New Essay On Polygamy From Lds.org

[Calm]

I'm not above admitting when I am wrong. Thanks for this Juliann.

I am impressed.

[juliann]

I'm not above admitting when I am wrong. Thanks for this Juliann.

Sorry for not coming up with that earlier,  I didn't remember it until you mentioned Oaks.  I also found this which may not be too meaningful but it is fun.

 

 

J. Golden Kimball, Conference Report, April 1904, p.29

 There are not Apostles enough in the Church to prevent us from thinking, and they are not disposed to do so; but some people fancy because we have the Presidency and Apostles of the Church they will do the thinking for us. There are men and women so mentally lazy that they hardly think for themselves. To think calls for effort, which makes some men tired and wearies their souls. Now, brethren and sisters, we are surrounded with, such conditions that it requires not only thought, but the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Latter-day Saints, you must think for yourselves. No man or woman can remain in this Church on borrowed light. I am a strong believer in the following statement made by my father in the House of the Lord in 1856 "We think we are secure in the chambers of the everlasting hills, but the time will come when we will be so mixed up that it will be difficult to tell the face of a Saint from the face of an enemy to the people of God. Then, brethren, look out for the great sieve, for there will be a great sifting time, and many will fall; for I say unto you there is a test, a test, a test coming, and who will be able to stand?"

 

[juliann]

I am afraid I can imagine that the Lord will "unseal" any temple polyandrous sealings since I don't think they should have happened in the first place.  In the covenant of marriage (both here when authorized and in eternity) a man can be sealed/married to multiple women.  A woman cannot be sealed/married to multiple men.

Love does matter, but it doesn't overcome eternal law.

 

Remember the reason for marriage, both plural & monogamous - to raise up seed.

This is made clear in Jacob 2:30, Genesis 1:28 (first commandment God gave to man), D&C 132:19 (the gift of eternal increase) etc.

Polyandrous marriage doesn't increase the number of righteous seed raised over monogamy and creates confusion in our sealing lines.  Polygamous marriage when ordained of God can increase the number of spirit children born into a righteous family.

 

The reason may seem cold, but we have to look beyond our mortal eyes and be realistic.  It's not about our limited perspective on marital love.  It's about eternity and our exaltation and living as God lives.

Actually, it is the women determining how much seed there is not the men.   Since the child producers produce less seed under polygyny than monogamy aside from the first wife, they would produce just as much under polyandry as monogamy, and likely more.  Further, they and the seed would be better cared for than in polygyny.

 

But since it really says raise up seed to me, not for you, it is quality over quantity anyway.

 

As long as we believe in adoption, sealing lines remain intact regardless of biological parentage.   But the bottom line is that it only takes one instance of polyandry to prove that JS considered it "realistic", enough so that he allowed for it in 132. 

 

The consequence of ignoring this is that the very women who paid the greatest price are not considered reliable witnesses as to who they darn well know could have fathered their child when they name JS.   That is the ultimate dismissal of women.

[sunstoned]

Actually, it is the women determining how much seed there is not the men.   Since the child producers produce less seed under polygyny than monogamy aside from the first wife, they would produce just as much under polyandry as monogamy, and likely more.  Further, they and the seed would be better cared for than in polygyny.

 

But since it really says raise up seed to me, not for you, it is quality over quantity anyway.

 

As long as we believe in adoption, sealing lines remain intact regardless of biological parentage.   But the bottom line is that it only takes one instance of polyandry to prove that JS considered it "realistic", enough so that he allowed for it in 132. 

 

The consequence of ignoring this is that the very women who paid the greatest price are not considered reliable witnesses as to who they darn well know could have fathered their child when they name JS.   That is the ultimate dismissal of women.

1000+   These women need to be recognized and respected.  Thank you for posting this.

[Tacenda]

I am afraid I can imagine that the Lord will "unseal" any temple polyandrous sealings since I don't think they should have happened in the first place. In the covenant of marriage (both here when authorized and in eternity) a man can be sealed/married to multiple women. A woman cannot be sealed/married to multiple men.

Love does matter, but it doesn't overcome eternal law.

Remember the reason for marriage, both plural & monogamous - to raise up seed.

This is made clear in Jacob 2:30, Genesis 1:28 (first commandment God gave to man), D&C 132:19 (the gift of eternal increase) etc.

Polyandrous marriage doesn't increase the number of righteous seed raised over monogamy and creates confusion in our sealing lines. Polygamous marriage when ordained of God can increase the number of spirit children born into a righteous family.

