Sealed... for Time and for All Eternity

[Deborah]

I have two.

But it's not my fault.

I have several friends who have two. One in heaven and one here.

What is amusing is how hard it is for women to accept being the second wife even when the first is dead. I first became familiar with this in college when a good friend lost his first wife and really had a hard time dating because the women he met didn't want to be number two. This guy was such a great catch they were nuts. I was too young and not interested in marriage at the time or I would love to have gone out with him, so we were just friends. If only....

[kamenraider]

Where in there does it mention plural marriage?

The men that Joseph Smith read the revelation to were all married men. W. W. Phelps asked how they could take wives of the Lamanites and Nephites if they were already married and Joseph Smith said the same way Abraham and Jacob took theirs.

In any case, prophets since Wilford Woodruff have said that plural marriage is not to be practiced. We listen to the living prophets.

Do you know of any revelations that say that plural marriage is not to be practiced? In OD 1 Wilford Woodruff gives his advice not to enter any marriages forbidden by the law (which he himself didn't even follow), but I'm not aware of any revelations that command us not to practice polygamy.

[kamenraider]

kamenraider, I'll repeat the question I asked before:

Question for all the guys saying that the commandment has not been rescinded. How many wives do you currently have and if you only have one, why, since the commandment is still in force in your eyes?

I made sure that my wife was willing to live it before we were engaged. If I were to have another sealed to me, I would want it to be the right person and not just anyone -- someone I was with in the pre-mortal existence. If you think of all of the legal and social pressures today that favor monogamy, you'll realize that this would be a little difficult to say the least, without something rather miraculous happening. Women that are associated with polygamy cults, and also other "independents", also tend to creep me out for some reason (and not just because of things like prairie dresses or whatever). I guess I've got some sort of (Church instilled?) irrational prejudice in that regard.

[thesometimesaint]

kamenraider:

As we have OD1 and excommunicate those who practice polygamy, the question is moot.

[Bunny]

I made sure that my wife was willing to live it before we were engaged.

This must have been an excellent way to narrow your choices [said with a smile].

[ttribe]

Did you notice the words "this people" and "among you" in there?

The revelation given to Joseph Smith on July 17, 1831 contains this:

"Verily I say unto you that the wisdom of man in his fallen state, knoweth not the purposes and the privileges of my holy priesthood. but ye shall know when ye receive a fulness by reason of the anointing: For it is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity may become white, delightsome and Just, for even now their females are more virtuous than the gentiles."

Can you please provide a link to this "revelation"? I'd like to see it and judge for myself.

BTW, I'm not sure the "this people" and "among you" statements are as restrictive as you are interpreting them.

[ttribe]

kamenraider:

As we have OD1 and excommunicate those who practice polygamy, the question is moot.

This is an excellent point.

[emeliza]

I have two.

But it's not my fault.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

You aren't living with both of them as current wives though, one you are divorced from. Doesn't count quite the way Deborah is speaking of.

[structurecop]

Doubtful since most Mormons prior to 1890 didn't participate in plural marriage. It was always a minority. Since some were not participants but were sealed to one wife they expected the blessings promised under the N&E Covenant.

Since early Mormons were communitarians/millenialists, and since Brigham Young appears to endorse this kind of collective righteousness based on the practice of a few:

It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. This is as true as that God lives. You who wish that there were no such thing in existence, if you have in your hearts to say: "We will pass along in the Church without obeying or submitting to it in our faith or believing this order, because, for aught that we know, this community may be broken up yet, and we may have lucrative offices offered to us; we will not, therefore, be polygamists lest we should fail in obtaining some earthly honor, character and office, etc,"â??the man that has that in his heart, and will continue to persist in pursuing that policy, will come short of dwelling in the presence of the Father and the Son, in celestial glory.

[thesometimesaint]

structurecop:

I don't see any type of implied righteousness to those that willfully ignore or refusing to practice polygamy when asked. There is the implication of assumed righteousness to those that would have if asked, but never were.

[consiglieri]

You aren't living with both of them as current wives though, one you are divorced from. Doesn't count quite the way Deborah is speaking of.

