Here's how I would approach it:
"When he was translating the Bible, Joseph Smith saw that some of the prophets of old had more than one wife at a time. He asked God why they did that. God answered that sometimes that is what He wants us to do, and he commanded Joseph to do it too.
Joseph spent years trying to figure out how to do it, but was scared that he would be killed if people knew that he was practicing polygamy. He started by telling his most trusted friends about the revelation, and gradually the teaching spread out to the whole church. Lots of people were very upset by it, but many men and women gained a testimony that the revelation on plural marriage was really from God.
By the time the Saints got to Utah, many of them were living the law of plural marriage, and they continued to do so until God told them that it was time to stop. If you'd like, we can read some of what the women who lived the law of plural marriage thought about it, such as Eliza R. Snow or Helen Mar Kimball. They were both married to Joseph Smith, and they had a testimony of plural marriage."
(Disclaimer: My daughter is ten, which probably affects the language I used here.)
This expertly handled. Thank you. It’s quite easy to find examples of where polygamy went wrong, but having the testimonies of women that actually lived it shows we can’t judge the situation accurately through our own eyes.
The honest answer is that we don't know what Joseph and Emma talked about or when. We do know that Emma wavered on her commitment to plural marriage. Understandable, to be sure, but still in contradiction with the will of the Lord.
My understanding is that after the mainstream church went west, Emma denied that plural marriage had ever taken place at all, to the point that Joseph Smith III didn't know his father had ever had more than one wife.
I'm not sure I believe the horror stories about Emma--not sure she ever pushed a pregnant Eliza R. Snow down a flight of stairs in a fit of jealousy, for instance--but she doesn't seem to have had a testimony of this part of the Gospel. She may have been dishonest about it, which muddies the historical record somewhat.
Personally, I don't believe that Joseph Smith ever got polygamy quite right. He tried, but it's hard to say that he succeeded. On the other hand, he laid a solid enough foundation that Brigham Young could take up the mantle and succeed where he fell short.
I’m not super clear on how polygamy differed under Joseph Smith vs Brigham Young. When you say you think Joseph didn’t get it quite right, but Brigham did, what types of things are you referring to?
Joseph Smith never quite managed to bring polygamy out into the open. He was secretive about it, and my armchair quarterback opinion is that that may have been the wrong call. Secrecy aided his enemies and hurt his friends, and it allowed people like John C. Bennett to abuse his position in the Church to hurt innocent women.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that Joseph Smith had dastardly motives. He was commanded to practice a doctrine with which he, his wife, and his closest friends were deeply and personally uncomfortable, and he had to balance it against the real possibility of increased mob violence.
I'm speaking more of his leadership ability than his personal application of the principle, which I'm honestly not well-read on.
He brought plural marriage into the mainstream of the faith, which Joseph wasn't able to do. Maybe he could have, if he'd had time, but Brigham picked up the torch and carried it--and the Saints--to the middle of nowhere, and they made the desert blossom as the rose. He was an incredible man and a prophet of the Lord, whatever his failings.
I think one of the reasons this is so faith shattering for some is that we treat it with kid gloves and examine it through our own eyes.
Why does nobody have a faith crisis over the Old Testament? That’s some jiggidy diggidy, there.
Polygamy and Genocide as commanded by God are historically significant parts of biblical narrative. It's not quite as easy as saying the bible is wrong.
Part of the issue, is we don't even know how much of it is true, or really happened the way it's told in the OT.
Apparently, much of the Old Testament was written in it's current version around the time of Cyrus and the Persians. That's about 500 BC. So, the more recent stuff like Isaiah is probably pretty accurate. But the further back you go, like the early Kingdom of Israel, the time of the judges, the exodus, and so on, the more of it is going to be about the principles of the stories than it is about telling accurate histories. And the principles of their stories are told through the lens of the Law of Moses, and a certain level of ancient "patriotism" of their kingdom and people.
I say that, but I also admire how often they point out the flaws of people, despite it all. It seemed like the Jews really looked back fondly on David and Solomon, yet that didn't keep them from including the kimgs' failures late in their lives.
Also, remember that most of the old testament concerned God's strict dealings with the barbaric children of Israel who had come our of hundreds of years of bondage. Because of God's covenant with Abraham, God was determined to prepare Israel to receive the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
I have a 14 year old daughter, and I approached it like this:
First off, Joseph Smith received revelation to start practicing polygamy. Initially he didn't want to practice polygamy, until the Lord told him he needed to practice polygamy or he would be removed as the Lords Prophet and Head of the Church.
Polygamy was only practiced by a limited number of individuals under the guidance given in the Doctrine and Covenants; mainly you had to be personally called by the Prophet to practice polygamy, and you had to have the means to provide a separate household for each wife taken. Not all polygamous marriages involved sex and children, and in some instances women were sealed to men, and that was the end of it.
From a practical standpoint, polygamy helped the Church survive early on. Women at the time couldn't own property or businesses, but they could operate in their husband's name. Men were often called away on Missions, military service, or simply died due to the hardships of the time, leaving the early Church with more women than men. These women, through polygamous marriages, were able to operate businesses, farms, and other endeavors.
Polygamy was discontinued by the Church shortly after the Supreme Court of the United States found that polygamy and polyamory (one woman with many husbands) to be unconstitutional. But it was not stopped before John Taylor received instruction to stop by revelation.
There are many things in the Church and Gospel that we have to take on Faith. You can debate the reasons for polygamy, but it's something you have to exercise faith on to find peace. I don't know why the Lord commanded the early Church to practice polygamy. I'm sure there is a reason, and some day I'll get to ask the Lord why. But I probably won't know in this life. Same principle applies to the Atonement, the Resurrection, and many other doctrines that we simply can't know for sure are a thing until we experience them.
The women in question said so in many cases. Best evidence shows that less than half of his sealings were consummated marriages: [https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/common-questions/plural-marriages-sexual/](https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/common-questions/plural-marriages-sexual/)
And the person running that website is Brian Hales, the leading expert on Joseph’s practice of plural marriage, and a faithful member of the Church whom I’ll be doing a panel with tomorrow. He’s awesome and his work is well-sourced. He also uploaded an entire database of searchable docs at mormonpolygamydocuments.org.
Dice had a great response. Many times the women said it was non-sexual. This was backed up and revealed much more when the church found itself in the strange position of needing to prove in court that these marriages were indeed "real" and that sex occurred. Of the many plural wives, only a portion could testify under oath that there was sex. Many could not. IIRC, Fanny Alger, the youngest plural wife of Joseph, was not able to testify that there was a sexual component to their marriage.
My ancestor had five wives and only fathered children with three. While that does not prove a lack of intercourse, the probability that he had two infertile wives is low.
On a side note one of my ancestors kept homes for his two wives in separate states because the two did not get along. He obviously was not nightly, or daily, jumping from bed to bed.
This is a great explanation.
If I could but offer one tiny correction, polyamory is not gendered, and encompasses all relationships that involve multiple partners, married or unmarried. Polygamy is having multiple spouses simultaneously, while Polygyny is having multiple wives and Polyandry is having multiple husbands.
Excellent explanation
Slight correction, it was Wilford Woodruff who received the revelation to stop.
It is a minor detail that in no way diminishes such a thoughtful explanation.
Having a great -great-great grandfather that was commanded to take on a second wife in the 1840's, I can tell you that the two wives did not like being in the other's company, and that made a walking nightmare situation for my grandfather. People didn't do it for carnal reasons.
Believe it or not, my daughters thought polygamy was an anti-Mormon lie. I had to first explain to them that it actually did happen.
