Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

[_harmony]

Fanny was the first clearly documented affair, and no apologist can get around her.

Yeah, well, I think it will be established in the not-too-distant future that he was having affairs as early as the late 1820s. My guess is that he got these habits from Joe Sr.

I deal in what I can clearly document at the time I'm making the argument. "In the not-too-distant-future" sounds altogether too much like William and his Book of Abraham arguments. So until documentation shows up for earlier affairs, Fanny works just fine.

[_why me]

Why me can't you see what is going on here? Do you think that some of the women who were bedded by Joseph felt much different? Look at their (Wayne's followers) attitude to their sexual experience, to how it made them feel to be having sex with a man of God. It's quite a trip don't you think, both for the man and for the women involved.

I'm puzzled as to why you can't see it.

In Sacred Loneliness


Anti-Mormon polemicists saw polygamy as pure evil. Mormon men were viewed as insidious enslavers of women; polygamous women were seen as helpless, mindless victims. A representative period novel was entitled, Elder Northfield's Home; or, Sacrificed on the Mormon Altar: A Story of the Blighting Curse of Polygamy. After sweeping aside such melodramatic propaganda, one finds that, in actuality, Mormon polygamists, both female and male, were generally sincere, intensely religious, often intelligent and able, and men and women of good will.

See my point now?

http://www.signaturebooks.com/excerpts/ ... troduction

[_Kishkumen]

I deal in what I can clearly document at the time I'm making the argument. "In the not-too-distant-future" sounds altogether too much like William and his Book of Abraham arguments. So until documentation shows up for earlier affairs, Fanny works just fine.

Jesus Christ, harm, I was chatting. No need to get your knickers in a bind.

[_why me]

So until documentation shows up for earlier affairs, Fanny works just fine.

Does she?

The keys?
Some have wondered how the first plural marriages (such as the Alger marriage) could have occurred before the 1836 restoration of the sealing keys in the Kirtland temple (see D&C 110:). Again, this confusion occurs because we tend to conflate several ideas. They were not all initially wrapped together in one doctrine:

plural marriage - the idea that one could be married (in mortality) to more than one woman: being taught by 1831.
eternal marriage - the idea that a man and spouse could be sealed and remain together beyond the grave: being taught by 1835.
"celestial" marriage - the combination of the above two ideas, in which all marriages—plural and monogamous—could last beyond the grave via the sealing powers: implemented by 1840-41.
Thus, the marriage to Fanny would have occurred under the understanding #1 above. The concept of sealing beyond the grave came later.

[color=#0000BF]Conclusion
The Fanny Alger marriage illustrates many of the difficulties which the historian encounters in polygamy. There is little information available, much of it is second hand, and virtually all of it was recorded "after the fact." Even the dates are unclear, and subject to debate.

It seems clear, however, that Joseph, Fanny's family, Levi Hancock, and even hostile witnesses saw their relationship as a marriage, albeit an unorthodox one. The witness of Chauncey Webb and Ann Eliza Webb Young make it untenable to claim that only a later Mormon whitewash turned an affair into a marriage. [/color]

http://en.fairmormon.org/Polygamy_book/ ... _or_affair

[_Kishkumen]

It seems clear, however, that Joseph, Fanny's family, Levi Hancock, and even hostile witnesses saw their relationship as a marriage, albeit an unorthodox one. The witness of Chauncey Webb and Ann Eliza Webb Young make it untenable to claim that only a later Mormon whitewash turned an affair into a marriage. [/color][/color]

Who cares? Picking up on teenage maids and bedding them was creepy, whether it was an illicit marriage or simply an affair.
.
.
.
.
.

[_Ray A]

See my point now?

http://www.signaturebooks.com/excerpts/ ... troduction

I think you're missing some very important points:

These women were extraordinary in many ways. Many were authentically heroic, living lives of loss, hardship, and tragedy.

History has too often neglected women in favor of their husbands, especially in a male-dominated social structure like Mormonism. Still, one finds information about women embedded in their husbands' stories.

It would be naïve to try to understand these women in their socio-cultural milieu without exploring and respecting their own ideology. For instance, Helen Mar Whitney's belief in the presence of demonic spirits by her bedside is the necessary back-drop for understanding her sickbed conversion to polygamy.

