Tribune Op Ed: Section 132 In Seminary This Week

[Scott Lloyd]

 

I have the impression that even the concept of “teenager” did not even exist until after WW II.  At any rate, one of my Civil War ancestors  fought at Shiloh at age 15.  So much for his “normal teenage life.”  

 

Here's a Time magazine article that explores the fact of adolescence being  a relatively late social invention.

[Kenngo1969]

One of my great-grandmothers was married, in Indiana in 1910, at age 15.  Neither spouse was Mormon and no shotguns seem to have been involved.

[bluebell]

That which had been taught to support the race-based priesthood/temple ban.

 

So the leaders asked Bott not to teach something that was the current doctrine of the church and was currently being taught in other places, because the leaders didn't believe the doctrine was actually of God?

 

I'm honestly confused.  

[Scott Lloyd]

That which had been taught to support the race-based priesthood/temple ban.

CFR.

 

As I recall, Professor Bott got into trouble for speculating about the matter during an interview with the Washington Post. I don't remember him propounding any of his speculation as doctrinal.

[rockpond]

So the leaders asked Bott not to teach something that was the current doctrine of the church and was currently being taught in other places, because the leaders didn't believe the doctrine was actually of God?

 

I'm honestly confused.  

 

 

CFR.

 

As I recall, Professor Bott got into trouble for speculating about the matter during an interview with the Washington Post. I don't remember him propounding any of his speculation as doctrinal.

 

He didn't speculate.  He taught what had been taught by past prophets and apostles.  He was told that it was wrong.  And that's about the time we got the first official disavowal on the matter.

[Scott Lloyd]

He didn't speculate.  He taught what had been taught by past prophets and apostles.  He was told that it was wrong.  And that's about the time we got the first official disavowal on the matter.

This does not answer the CFR. What did he put forth as doctrinal that was in fact not doctrinal? Or what doctrine did he teach that he was told to stop teaching? Specific quotes and references are called for here.

Edited March 30, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[stemelbow]

Right... to edit out some of the things... just like the Priesthood/Relief Society manuals have done.  And this church produced website as well:  http://josephsmith.net/?lang=eng

Well pretending things didn't happen, acting as if hiding information from people, even kids, is the kind of stuff that puts us in a bad spot. Way best to put it all out there and let the chips fall where they may, I say.

If she thinks polygamy was uninspired, it'd still be best to teach kids what happened and let it go from there.

[ksfisher]

 

Don't laugh, they were Methodists!!!

[Scott Lloyd]

The problem with all of this is, and I hate to repeat myself, there is not historical information behind any of it in regards to Mary specifically. And even assuming King David was a historical figure and assuming Mary was a decedent, there must have been thousands of living descendants  by that time. 

 

Regarding marriage laws, it seems to have been not as simple as "get married at 14". Also, I think the assumption that if it happened in the Bible then God must have been okay with it is unfounded.

 

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10435-marriage-laws

Here's an interesting bit from an LDS source:

 

 

Thus the household of Joseph and Mary apparently numbered at least five boys (including Jesus) and at least three girls—eight children—in addition to the parents.

There are two lines of thought as to the identity of these other children. Some hold that they were children of Joseph by a former marriage and not the children of Mary at all. In this case, Jesus would be younger than they, and of no close blood relation. This is a popular concept in the Christian world today, and illustrations of the “holy family” therefore generally picture Joseph as much older than Mary.

Another view is that these were actually the children of Joseph and Mary, and were half-brothers and sisters to Jesus, he being the eldest. Both of these views have their advocates and there are hints in the scriptures that can be interpreted to favor either point of view. However, Jesus is termed Mary’s “firstborn” son, which is indicative that she later gave birth to other children. (See Luke 2:7.) A more compelling reason for believing that these are Mary’s children is that Joseph’s firstborn son from his first wife would have been the heir to the Davidic throne instead of Jesus.

 

[cinepro]

It's an interesting article, but here is what she should have said:

 

"While polygamy has always been a divisive issue between the LDS Church and the rest of the world, and sometimes even within the Church itself, the Church has traditionally dealt with that part of our history by not dealing with it.  In the past, explanations given for the practice were often illogical, unsupported by the data, or disingenuous (though sincerely well-meaning).

 

With the advent of the internet and widely available sources of accurate information about the history of polygamy, many LDS are learning details that in the past were known by only a few.  Some find these details very disturbing, and it can lead to a negative reappraisal of their feelings towards Joseph Smith, or even the Church in general.  Last year, the Church took giant strides forward in dealing with these issues by officially publishing two essays that acknowledge some of the more difficult issues with polygamy.

 

In the coming weeks, LDS seminary students (ages 14 - 18) will be learning about section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants and the early practice of polygamy.  These lessons are important, because in this day and age it is almost certain that these youth will one day read about much of the potentially disturbing history of LDS polygamy in Nauvoo.  And how they react to that information in the future may depend on how these lessons are taught to them now.  If they can be taught the truth in a way that is respectful and unflinching, then there will be no need to flinch at a later date."

[cinepro]

Here's a Time magazine article that explores the fact of adolescence being  a relatively late social invention.

 

When was the idea that a man who is in his late 30s and already married probably shouldn't secretly marry a 14 year old invented?