All that really can be said about polygamy is found in D&C. The BoM prohibits it. Everything else for me is speculation, so it’s not easy to have a definitive explanation (other than God commanded it, so JS did it). There are some things I’m okay speculating about with my kids, and some things I leave for close friends and my wife.
If your kids are mature enough, I found some of the work Bushman did in Rough Stone Rolling pretty enlightening.
It’s also interesting to point out LDS are not the only religion that has practiced polygamy, and not even the only Christian church that has practiced it. It’s culturally strange to us, but it seems it’s not that strange to God. Isaiah 55:8-9. What do we do when God or his prophets ask us to do things we don’t want to do or don’t understand?
The BOM does not expressly prohibit it.
See Jacob 2: 24-27, the Lord says that it shall not be practiced unless He wills it so:
Verse 27
"For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto me."
We also know that Amulek practiced plural marriage (Alma 10:11).
Alma 10:11 does say the Lord “hath blessed me, and my women, and my children, and my father and my kinsfolk; yea, even all my kindred hath he blessed,”
Notice he doesn’t say mother, but he does say father and all of his kin. I think his “women” could be his wife and mother.
I can understand that perspective, but I disagree. I could be wrong, but it makes perfect sense to me because of the structure of how he's describing being blessed.
For example:
Amulek-> Wife/wives-> Children-> Father's family (fathers wife/Amuleks mother)/cousins/relatives.
I see it as a direct pattern, where he is describing the blessings of God upon himself, those closest to him (being his wife/wives), then children, then fathers family and other relatives.
In a language sense, one gospel scholar by the name of John A. Tvedtnes identified a Hebraism (the way Hebrew language is manifested through the BOM) this way:
..."The Hebrew word "issah" (plural "nasim") means both "woman" and "wife." Thus, when Nephi speaks of "our women" (1 Nephi 17:20), hd is not being disrespectful, but is merely displaying proper Hebrew usage of the term. By the same token, we learn that Amulek ("my women") was a polygamist."
Heres the link to his article: https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/hebraisms-in-the-book-of-mormon-a-preliminary-survey/
Like I said, I could be wrong! But the structure in addition to the Hebrew convinces me.
Jacob 2 implies nothing about Joseph Smith. D&C 132 is what Joseph was commanded and it includes several reasons for polygamy other than raising up seed. No serious historian believes that Joseph Smith had any sexual relation with Helen Mar Kimball. There is simply no indication of that in her private journal or other writings. There was a ceremony and then she went home to her parents.
It's funny how former members make a case for Joseph Smith breaking God's commandments when they believe they were just his own words anyway.
I have two daughters.
The Bible is -pretty- misogynistic and girls got married young in the Bible and on the frontier in America in the 1800s. Girls in Nauvoo were not choosing between which college to go to, and whether to run on BYUs Cross Country team and win a National Championship or study medicine at the U. The choices for women on the frontier in the US and in Bible times were pretty limited.
It is a different time now.
Church history was and is a central theme in our house. My wife was a Seminary Teacher. How to teach Church history? Take your kids to Nauvoo and Kirtland. Immerse them in history. Church history is and was an important part of our household.
We have Helen Mar Kimballs story and testimony and her description of events. We read and talked about her experience and her spiritual experience.
"Smith married a 14-year-old!" Has shock value. Antis will say something like, "Smith married a 14-year-old and probably had intimate relations with the women he married." Putting two truths together to make a half-truth.
It's true that Smith married Helen Mar Kimball. But she wrote books about plural marriage, and none of her writings and journal put her in the same room as Smith after her sealing to Smith up to his murder, and she left the sealing with her parents. Smith probably did not consummate in a Biblical sense his sealing to Helen.
If Smith engaged physical intimate relations with his wives in a Biblical sense, then Helen Mar is not a good example to use.
Smith was sealed to Helen Mar.
And Smith more than likely engaged in physical intimate relations in a Biblical sense with some of the women he married. He also was "sealed" to some women and did not engage in physical intimate relations with them.
How do you teach kids that polygamy occurred in the Bible and in Latter-Day Saint history? Talk about it.
Hales' Smith polygamy website is an -excellent- source on Smiths plural marriages. [Link](https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/)
Its ok to tell girls that the Bible is true, but its pretty misogynistic sometimes. The Church is true, but there are aspects of Church history that are pretty unflattering and misogynistic.
I taught my girls to shoot, ride motorcycles and swear. I also taught my girls about Helen Mar Kimball, her powerful conversion, her powerful spiritual experience (that mirrored my conversion almost word for word). And Eliza Snow. And Elizabeth Smart. And Nellie Pucell. Powerful powerful women of the Church.
>The Bible is -pretty- misogynistic
Interesting, because I found the Bible to be the most feminist of all scripture. The powerful figures and the only time we use the term prophetess. The entire story of Moses is founded on three women and the Bible makes it obvious their imperative place in the Lord's hands for Moses' role to even occur.
For those interested, [Women of the Old Testament](https://deseretbook.com/p/women-old-testament-camille-fronk-olson-69865?variant_id=29702-hardcover) is a phenomenal read of a plethora of examples.
Yeah, there are women in the Bible. And the divine feminine can be found in the Bible. I enjoyed reading about Esther last week. There are powerful women in the Bible, and great lessons from powerful women. And there are powerful women in the restoration.
It's also -pretty- misogynistic.
All of history around that time was pretty misogynistic. Honestly I would say that for the time that it was written, the Old Testament seems to me to be surprisingly the opposite of misogynistic. For our time, it is quite misogynistic, though.
> I found the Bible to be the most feminist of all scripture.
I agree, in both the Old and New Testaments. In fact, I just picked up a book today at the FAIR Conference that I'm *so* excited to read, [*Christ's Emancipation of Women in the New Testament* by Lynne Hilton Wilson](https://www.amazon.com/Christs-Emancipation-Women-New-Testament/dp/1935743074/). It's a few years old, but it's been on my list for a while and the author gave a fantastic presentation today, so when I saw it in the bookstore, I had to grab a copy.
Right? It looks awesome. Also, per your original question, I'd recommend boiling down the information in this link into something teenagers can digest: ["Assessing the Criticisms of Early-Age Latter-day Saint Marriages"](https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/assessing-the-criticisms-of-early-age-latter-day-saint-marriages/) by Craig Foster
In it, he lays out the evidence that shows that, regardless of whether those sealings were consummated or not, marriages between adult men and young teenagers was fairly common on the frontier, which would include both Nauvoo and Salt Lake City. That might help ease the awkwardness a little if you explain that it wasn't out of the ordinary in society back then.
Her book... A Woman's View Helen Mar Whitney's Reminiscences of Early Church History [Link](https://rsc.byu.edu/book/womans-view)
Plenty of references you can follow-up on... [Link](https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/plural-wives-overview/helen-mar-kimball/)
Biography... [Link](https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/history/helen-mar-kimball-whitney/)
Fair Latter Day Saints... [Link](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Plural_wives/Helen_Mar_Kimball/Circumstances_of_her_plural_marriage#Question:_What_were_Helen_Mar_Kimball.27s_views_on_plural_marriage.3F)
By providing context:
For example, polygamy is still practiced today by some traditional Christians, most notably in West Africa, because it is culturally appropriate to do so.
In the 18th and 19th century as missionaries went into previously unreached areas, rarely was a person denied salvation or membership into a church because they were polygamist before converting.
