Criticism of Mormonism/Books/No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith/Chapter 13

FAIR Answers—back to home page

Response to claims made in "Chapter 13: My Kingdom is of this World"



A FAIR 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.ch13.jpg

Response to claims made in No Man Knows My History, "Chapter 13: My Kingdom is of this World"


Jump to details:


Response to claim: 181 - Joseph Smith was rumored to have "seduced" Fannie Alger

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

Joseph Smith was rumored to have "seduced" Fannie Alger.

FAIR's 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

Rumors are not facts. There is evidence that this was a plural marriage.


Question: Did Joseph Smith marry Fanny Alger as his first plural wife in 1833?


Jump to details:


Response to claim: 181 - It was rumored that Fannie Alger was driven out of the house by Emma because she was pregnant

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

It was rumored that Fannie Alger was driven out of the house by Emma because she was pregnant.

FAIR's 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

Rumors are not facts. There is no evidence of a pregnancy, although it is likely that Emma drove Fanny out.


Question: Did Fanny Alger have a child by Joseph Smith?


Jump to details:


Response to claim: 181 - It is claimed that Joseph and Fannie were "found together"

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

It is claimed that Joseph and Fannie were "found together."

FAIR's 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

William Law claimed that Emma told him this.


Question: Did Emma Smith discover her husband Joseph with Fanny Alger in a barn?


Jump to details:


Response to claim: 182 - The author claims that Joseph accused Oliver Cowdery of "perpetuating the scandal"

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

The author claims that Joseph accused Oliver Cowdery of "perpetuating the scandal," and that Oliver was excommunicated for "insinuating that the prophet had been guilty of adultery."

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is based upon correct information - The author is providing knowledge concerning some particular fact, subject, or event

Oliver was excommunicated on April 11, 1838 in Far West, Missouri. One of the charges was that of accusing Joseph of adultery, however, the main issue was the handling of property and Oliver's rejection of the way the Church was being run.


Question: Did some of Joseph Smith's associates believe that he had an affair with Fanny Alger?


Jump to details:


Response to claim: 182 - Fannie Alger did not admit to being the Prophet's plural wife

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

Fannie Alger did not admit to being the Prophet's plural wife.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is based upon correct information - The author is providing knowledge concerning some particular fact, subject, or event

Fanny didn't discuss it: "That is all a matter of my own, and I have nothing to communicate." [1]


Question: What do we know about Joseph Smith's first plural wife Fanny Alger?


Jump to details:


Question: Did Joseph Smith marry Fanny Alger as his first plural wife in 1833?


Jump to details:


Response to claim: 183 - Martin Harris was brought to trial for adultery "as early as 1832"

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

Martin Harris was brought to trial for adultery "as early as 1832."

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is false

The July 1832 issue of The Evening and the Morning Star says nothing about Martin Harris being "brought to trial for adultery." The issue simply discusses an EXTRACT FROM THE LAWS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST which condemns adultery. (Note: there is no page 31 in the July 1832 issue of The Evening and Morning Star.) Source text: The Evening and The Morning Star 1:9 (July 1832) ..


Response to claim: 182 - Joseph told Ezra Booth to "take a wife from among the Lamanites"

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

Joseph told Ezra Booth to "take a wife from among the Lamanites."

FAIR's 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

The only source of this information is Ezra Booth, after he had apostatized from the Church, and it was produced for publication in the anti-Mormon book Mormonism Unvailed.


Question: Was Ezra Booth commanded to take a wife from among the Indians?

