New Gospel Topic Essays - Polygamy

[pogi]

Pogi if you believe you existed before this life you would have been born regardless of LDS polygamy. If not.... Then who knows.

 

I don't pretend to know how it all works, but I do believe in foreordination and foreknowledge of family units.  I am a result of my lineage and could not be any other way.  

[Ham Clam]

"The Juvenile Instructor" is taking questions on polygamy.

http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/taking-all-questions-about-polygamy

[Ares]

Indeed. These are a great attempt to make something that clearly smells like, looks like and really is a pile of poo smell and look like a rose. I am really happy with the openess but it seems like a lose lose either way. It may help questionig active members some but honestly it is a tough thing to justify and make plausible.

You are allowed to share your beliefs. You are not allowed to call others beliefs a pile of poo. You are out of this thread.

[KevinG]

Pogi if you believe you existed before this life you would have been born regardless of LDS polygamy. If not.... Then who knows.

But he was born into a royal priesthood.

[Calm]

What if the wife isn't given the opportunity to accept the Law of Sarah as was initially the case with Emma? Does the condemnation fall on Joseph?

Do we know for sure she wasn't?

 

At least in the first case?

[sjdawg]

When were the articles of faith written? Why did the early LDS church feel it was ok to ignore the law?

[Buckeye]

I don't pretend to know how it all works, but I do believe in foreordination and foreknowledge of family units.  I am a result of my lineage and could not be any other way.

The fact that something good (you) has come through a historical practice does not make that practice good, much less from god. I know many African Americans who are happy they live in this country and eternally grateful for the sacrifices of their ancestors. But that doesn't mean slavery and the removal of blacks from Africa to the United States was something to celebrate.

Moreover, many members of the church who have polygamous ancestors also have ancestors who refused to follow the practice, such as David o mckay's parents. So it can be argued that such members owe their existence to the rejection of polygamy just as much as to the acceptance of it.

[KevinG]

Looking for final proof of an eternal covenants value in mortality is somewhat futile.

 

We can argue that the descendants of polygamists have a disproportionately positive influence on church leadership (which I have)

We can argue that the descendants of Josephs plural marriages are non-existent (which they are).

We can argue that the results of polygamy were hardship and sacrifice (which it was)

We can argue that the results of polygamy were a tighter knit culture and strong extended families (which they were)

 

But the blessings of the tribe of Joseph, are for this life and the next.  The jury has not seen all the evidence, and we are in a feeble place to judge our predecessors in this matter.  I understand the difficulty of viewing the practice of multiple sealings from the viewpoint of 21st century highly romanticized monogamous marriages.  I can see why so many Saints are eager to eschew this practice as an anomaly or error.  It doesn't sit well with our socialized sensibilities.  Yet at the same time we seem to be more empathetic towards serial monogamy, divorce and single parents, which certainly leave our progeny in a worse place than in an extended polygamous family unit.

 

I'm more comfortable with the idea that Joseph and Brigham were inspired, yet human, and did their best to institute an eternal law, that was as difficult in the Old Testament,  as it was in the 19th Century.  Just view Abraham and Jacob how smoothly their extended families worked, yet the promises from the Lord for their obedience are astounding.

Edited October 24, 2014 by KevinG

[Tacenda]

Now that the Essay is out, why not add in the names of the polygamist wives of Joseph Smith, they deserve that much respect, they more than anyone had the most faith. 

 

Here is a podcast that outlines each wife and gives recognition. 

 

http://feministmormonhousewivespodcast.org/

 

Lindsay is the one that produced this and she's spent 3 years on it.  It's filled with stories and valuable insight into these women's lives.  Lindsay also gets into Utah polygamist wives as well. 

 

I would not be surprised if this happens eventually, but if they waited to put stuff up only when they had everything finalized we would be waiting until the JSP project was finished and probably decades just getting all the material we could and should put up eventually assembled.

 

I would suggest using the feedback option giving on lds.org and telling them this is something you would like to see.

It worked Cal, here is the reply I received!  But don't know why they say they don't have a list of all the wives, maybe it's just not a completed list, there could be more wives other than the 33 I presume. 

