Appearance
Polyandry
The claim:
"Of those 34 women, 11 of them were married women of other living men. Among them being Apostle Orson Hyde, who was sent on his mission to dedicate Palestine when Joseph secretly married his wife, Marinda Hyde."[1]
The CES Letter also quotes Church Historian Elder Marlin K. Jensen's Swedish Rescue Fireside: "Polyandry is when a man marries another man's wife. Joseph did both."[1:1]
That word -- polyandry -- does heavy lifting. It conjures a woman with two functioning husbands, two beds, two sexual relationships running simultaneously.
Were these marriages in the modern sense -- or something else entirely?
Eleven wives, fourteen sealings, and why the details matter
Depending on how you count disputed cases, Joseph Smith was sealed to between 11 and 14 women who had living husbands. The CES Letter says 11. Brian Hales's research identifies 14.[2]
The details matter more than the aggregate number. Here is the full list, organized by the husband's religious status -- because that turns out to be important:
| Wife | Husband | Husband's status | Approx. sealing date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ruth Vose Sayers | Edward Sayers | Non-member | Feb. 1843 |
| Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner | Adam Lightner | Non-member | Feb. 1842 |
| Sarah Kingsley Cleveland | John Cleveland | Non-member | c. 1842 |
| Presendia Huntington Buell | Norman Buell | Apostatized by 1839 | Dec. 1841 |
| Sylvia Sessions Lyon | Windsor Lyon | Excomm. Nov. 1842 | Feb. 8, 1842 |
| Zina Huntington Jacobs | Henry Jacobs | Faithful LDS | Oct. 27, 1841 |
| Patty Bartlett Sessions | David Sessions | Faithful LDS | Mar. 9, 1842 |
| Marinda Johnson Hyde | Orson Hyde | Faithful LDS (apostle) | Apr. 1842 or May 1843 |
| Elvira Cowles Holmes | Jonathan Holmes | Faithful LDS | Jun. 1, 1843 |
| Elizabeth Davis Durfee | Jabez Durfee | Faithful LDS | c. 1842 |
| Lucinda Pendleton Morgan Harris | George W. Harris | Faithful LDS | c. 1838 |
Sources: Hales, Joseph Smith's Polygamy; Compton, In Sacred Loneliness; FAIR.[2:1][3][4]
Several husbands were non-members or apostates with no expectation of an eternal sealing. Others were faithful Latter-day Saints. The circumstances varied dramatically -- but the CES Letter treats all of them as identical.
"Eternity-only" was a real category, not a convenient excuse
The CES Letter dismisses this framework outright:
"How is not having sex with a living man's wife on earth only to take her from him in the eternities to be one of your forty wives any better or any less immoral?"[5]
Fair emotional reaction. But it sidesteps what the evidence shows.
Early Latter-day Saint sealing theology recognized distinct categories. For a fuller explanation, see the sister article on Joseph Smith's Marriages.[6][2:2]
| Type | What it meant | Sexual relationship? |
|---|---|---|
| Time-and-eternity | A full marriage -- this life and the next | Evidence for some |
| Eternity-only | A sealing for the afterlife only | No |
| Dynastic/familial | Connecting families across generations | No |
The Ruth Vose Sayers case is the clearest example. Her non-member husband Edward insisted that Ruth be sealed to Joseph for eternity, because Edward himself could only claim her in this life. Andrew Jenson's handwritten notes confirm the arrangement.[7]
D&C 22:1 -- "all old covenants have I caused to be done away" -- provided the theological framework. Civil marriages were temporal contracts. Eternal sealings were a different category entirely.[8]
And for every one of these women, the same thing happened after the sealing: nothing changed. They continued living with their legal husbands. They continued bearing their husbands' children. They continued their daily lives.[6:1]
Zina Huntington Jacobs -- the hardest case
The CES Letter highlights Zina as its most emotionally potent example:
"A union with a newlywed and pregnant woman (Zina Huntington)."[9]
The facts: Zina married Henry Jacobs on March 7, 1841. On October 27, 1841 -- seven and a half months later, while six months pregnant with Henry's child -- she was sealed to Joseph Smith by her brother Dimick Huntington.[10][3:1]
That is genuinely difficult. Here is what the CES Letter doesn't mention.
