Church History Matters

The unjustified slaughter of around 120 men, women, and children emigrants in Mountain Meadows Utah on September 11, 1857, was an unspeakable tragedy. For Latter-day Saints then and now, one of the many painful details about this event is that it was instigated under the direction of local LDS leaders in Iron County who served simultaneously as ecclesiastical, civil, and military leaders.  On this episode of Church History Matters, we continue our discussion about the Mountain Meadows Massacre, with a focus on the aftermath of the atrocity. Specifically, we probe what we know of Brigham Young’s reaction to the massacre and where the erroneous idea came from that he ordered the attack. We walk through what we know about who was brought to justice for the massacre and what the eventual fate was of those who instigated and participated in this heinous tragedy.   For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

The Mountain Meadows Massacre—easily the darkest and most violent episode in our Church’s history—happened on September 11, 1857, when a group of Latter-day Saints, aided by some Paiute Native Americans, participated in the wholesale slaughter of around 120 men, women, and children belonging to a wagon train of emigrants from Arkansas en route to California.  This atrocity occurred against the backdrop of the 1857 Utah War when the feelings of Latter-day Saints were already set on edge. As federal US troops marched toward Utah with unknown intentions, Church leaders used defiant rhetoric and counseled the Saints—who had been victims of government-sanctioned violence before—to conserve their resources and be ready for anything. It was in this unfortunate atmosphere of hysteria that those in the Arkansas wagon train found themselves as they passed through Utah. So by the time these emigrants purportedly said and did offensive things toward some Latter-day Saints, the stage had already been tragically set for the highly irrational and totally unjustified violent response they received in return.  In this episode of Church History Matters, we walk through the details of how this atrocity unfolded under the direction of local Latter-day Saint leaders and think about what possible lessons we might glean from this darkest hour of our history. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

After the 1838 “Mormon War” and their official expulsion from Missouri, Latter-day Saints relocated to Illinois where they built up the city of Nauvoo and a number of other settlements in Hancock County. After a short time of relative peace, they were again embroiled in conflict with their enemies which culminated in the murder of Joseph and Hyrum Smith. This was followed two years later by the battle of Nauvoo and yet another expulsion from a US state with the blessing of its governor. Then it was off to the West where, not long after the Saints’ arrival in the Salt Lake Valley, conflicts began to arise with Native Americans. And by 1857 US President James Buchanan had ordered a force of 2,500 military personnel, under the command of Colonel Albert Sidney Johnston, to march to Utah to ensure that Brigham Young be replaced as the governor of Utah, which brought on the “Utah War.”   Today on Church History Matters, we discuss all of this and of course trace Latter-day Saint involvment in the violence which occured along the way.  For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

The fall of 1838 marked the first time the Latter-day Saints engaged in organized retaliation against their enemies. The setting was Northern Missouri and the situation was what is referred to as the “Mormon War.” Here the Saints marched on some nearby settlements that were supporting and equipping their enemies and conducted raids where they pillaged stores and torched buildings. Things only escalated from there and eventually culminated in the infamous “Extermination Order” of Missouri Governor Lilburn W. Boggs, the Hawn’s Mill massacre, the imprisonment of Joseph Smith and other Church leaders in Liberty Jail, and the wholesale removal of Latter-day Saints from the state of Missouri.   On this episode of Church History Matters, Casey and I walk through the history of this tumultuous time and think about what the conflict of 1838 might teach us about the justified and unjustified use of violence among Latter-day Saints—and its consequences. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

