Answers To Common Questions - New Era, March '15

[california boy]

It uses the term "without Church authority" to depict how these polygamous marriages could occur.

This would imply there were invalid.

 

Regards,

Jim

 

Well if they are invalid and some of the apostles entered into such marriages after the Manifesto, then that would mean they were committing fornication. Yikes.

[cinepro]

Well if they are invalid and some of the apostles entered into such marriages after the Manifesto, then that would mean they were committing fornication. Yikes.

 

It would be adultery, not fornication.  Double yikes!!

[DBMormon]

I agree with you on point B, but disagree on point A.

 

Yes, it would have been good to link to or cite the Church's essays and to otherwise facilitate the option of further exploration or enrichment.

 

But I don't see anything here that could fairly be characterized as misleading (though I acknowledge that, according to your Post #2, you intend to come back later and substantiate that claim; as of this writing you have not yet done so).

 

And we have to remember that teenage Church members are the target audience here. For the most part they not apt to be engaging in extremely deep or academically rigorous discussions with friends or acquaintances on these things. What they need is a ready vocabulary for expressing what they already believe when confronted with challenges but may not yet feel very confident or competent in putting into words. This article help can them do that. Were I a teenager, I think I would find it very useful. Furthermore, I don't see the implied reader here as being one who is going through a faith crisis, if that's what you are thinking. Many active Church members -- including youth -- are fervent and assured believers; they just need the tools to help them express that belief in interactions with others.

 

As for the responses being shallow, that's a bad rap. Yes, the thoughts expressed here could be developed more thoroughly; that's the case with most discousrse. But the messages expressed here would be just as true in any case.

 

In short, you are misapprehending conciseness for shallowness.

you disagreed with A and yet the site says

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints stopped practicing plural marriage in 1890

 

which is false and misleading

Edited March 2, 2015 by DBMormon

[tonie]

you disagreed with A and yet the site says

which is false and misleading

 

And entirely unnecessary. As the issue could be satisfactorily addressed without mention of dates.

[carbon dioxide]

Until recently, the argument against gay unions has been framed in the context of gay people being like unmarried LDS, so it's only fair that neither group can have "intimate relations" with another person.  But now that homosexuals can be legally married in many places, they are suddenly not like other LDS who aren't legally married.  Now the guidelines on chastity can't be based on "marriage", because as long as the church recognizes legal, secular marriages as being valid, the logical implications of gay marriage are unavoidable (apart from moral considerations).

Are you suggesting that if the government made marriage between human and animals legal that would change how the Church would view such an arraignment.   Find another example that does not risk comparing homosexuality and bestiality. -Ares

 

 

The guidelines on chastity are still based on legitimate marriage.  Though the state may recognize a gay marriage, God and the Church do not recognize such relationships as being righteous.  Homosexual behavior outside of a state sanctioned marriage is still just as sinful as in a state sanctioned marriage.  The Church does not recognize secular gay marriages. 

 

The law of chastity remains unchanged.  The only time sexual relations can occur that is not a sin is when a man and woman (husband and wife) are married.  I no other circumstance or situation is it acceptable.  A gay couple can get married and renew their "wedding" vows every day for the rest of their lives and it will not change anything.

[rockpond]

To my understanding, there were revelations. However, it may not be how one sees revelations. For example, it is obvious Joseph received some sort of instruction to begin polygamy. But how did he receive it? We know that he claimed later that angel with a sword came and told him to get a move on when it came to polygamy. What joseph told fanny is not known. And fanny was not exactly forthcoming with information. And the practice did not begin in the shawdows if we consider joseph asking fanny's relative if it were okay for fanny to be sealed to him.

And the official declaration can be said to be a revelation but how did that revelation come about? It could have been a strong feeling of intuition or an experience of thought with the help of the imagination of what would come if polygamy did not stop.

And if we fast forward this to the proclamation of the family, I consider this to be a revelation that was god inspired. However, other members don't see the proclamation this way. But something inspired the proclamation because it is more relevant now than when it was published. So, who is to claim that polygamy wasn't inspired? To my mind, it was perfectly clear why it needed to be practiced.

