Distinct polygamy concerns

[manol]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

I think there is also a danger of thinking God's way is always harder or less enjoyable. 

President Hinckley said, "In all of living, have much fun and laughter. Life is to be enjoyed, not just endured."

So I think that if we are on the straight and narrow path towards trying to be like God we are going to be naturally choosing his ways and more often than not it will make us feel at peace rather than constantly worried about doing the hard and "right".

I agree with you and President Hinckley.  And didn't Christ say, "My yoke is easy, and my burden is light"? 

I think Alma's plant-the-seed-and-see-what-happens approach is applicable:

"Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good seed, or that the word is good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me."

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

... starting with certain assumptions we should be able to arrive at a hypothesis.

- God loves all his children, daughters and sons.

- God wants what's best for them and wants them to be happy. 

- D&C 132 including polygamy is from God according to our religion and Church.  So is the belief that sealings are for eternity.

- Sometimes God's commands require sacrifice, challenge, and even suffering before the blessings are realized.

Using these and other axiomatic principles shouldn't it be possible to hypothetically show that polygamy can make any faithful daughter or son happy and bring them blessings despite any difficulties?

So, who has a good hypothesis?  😜

I'm guessing that you have a good hypothesis?   I get the impression you've put a lot of thought into this subject, and that you can reconcile polygamy with "God loves all his children, daughters and sons."  If so, that might be worth sharing here, so I hope you'll do so.

Edited July 7, 2022 by manol

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

 

I think there is also a danger of thinking God's way is always harder or less enjoyable. 

President Hinckley said, "In all of living, have much fun and laughter. Life is to be enjoyed, not just endured."

So I think that if we are on the straight and narrow path towards trying to be like God we are going to be naturally choosing his ways and more often than not it will make us feel at peace rather than constantly worried about doing the hard and "right".

Quote

Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

Ah, Manol got there first…

Edited July 7, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

6 hours ago, rongo said:

We moved into a new ward in April, in an area where we don't have connections. I was asked by the new Relief Society president (called two weeks ago) to address the Relief Society sisters about polygamy, because of concerns that have been expressed that are keeping some sisters away from church or tempting them to formally leave the church. 

What specific concerns with polygamy am I missing in preparing for this? I have . . .

1. Polygamy, period (concern about it being of God, ever, under any circumstances)

2. Caving to political pressure in ending it (concern that the Church followed man and not God)

3. Lying to hide and cover up polygamy (discomfort with lying under any circumstances)

4. Need for the Second Manifesto (1890 didn’t end it outright).

5. Polyandry (Joseph Smith being sealed to other men's wives)

6. Joseph Smith’s teenage wives (concerns about his sealings to women under 18)

7. Polygamy today via sealings to additional spouses (concerns that polygamy will be part of the hereafter, as denoted by sealings to multiple spouses).

7a) Incongruity/disparity between men and women additional sealings. 

8. Modern-day offshoots = 19th Century Mormon polygamy (concerns that polygamy among modern-day offshoots illustrates how it functioned from the 1840s to the early 20th century). 

9. Bad and demonstrably incorrect folk explanations (e.g., more women than men, etc.). 

10. Required for exaltation? Doctrinal shift on this?

---

Thanks in advance for any subtopics under this heading that I'm overlooking!

 

There is a new argument out there that the Book of Mormon verse in Jacob is actually saying the opposite, are you aware of it?  It is from an apostate group.

[Calm]

5 hours ago, strappinglad said:

I  should like to see a chart showing the age gap between early leaders and each of their wives and perhaps an average age gap.

FAIR should have that for Joseph…his marriages weren’t the norm because they were polygamous, taken on their own each was within the norm of the community.

[Calm]

5 hours ago, strappinglad said:

To me, the whole polygamy business was a case of Joseph getting a commandment without a lot of feedback about how he was to carry it out. From my reading, Joseph put the problem on a " shelf " as long as he could. He then " played it by ear " and often messed up. It got more orderly in the following decades. 

Not a lot of feedback or did he not ask for further instruction?

[Hamba Tuhan]

24 minutes ago, manol said:

And didn't Christ say, "My yoke is easy, and my burden is light"?

Absolutely! I have come to know the reality of this assurance through repeated personal experience.

