Fanny Alger: Wife Or Mistress?

[HappyJackWagon]

^{Can someone explain to me how Fanny Alger was a Plural Wife and not a mistress?}

 

 

^{The essay states that monogomous marriage was the only legal marriage in America at that time. Are they claiming that Joseph illegally had a marriage ceremony performed?}

 

^{We know the sealing keys from Elijah weren't received until 1836 though the Alger "dirty, filthy, affair" occurred in 1835 so we know it wasn't a sealing.}

 

 

^{At best, Alger would either be an illigitimate/illegal wife of "spiritual wife" similar to what the essay denounced as being done by certain "unscrupulous men". Can someone help me understand how Fanny was a wife?}

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

No, I wont. It really is simple though.

[Tacenda]

^{Can someone explain to me how Fanny Alger was a Plural Wife and not a mistress?}

 

 

^{The essay states that monogomous marriage was the only legal marriage in America at that time. Are they claiming that Joseph illegally had a marriage ceremony performed?}

 

^{We know the sealing keys from Elijah weren't received until 1836 though the Alger "dirty, filthy, affair" occurred in 1835 so we know it wasn't a sealing.}

 

 

^{At best, Alger would either be an illigitimate/illegal wife of "spiritual wife" similar to what the essay denounced as being done by certain "unscrupulous men". Can someone help me understand how Fanny was a wife?}

Just take some Advil and get rest. 

[Nevo]

Can someone explain to me how Fanny Alger was a Plural Wife and not a mistress?

 

The essay states that monogamous marriage was the only legal marriage in America at that time. Did he marry her illegally?

We know the sealing keys from Elijah weren't received until 1836 though the Alger "dirty, filthy, affair" occurred in 1835 so we know it wasn't a sealing.

 

At best, Alger would either be an illegitimate/illegal wife of "spiritual wife". Can someone help me understand this?

 

None of Joseph Smith's plural marriages had legal sanction so that's neither here nor there with regard to Alger. Joseph derived his authority to marry from God, not the state.

 

As Hales notes, "five accounts distinctly label the association [with Alger] as the Prophet's first plural marriage: Benjamin F. Johnson, Mosiah Hancock, Eliza R. Snow, sources in the Webb family, and sources in the Alger family." The accounts are late but credible, especially Eliza R. Snow's.

 

Joseph began performing weddings in Kirtland around the time of his marriage to Alger, which he said he did "by the authority of the holy Priesthood" (he had no legal authorization). Presumably he married Alger by the same authority.

[HappyJackWagon]

None of Joseph Smith's plural marriages had legal sanction so that's neither here nor there with regard to Alger. Joseph derived his authority to marry from God, not the state.

 

As Hales notes, "five accounts distinctly label the association [with Alger] as the Prophet's first plural marriage: Benjamin F. Johnson, Mosiah Hancock, Eliza R. Snow, sources in the Webb family, and sources in the Alger family." The accounts are late but credible, especially Eliza R. Snow's.

 

Joseph began performing weddings in Kirtland around the time of his marriage to Alger, which he said he did "by the authority of the holy Priesthood" (he had no legal authorization). Presumably he married Alger by the same authority.

Ok- So they were not legally married. She was not his wife and she wasn't sealed, right? Again, sounds like spiritual wifery to me. The question would be whether or not it was God sanctioned spiritual wifery.

 

Mola, don't be an &$$.

 

ETA: Clearly the church's definition of marriage was much more liberal in the good ole days.

 

Thread is closed. Do not call posters vulgar names.

[JLHPROF]

Ok- So they were not legally married. She was not his wife and she wasn't sealed, right? Again, sounds like spiritual wifery to me. The question would be whether or not it was God sanctioned spiritual wifery.

 

No, according to their perspective they were married by authority of the priesthood.  The concept of family sealing had not been revealed at the time.

Bascially:

1. Joseph knew by revelation plural marriage had to be restored and did not consider such to be adultery.

2. Joseph believed all marriages could be solemnized by the priesthood (that's how marriage was performed prior to the sealing keys being restored).  They had limited understanding of eternal marriage (despite having D&C 132 already).

3. Joseph had Fanny married to him by a priesthood holder.  If she had stayed after the sealing keys and eternal marriage were revealed they would have had that done too, just like he and Emma.

 

Really very simple, and nothing sinister about it.

 

And not "spiritual wifery" which required NO ceremony and was basically wicked men saying "we feel our spirits belong together" and not marrying the women.

Edited October 23, 2014 by JLHPROF

[ALarson]

3. Joseph had Fanny married to him by a priesthood holder. 

Do we know who that priesthood holder was?  

 

How old was Fanny at that time...do we know?

 

I need to do some reading on this topic, I guess, but thanks for any answers to my above questions!

