Gazelam wrote:What was the legal marrying age back in those days? Was 14 and odd age to get married back then? didn't the parents agree to the marriage as well, as in he went to the Father and asked permission to ask her to marry him?
And if they were married, and the bride was given away, then where is the impropriety?
bcspace wrote:So if HMK was not sealed to Joseph Smith until after his death, where is the impropriety based on the OP's logic?
Could I get a CFR on that one?
Scottie wrote:http://www.familysearch.org shows this:
Helen Mar KIMBALL (AFN: 1FZD-48) Pedigree
Spouse: Joseph SMITH (AFN: 9KGL-W2) Family
Marriage: May 1843
Smith's Store, Nauvoo, Hancock, Il
"Sec 121. Bigamy consists in the having of two wives or two husbands at one and the same time, knowing that the former husband or wife is still alive.
If any person or persons within this State, being married, or who shall hereafter marry, do at any time marry any person or persons, the former husband or wife being alive, the person so offending shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by a fine, not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisoned in the penitentiary, not exceeding two years.
It shall not be necessary to prove either of the said marriages by the register or certificate thereof, or other record evidence; but the same may be proved by such evidence as is admissible to prove a marriage in other cases, and when such second marriage shall have taken place without this state, cohabitation in this state after such second marriage shall be deemed the commission of the crime of bigamy, and the trial in such case may take place in the county where such cohabitation shall have occurred."
Revised Laws of Illinois, 1833, p.198-99
Mad Viking wrote:So… who would you rather indict? Joseph or god.
If their marriage was "of the D&C 132 variety" Joseph would not have committed adultery by marrying Helen according to D&C 132. However, if their marriage was not of the "D&C 132 variety", as you assert, then it was pure and simple adultery in the eyes of the Mormon god. Is that really the route you are taking on this issue?bcspace wrote:So what about this? Is the actuality of the consummation of the marriage between Joseph and Helen a moot point considering that either his god, or his ego, gave him license to do so?
Well, it might be except Helen was not sealed to Joseph Smith until after his death and at the same time married to Horace Whitney for time only. Horace Whitney was also then sealed for eternity to Elizabeth Sykes (deceased).
So this first "marriage" to Joseph Smith does not seem to be of the D&C 132 variety.
However, if it were, it doesn't bother me in the least.
bcspace wrote:Could I get a CFR on that one?
Brodie, Fawn M (1971), No Man Knows My History, p. 479-480.
Compton, Todd (Dec. 1997), In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith, p. 486.
They were married in the May of 1843. D&C 132 was produced 2 months later. How could there be sealings prior to July 1843. I believe what bc is saying is that they were only married (not sealed) in May of 1843. The implication being that Joseph didn't even have a revelation sanctioning plural marriage (let alone sealing) when he married Helen. According to D&C 132, recieved later, he committed adultery when he did so.Scottie wrote:How do they come to this conclusion?? The familysearch website clearly shows that Joseph Smith was alive when they were "married".