Polygamy: a Godly Act or One Driven by Lust

One of the most known traditions of Mormons that is known to many is the practice of polygamy, a practice that has forever tainted Mormonism since its arrival. Joseph Smith experienced numerous conflicted feelings on the subject that is made apparent in both Richard Bushman's Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling and Linda King Newell's and Valeen Avery's Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith. Though the two works focus on Joseph Smith's history and motivational purposes behind polygamy, the two pieces take on contradicting analyses of the tradition and its origins.

In Bushman's Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, the perspective of the work takes on a more personalized tone directed towards Smith and his personal experiences and emotions as he came upon his revelations of polygamy. This piece focuses primarily on the devotion that Smith possessed in order to continue on with his new found, mandatory act of plural marriages. Smith's conflicted emotions on the subject are made apparent as he continuously disputes his actions with his wife and hides the numerous marriages he obtains. Throughout Bushman's piece, Smith's reasoning for committing polygamy is intensified and mentions numerous times in order to convince readers that his actions were purely religiously driven and lack any form of lust or even a love connection between himself and his wives aside from Emma. Also, Emma;s true character in this piece is made out to be an unreasonable jealous person while portraying Smith as an innocent, devout messenger from God.

In Linda King Newell's and Valeen Avery's Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, the approach used is a more modern, feminist driven analysis on the subject of polygamy and Smith's history concerning it. Smith is made out to be a lustful man who disregarded the conflict that his practice of polygamy created in society simply because he wanted numerous wives as opposed to the contrasting, strictly religious motives offered in Bushman's piece. Emma's disapproval of the practiced was justified and made very apparent in this piece as well, making Joseph seem like a selfish, uncaring husband.

Discussion Questions:

1.) Smith acknowledges the controversy that his new practice conjures up in both pieces, yet he continues marrying numerous women for varying reasons. The causes of the mysterious destruction of his revelations permitting this act are unknown but one this for certain: "If Emma destroyed the document, she did so with Joseph's permission" (Avery). Why do you believe the act of polygamy, which was encouraged as a part of salvation, was completely dismissed upon the destruction of the written document as opposed to being revived? Especially if Smith claimed that he would be punished by an angel if he did not practice polygamy?

2.) In both pieces, it is made apparent that Emma was very independent on her thoughts about Smith's practices as she focused on one in particular; polygamy. Why do you believe Smith took all of the trouble that she put him through when he had numerous wives that he could easily have left her for? Why did he devote all of his time and attention to Emma and her kids while basically ignoring his other wives?

Interpreting Joseph Smith on Polygamy

Richard Bushman, author of Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, and Linda Newell and Valeen Avery, authors of Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, wrote concerning the beginnings of polygamy in the Church of the Latter Day Saints. The two pieces take from the same reservoir of historical information, as evidenced by several of the exact same quotes, for example: “I have placed my life in your hands therefore do not in an evil hour betray me to my enemies” (Bushman, 95) (Avery, 438). However the perspectives and the interpretations of personal accounts and research varies dramatically between the two pieces. The portrayal of Joseph Smith in relation to polygamy displays the authors’ different opinions.

Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith disparages Joseph from the very beginning of chapter seven. The authors suggest that Smith practiced and taught polygamy even though he was aware that it might destroy his people and cause his own death. Smith’s continuation of the practice while knowing the consequences seems to imply that he knew he was doing something wrong, especially since he initially kept Emma from knowing about his other wives. The authors also conjecture about the causes for Smith to institute polygamy. They mention rumors such as that Smith was a “brilliant imposter”, that he had an “insatiable sexual drive”, and that “Emma was frigid and unresponsive” (Avery, 97). None of these speculations were discredited, leaving the readers to wonder if Smith really was an egotistical selfish womanizer. The bare presence of these rumors in a historical piece displays the low opinion that the writers had concerning Smith on the subject of polygamy.

Both pieces of literature concede that historians don’t agree on the number of wives Joseph had. They both put forth different figures. Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith suggests 27, 48 or 84, which are really high. Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling presents that the number of wives probably ranged between 28 and 33, a conservative estimate in comparison to the other book’s numbers.