On the other hand, day-to-day practical polygamous living, for many women, was less than monogamous marriage—it was a social system that simply did not work in nineteenth-century America.

Not surprisingly, therefore, polygamous wives, even those married to prominent, well-to-do men, were often not supported adequately financially. Annie Clark Tanner wrote: "We returned from Provo after a single school year there. All of us were conscious now that we would have to make our own way, if possible, independent of help from Mr. Tanner." In 1913 Annie s husband told her that she should "look to [her] stalwart sons for support." Clearly, monogamous men also struggled financially at times, but polygamy exacerbated financial problems.

Annie Clark Tanner wrote, "A woman in polygamy is compelled by her lone position to make a confidant of her children." Plural wife Olive Andelin Potter wrote, "I have worshipped my children all my life, as I have had no husband to love so all my love has been for them."

Thus the title of this book, In Sacred Loneliness. Often plural wives who experienced loneliness also reported feelings of depression, despair, anxiety, helplessness, abandonment, anger, psychosomatic symptoms, and low self-esteem. Certainly polygamous marriage was accepted by nineteenth-century Mormons as thoroughly sacred—it almost defined what was most holy to them—but its practical result, for the woman, was solitude.

You need to read the whole book. How you can say that these women "got on just fine" is beyond me.

[Guest]

See my point now?

http://www.signaturebooks.com/excerpts/ ... troduction

I think you're missing some very important points:

These women were extraordinary in many ways. Many were authentically heroic, living lives of loss, hardship, and tragedy.

History has too often neglected women in favor of their husbands, especially in a male-dominated social structure like Mormonism. Still, one finds information about women embedded in their husbands' stories.

It would be naïve to try to understand these women in their socio-cultural milieu without exploring and respecting their own ideology. For instance, Helen Mar Whitney's belief in the presence of demonic spirits by her bedside is the necessary back-drop for understanding her sickbed conversion to polygamy.

On the other hand, day-to-day practical polygamous living, for many women, was less than monogamous marriage—it was a social system that simply did not work in nineteenth-century America.

Not surprisingly, therefore, polygamous wives, even those married to prominent, well-to-do men, were often not supported adequately financially. Annie Clark Tanner wrote: "We returned from Provo after a single school year there. All of us were conscious now that we would have to make our own way, if possible, independent of help from Mr. Tanner." In 1913 Annie s husband told her that she should "look to [her] stalwart sons for support." Clearly, monogamous men also struggled financially at times, but polygamy exacerbated financial problems.

Annie Clark Tanner wrote, "A woman in polygamy is compelled by her lone position to make a confidant of her children." Plural wife Olive Andelin Potter wrote, "I have worshipped my children all my life, as I have had no husband to love so all my love has been for them."

Thus the title of this book, In Sacred Loneliness. Often plural wives who experienced loneliness also reported feelings of depression, despair, anxiety, helplessness, abandonment, anger, psychosomatic symptoms, and low self-esteem. Certainly polygamous marriage was accepted by nineteenth-century Mormons as thoroughly sacred—it almost defined what was most holy to them—but its practical result, for the woman, was solitude.

You need to read the whole book. How you can say that these women "got on just fine" is beyond me.

Maybe in Aussie football one can change the goalposts but not in american football. I quoted that aspect which showed the women far from helpless victims as has been assumed on this thread.

I would never claim that life was easy. Also, Joseph Smith's wives did not have a negative word to say about him even after they left the LDS. That was my point and not that life was on 7th heaven.

[_silentkid]

Maybe in Aussie football one can change the goalposts but not in american football.

Lame.

[_Ray A]

Also, Joseph Smith's wives did not have a negative word to say about him even after they left the LDS. That was my point and not lthat ife was on 7th heaven.

How would you know? Was everything negative your wife said about you published in The Journal of Mormon History? Did she write down everything negative she thought about you? (It's only a hypothetical.)

[_Brackite]

It does seem that kinship ruled the day. I think that Joseph Smith was a very fertile guy. Strange that no women had any children by him. Now I know that there have been rumors...but so far none existed or have been found out. Now that is strange. No birth control at that time except by the natural method.

