--- title: Improvement Era description: Monthly periodical of the Mormon church, 1897 onward. This library holds the issues of November 1897 to December 1930. authors: - Widtsoe, John A. collections: - periodicals tags: - magazine - improvement-era periodical: Improvement Era volume: 16 number: 6 published: 1913-04 publisher: Young Men’s Mutual Improvement Associations publisher_place: Salt Lake City language: en type: magazine reference: "Widtsoe, John A., \"Dr. Widtsoe's Reply to Rev. Spalding,\" *Improvement Era* 16, no. 6 (April 1913): 616–620." source: url: https://archive.org/details/improvementera1606unse transcription: Transcribed from the Internet Archive scan of each issue (the item for each issue is named in the issue's own source); unnumbered advertising leaves are omitted, printed page numbers are kept as page markers. identifier: improvementera1606unse start_page: 616 end_page: 620 rights: status: public-domain basis: US publication 1930 or earlier (published 1913-04) source: https://archive.org/details/improvementera1606unse publication_year: 1913 note: The Internet Archive item metadata carries a blanket "© Copyright by Intellectual Reserve, Inc." notice. The library owner judged it inapplicable because this issue was published in 1913, before 1931; a scan-level notice does not restore copyright. --- # Dr. Widtsoe's Reply to Rev. Spalding Dr. Widtsoe's Reply to Rev. Spalding RT. Rev. F. S. Spalding, D. D. In your book you state with a num- Salt Lake City. ber of reasons that "If the Book of My dear Dr. Spalding: — Mormon is true, it is, next to the Did not Job say "Oh that mine ad- Bible, the most important book in the versary had written a book?" I fear world." The importance of the inquiry that this ancient bit of wisdom will is nowhere minimized by you. Morecome home to some of us who are over, in your dedication "To my many engaged in the public dis- Mormon friends, who are as honest cussion of the authenticity of searchers after the truth as he hopes the Book of Abraham. Yet, I — he is himself this book is dedicated am really pleased that you found both by the Author" you certainly imply time and inclination to answer, as you that this tremendously important indid in yesterday's Deseret Evening quiry which may double the written News, my letter of last January com- foundations of the Christian faith is to menting on your book, Joseph Smith, be conducted in the fullest spirit of Jr., as a Translator. It seems to prove strict truth. In no other manner could that you are not faltering in your ef- it be pursued by an honest man. forts to satisfy yourself as to the By your own words concerning the truth or falsity of "Mormonism." May great importance and the spirit of I add that you can not be any more the inquiry, nothing short of a sciendetermined than I am to know the tific, i. e., a truly systematic and extruth, the whole truth, of "Mormon- haustive, investigation could be tolerism." Let us have the truth! ated. Whether Joseph Smith was in I have twice read your letter. With error is, according to your own rearegret, for I would not wound your soning, of lit tie import in comparison feelings, I am obliged to say that I with the great gift to Christianity could am unconvinced that you have still the Book of Mormon be shown to be proved, even remotely, that the true. In your letter you reiterate this Prophet Joseph Smith erred in his thought, for by the accuracy of the translations of the illustrations print- prophet's translation of the hieroglyphed in the Pearl of Great Price. ics you would try the Prophet, the In fact your letter seems to me to Book of Mormon, the whole weaken your case exceedingly. system of "Mormon" belief I noted, also regretfully, that your and the successors in office of letter while directed to me is really the Prophel, including the present a blanket answer, especially to the president of the Church. Surely, a comments on your book by Prest. Jo- sane person was justified in expecting a seph F. Smith. Elder B. H. Roberts scientific, i. e., a systematic and exand Editor J. M. Sjodahl. These men haustive, examination of this subject have certainly made forceful object- which you had chosen to explain to the ions to your conclusion, but mine are world. very real to me. and I should have been pleased had you replied to them was amazed, therefore, to read in T one by one. your letter, your vigorous refusal to have your book classed as scientific *From The Deseret News, March 8, 1913. and your denial of any intent to con- : "JOSEPH SMITH, JR., AS A TRANSLATOR' 617 duct such an inquiry. May I ask then, ing the striking similarities between with all respect, in what class does Joseph Smith's translation and your your book belong and what was really eight opinions. your intent? This inquiry you claim 8. That you disregarded the possible to be of transcendent importance to internal evidences of the Book of the Avorld. you were sincere in this, If Abraham in support of the Prophet's and I shall not question it, you cer- translation. < tainly would not be ready to pronounce 9. That you were silent on the whole final judgment on the basis of eight vital matter of Egypt an:l Abraham. or eleven letters written in answer to, 10. That you, probably unintentiononly Heaven knows, what questions ally, prejudiced your witnesses. you propounded. I am half annoyed to 11. That your eight letters are not think that you would ask your "Mor- even remotely studies of the matter mon" friends to give attention to an under investigation. inquiry so superficially conducted. 