Hey!

No talking out of school, Em!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[kamenraider]

Can you please provide a link to this "revelation"? I'd like to see it and judge for myself.

BTW, I'm not sure the "this people" and "among you" statements are as restrictive as you are interpreting them.

I'm not interpreting them at all; I merely pointed them out to you. I don't think they need to be interpreted.

[ttribe]

Clever...btw, my request was a friendly way of saying "CFR".

I'm not interpreting them at all; I merely pointed them out to you. I don't think they need to be interpreted.

Interesting given that "interpret" is exactly what you did.

[kamenraider]

This must have been an excellent way to narrow your choices [said with a smile].

Yeah that's how I weeded out girls like Bunny.

Seriously though, I don't think I ever brought up the subject or discussed it on a date even once. I did take a fundamentalist book to read one time on a date that involved a long drive though. Also, I gave my wife a copy of Unpublished Revelations once for her birthday before we were married.

[kamenraider]

Clever...btw, my request was a friendly way of saying "CFR".

*sigh* Alright, I'll save you a few seconds of Googling.

The text of it:

Verily, verily, saith the Lord your Redeemer, even Jesus Christ, the light and the life of the world, ye can not discerne [discern] with your natural eyes, the design and the purpose of your Lord and your God, in bringing you thus far into the wilderness for a trial of your faith, and to be especial witnesses, to bear testimony of this land, upon which the zion of God shall be built up in the last days, when it is redeemed.

Verily, inasmuch as ye are united in calling upon my name to know my will concerning who shall preach to the inhabitants that shall assemble this day to learn what new doctrine you have to teach them, you have done wisely, for so did the prophets anciently, even Enoch, and Abraham, and others: and therefore, it is my will that my servant Oliver Cowdery should open the meeting with prayer; that my servant W. W. Phelps should preach the discourse; and that my servants Joseph Coe and Ziba Peterson should bear testimony as they shall be moved by the Holy Spirit. This will be pleasing in the sight of your Lord.

Verily I say unto you, ye are laying the foundation of a great work for the salvation of as many as will believe and repent, and obey the ordinances of the gospel, and continue faithful to the end: For, as I live, saith the Lord, so shall they live.

Verily I say unto you that the wisdom of man in his fallen state, knoweth not the purposes and the privileges of my holy priesthood. but ye shall know when ye receive a fulness by reason of the anointing: For it is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity may become white, delightsome and Just, for even now their females are more virtuous than the gentiles.

Gird up your loins and be prepared for the mighty work of the Lord to prepare the world for my second coming to meet the tribes of Israel according to the predictions of all the holy prophets since the beginning; For the final desolation, and decrees upon Babylon: For, as the everlasting gospel is carried from this land, in love for peace, to gather mine elect from the four quarters of the earth, for Zion,— even so shall rebellion follow after speedily, with hatred for war until the consumption decreed hath made a full end of all the kingdoms and nations that strive to govern themselves by the laws and precepts, and force and powers of men under the curse of sin, in all the world.

Verily I say unto you, that the day of vexation and vengeance is nigh at the doors of this nation, when wicked, ungodly and daring men will rise up in wrath and might, and go forth in anger, like as the dust is driven by [a] terrible wind; and they will be the means of the destruction of the government, and cause the death and misery of man[y] souls, but the faithful among my people shall be preserved in holy places, during all these tribulations.

Be patient, therefore, possessing your souls in peace and love, and keep the faith that is now delivered unto you for the gathering of scattered Israel, and lo, I am with you, though ye cannot see me, till I come: even so. Amen.

--The Joseph Smith Revelations: Text and Commentary, H. Michael Marquardt, SLC: Signature Books 1999, pgs. 374-375.

Here's a pic of it:

Interesting given that "interpret" is exactly what you did.

Here's what I wrote:

Did you notice the words "this people" and "among you" in there?

I'll let everyone draw their own conclusions as to whether that could be considered an interpretation.

[ttribe]

*sigh* Alright, I'll save you a few seconds of Googling.

