Criticism of Mormonism/Books/No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith/Chapter 11

Table of Contents

Response to claims made in "Chapter 11: Patronage and Punishment"

A FairMormon Analysis of: No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith, a work by author: Fawn Brodie
Claim Evaluation
No Man Knows My History
Chart.brodie.ch11.jpg

Response to claims made in No Man Knows My History, "Chapter 11: Patronage and Punishment"

Jump to Subtopic:


Response to claim: 159 - Zion's Camp was a "major failure" for Joseph Smith

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

Zion's Camp was a "major failure" for Joseph Smith.

Author's sources:

FairMormon Response

|authorsources=

  1. Author's opinion.

}}

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

Although Zion's Camp failed in its objective to retake land in Missouri, many of the future leaders of the Church were produced from that experience. It was not a "major failure."


Response to claim: 159 - Men and women had died in Missouri Joseph Smith's name

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

Men and women had died in Missouri Joseph Smith's name.

Author's sources:

FairMormon Response

|authorsources=

  1. Author's opinion.

}}

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The members of the Church in Missouri worshipped God, not Joseph Smith. They did not die in his name.


Response to claim: 159 - Joseph decided that he could no longer give out "incidental" revelations after the Missouri trials

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

Joseph decided that he could no longer give out "incidental" revelations after the Missouri trials.

Author's sources:

FairMormon Response

|authorsources=

  1. Author's opinion.

}}

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

Joseph had revelations as they were required, not as a way of controlling people.


Response to claim: 162 - The Kirtland High Council complained that the Apostles had too much power

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

The Kirtland High Council complained that the Apostles had too much power.

Author's sources:
  1. History of the Church 2:240

FairMormon Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The author is quote mining and making something from History of the Church appear to mean something that it doesn't.

History of the Church 2:240 states,

The time has come when we are about to separate, and when we shall meet again, God only knows. We therefore feel to ask him whom we have acknowledged to be our Prophet and Seer that he enquire of God for us and obtain a written revelation (if consistent) that we may look upon it when we are separated, that our hearts may be comforted. Our worthiness has not inspired us to make this request but our unworthiness.

How did the author interpret this to mean that the High Council complained that the Apostles had too much power?

See Quote mining—History of the Church 2:240 to see how this quote was mined.

Quote mining analysis

The quote and its use by the critic(s):

List Actual quote Critical use

*

The time has come when we are about to separate, and when we shall meet again, God only knows. We therefore feel to ask him whom we have acknowledged to be our Prophet and Seer that he enquire of God for us and obtain a written revelation (if consistent) that we may look upon it when we are separated, that our hearts may be comforted. Our worthiness has not inspired us to make this request but our unworthiness.

The Kirtland High Council complained that the Apostles had too much power.

Analysis

  • The complaint is not that the Twelve have too much power, but that they are not conducting themselves as they ought to, and that the wrong impression is being given to the scattered branches of the church through with whom the Twelve are working.


Response to claim: 162 - Henry Green was cut off from the church simply because of a remark made that Joseph was "extorting" the cost of a book

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

Henry Green was cut off from the church simply because of a remark made that Joseph was "extorting" the cost of a book.

Author's sources:

FairMormon Response

|authorsources=

  1. History of the Church 2:275

}}

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

From the minutes of the High Council hearing, the case of Henry Green appears to be more complex than the author is stating. He was not excommunicated from the Church simply because he made a remark.

Minutes of a High Council Held in Kirtland, September 16th, 1835.

The trial of Elder Henry Green—Sidney Rigdon, Oliver Cowdery and Frederick G. Williams presiding.

A complaint was preferred by President Joseph Smith, Jun., against Brother Henry Green, for accusing President Joseph Smith, Jun., "of rebuking Brother Aldridge wrongfully, and under the influence of an evil spirit."

Brother Green being absent, President Rigdon arose and said, that it was the decision of the Presidency, that the Council proceed to examine the charge preferred, because Brother Green had been regularly summoned by himself.

The Council appointed one to speak on each side; after which the following testimony was heard:

Elder Sylvester Smith testified that Brother Green, on Monday morning last, said that Brother Aldridge was justified in what he said, and that Presidents Joseph and Hyrum Smith were wrong in abusing the old man; and after Elder Smith explained the matter to him, said, that if any man should do so by him, he should call him a scoundrel; and that he should say that any man who would talk as Joseph did, must have the devil in him.