Bushman treats Joseph Smith more kindly. He presents the idea that Smith felt forced to marry additional women because an angel threatened to slay him with a sword. By Bushman’s accounts Smith is to be pitied; he is risking his marriage, his followers, and his freedom to follow God’s will and marry more women. The author specifically mentions that Smith did not marry women for their bodies and that his bond with them was “impersonal” (Bushman, 440). This suggests that Smith simply treated a marriage with his other wives as a business transaction and that nothing too untoward occurred. Bushman does not judge Smith harshly for proposing and partaking in polygamy; he takes a more understanding stance to the issue.

On a side note, I find it very interesting that the historical piece, which is extremely critical of Joseph Smith and plural marriages was written by women; whereas, a male wrote the book which treats Smith more gently concerning polygamy.

Questions:

1) Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling discusses at length Joseph Smith’s reluctance to take on plural wives. Morman Enigma: Emma Hale Smith mentions how Emma must have felt on various occasions. However historical proof of feelings and emotions is lacking and what exists can be open to interpretation. In your opinion how does an author prove the thoughts and feelings of another person? How much evidence is needed to support the author’s proposal? Is it impossible to prove conclusively people’s thoughts and emotions (such as Emma and Joseph Smith’s on polygamy)?

2) A strong bond exists between Emma and Joseph. Emma was the most influential person in Joseph’s life. They cared for each other deeply as evidenced by small actions such as Joseph asking a family to let Emma to take care of their daughter in order to cheer Emma up. If Joseph Smith believed that his and Emma’s marriage would end at death, then why did he wait so long to seal Emma “for time and all eternity”?

The Interplay between the Bible and The Book of Mormon

The Christian Bible is unequivocally the most significant text ever authored based solely on the sheer volume of individuals that have been exposed to its influence. Reproduced in more languages and greater quantities than any other single book in human history, the Bible has become a largely ubiquitous concept, regardless of religious tradition or physical location. In some circumstances with appropriate societal stimuli, such as the nineteenth century New England ripe with Revolution ideals, a feverous religious ethos is the consequence of a biblical super-saturated populace.

In the excerpt from Philip L. Barlow’s book "Mormons and the Bible: the Place of the Latter-day Saints in American Religion", the religious scholar considers the indirect impact of the Bible on Joseph Smith’s formative period and how this directly affects the Book of Mormon. Beyond determining that Smith had definitively read some portion of the Bible, and was thus familiar with some essential scriptures, prior to his dictation of the Book of Mormon, Barlow focuses on the myriad ways the Bible ultimately affected the Prophet and are expressed in his “third testament” (Barlow, 40). Barlow posits that it was not the physical or intellectual act of reading the Bible that profoundly affected Smith’s dictation. Instead, the historian argues that the ethos created by the ubiquity of the Bible is subtly manifested in the Book of Mormon. For example, the religious language Smith uses subconsciously throughout the text is based on popular vernacular that has integrated biblical vocabulary.

Barlow identifies and explicates parallels and discontinuities between the King James Version of the Bible and the Book of Mormon to highlight subtly biblical influences in the latter text. Fundamentally, the Book of Mormon is intended as a “restoration of the truths, ordinances, and priesthood of all eras or ‘dispensations’, including Old Testament” to the pure state of Christianity, and a fairly high degree of correlation between the texts is expected (18). However, Barlow maintains that both parallels and discontinuities belie biblical influence. Parallels demonstrate the inseparability of biblical Christianity from the Smith’s worldview. Deviations from the King James Version are indicative of Smith’s dissatisfaction and desire to return the scripture to its accurate condition. Additionally, Barlow addresses an anomalous aspect of Smith’s amendments compared to other religious texts: being that Smith directly inserts himself into the Book of Mormon. The Prophet includes his existence and even attempts to define himself and his work as the realization of various biblical prophesies. The Second Book of Nephi, Chapter 29, explicitly addresses the creation of texts such as the Book of Mormon while the Fourth Nephi, Chapter 1, Verse 49, alludes to the creation of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith.

The excerpts from Barlow and the Book of Mormon raise several questions regarding the true nature of the interplay between the Bible and the Book of Mormon. Is the Book of Mormon an independent “restoration” of the true words of God, as claimed by Joseph Smith? Or is the Book of Mormon a byproduct of the Bible saturated ethos that conditioned Joseph Smith? Neither question addresses the veracity of the contents of the Book of Mormon or the Bible; responses should consider historical and linguistic analyses. Additionally, what does Joseph Smith's inclusion of himself in the Book of Mormon indicate about Joseph Smith?