 

 

Feedback History

A complete history of your feedback and the company response is outlined below:

 

You submitted a Suggestion on October 24, 2014 at 3:30 AM:

I'm grateful the church has put out the latest essay on Joseph Smith's plural marriages. I've struggled with the knowledge for so long, and was always feeling like no one else around me knew of it and felt almost like I was some terrible person for having a faith crisis over it. But now that it is on lds.org I can feel maybe others will also know and it won't be like a secret and I've a place to point if someone questions my crisis or thinks it is because I want to sin. Anyhow, kudos to the church for doing this!! Suggestion...I would love it if the church would please list the names of Joseph's wives in the article or somewhere. Also, on each of the president's history, specifically "Significant Events", it leaves out so many of their wives. It only lists those wives that never lived polygamy with the exception of Joseph Smith, Jr. I think these women need some recognition, they deserve that especially for their faith in living the principle under some difficult conditions. https//www.lds.org/churchhistory/presidents/leaders.jsp Thank you and hopefully something can be done here.  

 

LDS Response Team responded on October 24, 2014 at 11:56 AM as follows:

Hello:

Thank you for your comments to us, and we are sorry that you have struggled with a faith crisis over this issue.  I too have met Latter-day Saints, even adults, who did not know that Joseph did have plural wives.  I can't speak for anyone else, but the history and facts about this issue have always been there.  This is just my opinion, but I think the vast amount of lies, rumors, slanders, exaggerations, caricatures, and innuendos about Joseph from non-Mormon critics and anti-Mormons over the years has caused many LDS to simply turn off their ears from even listening to those who would speak calmly and faithfully about it.

As to an actual list of the women he was sealed to, well.... this is a harder question.  Actually, we really don't know for sure, and the Church has never been able to publish an "official" list!  Records were not always kept, various lists do not match, and even the best of historians trying to be accurate and fair can not agree on all these names! 

I am going to send you a link to what I think is the BEST site on the Internet for accurate information about Joseph Smith and plural marriage during the Kirtland-Nauvoo years.  This is NOT an official Church website, and the author of it is always clear to separate his research and opinions from any insinuation that he speaks for the Church.  The link is this:

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/

The authors of this site are Brian and Laura Hales who are faithful LDS.  Their most recent work was a monumental 3-volume work entitled "Joseph Smith's Polygamy: History and Theology".  I personally don't know how anyone can claim to "know" about this subject without having first come to grips with this 3-vol work.  The best thing about their website is the "History" link that leads to biographical sketches of each of the women the Hales' think were sealed to Joseph Smith.  He used to have a spreadsheet that actually listed the various women different historians and biographers claimed were married to Joseph, so you can see the differences in their lists... but I'm not sure if he still keeps that spreadsheet available.

Anyway, God Bless!

Response Team Volunteer - RK

[DBMormon]

 I can't speak for anyone else, but the history and facts about this issue have always been there.  

 

In the response Tacenda  got I would ask where?  Where in LDS official sources have the facts been always?

LDS.org?

Ensign?

 

Show me one official source that discusses polyandry and the polyandrous wives prior to the essays?

[JLHPROF]

In the response Tacenda  got I would ask where?  Where in LDS official sources have the facts been always?

LDS.org?

Ensign?

 

Show me one official source that discusses polyandry and the polyandrous wives prior to the essays?

 

The response never claimed they were in official sources.  Just that they were readily available for anyone who cared enough to pick up a book.

[mormonnewb]

The response never claimed they were in official sources. Just that they were readily available for anyone who cared enough to pick up a book.

You mean they were available for anyone who was "disobedient," "foolish" or "reckless" enough to go to non-Church sources for the truth. Why would any "good" Mormon do that when the Church provides Primary, Seminary, Sunday School, etc.? Isn't that just risking being "led astray" by anti-Mormon sources?

It's simply not a truthful practice to have major (and relevant) omissions in your own teaching, just because others are telling the whole truth out there. For instance, a professor could not possibly justify omitting, say, slavery from a 19th century U.S. History course because there are "readily available books for anyone who cares to read them."

I think the Church agrees and has published these essays in an attempt to better educate the saints. Perhaps, we can follow the Church's lead and stop blaming people for not knowing what we failed to teach them.