By saying that polygamy was practiced in the shadows, I am referring to the fact that Joseph did it in secret from the general population of the church, and sometimes from his own wife. What percentage of today's church members do you think realize that Joseph was practicing polygamy while simultaneously preaching monogamy?

What percentage of today's church members do you think realize that polygamy was being practiced by some in the church long before Section 132 was published to the general church membership?

Finally, what percentage of today's church members do you think realize that even the Quorum of the Twelve didn't unanimously agree with the 1890 Manifesto?

These aren't just minor historic details. These are facts that change fundamental teachings on the role of prophets and revelation.

[JLHPROF]

Well if they are invalid and some of the apostles entered into such marriages after the Manifesto, then that would mean they were committing fornication. Yikes.

 

It would be adultery, not fornication.  Double yikes!!

 

Priesthood authority outranks Church authorization.

If they were performed by correct priesthood authority they were neither fornication or adultery, regardless of what church regulations said.

[Tacenda]

By saying that polygamy was practiced in the shadows, I am referring to the fact that Joseph did it in secret from the general population of the church, and sometimes from his own wife. What percentage of today's church members do you think realize that Joseph was practicing polygamy while simultaneously preaching monogamy?

What percentage of today's church members do you think realize that polygamy was being practiced by some in the church long before Section 132 was published to the general church membership?

Finally, what percentage of today's church members do you think realize that even the Quorum of the Twelve didn't unanimously agree with the 1890 Manifesto?

These aren't just minor historic details. These are facts that change fundamental teachings on the role of prophets and revelation.

Last paragraph. ..could you specify?

[california boy]

 

Priesthood authority outranks Church authorization.

If they were performed by correct priesthood authority they were neither fornication or adultery, regardless of what church regulations said.

 

Well then they were practicing recognized polygamist marriages long after the manifesto.  Just trying to figure out how people spin this.  The only thing that is apparent is that deceit was involved.

Edited March 2, 2015 by california boy

[california boy]

Are you suggesting that if the government made marriage between human and animals legal that would change how the Church would view such an arraignment.   The guidelines on chastity are still based on legitimate marriage.  Though the state may recognize a gay marriage, God and the Church do not recognize such relationships as being righteous.  Homosexual behavior outside of a state sanctioned marriage is still just as sinful as in a state sanctioned marriage.  The Church does not recognize secular gay marriages. 

 

The law of chastity remains unchanged.  The only time sexual relations can occur that is not a sin is when a man and woman (husband and wife) are married.  I no other circumstance or situation is it acceptable.  A gay couple can get married and renew their "wedding" vows every day for the rest of their lives and it will not change anything.

 

Because everyone knows marrying barnyard animals is just like marrying two consenting adults.  Why to people always go to the animal comparison?

 

Don't repeat it and make it worse.  Report violations.  Do not be a board nanny. -Ares

[why me]

By saying that polygamy was practiced in the shadows, I am referring to the fact that Joseph did it in secret from the general population of the church, and sometimes from his own wife. What percentage of today's church members do you think realize that Joseph was practicing polygamy while simultaneously preaching monogamy?

 

I dont know how secret it was since joseph would ask the women's family members if it were okay for him to be sealed to their daughter etc. Also, joseph was not the only one practicing polygamy at that time. Of course, the less people knew the better since if the 'secret' was let out of the bag, the mobs would be at the gates.

 

What percentage of today's church members do you think realize that polygamy was being practiced by some in the church long before Section 132 was published to the general church membership?

 

Does it matter?  What percentage of any church's membership know their history perfectly? As I said earlier maybe there should be examinations for church history and throughout the year, church history classes will be mandatory for members. These classes can replace priesthood and relief society meetings. How else can it be done? People need to do their own reading and educate themselves if they are interested in lds history. They can read bushman, O'Driscoll etc.

 

Finally, what percentage of today's church members do you think realize that even the Quorum of the Twelve didn't unanimously agree with the 1890 Manifesto?

 

This could be part of the history class. Likewise for your above comment. History should be taught every sunday, indepth so that a member in good standing will be one that passes the exam at the end. The book to be studied will be written by a prominent critic so that no critic can claim foul about the history to be studied.

