"The Life of William Marks: Faithful Leader to Two Josephs" with John Dinger

[@prospectoroutdoors]

Thank you for sharing this lecture. I have been down the reorganized rabbit hole as of late and can’t thank you enough.

[@randyjordan5521]

This is good research from John Dinger. I had only heard of him before by reading his article "Joseph Smith’s Indictment for Adultery and Fornication." In this presentation, John touched on why William Marks left Nauvoo after being forced out by the apostles. I realize that many RLDS-based people as well as these modern-day Utah Mormon "Joseph Smith Polygamy Deniers" want to believe that Smith had nothing to do with polygamy. But the situation after Joseph's death was that almost all of the 12 apostles had been inducted into plural marriage by Joseph. They were not aware of Joseph's instruction to Marks to set about excommunicating all polygamists. So because the apostles didn't hear that from Joseph, they refused to believe Marks. As Marks said in his 1853 statement: "I mentioned the circumstances of these conversations with Joseph to many of the brethren, immediately after his death; but the only effect it had was to raise a report that Brother Marks was about to apostatize: and my statement of the conversation in reference to the practice of polygamy, was pronounced false by the Twelve, and disbelieved; but I now testify that the above statements are verily true, and correct.” Marks reiterated that in 1859: "After the Prophet’s death, I made mention of this conversation to several, hoping and believing that it would have a good effect; but to my great disappointment, it was soon rumored about that Brother Marks was about to apostatize, and that all that he said about the conversation with the Prophet was a tissue of lies." Because Marks and Sidney Rigdon were anti-polygamy, the polygamous apostles simply forced them out of power by sheer weight of numbers. As John Dinger notes, Marks left Nauvoo and moved upriver, where he was joined by Emma Smith and her children. So this entire split between the Utah church and what became the RLDS church occurred primarily over polygamy.

[@jaredvaughan1665]

Thanks for the bio. It makes 0 sense the Lord intended for a local stake high council to outrank the 12 apostles in the hierarchy of the entire church body. Prior to Nauvoo, there were 2 stake high councils. One in Kirtland and one in Missouri. D&C stated that as the church grew, there were to be many stakes. And so with it many stake high councils. Stakes were local bodies only. They were never intended to oversee the entire church. Do you think the 12 apostles in the New Testament times and Book of Mormon times were outranked by the local bodies in Zarahemla or Antioch? No matter how big the church got, there was to remain only 1 body of 12 apostles. But the stakes were to multiply. Just look at the hierarchy in the RLDS (Community of Christ) today to further see this principle. Does a local stake in that church outrank their 12 apostles in seniority? Remember when the church just started out because there was only 1 or 2 stakes the 12 apostles were mostly responsible to preach the gospel to the ENTIRE WORLD and oversee its branches outside the main stake. Which makes sense. Because if they were responsible for overseeing stake matters in Nauvoo, there would be a redundancy. You would basically have 2 bodies of 12 men bumping into each other all the time. With the same responsibilities and infighting. Joseph continued to give more and more responsibility to the 12 as the Church grew. And in D&C (at least the LDS version) it states the 12 apostles were equal in authority to the first presidency (assuming it was dissolved.) That is the only logical way it could be looking at how the Book of Mormon and New Testament churches. When Jesus left the Nephites in Bountiful and Saints in Jerusalem to go back to heaven, who did he put in charge of the church? A local council or his 12 apostles? So please stop continuing the nonsense that a local stake high council outranks the 12 apostles of the lamb in authority. I agree that in local matters, a stake president has authority over an apostle in local matters. As does a Bishop. But not in the overall hierarchy of the church. Nor were they ever intended to.

[@randyjordan5521]

"It makes 0 sense the Lord intended for a local stake high council to outrank the 12 apostles in the hierarchy of the entire church body." In the Kirtland and Nauvoo period, the apostles were traveling missionaries/evangelists. That's why Joseph Smith constantly sent them out on missions. In fact, when Joseph was killed, most of the apostles were away lobbying support for his Quixotic presidential campaign. The Nauvoo stake high council was the governing body of the church at that time. That's the very reason Hyrum Smith presented the revelation on celestial marriage to seek their sustaining vote on August 12, 1843. It's also why Joseph ordered William Marks to set about excommunicating all polygamists weeks before his death: because most of the apostles had been inducted into polygamy, the anti-polygamous Marks held the church position and the moral authority to excommunicate the polygamists.