Hmmm...I found this interesting: Link

[kamenraider]

kamenraider:

As we have OD1 and excommunicate those who practice polygamy, the question is moot.

How so? Don't you remember how the Church excommunicated polygamists in Joseph Smith's day as well? When one of William Clayton's wives became pregnant and he asked Joseph Smith for advice, Joseph replied, "Just keep her at home and brook it and if they raise trouble about it and bring you before me I will give you an awful scourging and probably cut you off from the church and then I will baptize you and set you ahead as good as ever." --Journal of William Clayton, Oct. 19, 1843.

[structurecop]

Hmmm...I found this interesting: Link

Eh, the fact that there's no text on the page?

[ttribe]

Eh, the fact that there's no text on the page?

What are you talking about? The link works just fine for me. If it helps you any, here's the complete URL - http://en.fairmormon.org/Native_Americans_to_become_%22white_and_delightsome%22_through_polygamous_marriage%3F

[structurecop]

What are you talking about? The link works just fine for me. If it helps you any, here's the complete URL - http://en.fairmormon.org/Native_Americans_to_become_%22white_and_delightsome%22_through_polygamous_marriage%3F

[ttribe]

Lol! That is really weird! When I click on the link it brings up a whole page worth of discussion on this "revelation". Did you try hitting "refresh" when you got there? Just curious if it could be a cache problem on your local machine.

[ttribe]

Here's the text (for stucturecop):

Native Americans to become "white and delightsome" through polygamous marriage?

From FAIRMormon

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[hide]

* 1 Criticism

o 1.1 Source(s) of the criticism

* 2 Response

o 2.1 Is there an 1831 revelation?

o 2.2 W. W. Phelps 1861 recollection of the revelation

o 2.3 Does the 1831 "revelation" talk about polygamy?

o 2.4 Were the Indians to become "white and delightsome" through marriage?

* 3 Conclusion

* 4 Endnotes

* 5 Further reading

o 5.1 FAIR wiki articles

o 5.2 FAIR web site

o 5.3 External links

o 5.4 Printed material

Criticism

* Critics claim that the Church â??suppressedâ? a revelation given to Joseph Smith in 1831 which encouraged the implementation of polygamy by intermarriage with the Indians in order to make them a â??white and delightsomeâ? people.

Source(s) of the criticism

* Richard Abanes, Becoming Gods: A Closer Look at 21st-Century Mormonism (Harvest House Publishers: 2005). 73, 367 n.136. ( Index of claims )

* Richard Abanes, One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church (New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2003), 131, 530n23-24 (PB) ( Index of claims )

* Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945), 184, footnote. ( Index of claims )

* Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997) 27. ( Index of claims )

* B. Carmon Hardy, Doing the Works of Abraham: Mormon Polygamy, Its Origin, Practice, and Demise

* H. Michael Marquardt, The Joseph Smith Revelations: Text and Commentary, (Signature Books: Salt Lake City, 1999),

* Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), 208-212. ( Index of claims )

* Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History, (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), 3

Response

Is there an 1831 revelation?

Critics claim that the church "suppressed" a 1831 revelation in which the Church was commanded to make the Indians a â??white and delightsomeâ? people through polygamous intermarriage. The basis for this claim is a letter written by W. W. Phelps in 1861 (30 years after the revelation was said to have been given) in which he recounts from memory some of Joseph's comments in Independence, Missouri, on 17 July 1831. At present, the only evidence that an 1831 revelation was given is the 1861 document written by Phelps.

According to critics, Joseph Fielding Smith, who was Church historian at the time, stated that the principle of plural marriage was revealed to Joseph Smith in a revelation given in July 1831.[1] Critic Fawn Brodie claims that Joseph Fielding Smith told her about the revelation but would not allow her to see it.[2] Critics conclude that the â??real reasonâ? that the revelation was not released was because it commanded Church members to marry the Indians in order to make them a â??white and delightsomeâ? people.