But, as the Lord Himself made abundantly clear during His mortal ministry, sometimes the pleasing yoke is a cross that must be taken up as we follow Him, and sometimes that involves things like forsaking homes, fields and even family members for His sake.

And as Pres Hinckley's father wisely taught him when Gordon was a young missionary, it almost certainly requires forgetting oneself and going to work.

Edited July 7, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[Calm]

Specific incidents that show a lack of respect towards women as individuals…

The Heber C Kimball remark and any similar to it 

Quote

I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying a cow, and if you want to build up the kingdom you must take more wives.”

I believe the original source is an anti tell all…Ann Eliza Young likely fabricated it.

Wilford woodruff being sealed to hundreds of dead women for his birthday (I have talked about this, my understanding is he saw himself as a placeholder, the relevant quote should be somewhere on this board, let me know if you want it)

worry that missionaries get the women before the leaders in Utah did

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Question:_Was_Heber_C._Kimball_concerned_that_missionaries_would_"take_all_the_best"_convert_women_as_plural_wives_before_they_returned_to_Salt_Lake_City%3F

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Fether said:

I agree completely. I would stay out of specifics and trying to rationalize everything. Focus on ways people can find answers to their questions. I would still reference sources people can turn to. I’m not saying go over the content of those sources, just let them know they exist. If you search “Mormon polygamy” into any search engine, you will get 100 anti Mormon videos to every 1 faith promoting video. People just need to know there are sources.

A handout, starting with the Church History/gospel topic Essays and then links to faithful, reliable websites might be useful.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/plural-marriage-in-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/plural-marriage-and-families-in-early-utah?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/the-manifesto-and-the-end-of-plural-marriage?lang=eng

[The Nehor]

Also, why are brother-husbands not a thing?

[Hamba Tuhan]

14 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Also, why are brother-husbands not a thing?

When I was studying in America, one of my mates once told me that he and his wife had been discussing polyandry, and if the Lord ever commanded it, I was their number one choice. I was flattered … I think …

[webbles]

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Comparing to the average doesn’t really show how common it is. That is bad statistics. It also seems really high. Are they counting only the first marriage or any marriage?

I went a grabbed the 1880 10% IPUMS data set.  It has a variable for "Married within the past year".  I grabbed that plus the gender and then calculated the percentage for various age ranges.  I got average ages less than what that chart shows.

For men:

Ages 13-15: 0.05%
Ages 16-17: 0.36%
Ages 18-20: 8.83%
Ages 21-23: 28.82%
Ages 24-26: 25.31%
Ages 27-34: 25.02%
Ages 35-44: 7.42%
Ages 45-60: 4.18%

For women:

Ages 13-15: 2.00%
Ages 16-17: 9.96%
Ages 18-20: 34.90%
Ages 21-23: 24.99%
Ages 24-26: 12.57%
Ages 27-34: 8.88%
Ages 35-44: 3.88%
Ages 45-60: 2.82%

So, almost 12% of all the women married in that one year (1880) were under 18.  But for men, it was just 0.41%.  Over half the men were under 27 and over half the women were under 24.  ~45% of the women were <20.

 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

When I was studying in America, one of my mates once told me that he and his wife had been discussing polyandry, and if the Lord ever commanded it, I was their number one choice. I was flattered … I think …

I should check if the similar offer i got is still valid.

10 minutes ago, Obehave said:

What do you think would be cruel about our Father accepting more than 1 of his sisters as his wife?

Wait!  Don't tell me! I don't want to hear it!

I don’t inquire deeply into the nature of the intimacy in my parents’ relationships. This applies to ALL of my parents.

[JLHPROF]

5 hours ago, Obehave said:

What do you think would be cruel about our Father accepting more than 1 of his sisters as his wife?

Wait!  Don't tell me! I don't want to hear it!

Well ignoring the debate over how conception happened Heavenly Father did beget his only begotten son with his own spirit daughter.

Basically Christ's biological parents were spirit Father and Daughter.

And we can assume Heavenly Mother(s) was ok with it.

[teddyaware]

34 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Well ignoring the debate over how conception happened Heavenly Father did beget his only begotten son with his own spirit daughter.

Basically Christ's biological parents were spirit Father and Daughter.

And we can assume Heavenly Mother(s) was ok with it.

