View source for The Reality of Joseph Smith Practicing Plural Marriage

<small>[[Polygamy Sandbox|Polygamy]] > [[Joseph Smith's Introduction and Practice of Plural Marriage]] > <span style="color:#7BB375"> The Reality of Joseph Smith Practicing Plural Marriage</span></small>
__NOTOC__
{{Header}}
{{Summary1}} Some question whether Joseph Smith ever practiced polygamy. The overwhelming consensus of historians is that Joseph Smith indeed practiced plural marriage. This page answers common questions and criticisms surrounding the reality of Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy.
----
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Did Joseph Smith actually teach and practice polygamy?===
| state = closed
| content = =Did Joseph Smith actually teach and practice polygamy?=
Some splinter groups of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have claimed that Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy. Instead, these groups argue, polygamy was the later invention of a libidinous and greedy Brigham Young. Since, on these groups’ view, plural marriage was a man-made invention instead of a commandment from the divine, this is evidence that the modern Church is in apostasy and that we must seek the true authority elsewhere. A related charge is that the Church hasn’t taught that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy openly and frequently. 

There is contemporaneous, reliable documentation to establish that Joseph Smith received the revelation on plural marriage and there is ample documentation that he and many of his colleagues practiced plural marriage.

{{InterpreterBar
|link=https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/joseph-smith-monogamist-or-polygamist/
|title=Joseph Smith: Monogamist or Polygamist?
|author= Brian C. Hales
|publication=Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship
|vol=25
|num=
|date=2017
|summary= In the past decades much of the debate regarding Joseph Smith and plural marriage has focused on his motivation — whether libido or divine inspiration drove the process. Throughout these debates, a small group of observers and participants have maintained that Joseph did not practice polygamy at any time or that his polygamous sealings were nonsexual spiritual marriages. Rather than simply provide supportive evidence for Joseph Smith’s active involvement with plural marriage, this article examines the primary arguments advanced by monogamist proponents to show that important weaknesses exist in each line of reasoning.
}}

The charts below, prepared by Brian Hales, outline all the evidence available for a polygamist Joseph in an easy-to-read way.

[[File:B7BB6399-9961-40B2-8A3F-8627C5081D4C.jpeg]]{{blankline}}

[[File:BEB33A12-AE96-475A-8B5B-029773E6719D.jpeg]]{{blankline}}

<small>Video by The Interpreter Foundation.</small>
<embedvideo service="youtube">PMBWxnHVIuU</embedvideo>{{blankline}}
}}
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Did Joseph Smith ever publicly attempt to teach the doctrine of plural marriage?===
| state = closed
| content = 
====Joseph initiated the practice of polygamy and hid it from the general Church membership during his lifetime====
It is true that Joseph did not always tell others about plural marriage. One critic of the Church claims, "Joseph Smith publicly lied about his practice of polygamy, and lied to his own wife (Emma) about the practice." <ref>{{CriticalWork:Dehlin:Questions and Answers:25 June 2014}}</ref>

====Joseph made at least one attempt to teach the doctrine, but it was rejected====
Joseph did, however, make an attempt to teach the doctrine to the Saints. When Joseph tried to teach the doctrine, it was rejected by many Saints, including [[Emma_Smith_and_polygamy | Emma]], his wife.  Joseph then began to teach the doctrine privately to those who would obey. A contemporary journal describes the reaction to Joseph's attempt to teach this doctrine:

<blockquote> When the prophet "went to his dinner," [Joseph Lee] Robinson wrote, "as it might be expected several of the first women of the church collected at the Prophet’s house with his wife [and] said thus to the prophet Joseph O mister Smith you have done it now it will never do it is all but Blassphemy you must take back what you have said to day is it is outrageous it would ruin us as a people." So in the afternoon session Smith again took the stand, according to Robinson, and said "Brethren and Sisters I take back what we said this morning and leave it as though there had been nothing said."<ref>Richard S. Van Wagoner, ''Mormon Polygamy: A History'' (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1986),48; citing Robinson, Journal, 23&ndash;24.</ref></blockquote>
}}
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Why did Joseph keep the doctrine of plural marriage private?===
| state = closed
| content = 
====The Saints would have suffered negative consequences====
Keeping the doctrine private was also necessary because the enemies of the Church would have used it as another justification for their assault on the Saints.  Orson Hyde looked back on the Nauvoo days and indicated what the consequences of disclosure would have been:

<blockquote>
In olden times they might have passed through the same circumstances as some of the Latter-day Saints had to in Illinois. What would it have done for us, if they had known that many of us had more than one wife when we lived in Illinois? They would have broken us up, doubtless, worse than they did.<ref>{{JDfairwiki|author=Orson Hyde|title=The Marriage Relations|date=6 October 1854|vol=2|disc=18|start=75|end=75}}</ref>
</blockquote>

It is thus important to realize that the public preaching of polygamy&mdash;or announcing it to the general Church membership, thereby informing the public by proxy&mdash;was simply not a feasible plan.
}}
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Why did Joseph Smith say "I had not been married scarcely five minutes...before it was reported that I had seven wives"?===
| state = closed
| content
====William and Wilson Law sought to have Joseph indicted for adultery and perjury====
This statement refers to Joseph's well-known declaration on 26 May 1844 in his "Address of the Prophet—His Testimony Against the Dissenters at Nauvoo". Significantly, this address was given the day after William and Wilson Law sought to have Joseph indicted for adultery in the case of Maria Lawrence. (They also sought to indict him on a charge of perjury.)

