by me and said, 'God bless you. You are among friends.'" Both lines are a testament to Jane's faith and will to endure, characteristics she shared with fellow LDS pioneers. No doubt, she felt honored to live in the same home as the Smith family.

Joseph Smith was killed on June 27, 1844, giving Jane approximately one year to enjoy the presence of the prophet of the restoration. Soon, Jane was back on the trail headed west, becoming the first recorded African-American woman to enter the Utah territory in 1847. She had eight children with her husband, Isaac James, who eventually left her in 1869. Maybe it was the departure of her husband that reminded Jane of the finitude of life and  the terminality of our familial relationships. All around her fellow members of the church entered into sacred covenants to ensure that in the next life they would be together as a family forever. She, a faithful Mormon, who traversed the plains and left her fair share of blood on the rocky soil, wanted what her fellow saints had - the surety that she would be with her children in the next life.

Jane petitioned the church leaders to allow her, a black woman, receive thesacred endowment and be sealed to a worthy man. Jane approached Walker Lewis, a black man who was ordained an Elder under the leadership of Joseph Smith. Jane hoped that Lewis, being an Elder, would be considered worthy to go through the temple, and that she and her children could be sealed to Lewis, ensuring their survival as a family for the rest of eternity. Her requests were repeatedly denied.

Jane's first husband died in 1891, breaking open a once forgotten avenue for her family's eternal unity. She remembered Emma Smith, the wife of the prophet, who told her that she could be sealed to the Smith family as one of their children. Through adoption Jane could connect herself to a priesthood holder, the prophet, and ensure her eternal welfare. Jane sought to take advantage of the invitation for eternal adoption into the Smith family. Her request was denied.

Instead, the First Presidency of the LDS church devised a unique alternative to adoption. Jane could be sealed to Joseph Smith as his servant.The church would create a special ceremony for just that purpose. This special ceremony that bound Jane to the prophet for time and all eternity took place on May 18, 1894. Joseph F. Smith represented Joseph Smith as his proxy during the ceremony. Bathsheba W. Smith stood in place for Jane. Jane was not allowed to participate in her own, specially made, sacred ceremony because of the color of her skin and the associated LDS teachings of the time. Even alive, Jane would only know of the sweetness of the sealing power of the temple through proxy.

Jane was dissatisfied with the ceremony, but further petitions fell on deaf ears. Jane lived the rest of her life in Salt Lake City, UT. She was eventually let in the temple to perform baptisms for the dead. Near the end of her life Jane wrote, "And I want to say right here that my faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ of Latter‑day Saints is as strong today–nay it is if possible stronger–than it was the day I was first baptized. I pay my tithes and offerings, keep the Word of Wisdom. I go to bed early and arise early. I try in my feeble way to set a good example to all." 

 

 

 

 

[Bob Crockett]

In 1894, Pres. Woodruff abolished adoption sealings.  

[ALarson]

In 1894, Pres. Woodruff abolished adoption sealings.  

This sealing of Jane to Joseph Smith is on record here:  

 

"Salt Lake Temple Adoption Record, May 18, 1894, Book A, p. 26"

 

But I am interested in what you mean by "abolished adoption sealings" as I know they still take place today and I have records of family members being sealed to their parents through adoption.  It is still recorded as such by the church according to what I have.  Is there a difference in these vs. what adoption meant prior to 1894?   Thanks for any help on this or references you can give.

[ALarson]

I also did find the record of the exact wording used in this sealing (kept in the records of the church), but I hesitate giving a link since it does contain words from the actual temple sealings performed today in the temple.

 

But, here is the wording that pertains only to this sealing (This was asked of Bathsheba Smith who acted as proxy for Jane for the sealing):

 

"Jane Elizabeth Manning (a Negro Mormon) do you wish to be attached as a Servitor for eternity to the prophet Joseph Smith and in this capacity be connected with his family and be obedient to him in all things in the Lord as a faithful Servitor?" 