W. W. Phelps 1861 recollection of the revelation

In 1861, 30 years after it was said to have been given, W. W. Phelps wrote from memory his recollection of what he claimed was the revelation given in 1831 by the Prophet:

Part of a revelation by Joseph Smith Jr. given over the boundary, west of Jackson Co. Missouri, on Sunday morning, July 17, 1831, when Seven Elders, viz: Joseph Smith, Jr., Oliver Cowdery, W. W. Phelps, Martin Harris, Joseph Coe, Ziba Peterson, and Joshua Lewis united their hearts in prayer, in a private place, to inquire of the Lord who should preach the first sermon to the remnants of the Lamanites and Nephites, and the people of that Section, that should assemble that day in the Indian country, to hear the gospel, and the revelations according to the Book of Mormon.

Among the company, there being neither pen, ink or paper, Joseph remarked that the Lord could preserve his words as he had ever done, till the time appointed, and proceeded:

Verily, verily, saith the Lord your Redeemer, even Jesus Christ, the light and the life of the world, ye can not discerne with your natural eyes, the design and the purpose of your Lord and your God, in bringing you thus far into the wilderness for a trial of your faith, and to be especial witnesses, to bear testimony of this land, upon which the Zion of God shall be built up in the last days, when it is redeemed. â?¦

t is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity may become white, delightsome, and Just, for even now their females are more virtuous than the gentiles.

Gird up your loins and be prepared for the mighty work of the Lord to prepare the world for my second coming to meet the tribes of Israel according to the predictions of all the holy prophets since the beginning; â?¦

Be patient, therefore, possessing your souls in peace and love, and keep the faith that is now delivered unto you for the gathering of scattered Israel, and lo, I am with you, though ye cannot see me, till I come: even so. Amen.

Does the 1831 "revelation" talk about polygamy?

A note written by W. W. Phelps in the 1861 document implies that marriage with the Indians coincided with Joseph Smith's planned intent to institute polygamy.

About three years after this was given, I asked brother Joseph, privately, how "we," that were mentioned in the revelation could take wives of the "natives" as we were all married men? He replied instantly "In the same manner that Abraham took Hagar and Keturah; and Jacob took Rachel, Bilhah and Zilpah; by revelationâ??the saints of the Lord are always directed by revelation."

It is important to note that Phelp's wrote his note 30 years after the revelation was said to have been given, after polygamy had been openly practiced for a number of years.

The only contemporary report of a possible revelation on marriage with the Indians was written in a letter to the Ohio Star on 8 December, 1831 by Ezra Booth, who had apostatized from the Church.[3] This letter was republished in Eber D. Howe's anti-Mormon book Mormonism Unvailed. Booth states that,

...it has been made known by revelation, that it will be pleasing to the Lord, should they form a matrimonial alliance with the natives; and by this means the Elders, who comply with the thing so pleasing to the Lord, and for which the Lord has promised to bless those who do it abundantly, gain a residence in the Indian territory, independent of the agent...[4]

Booth makes no mention of polygamy, and instead implies that the "matrimonial alliance" was for the purpose of gaining "residence" in the Indian territory.[5] One would think that if Booth, given his opposition to the Church at the time, had been aware of something as controversial as a proposal that polygamy be instituted among the Indians, that he would have been highly motivated to proclaim this in a public forum. In fact, Booth actually states that in order to marry one of the natives, that one elder needed to be "free from his wife." Booth does go on to say:

...It has been made known to one, who has left his wife in the State of New York, that he is entirely free from his wife, and he is at pleasure to take him a wife from among the Lamanites. It was easily perceived that this permission was perfectly suited to his desires. I have frequently heard him state that the Lord had made it known to him, that he is as free from his wife as from any other woman; and the only crime I have ever heard alleged against her is, she is violently opposed to Mormonism. But before this contemplated marriage can be carried into effect, he must return to the State of New York and settle his business, for fear, should he return after that affair had taken place, the civil authority would apprehend him as a criminal.[6](emphasis added)

This quote implies that it was not to be a polygamous union.

Were the Indians to become "white and delightsome" through marriage?