The Book of Mormon: Biblically Inspired, Divinely Guided

Everything we create possesses unique qualities and characteristics; however, nothing we create stands alone. We continuously borrow from other sources: we expand and reflect existing works. The process of writing does not fail to do this. Writers gather and blend the ideas, language, and themes from existing passages to develop their own distinctive text.

Academic writers are no exception to this particular practice. According to Joseph Harris in the introduction of his writing handbook Rewriting, academic writers constantly respond, by rewriting and reinterpreting, to the established texts. In his first chapter, “Coming to Terms,” of his writers’ manual, Harris didactically elaborates in plain language on this practice of borrowing and responding to academic prose. When incorporating an existing text in one’s own writing, Harris proposes that one must first “come to terms” with the text. In other words, one must define the purpose, note key words and passages, and assess the limitations and positive characteristics of the established work. When borrowing from another source, complete understanding of the initial work becomes necessary.

Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon faith, certainly borrowed from existing works when writing his religious text, the Book of Mormon. According to Phillip Barlow, author of Mormons and the Bible: The Place of the Latter-day Saints in American Religion, Smith lived and breathed in the Bible-saturated culture of Western New York. Barlow claims that Smith frequently read the King James Bible and was perhaps more aware of the Bible’s contents, messages, and language than historians previously have guessed. Smith’s exposure to the King James Bible certainly reveals itself when reading the Book of Mormon. In the first chapter of his book, Barlow first analyzes the process and timeline by which Smith created his religious work. Barlow then methodically connects particular elements of the King James Bible and the Book of Mormon. The language, events, and themes of the Book of Mormon strongly reflect those of the King James Bible; however, Smith, in the writing of the Book of Mormon, altered some grammatical and lexical elements of the King James Bible, a fact which Barlow demonstrates by placing together almost identical passages from the King James Bible and the Book of Mormon and highlighting the differences and similarities between the two texts.

The similarities of between the Book of Mormon and the King James Bible highlighted in Barlow’s Mormons and the Bible: The Place of the Latter-day Saints in American Religion become even more apparent when reading the selections from the Book of Mormon. These particular collections historically chronicle the lives and fates of Nephi and his descendents as they flee Jerusalem, receive messages from the Lord, begin and end cycles of wickedness, and search for the Promised Land. Written in 17^th century prose and filled with noted biblical language, the selections closely parallel the well-known stories in the King James Bible, including, among others, the destruction of Jerusalem, Jesus’ birth, and the Lord’s Prayer. Smith’s employment of elements from the King James Bible both legitimizes and simplifies his own work for his Christian audience.

Questions for Discussion:

1. How did Smith explain some of the discrepancies between the Book of Mormon and the King James Bible? Why did Smith choose to do this?

2. While the events portrayed in the selections from the Book of Mormon occur in the late first century B.C. and early first century A.D., do elements of Smith’s 19^th century culture appear to influence the Book of Mormon?

3. Why did Smith choose to write in 17^th century prose? Does this make the work more “legitimate”?

4. The Book of Mormon was advertised as a companion to the Bible. Is it possible to fully understand the Book of Mormon without reading the Bible? Can the Book of Mormon stand alone as a religious work?

Emergence of Mormonisn

The two passages, “Joseph Smith — History” and “Mormonism: The Story of a New Religious Tradition,” both tell of the origins of the Mormon religion. Nevertheless, they address the topic in two completely different ways. The former is Joseph Smith, Jr.’s first-hand account of his upbringing, work and persecution. On the surface, it is merely a retelling of the events leading to the foundation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but under closer inspection, the reader can see Smith’s appeal to nonbelievers to consider the religion. He includes such details as his own indecision and alienation to make the religion more accessible. By mentioning his own hardships, he seeks to prove that believers in his faith are no different than mainstream Protestants; if the founder, a man gifted with God’s work, suffers from human troubles, so must the others. Smith likewise elaborates on his visions. His vivid imagery is there to reinforce the idea that these scenes are not mere hallucinations but visions detailing his task before God. All in all, the piece elucidates the origins of the religion in order to bring acceptance from nonbelievers of that time period.

