History

Faithful and secular sources alike understand that the history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints raises serious concerns about the church’s legitimacy. I am not a historian; presenting church history is not the objective of this project. In my opinion, while church history is a valuable tool to help one assess their belief system, evidence in the modern church is sufficient to make an informed decision regarding membership therein. Thus, I wish to explore only a small selection of events throughout the history of the church at surface level in this section. I encourage curious individuals to read both faithful and secular histories and draw their own conclusions.

Romantic Relationships

Romantic relationships within the context of early Mormonism reveal a complex tapestry of beliefs, practices, and societal norms. From the controversial practice of polygamy to the dynamics of marriage and family life, these relationships were often influenced by theological doctrines, cultural expectations, and the personal experiences of key figures in the church.

Polygamy and Polyandry

Polygamy is one of the most contentious aspects of early Latter-day Saint history, significantly impacting the lives of its leaders and members. It has been discussed heavily from both faithful and secular perspectives. While I provide a brief summary, resources like https://josephsmithspolygamy.org provide extensive information about polygamy in the early church.

Emma Smith, the wife of Joseph Smith, is a central figure in the church’s narrative, yet she was not the first woman sealed to Joseph. Historical accounts suggest that Joseph was first sealed to Fanny Alger in the early 1830s, around 1835 or 1836, while the Smiths were living in Kirtland, Ohio. Alger, a young woman living with the Smith family, is often considered the first instance of plural marriage in the Latter-day Saint movement.¹ This relationship was kept relatively private and not widely known during Joseph’s lifetime.

The practice of plural marriage was later formalized and publicly acknowledged in the 1850s, but it created significant tension within Joseph’s marriage to Emma, who reportedly opposed the practice and struggled with the idea of her husband taking additional wives². This tension is reflected in various historical accounts and letters where Emma expressed her feelings about polygamy and its implications for their family.³

Early church leaders also played a crucial role in establishing and promoting the practice of polygamy. Following Joseph Smith’s initial sealing to Fanny Alger, prominent leaders such as Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and Orson Pratt entered into plural marriages, further institutionalizing the practice. Brigham Young, who succeeded Joseph Smith as the leader of the church, publicly advocated for polygamy, famously stating, “I am going to be a God, and I will have a plurality of wives”⁴. This endorsement created a culture in which polygamy was not only accepted but encouraged, leading to significant demographic and social changes within the church.

The eventual public acknowledgment of polygamy in the 1850s, alongside the establishment of a hierarchical structure that supported plural marriages, complicated the dynamics of family and leadership within the early church⁵. The multifaceted history of polygamy highlights the challenges faced by early church leaders as they navigated the theological and social implications of their practices. In summary, while Emma Smith is a prominent figure in Joseph Smith’s life and the early church, her opposition to polygamy and the sealing to Fanny Alger underscore the complexities and tumultuous nature of relationships within early Mormonism and the evolving understanding of marriage and family during that period.

In addition to the practice of polygamy, which involved men taking multiple wives, early Latter-day Saint history also includes instances of polyandry, where women were sealed to multiple husbands. Joseph Smith himself was sealed to several women who were already married to other men, a practice that has raised significant ethical and theological questions. For example, one of the most notable cases of polyandry involved Joseph’s sealing to Zina Huntington, who was married to another man at the time. This practice of polyandry was not widely acknowledged or accepted within the early church and has been a point of contention among historians and scholars⁶. Furthermore, the broader concept of polyamory, which encompasses consensual relationships involving multiple partners regardless of marital status, is not explicitly addressed in early Mormon doctrine but has gained attention in contemporary discussions about relationships and family structures. The complexities of these practices reflect the evolving understanding of marriage and relationships within the Latter-day Saint community and highlight the challenges faced by early church leaders in reconciling their beliefs with the realities of human relationships.

Pedophilia

The early history of the church is also marked by troubling instances that raise serious ethical concerns, particularly regarding the age of some individuals involved in plural marriages. Historical records indicate that some of Joseph Smith’s plural wives were very young, with some estimates suggesting that he married girls as young as 14. For example, one of his wives, Helen Mar Kimball, was sealed to him when she was just 14 years old¹. This practice has led to significant criticism and accusations of pedophilia, as the marriages often occurred in a context where the young brides had little agency or choice in the matter.

Additionally, the church’s early leaders, including Brigham Young, also engaged in similar practices, marrying young women and sometimes widows of deceased church leaders. The normalization of such relationships within the context of plural marriage raises questions about the power dynamics at play and the implications for the young women involved. Critics argue that these practices reflect a broader pattern of exploitation and manipulation, particularly given the societal norms of the time that often placed women in subordinate positions⁶.

The church has since distanced itself from these practices and has publicly condemned any form of child marriage or exploitation. However, the historical reality of these relationships continues to be a source of contention and debate among scholars, historians, and church members. The legacy of these practices serves as a reminder of the complexities and moral challenges faced by early church leaders and the need for ongoing reflection on the ethical implications of their actions. I assert that they are evidence that church leaders were not inspired by a loving God, as they consistently did not display the character of people such a God would choose as leaders.

Racial Issues and Priesthood Restrictions

The historical ban on Black men receiving the priesthood is a significant and painful chapter in church history. Instituted in the mid-1800s, this policy was often justified by church leaders through a combination of cultural beliefs and selective interpretations of scripture. Prominent figures, including Brigham Young, cited the “curse of Cain” and other theological rationales to support the exclusion of Black individuals from priesthood ordination. This ban not only marginalized Black members but also perpetuated systemic racism within the church, leading to feelings of unworthiness and disconnection from the faith community.

