Comments on: I May Be Related (By Marriage) to a Direct Descendant of Joseph Smith

By: Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner « MCQESQ

Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner « MCQESQ — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:27:36 +0000

[...] Elizabeth Rollins Lightner As I mentioned in the thread to Kevin’s post, my wife is a descendant of Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner. You may not believe this now, but I [...]

By: Kevin Barney

Kevin Barney — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:27:06 +0000

Here's an interesting article about James Sorenson, the Utah billionaire who is behind this research.

By: J. Nelson-Seawright

J. Nelson-Seawright — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 23:22:12 +0000

John #25, it is instructive, though, that Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner — one of Joseph Smith’s wives, no less — radically underestimated the number of wives that Joseph Smith had. Misinformation about Joseph Smith’s polygamy is evidently very old indeed.

By: Costanza

Costanza — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:38:31 +0000

Reverse my first sentence. Much more likely to have heard about it in the 19th century.

By: Costanza

Costanza — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:37:38 +0000

John,
I know what you were arguing. My point was that, in fact, one was much less likely to hear about Joseph’s polygamy in the nineteenth century than the twentieth. There was clearly a shift in emphasis. They may not have been “hiding it” but the church has certainly kept it well out of the mainstream of church discourse for about 100 years. I don’t think that members who have followed that mainstream church discourse and have not heard of Joseph’s polygamous marriages deserve your incredulity for wondering why it isn’t as widely discussed as it once was.

By: john f.

john f. — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 21:37:46 +0000

re # 15, I know that the Church and its members often discussed and used Joseph Smith’s polygamy as an argument against RLDS claims that Brigham Young was not a prophet because of his practice of polygamy. My comment was an expression of my incredulity at many who say that they never knew Joseph Smith was a polygamist and then because they did not know this, claim that the Church was hiding something or covering something up. I don’t believe this is the case and I always find it amazing when some Latter-day Saint says that they didn’t know Joseph Smith was a polygamist.

By: Kevin Barney

Kevin Barney — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:35:23 +0000

I don’t think there’s a timetable, because the kind of multigeneration autosomal DNA study it is going to take is really cutting edge stuff.

By: By Common Consent » Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner

By Common Consent » Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 09:25:06 +0000

[...] I mentioned in the thread to Kevin’s post, my wife is a descendant of Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner.Â You may not believe this now, but I [...]

By: MCQ

MCQ — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:20:16 +0000

Thanks, Kev, it will be even cooler if they find direct living descendants of Joseph. I always find it amazing that with all the (33? 34? 42?) plural wives, and all the supposed sex, they haven’t come up with more than a few alleged children. My own explanation for this is that here wasn’t that much sex, but who knows?

Sorry that I totally jacked this thread, but to get back on track, is there a timetable for when the DNA tests are supposed to be complete?

By: Kevin Barney

Kevin Barney — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:41:12 +0000

Yeah, MCQ, I get the same sense of pride in the connection that you describe. It’s way cool that your wife is a direct descendant of her.