Joseph proposed to Zina three times before her marriage to Henry. She refused each time. She chose to marry Henry. Only after her marriage did she accept an eternity-only sealing to Joseph.[10:1][11]
After the sealing, Zina continued living with Henry. She bore Henry's son, Zebulon. Nothing about her daily life changed.
Henry knew. His response: "Whatever the Prophet did was right, without making the wisdom of God's authorities bend to the reasoning of any man."[3:2]
DNA evidence settled one question conclusively. Ugo Perego's 2005 genetic testing confirmed that Zebulon Jacobs was Henry's biological son -- not Joseph's.[12]
Worth Acknowledging
The Zina case is still hard. Sealing yourself to a newlywed pregnant woman -- even for eternity only -- raises questions without clean answers. The strongest evidence is what didn't happen: no sexual relationship, no disruption to the existing marriage, and a son confirmed by DNA as Henry's.
Orson Hyde wasn't sent away so Joseph could marry his wife
The CES Letter's most inflammatory framing:
"Apostle Orson Hyde, who was sent on his mission to dedicate Palestine when Joseph secretly married his wife, Marinda Hyde."[1:2]
The implication: Joseph sent Orson away to steal his wife.
The timeline doesn't support it. Orson left for Palestine in early 1841 and had been gone over a year before any sealing occurred. The Quorum of the Twelve assigned the mission -- one of the most spiritually significant assignments in early Church history, resulting in the dedication of the Holy Land.[13]
The sealing date itself is disputed. Two competing dates exist: April 1842 (during Orson's mission) and May 1843 (after his return). Marinda's own signed affidavit supports the later date.[4:1]
What happened afterward tells the real story. Weeks after returning, Orson asked Joseph to perform a plural sealing for him. Marinda did not become pregnant until after Orson's return. Orson remained a faithful apostle until his death in 1878. Marinda remained an active member for life.[13:1]
If Joseph had stolen Orson's wife, Orson's immediate response was to ask the man for a favor.
| Question | Evidence |
|---|---|
| Did Joseph engineer the mission? | No -- the Quorum of the Twelve assigned it |
| Was Orson gone briefly? | No -- over a year before sealing |
| Did Orson object afterward? | No -- asked Joseph to seal his own plural marriage |
| Did Marinda leave the Church? | No -- faithful her entire life |
| Is the sealing date certain? | No -- two conflicting dates, one during and one after the mission |
DNA evidence: zero children from polyandrous sealings
Every testable case of alleged offspring from polyandrous sealings has come back negative:
| Alleged child | Mother | DNA result |
|---|---|---|
| Zebulon Jacobs | Zina Huntington Jacobs | Henry's son -- not Joseph's (2005) |
| Oliver Buell | Presendia Huntington Buell | Not Joseph's (2007) |
| Josephine Lyon | Sylvia Sessions Lyon | Windsor Lyon's daughter -- not Joseph's (2016) |
Source: Ugo A. Perego, published in peer-reviewed journals.[12:1][14]
The Josephine Lyon case was the strongest candidate. Sylvia Sessions reportedly confessed on her deathbed that Josephine was Joseph's daughter. Autosomal DNA testing in 2016 proved Josephine was Windsor Lyon's daughter.[14:1]
Three tested individuals from polyandrous sealings. Zero confirmed as Joseph's. This is physical evidence -- not theological argument -- that these sealings did not involve sexual relations.
For the complete DNA evidence across all plural marriages, see Joseph Smith's Marriages.
What the husbands did afterward
If a religious leader had secretly married your wife, what would you do?