The impact of this policy was profound, as Black members were denied access to the same spiritual privileges and responsibilities as their white counterparts. Many faced discrimination and were often relegated to the periphery of church life. The emotional and spiritual toll of this exclusion cannot be overstated, as it created a barrier to full participation in the church’s spiritual and communal life. By preventing Black church members from receiving what the church considered to be necessary ordinances for exaltation, church leaders (who claimed to speak on behalf of God) made it clear that they believed Black members were less-than in God’s eyes.

In 1978, the church announced a revelation that lifted the ban, a decision that was met with mixed reactions. While many celebrated this change as a long-overdue step toward equality, it also raised questions about the nature of divine revelation and the church’s previous teachings. The church’s subsequent efforts to address its past, including the establishment of programs aimed at fostering inclusivity and understanding, reflect an ongoing struggle to reconcile its history with its present. The church’s failure to apologize for the policy or take steps toward restitution leave gaping wounds and prevent reconciliation and healing within the faith community.

Historical Revisionism and Transparency

The church’s approach to its own history has often been characterized by a tendency to downplay or omit controversial aspects in official narratives. This practice of historical revisionism has significant implications for members’ understanding of their faith. Many members have felt blindsided when confronted with historical facts that contradict the sanitized versions they were taught. For instance, the church’s early history includes instances of violence, polygamy, and conflicts with the U.S. government, yet these topics are frequently glossed over in official teachings.

The challenges faced by historians and scholars in presenting an accurate account of church history are critical to this discussion. Many have sought to uncover the complexities of the church’s past, only to encounter resistance from church leadership and members who prefer a more favorable narrative. This reluctance to fully embrace transparency has led to a growing demand for open dialogue about the church’s history, including the complexities of its founding, early controversies, and the actions of its leaders.

As members increasingly seek a more nuanced understanding of their faith, the church’s historical narratives are being scrutinized. This section will highlight the importance of historical accuracy in fostering a more informed and engaged membership, as well as the potential for healing and growth that comes from confronting uncomfortable truths.

Gender Roles and Women’s Rights

From the early days of the church, women have often been relegated to supportive roles, with virtually no opportunities for leadership or decision-making. While some women have found empowerment in their roles as wives and mothers, others experience feelings of confinement and inequality.

The lack of female leadership positions within the church has been a point of contention for many members. Despite the church’s emphasis on the importance of women in the family and community, leadership roles remain predominantly male. This has led to ongoing discussions about gender equality and the need for greater inclusion of women in leadership positions.

Violence and Conflict

Church history includes several instances of violence and conflict, with the Mountain Meadows Massacre being one of the most notorious. In 1857, a group of emigrants traveling through Utah was ambushed and killed by a contingent of Mormon settlers, along with some Native American allies. This tragic event raises profound questions about the moral and ethical implications of the church’s actions during a time of heightened tension and fear of persecution.

The church’s response to the Mountain Meadows Massacre has evolved over the years. Initially, the church leadership downplayed the incident, attributing it to rogue individuals rather than a systemic failure.

The implications of such events are significant for members navigating faith transitions. Violence in the church’s history can lead to questions about the nature of prophetic authority and the ethical foundations of church teachings.

Doctrinal Changes and Revelations

The church and its doctrine have undergone significant evolution since its founding in the early 19th century. Key changes include shifts in teachings about the nature of God, the afterlife, and the practice of polygamy. For instance, early church leaders taught a concept of God that included the potential for humans to become divine, a belief that has been refined over time. Additionally, the church’s stance on polygamy, once a central tenet, was officially renounced in 1890, leading to a redefinition of family structures within the faith.

These doctrinal changes have profound implications for members’ faith journeys. For many, the evolution of teachings can create a sense of instability or uncertainty regarding prophetic authority. If doctrines can change, what does that mean for the reliability of current teachings? This question can be particularly challenging for those who have built their faith on the belief in unchanging truths.

Moreover, the church’s ongoing revelations and adjustments to doctrine can lead to a sense of disillusionment among members who feel that their understanding of faith has been compromised. For those in transition, grappling with these changes can be a pivotal part of their journey, prompting them to reevaluate their beliefs and the foundations upon which they were built.

Treatment of LGBTQ+ Individuals

The church’s historical and contemporary stance on LGBTQ+ issues has been a source of significant tension and conflict, both within the church and in broader society. The church has consistently opposed same-sex marriage and has upheld policies that promote heterosexual marriage as the only option. This position has led to feelings of exclusion and marginalization among LGBTQ+ members and their families.

The church’s stance has often been framed in terms of doctrine and morality, which can create a painful dichotomy for members who identify as LGBTQ+ and wish to remain part of the faith community. The impact of these positions on LGBTQ+ members can be profound, leading to struggles with identity, mental health, and familial relationships.

In recent years, the church has made minimal efforts to address LGBTQ+ concerns. However, many LGBTQ+ individuals and allies feel that these efforts fall short of true acceptance and inclusion. Further, the changing nature of these policies raises questions about church leaders’ legitimacy and authority as prophets.

Conclusion

The church’s troubling history raises important questions about its role in society, its cultural practices, and the importance of inclusivity. This dialogue can foster a deeper understanding of the complexities of faith and identity, encouraging members to embrace a more nuanced perspective on their beliefs and the church’s place in the world.