The main problem that prevents Church members from coming to understand that plural marriage can be practiced in holiness is due to the fact that they are only able to view it from the vantage point of their own unconverted, carnal natures. They are unable to grasp that plural marriage can indeed be practiced in righteousness because they are only able to see it through the lens of their own carnal lusts and jealousies that act as blinders preventing them from comprehending the workings of the Spirit.

Edited July 7, 2022 by teddyaware

[CV75]

14 hours ago, rongo said:

We moved into a new ward in April, in an area where we don't have connections. I was asked by the new Relief Society president (called two weeks ago) to address the Relief Society sisters about polygamy, because of concerns that have been expressed that are keeping some sisters away from church or tempting them to formally leave the church. 

What specific concerns with polygamy am I missing in preparing for this? I have . . .

1. Polygamy, period (concern about it being of God, ever, under any circumstances)

2. Caving to political pressure in ending it (concern that the Church followed man and not God)

3. Lying to hide and cover up polygamy (discomfort with lying under any circumstances)

4. Need for the Second Manifesto (1890 didn’t end it outright).

5. Polyandry (Joseph Smith being sealed to other men's wives)

6. Joseph Smith’s teenage wives (concerns about his sealings to women under 18)

7. Polygamy today via sealings to additional spouses (concerns that polygamy will be part of the hereafter, as denoted by sealings to multiple spouses).

7a) Incongruity/disparity between men and women additional sealings. 

8. Modern-day offshoots = 19th Century Mormon polygamy (concerns that polygamy among modern-day offshoots illustrates how it functioned from the 1840s to the early 20th century). 

9. Bad and demonstrably incorrect folk explanations (e.g., more women than men, etc.). 

10. Required for exaltation? Doctrinal shift on this?

---

Thanks in advance for any subtopics under this heading that I'm overlooking!

 

Given such a lengthy list, which has probably tripled by now, I would say to address the priority of a testimony of maintaining membership in the Lord's Church, founded on the principal witnesses of the Risen Lord, the Book of Mormon and the Restoration. Then cover the approaches for how to handle facts, context, bias and matters of policy (sort of a primer on what our leaders have taught about approaching distressing questions from a position of faith).

[Fether]

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Also, why are brother-husbands not a thing?

The traditional 2022 response to this is simply to cry “patriarchy! Misogyny!”

But I would argue that is not the case.

I also recognize that most of the time, when people ask this type of question, they are trying to bait what I am about to say.

The first commandment man was given was to multiply and replenish the earth. And one man can have more babies with 30 wives than one woman can have babies with 30 husbands…… and as problematic as it sounds in This day and age… it makes sense. Jacob 2:27-30 seems to suggest this. This is also core to our understanding of what “eternal family” means.

I’m sure there are quotes out there by earlier church leaders that suggest the same thing.

 

[The Nehor]

40 minutes ago, Fether said:

The traditional 2022 response to this is simply to cry “patriarchy! Misogyny!”

But I would argue that is not the case.

I also recognize that most of the time, when people ask this type of question, they are trying to bait what I am about to say.

The first commandment man was given was to multiply and replenish the earth. And one man can have more babies with 30 wives than one woman can have babies with 30 husbands…… and as problematic as it sounds in This day and age… it makes sense. Jacob 2:27-30 seems to suggest this. This is also core to our understanding of what “eternal family” means.

I’m sure there are quotes out there by earlier church leaders that suggest the same thing.

 

That part is logical if the goal is to raise up lots of posterity but doesn’t seem to explain the eternal nature of it all. Why do the gods need to speed up their reproduction? Does time even apply?

If the goal is some kind of variety it would make sense instead to have a multitude of fathers and mothers creating new spirits in whatever way they are created.

[Bernard Gui]

10 hours ago, rongo said:

C'mon! You and @Bernard Gui can't leave all the mansplaining to me. I'm on an island, here.  

We have learned from sad experience……

[provoman]

16 hours ago, Tacenda said:

It wasn't normal for a very young woman to marry a much older man.

 

What is “normal”? 

Pochantos, Sacagawea, in 1998 I met a woman who was 72, she married her husband when she was 15 and he 29.

Perhaps a more apt word is “rare” rather than “not normal”.