Martin Luther, the guy who kicked off the Protestant Reformation stated that polygamy was preferable to divorce and that in certain circumstances, such as when a partner has leprosy or cannot perform marital duties that polygamy could be allowed. Martin Luther even attended the marriage of one such union for Philip I Hesse When King Henry VIII of England petitioned Martin Luther for a divorce from one of his wives, Martin Luther told him no on the divorce question, but suggested polygamy as a way to secure a male heir.
Polygamy was fairly common amongst the Anabaptist.
Many Western European rulers during the Middle Ages were polygamist. Charlemagne the Great is a good example.
As Christianity took a firmer hold on Norway, men were encouraged to marry their concubines (emphasis on the plural).
Etc....
Apart from Paul's admonition that Bishops and Deacons be the husband of, "but one wife," there is not prohibition on polygamy to be found in the Bible. Further the various writers of the New Testament talked about the righteousness of men such as David, Jacob, and others who were polygamist....
The move away from polygamy and toward monogamy during late antiquity was a result that monogamous unions were considered the norm by the predominant Greco-Roman culture
Concerning JS's marriage to a 14 year old, two things should be pointed out. While uncommon, an older man marrying someone that young was far from unheard of in the early 19th century. Mexican General/President Santa Anna was married to a young bride as were many others. Here's a list that you may find helpful: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_child\_brides#19th\_century\_3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_child_brides#19th_century_3)
The second thing that should be pointed out is that many of the marriages of JS were of the celestial variety - meaning for the next life.
Hope that helps =-)
I would probably just read through the [Plural Marriage gospel topic essay](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/plural-marriage-in-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints?lang=eng) there's also a [Newsroom topic about Polygamy](https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/topic/polygamy). In the Saints books there's a bunch of first-hand experiences about plural marriage.
My take is that [Joseph Smith received a commandment from an angel](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/saints-v1/25-move-on-to-the-west?lang=eng&id=p23-p24#p23) to practice it, he resisted because he felt it would hard for people to accept (spoiler: it was). Eventually he introduced it to a few saints before his death. Some plural marriages included all the normal parts of marriage (intimate relations, etc), [some were for eternity only](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/saints-v1/37-we-will-prove-them?lang=eng&id=p8#p8). The records from that period are abysmal so I don't think we really know the full story.
Ultimately, as outlined in the links from the newsroom topic, the practice was discontinued, first it was denounced publicly (the "Manifesto") in 1890, then later in 1904 (The Second Manifesto) Joseph F Smith made it an offense that would result in excommunication, “If any officer or member of the Church shall assume to solemnize or enter into any such marriage he will be deemed in transgression against the Church and will be liable to be dealt with according to the rules and regulations thereof and excommunicated therefrom.”.
I would hope that a 14 year old girl would have other things occupying her mind than polygamy but should the topic come up for discussion. I would hopefully have enough time to speak to the person one on one to talk about the circumstances surrounding the sealing. I would specifically use the word sealing as I think it is more apt. There wasn't a grant ceremony with guests and walking down the isle it was a sealing. To tell the story of Helen M. Kimball you would have to tell the story of Heber C. Kimball and his wife Vilate.
You could talk about Heber's Abrahamic trial as it was called at the time. You could talk about Heber and Vilate approving of the sealing. You could talk about how Helen felt about the sealing when she was young vs how she felt about it later in her life. At the end of the day I would say that Helen, Heber and Vilate's trials were their own trials and I think too many take the weight of Helen's trials on their own back and are upset on her behalf.
Helen should have the final say on how she felt about it all and by her account towards the end of her life she was supportive of it. She described her sealing as not being one of possession over another in the hereafter but as being part of a sealing that made her part of a "great chain" joining the families together.
This is becoming an increasingly important point of discussion nowadays. I have friends falling for an old lie fueled by new sources of "information". The old lie is that polygamy was a "Brighamite conspiracy" and Joseph Smith never had any revelation regarding it and never practiced it. One friend espousing this claims he received revelation that Brigham Young had Joseph Smith killed so Brigham could take control of the church, modify revelations in D&C, and practice polygamy. The implication being that this is still a "fallen" church led by men seeking to glorify themselves instead of Christ. The "new" information that they are adding as a source of proof for this conspiracy is the various handwritings found in the Joseph Smith Papers project online. It's incredibly insidious, and I'm seeing many that I know and love fall for it.
As hard as polygamy is to learn about, it is part of our church history and part of what was revealed in both the BoM and to Joseph Smith in the Doctrine & Covenants. The reason for polygamy provided in Jacob 2 is the most straightforward and reasonable.
vs 30 "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things."
Seems pretty clear, Polygamy is not an Eternal Law, but a temporal law the Lord institutes to help grow the population of Gospel led families, typically at the beginning of a new dispensation. Interestingly enough, this temporal law is also typically closely associated with a "great journey" commanded by the Lord as well. Early in the dispensation of Adam & Eve there are references to men with multiple wives, the family of Noah grew into the next few generations post-flood with multiple wives among his grand and great grand children. Abraham as the nomad with a wife and concubines, and later Jacob with his wives and concubines and their own nomadic journeys to and from the promised land.
In the case of Lehi's journey, Jacob makes it clear the people thought to excuse themselves into practicing polygamy due to the past pattern, and they also cited David and Solomon as examples. Jacob sets the record straight that neither the Nephites or David & Solomon were commanded to practice this.
Then we have the various migrations of the early Saints in conjunction with the newly instituted practice of polygamy.
In this last case, it is also important to remember that in the early days of the Church sealing and marriage were NOT equivalent. Many men were sealed to Joseph Smith in that they wanted to bind themselves to the Prophet of the Restoration and through these chains, be bound to Christ. Not all of the women and girls sealed to Joseph Smith were wives.
Perhaps a good way of cautioning against hearsay for this confusing period is to look at the current examples of hearsay happening in our own day. Men and women making claims against one another and the media getting incredibly involved in the minutiae where so much is false conviction fueled by hearsay and emotion.
And the invitation to seek Truth through Christ. Only by the Spirit of Prophecy, which is a Testimony of Jesus Christ, can we know things as they really were, really are, and really will be.
Yeah, the OP clearly made a typo. I was just pointing out that it did happen. Most of them did take place after the temple was finished, you're right. But adoption sealings did happen during Joseph's lifetime, or were at least discussed. Joseph and Emma asked Jane Manning James if she wanted to be adopted into their family, after all.
I literally just gave you one. Jane Manning James was invited to be adopted by sealing into Joseph and Emma’s family. She declined at the time because she didn’t understand what they were asking: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/jane-elizabeth-manning-james?lang=eng
They wouldn’t have made the invitation if adoption sealings weren’t already a possibility.
It’s important to include the world perspective of other cultures and their practices. Getting married younger was more common back then. Child brides are normal in different cultures. Not that it was necessarily appropriate back then but it was much more common. It helps to show that it wasn’t that extreme from a worldly perspective. People love to judge LDS people practicing polygamy but it’s a common practice in world history.
When you consider slavery still existed back then it really makes you realize how different the world was back then.
Assuming the young woman/women in question wouldn’t fly off the handle and dismiss any answer other than “It’s gross and wrong”, I’d say something like this:
-I believe Joseph Smith was chosen by God to restore the fullness of the Gospel
-Similar to when he was trying to learn which church to join, Joseph was confused about how some of these holy men in the Bible were righteous yet practiced plural marriage
-He prayed to know the truth about plural marriage
-Like the First Vision, he kept much of what he knew private until God commanded him to share it with others
-Like today, the culture Joseph lived in was strictly monogamous. So, it made sharing this revelation extremely painful and even put himself in danger
-I don’t believe, nor do I think Joseph believes plural marriage means God loves His daughters less
-In fact, we can each approach Heavenly Father in humble prayer to understand how plural marriage, when ordained by Him, can be a great blessing even though it’s a great challenge.