[ALarson]

Ok, I just read that it was Levi Hancock who performed the marriage.  But, I cannot find Fanny's age at the time.  Does anyone know?

 

Also, was Fanny the only plural wife that Joseph married prior to him receiving the sealing keys?  In what I read, there was a "Miss Hill" mentioned too.  Does anyone know who that was?

Edited October 23, 2014 by ALarson

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Ok- So they were not legally married. She was not his wife and she wasn't sealed, right? Again, sounds like spiritual wifery to me. The question would be whether or not it was God sanctioned spiritual wifery.

 

Mola, don't be an &$$.

 

ETA: Clearly the church's definition of marriage was much more liberal in the good ole days.

I can't help it sometimes. Sometimes people like making a bigger deal of things than they really are. You even managed to give us a false dichotomy.

 

OK Ill try harder but only if you try not so hard to find fault in everything the church does. Deal?

Edited October 23, 2014 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[JLHPROF]

Do we know who that priesthood holder was?  

 

How old was Fanny at that time...do we know?

 

I need to do some reading on this topic, I guess, but thanks for any answers to my above questions!

 

 

1.  I don't believe we do for certain, but there are candidates - chief among them Levi Hancock.

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/faq/fanny-alger-2/

 

“Father goes to Fanny and said, “Fanny, Brother Joseph the Prophet loves you and wishes you for a wife. Will you be his wife?” “I will Levi,” said she. Father takes Fanny to Joseph and said, “Brother Joseph I have been successful in my mission.” Father gave her to Joseph, repeating the ceremony as Joseph repeated to him.

Concerning the doctrine of celestial marriage the Prophet told my father [Levi] in the days of Kirtland, that it was the will of the Lord for His servants who were faithful to step forth in that order. But said Brother Joseph, ‘Brother Levi, if I should make known to my brethren what God has made known to me they would seek my life.’” - Mosiah Hancock

 

2.  She was between 16 & 17 depending when the actual ceremony likely took place in 1833.  And Joseph would have been 28.  Perfectly normal marrying ages at the time.

 

Basically, given that Joseph had received D&C 132 he may well have had a sealing ceremony performed, not realizing that he did not yet hold sufficient priesthood.  After all, he held the apostleship, and D&C 132 makes no mention of the office necessary to perform a sealing or eternal marriage.  As far as he knew, there was no additional priesthood to be restored since they already had the apostleship.

 

Fairmormon has a good article on this: http://en.fairmormon.org/Polygamy_book/Introduction_of_eternal_marriage

 

Some have wondered how the first plural marriages (such as the Alger marriage) could have occurred before the 1836 restoration of the sealing keys in the Kirtland temple (see DC 110:). Again, this confusion occurs because we tend to conflate several ideas. They were not all initially wrapped together in one doctrine:

1. plural marriage - the idea that one could be married (in mortality) to more than one woman: being taught by 1831.
2. eternal marriage - the idea that a man and spouse could be sealed and remain together beyond the grave: being taught by 1835.
3. "celestial" marriage - the combination of the above two ideas, in which all marriages—plural and monogamous—could last beyond the grave via the sealing powers: implemented by 1840-41.

Thus, the marriage to Fanny would have occurred under the understanding #1 above. The concept of sealing beyond the grave came later

 

I'm even willing to concede that they may have thought they were acting under #2 and not have realized they needed additional keys.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Basically, given that Joseph had received D&C 132 he may well have had a sealing ceremony performed, not realizing that he did not yet hold sufficient priesthood.  After all, he held the apostleship, and D&C 132 makes no mention of the office necessary to perform a sealing or eternal marriage.  As far as he knew, there was no additional priesthood to be restored since they already had the apostleship.

JLHPROF- They didn't have D&C 132 in 1836. That wasn't dictated until 1841 (or 43- I forget) and wasn't included in the D&C until 1870's. In 1835 they had a different law of marriage in the D&C which polygamy ran counter to.

[Tacenda]

Back to my old ways...Joseph went to God first to ask if Polygamy should be restored...so if he hadn't who knows...maybe we didn't really need it?  God didn't go to him first.  Seems to me Joseph asked because of this so called dirty nasty affair.  He needed to cover it up.  But that's all anti slant. 

 

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/far-west-high-council-meeting-record-april-12-1838/

Far West High Council Meeting Record

Ebenezer Robinson clerk, High Council Minutes, April 12, 1838, in Donald Q. Cannon and Lyndon W. Cook, eds., Far West Record: Minutes of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1830–1844 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1983), 167–68:

George W. Harris testifies that one evening last fall O. Cowdery was at his house together with Joseph Smith jr., and Thomas B. Marsh, when a conversation took place between Joseph Smith jr & O. Cowdery, when he seemed to insinuate that Joseph Smith jr was guilty of adultery, but when the question was put, if he (Joseph) had ever acknowledged to him that he was guilty of such a thing; when he answered No. Also he believes him to be instrumental in causing so many lawsuits as had taken place of late.

