An Important New Document Comes to Light

By Jerald and Sandra Tanner

The evidence we presented in another article in this issue of the Messenger shows that Joseph Smith failed as a translator. In this article we will show that the Mormon Church now faces a similar problem with regard to his role as a “Prophet.”

Church leaders maintain that Joseph Smith was appointed by God to be president of the true church and that there has been an unbroken chain of succession in the presidency ever since that time. According to Mormon apologists, any break in the chain of succession would throw the church into a state of apostasy. President Joseph Fielding Smith attacked the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints—a group that broke off from the Utah Mormons—for failure to conform to the true plan of succession: “An ordination in the ‘Reorganized’ church is of no more effect than is an ordination in the Methodist, Presbyterian, or Catholic church, for those officiating do not hold the priesthood, and are not recognized of God” (Succession in the Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Salt Lake City, 1975).

One of the chief differences between the Mormon Church and the RLDS Church centers around the question of who was the successor to Joseph Smith. While the Utah Mormons claim that Brigham Young was the true successor, the RLDS maintain that Joseph Smith had bestowed this right on his son Joseph Smith III. Although the Utah Church has always disputed this claim, a recent discovery proves that Joseph Smith actually did designate his son as successor. The Mormon Church’s own newspaper, Deseret News, confirmed the authenticity of the document:

A handwritten document thought to be a father’s blessing given by Joseph Smith Jr., first president and prophet of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to his son Joseph Smith III has been acquired by the Church Historical Department. . . .

Olson and other LDS officials said they are convinced the blessing is authentic. Handwriting and the paper were examined and compared with other documents . . .

The blessing document, dated Jan. 17, 1844, is thought to have been written by Thomas Bullock, one of several men who served as clerk to Joseph Smith Jr. . . .

Church officials obtained the document from Mark William Hofmann, a collector of historical documents and antiques. He said he received it from a descendant of Thomas Bullock. . . .

The document outlines a blessing given by Joseph Smith Jr. to his son, then age 11, and includes the possibility of the son succeeding his father “to the Presidency of the High Priesthood: A Seer, and a Revelator, and a Prophet, unto the Church.” (Deseret News, March 19, 1981)

A photograph of this important document is found above. The text of the blessing reads as follows:

A blessing given to Joseph Smith, 3rd, by his father, Joseph Smith, Jun., on Jan. 17, 1844.

Blessed of the Lord is my son Joseph, who is called the third, —for the Lord knows the integrity of his heart, and loves him, because of his faith, and righteous desires. And, for this cause, has the Lord raised him up; — that the promises made to the fathers might be fulfilled, even the anointing of the progenitor shall be upon the head of my son, and his seed after him, from generation to generation. For he shall be my successor to the Presidency of the High Priesthood: a Seer, and a Revelator, and a Prophet, unto the Church; which appointment belongeth to him by blessing, and also by right.

Verily, thus saith the Lord: if he abides in me, his days shall be lengthened upon the earth, but if he abides not in me, I, the Lord, will receive him, in an instant, unto myself.

When he is grown, he shall be a strength to his brethren, and a comfort to his mother. Angels will minister unto him, and he shall be wafted as on eagle’s wings, and be as wise as serpents, even a multiplicity of blessings shall be his. Amen.

For a number of years we have maintained that “After Joseph Smith’s death it was expected that his son would someday lead the Church” (Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? 1972, page 195). The recently discovered blessing, of course, confirms this statement.

The blessing not only fits very well with the historical evidence, but it even contains wording resembling that found in a revelation given to Joseph Smith on January 19, 1841. In the Doctrine and Covenants 124:57 and 59 we read:

. . . this anointing have I put upon his head, that his blessing shall also be put upon the head of his posterity after him. . . . let . . . his seed after him have place in that house, from generation to generation, . . .

In the blessing to Joseph Smith III we find this:

. . . the anointing of the progenitor shall be upon the head of my son, and his seed after him, from generation to generation.

