1. The two sources for these instructions are important since they form the basis for the account found in the Manuscript History of the Church which in turn was used by Orson Pratt to extract the section of the Doctrine and Covenants (130) based on them. The history account however is both an amalgamation and an edition to these two records. Leo Hawkins was the writer for the portion of the history containing this event and he wrote it sometime between April 1854 and January 1856. Hawkins may have used both the Clayton and Richards records but the results were then edited by Robert Lang Campbell. It is certain that Campbell did not do this on his own. George A. Smith was the Church Historian at the time. The history writers often took various accounts available to them and simply meshed them to form an extended account, possibly including the occasional gloss. While simple, this method could lead to rather curious results as it did with another scribe, Jonathan Grimshaw's, Smith's and Brigham Young's account of the "King Follet Discourse" found in the history. See 7Apr44 note 1. Problems could occur because recorders, for example Willard Richards, might summarize what Joseph said in pithy sayings. These sayings might be put together with more expanded or reminiscent accounts giving the effect of a disjointed or repetitious speech. Hence the version used by Elder Pratt may have been a less reliable one than the Clayton diary, containing as it seems, a gloss in the instruction regarding the Holy Ghost. Compare the three versions of this instruction:

Clayton	Smith Diary	MS History - LDS D&C 130
The Holy Ghost is a personage, and a person cannot have the personage of the Holy Ghost in his heart. A man receive the gifts of the H. G., and the H. G. may descend upon a man but not to tarry with him.	the Father has a body of flesh & bones as tangible as mans the Son also, but the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit. --and a person cannot have the personage of the H G. in his heart he may receive the gift of the holy Ghost. it may descend upon him but not to tarry with him,--	The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; The Son also; but the Holy Ghost^ has not a body of flesh and bones but is a personage of Spirit [; were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.] [erasure] A man may receive the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and [_ _ _ _ it _ _ _ _] may descend upo[n him and] not _ tarry with him.

The portions from the ms history in brackets were written over erasures. The phrases, "has not a body of flesh and bones but", "were it not so the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.", "_ _ _ _ it _ _ _ _" and "n him and" appear to be in the handwriting of Jonathan Grimshaw.. It is not clear what the erasures removed but it appears Hawkins was following Clayton at that point. What motivated the historians to make the change ("were it not so he could not dwell in us") remains a mystery. On the surface at least, the original sources appear in contradiction to this addition. However, the idea that two spirits might inhabit the same body is clearly accepted within normative Mormonism and Joseph Smith remarks elsewhere on this. See for example 21May43. Meanwhile, the addition seems to have been ignored in Church literature and discourse. Section 130 of the Doctrine and Covenants was extracted from the ms history by Orson Pratt. Portions of the Smith diary wording are reiterated in 16Jun44. See also 11Jun43 and 5Jan41.

Moreover, Clayton does not separate in time the morning and afternoon instructions. The Smith diary notes that these instructions were given at two separate meetings (in our parallel account we have parsed the Smith diary to compare its statements with Clayton; the next to last column is the Smith diary account as it appears in the original). The Smith diary dates the visit to Sophronia, April 4, 1843. Other sources give April 2nd.

The manuscript history has a fair number of erasures and insertions in the account of the visit. A transcription of the entry (pages 1509-1511, volume 5) follows:

At 10 A. M. went to meeting, heard Elder O. Hyde preach comparing the sectarian preachers
to crows living on carrion, as they were more fond of lies about the Saints than the truth, and alluding
to the coming of the Saviour, he said, "when he shall appear we shall be like him &c. he will appear
on a white horse as a warrior, and maybe we shall have some of the same spirit; our God is a
Warrior John 14 ch. 2 and 3 v. It is our privilege to have the Father and Son dwelling in our
hearts &c."

We dined with my Sister Sophronia McCleary; when I told Elder Hyde_^^that I was
going to offer some corrections to his sermon this morning, he replied they shall be thankfully
received. When the Saviour shall appear, we shall see him as he is; we shall see that he is a man
like ourselves, and that same sociality which exists among us here, will exist among us there, only
it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy 14 John 2. 3 v. the
appearing of the Father and the Son in that verse, is a personal appearance, and the idea that the
Father and the Son dwells in a man's heart, is an old Sectarian notion and is false. In answer
to the question "Is not the reckoning of God's time, angels' time, prophets' time and man's time
according to the planet on which they reside?" I anser yes, but there are no angels who
minister to this Earth, but_^^those who do belong, or have belonged to it. The Angels do not reside on a
Planet like this earth, but they reside in the presence of God, on a globe like a sea of glass and fire,
where all things_^^{for their glory} are manifest, past, present, and future, and are continually before the Lord. The
place where God resides is a great Urim and Thummim. The Urim and Thummim is a small
representation of this Globe. This Earth is its sanctified and immortal State will be made like
unto Crystal, and will be a Urim and Thummim,_^^{to the inhabitants who dwell thereon} whereby all things pertaining to an inferior kingdom
or all kingdoms of a lower order, will be manifest to those who dwell on it, and this Earth will
be with Christ's Then the white stone mentioned in Revelations ch. 2 v 17 is the_^^{will become a} Urim and
Thummim_^^{to each individual who receives one} whereby all things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms, even all kingdoms will be
made known, and a white stone is given to each of those who come into the celestial kingdom, whereon
is a new name written, which no man knoweth wave he that receiveth it. The new name is the key word