[Scott Lloyd]

When was the idea that a man who is in his late 30s and already married probably shouldn't secretly marry a 14 year old invented?

Whence came the notion that there is something dishonorable about keeping secret obedience to a commandment from God when general knowledge of that obedience would surely have led to destruction of the Church by murderous mobs?

[cinepro]

Whence came the notion that there is something dishonorable about keeping secret obedience to a commandment from God when general knowledge of that obedience would surely have led to destruction of the Church by murderous mobs?

 

I was talking about Emma.

[bluebell]

It's an interesting article, but here is what she should have said:

 

"While polygamy has always been a divisive issue between the LDS Church and the rest of the world, and sometimes even within the Church itself, the Church has traditionally dealt with that part of our history by not dealing with it.  In the past, explanations given for the practice were often illogical, unsupported by the data, or disingenuous (though sincerely well-meaning).

 

With the advent of the internet and widely available sources of accurate information about the history of polygamy, many LDS are learning details that in the past were known by only a few.  Some find these details very disturbing, and it can lead to a negative reappraisal of their feelings towards Joseph Smith, or even the Church in general.  Last year, the Church took giant strides forward in dealing with these issues by officially publishing two essays that acknowledge some of the more difficult issues with polygamy.

 

In the coming weeks, LDS seminary students (ages 14 - 18) will be learning about section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants and the early practice of polygamy.  These lessons are important, because in this day and age it is almost certain that these youth will one day read about much of the potentially disturbing history of LDS polygamy in Nauvoo.  And how they react to that information in the future may depend on how these lessons are taught to them now.  If they can be taught the truth in a way that is respectful and unflinching, then there will be no need to flinch at a later date."

 

Are these your own words or do they need to be attributed to someone else?

 

I just noticed the quotes and am unsure who is speaking.

[cinepro]

Are these your own words or do they need to be attributed to someone else?

 

I just noticed the quotes and am unsure who is speaking.

 

I wrote it.

[bluebell]

He didn't speculate.  He taught what had been taught by past prophets and apostles.  He was told that it was wrong.  And that's about the time we got the first official disavowal on the matter.

 

This doesn't actually answer the question that i asked then.  

 

When has the church ever told someone not to teach something that was actually doctrine because the church didn't believe it should be doctrine?

 

This is what the author of the letter is doing, and since you have claimed the church does the same thing i'm looking for support of that assertion.

[bluebell]

I wrote it.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

I was talking about Emma.

Did Emma not know Joseph was practicing plural marriage?

[mtomm]

When was the idea that a man who is in his late 30s and already married probably shouldn't secretly marry a 14 year old invented?

 

And we shouldn't be implying to our youth today that this is okay.

[Scott Lloyd]

And we shouldn't be implying to our youth today that this is okay.

If it's in fulfillment of a commandment from God, why not?

[Tacenda]

My own personal experience gives me a very different take away from this op-ed piece and I think maybe more in the spirit in which it is given. I'm not sure the author comes across this way but to me it screams loud and clear why we need to be very careful how we teach this topic.

 

I know that using Joseph Smith as his example was how Chris Nemelka was finding young women to follow him.  How do I know? I heard directly from his lips to my ears when I briefly dated him around 1986ish...   I can see how he would have chosen me because from outward appearances I should have been an easy target but he soon learned that this girl was not one to follow just anyone who claimed revelation, thank goodness I'm a skeptic first.  Maybe it was a good thing that I didn't really know anything about Joseph's polygamy at that time and so what he was implying didn't make a lot of sense. 

Exactly, and not saying you think this, but see why the article Ms. Money presents is very plausible.  And given that there is the TR questioning that was more or less a way to weed out a person that is thinking of polygamy or associating with any polygamous group, it's a big plausibility.  It apparently was a problem or can be a problem, as you put forth here.  I can name one more doofus/creep that used polygamy and that is Brian David Mitchell.  

[JLHPROF]

When was the idea that a man who is in his late 30s and already married probably shouldn't secretly marry a 14 year old invented?

 

Ancient Rome - possibly the first society that officially outlawed polygamy.

That bastion of moral fortitude (that little thing with crucifying the Savior notwithstanding).

But then if the unsubstantiated Celsus quote turned out to be accurate that would explain a lot...

Edited March 30, 2015 by JLHPROF

[Kenngo1969]

One of my great-grandmothers was married, in Indiana in 1910, at age 15.  Neither spouse was Mormon and no shotguns seem to have been involved.

 

 

Don't laugh, they were Methodists!!!

 (You told me not to laugh; you didn't say anything about winky-smileys and grins ...)

[Teancum]

Interesting Op Ed in the Salt Lake Tribune from Saturday.  Kristy Money follows up her previous letter regarding the polygamy essay with a please to parents and seminary teachers...

 

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/2335798-155/op-ed-think-seminary-teachers-before-acceding

 

I think she makes some good points about how we ought to re-think how we teach polygamy to our youth.

 

Great article. Comments are spot on.

[Teancum]

I am sorry who is this person? I think I will follow the prophets, whom we sustain, on this issue. Thanks.

 

 

That is certainly your prerogative.   She makes some good points though. If you want your kids to learn about plural marriage this way and have all the baggage that can come from it have at it.