Here is what these men actually did:
| Husband | What happened |
|---|---|
| Edward Sayers | Arranged the sealing himself |
| Jonathan Holmes | Stood as proxy in the temple resealing |
| Henry Jacobs | Remained faithful; later stood as proxy for Zina's sealing |
| David Sessions | Continued living with Patty |
| George W. Harris | Continued as a faithful member |
| Adam Lightner | Joseph told Mary to remain with him; she did for 40+ years |
No legal husband filed a grievance. No husband sought divorce over a sealing. No husband left a hostile record. Several actively participated.[2:3][4:2]
Joseph's enemies never accused him of sexual polyandry
John C. Bennett -- Joseph's most aggressive and informed enemy -- knew about plural marriage and used that knowledge to attack Joseph publicly. William Law published the Nauvoo Expositor specifically to expose polygamy.
Neither accused Joseph of sexual polyandry. These men had every incentive to use the most damning version of events. They didn't.[2:4][15]
If Joseph were carrying on sexual relationships with other men's wives, his enemies would have said so. They knew the details. They chose the ammunition that would do the most damage. Genuine polyandry would have been devastating -- and they never used it.
The courtroom evidence points the same direction
In 1892, the Temple Lot Case required the Church to prove Joseph had practiced plural marriage. Church attorneys called plural wives to testify about consummation.
They specifically avoided calling Zina Huntington, Patty Bartlett Sessions, and Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner -- three polyandrous wives who were alive and available.[15:1]
The simplest explanation: Church attorneys knew these women could not testify to sexual relations that hadn't happened.
The genuine difficulty
This topic is hard. Pretending otherwise would be dishonest.
Even granting the best-case reading -- eternity-only sealings, no sexual relations, husbands often consenting -- real questions remain.
Some husbands were not asked. Esther Dutcher's husband Albert was initially devastated when he learned of the sealing. Not every case involved prior consent.[16]
Power dynamics were real. When a prophet claiming divine mandate asks to be sealed to your wife, the voluntariness of "consent" is complicated -- even if the sealing carries no mortal implications.
We don't fully understand the theology. Why were these sealings necessary? What eternal purpose did they serve for women already married to faithful members? Joseph's sealing theology was evolving, and he died before it was fully codified.
The term "polyandry" is technically accurate for the ceremonial arrangement, even if sexually misleading.
The CES Letter's strongest version of this criticism isn't the inflammatory framing it uses. It's the scholarly version: Joseph exercised extraordinary religious authority over the most intimate aspects of people's lives, in secret, with an evolving theological justification. The best defenses each answer part of the problem -- but none answers all of it simultaneously.
That is an honest statement of the difficulty. What follows is why faith remains reasonable despite it.
The case for understanding
These sealings were about eternity, not this life
Every polyandrous wife continued living with her legal husband. No cohabitation with Joseph. No separation from the first husband. No change in domestic arrangements. No children.[6:2]
The Gospel Topics Essay offers three explanations: (1) creating family links across the community, (2) complying with a divine commandment without cohabitation, or (3) securing eternal blessings the women desired.[6:3]
The Ruth Vose Sayers case -- where the husband himself arranged the sealing -- is the clearest window into the theology. A faithful woman married to a non-believing husband had no path to eternal marriage under the new sealing theology. The eternity-only sealing provided that path without disrupting her mortal marriage.
The timeline changes the picture
Historian Don Bradley's revised chronology of Joseph's Nauvoo sealings reorders the entire picture. Joseph's earliest sealings were not to young single women. They were to already-married women -- including Zina Huntington, who was pregnant.[17]
If Joseph's motive were sexual, he would have started with available single women. He started with the least sexually available women possible: married, pregnant, already committed.
That sequence is evidence of religious motivation.
The women chose -- and some refused
The CES Letter treats these women as silent objects. They weren't.
Zina refused Joseph three times before eventually accepting. Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner testified that Joseph told her she was "created for him before the foundation of the earth" and was his "before I came here."[18] Five women declined Joseph's proposals entirely, and he accepted their refusals without retaliation.[2:5]
None of Joseph's approximately 35 plural wives ever publicly accused him of wrongdoing -- including women who later left the Church. Their voices, taken seriously, tell a different story from the CES Letter's portrait of silent victims.
