The Council of Fifty — What It Was and What It Wasn’t

Critics argue Joseph Smith’s secret Council of Fifty reveals theocratic ambitions incompatible with American democracy. The history is more nuanced — and more interesting — than this reading allows.

The Claim

Joseph Smith organized a secret “Council of Fifty” in 1844 — a political body that planned a Mormon nation-state in the West, discussed nullifying U.S. law in Utah territory, and included an oath of vengeance against the United States. Joseph Smith ran for U.S. President in 1844 with theocratic intentions.

The Historical Reality

What the Council of Fifty actually was

The Council of Fifty (formally “The Kingdom of God and His Laws with the Keys and Power thereof, and Judgment in the Hands of His Servants”) was organized March 1844, months before Joseph Smith’s death. It served multiple purposes: (1) exploring a potential western territory beyond U.S. jurisdiction (Texas or the Great Basin) where the Saints could escape persecution; (2) planning for Joseph’s presidential campaign; (3) studying constitutional governance in anticipation of the Millennium.

The context of persecution

The Council was organized after the Missouri Extermination Order (1838) and multiple expulsions. The Saints had been driven from Missouri at gunpoint, with an active government order making it legal to kill them. Joseph Smith’s assassination in June 1844 — by an armed mob while in government custody — vindicated his assessment that the Saints needed either legal protection or geographic separation. The Council was a response to documented, ongoing persecution, not unprovoked ambition.

Joseph Smith’s presidential platform

Joseph Smith’s 1844 presidential platform was one of the most progressive of the era: abolition of slavery (funded by sale of public lands), prison reform, reduction of Congress, extension of executive power to protect minority rights. This is not the platform of a theocrat seeking dominion — it is the platform of a reformer who had watched the government fail to protect his people.

The Kingdom of God in theological context

LDS theology does anticipate a millennial Kingdom of God on earth — this is explicitly taught in D&C and Book of Mormon eschatology. The Council of Fifty was preparing for that eventual governance in a theological sense. This is not different from Augustine’s “City of God” theology, Calvin’s Geneva theocracy, or Puritan New England — all of which understood civil governance as ultimately accountable to divine law. The difference: the Saints actually expected the Millennium imminently.

The Oath of Vengeance controversy

Some accounts describe an “oath of vengeance” against the U.S. government for the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum Smith. This oath, if it existed in formal ceremony, was removed from temple practice by the early 20th century. Its removal demonstrates the living church’s ability to discontinue practices inconsistent with the Gospel — not evidence of a fundamentally anti-government institution. The Church has sustained constitutional government consistently since Utah statehood.

The Verdict

The Council of Fifty was a real institution — a political planning body organized in a context of persecution and millennial expectation. It was not a secret conspiracy against American democracy. Joseph Smith’s presidential platform was reformist, not theocratic. The theological vision of a Kingdom of God is scripture — but so is “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates” (Article of Faith 12). The tension between millennial expectation and present-day constitutional loyalty is real; the Church has resolved it consistently in favor of constitutional governance since the 19th century.