12. That you accepted at their face Meanwhile I am gratified that you value letters that are clearly prejudiced agree with the charge I made that the and ill-tempered. argument was not scientific. I submit these reasons to you again, You cannot mean it. If you intended for, as I view it, they completely vitionly to place on permanent record the ate your argument. You must give the eight in your possession, you letters subject a thoroughly scientific examhave no argument. Some one else ination before you can expect a fully must continue the work that you have respectful hearing. You can not ask only hinted at. You claim that you are every reader, as you suggest in your incompetent for want of special letter, to do this work for himself. You learning to make an inquiry, such have publicly chosen to do the labor, as I suggested. If so, you should not you must in justice to yourself and in have undertaken it. But I know, as fairness to the readers, complete it. do all your friends, that your long Meanwhile, I am very glad to notice years of training and your lifelong that, in your letter you make answer to charges 1 and 4 as above stated. scholarly habits make you eminently I hope you will give the others your able to pursue such an inquiry to the early attention. end. though it may require many Dr. Mercer's attempt to harmonize years. Are you dodging the demand the apparent differences among the that you make this inquiry an honest jury is very fair, and so far as it goes, search after truth? If so, you will very satisfactory. I snail not allow tempt your friends to believe you in- myself to be drawn into any discussion sincere. You have undertaken the work, of the meaning of Egyptian hieroand have asked us to accept certain glyphics, which you have agreed to conclusions. You must now round up make clear to us. the investigation and make the con- As a layman, though an educated clusions convincing. and, I hope, an intelligent layman, who When I commented on your book has spent the larger part of his life in you will that I took no issue recall research in another difficult departwith the Egyptologists. I did ques- ment of science, I am not impressed tion the method of the investigation, that your conclusion has received maand claimed that your work was in- terial support from the letters of Drs. complete and your conclusion unwar- Mercer, Barton and Peters. These ranted for the following reasons (the scholars agree in giving you a meevening was too short to enumerate chanical and somewhat antiquated inseveral others) terpretation of a small part of plates 1. That you secured the opinions of 1 and 3. They frankly admit that they only eight scholars in the somewhat can do little or nothing with plate 2. inexact field of Egyptology when many more were available. Your scholars do not attempt to ex- plain the plates, that is, to exhibit their 2. That there was evidence of an unscientific haste to get into print. symbolism and their probable historical That you accepted without ques- 3. derivation so that they may be used to test the translation which the prophtion the authority of your small jury. That you ignored the evident dif- et made of them as emphasized in 4. ferences in the opinions of the mem- the Book of Abraham. If, for argu- bers of the jury. ment's sake, we say that your scholars 5. That you failed to make minutt- agree and are correct in their intercomparisons of the figures and script ' pretation of the figures in plates 1 and in the hieroglyphics in the Pearl of 2, it would not be difficult to reconcile Great Price with similar figures and their version with that of the prophet. script in the museums of the world. Suppose a photograph of Woodrow That you virtually denied the 6. Wilson's inauguration should be handsymbolical meaning of all Egyptian ed down to posterity. Four or five "funeral inscriptions. thousand years hence the picture mighi 7. That you refrained from mention- be interpreted to be a scene of the in- 618 IMPROVEMENT ERA auguration ni' prcsidonl of the United .1 understand its message? Would it be States hi the twentieth century, as four possible to find a scholar who could schola is ha e Interpreted \ he plates of I i ass a scholarly opinion on this subject the Book of Abraham; or, as ;i scene of without taking a ding at "Mormonism" a particular president, Woodrow Wil- of which it is evident your jurymen son, as the prophet did In the notations know nothing? Frankly, I