David W. Patten testifies, that he went to Oliver Cowdery to enquire of him if a certain story was true respecting J. Smith’s committing adultery with a certain girl, when he turned on his heel and insinuated as though he was guilty; he then went on and gave a history of some circumstances respecting the adultery scrape stating that no doubt it was true. Also said that Joseph told him, he had confessed to Emma, Also that he has used his influence to urge on lawsuits.

Thomas B. Marsh testifies that while in Kirtland last summer, David W. Patten asked Oliver Cowdery if he Joseph Smith jr. had confessed to his wife that he was guilty of adultery with a certain girl, when Oliver Cowdery cocked up his eye very knowingly and hesitated to answer the question, saying he did not know as he was bound to answer the question yet conveyed the idea that it was true. Last fall after Oliver came to this place he heard a conversation take place between Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery when J. Smith asked him if he had ever confessed to him that he was guilty of adultery, when after a considerable winking &c. he said No. Joseph then asked him if he ever told him that he confessed to any body, when he answered No.

Joseph Smith jr testifies that Oliver Cowdery had been his bosom friend, therefore he entrusted him with many things. He then gave a history respecting the girl business.” 

 

bold mine  

Edited October 23, 2014 by Tacenda

[HappyJackWagon]

Back to my old ways...Joseph went to God first to ask if Polygamy should be restored...so if he hadn't who knows...maybe we didn't really need it?  God didn't go to him first.  Seems to me Joseph asked because of this so called dirty nasty affair.  He needed to cover it up.  But that's all anti slant. 

Though it seems clear Joseph was thinking about polygamy prior to Alger in 1835.

[USU78]

Ok, I just read that it was Levi Hancock who performed the marriage.  But, I cannot find Fanny's age at the time.  Does anyone know?

 

Also, was Fanny the only plural wife that Joseph married prior to him receiving the sealing keys?  In what I read, there was a "Miss Hill" mentioned too.  Does anyone know who that was?

 

There is speculation that the one and only person who reported a "Miss Hill" meant Fanny Alger, but couldn't remember her last name yet did remember the titular character in the racy British novel, Fanny Hill.

 

Makes sense to me.

[ALarson]

I have to say that in reading more about the Fanny Alger and Joseph relationship, it's all pretty unsettling.  A whole lot of "what if's" or "well, maybe's" or "Joseph must have's" have to occur in order to make this union one that is believed to be sanctioned by God.   And to know how it upset Emma (and Oliver) is also unsettling at best.  Add to that the circumstances that Joseph and Fanny were discovered (in the barn) and this whole thing is not pleasant to read about.

 

Why didn't Joseph tell Emma or ask her about it prior to this?

 

I know of many members who have this incident on their shelf and hope to get more answers at another time that will help them understand it.  I'm going to have to do the same.

Edited October 23, 2014 by ALarson

[JLHPROF]

JLHPROF- They didn't have D&C 132 in 1836. That wasn't dictated until 1841 (or 43- I forget) and wasn't included in the D&C until 1870's. In 1835 they had a different law of marriage in the D&C which polygamy ran counter to.

Though it seems clear Joseph was thinking about polygamy prior to Alger in 1835.

 

 

 

Sorry, wrong.  They had D&C 132 (at least in part) in 1836.  Did you not read the new articles - the revelation was received in 1831.  It just wasn't canon until much later.

 

 

The revelation on plural marriage was not written down until 1843, but its early verses suggest that part of it emerged from Joseph Smith’s study of the Old Testament in 1831. People who knew Joseph well later stated he received the revelation about that time.⁴ The revelation, recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 132, states that Joseph prayed to know why God justified Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon in having many wives. The Lord responded that He had commanded them to enter into the practice.⁵  -https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng

 

Not that this is news.  The header for D&C 132 has read:

 

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant and the principle of plural marriage. Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, evidence indicates that some of the principles involved in this revelation were known by the Prophet as early as 1831.

for decades.

[JLHPROF]

Back to my old ways...Joseph went to God first to ask if Polygamy should be restored...so if he hadn't who knows...maybe we didn't really need it?  God didn't go to him first.  Seems to me Joseph asked because of this so called dirty nasty affair.  He needed to cover it up.  But that's all anti slant. 

 

No, once again.  Joseph asked about polygamy in 1831 when translating the Bible.

He married Fanny Alger in 1833, two years later.  He hardly needed the revelation to "cover up" an affair or a marriage that hadn't happened yet.