(side note: some things that have occurred since Biblical times, happen today and some label those things as “not normal” and some would say “it is normal because it has occurred since dawn of humanity, though might be less than 3% of the total population)

[Fether]

50 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That part is logical if the goal is to raise up lots of posterity but doesn’t seem to explain the eternal nature of it all. Why do the gods need to speed up their reproduction? Does time even apply?

If the goal is some kind of variety it would make sense instead to have a multitude of fathers and mothers creating new spirits in whatever way they are created.

Depends on the nature of how spirit children are made and the ratio of male and female spirits that are exalted

[Tacenda]

28 minutes ago, provoman said:

What is “normal”? 

Pochantos, Sacagawea, in 1998 I met a woman who was 72, she married her husband when she was 15 and he 29.

Perhaps a more apt word is “rare” rather than “not normal”.

(side note: some things that have occurred since Biblical times, happen today and some label those things as “not normal” and some would say “it is normal because it has occurred since dawn of humanity, though might be less than 3% of the total population)

 

Normal

ADJECTIVE

Something that is normal is usual and ordinary, and is what people expect.

[Buckeye]

17 hours ago, rongo said:

We moved into a new ward in April, in an area where we don't have connections. I was asked by the new Relief Society president (called two weeks ago) to address the Relief Society sisters about polygamy, because of concerns that have been expressed that are keeping some sisters away from church or tempting them to formally leave the church. 

What specific concerns with polygamy am I missing in preparing for this? I have . . .

1. Polygamy, period (concern about it being of God, ever, under any circumstances)

2. Caving to political pressure in ending it (concern that the Church followed man and not God)

3. Lying to hide and cover up polygamy (discomfort with lying under any circumstances)

4. Need for the Second Manifesto (1890 didn’t end it outright).

5. Polyandry (Joseph Smith being sealed to other men's wives)

6. Joseph Smith’s teenage wives (concerns about his sealings to women under 18)

7. Polygamy today via sealings to additional spouses (concerns that polygamy will be part of the hereafter, as denoted by sealings to multiple spouses).

7a) Incongruity/disparity between men and women additional sealings. 

8. Modern-day offshoots = 19th Century Mormon polygamy (concerns that polygamy among modern-day offshoots illustrates how it functioned from the 1840s to the early 20th century). 

9. Bad and demonstrably incorrect folk explanations (e.g., more women than men, etc.). 

10. Required for exaltation? Doctrinal shift on this?

---

Thanks in advance for any subtopics under this heading that I'm overlooking!

 

I’m not sure if this has been covered, but the impact of polygamy on men is horrible and often overlooked. I agree with all the concerns about the impact on women, but for me the impact on men is at least as bad and much less discussed.

Simply put, because roughly equal numbers of men and women exist, to accept polygamy as practiced by the church (ie, multiple wives per husband), one must either (i) believe that men are inherently less valiant than women or (ii) accept that huge numbers of men will be excluded from exaltation for no fault of their own.  Even if just a few men practice polygamy, that means some portion of men will be excluded from eternal marriage. And I don’t buy the argument that only a small potion of saints practiced it. That may have been factually true because we practiced it for only a few decades, but our teaching was that all should practice it. And why not? If something is good we desire all to receive it. 

Polygamy is simply evil. There’s no way to square it. The impact on women is harmful. And the impact on men is just as harmful. Just ask any of the mothers of FLDS “lost boys”

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

The main problem that prevents Church members from coming to understand that plural marriage can be practiced in holiness is due to the fact that they are only able to view it from the vantage point of their own unconverted, carnal natures. They are unable to grasp that plural marriage can indeed be practiced in righteousness because they are only able to see it through the lens of their own carnal lusts and jealousies that act as blinders preventing them from comprehending the workings of the Spirit.

While this may be true it is also the dogma of virtually every sex cult.

[The Nehor]

40 minutes ago, Fether said:

Depends on the nature of how spirit children are made and the ratio of male and female spirits that are exalted

True, of which I know virtually nothing.

[bluebell]

12 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I have a hard time putting much credit in the “I don’t think God would do this” argument. From our point of view God often does things that by our morality are downright cruel.

Most people who I know that lean often on the "God wouldn't do that" argument, don't believe that God does things that are cruel really ever.  Usually they explain the cruelty of mortality by saying there is no God (or something similar, like God made us and then left the world to its own devices, rarely intervening in any way).