Phoebe Woodruff on the DL

From the 132 Problems podcast:

In 1878 George Q Cannon organized a women's meeting to answer challenges from the Anti-Polygamy Society, a group of non Mormon Utah women who actively fought against the  practice of polygamy after the beginning of John Taylor's presidency. This society had just held an anti-polygamy rally in the city.

Phebe Woodruff (Wilford's first wife) gave a talk in favor of the practice. (12:40 to 17:05 in the above video).

A few days later a friend asked why she had done a complete reversal on her well known views of polygamy. This was her reported response: (18:15)

"I have not changed. I loathe the unclean thing with all the strength of my nature, but sister I have suffered all that a woman can endure. I am old and helpless and I would rather stand up anywhere and say anything commanded of me than be turned out of my home in my old age, which I should most assuredly be if I refused to obey counsel."

So my questions begin with this: Why would a prominent LDS woman insist that she would "assuredly" be kicked out of her own house if she refused to obey? With "obey(ing) counsel" in this case meaning that she preach contrary to her true feelings on polygamy, she follows that public testimonial with a private description of polygamy as an "unclean thing" that she "loathes".

This comment says a lot about what Salt Lake City was when Mrs. Woodruff was alive. This was not a free city, typical of the United States at the time. It was not necessarily a place where women could run to local authorities should they experience domestic violence, or even a place where they could find shelter if they were turned out of their homes. SLC, in 1878, was something closer to what Hilldale was under Warren Jeffs in 2002. 

Underscoring the seriousness of this comment was the fact that Brigham Young had died the year before. So even with Brigham out of the picture, the fact of these circumstances for women in the church remained just as harsh should they do something as disobedient as refusing to lie publicly to sustain the status quo.

Next question: If the clear threat was that even a woman in old age would assuredly be turned out of her home, then what does that say about the autonomy of LDS women when testifying on behalf of the hierarchy in support of polygamy? If Phoebe wasn't free in 1878, then who was free to speak the truth when Section 132 was canonized in the Doctrine & Covenants two years earlier in 1876? Or even later on during the Temple Lot case from 1891-1896? 

It should be remembered that all of the women who testified about Joseph and Hyrum at the Temple Lot case were similarly up in age, by that time 47+ years removed from Nauvoo. Mrs. Woodruff's comment should be part of the context from which we read and understand those testimonies.

Close to the Vest

 

Before we get all caught up in the discovery of the photograph of Joseph Smith, let's consider the rationale of the person who didn't let on to the LDS historians who questioned her that it even existed: Joseph's wife, Emma.

It tracks well that she would not have handed this picture over to those who followed Brigham Young to the Uintah Basin. Young defamed and condemned her from the pulpit in General Conference because she always refuted the LDS claim that Joseph practiced polygamy, and because she refused to hand over Joseph's manuscript of the JST Bible, and also because she refused to come to Utah in support of the Brighamite sect.

Being a source of deep embarrassment to Young, Emma's disapproval of his successful bid to take leadership of the larger portion of the LDS movement bugged him for the duration of his presidency. His response to this refutation and disapproval was to nurture a very bitter grudge.

So of course Emma kept it hidden. She likely also instructed its inheritors to keep it thus. Why allow an authentic image of Joseph to be cross-branded ad nauseum with all of the lies foisted upon his reputation? Why trust any sect after a schism with anything that is real?

For anyone who finds that they are still in agreement with Young on the matter of Joseph beginning the practice of polygamy (and that Emma, therefore, should be considered a liar), Denver Snuffer skillfully dissected volume 9 of the Joseph Smith Papers in September of 2020 for you as if it were a damned frog: 

http://denversnufferpodcast.com/transcripts/124_The-Foolish-and-the-Wise_Transcript.pdf

For myself, I do not consider Emma a liar (or a capitulator, or a poisoner) at all. I think anyone who insists as much should read Snuffer's examination of the Institution's own presentation of the "Nancy Rigdon letter" in their continued miscarriage of their own history. 

The Church botching the record of events has become almost ritualistic at this point, which makes perfect sense when you remember that Jesus insisted that we "cannot serve two masters". In choosing to honor Brigham Young and their post-Joseph hierarchy, the institution indeed has thrown Joseph, Emma, Hyrum, and the entire Smith family under the bus.

It is no surprise that Emma would not follow them, serve them, or share with them. Our admiration of her should only increase if the daguerreotype is deemed to be real.