There are quotes from Church leaders indicating that they believed that the Indians were becoming "white and delightsome." However, it was always implied that the process of becoming "white and delightsome" was to be achieved through the power of Godâ??not through intermarriage. Critics cite a statement made by Spencer W. Kimball in the October 1960 General Conference, 15 years before he became president of the Church:

I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today ... they are fast becoming a white and delightsome people.... For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised.... The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.[7]

Although this is an interesting statement by President Kimball, it has nothing whatsoever to do with polygamy or intermarriage with the Indians. It is simply President Kimballâ??s own observation that he felt that the Indians were becoming a â??white and delightsomeâ? people through the power of God. Then-Elder Kimball was likely unaware that Joseph Smith had edited the Book of Mormon text in 1837 to say "pure and delightsome," possibly to counter the idea that the change referred to was predominantly physical, rather than spiritual. This change was lost in future LDS versions of the Book of Mormon until 1981. (See here for more information).

Conclusion

There is no evidence that the instructions contained in the revelation regarding intermarriage with the Native Americans were actually implemented. There is no contemporary evidence, other than that provided by Booth, that anyone was even aware of the revelation at the time that it was supposed to have been given. The only evidence that a revelation was even given is the 1861 document by W. W. Phelps, which he recalled word-for-word from memory 30 years later at a time when the Church was actively and publicly justifying the practice of polygamy.

It is also interesting to note that the typical critical argument against polygamy is that a revelation on polygamy was not received until 1843 and that prior to that time that Joseph Smith was living in adultery with his plural wives. Yet, in this case, the critics are perfectly content to argue the case for a revelation on polygamy actually existing in 1831 as long as it can be tied to making the Native Americans a "white and delightsome" people. While there is evidence that Joseph was discussing plural marriage by 1831, it is difficult to believe that Phelps' text is an exact rendition of any revelation Joseph may have shared with him.

Endnotes

1. [back] The source is said to be a letter from Joseph Fielding Smith to J. W. A. Baily dated September 5, 1935.

2. [back] Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945), 184, footnote. ( Index of claims )

3. [back] Ezra Booth letter, Ohio Star (Ravenna, Ohio), 8 December 1831.

4. [back] Eber D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (Painesville, OH, 1834), 220. (Affidavits examined)

5. [back] David Whittaker, "Mormons and Native Americans: A Historical and Bibliographical Introduction," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 18:4 (Winter 1985): 33â??60. off-site

6. [back] Eber D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (Painesville, OH, 1834), 220. (Affidavits examined)

7. [back] Improvement Era, December 1960, pp. 922-23.

Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

* Book of Mormon textual changes/"white" changed to "pure"

* Lamanite curse

FAIR web site

* FAIR Topical Guide: Polygamy FAIR link

* FAIR Topical Guide: Native Americans FAIR link

External links

* Allen L. Wyatt, "Plural Marriage and the Half-Empty-Glass School of Historiography (Review of Doing the Works of Abraham: Mormon Polygamy, Its Origin, Practice, and Demise by B. Carmon Hardy)," FARMS Review 19/2 (2007): 117â??136. off-site PDF link wiki

* David Whittaker, "Mormons and Native Americans: A Historical and Bibliographical Introduction," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 18:4 (Winter 1985): 33â??60.. off-site

Printed material

[structurecop]

Here's the text (for stucturecop):

Thanks, man. I kept closing my browser and opening it again. You're probably right, it's cookies or something in the cache.

[thesometimesaint]

kamenraider:

Yes I am familiar with the sanctioned and unsanctioned polygamous marriages during the Nauvoo Period. Fortunately since OD1 is long after JS and subsequent Prophets from OD1 have not looked kindly on earthly polygamous marriages.

[kamenraider]

kamenraider:

Yes I am familiar with the sanctioned and unsanctioned polygamous marriages during the Nauvoo Period. Fortunately since OD1 is long after JS and subsequent Prophets from OD1 have not looked kindly on earthly polygamous marriages.

Did Lorenzo Snow or Joseph F. Smith look kindly on earthly polygamous marriages?