Polyandry Questions And Comments

[DBMormon]

There is a survey currently discussing Polygamy and when we discovered it. I really feel the real issue here is polyandry. so lets answer similar questions regarding Polyandry (The sealings of women to Joseph Smith who were already married legally to other men).

Question 1. How long were you in the church when you encountered this historical issue?

Question 2. What age were you when you encountered it

Question 3. Did this challenge your testimony? Is it still a challenge?

Question 4. What ways would have been better in your mind for you to have encountered this?

Question 5. Would it have been more beneficial for you if this issue and others were more readily available within church resources to encounter and wrap your head around prior to your discovery in some other place. (Please don't take this as critical, It is a fact that this is not a subject one will find in a current church source and trying to gauge how others see the lack of information on it from a church sponsored source)

Question 6. Would you find value in training local lay leaders in handling this issue or others that members find as a testimony struggle so that leaders would more readily be able to handle faith crisis issues and better be able to understand the struggle some members have.

[Tacenda]

I'm glad you brought this up. Because I believe the old survey was amiss on the polyandry. Which is in my personal opinion what some people find so disturbing.

[DBMormon]

Question 1. How long were you in the church when you encountered this historical issue?

10 years

Question 2. What age were you when you encountered it

late 20's

Question 3. Did this challenge your testimony? Is it still a challenge?

yes it caught me off guard at the onset. Not a challenge today though the way I see the issue could be challenged if new evidence came forward indicating it was not an family adoption type sealing in most cases .

Question 4. What ways would have been better in your mind for you to have encountered this?

I would have struggled with this issue less had I at least encountered an acknowledgement of it in church sources. I realize their is not explanation that we have complete evidence for so it is better not to defend it or explain it so I don't expect that. just an acknowledgement.

Question 5. Would it have been more beneficial for you if this issue and others were more readily available within church resources to encounter and wrap your head around prior to your discovery in some other place. (Please don't take this as critical, It is a fact that this is not a subject one will find in a current church source and trying to gauge how others see the lack of information on it from a church sponsored source)

It at least needs to be acknowledged in some church source where most members will at least be aware of it and then can choose for themselves to research it or look further into it. This would be of help to those who struggle with this issue.

Question 6. Would you find value in training local lay leaders in handling this issue or others that members find as a testimony struggle so that leaders would more readily be able to handle faith crisis issues and better be able to understand the struggle some members have.

Many leaders at the local level could better understand these issues so that empathy could be part of the help.

[robuchan]

Polyandry is part of it but not all. I think the real issue is "when and how did you learn all the jacked up details about polygamy and how did it affect you?" Sure, when you grow up in the LDS church, you know about polygamy. But most likely you are insulated from the nitty gritty details for most of your life unless you go seek them out.

details such as:

--the number of wives of Joseph

--the ages

--whether or not there were actual sexual relationships

--the first hand accounts at how tortured some of these girls were over this

--the whole issue with the flaming sword and how it comes across as a threat

--polyandry

--the pervasiveness in the doctrine, how it affected everything, how it was taught that it was required for exaltation

--the real meaning of section 132

--how it's what caused the downfall of Nauvoo and the prophet's death

--how it was lied about and covered up and hid behind Emma's back

[DBMormon]

That sounds like it's own thread... I'm simply dealing with polyandry and how it is encountered.

Edited July 6, 2012 by DBMormon

[CV75]

There is a survey

Q1: Within 3 years; I believe during my mission, as I was a voracious reader from my mission president’s library.

Q2: Early twenties.

Q3: No, and it isn’t a challenge now. I had then, and have now, an understanding of what was going on, and that does not conflict with my understanding of the Doctrine of Christ.

Q4: I cannot think of a better way than having the Gift of the Holy Ghost with me regardless of the learning format, style or other conditions under which information can be obtained (and whether I come across it intentionally or accidentally).

Q5: The source of this information (as indicated in Q4) would not be of great benefit or even relevance to how I receive it. I naturally don’t like being imposed upon, but that’s often what we have to deal with in life.

Q6: No. My observation is that they are getting this training already, or at least they have all the training tools they need at their disposal. Plus, “Whom the Lord calls, the Lord qualifies.” Faith crises and testimony struggles are very individualized and each one has to be addressed accordingly.

[CV75]

It at least needs to be acknowledged in some church source where most members will at least be aware of it and then can choose for themselves to research it or look further into it. This would be of help to those who struggle with this issue.

I would counter that it needs to be as generally available as it is relevant to what we generally need to do as saints.

[DBMormon]

I know I am beating a dead horse here, and will be careful in my approach. I now see that at some point we all need to rest on faith. That God never intends for us to have our whole belief turned into knowledge prior to our faith being at that same point. I get that. At the same time I simply want to protect those whose faith crisis is such that it can be kept from occuring on things such as this. It seems so easy to prevent. I know there are two sides and that protecting one person's faith with information might damage anothers with the same info. I just see the hurt and anguish caused when one feels their trust with the church has been broken and struggles with faith from there forward. I am more comfortable with someone knowing all available information and leaving the church due to it then one leaving because they felt the church didn't disclose.

