Changing LDS Church History: Part 1

Have their been changes to the LDS church history, as well as Joseph Smith’s personal history? Who was involved? When did it happen? How did it happen? Are modern LDS church leaders and general membership aware of these changes? If so, are they willing to admit that changes have been made, or will they insist that there were no changes ever made? These quotes and documents outline the answer to these questions and more, as we kick off this series investigating the nature of these LDS church history changes.

Listen to the podcast

Watch the video

---

Changes to LDS Church History

Brigham Young said:

“I commenced revising the history of Joseph Smith at Brother Richard’s office: Elder Heber C. Kimball and George A. Smith were with me. President Joseph Smith had corrected forty-two pages before his massacre. It afforded us great satisfaction to hear Brother [Willard] Richards read the history of the infancy of the church. Adjourned at eleven p.m. having read one hundred and forty pages in Book ‘A’”

Brigham Young, History of the Church 7:29, p. 389; April 1, 1845

Some annotations in the manuscript itself verify that April 1, 1845 was the day they began the work of revising church history.

“…the date when Brigham Young began revising the history is also corroborated by a note at the top of page 42 of the manuscript which reads ‘Tuesday April 1 commenced revising’ page 42 in the manuscript is in the handwriting of James Mulholland the first clerk to write in the manuscript history book and deals with a conference held on 1 june 1830.”

History of the church 7:389

Brigham Young Led the Changing of LDS History

Charles Wesley Wandell also noticed that strange things were happening behind the scenes in the church historian’s office, at the direction of Brigham Young.

“I notice the interpolations because having been employed in the Historian’s office at Nauvoo by Doctor Richards, and employed, too, in 1845, in compiling this very autobiography, I know that after Joseph’s death his memoir was “doctored” to suit the new order of things, and this, too, by the direct order of Brigham Young to Doctor Richards and systematically by Richards.”

Inez Smith, “Biography of Charles Wesley Wandell,” Journal of History 3 (Jan.1910): p.455-63

Brigham Young Omitting Events from LDS History

In the July 11, 1856 entry of Wilford Woodruff’s journal, we find that President Brigham Young was involved in redacting and omitting pieces of the church history. Richard Van Wagoner describes Wilford Woodruff’s experience as such:

“that this revision of censorship of the official history came from Brigham Young is evidenced by an 11 July 1856 reference in Wilford Woodruff’s diary. Apostle Woodruff, working in the church historian’s office questioned Young respecting a ‘piece of history on book E-1 page 1681-2 concerning Hyrum leading this church and tracing the Aaronic priesthood.’ Young advised ‘it is not essential to be inserted in the history and it had better be omitted.’” 

Richard Van Wagoner, summarizing Wilford Woodruff’s July 11, 1856 journal entry

B.H. Roberts Omitting Events from Documentary History of the Church

In 1943, J. Reuben Clark (an apostle) blasted the quality of the most recently-minted history of the church, stating that omissions were a regular strategy of B. H. Roberts.

“The Documentary History of the Church unfortunately as printed does not contain all of the documentary history as it was written. Brother Roberts made some changes in it. We do not know always what the changes were or what they are, so that, as an absolute historical source, the printed Documentary History is not one that we can invariably rely upon…. Brother Roberts’ work is the work of an advocate and not of a judge, and you cannot always rely on what Brother Roberts says. Frequently he started out apparently to establish a certain thesis and he took his facts to support his thesis, and if some facts got in the way it was too bad, and they were omitted.”

J. Reuben Clark statement, 8 April 1943, in “Budget Beginnings,” 11-12, Box 188, J. Reuben Clark Papers, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah

Adding Events to LDS Church History

About 13-14 years after an event is supposed to have happened, Brigham Young is seen here seeking to add the story to the church history in hindsight. Conveniently, the story he wants published emphasizes the newly-established “doctrine” of holding living leaders’ teachings as more important than the teachings found in scripture.

“I spent the day in the office. President Young was with us 3- hours in hearing history read. He asked if there had been any note made of his meeting in Nauvoo at Joseph’s house at the time Hyrum had preached the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants as the Standard, while I took the ground that they were of no account to us without a living prophet and revelations. I told him we would examine and see.”

Wilford Woodruff journal, Aug 6, 1856

What story did Brigham Young want written into history post hoc? One wherein he corrected Hyrum and was seen as being a close confidant to Joseph.

“Reluctantly, Brigham agreed to preach, and he walked home with the prophet. They found Hyrum standing beside the fireplace, speaking to a full house. He held the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants in his hand and declared that they were the law God had given them to build up His kingdom.

‘Everything more than these,’ Hyrum said, ‘is of man and is not of God.’

Brigham listened to Hyrum’s sermon, his emotions rising. Beside him, Joseph sat with his face buried in his hands. When Hyrum finished, Joseph nudged Brigham and said, “Get up.”