[Calm]

You weren't around when they used to have bookstores in almost every ward, I think they were fundraisers for the High Priests.  Many people donated books to the ward library and they could become quite massive and could be checked out by anyone.  There usually wasn't a control over what books were put in there either (I had some interesting ones left over from the early 1900s on public education, beekeeping and totally unrelated to church stuff as well as journals of church leaders, Talmage's books, etc.)  Wards aren't supposed to have non church distribution books in the ward libraries anymore, but if you've ever been to Deseretbook or one of the many other stores marketing to church members who had to have survive all the years by selling stuff not issued by the Church (given that they can't make much of a profit off of them since iirc they get it at the same cost as everyone else or 5% off if they pick it up rather than have it shipped), you will be able to find books not vetted through the Church distribution process.

[KevinG]

You mean they were available for anyone who was "disobedient," "foolish" or "reckless" enough to go to non-Church sources for the truth. Why would any "good" Mormon do that when the Church provides Primary, Seminary, Sunday School, etc.? Isn't that just risking being "led astray" by anti-Mormon sources?

It's simply not a truthful practice to have major (and relevant) omissions in your own teaching, just because others are telling the whole truth out there. For instance, a professor could not possibly justify omitting, say, slavery from a 19th century U.S. History course because there are "readily available books for anyone who cares to read them."

I think the Church agrees and has published these essays in an attempt to better educate the saints. Perhaps, we can follow the Church's lead and stop blaming people for not knowing what we failed to teach them.

Don't break the scare quotes! Funny how a convert like me on the 80s found most of this stuff from institutes and church history publications, asked questions of members and leaders, and they still baptized me and let me serve in callings. The only book I was ever cautioned not to read, by a friend, was one on Satanism. His only counsel was that I probably did t need to research it to know it wasnt good.

When Bushman published Rough Stone Rolling my Stake President was giving them away as gifts.

I just don't find the stories of inaccessible information that credible, given most of what I (a first gen convert) knew was from church and LDS affiliated publishing house sources. A few gems have been learned since on I discovered apologetics on line, but I find who presents the facts and what their intent is, makes for good or awful context. Take it easy on the LDS.org folks, they only got the standard works on line about a decade ago.

There are those kept on the dark, but that tends to be a localized dysfunction. Kind of like the homeschooling families who don't let their kids read Harry Potter. We all know them, and every ward has one. But on the balance the Saints are about as open with their history as any church, with the possible exception of the Catholics. If you look past the Vatican library restrictions.

Edited October 25, 2014 by KevinG

[KevinG]

I also note the critics are now getting in a flurry of "too little too late" while the topic is fresh. Poor dears what will they do in a generation when the wheat and tares of church history are separated and lying open on the threshing floor. Probably complain that the Church is hiding the 19th century Excel spreadsheet Joseph used to keep track of his 34th through 47th child brides.

[Kenngo1969]

Would anyone here be ok with their wife being sealed to Joseph Smith for eternity while he already has a dozen wives and you have to give up your only one for eternity. How is that fair?

Either God is Omniscient and Omnipotent, or He isn't.  If He is, then I don't think He's going to have to tell anyone in the next life, "I know you were expecting more, or better, but ... Crap! [sigh!] ... this is the best I could do.  Sorry. ."

Edited October 25, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[Kenngo1969]

Indeed. These are a great attempt to make something that clearly smells like, looks like and really is a pile of poo smell and look like a rose. I am really happy with the openess but it seems like a lose lose either way. It may help questionig active members some but honestly it is a tough thing to justify and make plausible.

Alrighty, then!  Teancum has spoken!  It's all a pile of poo!  (Anyone who dares to suggest otherwise is simply putting perfume and lipstick on a pig, dressing it up all pretty, and talking sweetly to it, but it's still a dirty, foul-smelling pig.  Someday, the rest of us, too, will reach the point where we don't see the world as we are, but rather as it is.  When that happens, will the last person to leave the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints please turn out the lights?

 

Oh, we poor, benighted, unenlightened souls!

 

If ONLY...

Edited October 25, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[Calm]

When Bushman published Rough Stone Rolling my Stake President was giving them away as gifts.

 

Family Christmas presents from father-in-law to his eight kids.

[Scott Lloyd]

Alrighty, then!  Teancum has spoken!  It's all a pile of poo!  (Anyone who dares to suggest otherwise is simply putting perfume and lipstick on a pig, dressing it up all pretty, and talking sweetly to it, but it's still a dirty, foul-smelling pig.  Someday, the rest of us, too, will reach the point where we don't see the world as we are, but rather as it is.  When that happens, will the last person to leave the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints please turn out the lights?

 

Oh, we poor, benighted, unenlightened souls!

 

If ONLY...