Further Reading
The Church's Gospel Topics Essay on Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo addresses polyandry directly. Brian Hales's josephsmithspolygamy.org provides the most exhaustive scholarly treatment.
Bottom line: The word "polyandry" implies Joseph Smith was collecting other men's wives. The evidence shows eternity-only sealings that left every existing marriage intact -- no cohabitation, no children, no disruption. DNA has ruled out every tested case of alleged offspring. Most husbands knew, several arranged it themselves, and none filed complaints. Joseph's own enemies never accused him of sexual polyandry -- and they would have if they could. The genuine difficulty is real and worth sitting with. But the CES Letter's portrait of a predator secretly stealing wives collapses under the weight of what actually happened -- and what didn't.
Runnells, CES Letter (2017), "Polygamy | Polyandry," pp. 51-52. ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Brian C. Hales, "Sealings to Legally Married Women — Sexual Polyandry," Joseph Smith's Polygamy. https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/common-questions/sexual-polyandry/ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997). ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
"Polyandry and Joseph Smith: Sealings to Women with Living Husbands," FAIR. https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Polyandry_and_Joseph_Smith:_sealings_to_women_with_living_husbands ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Runnells, CES Letter (2017), "Polygamy | Polyandry," p. 52. ↩︎
"Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo," Gospel Topics Essays, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Andrew Jenson, 1887 historical notes. Edward Sayers "insisted that his wife Ruth should be sealed to the Prophet for eternity, as he himself should only claim her in this life." Cited in Brian C. Hales, Joseph Smith's Polygamy, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2013), 1:365-367. ↩︎
"Explanation of Polyandry," Debunking the CES Letter. https://debunking-cesletter.com/polygamy-polyandry-1/polyandry/explanation-of-polyandry/ ↩︎
Runnells, CES Letter (2017), "Polygamy | Polyandry," pp. 56-57. ↩︎
"Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs," FAIR. https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Zina_Diantha_Huntington_Jacobs ↩︎ ↩︎
Allen L. Wyatt, "Zina and Her Men: An Examination of the Changing Marital State of Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs Smith Young," FAIR Conference, August 2006. ↩︎
Ugo A. Perego et al., DNA studies on alleged Smith offspring, published in Forensic Science International: Genetics (2005, 2007). See also "DNA Tests Rule Out 2 as Smith Descendants," Deseret News, November 10, 2007. https://www.deseret.com/2007/11/10/20052616/dna-tests-rule-out-2-as-smith-descendants/ ↩︎ ↩︎
"Marinda Johnson Hyde," Debunking the CES Letter. https://debunking-cesletter.com/polygamy-polyandry-1/polyandry/explanation-of-polyandry/marinda-johnson-hyde/ ↩︎ ↩︎
Ugo A. Perego, "Using Science to Answer Questions from Latter-day Saint History: The Case of Josephine Lyon's Paternity," BYU Studies 57, no. 2 (2018). https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/using-science-answer-questions-from-latter-day-saint-history-case-josephine-lyons-paternity ↩︎ ↩︎
Brian C. Hales, "Joseph Smith's Sexual Polyandry and the Emperor's New Clothes," FAIR Conference, August 2012. https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/conference_home/august-2012/joseph-smiths-sexual-polyandry-and-the-emperors-new-clothes-on-closer-inspection-what-do-we-find ↩︎ ↩︎
"Knowledge and Consent of Living Husbands," FAIR. https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Polyandry/Knowledge_and_consent_of_living_husband ↩︎
Don Bradley, interview with Ward Radio, "BOMBSHELL New Discoveries of Nauvoo Polygamy." Bradley's revised chronology shows Joseph's earliest Nauvoo sealings were to already-married women, not single women -- evidence that religious rather than sexual motivations drove the practice. ↩︎
"How Could Joseph Smith's Polyandrous Marriages Be Explained?" LDS Answers. https://ldsanswers.org/how-could-joseph-smiths-polyandrous-marriages-be-explained/ ↩︎