Brigham stood and picked up the scriptures Hyrum had set down. He laid the books in front of him, one by one, so everyone in the room could see. “I would not give the ashes of a rye straw for these three books,” he declared, “without the living oracles of God.” Lacking a latter-day prophet, he said, the Saints were no better off than they were before God revealed the gospel through Joseph Smith.

When he finished, Brigham could tell his sermon had moved Hyrum. Rising to his feet, Hyrum humbly asked the Saints to forgive him. Brigham was right, he said. As valuable as the scriptures were, they were no substitute for a living prophet.

Saints, Volume 1, chapter 40, p.485-486)

Fabricating Joseph Smith’s Journal Entries

In a particularly popular example, church historians placed other people’s writings into Joseph Smith’s own journal to pass the teachings off as from him. Notice the strangeness of these dates for the “Happiness Letter” which contained no date, signature, address, names or anything to specify who the document was from.

• August 2, 1842 – Included in a letter by John C. Bennett on this date
• August 19, 1842 – Published in Sangamo Journal newspaper
• August 27, 1842 – Inserted into Joseph Smith’s journal as an entry for this day (13 years later), as if he said it on this day.
• November 1855 – Added to Church History by Thomas Bullock, who inserted it into Joseph Smith’s alleged journal on dates that completely conflict and cannot be true.

How can John Bennett quote a future statement in his letter? How can the Sangamo Journal publish something Joseph Smith hadn’t written yet?

Altering LDS Church History Documents

Some historians added information to records much later, back-filling details into the storyline. In the example below, Thomas Bullock added into the top margin of the last page in the journal “Marinda Hyde to Joseph Smith,” used later to bolster the story of their alleged plural marriage.

Who Supervised the Changes In LDS Church History?

Let’s see what the LDS church’s official history says happened first, and who was in charge:

“Moreover, since the death of the Prophet Joseph, the history has been carefully revised under the strict inspection of President Brigham Young, and approved of by him.”

History of the Church, vol. pg.243

Would the historians agree? Would the editors of the drafts and revisions admit that Brigham Young was the driving force behind the editing project?

Brigham Young Admits Revising History

What would Brigham Young and others that were involved say if asked if they participated in creating a revisionist history? Consider the following journal entries attributed to Brigham Young:

• Apr 1, 1845 – “I commenced revising the History of Joseph Smith at Brother Richards’ office: Elder Heber C. Kimball and George A. Smith were with me.” (HC 7:389)
• Apr 2, 1845 – “Engaged at Elder Richards’ office with Elders Kimball and Smith revising Church History.” (7:389-390)
• Apr 13, 1845 – “With Elders Heber C. Kimball, W. Richards and George A. Smith reading and revising Church History” (7:408)
• Apr 14, 1845 – “we read and revised history all day.” (7:411)
• Apr 16, 1845 – “I spent the day at Brother Hunter’s in company with Brothers Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards, George A. Smith and N. K. Whitney revising history”
• Apr 17, 1845 – “Revising history as yesterday” (7:411)
• Apr 20, 1845 – “We read and revised fifty-seven pages of History of Joseph Smith from Book ‘B’” (7:411)
• May 18, 1845 – “I met with Elders Heber C. Kimball, John Taylor and George A. Smith at Brother Taylor’s; we revised a portion of the History of Joseph Smith” (7:414)
• May 19, 1845 – “I spent the day with Brothers H. C. Kimball and George A. Smith revising history” (7:427)
• May 20, 1845 – “Elders H. C. Kimball, Orson Pratt, George A. Smith, and myself engaged revising Church History.” (7:428)
• Nov 8, 1845 – “Revising history in company with Brothers Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards and George A. Smith” (7:514)
• Nov 11, 1845 – “Forenoon, Elders Willard Richards and George A. Smith revising history. Afternoon, Elder Kimball and I joined them, and assisted in revising history.” (7:514)
• Nov 24, 1845 – “Ten a.m., Brother Heber C. Kimball and I called at the Historian’s Office and read history with Dr. Richards and George A. Smith.” (7:532)
• Nov 24, 1845 – “At the Historian’s Office with Elder George A. Smith and revised fifty pages history.” (7:532)
• Nov 24, 1845 – “Elders Willard Richards and George A. Smith read and revised history to the end of 1843.” (7:533)

Lucy Mack Smith’s History Revised

“I spent the day with Elders Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards and George A. Smith revising Church History; several of the Twelve and others called in the afternoon; we consulted on the subject of purchasing the copyright of Mother Smith’s History; and concluded to settle with Brother Howard Coray* for his labor in compiling the same.”

Brigham Young, History of the Church 7:520

The work was finally published under the direction of President Joseph F. Smith in Salt Lake City, Utah, October, 1901. It was revised by Elders George A. Smith and Elias Smith (both polygamists).

William Smith (Joseph & Hyrum’s brother) accused Brigham Young and members of the Twelve of pirating copyrighted materials and claiming ownership to volumes that they didn’t own.

“Brigham Young, John Taylor and Willard Richards with the appointed bishops have assumed the publishing of the church documents The Book of Covenants and also Joseph’s private history as their own property, entirely regardless of the rights of the Smith family as therewith connected.”