The only contemporary report of a possible revelation on marriage with the Indians was written in a letter to the Ohio Star on 8 December, 1831 by Ezra Booth

The only contemporary report of a possible revelation on marriage with the Indians was written in a letter to the Ohio Star on 8 December, 1831 by Ezra Booth, who had apostatized from the Church.[2] This letter was republished in Eber D. Howe's anti-Mormon book Mormonism Unvailed. Booth states that,

...it has been made known by revelation, that it will be pleasing to the Lord, should they form a matrimonial alliance with the natives; and by this means the Elders, who comply with the thing so pleasing to the Lord, and for which the Lord has promised to bless those who do it abundantly, gain a residence in the Indian territory, independent of the agent....[3]

Booth makes no mention of polygamy, and instead implies that the "matrimonial alliance" was for the purpose of gaining "residence" in the Indian territory

Booth makes no mention of polygamy, and instead implies that the "matrimonial alliance" was for the purpose of gaining "residence" in the Indian territory.[4] One would think that if Booth, given his opposition to the Church at the time, had been aware of something as controversial as a proposal that polygamy be instituted among the Indians, that he would have been highly motivated to proclaim this in a public forum. In fact, Booth actually states that in order to marry one of the natives, that one elder needed to be "free from his wife." Booth does go on to say:

...It has been made known to one, who has left his wife in the State of New York, that he is entirely free from his wife, and he is at pleasure to take him a wife from among the Lamanites. It was easily perceived that this permission was perfectly suited to his desires. I have frequently heard him state that the Lord had made it known to him, that he is as free from his wife as from any other woman; and the only crime I have ever heard alleged against her is, she is violently opposed to Mormonism. But before this contemplated marriage can be carried into effect, he must return to the State of New York and settle his business, for fear, should he return after that affair had taken place, the civil authority would apprehend him as a criminal (emphasis added).[5]

This quote implies that it was not to be a polygamous union.

It was always implied that the process of becoming "white and delightsome" was to be achieved through the power of God—not through intermarriage

There are quotes from Church leaders indicating that they believed that the Indians were becoming "white and delightsome." However, it was always implied that the process of becoming "white and delightsome" was to be achieved through the power of God—not through intermarriage. Critics cite a statement made by Spencer W. Kimball in the October 1960 General Conference, 15 years before he became president of the Church:

I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today ... they are fast becoming a white and delightsome people.... For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised.... The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.[6]

Although this is an interesting statement by President Kimball, it has nothing whatsoever to do with polygamy or intermarriage with the Indians. It is simply President Kimball’s own observation that he felt that the Indians were becoming a “white and delightsome” people through the power of God. Then-Elder Kimball was likely unaware that Joseph Smith had edited the Book of Mormon text in 1837 to say "pure and delightsome," possibly to counter the idea that the change referred to was predominantly physical, rather than spiritual. This change was lost in future LDS versions of the Book of Mormon until 1981.

There is no evidence that the instructions contained in the revelation regarding intermarriage with the Native Americans were actually implemented

There is no contemporary evidence, other than that provided by Booth, that anyone was even aware of the revelation at the time that it was supposed to have been given. The only evidence that a revelation was even given is the 1861 document by W. W. Phelps, which he recalled word-for-word from memory 30 years later at a time when the Church was actively and publicly justifying the practice of polygamy.

It is also interesting to note that the typical critical argument against polygamy is that a revelation on polygamy was not received until 1843 and that prior to that time that Joseph Smith was living in adultery with his plural wives. Yet, in this case, the critics are perfectly content to argue the case for a revelation on polygamy actually existing in 1831 as long as it can be tied to making the Native Americans a "white and delightsome" people. While there is evidence that Joseph was discussing plural marriage by 1831, it is difficult to believe that Phelps' text is an exact rendition of any revelation Joseph may have shared with him.


Response to claim: 183 - Joseph performed marriages even though it was against Ohio law

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

Joseph performed marriages even though it was against Ohio law. The marriage of Newel Knight and Lydia Goldthwait Baily was performed by Joseph against the law.

FAIR's Response

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

The Knight-Bailey wedding was not illegal, since Newel Knight obtained a marriage license from the secular authorities. The state of Ohio did not contest Joseph's performance of the marriage, since it then issued a marriage certificate for the Knights' marriage. Joseph later performed other marriages in Ohio, and these couples likewise received marriage certificates after Joseph submitted the necessary paperwork.