Elder Lorin Babbitt said he was present when the above conversation took place, and heard a considerable part of it, and fully concurred in the statement of Elder Smith; and he heard Brother Green say, previous to the above talk, that although they accused Brother Aldridge of having an evil spirit, yet, if the truth were known, the devil was in them, (namely, Presidents Joseph and Hyrum); for if any man should ask my opinion, and then abuse me in that way, I should call him a scoundrel or a knave.

President Cowdery stated to the Council, that Brother Aldridge was not called upon to give his opinion concerning the book, but said what he did without being called upon to speak; for the book was only handed to him and others to look at, that they might see the quality and goodness.

President Joseph Smith arose and stated that he knew that Brother Aldridge was under the influence of an evil spirit, and had been for a long time.

Councilor Orson Johnson also said that he knew that this was so, by what he had seen and learned, and that he had heard from credible authority, that the old gentleman had been in the habit, for a long time, of neglecting prayer and family worship.

Councilor Samuel H. Smith said, that President Joseph Smith was in the line of his duty when he reproved Brother Aldridge for his evil; and, consequently, Brother Green must have been wrong in opposing him, and saying he [Joseph] acted like a scoundrel, and that the devil was in him.

[Page 275]

Councilor Levi Jackman said that Brother Green could not be justified in opposing the servant of the Lord, while in the actual discharge of his duty, and that it was evident that Satan hath sought to make divisions in the Church, and had taken advantage of the occasion of presenting the book, to do this.

The book referred to, was purchased for recording "The Patriarchal Blessings."

President Frederick G. Williams said, that the wickedness of Brother Green in condemning President Smith is evident from the testimony; and that Brother Aldridge also did act foolishly, and by the influence of a wrong spirit, in questioning the integrity of the head of the Church, in the purchase of the book, and that President Smith was and is justifiable in doing as he has done in the matter, and should not be censured, as he has been by Brother Green.

President Oliver Cowdery then arose, and showed, by a few plain remarks who Satan had sought, from the beginning, to destroy the Book of Mormon; and in order to do this, had been actually levelling his shafts against the servants of God, who were called to bring it forth and bear testimony of it to the world; and now had sought occasion against the servants of God, in tempting brethren to say they had equivocated in the price of the record book, which was presented last Sabbath; and that Brother Aldridge, and perhaps others, fell under this evil influence, and Brother Green justifies them in this thing, and condemns President Smith, and is not, and ought not to be justified in so doing.

President Cowdery went on to show that the book was purchased as cheap as it could be, and was actually worth what was given for it, namely, twelve dollars.

Elder Cahoon requested leave to interrupt President Cowdery a moment, to inform the Council that, a moment before, Brother Green passed the house, and when the speaker told him the Council was considering his case, and requested him to come in, he said he should go about his own business, so went on his way regardless of the Council.

President Cowdery resumed, showing that the design of Brother Aldridge, or at least of the spirit that was in him, was to destroy the character of the heads of the Church, by charging that we intended to speculate out of the brethren, and extort from them more than the cost of the book; and now, instead of regarding our feeling, he disregards us altogether, and shows that he has no faith in the High Council.

[Page 276]

Soon afterwards Brother Green came in, and said that he had been detained longer than he intended, having been to Chagrin on business, and had to deliver the horse and harness to the owner before he could attend the Council.

President Rigdon then arose and decided that Brother Green should not have been hindered from being here, by any other business; and if so, he should have notified the Council, and requested an adjournment.

President Cowdery then observed, that he thought the case sufficiently brought before the Council, and would say no more. And President Rigdon proceeded to give his decision—that Brother Green should have gone, if he were grieved with President Smith, and told him of his difficulty, and should not have said anything about it to his neighbor. And again, that Mr. Aldridge, as has been shown, has been guilty of neglecting his prayers before God, and therefore has not had the Spirit of God to preserve him from the temptations of Satan, and has fallen into evil, and actually did do wrong in raising objections to the price of the book presented last Sabbath, and was under the influence of an evil spirit.