Edited October 23, 2014 by JLHPROF

[stemelbow]

1.  I don't believe we do for certain, but there are candidates - chief among them Levi Hancock.

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/faq/fanny-alger-2/

 

2.  She was between 16 & 17 depending when the actual ceremony likely took place in 1833.  And Joseph would have been 28.  Perfectly normal marrying ages at the time.

27 - his birthday was late December.

[stemelbow]

Sorry, wrong.  They had D&C 132 (at least in part) in 1836.  Did you not read the new articles - the revelation was received in 1831.  It just wasn't canon until much later.

The issue, historically, isn't that it appeared he may have received parts of the revelation as early as 1831, though. We simply don't know that he did, correct?

[ttribe]

I can't help it sometimes. Sometimes people like making a bigger deal of things than they really are. You even managed to give us a false dichotomy.

 

OK Ill try harder but only if you try not so hard to find fault in everything the church does. Deal?

 

Ease up there, killer.  I happen to know that HJW is the Bishop of his ward.  He's struggling through a lot of doubt while still trying to fulfill his duties as a Bishop.  You might just be able to help him, instead of contributing to driving him away.

Edited October 23, 2014 by ttribe

[Nevo]

No, once again.  Joseph asked about polygamy in 1831 when translating the Bible.

He married Fanny Alger in 1833, two years later.  He hardly needed the revelation to "cover up" an affair or a marriage that hadn't happened yet.

 

I think 1833 is too early. I think a late 1835 date is much more likely.

[Avatar4321]

False dilemma. There are more options. Especially since there is no evidence of a sexual relationship.

[omni]

1. I don't believe we do for certain, but there are candidates - chief among them Levi Hancock.

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/faq/fanny-alger-2/

.

I'm on my phone and can't view the link, can you please give me the date of the quote? It was my impression there were no contemporary accounts of the marriage.

[mormonnewb]

I have to say that in reading more about the Fanny Alger and Joseph relationship, it's all pretty unsettling.  A whole lot of "what if's" or "well, maybe's" or "Joseph must have's" have to occur in order to make this union one that is believed to be sanctioned by God.   And to know how it upset Emma (and Oliver) is also unsettling at best.  Add to that the circumstances that Joseph and Fanny were discovered (in the barn) and this whole thing is not pleasant to read about.

 

Why didn't Joseph tell Emma or ask her about it prior to this?

 

I know of many members who have this incident on their shelf and hope to get more answers at another time that will help them understand it.  I'm going to have to do the same.

 

Being ever the cynic, I haven't even put this one of my shelf.  The most straightforward answer is that JS had an illicit affair with Alger, which he later tried to excuse through the reinstitution of polygamy.  I confess that it's not the ONLY possible explanation, but it's the only one that MY wife would reach if presented with the same evidence about me.

 

That being said, I'm not sure why this is such a big deal for so many, because for me, this piece fits perfectly within the prophetic puzzle.  The scriptures are replete with prophets and great men of God who still committed significant transgressions.

 

Noah was the only person of his day who the Lord accounted righteous enough to survive the flood and how does he pay back HF for this grace?  By getting frat party drunk, passing out butt naked in his tent.  And how does the Lord respond?  By cursing the child who posted Noah's pic on Facetablet.

 

The Lord establishes an everlasting covenant with Abraham, who promptly leaves his father's house and pimps out Sarah to Abimelech.  And how does the Lord respond?  By making clear to Abimelech that he should not only return Sarah to Abraham, but send him off with gifts and livestock.

 

Aaron is left in charge of the Israelites when Moses went up to Mount Sinai to get the 10 Commandments.  And when Moses returns, he finds them having Spring Break 1500 B.C.  So how does the Lord respond?  By naming the one of his holy priesthoods after Aaron.

 

David has an affair with Bathsheba and has her husband killed so that he can have her all to himself.  And how does the Lord respond?  By delivering Christ through the bloodline of David and Bathsheba.

 

More often than not, HF works with His chosen servants DESPITE their flaws; not in the absence of such flaws.  So IF JS was indeed guilty of adultery, He even more resembles a prophet in my eyes.  And in no event would any transgression on his part change the truth of the Restoration.

Edited October 23, 2014 by mormonnewb

[omni]

^{Can someone explain to me how Fanny Alger was a Plural Wife and not a mistress?}

^{The essay states that monogomous marriage was the only legal marriage in America at that time. Are they claiming that Joseph illegally had a marriage ceremony performed?}

^{We know the sealing keys from Elijah weren't received until 1836 though the Alger "dirty, filthy, affair" occurred in 1835 so we know it wasn't a sealing.}

^{At best, Alger would either be an illigitimate/illegal wife of "spiritual wife" similar to what the essay denounced as being done by certain "unscrupulous men". Can someone help me understand how Fanny was a wife?}

Don't forget to include the lack of any marriage or divorce records and I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) all accounts of the marriage are secondhand and not contemporary.