 

These are facts that change fundamental teachings on the role of prophets and revelation.

 

Not really. Since much is already in the seminary manual, I don't see the problem.

Sorry for the blue writing but I need to conserve on my posts.

 

Here is what the Seminary manual says about the revelation of plural marriage:

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-seminary-teacher-manual-2014/section-6/lesson-140-doctrine-and-covenants-132-1-2-34-66?lang=eng

 

Introduction

While the Prophet Joseph Smith was working on the inspired revisions of the Bible in 1831, he asked the Lord for understanding about the ancient patriarchs having more than one wife. At that time the Prophet began to receive revelation in answer to his inquiries. In subsequent years, the Lord commanded the Prophet and other Latter-day Saints to live the principle of plural marriage. In July 1843, while the Church was headquartered in Nauvoo, Illinois, the Prophet recorded the revelation he had received. Doctrine and Covenants 132 addresses the Lord’s teachings regarding plural marriage, including counsel to Joseph and Emma Smith.

 

.............

 

Begin by explaining that while Joseph Smith was working on the inspired translation of the Old Testament in 1831, he read about some of the ancient prophets practicing plural marriage (also called polygamy). Under this practice, one man is married to more than one living wife. The Prophet studied the scriptures, pondered what he learned, and eventually took his questions about plural marriage to Heavenly Father in prayer.

 

.............

Invite students to read Doctrine and Covenants 132:1 silently, looking for what the Prophet Joseph Smith asked as he studied passages in the Old Testament concerning the practice of plural marriage. Ask students to report what they find. (You may want to explain that the word concubine is a term used to describe women in the Old Testament who, in the time and culture in which they lived, were legally married to a man but had a lower social status than a wife. Concubines were not part of the practice of plural marriage in our dispensation.)

Write the following question on the board: Why would the Lord command righteous men and women to obey the principle of plural marriage at certain times?

Explain that in their study of Doctrine and Covenants 132, students can find answers to the question on the board and other questions they may have concerning plural marriage. Invite them to write down the doctrines and principles they discover during their study today.

 

...................

 

Explain that the Prophet Joseph Smith was reluctant to begin the practice of plural marriage. He stated that he did not begin the practice until he was warned that he would be destroyed if he did not obey (see “Plural Marriage,” Historical Record, May 1887, 222). Because of a lack of historical documentation, we do not know about Joseph Smith’s early attempts to comply with the commandment.

 

Now this may seem a little dodgy but at the time when the manual was written, I think that this was true. It does need to be updated. Don Bradley's work on fanny alger gives us more details about it at this time with fanny alger.

Edited March 2, 2015 by why me

[california boy]

Sorry for the blue writing but I need to conserve on my posts.

 

Here is what the Seminary manual says about the revelation of plural marriage:

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-seminary-teacher-manual-2014/section-6/lesson-140-doctrine-and-covenants-132-1-2-34-66?lang=eng

 

Introduction

While the Prophet Joseph Smith was working on the inspired revisions of the Bible in 1831, he asked the Lord for understanding about the ancient patriarchs having more than one wife. At that time the Prophet began to receive revelation in answer to his inquiries. In subsequent years, the Lord commanded the Prophet and other Latter-day Saints to live the principle of plural marriage. In July 1843, while the Church was headquartered in Nauvoo, Illinois, the Prophet recorded the revelation he had received. Doctrine and Covenants 132 addresses the Lord’s teachings regarding plural marriage, including counsel to Joseph and Emma Smith.

 

.............

 

Begin by explaining that while Joseph Smith was working on the inspired translation of the Old Testament in 1831, he read about some of the ancient prophets practicing plural marriage (also called polygamy). Under this practice, one man is married to more than one living wife. The Prophet studied the scriptures, pondered what he learned, and eventually took his questions about plural marriage to Heavenly Father in prayer.

 

.............