Brother Green fellowships the evil spirit in Brother Aldridge, and says he is justified in what he has done, and therefore it is evident that an evil spirit is reigning in the breast of Brother Green. And it is also as evident, that President Joseph Smith, Jun., was justified in rebuking that evil spirit, and it was not only justifiable in President Smith to rebuke that evil spirit, but it was also his duty as President and First High Priest in the Church of Christ, appointed of God to lead the same in all righteousness.

The decision, then, of the Presidency of the High Council is, in short, that Brother Green be and is now, excluded from this Church, and shall be a member no more, until he comes in by the ordinance of baptism, as appointed by the Gospel, to be done in the Church.

This was agreed to by all the Councilors except Joseph Coe, who queried whether Mr. Green should not have the privilege of confessing his faults, and still be retained in the Church. He therefore thought that it was the privilege of Brother Green to have a reorganization of the Council, and a rehearing. This was about to be granted and the council to be adjourned till tomorrow, but Councilor Coe requested some explanation from the President, and was instructed as follows:—

"When a serious offense is committed, and indignity offered to the High Council, then it is the privilege of the Presidency of the High Council to stamp it with indignation under foot, and cut off the offender as in the case just decided."

Councilor Coe then withdrew his objection to the decision of the Presidency, which was acknowledged by the whole house, and council adjourned. [1]

[Page 277]

Sylvester Smith, Clerk.

Response to claim: 165 - Joseph was "vain" regarding his "wrestling prowess"

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

Joseph was "vain" regarding his "wrestling prowess."

Author's sources:
  1. Author's opinion.

FairMormon Response

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

This is simply the author's opinion.


Response to claim: 166 - The Word of Wisdom was not given by "commandment or constraint" because Joseph was "too fond of earthly pleasures"

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

The Word of Wisdom was not given by "commandment or constraint" because Joseph was "too fond of earthly pleasures."

Author's sources:

FairMormon Response

|authorsources=

  1. Author's opinion.

}}

Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader

The author is reading Joseph's mind.


Response to claim: 167 - Joseph did not take the Word of Wisdom seriously

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

Joseph did not take the Word of Wisdom seriously.

Author's sources:
  1. Author's opinion.

FairMormon Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The author does not understand how the Word of Wisdom was initially regarded by Joseph Smith and other Latter-day Saints. It was much less strict at the time.


Question: In what way did Joseph Smith implement the Word of Wisdom during his lifetime?

Joseph Smith never interpreted the Word of Wisdom revelation as demanding total abstinence

The Word of Wisdom was enforced differently in the 19th century than today. Observance of the Word of Wisdom has changed over time, due to on-going revelation from modern-day prophets, who put greater emphasis on certain elements of the revelation originally given to Joseph Smith. Early Latter-day Saints were not under the same requirements as today's Saints are.

Latter-Day Saints believe that the Lord reveals his will to men "line upon line, precept upon precept," (Isaiah 28:10,13 and others) and that revelation continues as circumstances change.

As one historian noted:

it appears clear that Joseph Smith never interpreted the [Word of Wisdom] revelation as demanding total abstinence, but stressed moderation and self-control....He had no objections to using tobacco for medicinal purposes. With regard to wine and "strong drink" possibly the most accurate index to the Prophet's position was expressed by Benjamin F. Johnson, who personally knew Joseph: "As a companion, socailly, he was highly endowed; was kind, generous, mirth loving, and a times even convivial. He was partial to a well supplied table and he did not always refuse the wine that maketh the heart glad."[2]

Beer, unfermented or lightly fermented wine, and cider were considered "mild drinks" by some and therefore acceptable under at least some circumstances

The text of the Word of Wisdom forbids "strong drink" (D&C 89:5,7), which some (including Joseph) seem to have interpreted as distilled beverages (hard liquor). Beer, unfermented or lightly fermented wine, and cider were considered "mild drinks" by some (D&C 89:17) and therefore acceptable under at least some circumstances (note that verse 17 specifically permits "barley...for mild drinks"). One historian notes that the degree of rigor with which early Saints observed the Word of Wisdom varied:

[23] While the Saints opposed the common use of tea [24] and coffee, it would appear that they had little objection to its occasional use for medicinal purposes. In an age when these items were frequently used as a relief for a wide variety of ailments, it would have been imprudent to have entirely forbidden their use....

[25] The journal of Joseph Smith reveals many instances where Joseph and other Church leaders drank wine and a tolerant attitude towards the consumption of this beverage is particularly noticeable....