In November 1833, ruthless mobs of local settlers drove over a thousand Church members out of Jackson County, Missouri, plundering their property and burning their homes to dissuade them from ever returning. These battered and scattered saints took refuge that winter in various nearby counties while local Church leaders sent desperate letters to Ohio to seek the counsel of the prophet Joseph Smith. As the prophet petitioned the Lord’s guidance on the matter he was told, among other things, to have those scattered saints petition government leaders for help, which they did. In fact Missouri Governor Daniel Dunklin was quite sympathetic to the saints’ plight and expressed his willingness to provide a military guard to escort the saints back to their lands and property in Jackson County. The only problem, he said, was that he could not authorize a standing army to be stationed there for the ongoing protection of the saints. This essential piece of news would soon factor heavily into the decision of Joseph Smith and over 200 saints from the East to march nearly a thousand miles to Missouri in what became known as Zion’s camp. Their aim was to join with the governor’s military escort of the saints into Jackson County and then become that standing army who would ensure the resettlement and safety of their scattered friends once Governor Dunklin’s troops withdrew.   In this episode of Church History Matters, we dig in to some of the ins and outs of Zion’s Camp and discuss what the march of a quasi-military group of Latter-day Saints led by a prophet of God might teach us about peace and violence among Latter-day Saints. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

In the late summer of 1831, select groups of Church members began settling on the far western frontier of the United States in Jackson County, Missouri. Earlier that year the prophet Joseph Smith had received a revelation identifying the area as “the land of promise” and “the place for the city of Zion,” and shortly afterward the gathering to Zion had begun. Tensions between Church members and the non-Latter-day Saint locals in Jackson County existed almost immediately. By the spring of 1832 Missouri locals began verbally threatening the saints and occasionally vandalizing their homes to intimidate them and get them to leave. By the summer of 1833 the hatred and fear of the locals erupted into full-blown violence against Church members culminating in their forcible expulsion from Jackson County.  On this episode of Church History Matters, we take a close look at the various factors that led to this violent eviction of the Saints from Jackson County, the response of the Missouri governor to this illegal action in his state, and the revelations received by Joseph Smith responding to this severe treatment. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Did you know that one of the best selling books in Latter-day Saint history on Amazon.com was not written by a Latter-day Saint or a historian? It was a controversial book written by atheist Jon Krakauer in 2003 titled, Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith, which still tops the Amazon charts (in Kindle releases) in the category “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” And an adaptation of the book was released as a mini-series in 2022. One of the major premises of the book is that religion is inherently violent. To illustrate this premise Krakauer combines stories from early Latter-day Saint history with the story of a tragic murder in 1984 committed by two former members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Now Krakauer’s work has already been repeatedly criticized as a gross caricature of Latter-day Saint history and of religious people in general, but considering the widespread reach and influence of his fundamental premise and the LDS history he chose to support it, we felt like this is a topic that might warrant further investigation.   So today on Church History Matters, Casey and I begin our multi-episode exploration of this question: Does faith in general, and the faith of the Latter-day Saints in particular, lend itself to acts of aggression and violence? What does reflecting on our Church’s history—and specifically the violent episodes of our history—teach us about this important question?  For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