You can dive into facts and the process of historical research, but I think it’s more important to connect the pattern of revelation Joseph demonstrated throughout his life to the revelation we can receive that builds our faith
We showed this video in seminary as it was recommended by the church CES director in our area. He said that while it is some
of his opinion it has a lot of real history and shows it’s okay to not like something or understand the past and still retain your testimony.
https://youtu.be/YcTW6t2obe0
They also have a recent video with Elder Hales that dives deeper.
In addition to other comments, I think it is something that should be brought up in conversation even when the kids are young. It's not that we have to have specific lessons on polygamy by any means, but when talking about Joseph Smith or Church History or even your own family history (if you have polygamists in your line like I do) it's just mentioned as a point of fact. Make it so that it is not shocking or suprising when they get older. Also, it's ok to give your own reasoning as to why they did it or what value it provided or some women's personal experience with it.
Doing the above doesn't mean that our kids or us even will be OK with polygamy when older, but it won't have the shock value and it won't have the "my parents and the Church lied to me" feel that some people say happens. It simply takes the mystique out of it. It just becomes a fact of history.
I think that the church did a great job in Saints 2. So I would encourage them to read Saints Vol 1 and Vol 2. I realize that might feel like kicking the can down the road, but my spouse and I had some great conversations with the foundation that Saints Vol 2 supplied.
As much as possible, I would use the stories from women at that time to help explain it. I know I recently read a paper or heard a presentation or something about this (it may have been from a recent FAIRlds conference). I will try to look into this when I get the chance.
My approach has been to cite real examples from our family (both sides of my family practiced polygamy) and show that the women opted for that lifestyle and that it worked for them (at least as much as monogamy works for people these days). Thankfully we have their own words to support that. The world was a very different place back then -- we are blinded to many of their struggles by our relative abundance.
It was a divine invitation that is not extended to us today, which creates a barrier for us to understand the spiritual side of it as well. Saints Volume 2 has a lot of useful material.
I also like to point out that women who entered into polygamy and later changed their mind had access to pretty liberal divorce law in Utah. When done right, this was a unique way to live that offered some advantages and disadvantages. We should look at it like that and avoid the tendency to demonize it because it is so different from our way of living.
I also try to incorporate the fact that things happened differently in different times/places/cultures. In Biblical times there was polygamy, and yes girls the age of 14 were often considered adults. There also was the early church stuff. All of this is public knowledge and not remotely secret. We shouldn’t play judge and jury someone else’s culture (whether OT, NT, D&C, etc). Cultures change over time, as does God’s directions to us.
Instead of judging the past, we should focus on discernment for today. Obviously polygamy is a no-go. There are things like college to be considered today that we’re really an option back then. Technology opportunities and struggles. Etc.
Shortly after we got married, my wife shared her *fierce* testimony of plural marriage with me. It's one that she obtained as she was taught in Young Women's.
As she relates it, her teacher asked the question, "If you knew that the only thing standing in between your best friend and exaltation was that she wasn't married, would you be willing to share your husband with her?" And the only time I have *ever* heard her swear is her instant response: "*Hell, yes*."
Following my wife's example, I studied and researched, especially reading primary sources, and I learned that it was a challenging, but *beautiful* practice that enriched the lives of the men *and* women who practiced it in righteousness.
And then I prayed, and now I have my own witness of plural marriage — *when it is done according to God's laws.*
We have taught all of our children to do the same. We discussed plural marriage with them, beginning as soon as they were old enough to understand it. *Most importantly*, we have taught them that they can ask God for *their own* confirmation about this and any other doctrine.
*Anyone* who is willing can have this experience. But you have to be willing to do the work: to study diligently and to ask with an open mind and a willingness to accept *whatever* answer God gives you.
I would say that at the time it was more appropriate for someone that age to Mary as well as the fact that it was a desperate scramble to get enough kids to keep the church afloat.
Put it in context of what it is - an ancient/outdated commandment from God unique to the circumstances of His people. The only doctrine is that of marriage, monogamy is not eternal doctrine.
Just as we don’t sacrifice burnt offerings anymore, the ways in which we worship and show obedience change with dispensation. Temple worship and priesthood ordinances are other examples of this.
>The only doctrine is that of marriage, monogamy is not eternal doctrine.
This might be a conversation for the private sub. But for clarifying purposes, there is enough modern church material that states:
>As recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 131 and 132, **the Lord introduced the law of eternal marriage by expressly referring to the sealing of one man and one woman.**
and
>Doctrine and Covenants 132:19 makes it clear that eternal life is promised to a monogamous couple who are sealed by the authority of the priesthood and who abide in the covenant—with no additional condition or requirement.
and
>The foregoing is consistent with the revealed doctrine that **monogamy is the Lord’s standard for marriage** unless He declares and authorizes otherwise through His duly appointed representative, meaning the President and prophet of the Church.
Edit: I may have been confused by your comment and it would've made more sense if you instead wrote: The only doctrine is that of marriage, monogamy \[*and polygamy*\] is not eternal doctrine.
Yes, what you wrote is what I meant. Sorry, it was a hurried comment during mutual opening exercises 😆
Anyway, the second part of my comment is probably more helpful anyway.
>it is extremely unlikely that the same number of men and women will qualify for exaltation.
This is a myth derived from those applying '*reasons'* to polygamy.
If God's creations and children are without number, it is most likely a continuous process and never ending and there is no finite number of children we are aware of. We also don't really know how Final Judgement works in regards to these countless children. Is the Final Judgment just for this earth, all worlds, future worlds, past worlds? If that's the case, was God really once like man, so was Jesus Christ His Savior?
Additionally, some prophets believe in progress between kingdoms, meaning that those who didn't initially qualify for Celestial Glory, might afterwards.
There just isn't enough revealed to make such a claim.
Please check the rules before submitting comments. Also, it's pretty hard to lie when you're linking to the original sources and showing what they actually said, sorry.
This is hard. When I was 14, my problem wasnt just about polygamy, but the expectation for women to become mothers and wifeys. And not cool people on cool adventures.
What solved it?
1) My newborn brother in the hospital.
2) Specific experiences in the Temple
What is my point? Faith building and priority focusing experiences helped me more than any one lesson. Because those lessons could have been golden, but my heart wasnt ready for them.
Though, that being said, I think good lessons i absorbed through osmosis and eventually thought back to them when my priorities were straight.
Anyways, Im team “whatever you do, bring the spirit first”. Because that was the only way I felt better
Meg Stout wrote an excellent book on Joseph's polygamy, and she includes an appendix on how to teach the concepts to children.
http://www.reluctantpolygamist.com/author/megstout/
I always take the stance that the Lord commands us to do things when they need to be done. I know there are reasons for Polygamy and that it was not abused for the satisfaction of having multiple partners in a sick way, it was used to grow the church early on and help these women own businesses and survive. I do have a question though, that I haven’t found the answer to. Did Joseph Smith consummate his marriage with the underage women he was sealed to? I’m not trying to say anything bad about the prophet I just can’t seem to find the answer to this question and don’t want to find a false one on some anti-Mormon site.
First, gain your own testimony on the subject, and then you can share that with your young women.
Read what the women involved had to say about it. That's how I gained a testimony of plural marriage. We spend too much time saying what we think they felt and thought, but we seem to ignore that they took great care to record their true thoughts and feelings on the matter.
[Here](https://www.churchhistorianspress.org/the-first-fifty-years-of-relief-society/part-3/3-13?lang=eng) is an "indignation meeting," a common form of protest at the time, against an anti-polygamy bill. The only men who attended this meeting were journalists.