[26] Despite the injunction contained in the revelation discouraging the drinking of wine, (except for sacramental purposes) the casual nature of the allusions to this beverage suggest that many Church Authorities did not consider moderate wine drinking in the same category as the use of strong drinks....

Evidence suggests that the drinking of tea, coffee, and liquor was [in the 1830s] in general violation of the principle [of the Word of Wisdom], though exceptions can be found. All of these items were used by the Saints for medicinal purposes. Moderate wine-drinking was evidently acceptable to most Church leaders....[27] In short, it would seem that adherence to the revelation to at least 1839 required Church members to be moderately temperate but certainly [did] not [require] total abstinence....[3]


Revelations in Context: "it required time to wind down practices that were so deeply ingrained in family tradition and culture"

"The Word of Wisdom: D&C 89," Revelations in context on history.lds.org (11 June 2013):

Nevertheless, it required time to wind down practices that were so deeply ingrained in family tradition and culture, especially when fermented beverages of all kinds were frequently used for medicinal purposes. The term “strong drink” certainly included distilled spirits like whiskey, which hereafter the Latter-day Saints generally shunned. They took a more moderate approach to milder alcoholic beverages like beer and “pure wine of the grape of the vine of your own make” (see D&C 89:6). For the next two generations, Latter-day Saint leaders taught the Word of Wisdom as a command from God, but they tolerated a variety of viewpoints on how strictly the commandment should be observed. This incubation period gave the Saints time to develop their own tradition of abstinence from habit-forming substances. By the early twentieth century, when scientific medicines were more widely available and temple attendance had become a more regular feature of Latter-day Saint worship, the Church was ready to accept a more exacting standard of observance that would eliminate problems like alcoholism from among the obedient. In 1921, the Lord inspired Church president Heber J. Grant to call on all Saints to live the Word of Wisdom to the letter by completely abstaining from all alcohol, coffee, tea, and tobacco. Today Church members are expected to live this higher standard.[4]


Response to claim: 167 - Joseph replaced wine with water in the Sacrament because Sidney Rigdon forced a vote for total abstinence through the Church

The author(s) of No Man Knows My History make(s) the following claim:

Joseph replaced wine with water in the Sacrament because Sidney Rigdon forced a vote for total abstinence through the Church.

Author's sources:
  1. Wilford Woodruff's journal, quoted by Matthias F. Cowley in Wilford Woodruff (Salt Lake, 1909), p. 65.

FairMormon Response

Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources

The Church replaced wine with water because Joseph had a revelation which warned him against purchasing wine that was possibly contaminated from their enemies.


Question: Why do Mormons use water instead of wine for their sacrament services?

Latter-day Saints understand and accept the symbolism of wine, as used by the Savior at the Last Supper and in communion services among other Christian churches

Latter-day Saints understand and accept the symbolism of wine, as used by the Savior at the Last Supper and in communion services among other Christian churches. The color of wine closely matches that of blood, and is an apt symbol for the blood of Jesus Christ, shed for the redemption of the human race.

The Latter-day Saint use of water in its sacramental services stems from scriptural authorization given in 1830, followed by an institutional change in the early 20th century.

The Lord provided scriptural authorization to substitute water for wine in the Sacrament

Four months after The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (then called The Church of Christ) was established, Joseph Smith received the following divine manifestation:

Early in the month of August [1830], Newel Knight and his wife paid us a visit, at my place at Harmony, Penn[sylvania]; and as neither his wife nor mine had been as yet confirmed, and it was proposed that we should confirm them, and partake together of the sacrament, before he and his wife should leave us.— In order to prepare for this; I set out to go to procure some wine for the occasion, but had gone but <only> a short distance when I was met by a heavenly messenger, and received the following revelation; the first paragraph of which was written at this time, and the remainder in the September following.

Revelation given at Harmony Penn, August 1830.

1 Listen to the voice of Jesus Christ, your Lord, your God and your redeemer, whose word is quick and powerful. For behold I say unto you, that it mattereth not what ye shall eat, or what you shall drink, when ye partake of the sacrament if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory; remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins: wherefore a commandment I give unto you, that you shall not purchase wine, neither strong drink of your enemies: wherefore you shall partake of none, except it is made new among you, yea, in this my Father’s kingdom which shall be built up on the earth.