am heartily to the hieroglyphics; or, the scene could ashamed for the sake of scholarship, of be used as the basis of a discussion of some of the letters that you have pubthe government, conditions, education, lished. If the authors write bocks and history and Ideals of a great and mag- teach classes in the same spirit, — nificent nation the method used by the scholarship will soon be held in conprophet in the text of the Book of tempt. Don't you think that the spirit Abraham. All three interpretations of the whole inquiry is summed up by would be correct, but the first would be Dr. Mercer when he says, "It is comeasy, mechanical and unsatisfactory. I plained that scholars did not interpret repeat that something more must be all the figures of these fac-similes an-.! done than to label a few of the figures comment upon all of Smith's interpre- Osiris, Isis or Anubis before Joseph — tations, they probably feel" as I did, Smith can be placed in "the same class that their time was too valuable to of fakers as Dr. Cook." You, yourself spend on such scientific work as that of Joseph Smith's guesses." In my letmust do something more than to collect ter to you, I said that such was the letters n this controversy. The real re- ; sults Of men's scholarship are found in feeling of your jurymen. And that is your honest search after the truth their written books, scientific papers of a matter second in importance to and formal addresses. The method th^t the Bible! To the acceptance of such you have pursued in this inquiry io an inquiry you have invited your dangerously like that employed by Dr Cook in his "discovery" of the north "Mormon" friends! But why continue the guessing? pole. Were it worth while I might pro- When Egyptologists will respectfully and thoroughly examine the plates in pound an endless list of questions. For the Pearl of Great Price and render instance: Did you observe that Dr. their translations of figures and script, Mercer and Dr. Barton, the witnesses as best they can. even that "badly for the witnesses, do not agree? To one copied," and in full light of the religion the meaning of the figures is absolute: of ancient Egypt, it will be time to deal to the other it varies with the historical with their findings seriously. This has period. not yet been done. How can it be that from Mr. Deveria You have done me the honor to send to Dr. Barton, some imply that they a copy of my letter to Dr. Mercer. I. are able to read the hieroglyphics too, have respect for any Harvard man. easily; others only with difficulty, and especially for one who has attained the some not at all? As a layman my dis- scholarship of Dr. Mercer. I know the trust is awakened. Can it be possible Harvard training well enough to tell that this learned jury has not sat you if you will call on Dr. Mercer in down with magnifying glasses and dic- person and ask for the full truth, he tionaries to work out as much as pos- will tell you as I have told you, that sible of the "badly" copied hierogly- your research under the heading Jophics, upon the safe interpretation of seph Smith, Jr., as a Translator is which so much of good for Christianity thoroughly unscientific. The spirit of rests? Is it possible these men i>£ the Jesuit Kirsher, several times rescience are dealing lightly with this ferred to by the jury of Egyptologists, mighty subject? occasionaly enters into the best of us Why is such Egyptian darkness hov- even in this late and enlightened day. ering over the translation of Plate 2? Is it probable that Egyptologists can The loose spirit of your methods of inquiry is well shown in your sumnot read it? Some have so stated. If mary disposition of my first charge, one set of figures can not be read, may that you secured the opinions of only it be suggested that others may as yet eight scholars in the somewhat inexact be poorly understood? Who says or has said that Abraham wrote the Book of field of Egyptology, when manv more were available. To this you simplv an- Abraham in Egyptian? Abraham wrote swer that eleven men the book, but in what language I think of Egyptian learning have labeled approximately none knows. Even in his day scribes alike, the main figures in Plates 1 and and linguists no doubt existed. Besides 2; eleven witnesses, only, Abraham might have known more than testified publicly to having seen and handled one language. Some very ordinary peo- the plates from which the Book of ple of today know three or four. Do you not think this inquiry would pros- — Mormon was translated hence your jury s l?rge enough. Certainlv', 'it is i per more if your prejudiced jury could an unexpected tribute that yon pav to be induced to read the Book of Abra- the authority of Joseph ham carefully and really learn to Smith I should be interested to know just "JOSEPH SMITH, JR., AS A TRANSLATOR" 619 how far you are willing to submit to only partial evidences of the genuinethe example of the "Mormon" prophet. ness of the Book of Mormon. In fact, The witnesses to the Book