The reason may seem cold, but we have to look beyond our mortal eyes and be realistic. It's not about our limited perspective on marital love. It's about eternity and our exaltation and living as God lives.

As Omni, I appreciate your frankness, or whatever word he used. But wouldn't you be saying the prophet JS had it wrong? Therefore, didn't get revelation to marry other men's wives. This is to me, shaky ground.

[Tacenda]

1000+ These women need to be recognized and respected. Thank you for posting this.

They don't exist in this church, IMO. Go to any church history site, they aren't mentioned. The polygamist wives. There use to be a portrait of BY's wives on a wall at the Lion House when I was a child but has been taken down, and I doubt it was for decorating purposes. These polygamist wives deserve to be known for their sacrifice. It's shameful how on LDS.org under Presidents of the Church, only the wives of non polygamist prophets/presidents are mentioned. Come on!

[JLHPROF]

As Omni, I appreciate your frankness, or whatever word he used. But wouldn't you be saying the prophet JS had it wrong? Therefore, didn't get revelation to marry other men's wives. This is to me, shaky ground.

 

Not at all.  In virtually ever case of polyandry with the prophet Joseph Smith, he was the only man they were sealed to (I think there was one exception that is yet unexplained).  The other marriages were civil marriages.  A woman can only be sealed for eternity to one man.  Joseph apparently believed or had revelation that they belonged in his family instead of with their civil partners and these women agreed so allowed themselves to be sealed to him.  He did not get it wrong.

[Stone holm]

Not at all.  In virtually ever case of polyandry with the prophet Joseph Smith, he was the only man they were sealed to (I think there was one exception that is yet unexplained).  The other marriages were civil marriages.  A woman can only be sealed for eternity to one man.  Joseph apparently believed or had revelation that they belonged in his family instead of with their civil partners and these women agreed so allowed themselves to be sealed to him.  He did not get it wrong.

As much as I would like to support the other side of this argument by leaving the door open for eternal polyandrous sealings, I have to confess that I believe you are correct in this. How is it you avoided being attacked?

[BlueDreams]

As much as I would like to support the other side of this argument by leaving the door open for eternal polyandrous sealings, I have to confess that I believe you are correct in this. How is it you avoided being attacked?

 

Well, for one he didn't call a post a rant. For another, it's 6:45 in the morning....most people are still getting ready in the morning or sleeping (how I wish that were me). Give it time

[Stone holm]

Well, for one he didn't call a post a rant. For another, it's 6:45 in the morning....most people are still getting ready in the morning or sleeping (how I wish that were me). Give it time

Lol...good point BlueDreams...how does the saying go, a rant by any other name is still a rant...he says while playing with his iPad while stalling about getting out of a warm bed to face the day.

[bluebell]

I am afraid I can imagine that the Lord will "unseal" any temple polyandrous sealings since I don't think they should have happened in the first place. In the covenant of marriage (both here when authorized and in eternity) a man can be sealed/married to multiple women. A woman cannot be sealed/married to multiple men.

Love does matter, but it doesn't overcome eternal law.

Remember the reason for marriage, both plural & monogamous - to raise up seed.

This is made clear in Jacob 2:30, Genesis 1:28 (first commandment God gave to man), D&C 132:19 (the gift of eternal increase) etc.

Polyandrous marriage doesn't increase the number of righteous seed raised over monogamy and creates confusion in our sealing lines. Polygamous marriage when ordained of God can increase the number of spirit children born into a righteous family.

The reason may seem cold, but we have to look beyond our mortal eyes and be realistic. It's not about our limited perspective on marital love. It's about eternity and our exaltation and living as God lives.

So every man who is sealed to a woman had better hope she dies first. Otherwise, his sealing is not secure for if she marries again and is sealed to that husband as well, he has no definite claim on her. God can just separate them at His will and leave the man without the woman he loves thru no fault of his own and despite him being true to the marriage covenant.

Sounds perfectly just.

[Stone holm]

So every man who is sealed to a woman had better hope she dies first. Otherwise, his sealing is not secure for if she marries again and is sealed to that husband as well, he has no definite claim on her. God can just separate them at His will and leave the man without the woman he loves thru no fault of his own and despite him being true to the marriage covenant.

Sounds perfectly just.

I wouldn't go so far as calling it perfectly just, but your counter conception is?

[bluebell]

I wouldn't go so far as calling it perfectly just, but your counter conception is?

 

If that's the way God is going to operate, then it HAS to be perfectly just, right?  Otherwise, it would mean that God's not just.

[Stone holm]

If that's the way God is going to operate, then it HAS to be perfectly just, right?  Otherwise, it would mean that God's not just.