If there is any truth to the claim that Joseph Smith was led by revelation, the blessing given to his son would seem to indicate that Joseph Smith III was the true successor and that Brigham Young wrongfully appropriated this right to himself. The idea that Brigham Young had stolen Joseph Smith’s son’s right to be President of the Church was widely discussed in the 1800s. John D. Lee, who followed Brigham Young west, made these revealing comments in a book published in 1877:

Before proceeding further, we must learn who was to be the successor of the Prophet to lead the Church. It was then understood among the Saints that young Joseph was to succeed his father, and that right justly belonged to him. Joseph, the Prophet, had bestowed that right upon him by ordination, but he was too young at that time to fill the office and discharge its solemn duties. Some one must fill the place until he had grown to more mature age. . . . a conference was held . . . Brigham Young arose . . . I myself at the time, imagined that I saw and heard a strong resemblance to the Prophet in him, and felt that he was the man to lead us until Joseph’s legal successor should grow up to manhood, when he should surrender the Presidency to the man who held the birthright. After that time, if he continued to claim and hold the position, he could not be considered anything else than an usurper, . . . Hence the course of Brigham Young has been downward ever since. . . .

I heard Mother Smith, the mother of Joseph the Prophet, plead with Brigham Young, with tears, not to rob young Joseph of his birthright, which his father, the Prophet, bestowed upon him previous to his death. That young Joseph was to succeed his father as the leader of the Church, and it was his right in the line of the priesthood. “I know it,” replied Brigham, “don’t worry or take any trouble, Mother Smith; by so doing you are only laying the knife to the throat of the child. If it is known that he is the rightful successor of his father, the enemy of the Priesthood will seek his life. He is too young to lead this people now, but when he arrives at mature age he shall have his place. No one shall rob him of it.” This conversation took place in the Masonic Hall at Nauvoo, in 1845. (Mormonism Unveiled; Or the Life and Confessions of the Late Mormon Bishop, John D. Lee, 1877, pages 155, 156 and 161)

On June 3, 1860, President Brigham Young gave a sermon in the Tabernacle which gives support to Lee’s claim:

What of Joseph Smith’s family? What of his boys? . . . They are in the hands of God, and when they make their appearance before this people, full of his power, there are none, but what will say—“Amen! we are ready to receive you.”

The Brethren testify that brother Brigham is brother Joseph’s legal successor. You never heard me say so. I say that I am a good hand to keep the dogs and wolves out of the flock. I do not care a groat who rises up. I do not think anything about being Joseph’s successor. That is nothing that concerns me. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, page 69)

Mormon scholar D. Michael Quinn, of the Church’s Brigham Young University, concluded that Brigham Young expected Joseph Smith III or his brother to lead the Church:

Brigham Young is also alleged to have acknowledged privately and publicly prior to 1860 that Joseph Smith III had a right to preside in the Church. Not only Brigham Young, but many Mormons in the Great Basin seem to have anticipated that one day Joseph Smith III would become a leader in the Church perpetuated by the apostles. It was with wonderment that they learned he had become the president, on 6 April 1860, of a church formed by dissidents from numerous sects established after the death of Joseph Smith, Jr. Joseph Smith III was ordained president of the RLDS Church . . . As Joseph Smith III demonstrated increasing hostility to the church in Utah, Brigham Young expressed hope that the martyred Prophet’s youngest son, David Hyrum Smith would one day merit his rightful place as president of the LDS Church. (Brigham Young University Studies, Winter 1976, pages 228-29)

As the RLDS Church continued to oppose the Utah Mormons, feelings became very bitter and a great deal of literature was printed by both sides. Finally, on April 10, 1898, President Wilford Woodruff completely denied that Joseph Smith had set his son apart to lead the Church:

“Joseph Smith never ordained his son Joseph, never blessed him nor set him apart to lead this Church and Kingdom on the face of the earth. When he or any other man says he did, they state that which is false before high heaven.” (Statement by President Woodruff, as cited in Priesthood and Presidency, by Charles W. Penrose, page 22)

It should be obvious that the discovery of the blessing completely destroys President Woodruff’s case.

A True Revelation?

The second paragraph of the recently discovered blessing is extremely interesting:

Verily, thus saith the Lord: if he abides in me, his days shall be lengthened upon the earth, but, if he abides not in me, I, the Lord, will receive him, in an instant, unto myself.

Since this statement begins with the words, “Verily, thus saith the Lord,” the Utah Mormon Church will have a difficult time explaining it away. Notice that the blessing says that if Joseph Smith III “abides in me his days shall be lengthened.” While Brigham Young lived to be an old man, Joseph Smith III lived even longer. He was eighty-two years old when he died in 1914.