From our brief survey of some of the various branches of the Restoration in this series, a few things have become apparent. First, it’s clear that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do not have a monopoly on a love of the Book of Mormon. Many of our Restoration cousins also deeply revere this sacred text, have their faith in Christ strengthened because of it, and draw near to God by abiding by its precepts. Second, and perhaps more puzzling to some Latter-day Saints, it’s also clear that we do not have a monopoly on God’s notice, God’s mercy, and God’s guidance in our Church. In spite of many key differences between us, God also seems to actively be at work among many in the other Restoration branches as they seek him in faith. So what are we to make of this? What does it mean for our Church if God is guiding others as well?  In this episode of Church History Matters, Casey and I sit down with Dr. Christopher Blythe, a gifted historian, author, fellow podcaster, and Joseph Smith Papers editor. Together we briefly overview two additional branches of the Restoration—the Henrickites and Cutlerites—and then dig into the question about how we reconcile God’s involvement in other faiths with the generally shared belief among Latter-day Saints that ours is God’s one-and-only authorized Church (and not least because we got succession right!). We each share why we choose to continue our membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in spite of other attractive alternatives. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Most of the main branches of the Restoration were formed within roughly two decades of the martyrdom of the Prophet Joseph Smith. One clear exception, however, is the Mormon Fundamentalist movement. Here’s a little backstory: In 1890 President Wilford Woodruff issued a manifesto announcing the Church’s intention to submit to those laws recently passed and declared constitutional by the US Supreme Court forbidding plural marriage. Then in 1904, as a result of the Reed Smoot hearings before the US Senate and the national attention this brought to the continued practice of plural marriage in Utah, President Joseph F. Smith issued what is known as the “Second Manifesto,” which announced the Church’s policy to excommunicate anyone who continued to enter into new polygamous marriages.  Yet some Church members felt that the manifestos of Presidents Woodruff and Smith were not inspired. Instead, they saw them as weak and uninspired capitulations to government demands rather than a continued courageous commitment to God’s commands in the face of persecution. Within a few decades, those who dissented against these manifestos or were excommunicated from the LDS Church for entering into additional plural marriages began to gather on the Utah/Arizona border at a place known as Short Creek. They believed in a 1912 statement by Lorin C. Woolley, who had been courier for President John Taylor, about an unpublished 1886 revelation of President Taylor wherein the Lord declared that the “New and Everlasting Covenant” had not been revoked, nor would it ever be. This was interpreted by those in this group to mean that plural marriage would never be withdrawn. They concluded therefore that President Taylor’s unpublished revelation (and their interpretation of it) overruled and superceded the first manifesto of President Woodruff in 1890 and the second manifesto of President Smith in 1904. They were staying true to this core fundamental element of Mormonism while the LDS Church was not.   In time these Mormon Fundamentalists fragmented into various groups, including the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or FLDS Church), the Apostolic United Brethren (or AUB), the Righteous Branch of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days, among others.  In this episode of Church History Matters, Casey and I sit down with Dr. Brian Hales, an expert researcher and author of several books on the Mormon fundamentalist movement, to discuss this fascinating branch of the Restoration.  For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Among many of those Nauvoo Saints who did not choose to follow Brigham Young and the Twelve Apostles into the mountains of Utah, there was an emerging hope that someone from the Smith family would step forward and begin a reorganization of the Church Joseph Smith Jr. had established. In 1851 a soft reorganization began and built up to that culminating moment of 1860 when the eldest son of Joseph and Emma Smith, Joseph Smith III, stepped forward at the age of 28 and was ordained president of what they referred to then as the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or RLDS Church. Over time their method of succession in their presidency developed upon a different set of criteria than that of their Utah-based cousins, as did many of their practices, policies, programs, and governing principles. In 2001 the name of the RLDS Church was changed to Community of Christ, and today this is the second largest branch of the Restoration movement.  In this episode of Church History Matters, Casey and Scott sit down with Andrew Bolton, a friend and member of the Community of Christ who served in their Council of Twelve Apostles from 2007 to 2016. Together we take a deep dive into the details of how succession works in this movement, while also considering some key similarities and differences between our two Restoration branches today. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Following the murders of Joseph and Hyrum Smith in 1844, Sidney Rigdon, who had been Joseph’s 1st Counselor, made the claim to Church members in Nauvoo that he was the rightful successor to lead the Church as its guardian. After his falling out with the Twelve apostles, Sidney left Nauvoo and travelled to Pittsburg, Pennsylvania where he built up a church there separate and apart from the Church Brigham Young and the Twelve led to Utah. And, today, the only branch of the Restoration that claims its right of succession from Joseph Smith through Sidney Rigdon is The Church of Jesus Christ, also sometimes referred to as the “Bickertonites.” The Church of Jesus Christ is headquartered in Monongahela, Pennsylvania and is the third largest branch of the Restoration movement today. On this episode of Church History Matters, Casey sits down with Josh Gehly, a friend and ordained Evangelist in The Church of Jesus Christ, to take a deep dive into the details of this movement. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Who was James J. Strang? And why were his claims so appealing to so many of those Latter-day Saints who did not follow Brigham Young and Twelve after the succession crisis of 1844? Why did his movement experience so much initial success but then dissipate so quickly? Some have made strong comparisons between James Strang and Joseph Smith, but how accurate are these comparisons really?  On this episode of Church History Matters, we sit down with Dr. Kyle Beshears, a friend and expert researcher on the Strangite branch of the Restoration, to take a deep dive into the details of this movement. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