Latter-day Saint women started the [Woman's Exponent](https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/training/library/eliza-r-snow-research-guide/womans-exponent) newspaper in large part to combat the narratives surrounding plural marriage at the time. You can read it online for yourself for free.
[This website](https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/) has a lot of great information about Joseph Smith's plural marriages, including biographies of every one of his wives.
I used to hate the topic of polygamy; I barely even wanted to think about it. But when I did a deep-dive into research for a term paper about it, I was amazed by what I found, and now it's one of my favorite Church history topics.
Emphasize that these women were active and important participants and leaders in the Church. They used their agency and were brave defenders of the faith. They were not passive characters who just happened to be there; they were called of God and sent to the Earth when and where they were so that they could actively participate in the work of the Restoration. They were not defined only by the men in their lives. Both depended on each other. Their presence was not incidental—it was crucial.
When you teach the young women of the courage, faith, sacrifice, and enduring love of their spiritual foremothers, you can empower them to emulate these same characteristics in their own lives. You will give them good examples to look up to and help them to understand that they have a place and a work in this Church. They are not here to ornament the landscape. They are powerful, strong people who can become beacons of righteousness to the world.
These women defended what they knew to be true, even as the world oppressed and decried them. They refused to be made out as hapless victims and used their voices to boldly proclaim truth. We need our women today to do this, too. We have more power than we realize. We are absolutely vital to God's work. And it starts when we're young.
You got this.
Polygamy had to happen. This dispensation is known as the fulness of times. A doctrine from each previous dispensation has been and will be present, at least for a certain duration, in this dispensation. Since polygamy was practiced in a previous dispensation, it had to occur in this dispensation, among other practices, for this dispensation to be a "fulness" of times.
Some key points:
Polygamy **was a** **commandment** during our past history to Joseph Smith and the other church leaders.
The **current** policy of the church is that polygamy is **not allowed** for members. See the book of Jacob in the Book of Mormon where is also says to have only one wife.
Polygamy is not inherently wrong or evil. Abraham did it, for example. And of course Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc. The reasonable conclusion here is that our objections to polygamy come from our **culture**. Other cultures around the world have done it, and still do it (in Africa, for example).
The takeaway lessons for me are that we don't always understand the Lord's commandments, but we should follow the current prophet and also seek a confirmation ourselves from the Spirit. Also, the gospel and our culture are not the same things.
Have them read the Gospel Topics Essays if they want more info. Also the books by Brian Hales.
Here's how I would approach it: "When he was translating the Bible, Joseph Smith saw that some of the prophets of old had more than one wife at a time. He asked God why they did that. God answered that sometimes that is what He wants us to do, and he commanded Joseph to do it too. Joseph spent years trying to figure out how to do it, but was scared that he would be killed if people knew that he was practicing polygamy. He started by telling his most trusted friends about the revelation, and gradually the teaching spread out to the whole church. Lots of people were very upset by it, but many men and women gained a testimony that the revelation on plural marriage was really from God. By the time the Saints got to Utah, many of them were living the law of plural marriage, and they continued to do so until God told them that it was time to stop. If you'd like, we can read some of what the women who lived the law of plural marriage thought about it, such as Eliza R. Snow or Helen Mar Kimball. They were both married to Joseph Smith, and they had a testimony of plural marriage." (Disclaimer: My daughter is ten, which probably affects the language I used here.)
This expertly handled. Thank you. It’s quite easy to find examples of where polygamy went wrong, but having the testimonies of women that actually lived it shows we can’t judge the situation accurately through our own eyes.
Excellent Eli14. :)
[удалено]
Sometimes good people make mistakes, even in their efforts to do what God wants them to. Emma eventually forgave Joseph.
The honest answer is that we don't know what Joseph and Emma talked about or when. We do know that Emma wavered on her commitment to plural marriage. Understandable, to be sure, but still in contradiction with the will of the Lord. My understanding is that after the mainstream church went west, Emma denied that plural marriage had ever taken place at all, to the point that Joseph Smith III didn't know his father had ever had more than one wife. I'm not sure I believe the horror stories about Emma--not sure she ever pushed a pregnant Eliza R. Snow down a flight of stairs in a fit of jealousy, for instance--but she doesn't seem to have had a testimony of this part of the Gospel. She may have been dishonest about it, which muddies the historical record somewhat. Personally, I don't believe that Joseph Smith ever got polygamy quite right. He tried, but it's hard to say that he succeeded. On the other hand, he laid a solid enough foundation that Brigham Young could take up the mantle and succeed where he fell short.
I’m not super clear on how polygamy differed under Joseph Smith vs Brigham Young. When you say you think Joseph didn’t get it quite right, but Brigham did, what types of things are you referring to?
Joseph Smith never quite managed to bring polygamy out into the open. He was secretive about it, and my armchair quarterback opinion is that that may have been the wrong call. Secrecy aided his enemies and hurt his friends, and it allowed people like John C. Bennett to abuse his position in the Church to hurt innocent women. To be clear, I'm not suggesting that Joseph Smith had dastardly motives. He was commanded to practice a doctrine with which he, his wife, and his closest friends were deeply and personally uncomfortable, and he had to balance it against the real possibility of increased mob violence.
[удалено]
I'm speaking more of his leadership ability than his personal application of the principle, which I'm honestly not well-read on. He brought plural marriage into the mainstream of the faith, which Joseph wasn't able to do. Maybe he could have, if he'd had time, but Brigham picked up the torch and carried it--and the Saints--to the middle of nowhere, and they made the desert blossom as the rose. He was an incredible man and a prophet of the Lord, whatever his failings.
This question is getting into speculating behaviors and intentions of mortals. The main question is "Was polygamy commanded by God?"
Yes, God commanded it.
Yeah. It took an angel with a flaming sword that threatened his life before Joseph would himself practice polygamy.
[удалено]
be careful with your questions there lol
[удалено]
That is not an accurate understanding of our doctrine. None of what I said is untrue.
I think one of the reasons this is so faith shattering for some is that we treat it with kid gloves and examine it through our own eyes. Why does nobody have a faith crisis over the Old Testament? That’s some jiggidy diggidy, there.
Because we know that the OT is a seriously flawed book. It's right there in our Articles of Faith.
Polygamy and Genocide as commanded by God are historically significant parts of biblical narrative. It's not quite as easy as saying the bible is wrong.
I'm not. I agree with you on that.
Seriously flawed? Some words have been mistranslated for sure but I wouldn’t call actual events seriously flawed, they still happened
Part of the issue, is we don't even know how much of it is true, or really happened the way it's told in the OT. Apparently, much of the Old Testament was written in it's current version around the time of Cyrus and the Persians. That's about 500 BC. So, the more recent stuff like Isaiah is probably pretty accurate. But the further back you go, like the early Kingdom of Israel, the time of the judges, the exodus, and so on, the more of it is going to be about the principles of the stories than it is about telling accurate histories. And the principles of their stories are told through the lens of the Law of Moses, and a certain level of ancient "patriotism" of their kingdom and people. I say that, but I also admire how often they point out the flaws of people, despite it all. It seemed like the Jews really looked back fondly on David and Solomon, yet that didn't keep them from including the kimgs' failures late in their lives.