The reaction from the critics was rather predictable, was it not? You can trust the critics -- to act like critics.

[canard78]

It worked Cal, here is the reply I received! But don't know why they say they don't have a list of all the wives, maybe it's just not a completed list, there could be more wives other than the 33 I presume.

Feedback History

A complete history of your feedback and the company response is outlined below:

You submitted a Suggestion on October 24, 2014 at 3:30 AM: I'm grateful the church has put out the latest essay on Joseph Smith's plural marriages. I've struggled with the knowledge for so long, and was always feeling like no one else around me knew of it and felt almost like I was some terrible person for having a faith crisis over it. But now that it is on lds.org I can feel maybe others will also know and it won't be like a secret and I've a place to point if someone questions my crisis or thinks it is because I want to sin. Anyhow, kudos to the church for doing this!! Suggestion...I would love it if the church would please list the names of Joseph's wives in the article or somewhere. Also, on each of the president's history, specifically "Significant Events", it leaves out so many of their wives. It only lists those wives that never lived polygamy with the exception of Joseph Smith, Jr. I think these women need some recognition, they deserve that especially for their faith in living the principle under some difficult conditions. https//www.lds.org/churchhistory/presidents/leaders.jsp Thank you and hopefully something can be done here.

LDS Response Team responded on October 24, 2014 at 11:56 AM as follows:

Hello:

Thank you for your comments to us, and we are sorry that you have struggled with a faith crisis over this issue. I too have met Latter-day Saints, even adults, who did not know that Joseph did have plural wives. I can't speak for anyone else, but the history and facts about this issue have always been there. This is just my opinion, but I think the vast amount of lies, rumors, slanders, exaggerations, caricatures, and innuendos about Joseph from non-Mormon critics and anti-Mormons over the years has caused many LDS to simply turn off their ears from even listening to those who would speak calmly and faithfully about it.

As to an actual list of the women he was sealed to, well.... this is a harder question. Actually, we really don't know for sure, and the Church has never been able to publish an "official" list! Records were not always kept, various lists do not match, and even the best of historians trying to be accurate and fair can not agree on all these names!

I am going to send you a link to what I think is the BEST site on the Internet for accurate information about Joseph Smith and plural marriage during the Kirtland-Nauvoo years. This is NOT an official Church website, and the author of it is always clear to separate his research and opinions from any insinuation that he speaks for the Church. The link is this:

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/

The authors of this site are Brian and Laura Hales who are faithful LDS. Their most recent work was a monumental 3-volume work entitled "Joseph Smith's Polygamy: History and Theology". I personally don't know how anyone can claim to "know" about this subject without having first come to grips with this 3-vol work. The best thing about their website is the "History" link that leads to biographical sketches of each of the women the Hales' think were sealed to Joseph Smith. He used to have a spreadsheet that actually listed the various women different historians and biographers claimed were married to Joseph, so you can see the differences in their lists... but I'm not sure if he still keeps that spreadsheet available.

Anyway, God Bless!

Response Team Volunteer - RK

That's a really decent response. I'm impressed.

The article doesn't name them all but says:

"The exact number of women to whom he was sealed in his lifetime is unknown because the evidence is fragmentary.24"

Footnote "24" says: "Careful estimates put the number between 30 and 40"

The article also says: "Joseph Smith was sealed to a number of women who were already married.29"

Footnote "29" says:

"Estimates of the number of these sealings range from 12 to 14. (See Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith [salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997], 4, 6; Hales, Joseph Smith’s Polygamy, 1:253–76, 303–48.)"

Lds.org has just:

- referenced Compton!

- acknowledged Joseph's polygamy may have included some sexual relationships

- said that he had 30-40 wives, of which 12-14 were married to other men and that other wives were children

- recognised that Emma was unaware of some of them and that plural marriage was illegal

On LDS dot Freakin' Org!

I don't care that some of it is on the 29th footnote of a page 5 clicks deep.

If people are disappointed that the church hasn't created a new banner for the home page saying "Meet Joseph's Harem" to sit next to the slightly kitch news stories and fluffy articles then I think we need to manage expectations

Next time someone asks someone struggling with polygamy is challenged about polygamy, this article (on the official website) is a great resource to share.

[Tacenda]

Touche Canard!! LDS.org is my go to site!

[Calm]

It worked Cal, here is the reply I received!  But don't know why they say they don't have a list of all the wives, maybe it's just not a completed list, there could be more wives other than the 33 I presume. 