After the succession crisis of 1844, not every member of the Church chose to sustain and follow Brigham Young and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. And many of these members eventually formed or joined alternative restoration movements which became separate, distinct, and independent churches from one another. In fact, over the last 180 years there have actually been hundreds of Churches that have branched off from the same Joseph Smith-era restoration trunk.  Today on Church History Matters, for reasons we will explain, Casey and I have chosen to consider three such Restoration branches—namely, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints (or Strangites); the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints (or Josephites), today known as the Community of Christ; and the Church of Jesus Christ (or Bickertonites). Our focus will be primarily on the question of how succession has developed and works today in each of these movements.  For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

In the unlikely event that the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve all died simultaneously, how would that affect succession? In this hypothetical worst-case scenario, would the keys of the kingdom be lost? And, if an apostle came down with a debilitating health problem, is there any precedent for making him an emeritus apostle?  And speaking of apostles, is there a set procedure in calling them, or does the method vary from Church president to president? Also, sometimes in the Church people speak of a special requirement for a man to become an apostle—the phrase “sure” or “special” witness of Christ comes up a lot. What’s true? Must a man have personally seen Jesus Christ in order to be fully considered an apostle? On this episode of Church History Matters Casey and I are joined by a special guest, Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, to help us answer these and other great questions related to succession.  For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Between the presidencies of Lorenzo Snow in 1898 and Russell M. Nelson today, there have been a few key clarifications relative to the inner workings of Church government at the level of the Church presidency. And on today’s episode of Church History Matters we want to talk about them! The first of these clarifications deals with the confusion introduced during Joseph F. Smith’s presidency surrounding the role and position of the presiding Church Patriarch within the Church’s hierarchy. The second is regarding the important question about who can serve in the First Presidency? Is it entirely the prerogative of the President of the Church to choose who serves as his counselors, or are there constraints in place which he must abide by when doing so? And the third clarification deals with what happens when you have a Church president who is incapacitated due to poor health, and therefore cannot actively lead the Church? To what degree can his counselors lead the Church without him? And what, if any, restraints are there to their authority in this circumstance?   For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

From the history we’ve covered in this series so far, we know that the succession plan of having the most senior apostle become the next Church president took time to develop and wasn’t fully fleshed out in Joseph Smith’s lifetime. In fact, it was during the decades of President Brigham Young’s presidency that this plan was ultimately finalized … well, mostly. It turns out that prior to President John Taylor’s death, there was one young apostle who challenged this plan of succession one last time.  In this episode of Church History Matters we walk through this history and talk about how apostle Wilford Woodruff settled this issue once and for all. We’ll also talk about the sacred experience Lorenzo Snow had after Wilford Woodruff’s passing which established the pattern we follow today of reorganizing the First Presidency immediately after a Church president’s death. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Who is next in line to become the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Today this is not a difficult question. It is well understood that whoever is the next most senior apostle to the current Church president will be the next president, should he live long enough. The singular issue is seniority. It all boils down to seniority. So, what determines seniority among the apostles? Again, today there is a ready answer to this question. But it was not always so.  In fact, in this episode of Church History Matters, we walk through the winding path of how criteria for seniority in the apostleship has changed significantly from Joseph Smith’s day to our own. And we’ll talk about how Church presidents have responded to difficult seniority questions, such as, If two men are ordained apostles on the same day, who is the senior apostle? And, if a man is ordained an apostle but  never becomes a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, how is his seniority determined? Or say two men were ordained apostles, the one sometime before the other, but then the man ordained second becomes a member of the Quorum of the Twelve ahead of the man ordained before him. Which of the two men has seniority over the other? Or how, if at all, is a man’s seniority affected if he is an apostle who leaves the Church or is excommunicated for a time, but is then reinstated back into the Quorum of the Twelve?  While these may seem like very technical questions, they have come from real-life circumstances. And the decisions made about each scenario have determined, more than once, who has become president of the Church.  For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Shortly after the Nauvoo Saints voted on August 8, 1844 to sustain the Twelve Apostles as the new leaders of Church, Sidney Rigdon was excommunicated (for reasons we will discuss in this episode). Then for more than three years, between 1844 and 1847, Brigham Young and the Twelve led the Church as a group of equals. Together they oversaw the completion of the Nauvoo temple and organized an exodus out of the United States.  Yet after leading a vanguard company to the Salt Lake Valley in 1847, Brigham Young became concerned about the Twelve collectively leading the Church and became persuaded (for reasons we will discuss) that it was time to reorganize the First Presidency. But his proposal was not uncontested by the Twelve. And so, in a spirited series of debates, with Orson Pratt leading the opposition, Brigham Young ultimately persuaded the majority of the Twelve to reestablish the First Presidency, which officially took place on 27 December 1847 at the Kanesville Tabernacle in Council Bluffs, Iowa. In this episode of Church History Matters, we dig into the intriguing details of all of this.  For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