Many have criticized or been concerned by the secrecy with which Joseph instituted plural marriage without appreciating the realities of the dangers involved. Illinois law only criminalized adultery or fornication if it was "open". Since Joseph was sealed to his plural wives for either eternity, or for time and eternity, he did not view these relationships as constituting adultery or fornication. Therefore, under Illinois law, as long as Joseph and his plural wives did not live in an "open," or "public," manner, they were not guilty of breaking any civil law then in force in Illinois. Furthermore, this reality explains some of Joseph's public denials, since he could be truthfully said to not be guilty of the charges leveled against him: he was not committing adultery or fornication.

====Joseph was refuting the charge of ''adultery'', not the fact that he had "seven wives"====
''History of The Church'' 6:410-411:
<blockquote>
<span style="color:blue">I had not been married scarcely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives.</span> I mean to live and proclaim the truth as long as I can.

<span style="color:red">This new holy prophet [William Law] has gone to Carthage and swore that I had told him that I was guilty of adultery. This spiritual wifeism!</span> Why, a man dares not speak or wink, for fear of being accused of this.<ref>Note that "spiritual wifeism" likely refers to [[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett's]] pattern of seduction and sexual license, which the Saints were always at pains to deny.</ref>....

<span style="color:blue">A man asked me whether the commandment was given that a man may have seven wives; and now the new prophet has charged me with adultery. I never had any fuss with these men until that Female Relief Society brought out the paper against adulterers and adulteresses.</span>

Dr. Goforth was invited into the Laws' clique, and Dr. Foster and the clique were dissatisfied with that document,<ref>That is, the Relief Society document condemning adultery, which Foster had engaged in under the tutelage of [[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]].</ref> and they rush away and leave the Church, and conspire to take away my life; and because I will not countenance such wickedness,<ref>Again, Joseph is denying the spiritual wifeism of Bennett, which he calls "wickedness" and was quick to oppose via Church discipline.</ref> they proclaim that I have been a true prophet, but that I am now a fallen prophet.

[Joseph H.] Jackson<ref>Jackson was another witness against Joseph Smith, and would go on to write an anti-Mormon tract: {{CriticalWork:Jackson:Narrative}}</ref> has committed murder, robbery, and perjury; and I can prove it by half-a-dozen witnesses. Jackson got up and said—"By God, he is innocent," and now swears that I am guilty. He threatened my life.

There is another Law, not the prophet, who was cashiered for dishonesty and robbing the government. <span style="color:red">Wilson Law also swears that I told him I was guilty of adultery.</span> Brother Jonathan Dunham can swear to the contrary. I have been chained. I have rattled chains before in a dungeon for the truth's sake. I am innocent of all these charges, and you can bear witness of my innocence, for you know me yourselves.

When I love the poor, I ask no favors of the rich. I can go to the cross—I can lay down my life; but don't forsake me. I want the friendship of my brethren.—Let us teach the things of Jesus Christ. Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a downfall.

Be meek and lowly, upright and pure; render good for evil. If you bring on yourselves your own destruction, I will complain. It is not right for a man to bare down his neck to the oppressor always. Be humble and patient in all circumstances of life; we shall then triumph more gloriously. <span style="color:blue">What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one.</span>

I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and <span style="color:red">I can prove them all perjurers.</span> I labored with these apostates myself until I was out of all manner of patience; and then I sent my brother Hyrum, whom they virtually kicked out of doors.<ref>{{HoC|vol=6|pages=410-412}}</ref>
</blockquote>

Note the rejection of the term "spiritual wifeism". Note that "spiritual wifeism" likely refers to [[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett's]] pattern of seduction and sexual license, which the Saints were always at pains to deny.

====Joseph was not merely bluffing, nor was he lying—he literally could prove that the Laws were perjuring themselves on this point====

In light of the circumstances under which they were spoken, Joseph's words were carefully chosen. Joseph was not merely bluffing, nor was he lying&mdash;he literally ''could'' prove that the Laws were perjuring themselves on this point in the charges brought only the day before.

Bradshaw cites a portion of Joseph's above statement, and then concludes:

<blockquote>A review of Joseph's remarks in light of the circumstances under which they were spoken shows that Joseph's words were carefully chosen. In this speech, Joseph was specifically reacting to the indictments for perjury and adultery that were presented by the grand jury the day earlier. Thus, when Joseph affirmed during the same speech: "I am innocent of all these charges," he was in particular refuting a claim that he and Maria [Lawrence] had openly and notoriously cohabitated, thus committing the statutory offense of adultery. He was also refuting the perjury charge. While the overall tone of Joseph's remarks may seem misleading, it is understandable that Joseph would have taken pains to dodge the plural marriage issue. By keeping his plural marriages in Nauvoo secret, Joseph effectively kept them legal, at least under the Illinois adultery statute.<ref name="defining">{{Article:Bradshaw:Defining Adultery/Full title|pages=}}</ref>{{Rp|413}}
</blockquote>
}}
{{endnotes sources}}