Lareliw Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 Sorry, I totally LOL'd at your Danite "address" book. I have to say that if polygamy was not illegal in the US at the late 1800s, and if it wasn't a statehood matter, I would guess that it never would have been removed from the LDS church. It is in fact still there in D&C 132. Anyway I had foot surgery so I'm kind of in and out here JessicaIt happened about a month ago. But at least now I can dig up everyone's personal records and update my Danite hit list address book. My wife and I have enjoyed going to Marriage and Family Relations instead. At least there I'm not made to feel like I'm an apostate for quoting the Greek mss. I guess it's the latest way for me to get the most out of my Church meetings. Link to comment
TAO Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 Sorry, I totally LOL'd at your Danite "address" book. I have to say that if polygamy was not illegal in the US at the late 1800s, and if it wasn't a statehood matter, I would guess that it never would have been removed from the LDS church. It is in fact still there in D&C 132. Anyway I had foot surgery so I'm kind of in and out here Jessica0.o did the surgery go all right =0? Link to comment
Lareliw Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Yeah thanks for asking! Foot surgery, so no weight on it for probably about 8 weeks. Makes things a little harder, and more painful, but will be happy when recovery is over That is why I have been gone for so long!0.o did the surgery go all right =0? Link to comment
TAO Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Yeah thanks for asking! Foot surgery, so no weight on it for probably about 8 weeks. Makes things a little harder, and more painful, but will be happy when recovery is over That is why I have been gone for so long!Yayz! I'm happy it's okay.. though that will be hasslish... still glad it isn't worse =D. Link to comment
Calm Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 They have to legally separate from their plural marriages before being baptized. In other words, an African man would have to choose his favorite wife and divorce the other ones. Roman Catholicism and to some extent, the Community of Christ, allows plural marriage among African converts where it is legal. In a sense, Jon Krakauer is right. "Nobody cracks down on polygamy like the LDS Church." (source)In case no one has mentioned it, I am pretty sure (will check for a source to see if my memory is correct) that the Church does not encourage separation of the family if the polygamy is legal even though it will not allow baptism to take place. Link to comment
kolipoki09 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Sorry, I totally LOL'd at your Danite "address" book. I have to say that if polygamy was not illegal in the US at the late 1800s, and if it wasn't a statehood matter, I would guess that it never would have been removed from the LDS church. It is in fact still there in D&C 132. Anyway I had foot surgery so I'm kind of in and out here JessicaWhile issues of statehood were certainly pressing on the Church at the time, I believe O.D. 1 was divinely inspired as a tool to begin the ultimate phasing out of polygamy from the Church. People can make a ruckus about Post-Manifesto polygamy all they want, but the process to end the practice began with the first manifesto, and continued for the next two decades. I have Bringhurst and Foster's book on Polygamy coming this week, so if you don't see me on the boards...... Link to comment
Calm Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 While issues of statehood were certainly pressing on the Church at the time, I believe O.D. 1 was divinely inspired as a tool to begin the ultimate phasing out of polygamy from the Church. People can make a ruckus about Post-Manifesto polygamy all they want, but the process to end the practice began with the first manifesto, and continued for the next two decades. I have Bringhurst and Foster's book on Polygamy coming this week, so if you don't see me on the boards......I think the beginning of the phasing out was already naturally happening as the number of plural marriages were significantly down even before the major persecution began IIRC Kathryn Daynes' research correctly. It probably sped things up though and made it final as opposed to a traditional ongoing practice that just involved a very small percentage over all. I think this could have been problematic as it might have created a perception of difference between those who practiced and those who didn't especially if most who were called to practice it were in the higher echelons of the Church, something along the lines of how Second Anointings are sometimes treated but a big difference is that such marriages would easily become public knowledge while 2nd Anointings can be kept private and therefore not made into some badge of ultimate worthiness, etc. Link to comment
ERMD Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Also, if a husband and wife get a divorce after a temple marriage, the husband can remarry in the temple whenever he wants without approval from the First Presidency to break his previous sealing. A man previously sealed, then divorced, must obtain a sealing clearance from the First Presidency prior to being sealed to another woman.Note that sealing clearance and cancellation of sealing are two different things. Link to comment
kolipoki09 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 A man previously sealed, then divorced, must obtain a sealing clearance from the First Presidency prior to being sealed to another woman.Note that sealing clearance and cancellation of sealing are two different things.Good to know, thanks for clarifying! Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.