Invite students to read Doctrine and Covenants 132:1 silently, looking for what the Prophet Joseph Smith asked as he studied passages in the Old Testament concerning the practice of plural marriage. Ask students to report what they find. (You may want to explain that the word concubine is a term used to describe women in the Old Testament who, in the time and culture in which they lived, were legally married to a man but had a lower social status than a wife. Concubines were not part of the practice of plural marriage in our dispensation.)

Write the following question on the board: Why would the Lord command righteous men and women to obey the principle of plural marriage at certain times?

Explain that in their study of Doctrine and Covenants 132, students can find answers to the question on the board and other questions they may have concerning plural marriage. Invite them to write down the doctrines and principles they discover during their study today.

 

...................

 

Explain that the Prophet Joseph Smith was reluctant to begin the practice of plural marriage. He stated that he did not begin the practice until he was warned that he would be destroyed if he did not obey (see “Plural Marriage,” Historical Record, May 1887, 222). Because of a lack of historical documentation, we do not know about Joseph Smith’s early attempts to comply with the commandment.

 

Now this may seem a little dodgy but at the time when the manual was written, I think that this was true. It does need to be updated. Don Bradley's work on fanny alger gives us more details about it at this time with fanny alger.

 

I agree with you that there shouldn't be an expectation of all members knowing the exact history of the church.  But I don't think that is what people are objecting to.  I think the thing that is causing so many to loose trust in the church is that WHEN the church has the opportunity to teach what actually happened, they don't.  As with the New Era answer, one more sentence would have been a more truthful answer.  And as in your example, the seminary manuel glossing over all of what Joseph Smith did PRIOR to D&C 132.  It makes it sound like polygamy started church wide when D&C 132 was given.  And this is what the church is STILL teaching in a class that spends an ENTIRE YEAR studying church history.  It is pretty apparent the church avoids a lot of these issues in hopes that members don't get the entire story.  If that wasn't the case, then why not spend 5 minutes of a class on polygamy naming Joseph Smith's wives and Emma's reaction to them.  

[KevinG]

Where is the outrage over the misleading claim that the Word of Wisdom was a suggestion before it was a commandment?  Oh the horrors!!

 

https://www.lds.org/topics/word-of-wisdom?lang=eng

 

The Word of Wisdom is a law of health revealed by the Lord for the physical and spiritual benefit of His children. On February 27, 1833, as recorded in section 89 of the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord revealed which foods are good for us to eat and which substances are not good for the human body. He also promised health, protection, knowledge, and wisdom to those who obey the Word of Wisdom.

[JLHPROF]

Well then they were practicing recognized polygamist marriages long after the manifesto.

 

Yes.  They were.  (Even a couple possibly after the 2nd Manifesto).

 

 

The only thing that is apparent is that deceit was involved.

 

Pearls before swine.  The entire world didn't need to know that plural marriage continued.  And as for general church membership - I think far more knew than didn't.  I mean entire families were being sent to Mexico and Canada from a relatively small church population at the time.   Church membership in 1892 was only 200,961.

I'm sure it was noticed.  Not to mention the birth of children etc.

I doubt the membership in general was ignorant of continuing marriages.

Edited March 2, 2015 by JLHPROF

[rockpond]

Last paragraph. ..could you specify?

 

Are you asking about this:  "These aren't just minor historic details. These are facts that change fundamental teachings on the role of prophets and revelation."

 

I think that Joseph Smith receiving a revelation and practicing it among an exclusive group of church members while preaching something different is not consistent with how we view a prophet.

 

That Wilford Woodruff could receive a revelation and have it rejected by the apostles also seems inconsistent with how we view their role today.

[rockpond]

Sorry for the blue writing but I need to conserve on my posts.

 

Here is what the Seminary manual says about the revelation of plural marriage:

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-seminary-teacher-manual-2014/section-6/lesson-140-doctrine-and-covenants-132-1-2-34-66?lang=eng

 

Introduction

While the Prophet Joseph Smith was working on the inspired revisions of the Bible in 1831, he asked the Lord for understanding about the ancient patriarchs having more than one wife. At that time the Prophet began to receive revelation in answer to his inquiries. In subsequent years, the Lord commanded the Prophet and other Latter-day Saints to live the principle of plural marriage. In July 1843, while the Church was headquartered in Nauvoo, Illinois, the Prophet recorded the revelation he had received. Doctrine and Covenants 132 addresses the Lord’s teachings regarding plural marriage, including counsel to Joseph and Emma Smith.