Contrariwise, the second piece summarizes Smith’s role in the creation of the religion while drawing upon modern interpretation of historic events and their influences on Smith. Ian Shipps, the author, gives the reader perspective: he really puts the founding of the religion into context. He considers the mentality of the era, dwelling on the common view of the time period, which was that the world had already been enlightened by science. He states that others regarded the Mormon movement as superstitious and thus a threat to the educated world. Of course, such a benighted view lead to an irrational fear and ironically actions that would threaten a civilized world. Shipps then hones his historical microscope in on the actual environment Smith developed his ideas in. He looks at the consequences of Smith’s upbringing and the religious landscape of the second Great Awakening’s Burned-over District. He suggests that without this environment Smith could not have founded the Mormon religion, for without the religious supersaturation Smith would not have questioned and searched for his beliefs, and without his supportive family he probably would not have set out on his endeavor.

In conclusion, both works examined the birth of Mormonism; however, they possess different focuses. Keeping that in mind, what do you think is the difference between a historical view looking back to the birth of Mormonism and a real time period view? Also, consider Joseph Smith for who he is. How would he be different if he had been born into different circumstances (ie. lacking the Enlightenment culture, religious upheaval and loving family) and still had his visions? How would the modern world be different in light of that?

On a less serious note, can we just say that I think this is a really weird facial expression? Is he smiling or is he not? Joseph Smith might be the new Mona Lisa. http://www.mormontemples.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/joseph-smith.jpg

Emergence of Mormonism---Dual Views

The burgeoning of Mormonism is viewed both canonically and historically in the two assigned reading documents, “Joseph Smith---History” by Joseph Smith and “Mormonism: The Story of A New Religious Tradition” by Jan Shipps. The first, “Joseph Smith ­---History” are excerpts from Smith’s autobiographical account as the prophet regarding the origins of Mormonism. This explains the rationale behind the Mormon faith by the creator of the sect, and allows us to consider the Mormon faith from the Latter Day Saints’ perspective. This shift from the general public’s paradigm allows bilateral analysis of the emergence of Mormonism, especially due to the negative media Mormonism receives over faith-based controversies. “History” provides a detailed account of Smith’s visions and ensuing persecution, which relates his experience with those of biblical prophets such as Paul, similarly harassed for their beliefs. The visions are described with formal prose closely imitating the Bible, while the imagery associated with divine beings also match traditional biblical descriptions. Such theological details strengthen the faith of LDS as the prose helps to legitimize their belief.

In “Mormonism”, the early history of the LDS is detailed through a more historical-documentary manner than “History”. In terms of bias, though the author Jan Shipps is a scholar in Mormon history, she is not a LDS which credits her work with more impartiality. Historically, “’inside’ and ‘outside’ perceptions of what was happening differed at practically every point in LDS history.” This means that both sides contribute significant bias to chronicles of major events, thus making it hard to distinguish the truth behind the words. To holistically approach the beginnings of Mormonism through the life of Joseph Smith, Shipps detailed and analyzed his family life and history to better understand the environment that raised a future prophet. Many of the facts revolving around Mormonism’s humble beginnings were unearthed and disparities between them and Mormon accounts of the story can be used to evaluate the merit behind the statements made by both.

The spiritual condition of America during Smith’s visions was highly volatile, even fanatically zealous. Smith introduced his new beliefs in the midst of the Second Great Awakening (1790 to 1840’s), and so was naturally greatly distrusted by the general public and prominent religious figures. In the battle of sects, Smith’s intention to purify Christian belief by introducing an entirely new sect doomed his nascent faith to slander and persecution. Although people were widely returning to church, it created tension between church leaders as each fought for popularity, influence and new converts. And as suggested by “Mormonism”, the progression of scientific enlightenment and Protestant Reformation did not lend much credibility to Smith’s visions, nor did its church hierarchy reminiscent of the public of oppressive medieval feudalism improve its cultural image.

In your opinion, what is the effect of early adversity on the Mormons? What disparities do you think are most significant between Smith’s “Histories” and Shipps’ book? Why do you think these disparities are significant? What do you think is the most important reason why Mormonism was so persecuted in the early days?