Why Wasn't Emma The First To Be Sealed To Joseph?

[BCSpace]

Joseph was sealed to Emma on May 28, 1843.  

 

We have records of him sealing himself to many women prior to that date.  Do you want those dates too?  I can look them up and return, but I just mainly was wondering if Joseph felt in the beginning that the sealing keys were to be used to live the principle of polygamy only?  Otherwise why did he not seal Emma to him when he received the keys instead of waiting until she seemed to be more approving of polygamy?  Hope that makes sense.  

 

You might want to avail yourself of the information in this link:

 

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/faq/emmas-response/

 

...the home page of which I link to in my siggy.  Near the beginning it states:

 

Emma accepted plural marriage teachings briefly in the spring of 1843 and gave Joseph four wives in May, but then she immediately rejected the principle.

 

And it has a section entited:

 

May to July 13, 1843—Emma Struggles as a Plural Wife

 

Seems like Emma's difficultly in accepting the doctrine is the reason.

 

It is worthwhile to note that:

 

During the last ten months of his life, Joseph and Emma lived an outwardly monogamous lifestyle. Her path through plural marriage was extremely difficult, so observers should, perhaps, suspend judgment of her. Despite her struggles and stumbles, she remained true to her husband. Her final words were: “Joseph Joseph . . . yes, yes, I am coming.”

[bcuzbcuz]

Well, then I must congratulate you on the stability of your marriage.

 

My wife is now deceased.  I am not sure what here response would have been nor how long it would have taken her to decide as we were never faced with the need to make such a decision.

My first, now deceased wife, was so against the idea, and even more, the practise of plural marriage that she wanted me to promise I wouldn't marry anyone else if she died. I didn't have any problem giving her such a promise, for two reasons. First and foremost, because I find the idea of plural marriage repugnant (polyandry, of marrying women already married, to a mate not deceased, is off the chart repugnant to me). My second reason for feeling secure in my promise to never re-marry lies in my own inability to even conceive of having two women in the same household as me. I find it hard enough to please one wife, let alone two.

 

It is MNSHO that to many do not know and make the distinction between marriage and sealing.

My first wife died unexpectedly, more than 20 years ago. I still moarn her loss.

 

My wife died in July after a long illness.  Know what you mean.

I did eventually re-marry, after a respectful 15 years. My present wife, knowing the present aimless wallowing about polygamy, and the chorus of yes-sayers who try to convince any who will listen, that polygamy is going to hit us sooner or later, has eloquently expressed her thoughts that if I even thought about or lusted after another woman she would be out the door, and out of my life, before I could blink twice.

 

I do not think all of polygamy was because of lusting but that is for another thread, some other time.

You say your wife would need time to come around to the concept.

If I came home and informed my wife that plural marriage was a divine principle, and, Oh, by the way, I've been doing it for 11 years to a 20 some-odd women?? She wouldn't need any time to "come around" to the idea. She'd be gone.

 

I can understand her attitude.  I will be the first to agree that it was always done correctly but I don't condemn the men and women who did the best they knew how.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I feel for your loss and hope you find solace in friends and community.

[Thinking]

Why are you struggling with it?  If you have a spiritual manifestation of the restoration does this negate that?

 

Are you saying that there is nothing you could discover that would cause you to question your spiritual manifestation?

[JulieM]

You might want to avail yourself of the information in this link:

http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/faq/emmas-response/

...the home page of which I link to in my siggy. Near the beginning it states:

And it has a section entited:

May to July 13, 1843—Emma Struggles as a Plural Wife

Seems like Emma's difficultly in accepting the doctrine is the reason.

It is worthwhile to note that:

What does all of that have to do with Joseph being sealed to approximately 25 women before he was sealed to his legal, first wife Emma for eternity?

Joseph couldn't seal himself to Emma until she accepted polygamy? Is that what you're saying?

Edited November 17, 2014 by JulieM

[ERayR]

Are you saying that there is nothing you could discover that would cause you to question your spiritual manifestation?

 

Not yet anyway and I doubt that there is.  I recognize the fallibility of human beings(including prophets) but the spiritual manifestation that the restored gospel is true forces me to accept those by which it came, warts and all.