Aside from a small handful of events, like the First Vision, the translation of the Book of Mormon, and the restoration of priesthood keys, it is possible that what happened in Nauvoo on August 8th, 1844 was the most critical, pivotal moment in our history forever shaping the trajectory of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This was the day Church members in Nauvoo voted on who would lead the Church following the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum Smith. And the stakes could not have been higher as they decided between Joseph’s first counselor, Sidney Rigdon, on the one hand, and the Twelve Apostles led by Brigham Young on the other, because the choice at hand was not just about who would lead the Church, but ultimately about what kind of Church that would be. Would the Church hold onto and perpetuate the Nauvoo doctrines and practices, or abandon them in favor of returning to a more Kirtland or even Fayette-era type church? With this vote, the future of the Church hung in the balance.   On this episode of Church History Matters, we walk through the six days in August leading up to and including this meeting of August 8th. And we weigh into the controversy about whether or not God actually transfigured Brigham Young in front of the crowd to make him look and sound like Joseph Smith. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/

In August 1844, there were two major contenders to assume leadership of the church following the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum Smith. On the one hand was Sidney Rigdon, a gifted man who had been at Joseph Smith’s side as his confidante since 1830. Sidney initially proved quite effective as Joseph’s scribe and mission companion, and later as his first counselor. Over time, however, Joseph lost confidence in Sidney’s stability and, therefore, his ability to serve effectively as his counselor. Things came to a head in 1843 when, at a Church conference, Joseph officially sought to vote Sidney out of the First Presidency for his suspected role in a kidnapping attempt against Joseph to get him back to Missouri. And although they appear to have reconciled to some degree prior to Joseph’s death, the question remained: did Joseph intend for Sidney to preside over the Church following his death? On the other hand there was Brigham Young and the Quorum of the Twelve apostles. It seemed that at the same time Sidney’s star was falling, that of Brigham Young and the Twelve was rising. As time passed, their leadership only proved more and more vital and trustworthy. From leading the frantic exodus out of Missouri to Quincy, Illinois while Joseph was in Liberty Jail, to leading crucial missions to England where thousands of converts were brought into the Church, the Twelve, under Brigham Young’s leadership, were proving to be not only reliable but critical to the success and growth of the Church. And following his death, multiple members of the Twelve attested to a private meeting Joseph held with them that previous Spring wherein he officially commissioned and empowered them to lead the Church should his enemies kill him.   In this episode of Church History Matters, we explore all of this in detail and set the stage for the watershed Church meeting held on August 8 1844 where Church members get to vote on who they will follow. For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/