[@Jjj53214]

What was the view of Marks regarding allegations that Joseph Smith was a polygamist?

[@nealljones]

I asked this speaker during the Q&A if Marks (who knew JS, Jr was a polygamist in Nauvoo) shared with JS III that his father was a polygamist. The speaker said JS III must have known his father was a polygamist. Joseph's brother also knew JS, Jr. was a polygamist. So many knew in the early RLDS Church and stayed quiet.

[@randyjordan5521]

Marks, the Nauvoo stake president, was in the high council meeting on August 12, 1843, wherein Hyrum Smith presented the revelation on celestial marriage to ask for the council's vote to sustain it as church doctrine. Marks was one of three men present who rejected the proposal. The other two men resigned their positions over it, but Marks was loyal to Joseph, so he remained as stake president. Six of the men who were in that meeting swore legal affidavits stating that the document which Hyrum read is the same as D&C 132 today. Three of those men said that Marks was in that meeting. Also, Marks' multiple statements re: his conversation with Joseph a few weeks before his death make it obvious that Marks was well aware that Smith had originated and practice polygamy. Also, former Times & Seasons editor Ebenezer Robinson related this in his memoir: "On the 12th of July it is claimed the revelation on polygamy was given through Joseph Smith. I did not see the revelation, but was told a few days after, and before leaving Nauvoo, that such a revelation had been given. I started on that mission on the last day of July, 1843, accompanied by my wife, Gen. Wilson Law and wife, who were going to Pennsylvania, and my wife to stop in Ohio visiting relatives there, while I should prosecute the mission in the state of New York. Gen. Law and myself employed President Wm. Marks to take us in his family carriage to Chicago, Ill., where we took a steamer for Ohio and Penn. On our way to Chicago the subject of spiritual wives, or polygamy, was freely discussed, when President Marks also told us that a revelation had been received on the subject, or, to use his own words, "They have got a revelation on the subject." From Bro. Marks' testimony and what I had been told in Nauvoo, before leaving home, as firmly believed that Joseph Smith had given a revelation on polygamy as that he had ever given one on any subject in his life."

[@randyjordan5521]

@@nealljones It was an "open secret" at the time of Joseph's death that he had implemented and practiced polygamy. William Law, Jane Law, and Austin Cowles swore legal affidavits that Joseph or Hyrum had presented the revelation on celestial marriage to them. Joseph Smith's close aide Joseph H. Jackson wrote his account of his dealings with Smith just before Smith's death, and he wrote great detail about Smith's practice, and named some of the women. William Law filed legal charges against Smith of "living in an open state of adultery with Maria Lawrence" on May 23, 1844. William Marks sat on the grand jury that heard the charges. So there was no question at that time that Smith was polygamy's instigator. But what happened was, Smith had inducted most of the 12 apostles into polygamy. After Joseph's death, the pro-polygamy apostles and the anti-polygamy guys (primarily William Marks and Sidney Rigdon), split over who should take control of the church. The apostles won out by force of numbers. So Marks and Rigdon left Nauvoo. Years later, a handful of other anti-polygamists who still believed in Joseph's mission and the Book of Mormon got together and began a "restoration" movement which became the RLDS church. They persuaded Joseph Smith III to be their leader. They adopted an anti-polygamy stance as an ideological/policy position, which necessitated denying that Joseph had been polygamy's originator. Their thinking was, that if Joseph practiced polygamy, he was also a liar, an adulterer, and a hypocrite. So in order to keep believing in Joseph, they just went into "denial mode." They began trying to debunk or discredit everyone who said that Joseph had originated polygamy. That's how the RLDS church handled the situation for about 150 years, but in recent decades, they have admitted that Smith started it, but they declare that he was simply wrong to do so.