I suppose practicing law has made me cynical about Justice, but the question wasn't whether God was just, but how you propose to have things be to satisfy the demands of Justice.

[JLHPROF]

So every man who is sealed to a woman had better hope she dies first. Otherwise, his sealing is not secure for if she marries again and is sealed to that husband as well, he has no definite claim on her. God can just separate them at His will and leave the man without the woman he loves thru no fault of his own and despite him being true to the marriage covenant.

Sounds perfectly just.

 

I'm afraid you are coming at this from the wrong side.  God isn't separating them because under eternal law a woman CAN'T be sealed for eternity to two men.  Any such sealing would be invalid in the eyes of God.  Arguing what happens in the next life after a woman is sealed to two men is arguing about something that doesn't exist.

 

A man who dies first and his wife remarries still has the claim on her as his wife (so long as she desires to be his companion).  If she remarries that second marriage CAN'T be an eternal marriage unless she is released from her first sealing.

Not about justice, but about order and eternal law.

Edited December 20, 2013 by JLHPROF

[bluebell]

I suppose practicing law has made me cynical about Justice, but the question wasn't whether God was just, but how you propose to have things be to satisfy the demands of Justice.

I have no propositions to make on the issue.

God is just. He knows how to make it work so everyone is treated justly. I don't think some men (speaking generally) have spent any time at all pondering how women will be justly treated in heaven, even though they are very vocal about how they can't believe in a heaven where THEY are not treated justly.

I think this topic of discussion might help these men to view their understanding of plural marriage in a way that is not so man-centric.

[bluebell]

I'm afraid you are coming at this from the wrong side.  God isn't separating them because under eternal law a woman CAN'T be sealed for eternity to two men.  Any such sealing would be invalid in the eyes of God.  Arguing what happens in the next life after a woman is sealed to two men is arguing about something that doesn't exist.

 

A man who dies first and his wife remarries still has the claim on her as his wife (so long as she desires to be his companion).  If she remarries that second marriage CAN'T be an eternal marriage unless she is released from her first sealing.

Not about justice, but about order and eternal law.

 

This is not what the church teaches.  

 

It teaches that a woman who is sealed to more than one man will choose who she will be sealed to in eternity.  

 

The church, by sealing both living and dead women to more than one man, demonstrates that the leadership is not as sure of how exactly everything is going to work after death as you are.

 

I personally feel safe is agreeing with them on this issue.

[juliann]

I'm afraid you are coming at this from the wrong side.  God isn't separating them because under eternal law a woman CAN'T be sealed for eternity to two men.  Any such sealing would be invalid in the eyes of God.  Arguing what happens in the next life after a woman is sealed to two men is arguing about something that doesn't exist.

 

A man who dies first and his wife remarries still has the claim on her as his wife (so long as she desires to be his companion).  If she remarries that second marriage CAN'T be an eternal marriage unless she is released from her first sealing.

Not about justice, but about order and eternal law.

You are so set on your male privileges you are still not thinking this through.  If she remarries another man, she can be sealed to both either by special permission or after she dies.  Now that is actually good news.  The bad news is if men get to prohibit women from multiple sealings.  The the woman cancels a man's sealing.  That means a man is left floating loose.  It is becoming quite odd that no matter how many times that is explained, the thinking goes back to the default position that men will always get exactly what they think they should get even though they have set up a situation where their own sealings will be canceled. 

 

 

This is not what the church teaches.  

 

It teaches that a woman who is sealed to more than one man will choose who she will be sealed to in eternity.  

 

 

Not any more.  That sentence was removed from the CHI.  Unfortunately, as we can see, an awful lot of men refuse to remove it from their language.

[Stone holm]

I'm afraid you are coming at this from the wrong side.  God isn't separating them because under eternal law a woman CAN'T be sealed for eternity to two men.  Any such sealing would be invalid in the eyes of God.  Arguing what happens in the next life after a woman is sealed to two men is arguing about something that doesn't exist.

 

A man who dies first and his wife remarries still has the claim on her as his wife (so long as she desires to be his companion).  If she remarries that second marriage CAN'T be an eternal marriage unless she is released from her first sealing.

Not about justice, but about order and eternal law.

I guess BlueBell was right I just needed to wait.

[Stone holm]

This is not what the church teaches.  

 

It teaches that a woman who is sealed to more than one man will choose who she will be sealed to in eternity.  

 

The church, by sealing both living and dead women to more than one man, demonstrates that the leadership is not as sure of how exactly everything is going to work after death as you are.