He also repeated his dream of March 10th, when Elder Hyde gave this interpretation,
"The Old man represents the Government of the United States, who will be invaded by a foreign
foe, probably England. The United States government will call on the Saints to defend probably
all this Western Territory, and will offer their leader any amount of men he shall desire, and put
them under his command for that purpose."

I prophesy in the name of the Lord God, that the commencement of_^^{the difficulties which will cause much} bloodshed, as
preparatory^previous to the coming of the Son of Man, will commence^be in South Carolina, (it probably
may arise through the Slave Trade,^Question) this a voice declared to me, while I was praying earnestly
on the subject: December 25th. 1832

I was once praying very earnestly to know the time of the coming of the Son of Man,
when I heard a voice repeat the following, "Joseph my son, if thou livest until thou art 85 years
old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man, therefore let this suffice and trouble me no more on
this matter." I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the
beginning of the Millennium, or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his
face, I believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time.

At 1 P. M. Attended meeting, I read the 5th chapter of Revelations, referring particu-
larly to the 6th verse, shewing from that, the actual existence of beasts in heaven, probably those were
beasts which had lived on another planet, and not ours. God never made use of the figure
of a beast to represent the kingdom of heaven; when it is made use of, it is to represent an Apostate
Church. This is the first time I have ever taken a text in Revelations, and if the young elders
would let such things alone, it would be far better.

Then corrected Elder Hyde's remarks,_^^the same as I had done to him privately.

At the close of the meeting, we expected to start for Carthage, but the bad weather
prevented, so I called another meeting in the evening.

Between meetings I read in revelations with Elder Hyde, and expounded_^^the same, during
which time several persons came in, and expressed their fears that I had come in contact with the old
scriptures.

At 7 o'clock meeting, I resumed the subject of the beast, shewed very plainly that John's
vision was very different from Daniel's prophecy- one referring to things actually existing in Heaven,
the other being a figure of things which are on Earth.

Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the
resurrection, and if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life thro' his dilegence
and obedience than another; he will have so much the advantage in the world to come. There is
a law irrevocably decreed in Heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings
are predicated; and when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon
which it is predicated.

The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; The Son also; but the
Holy Ghost_^^{has not a body of flesh and bones but} is a personage of Spirit; were it not so the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.

A man may receive the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and - - - - it - - - - may descend
upon him and not - tarry with him.

What is the meaning of the Scriptures, he that is faithful over a few things shall
be made ruler over many, and he that is faithful over many, shall be made ruler over many
more? What is the meaning of the parable of the ten talents? Also the conversation with
Nicodemus, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit? Were questions put to one which
I shall not answer at present.

2. In several reminiscent accounts (for an example, note 7), Benjamin F. Johnson who lived at Ramus verified that Clayton was there. He does not mention Willard Richards. Indeed, Richards was apparently in Nauvoo during this trip to Ramus. The source of the Smith diary, recorded in Richards' hand, is not known, though the phrasing suggests that it was copied from Clayton's record, at least in part. Perhaps the unique portions of the Smith diary came from conversations with Clayton or Joseph Smith about these meetings.

3. The meaning of this statement is expanded on in later sermons. See 16July43 note 1. The reference is to the power of the priesthood being necessary to create bonds lasting beyond mortal life. Compare "a law irrevocably decreed in heaven" with 9Oct43 also.

3a. Not the first time Joseph spoke of this. See 18Feb43.

4. This is undoubtedly a reference to the temple endowment and other temple ordinances. This is the special knowledge that provides an advantage in the world to come.

5. This was certainly not the first time this particular doctrine was taught. For example see Times and Seasons (September 15, 1842), vol. 3, 926. Cp. Millennial Star 2 (April 1842): 184. See also, Book of Abraham, Facsimile No. 3, explanation 1. That God has a body of flesh was a recurring theme (see Note 1 at 7Apr44, and the notion that the Holy Ghost is a spirit body was also taught elsewhere (see 27Aug43 and note 4 there).

6. For an earlier reference to this experience see February 14, 1835. Joseph's own interpretation of this experience seems to have evolved from feeling that it suggested a time-table to the end, to one of uncertainty regarding its meaning. See also 10Mar44 and 6Apr43-afternoon-session.

7. The reference was apparently to plural marriage, according to Benjamin F. Johnson (note 2) who claimed a conversation prior to the meeting involved Joseph explaining the doctrine and saying he would preach something only Johnson would understand (see Johnson's autobiography).

8. See 16Jul43 for the link between John 3:6 with note 7.