of Mor- in ''Mormon" literature you will find mon testify that they saw and han- a whole host of other evidences, held dled the golden plates. Your jury of equal value with the testimonies of testify to the accepted inferences con- the witnesses. The book itself gives cerning matters submerged in the the supreme test. Have you read it? twilight of antiquity, into which new Have you tried it? It can do no harm: light is daily being thrown, often to "And when ye shall receive these the destruction of former inferences. things, I would exhort you that ye Assuming, if you will permit me, that would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the two sets of men are equally honest, the name of Christ, if these things are which evidence possesses the higher not true; and if ye shall ask with degree of credibility? Eleven men a sincere heart, with real intent, havcould scarcely disagree on the big fact ing faith in Christ, he will manifest that they saw and handled a series of the truth of it unto you, by the power metallic plates covered with inscrip- of the Holy Ghost." (Book of Mortions, though they might vitally disa- mon, Moroni: 10: 4). gree on the minor matters of the exact received and read your hook on I size of the plates, the nature of the "Joseph Smith, Jr., as a Translator" inscriptions or the quality of the metal. with the love of truth in my heart. On the other hand, eleven or eleven After giving the matter considerable hundred men might disagree funda- thought I wrote you as I had prommentally on inferences concerning ised, my candid opinion of it, and pointthings and conditions of the past which ed out the great flaw which to my mind never may be known directly by the — present unless indeed they slavishly invalidated your conclusion that of — specified 12 careless superficiality. I follow some high authority, to wlKCh reasons, as above summarized, for my they should be subjected for examina- view, and 12 others are waiting to be tion. The only big agreement among presented when the first lot have been your jury is with respect to the general disposed of. In reply you ignore 10 of meaning of Plates 1 and 2 and the my reasons by insisting that your book use of Plate 3— and this agreement is is not and does not pretend to be a not based on tangible facts like the handling of material things or the con- thoroughgoing search after truth. You nected logical steps of thought that again present letters from three schollead to certainty. — ars how you must revel and riot in the effulgence of letter writing author- Much as I dislike to disagree with ities—to support your contention that you, I must insist that eleven wit- the jury of Egyptologists is fully nesses, especially since they admit agreed. You have added very little to their examination is cursory, and are your contention. You then proceed to unwilling to make it extensive, are not meet my criticism that your jury, in sufficient to settle this question that view of the great importance of the roots in the uncertain past. I will pre- subject and the uncertain and grow- dict that if your jury be en- ing field of Egyptology, should have larged, freed from prejudice been larger, by saying that there are and asked to go into the 11 men in your jury and only 11 wit- whole question of figures, script and names, in the light of the Book nesses to the Book of Mormon, and all of Abraham, you will be greatly sur- that in face of the common knowledge prised. If such a thorough examination that although the Book of Mormon should point to the correctness of Jo- witnesses actually saw and handled the seph Smith's work, would you be as plates, their testimonies are only one willing to enter the "Mormon" of many in establishing the truth of Church as you suggest I should be to the Book of Mormon, whereas you base leave it should the examination turn everything upon your 11 unwilling or against the prophet's correctness? prejudiced witnesses. You have chosen the wrong comparison, and my first Moreover, the. use you make of your charge stands intact. eleven testimonies is vastly different You from that made by the Prophet or the Your work has only been begun. Church, of the eleven testimonies for must either admit defeat or you must carry it on to the end. If you leave it the Book of Mormon. You rest your where it is now, the historian of the whole case on your eleven lightly writ- ten reoorts. No more can be said. Your Mormon controversy, on whatever side, childlike reverence of pointed authority cannot place you high. is sublime! I envy you: for life has As I wrote before, let me write now. I have no fear of the outcome when fastened upon me the habit of an- alyzing, for myself, every vital matter, Joseph Smith the Prophet is subjected to any fair examination, but the inquiry irrespective of the authority from which it proceeds. must be an honest search after truth. Sincerely, To the "Mormon" the testimonies of JOHN A. WIDTSOE. the eleven witnesses are important but 620 IMPROVEMENT ERA