William Smith, Warsaw Signal 2:32, Oct 29, 1845

Would Leaders Edit or Revise Conference Talks?

“Brother Heber says that the music is taken out of his sermons when brother Carrington clips out a word here and there: and I have taken out the music from mine… I know that I have seen the day when, let men use language like brother Heber has today, and many would apostatize from the true faith. In printing my remarks, I often omit the sharp words though they are perfectly understood and applicable here.”

Brigham Young, August 2, 1857, JD 5:99

“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve.”

Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 13:95-95

“Brigham Young has said ‘when he sends forth his discourses to the world they may call them Scripture.’ I say now, when they are copied and approved by me they are as good Scripture as is couched in this Bible“

Brigham Young

Joseph Smith’s History Written in 1st Person After His Death

What Church Leaders Said About the Changes in History

“All Has Been Published… No Flaws Have Been Found In It”

Apostle John A. Widsoe proactively addressed some concerns about events being “hidden away” and “undercover planning.” He declares that all history has been published, and that no flaws have been found in the history.

“Joseph was sincere or he would have permitted some events to be hidden and only major concerns of the Church to come before the public. There was no undercover planning in his work—there was nothing to hide… The use of the modern printing press ensured the continued existence of the correct history of the Church. The History of the Church and the utterances therein contain, if read properly, a continued evidence that Joseph Smith told the truth… Throughout all his writings runs the simple spirit of truth. There is in them no attempt to ‘cover up’ any act of his life… Mormon history and doctrine have been carefully preserved in the published records of the Church—and all has been published. The History of Joseph Smith, published by the Church, as to events and dates, may be accepted as an unusually accurate historical document. It will increase in importance with the years and become more and more a proof of the honest sincerity of the founders of the Church in this dispensation. The history is trustworthy. No flaws have been found in it.”

John A. Widtsoe, “Joseph Smith—Seeker After Truth”, p.250,256-257,297 (1951)

Was Joseph Smith Involved in Compiling the LDS Church History?

How involved was Joseph Smith? This is a common question, and to answer it, which we should look into how much of the history was written at the time of his death. Nothing compiled or written after his death would have had his approval or verification, for obvious reasons.

“The official History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was published in book form under the direction of the First Presidency in 1902. The introductory assurance that ‘no historical or doctrinal statement has been changed’ is demonstrably wrong. Overshadowed by editorial censorship, hundreds of deletions, additions, and alterations, these seven volumes are not always reliable… The nineteenth century propaganda mill was so adroit that few outside Brigham Young’s inner circle were aware of the behind the scenes alterations so seamlessly stitched into the church history… The Quorum of the Twelve, under Brigham Young’s leadership, began altering the historical record shortly after Smith’s death. Contrary to the introduction’s claim, Smith did not author the History of the Church. At the time of his 1844 death, the narrative had been written up to 5 August 1838.”

Richard Van Wagoner

None of the Nauvoo historical chapter would have been seen, read, edited or approved by Joseph Smith.

What Do Modern LDS Church Leaders Say About It?

In a fireside with Dallin H. Oaks, Elder Ballard made the following statement in November 2017:

“Some are saying that the Church has been hiding the fact that there’s more than one version of the First Vision, which is just not true. The facts are, we don’t study. We don’t go back and search what has been said on the subject. For example, Dr. James B. Allen of BYU, in 1970 he produced an article for the church magazines explaining all about the different versions of the First Vision… “… But it’s this idea that the Church is hiding something, which we would have to say–as two apostles that have covered the world and know the history of the Church and know the integrity of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve from the beginning of time–there has been no attempt on the part, in any way, of the Church leaders trying to hide anything from anybody. Now we’ve had the Joseph Smith Papers. We didn’t have those where they are in our hands now. And so we’re learning more about the Prophet Joseph… So, just trust us wherever you are in the world. And you share this message with anyone else who raises the question about the Church not being transparent. We’re as transparent as we know how to be in telling the truth. We have to do that. That’s the Lord’s way. [46:38/-53:39]

M. Russell Ballard, Nov 19, 2017 YSA “Face to Face” event. Deseret News, “Elder Oaks and Ballard answer tough questions in Face to Face broadcast” (article has been deleted) [timestamp on video interview: 46:38-53:39]

Is Changing Church History Ethical?

You will ultimately have to decide what this means to you. The last quote shared in the presentation is from Jerald & Sandra Tanner:

“The Mormon historians evidently feel that more converts can be won to the church with a bogus history than with a true factual one. It is apparently felt that the truth will not bear its own weight and that a little forgery here and there is not wrong as long as it helps win converts to the Church. Men go to prison for the crime of forgery; however, the Mormon Church leaders seem to be immune from punishment because it is a religious document they have falsified. Perhaps some day the members of the Church will demand an honest history and that the ‘secret manuscripts’ be made available.”

Jerald & Sandra Tanner, “Changes in Joseph Smith’s History,” p.7-9