2 Behold this is wisdom in me: wherefore marvel not, for the hour cometh that I will drink of the fruit of the vine with you on the earth.[5]

The Lord's revelation that "it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory—remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins" (D&C 27:1-2) gave the Saints permission to substitute any emblems for the original bread and wine, if circumstances warranted.

Beginning in 1902 President Smith began institutional reforms to require greater adherence to the Word of Wisdom

Joseph Smith's revelation of The Word of Wisdom allows for wine to be used for the sacrament: "Inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him. And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make." (D&C 89:5-6, emphasis added.)

Latter-day Saints continued to use wine in their sacramental services throughout the 19th century.[6] During this same time the Word of Wisdom was not enforced as rigorously as it is today, and social drinking of wine and other alcoholic beverages was not uncommon among Latter-day Saints (although leaders often counseled against it).

Various American temperance movements since the mid-18th century had called for a ban on the sale and use of alcohol. The third wave of this movement began in 1893 and culminated with national prohibition in 1919.[7] Among the supporters of complete abstinence were LDS Church Presidents Joseph F. Smith and Heber J. Grant. Beginning in 1902 President Smith began institutional reforms to require greater adherence to the Word of Wisdom. "In keeping with the change in emphasis, the First Presidency and Twelve substituted water for wine in the sacrament in their temple meetings, apparently beginning July 5, 1906."[8] Local Latter-day Saint congregations followed suit soon after, a practice that remains to this day.

Some early Christians used both water and wine in the sacrament

It is noteworthy that some early Christians used both water and wine in the sacrament. Justin Martyr (ca. 140 A.D.) recorded:

On Sunday we hold a meeting in one place for all who live in the cities or the country nearby. The teachings of the Apostles or the writings of the prophets are read as long as time is available. When the reader has finished, the president gives a talk urging and inviting us to imitate all these good examples. We then all stand together and send up our prayers. As noted before, bread, wine and water is brought forth after our prayer. The president also sends up prayers and thanksgivings. The people unitedly give their consent by saying, "Amen." The administration takes place, and each one receives what has been blessed with gratefulness. The deacons also administer to those not present... We all choose Sunday for our communal gathering because it is the first day, on which God created the universe by transforming the darkness and the basic elements, and because Jesus Christ—our Redeeming Savior—rose from the dead on the same day.[9]

This practice was also mentioned by Pope Julius I (A.D. 337) in a decree which stated: "But if necessary let the cluster be pressed into the cup and water mingled with it."[10] This practice of mixing wine and water may be related to the fact that both blood and water were shed on the cross. John recorded that, "one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water" (John 19:34). John later recorded that, "there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one" (1 Jn. 5:8). In like manner baptism by water was also related by Paul to Christ's death (Romans 6:3-5).

Samuele Bacchiocchi, a non-Mormon scholar, has observed that

An investigation... of such Jewish Christian sects as the Ebionites, the Nazarenes, the Elkesaites, and the Encratites, might provide considerable support for abstinence from fermented wine in the Apostolic Church. The fact that some of these sects went to the extreme of rejecting altogether both fermented and unfermented wine using only water, even in the celebration of the Lord's Supper, suggests the existence of a prevailing concern for abstinence in the Apostolic Church.[11]

It also suggests that early Christians understood that "it mattereth not what ye shall eat or drink when [partaking] of the sacrament" (D&C 27:1-2).

Later developments in Christianity: Some Christians felt it was permissible to modify the observance of the sacrament even without direction from the Lord

Catholics at a much later period also substituted the Eucharist for the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper, believing that it would literally be turned into the flesh and blood of the Lord.[12]

Although the latter practice was introduced during a period of what the LDS understand to be the apostasy from the fulness of gospel doctrine and authority, it nonetheless shows that some Christians felt it was permissible to modify the observance of the sacrament even without direction from the Lord.

The LDS sacrament service is observed often and within the guidelines given by the Lord as prescribed in LDS scriptures (See John 6:53-54; Acts 2:46; Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 11:23-30; Moroni 4-5:; D&C 20:75-79; 27:1-4). Early Christian practices are useful illustrations of the fact that LDS practice is not foreign to Christianity generally, but the LDS rely on scripture and the teachings of modern prophets for their forms of worship.