 

I personally feel safe is agreeing with them on this issue.

Am a little lost at this point, you agree with them as to:

1) a man can have more than one wife in the eternities?

2) a man can be sealed to more than one woman, but ultimately can only have one wife in the eternities?

3) that a woman can be sealed to more than one man, but ultimately can only have one husband in the eternities?

4) that a woman can have more than one husband in the eternities?

5) God disregards all sealings and plays mix and match as He sees fit in the eternities?

6) Eternal marriages in this life are just role playing, and we all get to play the dating game in the hereafter?

[JLHPROF]

This is not what the church teaches.  

It teaches that a woman who is sealed to more than one man will choose who she will be sealed to in eternity.  

 

The church, by sealing both living and dead women to more than one man, demonstrates that the leadership is not as sure of how exactly everything is going to work after death as you are.

 

I personally feel safe is agreeing with them on this issue.

 

Well, I don't know where you got that church teaching from but Church policy actually states in the Handbook of Instructions vol 1:  3.6.2:

 

"Sealing of Living Members after Divorce

Women.  A living woman may be sealed to only one husband.  If she is sealed to a husband and later divorces, she must receive a cancellation of that sealing from the First Presidency before she may be sealed to another man in her lifetime.

Men.  If a husband and wife have been sealed together and later divorced, the man must received a sealing clearance from the First Presidency before another woman may be sealed to him"

also

"Sealing of Living Member after a Spouse's Death

Women. A living woman may be sealed to only one husband.

Men. If a husband and wife have been sealed and the wife dies, the man may have another woman sealed to him."

 

Also, what then is the purpose for "marriage for time only" as practiced all throughout Church history?  The usage of that ceremony has always been for women who were being remarried after previously being sealed to another man.

 

"Having established this principle of marriage for eternity, let us examine the results flowing from it. Let me suppose that here is my neighbor; he has a wife, and she is married to him for all eternity. By-and-by, he dies and leaves his widow. I am a young unmarried man, and pay my attentions to her; and she, being still young, accepts my attentions and wishes to be married to me; yet she has been married to a man for all eternity. Can she be married to me for all eternity? No. I accept of her as a wife for time only, yielding her up with all her posterity in the morning of the first resurrection to her legal and lawful husband." - Orson Pratt

(See also Genesis 38:8-9 & Deut 25).

[Stone holm]

You are so set on your male privileges you are still not thinking this through.  If she remarries another man, she can be sealed to both either by special permission or after she dies.  Now that is actually good news.  The bad news is if men get to prohibit women from multiple sealings.  The the woman cancels a man's sealing.  That means a man is left floating loose.  It is becoming quite odd that no matter how many times that is explained, the thinking goes back to the default position that men will always get exactly what they think they should get even though they have set up a situation where their own sealings will be canceled. 

 

 

Not any more.  That sentence was removed from the CHI.  Unfortunately, as we can see, an awful lot of men refuse to remove it from their language.

Isn't that what he said? She can seek a cancelation of the first sealing.

[Calm]

https://www.lds.org/manual/members-guide-to-temple-and-family-history-work/chapter-7-providing-temple-ordinances?lang=eng

You can seal a deceased woman to ALL her husbands without any cancelation...it is identical to how they treat deceased men.

Even if she was sealed to one man while living...you just have to wait until that man is dead.

So it is no guarantee to outlive a woman you've been sealed to if she was legally married to anyone else.

Edited December 20, 2013 by calmoriah

[juliann]

The church makes exceptions to the rules all the time.  I was granted an exception which I will not disclose.  All I had to do was ask.  You will also note that the restriction is "while living".   The rules will continue to be changed.  This is the last remaining vestige of polygyny and I'll lay odds it is equalized within the next decade.  It is virtually meaningless even now since everyone will be sealed after the fact.  My deceased MIL is sealed to two husbands.  And seriously, if you have to use Orson Pratt rather than a living prophet for support....

[JLHPROF]

https://www.lds.org/manual/members-guide-to-temple-and-family-history-work/chapter-7-providing-temple-ordinances?lang=eng

You can seal a deceased woman to ALL her husbands without any cancelation...it is identical to how they treat deceased men.

 

The difference here is that this is done to cover the bases, they don't know who her eternal companion should be.  There is a reason that this same thing is not done for living women with a sealing.  A woman can only be sealed to one man for eternity.  If she died and was married civilly to several men they don't know who she should be sealed to so the option for all is given.  She still only has one husband in the eternities.

Edited December 20, 2013 by JLHPROF