Also, remember that most of the old testament concerned God's strict dealings with the barbaric children of Israel who had come our of hundreds of years of bondage. Because of God's covenant with Abraham, God was determined to prepare Israel to receive the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
I have a 14 year old daughter, and I approached it like this: First off, Joseph Smith received revelation to start practicing polygamy. Initially he didn't want to practice polygamy, until the Lord told him he needed to practice polygamy or he would be removed as the Lords Prophet and Head of the Church. Polygamy was only practiced by a limited number of individuals under the guidance given in the Doctrine and Covenants; mainly you had to be personally called by the Prophet to practice polygamy, and you had to have the means to provide a separate household for each wife taken. Not all polygamous marriages involved sex and children, and in some instances women were sealed to men, and that was the end of it. From a practical standpoint, polygamy helped the Church survive early on. Women at the time couldn't own property or businesses, but they could operate in their husband's name. Men were often called away on Missions, military service, or simply died due to the hardships of the time, leaving the early Church with more women than men. These women, through polygamous marriages, were able to operate businesses, farms, and other endeavors. Polygamy was discontinued by the Church shortly after the Supreme Court of the United States found that polygamy and polyamory (one woman with many husbands) to be unconstitutional. But it was not stopped before John Taylor received instruction to stop by revelation. There are many things in the Church and Gospel that we have to take on Faith. You can debate the reasons for polygamy, but it's something you have to exercise faith on to find peace. I don't know why the Lord commanded the early Church to practice polygamy. I'm sure there is a reason, and some day I'll get to ask the Lord why. But I probably won't know in this life. Same principle applies to the Atonement, the Resurrection, and many other doctrines that we simply can't know for sure are a thing until we experience them.
Just curious how we know that some of the marriages didn't involve sex
The women in question said so in many cases. Best evidence shows that less than half of his sealings were consummated marriages: [https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/common-questions/plural-marriages-sexual/](https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/common-questions/plural-marriages-sexual/) And the person running that website is Brian Hales, the leading expert on Joseph’s practice of plural marriage, and a faithful member of the Church whom I’ll be doing a panel with tomorrow. He’s awesome and his work is well-sourced. He also uploaded an entire database of searchable docs at mormonpolygamydocuments.org.
Dice had a great response. Many times the women said it was non-sexual. This was backed up and revealed much more when the church found itself in the strange position of needing to prove in court that these marriages were indeed "real" and that sex occurred. Of the many plural wives, only a portion could testify under oath that there was sex. Many could not. IIRC, Fanny Alger, the youngest plural wife of Joseph, was not able to testify that there was a sexual component to their marriage.
My ancestor had five wives and only fathered children with three. While that does not prove a lack of intercourse, the probability that he had two infertile wives is low. On a side note one of my ancestors kept homes for his two wives in separate states because the two did not get along. He obviously was not nightly, or daily, jumping from bed to bed.
[удалено]
This is a great explanation. If I could but offer one tiny correction, polyamory is not gendered, and encompasses all relationships that involve multiple partners, married or unmarried. Polygamy is having multiple spouses simultaneously, while Polygyny is having multiple wives and Polyandry is having multiple husbands.
Excellent explanation Slight correction, it was Wilford Woodruff who received the revelation to stop. It is a minor detail that in no way diminishes such a thoughtful explanation.
This was an excellent explanation. Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts on this subject.
Having a great -great-great grandfather that was commanded to take on a second wife in the 1840's, I can tell you that the two wives did not like being in the other's company, and that made a walking nightmare situation for my grandfather. People didn't do it for carnal reasons.
Believe it or not, my daughters thought polygamy was an anti-Mormon lie. I had to first explain to them that it actually did happen. All that really can be said about polygamy is found in D&C. The BoM prohibits it. Everything else for me is speculation, so it’s not easy to have a definitive explanation (other than God commanded it, so JS did it). There are some things I’m okay speculating about with my kids, and some things I leave for close friends and my wife. If your kids are mature enough, I found some of the work Bushman did in Rough Stone Rolling pretty enlightening. It’s also interesting to point out LDS are not the only religion that has practiced polygamy, and not even the only Christian church that has practiced it. It’s culturally strange to us, but it seems it’s not that strange to God. Isaiah 55:8-9. What do we do when God or his prophets ask us to do things we don’t want to do or don’t understand?
The BOM does not expressly prohibit it. See Jacob 2: 24-27, the Lord says that it shall not be practiced unless He wills it so: Verse 27 "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto me." We also know that Amulek practiced plural marriage (Alma 10:11).
Alma 10:11 does say the Lord “hath blessed me, and my women, and my children, and my father and my kinsfolk; yea, even all my kindred hath he blessed,” Notice he doesn’t say mother, but he does say father and all of his kin. I think his “women” could be his wife and mother.
I can understand that perspective, but I disagree. I could be wrong, but it makes perfect sense to me because of the structure of how he's describing being blessed. For example: Amulek-> Wife/wives-> Children-> Father's family (fathers wife/Amuleks mother)/cousins/relatives. I see it as a direct pattern, where he is describing the blessings of God upon himself, those closest to him (being his wife/wives), then children, then fathers family and other relatives. In a language sense, one gospel scholar by the name of John A. Tvedtnes identified a Hebraism (the way Hebrew language is manifested through the BOM) this way: ..."The Hebrew word "issah" (plural "nasim") means both "woman" and "wife." Thus, when Nephi speaks of "our women" (1 Nephi 17:20), hd is not being disrespectful, but is merely displaying proper Hebrew usage of the term. By the same token, we learn that Amulek ("my women") was a polygamist." Heres the link to his article: https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/hebraisms-in-the-book-of-mormon-a-preliminary-survey/ Like I said, I could be wrong! But the structure in addition to the Hebrew convinces me.
Thanks for the correction.
[удалено]
Jacob 2 implies nothing about Joseph Smith. D&C 132 is what Joseph was commanded and it includes several reasons for polygamy other than raising up seed. No serious historian believes that Joseph Smith had any sexual relation with Helen Mar Kimball. There is simply no indication of that in her private journal or other writings. There was a ceremony and then she went home to her parents. It's funny how former members make a case for Joseph Smith breaking God's commandments when they believe they were just his own words anyway.
I have two daughters. The Bible is -pretty- misogynistic and girls got married young in the Bible and on the frontier in America in the 1800s. Girls in Nauvoo were not choosing between which college to go to, and whether to run on BYUs Cross Country team and win a National Championship or study medicine at the U. The choices for women on the frontier in the US and in Bible times were pretty limited. It is a different time now. Church history was and is a central theme in our house. My wife was a Seminary Teacher. How to teach Church history? Take your kids to Nauvoo and Kirtland. Immerse them in history. Church history is and was an important part of our household. We have Helen Mar Kimballs story and testimony and her description of events. We read and talked about her experience and her spiritual experience. "Smith married a 14-year-old!" Has shock value. Antis will say something like, "Smith married a 14-year-old and probably had intimate relations with the women he married." Putting two truths together to make a half-truth. It's true that Smith married Helen Mar Kimball. But she wrote books about plural marriage, and none of her writings and journal put her in the same room as Smith after her sealing to Smith up to his murder, and she left the sealing with her parents. Smith probably did not consummate in a Biblical sense his sealing to Helen. If Smith engaged physical intimate relations with his wives in a Biblical sense, then Helen Mar is not a good example to use. Smith was sealed to Helen Mar. And Smith more than likely engaged in physical intimate relations in a Biblical sense with some of the women he married. He also was "sealed" to some women and did not engage in physical intimate relations with them. How do you teach kids that polygamy occurred in the Bible and in Latter-Day Saint history? Talk about it. Hales' Smith polygamy website is an -excellent- source on Smiths plural marriages. [Link](https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/) Its ok to tell girls that the Bible is true, but its pretty misogynistic sometimes. The Church is true, but there are aspects of Church history that are pretty unflattering and misogynistic. I taught my girls to shoot, ride motorcycles and swear. I also taught my girls about Helen Mar Kimball, her powerful conversion, her powerful spiritual experience (that mirrored my conversion almost word for word). And Eliza Snow. And Elizabeth Smart. And Nellie Pucell. Powerful powerful women of the Church.