 

 

Feedback History

A complete history of your feedback and the company response is outlined below:

 

You submitted a Suggestion on October 24, 2014 at 3:30 AM:

I'm grateful the church has put out the latest essay on Joseph Smith's plural marriages. I've struggled with the knowledge for so long, and was always feeling like no one else around me knew of it and felt almost like I was some terrible person for having a faith crisis over it. But now that it is on lds.org I can feel maybe others will also know and it won't be like a secret and I've a place to point if someone questions my crisis or thinks it is because I want to sin. Anyhow, kudos to the church for doing this!! Suggestion...I would love it if the church would please list the names of Joseph's wives in the article or somewhere. Also, on each of the president's history, specifically "Significant Events", it leaves out so many of their wives. It only lists those wives that never lived polygamy with the exception of Joseph Smith, Jr. I think these women need some recognition, they deserve that especially for their faith in living the principle under some difficult conditions. https//www.lds.org/churchhistory/presidents/leaders.jsp Thank you and hopefully something can be done here.

 

 

LDS Response Team responded on October 24, 2014 at 11:56 AM as follows:

Hello:

Thank you for your comments to us, and we are sorry that you have struggled with a faith crisis over this issue.  I too have met Latter-day Saints, even adults, who did not know that Joseph did have plural wives.  I can't speak for anyone else, but the history and facts about this issue have always been there.  This is just my opinion, but I think the vast amount of lies, rumors, slanders, exaggerations, caricatures, and innuendos about Joseph from non-Mormon critics and anti-Mormons over the years has caused many LDS to simply turn off their ears from even listening to those who would speak calmly and faithfully about it.

As to an actual list of the women he was sealed to, well.... this is a harder question.  Actually, we really don't know for sure, and the Church has never been able to publish an "official" list!  Records were not always kept, various lists do not match, and even the best of historians trying to be accurate and fair can not agree on all these names! 

I am going to send you a link to what I think is the BEST site on the Internet for accurate information about Joseph Smith and plural marriage during the Kirtland-Nauvoo years.  This is NOT an official Church website, and the author of it is always clear to separate his research and opinions from any insinuation that he speaks for the Church.  The link is this:

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/

The authors of this site are Brian and Laura Hales who are faithful LDS.  Their most recent work was a monumental 3-volume work entitled "Joseph Smith's Polygamy: History and Theology".  I personally don't know how anyone can claim to "know" about this subject without having first come to grips with this 3-vol work.  The best thing about their website is the "History" link that leads to biographical sketches of each of the women the Hales' think were sealed to Joseph Smith.  He used to have a spreadsheet that actually listed the various women different historians and biographers claimed were married to Joseph, so you can see the differences in their lists... but I'm not sure if he still keeps that spreadsheet available.

Anyway, God Bless!

Response Team Volunteer - RK

I am impressed. Much better than mine though I will admit last question i was asking was when are they going to get an online catalog system for ward libraries isn't as interesting...and if they had told me how far down the list it was, it might have sent me into a free fall snit at the time....I had just lost five years of work in a move making my own because the massive backup didn't have it on it after all and the discs were lost as well)

[Tacenda]

I'm sorry you had to go through that Cal. I've never been ward librarian, but know they don't make your job very easy sometimes. For a long time we had issues with our copier, it kept breaking down and was really slow. That's the only one I was aware of, except for people losing things, or not bringing them back.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Tacenda

[Silhouette]

I'm sorry you had to go through that Cal. I've never been ward librarian, but know they don't make your job very easy sometimes. For a long time we had issues with our copier, it kept breaking down and was really slow. That's the only one I was aware of, except for people losing things, or not bringing them back.

This might be off-topic, but I've been Ward Librarian before too. We had the same issues with people not returning things. We were told that for "small items" we were expected to replace them ourselves without turning in any receipts. I ended up asking for a release because it got so ridiculous.

[JLHPROF]

This might be off-topic, but I've been Ward Librarian before too. We had the same issues with people not returning things. We were told that for "small items" we were expected to replace them ourselves without turning in any receipts. I ended up asking for a release because it got so ridiculous.

 

Oh, I'd be furious.  But that's the book junkie in me.  You just don't lose them!  You love them, and take care of them, and treasure them.

I know we're probably talking pictures, videos etc, but the principle is the same.