In view of Joseph Smith III’s long life, those who believe Joseph Smith received his revelations from God are almost forced to the conclusion that his son lived a righteous life. If this is the case, why was he rejected by the Utah Mormon Church?

Notice also that the revelation says that if he was not faithful, the Lord would “receive him, in an instant, unto myself.” According to Mormon belief, Joseph Smith III must have been one of the most evil men who ever lived, for he spent over fifty years of his life actively fighting the Utah Mormon Church. Now, if one were to assume that the Utah Mormon Church is really the true church, it would be difficult to understand why the Lord would allow Joseph Smith III to continue living. There could hardly be any sin worse than fighting against the Lord’s church. He certainly could not be abiding in the Lord and be actively opposing His work, and the blessing definitely states, “if he abides not in me, I, the Lord, will receive him, in an instant unto myself.”

Although the RLDS Church may proclaim that the new discovery is a victory over the Utah Church, a careful examination of all the evidence concerning succession leads one to conclude that Joseph Smith was never directed by revelation from God. It seems, in fact, that Smith had been groping in the dark for years trying to find a successor. According to David Whitmer, one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith

had so much confidence in me that in July, 1834, he ordained me his successor as “Prophet Seer and Revelator” to the Church. He did this of his own free will and not at any solicitation whatever on my part. I did not know what he was going to do until he laid his hands upon me and ordained me. (An Address To All Believers In Christ, by David Whitmer, Richmond, Missouri, 1887, page 55)

Neither Mormons nor members of the Reorganized Church can believe it was God who directed Joseph Smith to ordain David Whitmer because Whitmer later claimed that Smith was a fallen prophet and spent the last part of his life striving to build up another apostate church. Writing in 1887, Whitmer admonished:

If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses by his own voice, then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to “separate myself from among the Latter Day Saints, for as they sought to do unto me, so should it be done unto them.” In the spring of 1838, the heads of the church and many of the members had gone deep into error and blindness. (Ibid., page 27)

According to Dr. Quinn, Whitmer was not the only one Joseph Smith appointed successor:

When Joseph Smith contemplated a successor, he made an appointment without seeking prior approval of the other governing bodies of the Church. He did this in 1834 with David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery, and in 1843 with Hyrum Smith. (BYU Studies, Winter 1976, page 219)

On page 232 of the same article, Quinn sadly observes:

Joseph Smith had at different times by precept or precedent established eight possible routes of legitimate succession to his place as President of the Church and of the High Priesthood on earth. As two recent analysts of LDS succession have observed: “In the first years of church government, the law of succession was in embryo stage. It seems that even in the Prophet Joseph Smith’s mind, just who would succeed him at any given moment was not always clear. There was a gradual evolution of succession principles.” Whether through oversight or as a means to test the faithful, Joseph Smith’s neglect to make explicit to the general membership an undisputed mode of succession caused thousands of his followers to falter, wander, and ultimately to reject the Church headquartered in Utah, . . .

We cannot believe that all this confusion could possibly come from the Lord. The Bible says that “God is not the author of confusion” (1 Corinthians 14:33). It would appear from the evidence presented that if the Mormon Church ever had any “priesthood,” it was lost when Brigham Young took the presidency unto himself. Our research, however, leads us to believe the Mormon Church never had any priesthood to lose. In The Changing World of Mormonism we show that serious changes were made in Joseph Smith’s revelations concerning priesthood, and we also demonstrate that the Mormon idea of “priesthood” is unscriptural. The Bible teaches that the Old Testament order of priesthood was fulfilled and that Christ Himself is our High Priest. It indicates that Jesus has “an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them” (Hebrews 7:24-25).

The Bible also indicates that all Christians (not just men) are a “royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9). In 1 Peter 2:5 we read that “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” The priesthood of the Old Testament has been fulfilled, and now “As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, . . .” (John 1:12). Instead of trusting in a church to save them, the Mormon people should turn directly to Christ for salvation. The Lord Himself has said: “. . . I am the way, the truth and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6).

The work we have presented in the article concerning Joseph Smith’s ability as a translator is absolutely devastating, but if there is still any doubt in the reader’s mind, the recently discovered blessing should completely settle the matter. The blessing certainly disproves the claim that Joseph Smith was God’s true “Prophet” on the earth.

---

---