[ALarson]

In 1894, Pres. Woodruff abolished adoption sealings.  

 In doing a quick search, I think this was pertaining only to men to men sealings and this is what President Woodruff abolished.  Is that correct?

[Bob Crockett]

Adoption was abolished in the April 1894 general conference. I am of the personal view that adoption sealings will be of no effect if there is a proper sealing to parents or in some cases spouse.

So when the story occurred as you ssid, adoption was not an option. Of course, I don't know if adoptions occurred notwithstanding the ban.

[Bob Crockett]

All adoptions were abolished. Of course, that wouldn't apply to a true adoption and maybe Manning was.

[ALarson]

Adoption was abolished in the April 1894 general conference. I am of the personal view that adoption sealings will be of no effect if there is a proper sealing to parents or in some cases spouse.

So when the story occurred as you ssid, adoption was not an option. Of course, I don't know if adoptions occurred notwithstanding the ban.

Adoption sealings do still take place as a child being sealed to a parent.

 

What President Woodruff ended was the sealing of men to men.  

 

That is not what the topic of this thread is about, I am asking what occurred with Jane Manning James and there are records that exist for her sealing at that time.

 

I really would like to know if she was ever sealed at a later date to Joseph Smith as his daughter?

Edited December 15, 2013 by ALarson

[MichelleD]

Adoption was abolished in the April 1894 general conference. I am of the personal view that adoption sealings will be of no effect if there is a proper sealing to parents or in some cases spouse.

So when the story occurred as you ssid, adoption was not an option. Of course, I don't know if adoptions occurred notwithstanding the ban.

That's not true. Only the sealing of a man to a man (labeling it adoption) was ended at that time.

Are you truly saying that since adoption wasn't available (even though it really was), the only other option was to seal Jane to Joseph as his servant?

[halconero]

This bothers me, but does not shake me. It hurts, but does not make me stumble. 

 

One of my cherished stories in the Bible is that found in Galatians 2. Paul describes having to rebuke Peter, the presiding apostle, for his treatment of the Gentile converts. It seems that one of Peter's weaknesses, throughout his life, was capitulating in the face of public pressure. This was the man who had received a vision opening baptism and missionary work among the non-Jew. He lead the conference in Jerusalem that confirmed the revelation. Yet even he was susceptible to what we would call ethnic discrimination in this day and age.

 

For all this he was still a special witness and messenger of Christ and God.

 

God chooses imperfect people to lead his people. This leads to a sometimes imperfect, but nevertheless true and living church. Living as it is guided by revelation, true because, though we sometimes stumble in it, we accept and strive to keep those revelations and covenants.

 

God bless Sister Manning.

[ALarson]

This bothers me, but does not shake me. It hurts, but does not make me stumble. 

 

....

 

God chooses imperfect people to lead his people. This leads to a sometimes imperfect, but nevertheless true and living church. Living as it is guided by revelation, true because, though we sometimes stumble in it, we accept and strive to keep those revelations and covenants.

 

God bless Sister Manning.

Oh, I agree.  But it has shaken this brother from my ward and I told him I'd try to get more information on this for him.  I think there is no doubt that this sealing took place (as a servant to Joseph) as the actual records of it exist.  What I am wondering is if her request to be sealed to him as his daughter (as was originally offered to her by Joseph and Emma) has been honored and has another sealing taken place at a later date?

Edited December 15, 2013 by ALarson

[bluebell]

As I understand it WW stopped the kind of adoptions dealing with people who were sealed to the prophets in order to make them the prophets' posterity in the next life instead of being sealed to their own parents.

It had nothing to do with adoptions where a child is adopted or raised by non biological parents and were sealed to them.

[ALarson]

As I understand it WW stopped the kind of adoptions dealing with people who were sealed to the prophets in order to make them the prophets' posterity in the next life instead of being sealed to their own parents.

It had nothing to do with adoptions where a child is adopted or raised by non biological parents and were sealed to them.

I agree but this still does not answer my question.

