The Tanners, relying on the work of Alice Smith McKay, wrote the following against Joseph Smith and the so-called “Civil War Prophecy” (D&C 87):
Alice Smith McKay did a great
deal of research with regard to Joseph Smith’s revelation concerning the Civil
War and came to the conclusion that it was only “the natural result of the
stirring conditions of that particular period of history.” In her thesis she made
these interesting observations:
In 1831, a French Scholar and
publicist, Alexis de Tocqueville, came to the United States. He became interested
in the study of the machinery of the government and as a result wrote his
famous treatise on “Democracy in America.” He predicted the “inevitable
separation” of the North and the South after his study of existing conditions. (“A
Psychological Examination of a Few Prophecies of the Early Founders of
Mormonism,” unpublished Master’s thesis, University
of Utah, 1930, p. 15)
In the Annual Register of
the History of Europe, published in London, 1832 (p. 406) is the following
prediction of the conditions of the United States:
Civil war and a dissolution of
the union seems thus to be approaching.
This statement was given at
the same time that Joseph Smith gave his prophecy. The conditions at South
Carolina pointed directly to war. Joseph Smith a man of foresight and wisdom,
accurately interpreted the facts and information known. . . . The prediction
was given at a period of actual preparation for war in South Carolina. (Ibid.,
p. 19) In view of the historical evidence, as presented, the most reasonable conclusion
is that this Civil War prediction was the natural result of the stirring
conditions of that particular period of history. The data in this short
discussion indicates very forcibly that this utterance was not “Beyond the
power of human sagacity to discern or to calculate.” (Ibid., p. 20A) (Jerald
Tanner and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? [5th ed.; Salt
Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1987, 2008], 191)
The McKay thesis can be found online here.
With respect to the reference to the Annual Register, it appears on page 17
(not 19). Be that as it may, the Tanners correctly quote McKay; McKay quotes
the work as saying Civil War seems to be approaching (as if, in 1832, it
was common knowledge Civil War would happen in the then-future). However,
the Annual Register is available online:
The
Annual Register, or a View of the History, Politics, and Literature, of the
Year 1832 (London: Baldwin and Cradock, 1833)
However, it reads differently than how McKay (and those who follow
her, such as the Tanners) quoted it. Speaking of the fears concerning a
potential Civil War in 1832 and the "nullification" crisis (emphasis
added):
While civil war, and a dissolution
of the Union seemed thus to be approaching, General Jackson, his four
years having expired, had been re-elected President. He lost no time in
assembling Congress. . . .
Firstly, note that the text does not use “sees” but “seemed”—the
impression McKay et al., want to give is that, in 1833 when this volume of the
Annual Register was published, it was believed Civil War in the U.S. was commonly
believed. It was not. It was at the time before the resolution of the
nullification crisis, but for the author of this article, it was a past event.
This can be seen in the fact that the article continues to discuss the various
measures taken by Jackson et al., to resolve the nullification crisis.
This criticisms, apart from being based on a misquotation of a source, is also another failed attempt to downplay the prophetic nature of D&C 87.
Further Reading:
