LDS question regarding polygamy

[luv-my-boys]

first off let me say I dont mean this question in harm, honestly Im just curious. I grew up in a very non-LDS portion of the U.S, simply there were very few LDS around I have since met several very faithful LDS members and have some curiosity. However, they find it "inappropriate" to speak about the church to "outsiders" (at least that what was told to us by several people) we met a very nice couple who are very faithful LDS members in fact her husband is someone high in the church. It was brought up one day in casual conversation about other things were it became known that they (this couple and family) believe in the biblical calling of polygamy but that they also believe that they must obey the laws of the land, therefore it is not allowed. I wanted to ask questions, but felt it was inappropriate at that time. but now it has be thinking, is this belief common in mainstream LDS, this family is by far not the atypical family. they are very well known and respected in the LDS church (national) and in our local community. I know that the mainstread LDS has gone away from the practice but is the "belief in the principle" still there just not practiced because it is illegal and the church therefore frowns on it. and was is the biblical reasoning behind polygamy in LDS doctrine. but if the church were to condone and it not be illegal would there be more polygamy in LDS homes? sorry not sure how to word it. but I found it interesting that they made this comment.

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by luv-my-boys

I have since met several very faithful LDS members and have some curiosity. However, they find it "inappropriate" to speak about the church to "outsiders" (at least that what was told to us by several people)

That's really odd. Usually you can't get LDS folks to shut up about the church :

we met a very nice couple who are very faithful LDS members in fact her husband is someone high in the church. It was brought up one day in casual conversation about other things were it became known that they (this couple and family) believe in the biblical calling of polygamy but that they also believe that they must obey the laws of the land, therefore it is not allowed. I wanted to ask questions, but felt it was inappropriate at that time. but now it has be thinking, is this belief common in mainstream LDS, this family is by far not the atypical family. they are very well known and respected in the LDS church (national) and in our local community. I know that the mainstread LDS has gone away from the practice but is the "belief in the principle" still there just not practiced because it is illegal and the church therefore frowns on it. and was is the biblical reasoning behind polygamy in LDS doctrine. but if the church were to condone and it not be illegal would there be more polygamy in LDS homes? sorry not sure how to word it. but I found it interesting that they made this comment.

This is tricky. The church itself shies away from any talk about polygamy and so a lot of members do too. In my personal life both online and in the "real world" I can honestly say the vast majority of members I have spoken with about polygamy are not a fan. I can even go as far as to say some express venom towards the practice. However although I am not too keen on the idea of practicing it myself I do believe in it the way the couple you are talking about do (oh yeah, did I mention I am LDS?) There are members who believe it was practiced in our history when it was because it needed to be and those occasions are a rarity. I am not in this camp. I believe it to be a part of what the family structure is intended to be for some.

The church is mum on the issue beyond "we don't currently practice it here on this Earth" so each member is going to have a different take. Some say it will never ever be brought into the church again. Some say if it were to they'd leave the church. Some are waiting for the day it is reinstated. Some believe it is going on on a spiritual level in temple sealings and some think that that will be worked out in heaven and we shouldn't concern ourselves with it now. To answer the part I bolded it just really depends on the home. One thing about polygamy is that even in the days of Joseph Smith it wasn't something required of everyone.

The only thing that is for sure is it's a touchy subject. I got the feeling from your post that this family isn't advertising their beliefs and I can't say I blame them. After the gazzilionth time of listening to sisters in my area bashing the practice and all who practice it I quickly learned not to come to it's defense if I didn't want to be eaten alive. Still I do have plenty of friends who feel the way DH and I do and who I can talk to about it openly.

Do you happen to know what calling this man holds? No reason besides I am nosy-er-curious

[luv-my-boys]

whats funny is the conversation got started on how DH and I had to go inside because we were going to watch our "show" she asked which one and we said Big love thats when the conversation got interesting. I dont know what office he holds in their church only the few things that have been told to me and how proud she is of her husbands calling and his position in the church by others. I have never asked because frankly I really didnt care, there nice and that whats important to me.

[holyhelianthus]

That makes sense. I was just wondering.

[Bekka]

Here a section from the Book of Mormon that talks about it. This is really where I've found "peace" about the issue, in verse 30 (just to have context, by commandment, this group of people in the Book of Mormon were commanded to have one wife, see v. 27. We believe that there have been times in history when more than one wife was condoned/commanded by God, and there were other times when just one wife was commanded.

Jacob chapter 2:

27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

This may seem "blind faith" to some, but I believe/have faith that the Book of Mormon is true scripture, and these words were given by God during a time when the people were being unrighteous, so these are specific guidelines for those people. I cannot know all of God's reasons for asking us to do the things he asks, so I just have to have faith that His reasons make more sense than my mortal mind can reason/understand.

I also believe that a lot of things will be "worked out" or just "make sense" in heaven, after we die, and we'll wonder what the big fuss was all about, anyway!

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by Bekka

This may seem "blind faith" to some, but I believe/have faith that the Book of Mormon is true scripture, and these words were given by God during a time when the people were being unrighteous, so these are specific guidelines for those people.

This actually goes into really well what I was saying about the disagreement between members (and even splinter groups)....

Some members believe that not practicing plural marriage is the exception and others believe that practicing it is the exception meaning some believe marriage between one man and one woman is the mandate and there are times when it becomes necessary to institute plural marriage and others believe the opposite that polygamy is the mandate and sometimes it becomes necessary for monogamy (clear as mud? )

But yes Bekka is right- because there is nothing really definite on it it is about what brings you peace.

And doesn't everything seem like blind faith to those on the outside looking in?

[A&A]

My parents are LDS. They are sealed for eternity. If my mom were to die, my dad could get sealed to another woman, for eternity, also. (The reverse is not true......my mom wouldn't be able to be sealed to another man.)

Make of it what you will.

[JustVanessa]

Originally Posted by A&A

My parents are LDS. They are sealed for eternity. If my mom were to die, my dad could get sealed to another woman, for eternity, also. (The reverse is not true......my mom wouldn't be able to be sealed to another man.)

Make of it what you will.

So your dad would get 2 wives in the next life? But your mom could not have 2 husbands......can you be married and not sealed for eternity?
Or is once a woman widowed never allowed to remarry?

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by JustVanessa

So your dad would get 2 wives in the next life? But your mom could not have 2 husbands......can you be married and not sealed for eternity?
Or is once a woman widowed never allowed to remarry?

Yes and yes you can be married without being sealed. When I was a kid a good friend of the family married a widow but they were not sealed. If my DH were to die right now (God forbid!) I could be married for time only and not sealed.

Also women can get their sealings revoked whether because they are divorced or because their husbands died early on or whatever. If your husband breaks his covenants (say beats you) you can be unselaed.

[Liquesce]

Originally Posted by magstphil

or because their husbands died early on or whatever.

I know it's veering pretty far off-topic, but ... does that include after a long marriage? Like, someone marries at twenty, is widowed at thirty, and wants to be sealed to the person they plan to remarry at thirty-five? Or is that just a "he died a year after we wed" kind of thing.

[JustVanessa]

Originally Posted by magstphil

Also women can get their sealings revoked whether because they are divorced or because their husbands died early on or whatever. If your husband breaks his covenants (say beats you) you can be unselaed.

So it isn't really "sealed for eternity". That phrase sounds irrevocable.

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by Liquesce

I know it's veering pretty far off-topic, but ... does that include after a long marriage? Like, someone marries at twenty, is widowed at thirty, and wants to be sealed to the person they plan to remarry at thirty-five? Or is that just a "he died a year after we wed" kind of thing.

I can't really say. Each of these things is brought to an authority in the church to discern. You go in, state your case, and they decide if you will be unsealed or not (this does not include divorce. That's a different process). So in some cases maybe not and in some cases maybe yes

Originally Posted by JustVanessa

So it isn't really "sealed for eternity". That phrase sounds irrevocable.

Well it is in that we believe we are literally sealed forever. It's just that the sealing can be undone if needs be either here on Earth or by the Lord in there hereafter.

[A&A]

Originally Posted by JustVanessa

So your dad would get 2 wives in the next life?

Yes, he would have two wives for eternity if he chose to be sealed to both of them.

[ZorroZ]

A women can also be sealed to more then one man after she dies. So if husband #1 dies & she remarries (for time only) to husband #2. When she dies she can be sealed to him by someone standing in as proxy.

I find it facinating. It also makes my head hurt. So I let Heavenly Father figure it out.

I knew one women who had 3 husbands throughout her long lifetime. She is now sealed to all of them.

[akichan]

I didn't read all the posts thoroughly, but from what I understand, polygamy was started in the LDS church because of all the Mormon exoduses from place to place in the beginning of the church. More men were dying than women due to overexposure, being a part of the "Mormon Battalion", etc, and women and children needed someoen to provide for them, so men were asked to take on more wives/adopt more families, to help support them in the long travels ahead.

When the practice was no longer necessary and the people were firmly rooted in the Salt Lake Valley, it was revoked.

Sealings, I don't know too much about. I know that men can be sealed to more than one wife and that it will "work itself out fairly in the eternities". That's about all I know and I trust in that completely. However, I also believe there will be many more people than those we know lived on earth, meaning that the people who died as children or single here on earth will have an opportunity to also be married and sealed. So if that means that men will be allowed to keep both wives or if in the end there will be an even number of each sex, I do not know, either, and these are a options I can think of with my limited human intelligence. I am sure that there are many, many other options I am not aware of and ways that this will justly be dealt with.

[momma4fun]

Originally Posted by akichan

I didn't read all the posts thoroughly, but from what I understand, polygamy was started in the LDS church because of all the Mormon exoduses from place to place in the beginning of the church. More men were dying than women due to overexposure, being a part of the "Mormon Battalion", etc, and women and children needed someoen to provide for them, so men were asked to take on more wives/adopt more families, to help support them in the long travels ahead.

When the practice was no longer necessary and the people were firmly rooted in the Salt Lake Valley, it was revoked.

this is not true.

The Mormon apostle John Widsoe de-bunked the common explanation that polygamy was practiced in order to provide homes to a surplus of women in the church:

“Plural marriage has been a subject of wide and frequent comment. Members of the Church unfamiliar with its history, and many nonmembers, have set up fallacious reasons for the origin of this system of marriage among the Latter-day Saints. “The most common of these conjectures is that the Church, through plural marriage sought to provide husbands for its large surplus of female members. The implied assumption in this theory, that there have been more female than male members in the Church, is NOT supported by existing evidence. On the contrary, there seems always to have been MORE MALES than females in the Church...
“The United States census records from 1850 to 1940, and all available Church records, uniformly show a preponderance of MALES in Utah, and in the Church. Indeed, the excess in Utah has usually been larger than for the whole United States,...Orson Pratt, writing in 1853 from direct knowledge of Utah conditions, when the excess of females was supposedly the highest, declares against the opinion that females out numbered the males in Utah...
“Another conjecture is that the people were few in numbers and that the Church, desiring greater numbers, permitted the practice so that a phenomenal increase in population could be attained. This is not defensible, since there WAS NO SURPLUS OF WOMEN.”

[brightonwoman]

Originally Posted by magstphil

Also women can get their sealings revoked whether because they are divorced or because their husbands died early on or whatever. If your husband breaks his covenants (say beats you) you can be unselaed.

Originally Posted by JustVanessa

So it isn't really "sealed for eternity". That phrase sounds irrevocable.

Yes it is sealed for eternity, and to get a 'temple cancellation' is quite an involved process. (Speaking as someone who has been there--my DH was married and divorced before, and we had to get permission for us to marry since he was still technically sealed to her, even though they were legally divorced...and then three years later when she wanted to marry again she had to go through a similar process to get the sealing actually canceled)... anyway, they have to have solid grounds, such as that the marriage was not consummated (or like the situation mentioned of the DH dying very early on), or that there was abuse/abandonment, or sometimes adultery. If the former spouse is still living, they have to have written testimony from that former spouse saying that they have no interest in renewing the union. They have to have letters from their local church leaders who have interviewed them and feel that they are ready and able to make the commitment and that there was a valid reason to end the former marriage. It's pretty involved, like I said, and commonly takes months (or even a year or two) to go through the whole process.

Originally Posted by momma4fun

The Mormon apostle John Widsoe de-bunked the common explanation that polygamy was practiced in order to provide homes to a surplus of women in the church:
<snip>

It's worth pointing out that even at the height of polygamy, it was only practiced by about 5% of the members of the church. Many of them struggled with it, but believed that it was a commandment from God so they did it. Also, the stories we hear about having 14 or 35 wives were not that common--most men who were plurally married had more like 3 wives.
Polygamy gets a bad name because of the modern compounds and (especially) the 14yo girls marrying 60yo men. 150 years ago the girls getting married as 2nd and 3rd wives were normal marrying age for the time, and the men were not the age of their grandfathers. Subsequent wives were always approved by the prior ones, and I believe sometimes even chosen by them (ie, the first wife would bring a potential wife to the husband). Sisters commonly married the same man, which I suspect contributed to marital harmony (since they were already used to living/working together).

I have no doubt that polygamy had hard aspects, but I don't think it was awful to live it either, you know? Different from what we're used to perhaps, but I always remind myself that polygamy has been practiced all over the world for centuries. In the USA it draws a lot of attention because it's perceived as abnormal, but there are otherwise "normal" people (ie, not on communes) who are polygamous--and openly so. I've seen talk shows with men who have two or three wives and they're all pretty ok with it.

Incidentally, my DH and I have been getting Big Love on DVD and find it very interesting. We've had a number of discussions about the pros, cons, and logistics of living a polygamous life. Since it's techincally illegal in this country we have no intention of doing it, but if it were legalized we might consider it. It's a very interesting practice.

[momma4fun]

sadly most mormons don't know the actual history of polygamy in their church. if they did, i don't think they'd be willing to to accept it.

that's not to say that polyamoury can't be a valid lifestyle.....

here is a quote from http://mormonthink.com/polyweb.htm#diffview
on mormons feeling ok about polygamy:

It's possible to come to terms with polygamy if it was done in an honorable way - never lied about, no secret marriages, not marrying other men's wives, etc. - and if there was a reason for it. Most of us can accept the Biblical account of God allowing Abraham to take a second wife as his wife was past the normal child-bearing years. Perhaps that was a lesson for Abraham. But that's a far cry from taking dozens of wives including 14 year-old girls, women already married and marrying some women behind your wife's back. Also Abraham lived almost 4,000 years before Joseph did - a completely different situation.

Let's assume that Joseph was indeed threatened by an angel with a sword to practice polygamy and he was merely obeying God's will. If Joseph then would have taken an old, unattractive widow as a 2nd wife in a public ceremony with Emma's permission and had he been totally open and honest about it, then that would be perhaps understandable, and maybe even admirable. That would have likely fulfilled the angel's requirements and not made Joseph look like such a scoundrel.

Instead Joseph did the following things which made him appear very unprophetlike:

Married numerous women - at least 33 women, perhaps as many as 60.
Married girls as young as 14.
Married women that were already married to other men.
Married his own foster children.
Broke the law by practicing polygamy and encouraged others to do the same.
Threatened young girls to marry him and promised exaltation to parents of young girls that gave their permission to Joseph to marry their daughters.
Lied continually in public and to fellow church members about practicing polygamy.
Had other church members lie about his polygamy.
Married women without telling his wife Emma first and even having pretended second marriages later to cover for his deceptions.
Destroyed a printing press that printed newspapers exposing his polygamy - ultimately landing Joseph in jail leading to his murder.

[holyhelianthus]

Actually DH and I are very aware of our church's history with polygamy- some things which a lot of members just cannot come to terms with sadly. The thing is most critics don't take into account our beliefs when they run off the facts which are one-sided and don't show all the complexities of Mormonism, marriage and family within Mormonism, and temple work.

Though Joseph Smith had a lot of wives and some very young and some married some were also older and just old by the time's standards (in their 30s to 50s) and a lot sealed to him for eternal purposes. Not all of Joseph Smith's wives were treated as earthly wives in that they did not share his bed or have children and they weren't meant to- if they had there would be a lot more cases of children of the prophet, don't you think? Especially because the children he did have were seen by so many as so important. See in our faith one must be sealed to someone in order to progress. Though now we do this by proxy in those days there was a sense of urgency and so many women and men were sealed to Prophets and others as a means of spiritual progression. Things are done differently now but then the church was not only in it's infancy (still ironing out the kinks so to speak) but also was under much different circumstances. Temple work is sacred and also just that- work. There are things within that we feel must be done and at a time where it seemed all hell was breaking loose around them the early Saints felt it must be done NOW.

So yes Joseph Smith had many wives but not all were wives in the sense most people think.

Beyond that do you blame them for lying about the polygamy? Many early Mormons were beaten and killed for many a reason and polygamy wasn't going to go over well either. Lying for protection isn't shocking or wrong, IMO. Sadly these types of lies for safety are seen throughout human history and will continue to be seen until human beings can learn to be more accepting. This also goes for breaking the law.

But the most important thing to remember is that a Prophet is not God nor is he God-like. Prophets are fallible. They are men and capable of mistake. A single man's actions cannot speak entirely for God, religion, or a movement no matter how convenient that may be. Joseph lied to Emma. Should he have? Probably not. Judging by Emma's reaction and later words it's no surprise that he felt the need to and no surprise Emma was hurt. Yet that is THEIR marriage, isn't it? Their marriage does not affect history or doctrine as a whole because it is their own.

So yes those are the facts that you posted but they are one-sided. Take into account the practices and beliefs of those you are referring to to get a more complete picture.

Of course what it comes down to is none of us on any side is going to know the 100% truth in this history or personal wise.

ETA- I forgot to thank you for posting about polygamy not being enacted as a help for widows. That is myth deeply rooted in Mormon culture. I was even raised to believe that was what polygamy was all about. You are right when you say a lot of Latter-Day Saints don't know much about polygamy or our history involving it but the main reason for that is because it's not as important as the outside world likes to bulk it up to be. You don't have to have more than one wife to progress. It's not a central doctrine so there is no need for us to stress in it Sunday school. And as we don't gather round as members of the LDS church to study our church's history in depth very often it's not an issue there either.

There are plenty of books LDS and non-LDS on the matter if one does choose to look further into it but not many do. They have their reasons and they are allowed them. I just think it's really important for people to understand that plural marriage just isn't central to Mormonism like it is painted to be.

[holyhelianthus]

More information on Latter-Day Saints and plural marriage...

FAIRLDS.org on polygamy- an apologetics site. This link is to their "topical guide" on polygamy and has several links to scholarly articles with regards to the practice and our history with it including Joseph Smith's young wives and the purpose of plural marriage.

Mormon polygamy dot org- site with history, doctrine, and quotes from the Prophets on the practice of plural marriage. Also provides lots of different links.

This is a book called Rough Stone Rolling by Richard Bushman an LDS Patriarch (a calling in the church). Now what DH and I love about this book is that it paints a fair picture of Joseph Smith (it is his biography) but is not too candy or too harsh. Though Bushman is LDS many LDS folks are upset with the book and the work he did because he shows Joseph Smith as a human being and not wrapped in typical Mormon mythology. His wife also works with women's issues within the church. Google Caludia Bushmen if you are interested. It is a huuuge book though so only pick it up if you're reeeeeally interested

And here is the link to the list of Joseph Smith's wives including their ages.

ETA- the above site listed seems fishy to me. For one Eliza Snow is listed as being 16 when they married but Wikipedia and other bigraphy sources has Eliza being born in 1804. Reports say she was sealed to the Prophet at 38 in 1842. And if you even click on her name in that list it says she was older : I think the list of ages isn't square to the names so take that or leave it. What I like about the site is it gives a bit of a history about each wife.