This is also my reaction to Josephine Lyon's mother, Sylvia Sessions, telling her, on her deathbed, that she was the child of Joseph Smith. Apologists respond that this simply referred to the sealing, that since Sylvia had been sealed to Joseph, Josephine was his daughter in a spiritual sense. Yet this doesn't make sense in the context of the confession - something that Sylvia kept secret and revealed only on her deathbed. It also doesn't make sense that Sylvia singled Josephine out, and didn't refer to her other children as Joseph Smith's children, as well.

The Following information here is from a Pro-Mormon (Fair Wiki) Web Site Page:

Josephine's account is also noteworthy because her mother emphasizes that "…she [had] been sealed to the Prophet at the time that her husband Mr. Lyon was out of fellowship with the Church."[42] This may explain her reasoning for being sealed to Joseph at all—her husband was out of fellowship. Alternatively—or additionally—it may explain why she was cohabitating with Joseph. Todd Compton opines that "[i]t seems unlikely that Sylvia would deny [her husband] cohabitation rights after he was excommunicated," but this conclusion seems based on little but a gut reaction.[43] These women took their religion seriously; given Sylvia's deathbed remarks, this was a point she considered important enough to emphasize. She apparently believed it would provide an explanation for something that her daughter might have otherwise misunderstood.

There is also clear evidence that at least some early members of the Church would have taken a similar attitude toward sexual relations with an unbelieving spouse. My own third-great grandfather, Isaiah Moses Coombs, provides a striking illustration of this from the general membership of the Church.

Coombs had immigrated to Utah, but his non-member spouse refused to accompany him. Heartsick, he consulted Brigham Young for advice. Young "sat with one hand on my knee, looking at my face and listen[ing] attentively." Then, Young took the new arrival "by the hand in his fatherly way," and said "[Y]ou had better take a mission to the States…to preach the gospel and visit your wife…visit your wife as often as you please; preach the gospel to her, and if she is worth having she will come with you when you return to the valley. God bless and prosper you."[44]

Coombs did as instructed, but was not successful in persuading his wife. His description of his thoughts is intriguing, and worth quoting at length:

I may as well state here, however, that during all my stay in the States, [my wife and I] were nothing more to each other than friends. I never proposed or hinted for a closer intimacy only on condition of her baptism into the Church. I felt that I could not take her as a wife on any other terms and stand guiltless in the sight of God or my own conscience…I could not yield to her wishes and she would not bend to mine. And so I merely visited her as a friend. This was a source of wonder to our mutual acquaintances; and well it might be for had not my faith been founded on the eternal rock of Truth, I never could have stood such a test, I never could have withstood the temptations that assailed me, but I should have yielded and have abandoned myself to the life of carnal pleasure that awaited me in the arms of my beautiful and adored wife. She was now indeed beautiful. I had thought her lovely as a child—as a maiden she had seemed to me surpassing fair, but as a woman with a form well developed and all the charms of her persona matured, she far surpassed in womanly beauty anything I had ever dreamed of.[45]

Coombs' account is startlingly blunt and explicit for the age. Yet, if this young twenty-two-year-old male refused marital intimacy with his wife (whom he married knowing their religious differences), Compton's confidence that Sylvia Sessions would not deny marital relations to her excommunicated husband seems misplaced. Sessions may, like Coombs, have seen her faithfulness to the sealing ordinances sufficient to "eventually either in this life or that which is to come enable me to bind my [spouse] to me in bands that could not be broken." Like him, she may have believed that "[My spouse] was blind then but the day would come when [he] would see."[46]

Brian Hales has recently published work demonstrating that Todd Compton misread the data on Session's first marriage. In Hales' view, Sessions considered herself divorced from her husband, and Joseph is the only viable father for her child. If so, Sessions' marriage to Joseph was not polyandrous, and the evidence for Josephine Lyons being Joseph's child is even stronger. [See: Hales, Brian C. "The Joseph Smith-Sylvia Sessions Plural Sealing: Polyandry or Polygyny?" Mormon Historical Studies 9/1 (Spring 2008): 41–57.]

( http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith_a ... ok_chapter , Bold Emphasis Mine. )



Josephine Rosetta Lyon Fisher is indeed very, very much likely to have been the Biological Daughter of Joseph Smith.