 

Jane Manning was sealed as a servant to Joseph Smith (the references are above).

 

Has this been changed or is this sealing still in place?

Edited December 15, 2013 by ALarson

[bluebell]

I agree but this still does not answer my question.

Jane Manning was sealed as a servant to Joseph Smith (the references are above).

Has this been changed or is this sealing still in place?

I think its possible to look up what work has been done for people on the church's genealogy site, isn't it?

[JLHPROF]

As I understand it WW stopped the kind of adoptions dealing with people who were sealed to the prophets in order to make them the prophets' posterity in the next life instead of being sealed to their own parents.

 

Now this is a very interesting doctrine that is virtually never mentioned and even less understood.

While WW did end the practice, a study of the origins and practice of these adoptions provides many doctrinal insights.

The early saints who practiced these adoptions had teachings behind them that went beyond "wanting to be the prophet's posterity".

[Bob Crockett]

As I understand it WW stopped the kind of adoptions dealing with people who were sealed to the prophets in order to make them the prophets' posterity in the next life instead of being sealed to their own parents.

It had nothing to do with adoptions where a child is adopted or raised by non biological parents and were sealed to them.

Right; I tried to make that point.  

 

Pres. Woodruff brought an end to all other adoptions.  It wasn't limited to men-to-men adoptions.  You will see in his sermon about his revelation on the topic that he refers to adoptions of men and of women.  See http://scottwoodward.org/Talks/html/Woodruff,%20Wilford/WoodruffW_LawOfAdoption.html.  I have also long suspected that it brought an end to sealings for eternity of already-married-for-time-spouses-of-others.  From what I can tell, it was a rather common practice for a sister to want to be sealed to somebody else when she was married to an inactive member of the Church.

 

What this means is that one month after Manning's proxy entered the temple, she couldn't have the adoption sealing.   I wonder if the revelation, in part, was the result of Manning's request.  Who knows.

 

In terms of being sealed as a "servant," it seems like a harmless gesture.   But I'd have to really know more.

 

 

That's not true. Only the sealing of a man to a man (labeling it adoption) was ended at that time.

Are you truly saying that since adoption wasn't available (even though it really was), the only other option was to seal Jane to Joseph as his servant?

 

Yes it is true; see above.

 

No I'm not saying that the only other option was to seal as a servant.  It could be a meaningless gesture.  I'd need more information.

 

All this is interesting considering the fact that Wilford Woodruff apparently had a woman sealed to him 20 or 30 years after his death, a non-member lecturer who came through Salt Lake City in the 1890s.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Bob Crockett

[BlueDreams]

I agree but this still does not answer my question.

 

Jane Manning was sealed as a servant to Joseph Smith (the references are above).

 

Has this been changed or is this sealing still in place?

 

No. IMO the better work was done for her. Being the smith's daughter was always her plan B or C. What she received in her lifetime was the crumbs of the table. Her family was plan A....and that's what was given after the ban was lifted, from what I could find online: See here and here.

 

As for your shaken friend. I remember when first reading this, it was like putting on an old, familiar sad hat. It isn't pretty, but frankly digging into this part of history is messy no matter what. There were a number of redeemable things about this era with race and the church, especially when put in the overall backdrop of the U.S. history. They were, in general, fairly moderate. But there is plenty that from our present view that just ain't that pretty. What I find helpful is to know that she was faithful throughout it all. Somehow through her history, she found space to have faith, endure, and thrive in the context that she found herself in. She knew the restored gospel and that was the more pertinent message to the end of her days.

 

With luv,

BD 

Edited December 15, 2013 by BlueDreams

[ALarson]

No. IMO the better work was done for her. Being the smith's daughter was always her plan B or C. What she received in her lifetime was the crumbs of the table. Her family was plan A....and that's what was given after the ban was lifted, from what I could find online: See here and here.