Latter-day Saints emphatically affirm our reliance on the atoning blood of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins

Latter-day Saints emphatically affirm our reliance on the atoning blood of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins as attested to in the Bible (Colossians 1:14; 1 Peter 1:18-19; 1 Jn 1:7;Revelation 7:14) and modern scripture (1 Nephi 12:10; Mosiah 3:7,11; 4:2; Alma 5:21,27; 21:9;24:13; 34:36; Helaman 27:19; Ether 13:10; Moroni 4:1;5:2; 10:33; D&C 20:40; 27:2; 76:69; Moses 6:62).[13]

Even the sacrament prayer given at the beginning of the administration of the water affirms the symbolism of the atoning blood. It states in part: "... bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them..." (D&C 20:79).


Notes

  1. History of the Church 2:274-277.
  2. Paul H. Peterson, "An Historical Analysis of the Word of Wisdom," Master's thesis, Brigham Young University, 1972, 38. The cited material is [Letter from BF Johnson to George F. Gibbs, 1903.]
  3. Paul H. Peterson, "An Historical Analysis of the Word of Wisdom," Master's thesis, Brigham Young University, 1972. Page numbers cited within text.
  4. "The Word of Wisdom: D&C 89," Revelations in context on history.lds.org (11 June 2013)
  5. History, circa June 1839–circa 1841 (Draft 2): 51–52 (cf. History of the Church 1:106–07). The shorter version of this revelation—now canonized as D&C 27:1-5—was first recorded in the early 1830s in Revelation Book 1: 35–36, then published in 1833 in The Evening and the Morning Star 1/10 (March 1833) and in The Book of Commandments as chapter XXVIII (p. 60). It was combined with another revelation and published in a longer version in 1835 as Doctrine and Covenants chapter L (pp. 179–81) and in an expanded reprint of Evening and Morning Star 1/10 (March 1833; reprinted May 1836): 155. The longer (1835) version is now D&C 27.
  6. In 1861 Brigham Young sent 309 Mormon families to settle in Utah's "Dixie" region, where they would produce, among other crops, wine for the sacrament. (Leonard J. Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom: An Economic History of the Latter-day Saints, 1830–1900 [Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1958]: 216.) President Young remarked publicly that he "anticipate[d] the day when we can have the privilege of using, at our sacraments pure wine, produced within our borders." ("Remarks by President Brigham Young, Tabernacle, G[reat].S[alt].L[ake]. City, June 4, 1864," The Deseret News 13/39 (22 June 1864): 302. off-site link.) By the 1870s Church vineyards were producing "as much as 3,000 gallons per year," however, "by the turn of the [20th] century, most of the vines had been pulled on the advice of church authorities…" (Great Basin Kingdom, 222).
  7. See "Temperance movement in the United States." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 4 January 2016. off-site link
  8. Thomas G. Alexander, "The Word of Wisdom: From Principle to Requirement," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 14/3 (autumn 1981): 79. off-site PDF
  9. Justin Martyr, "First Apology," in ? Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff (Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886)?:65–67. ANF ToC off-site This volume; cited by Kirk Holland Vestal and Arthur Wallace, The Firm Foundation of Mormonism (Los Angeles, CA: The L. L. Company, 1981), 231. ISBN 0937892068.
  10. Gratian, De Consecratione, Pars III, Dist. 2, c. 7, as cited by Leon C. Field, Oinos: A Discussion of the Bible Wine Question (New York, 1883), 91, and Samuele Bacchiocchi, Wine in the Bible : A Biblical Study on the Use of Alcoholic Beverages (Biblical Perspectives, 1989), 109–110. ISBN 1930987072.
  11. Samuele Bacchiocchi, Wine in the Bible : A Biblical Study on the Use of Alcoholic Beverages (Biblical Perspectives, 1989), 181. ISBN 1930987072.
  12. See Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd edition, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), 241. GL direct link or James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of our Fathers (T A N Books & Publishers, 1980), 235–250. ISBN 0895551586.
  13. This wiki article was originally based upon Michael Hickenbotham, Answering Challenging Mormon Questions: Replies to 130 Queries by Friends and Critics of the LDS Church (Horizon Publishers & Distributors, 1995) (now published by Cedar Fort Publisher: Springville, UT, 2004),131–133. ISBN 0882905368. ISBN 0882907786. ISBN 0882907786. It has been subsequently edited by FairMormon Answers wiki editors.