Response to claim: 185 - Oliver Cowdery wrote a formal statement that the Church denied polygamy in August 1835

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

Oliver Cowdery wrote a formal statement that the Church denied polygamy in August 1835.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is based upon correct information - The author is providing knowledge concerning some particular fact, subject, or event

This is correct.


Question: Why did the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants include a statement of marriage that denied the practice of polygamy at a time when some were actually practicing it?


Jump to details:


Question: Was Oliver Cowdery aware that some in the Church were practicing polygamy in 1835 at the time he authored the "Article on Marriage"?


Jump to details:


Question: Was the practice of polygamy general knowledge among Latter-day Saints in 1835 when the "Article on Marriage" was published?


Jump to details:


Response to claim: 187 - Joseph realized "that for a prophet it is easier to change marriage laws than to contravene them"

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

Joseph realized "that for a prophet it is easier to change marriage laws than to contravene them."

Author's sources: Author's opinion

FAIR's 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: 189 - Isaac McWithy was brought to trial before the High Council because he would not sell his farm to Joseph Smith

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

Isaac McWithy was brought to trial before the High Council because he would not sell his farm to Joseph Smith.

FAIR's Response

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

The transaction was with the Church, and it ended up costing the Church money.


Question: Was Isaac McWithy brought before the High Council on charges of "insolence" because he refused to sell his land to Joseph Smith for $3000?

This was not a personal transaction with Joseph, and McWithy's reneging on the deal would cost the Church four to five hundred dollars

One critic of the Church states that Isaac McWithy was "brought to trial before the church's High Council for insolence" after he "refused to sell his land to Joseph for $3000."

The High Council court was to "investigate the charges of 'A want of benevolence to the poor, and charity to the Church,' which [Joseph] had previously preferred against Brother Preserved Harris and Elder Isaac McWithy.

History of the Church states:

In the pleas of the Councilors, in the case of Elder McWithy, they decided that the charges had been fully sustained; after which, I spoke in my turn as accuser, and stated that I called on the accused, in company with President Oliver Cowdery, for money to send up to Zion, but could get none; afterwards saw him, and asked him if he would sell his farm. He at first seemed willing, and wished to build up Zion. He pleaded excuse in consequence of his liberality to the poor. We offered him three thousand dollars for his farm, would give him four or five hundred dollars to take him to Zion, and settle him there, and an obligation for the remainder, with good security and interest. He went and told Father Lyon that we demanded all his property, and so we lost four or five hundred dollars; because the accused told him [Lyon] such a story, [that] he calculated to keep it [the aforesaid four or five hundred dollars] himself."

Note that Joseph said "We offered him..."—this was not a personal transaction with Joseph.


Response to claim: 192 - Joseph's trip to Salem in August 1836 with Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon and Hyrum was to look for buried gold beneath a house

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

Joseph's trip to Salem in August 1836 with Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon and Hyrum was to look for buried gold beneath a house.

FAIR's Response

Fact checking results: This claim is based upon correct information - The author is providing knowledge concerning some particular fact, subject, or event

This is correct.

Question: Was Joseph Smith commanded by the Lord to go to Salem, Massachusetts to hunt for treasure in the cellar of a house?


Notes

  1. Dean Zimmerman, I Knew the Prophets: An Analysis of the Letter of Benjamin F. Johnson to George F. Gibbs, Reporting Doctrinal Views of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young (Bountiful, Utah: Horizon, 1976), 33
  2. Ezra Booth letter, Ohio Star (Ravenna, Ohio), 8 December 1831.
  3. Eber D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (Painesville, OH, 1834), 220. (Affidavits examined)
  4. David Whittaker, "Mormons and Native Americans: A Historical and Bibliographical Introduction," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 18 no. 4 (Winter 1985), 33–60.off-site
  5. Eber D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (Painesville, OH, 1834), 220. (Affidavits examined)
  6. Spencer W. Kimbal, Improvement Era (December 1960), 922-23.