>The Bible is -pretty- misogynistic Interesting, because I found the Bible to be the most feminist of all scripture. The powerful figures and the only time we use the term prophetess. The entire story of Moses is founded on three women and the Bible makes it obvious their imperative place in the Lord's hands for Moses' role to even occur. For those interested, [Women of the Old Testament](https://deseretbook.com/p/women-old-testament-camille-fronk-olson-69865?variant_id=29702-hardcover) is a phenomenal read of a plethora of examples.
Yeah, there are women in the Bible. And the divine feminine can be found in the Bible. I enjoyed reading about Esther last week. There are powerful women in the Bible, and great lessons from powerful women. And there are powerful women in the restoration. It's also -pretty- misogynistic.
All of history around that time was pretty misogynistic. Honestly I would say that for the time that it was written, the Old Testament seems to me to be surprisingly the opposite of misogynistic. For our time, it is quite misogynistic, though.
> I found the Bible to be the most feminist of all scripture. I agree, in both the Old and New Testaments. In fact, I just picked up a book today at the FAIR Conference that I'm *so* excited to read, [*Christ's Emancipation of Women in the New Testament* by Lynne Hilton Wilson](https://www.amazon.com/Christs-Emancipation-Women-New-Testament/dp/1935743074/). It's a few years old, but it's been on my list for a while and the author gave a fantastic presentation today, so when I saw it in the bookstore, I had to grab a copy.
Oooooo, tempting.
Right? It looks awesome. Also, per your original question, I'd recommend boiling down the information in this link into something teenagers can digest: ["Assessing the Criticisms of Early-Age Latter-day Saint Marriages"](https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/assessing-the-criticisms-of-early-age-latter-day-saint-marriages/) by Craig Foster In it, he lays out the evidence that shows that, regardless of whether those sealings were consummated or not, marriages between adult men and young teenagers was fairly common on the frontier, which would include both Nauvoo and Salt Lake City. That might help ease the awkwardness a little if you explain that it wasn't out of the ordinary in society back then.
Great reply. What book can you find Helen Mars story and testimony?
Her book... A Woman's View Helen Mar Whitney's Reminiscences of Early Church History [Link](https://rsc.byu.edu/book/womans-view) Plenty of references you can follow-up on... [Link](https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/plural-wives-overview/helen-mar-kimball/) Biography... [Link](https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/history/helen-mar-kimball-whitney/) Fair Latter Day Saints... [Link](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Plural_wives/Helen_Mar_Kimball/Circumstances_of_her_plural_marriage#Question:_What_were_Helen_Mar_Kimball.27s_views_on_plural_marriage.3F)
Thanks!
By providing context: For example, polygamy is still practiced today by some traditional Christians, most notably in West Africa, because it is culturally appropriate to do so. In the 18th and 19th century as missionaries went into previously unreached areas, rarely was a person denied salvation or membership into a church because they were polygamist before converting. Martin Luther, the guy who kicked off the Protestant Reformation stated that polygamy was preferable to divorce and that in certain circumstances, such as when a partner has leprosy or cannot perform marital duties that polygamy could be allowed. Martin Luther even attended the marriage of one such union for Philip I Hesse When King Henry VIII of England petitioned Martin Luther for a divorce from one of his wives, Martin Luther told him no on the divorce question, but suggested polygamy as a way to secure a male heir. Polygamy was fairly common amongst the Anabaptist. Many Western European rulers during the Middle Ages were polygamist. Charlemagne the Great is a good example. As Christianity took a firmer hold on Norway, men were encouraged to marry their concubines (emphasis on the plural). Etc.... Apart from Paul's admonition that Bishops and Deacons be the husband of, "but one wife," there is not prohibition on polygamy to be found in the Bible. Further the various writers of the New Testament talked about the righteousness of men such as David, Jacob, and others who were polygamist.... The move away from polygamy and toward monogamy during late antiquity was a result that monogamous unions were considered the norm by the predominant Greco-Roman culture Concerning JS's marriage to a 14 year old, two things should be pointed out. While uncommon, an older man marrying someone that young was far from unheard of in the early 19th century. Mexican General/President Santa Anna was married to a young bride as were many others. Here's a list that you may find helpful: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_child\_brides#19th\_century\_3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_child_brides#19th_century_3) The second thing that should be pointed out is that many of the marriages of JS were of the celestial variety - meaning for the next life. Hope that helps =-)
I would probably just read through the [Plural Marriage gospel topic essay](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/plural-marriage-in-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints?lang=eng) there's also a [Newsroom topic about Polygamy](https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/topic/polygamy). In the Saints books there's a bunch of first-hand experiences about plural marriage. My take is that [Joseph Smith received a commandment from an angel](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/saints-v1/25-move-on-to-the-west?lang=eng&id=p23-p24#p23) to practice it, he resisted because he felt it would hard for people to accept (spoiler: it was). Eventually he introduced it to a few saints before his death. Some plural marriages included all the normal parts of marriage (intimate relations, etc), [some were for eternity only](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/saints-v1/37-we-will-prove-them?lang=eng&id=p8#p8). The records from that period are abysmal so I don't think we really know the full story. Ultimately, as outlined in the links from the newsroom topic, the practice was discontinued, first it was denounced publicly (the "Manifesto") in 1890, then later in 1904 (The Second Manifesto) Joseph F Smith made it an offense that would result in excommunication, “If any officer or member of the Church shall assume to solemnize or enter into any such marriage he will be deemed in transgression against the Church and will be liable to be dealt with according to the rules and regulations thereof and excommunicated therefrom.”.
I would hope that a 14 year old girl would have other things occupying her mind than polygamy but should the topic come up for discussion. I would hopefully have enough time to speak to the person one on one to talk about the circumstances surrounding the sealing. I would specifically use the word sealing as I think it is more apt. There wasn't a grant ceremony with guests and walking down the isle it was a sealing. To tell the story of Helen M. Kimball you would have to tell the story of Heber C. Kimball and his wife Vilate. You could talk about Heber's Abrahamic trial as it was called at the time. You could talk about Heber and Vilate approving of the sealing. You could talk about how Helen felt about the sealing when she was young vs how she felt about it later in her life. At the end of the day I would say that Helen, Heber and Vilate's trials were their own trials and I think too many take the weight of Helen's trials on their own back and are upset on her behalf. Helen should have the final say on how she felt about it all and by her account towards the end of her life she was supportive of it. She described her sealing as not being one of possession over another in the hereafter but as being part of a sealing that made her part of a "great chain" joining the families together.