[Tacenda]

Joseph apparently viewed the sealing ordinance as a way to bind families to him in a dynastic relationship. He not only sealed women to him but he sealed men to him as sons. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_adoption_%28Mormonism%29

For some good information see: http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Polyandry

Isn't that because he was getting a head start on the next world that he would be a God in? I've read that somewhere. About BY too.

[ERayR]

Isn't that because he was getting a head start on the next world that he would be a God in? I've read that somewhere. About BY too.

 

You read to much anti-Mormon literature.  It most likely had to do with sealing the saints into a family unit.

[Svawd]

.

You read to much anti-Mormon literature.  It most likely had to do with sealing the saints into a family unit.

Good answer with the (most likely) statement.

[VideoGameJunkie]

Being sealed to someone sounds so wonderful. I hope to experience it either in this life or the next.

[rpn]

We know that JS fundamentally misunderstood the sealing (because Wilford Woodruff received revelation directing that members be sealed to their immediate families/ancestors  instead of to church leaders as had been previous practice.

[Nevo]

Why didn't Joseph have Emma sealed to him when he received the sealing keys?  Why was he sealed to so many other women before he was sealed to Emma?  

 

Although Joseph had been sealed to other women before 28 May 1843, he and Emma were the first civilly married couple to be sealed. Emma was also the first woman to be admitted into the Anointed Quorum and the first to receive her second anointing.

[BCSpace]

What does all of that have to do with Joseph being sealed to approximately 25 women before he was sealed to his legal, first wife Emma for eternity?

Joseph couldn't seal himself to Emma until she accepted polygamy? Is that what you're saying?

 

Hasn't that always been the case?

[JulieM]

Hasn't that always been the case?

The purpose of restoring the sealing keys was for living polygamy? That's always been the the case? How about today?

[ERayR]

The purpose of restoring the sealing keys was for living polygamy? That's always been the the case? How about today?

 

No the purpose of restoring the sealing keys was to seal together the family of God.

[BCSpace]

The purpose of restoring the sealing keys was for living polygamy? That's always been the the case? How about today?

 

I'm referring to your question of:

 

 

Joseph couldn't seal himself to Emma until she accepted polygamy? Is that what you're saying?

 

 

I'll expand the answer. Hasn't it always been the case that a living woman has to consent to be sealed?

[mfbukowski]

Are you saying that there is nothing you could discover that would cause you to question your spiritual manifestation?

Is there nothing you could discover that would cause you to question that you are reading this post?

 

Why would you do that?

[JLHPROF]

What does all of that have to do with Joseph being sealed to approximately 25 women before he was sealed to his legal, first wife Emma for eternity?

Joseph couldn't seal himself to Emma until she accepted polygamy? Is that what you're saying?

 

Hasn't that always been the case?

 

Eternal sealings in Nauvoo were primarily given to those who had accepted polygamy (whether they entered the law or not).

The story of Heber C. Kimball & Vilate's Abrahamic test is evidence of this.

 

Joseph wept at this proof of devotion, and embracing Heber, told him that was all that the Lord required. He had proved him, as a child of Abraham, that he would "do the works of Abraham," holding back nothing, but laying all upon the altar for God's glory.

The Prophet joined the hands of the heroic and devoted pair, and then and there, by virtue of the sealing power and authority of the Holy Priesthood, Heber and Vilate Kimball were made husband and wife for all eternity.  - LIfe of Heber C. Kimball

 

As BCSpace quite correctly observed, Joseph and Emma were sealed together when Emma accepted plural marriage and gave Joseph 4 wives.  During this time period (abt May-Sep 1843) Emma was in better harmony with those who were in the anointed quorum - she had given Joseph plural wives (living the law of Sarah), she had been sealed to Joseph, and she eventually received her second anointings and administered the temple ordinances to other members.

 

These blessings were all reserved (at the time) for loyal members of the quorum.  Emma took time to reach that point so was not sealed to Joseph first.

[JLHPROF]

I am shocked that Joseph wasn't sealed to Emma his beloved first wife (and his children) before he was sealed to many (25 or more?) other women.

 

What makes you think the other women he had sealed to him as wives weren't also "beloved"?

 

If Emma hadn't come to terms with polygamy and Joseph was to take another wife that he loved too, why wouldn't they be sealed?

 

If polygamy was completely legal today, even practiced in society, and a husband had a member wife and a non-member wife  why on earth would he wait for wife number one two get her recommend before being sealed to wife number two who was temple worthy at the time?