[robuchan]

I know I am beating a dead horse here, and will be careful in my approach. I now see that at some point we all need to rest on faith. That God never intends for us to have our whole belief turned into knowledge prior to our faith being at that same point. I get that. At the same time I simply want to protect those whose faith crisis is such that it can be kept from occuring on things such as this. It seems so easy to prevent. I know there are two sides and that protecting one person's faith with information might damage anothers with the same info. I just see the hurt and anguish caused when one feels their trust with the church has been broken and struggles with faith from there forward. I am more comfortable with someone knowing all available information and leaving the church due to it then one leaving because they felt the church didn't disclose.

What if the choice was to lose 100,000 members by telling everything up front vs losing 1,000 members by letting them discover it on their own?

[DBMormon]

Robochan

That is a good way to put it....

If that is the case.... I guess you leave it out, though I would have to be convinced it is that lopsided. I would much rather have folks leave becasue thay can't handle truth then leaving because they felt the truth was witheld from them.

Do you think it is that lopsided?

[DBMormon]

^{surprised more people are not answering this post... why is that?}

Edited July 6, 2012 by DBMormon

[Tacenda]

What if the choice was to lose 100,000 members by telling everything up front vs losing 1,000 members by letting them discover it on their own?

I agree with this and agree with DBMormon, thus I believe is the dilemma that our beloved Prophet and GA's must be going through for so many years, on how best to provide the facts.

[robuchan]

Robochan

That is a good way to put it....

If that is the case.... I guess you leave it out, though I would have to be convinced it is that lopsided. I would much rather have folks leave becasue thay can't handle truth then leaving because they felt the truth was witheld from them.

Do you think it is that lopsided?

I think it could potentially be that lopsided. The reason being that I don't think the concealing of the information is the issue. People leave when they find out a lot of weird stuff and are unable to make sense of it and lose their testimony. So if that is happening now to X percent of people. It will happen to a lot more than X percent if you let everyone in on all the weird stuff.

[CV75]

I simply want to protect those whose faith crisis is such that it can be kept from occuring on things such as this.

You can’t (I see this as an “O if I were an angel” situation)—the protection one receives by virtue of their faith can come only, and directly, from God. The problems with attempting to intercede are obvious, but we can facilitate their getting God’s protection:

James 1: 27, “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.”

From D&C 81, “And in doing [this] thou wilt do the greatest good unto thy fellow beings, and wilt promote the glory of him who is your Lord. Wherefore, be faithful; stand in the office which I have appointed unto you; succor the weak, lift up the hands which hang down, and strengthen the feeble knees.”

Moroni 6:4, “And after they had been received unto baptism, and were wrought upon and cleansed by the power of the Holy Ghost, they were numbered among the people of the church of Christ; and their names were taken, that they might be remembered and nourished by the good word of God, to keep them in the right way, to keep them continually watchful unto prayer, relying alone upon the merits of Christ, who was the author and the finisher of their faith.”

I am more comfortable with someone knowing all available information and leaving the church due to it then one leaving because they felt the church didn't disclose.

Like protection, your ultimate comfort is not a function of what others do, but what God does for you and them.

[cinepro]

There is a survey currently discussing Polygamy and when we discovered it. I really feel the real issue here is polyandry. so lets answer similar questions regarding Polyandry (The sealings of women to Joseph Smith who were already married legally to other men).

Question 1. How long were you in the church when you encountered this historical issue?

~30 years

Question 2. What age were you when you encountered it

~30 years

Question 3. Did this challenge your testimony? Is it still a challenge?

It definitely challenged my testimony of polygamy. For the Church, not so much.

Question 4. What ways would have been better in your mind for you to have encountered this?

The problem is that it runs counter to the reasons we often hear for polygamy (widows from crossing the plains, raising up a righteous posterity etc.)

Question 5. Would it have been more beneficial for you if this issue and others were more readily available within church resources to encounter and wrap your head around prior to your discovery in some other place. (Please don't take this as critical, It is a fact that this is not a subject one will find in a current church source and trying to gauge how others see the lack of information on it from a church sponsored source)

Probably not. I don't think there's ever a good time or place to learn about it.

Question 6. Would you find value in training local lay leaders in handling this issue or others that members find as a testimony struggle so that leaders would more readily be able to handle faith crisis issues and better be able to understand the struggle some members have.

Bishops, and anyone who might counsel with a struggling member, should definitely be aware of the issue.

[William Schryver]

There is a survey currently discussing Polygamy and when we discovered it. I really feel the real issue here is polyandry. so lets answer similar questions regarding Polyandry (The sealings of women to Joseph Smith who were already married legally to other men).

Question 1. How long were you in the church when you encountered this historical issue?

I was BIC, so see answer to #2.

Question 2. What age were you when you encountered it

Early 20s.

Question 3. Did this challenge your testimony? Is it still a challenge?

No.

Question 4. What ways would have been better in your mind for you to have encountered this?

Better than what?