 

.............

 

Begin by explaining that while Joseph Smith was working on the inspired translation of the Old Testament in 1831, he read about some of the ancient prophets practicing plural marriage (also called polygamy). Under this practice, one man is married to more than one living wife. The Prophet studied the scriptures, pondered what he learned, and eventually took his questions about plural marriage to Heavenly Father in prayer.

 

.............

Invite students to read Doctrine and Covenants 132:1 silently, looking for what the Prophet Joseph Smith asked as he studied passages in the Old Testament concerning the practice of plural marriage. Ask students to report what they find. (You may want to explain that the word concubine is a term used to describe women in the Old Testament who, in the time and culture in which they lived, were legally married to a man but had a lower social status than a wife. Concubines were not part of the practice of plural marriage in our dispensation.)

Write the following question on the board: Why would the Lord command righteous men and women to obey the principle of plural marriage at certain times?

Explain that in their study of Doctrine and Covenants 132, students can find answers to the question on the board and other questions they may have concerning plural marriage. Invite them to write down the doctrines and principles they discover during their study today.

 

...................

 

Explain that the Prophet Joseph Smith was reluctant to begin the practice of plural marriage. He stated that he did not begin the practice until he was warned that he would be destroyed if he did not obey (see “Plural Marriage,” Historical Record, May 1887, 222). Because of a lack of historical documentation, we do not know about Joseph Smith’s early attempts to comply with the commandment.

 

Now this may seem a little dodgy but at the time when the manual was written, I think that this was true. It does need to be updated. Don Bradley's work on fanny alger gives us more details about it at this time with fanny alger.

 

Well good, we agree that it's a little dodgy and that it needs to be updated.  Good to find some common ground.

 

As for your question:  Does it matter what percentage of church members know about some of these issues?  Only to the extent that we lose people because of it.

[canard78]

Because everyone knows marrying barnyard animals is just like marrying two consenting adults. Why to people always go to the animal comparison?

Because they are stupid. That's all.

[JLHPROF]

Because everyone knows marrying barnyard animals is just like marrying two consenting adults.  Why to people always go to the animal comparison?

 

Because they are stupid. That's all.

 

Or perhaps because both acts are just as unnatural...

 

No beastiality/homosexuality comparisons allowed.  -Ares

[Jeanne]

It would be adultery, not fornication.  Double yikes!!

Do we have an ahh hah moment here? 

[KevinG]

 

Pearls before swine.  

 

Bingo!  Funny how people want to know the intimate details of the marriages of the prophets, yet they would reject their teachings on eternal marriage out of hand if asked to take part themselves.

 

I contend we cannot know anything of polygamy among the early Saints as we currently cannot even do monogamy correctly.

[KevinG]

Do we have an ahh hah moment here? 

 

No, just some smart aleks confusing the US Government with Priesthood Keys.

[JLHPROF]

Do we have an ahh hah moment here? 

 

Yes, people don't understand what adultery OR fornication are in a priesthood context.

[canard78]

Or perhaps because both acts are just as unnatural...

I won't report you this time, but the mods have made it clear that comparing homosexuality to bestiality is not acceptable:

There are a few hot button topics that have required aggressive moderation to maintain an environment that is inviting. Offensive comments about same sex attraction are not going to be accepted on this board. That includes such things as any comparison, analogy, or even mention of animals or criminals or criminal acts in an attempt to defend a position.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/59529-hot-button-topics/

[Ares]

I won't report you this time, but the mods have made it clear that comparing homosexuality to bestiality is not acceptable:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/59529-hot-button-topics/

 

JLHPROF did not make the comparison.  He responded to California Boy.

 

Everyone needs to stop with the slippery slope comparisons and the board nannying.

 

-Ares

[canard78]

JLHPROF did not make the comparison. He responded to California Boy.

Everyone needs to stop with the slippery slope comparisons and the board nannying.

-Ares

Yessir!