 

As for your shaken friend. I remember when first reading this, it was like putting on an old, familiar sad hat. It isn't pretty, but frankly digging into this part of history is messy no matter what. There were a number of redeemable things about this era with race and the church, especially when put in the overall backdrop of the U.S. history. They were, in general, fairly moderate. But there is plenty that from our present view that just ain't that pretty. What I find helpful is to know that she was faithful throughout it all. Somehow through her history, she found space to have faith, endure, and thrive in the context that she found herself in. She knew the restored gospel and that was the more pertinent message to the end of her days.

 

With luv,

BD 

Thank you for this post and perspective BlueDreams.  I am going to print it out and give it to my friend to read and hopefully it'll help him.  Thanks again.

[ALarson]

What this means is that one month after Manning's proxy entered the temple, she couldn't have the adoption sealing.   I wonder if the revelation, in part, was the result of Manning's request.  Who knows.

 

In terms of being sealed as a "servant," it seems like a harmless gesture.   But I'd have to really know more.

From what I have read, Jane Manning had been requesting this sealing take place for several years and had repeatedly been denied.  What Wilford Woodruff abolished had nothing to do with what was finally approved and it also had nothing to do with why her requests had been repeatedly denied in previous years.

[juliann]

 

 

My fellow ward member went on to tell us that what he found out about Jane Manning was extremely upsetting to him.  He learned that she was denied her request to be sealed to Joseph Smith as his daughter (Emma and Joseph had offered this to her back in Nauvoo), but she was allowed to be sealed to Joseph as his eternal servant in the Celestial Kingdom.

 

Our mistreated black members are actually the greatest testimony to the truth of the gospel.  This says it all:  Near the end of her life Jane wrote, "And I want to say right here that my faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ of Latter‑day Saints is as strong today–nay it is if possible stronger–than it was the day I was first baptized. I pay my tithes and offerings, keep the Word of Wisdom. I go to bed early and arise early. I try in my feeble way to set a good example to all."

 

 Nobody Knows: The Untold Story of Black Mormons http://blackmormonfilm.com/ might also be helpful, it is a DVD made by Darius Gray and Margaret Young, the experts on the topic,  and it is powerful.  It is hard to watch at some points but their dedication and belief is inspiring beyond words.  It periodically runs on TV.

[Bob Crockett]

From what I have read, Jane Manning had been requesting this sealing take place for several years and had repeatedly been denied. What Wilford Woodruff abolished had nothing to do with what was finally approved and it also had nothing to do with why her requests had been repeatedly denied in previous years.

I get the impression that Pres Woodruff had serious reservations about the doctrine. I can see where he would decline approval in a marginal case. I say "marginal" because the great bulk of these sealings in adoption were patriarch to patriarch where both are alive. He probably had no means to derive mutual consent.

[Calm]

As I understand it WW stopped the kind of adoptions dealing with people who were sealed to the prophets in order to make them the prophets' posterity in the next life instead of being sealed to their own parents.

It had nothing to do with adoptions where a child is adopted or raised by non biological parents and were sealed to them.

And since that time such nonparent as parent sealings have been replaced by actual parent (whether biological or legally adopted). I had relatives that had been sealed to JS, I believe, that are now sealed to their own parents for example.

Having Sister James sealed to Joseph and Emma instead of her own mother and father goes back to the original sealing practice so I see it as unlikely to have been done, though I wish it had been anyway because while I don't believe those earlier sealings meant what we apparently thought they meant---a removal of ourselves from our mortal families into a significantly different one, I believe they still hold a deep spiritual meaning for those who participated in them.

Edited December 16, 2013 by calmoriah

[rpn]

I have seen records showing Jane Manning James sealed to Joseph Smith and to Brother James, her husband.

 

From the beginning the saints thought they got some advantage by being sealed to the most righeous person they knew or a church leader (I think this was the reason for the polyandry).   Wilford Woodruff received and published revelation that restricted sealing to your own parents and ancestors and families.  (See the introduction and the lesson on temples in the Teachings of WW manual of a few years ago).    That is what the earlier poster mean by adoption sealings.