Question 5. Would it have been more beneficial for you if this issue and others were more readily available within church resources to encounter and wrap your head around prior to your discovery in some other place. (Please don't take this as critical, It is a fact that this is not a subject one will find in a current church source and trying to gauge how others see the lack of information on it from a church sponsored source)

No, not really. I understood it then, as I understand it now as part of the challenges incident to implementing plural marriage into a culture that regarded it as alien and novel.

Question 6. Would you find value in training local lay leaders in handling this issue or others that members find as a testimony struggle so that leaders would more readily be able to handle faith crisis issues and better be able to understand the struggle some members have.

No. In fact, I don't believe "local lay leaders," as a general rule, should be in the business of teaching church history.

[KevinG]

I have learned more and more through my 25 years as a Latter-day Saint. The moment someone comes up with something to "shock" me I research some more and find out there are very complex things going on.

To avoid a very long post... I think some people stop researching and learning when they are shocked and neglect to find out the context and meaning of the sealings.

For example the oft misquoted Brigham Young admonition that you must accept the principle ("at least in faith" gets left out) to be exalted. Then there are the sealings to married women - neglecting to add the sealings to married men and entire families meant to unite a royal priesthood.

Don't just get part of the story.

I'm still learning and the testimonies of faithful saints in their journals is very illuminating. My conclusion is that it isn't about sex or reproduction it is about strengthening the priesthood at the start of this dispensation.

Those who quit learning when the find out something that seems salacious or shocking cheat themselves of the rest of the story.

[DBMormon]

What is it that allows some of you to simply lay these things aside without them bothering you in the least? I get the testimony answer but there has to be other factors too in how you see things and in how you handle difficult issues.

[why me]

If one goes to the lds familysearch.org website and look at Joseph Smith's marriages, I believe that they will discover polyandry. It is all there to see, at least it was several years ago.

[why me]

What is it that allows some of you to simply lay these things aside without them bothering you in the least? I get the testimony answer but there has to be other factors too in how you see things and in how you handle difficult issues.

Once I read the tesimonies of the women involved, I was not bothered at all. The powerful witnesses that they received about the principle convinced me that the holy ghost spoke to them. So, no problem.

[robuchan]

What is it that allows some of you to simply lay these things aside without them bothering you in the least? I get the testimony answer but there has to be other factors too in how you see things and in how you handle difficult issues.

These issues bothered me a little, but not as much as other issues (ie Book of Abraham, BOM issues, sketchiness of First Vision and other angelic visit stories, etc.). I think my testimony would have been fine if everything else checked out OK and this was the only unexplainable issue.

Reasonable explanation:

Polygamy was never really authorized by God. Joseph misinterpreted the revelations. God fixed it all with a future prophet. Prophets are not perfect. God sometimes for reasons we don't understand allow his prophets to stray a little from time to time. The important thing is we're getting closer and closer to perfect doctrine as the church progresses.

Another reasonable explanation:

God authorized polygamy for reasons we don't really understand. It was a failed experiment because the people didn't have enough faith. The weird stuff like polyandry was Joseph's best attempt at implementing something he had no idea how to do. Everything ended up OK in the end.

[why me]

Another reasonable explanation:

The weird stuff like polyandry was Joseph's best attempt at implementing something he had no idea how to do. Everything ended up OK in the end.

And yet, these women received powerful witnesses that it was a true principle, which is why they eventually said yes. How to explain those powerful spiritual experiences when these women prayed about the principle?

[altersteve]

I've actually been vaguely aware of it for a very long time and it didn't have any effect on my testimony when I studied it in detail. I just found it interesting. Maybe confusing, but not disturbing in any way.

[why me]

Here is the testimony of Prescendia Buell:

On June 27, 1859, Presendia and several friends climbed Ensign Peak to commemorate the death of her second husband, Joseph Smith. “We offered up our prayers to God and thanks that He had raised up a prophet in these last days and the Gospel had been restored to the earth, and that we had been of the few that had received the truth”

http://www.wivesofjo...ingtonBuell.htm

How can I find fault here? Her testimony was strong that it was a correct principle and enjoyed her life knowing that. And obviously it was known that Joseph had multiple wives and some were married.

Edited July 6, 2012 by why me

[Closet Doubter]

What if the choice was to lose 100,000 members by telling everything up front vs losing 1,000 members by letting them discover it on their own?

When determining how to represent the truth, the Church should probably take its marching orders from its own Church approved and correlated Gospel Essentials lessons

From Gospel Essentials manual lesson 31 (selectively cut, pasted, and bolded by me but it doesn’t change the message being conveyed by the lesson) - We can intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest. Complete honesty is necessary for our salvation. The devil is the father of lies. Those who choose to cheat and lie and deceive and misrepresent become his slaves. The Lord is not pleased with such dishonesty and we will have to account for our lies. People use many excuses for being dishonest. People lie to protect themselves and to have others think well of them. These excuses and many more are given as reasons for dishonesty. To the Lord, there are no acceptable reasons. To become completely honest, we must look carefully at our lives. If there are ways in which we are being even the least bit dishonest, we should repent of them immediately.