It's a bit of a labored analogy, but that is basically Joseph's situation - he had a wife who hadn't yet accepted the doctrines of the anointed quorum (and might never) and potential wives that had testimonies.  If a wife was ready and had a testimony they were sealed.

[Nevo]

These blessings were all reserved (at the time) for loyal members of the quorum.  Emma took time to reach that point so was not sealed to Joseph first.

None of Joseph's plural wives were initiated into the Anointed Quorum before Emma, notwithstanding their acceptance of polygamy. It's pretty clear that Joseph did wait for Emma. He wanted her to be the first.

[BCSpace]

Interesting that the 4 women Emma 'gave' to JS were the Partridge (ages 19 and 22) and Lawrence (ages 17 and 19) sisters, among the youngest of the group. Helen Mar Kimball was in that time frame as well.

 

I think this needs to be pointed out when the argument of JS supposedly going after young girls is brought up. I think it bolsters the fact that such ages weren't necessarily unreasonable or unheard of in terms of marriages at the time (look also at the recent or current marriage laws of some North Eastern states) and also that JS wasn't the only one involved in the selection.

[Thinking]

Interesting that the 4 women Emma 'gave' to JS were the Partridge (ages 19 and 22) and Lawrence (ages 17 and 19) sisters, among the youngest of the group. Helen Mar Kimball was in that time frame as well.

 

I think this needs to be pointed out when the argument of JS supposedly going after young girls is brought up. I think it bolsters the fact that such ages weren't necessarily unreasonable or unheard of in terms of marriages at the time (look also at the recent or current marriage laws of some North Eastern states) and also that JS wasn't the only one involved in the selection.

 

You can't use Joseph Smith's marriages to teenagers as evidence that such ages weren't necessarily unreasonable or unheard of in terms of marriages at the time.

[ALarson]

From reading more on this, I learned that Joseph wasn't the only member living polygamy that didn't have their legal wife sealed to them first:  

 

"There were 30 men who married plural wives prior to when Joseph Smith was killed. Out of those 30, only 4 of them were sealed to their civil wives before they were sealed to their plural wives. In other words....they were sealed to their non-legal wives before they were sealed for eternity to their legal wife."

 

So Emma must not have been the only first wife that had difficulty accepting the principle.  I'm sure it was a confusing time for many and that explains why this may have happened. 

[bcuzbcuz]

I'm referring to your question of:

 

 

I'll expand the answer. Hasn't it always been the case that a living woman has to consent to be sealed?

Yes, consent to being sealed but that doesn't mean consent to being one wife among many.

It can be safely said that Joseph was taking on myriad responsibilities without Emma being in consent. In her marriage to Joseph she could rightly assume that the marriage entailed responsibilities to each other, that encompassed faithfulness and devotion. Joseph changed the game plan after the fact and those details did not entail informing Emma.

"Why bother her with the details when she just isn't going to agree with them anyway?" Hardly seems the correct manner to treat one's wife. No???

[bcuzbcuz]

From reading more on this, I learned that Joseph wasn't the only member living polygamy that didn't have their legal wife sealed to them first:  

 

"There were 30 men who married plural wives prior to when Joseph Smith was killed. Out of those 30, only 4 of them were sealed to their civil wives before they were sealed to their plural wives. In other words....they were sealed to their non-legal wives before they were sealed for eternity to their legal wife."

 

So Emma must not have been the only first wife that had difficulty accepting the principle.  I'm sure it was a confusing time for many and that explains why this may have happened.

Where did you find such information? Who said it? How accurate is it? Was dishonesty such that a whole group of 26 men granted themselves the right to take other wives WITHOUT first consulting their first wife?

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

My wife has said, specifically, "If you (meaning me the writer of this opinion) were ever to want another woman, have the courage to inform me and take out a divorce before ever entering into such a realtionship. Don't play around and keep me uninformed as a 'security blanket' should your new playmate not want to continue playing".

Honesty and courage and truthfulness. Aren't those prerequisites to building a good relationship?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I am seeing this question asked on other forums and I thought I'd ask for input on this topic here.  

 

Why didn't Joseph have Emma sealed to him when he received the sealing keys?  Why was he sealed to so many other women before he was sealed to Emma?  

I have an idea. I don't know. And neither do you.