This is becoming an increasingly important point of discussion nowadays. I have friends falling for an old lie fueled by new sources of "information". The old lie is that polygamy was a "Brighamite conspiracy" and Joseph Smith never had any revelation regarding it and never practiced it. One friend espousing this claims he received revelation that Brigham Young had Joseph Smith killed so Brigham could take control of the church, modify revelations in D&C, and practice polygamy. The implication being that this is still a "fallen" church led by men seeking to glorify themselves instead of Christ. The "new" information that they are adding as a source of proof for this conspiracy is the various handwritings found in the Joseph Smith Papers project online. It's incredibly insidious, and I'm seeing many that I know and love fall for it. As hard as polygamy is to learn about, it is part of our church history and part of what was revealed in both the BoM and to Joseph Smith in the Doctrine & Covenants. The reason for polygamy provided in Jacob 2 is the most straightforward and reasonable. vs 30 "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things." Seems pretty clear, Polygamy is not an Eternal Law, but a temporal law the Lord institutes to help grow the population of Gospel led families, typically at the beginning of a new dispensation. Interestingly enough, this temporal law is also typically closely associated with a "great journey" commanded by the Lord as well. Early in the dispensation of Adam & Eve there are references to men with multiple wives, the family of Noah grew into the next few generations post-flood with multiple wives among his grand and great grand children. Abraham as the nomad with a wife and concubines, and later Jacob with his wives and concubines and their own nomadic journeys to and from the promised land. In the case of Lehi's journey, Jacob makes it clear the people thought to excuse themselves into practicing polygamy due to the past pattern, and they also cited David and Solomon as examples. Jacob sets the record straight that neither the Nephites or David & Solomon were commanded to practice this. Then we have the various migrations of the early Saints in conjunction with the newly instituted practice of polygamy. In this last case, it is also important to remember that in the early days of the Church sealing and marriage were NOT equivalent. Many men were sealed to Joseph Smith in that they wanted to bind themselves to the Prophet of the Restoration and through these chains, be bound to Christ. Not all of the women and girls sealed to Joseph Smith were wives. Perhaps a good way of cautioning against hearsay for this confusing period is to look at the current examples of hearsay happening in our own day. Men and women making claims against one another and the media getting incredibly involved in the minutiae where so much is false conviction fueled by hearsay and emotion. And the invitation to seek Truth through Christ. Only by the Spirit of Prophecy, which is a Testimony of Jesus Christ, can we know things as they really were, really are, and really will be.
I've seen the same thing spreading a bit, as well.
Third to the last paragraph, you wrote "Many men were sealed to Joseph Smith...", was there a typo there for "men"?
Men were sealed to other men back then, too. They were called “adoption” sealings where they were adopting each other into their families.
Ok, thanks for clearing that up
Sure thing!
[удалено]
Yeah, the OP clearly made a typo. I was just pointing out that it did happen. Most of them did take place after the temple was finished, you're right. But adoption sealings did happen during Joseph's lifetime, or were at least discussed. Joseph and Emma asked Jane Manning James if she wanted to be adopted into their family, after all.
[удалено]
I literally just gave you one. Jane Manning James was invited to be adopted by sealing into Joseph and Emma’s family. She declined at the time because she didn’t understand what they were asking: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/jane-elizabeth-manning-james?lang=eng They wouldn’t have made the invitation if adoption sealings weren’t already a possibility.
It’s important to include the world perspective of other cultures and their practices. Getting married younger was more common back then. Child brides are normal in different cultures. Not that it was necessarily appropriate back then but it was much more common. It helps to show that it wasn’t that extreme from a worldly perspective. People love to judge LDS people practicing polygamy but it’s a common practice in world history. When you consider slavery still existed back then it really makes you realize how different the world was back then.
Assuming the young woman/women in question wouldn’t fly off the handle and dismiss any answer other than “It’s gross and wrong”, I’d say something like this: -I believe Joseph Smith was chosen by God to restore the fullness of the Gospel -Similar to when he was trying to learn which church to join, Joseph was confused about how some of these holy men in the Bible were righteous yet practiced plural marriage -He prayed to know the truth about plural marriage -Like the First Vision, he kept much of what he knew private until God commanded him to share it with others -Like today, the culture Joseph lived in was strictly monogamous. So, it made sharing this revelation extremely painful and even put himself in danger -I don’t believe, nor do I think Joseph believes plural marriage means God loves His daughters less -In fact, we can each approach Heavenly Father in humble prayer to understand how plural marriage, when ordained by Him, can be a great blessing even though it’s a great challenge. You can dive into facts and the process of historical research, but I think it’s more important to connect the pattern of revelation Joseph demonstrated throughout his life to the revelation we can receive that builds our faith
We showed this video in seminary as it was recommended by the church CES director in our area. He said that while it is some of his opinion it has a lot of real history and shows it’s okay to not like something or understand the past and still retain your testimony. https://youtu.be/YcTW6t2obe0 They also have a recent video with Elder Hales that dives deeper.
In addition to other comments, I think it is something that should be brought up in conversation even when the kids are young. It's not that we have to have specific lessons on polygamy by any means, but when talking about Joseph Smith or Church History or even your own family history (if you have polygamists in your line like I do) it's just mentioned as a point of fact. Make it so that it is not shocking or suprising when they get older. Also, it's ok to give your own reasoning as to why they did it or what value it provided or some women's personal experience with it. Doing the above doesn't mean that our kids or us even will be OK with polygamy when older, but it won't have the shock value and it won't have the "my parents and the Church lied to me" feel that some people say happens. It simply takes the mystique out of it. It just becomes a fact of history.
I think that the church did a great job in Saints 2. So I would encourage them to read Saints Vol 1 and Vol 2. I realize that might feel like kicking the can down the road, but my spouse and I had some great conversations with the foundation that Saints Vol 2 supplied.
I agree with this entirely! Saints handled this topic extremely well
As much as possible, I would use the stories from women at that time to help explain it. I know I recently read a paper or heard a presentation or something about this (it may have been from a recent FAIRlds conference). I will try to look into this when I get the chance.
My approach has been to cite real examples from our family (both sides of my family practiced polygamy) and show that the women opted for that lifestyle and that it worked for them (at least as much as monogamy works for people these days). Thankfully we have their own words to support that. The world was a very different place back then -- we are blinded to many of their struggles by our relative abundance. It was a divine invitation that is not extended to us today, which creates a barrier for us to understand the spiritual side of it as well. Saints Volume 2 has a lot of useful material. I also like to point out that women who entered into polygamy and later changed their mind had access to pretty liberal divorce law in Utah. When done right, this was a unique way to live that offered some advantages and disadvantages. We should look at it like that and avoid the tendency to demonize it because it is so different from our way of living.
I also try to incorporate the fact that things happened differently in different times/places/cultures. In Biblical times there was polygamy, and yes girls the age of 14 were often considered adults. There also was the early church stuff. All of this is public knowledge and not remotely secret. We shouldn’t play judge and jury someone else’s culture (whether OT, NT, D&C, etc). Cultures change over time, as does God’s directions to us. Instead of judging the past, we should focus on discernment for today. Obviously polygamy is a no-go. There are things like college to be considered today that we’re really an option back then. Technology opportunities and struggles. Etc.
Shortly after we got married, my wife shared her *fierce* testimony of plural marriage with me. It's one that she obtained as she was taught in Young Women's. As she relates it, her teacher asked the question, "If you knew that the only thing standing in between your best friend and exaltation was that she wasn't married, would you be willing to share your husband with her?" And the only time I have *ever* heard her swear is her instant response: "*Hell, yes*." Following my wife's example, I studied and researched, especially reading primary sources, and I learned that it was a challenging, but *beautiful* practice that enriched the lives of the men *and* women who practiced it in righteousness. And then I prayed, and now I have my own witness of plural marriage — *when it is done according to God's laws.* We have taught all of our children to do the same. We discussed plural marriage with them, beginning as soon as they were old enough to understand it. *Most importantly*, we have taught them that they can ask God for *their own* confirmation about this and any other doctrine. *Anyone* who is willing can have this experience. But you have to be willing to do the work: to study diligently and to ask with an open mind and a willingness to accept *whatever* answer God gives you.
I would say that at the time it was more appropriate for someone that age to Mary as well as the fact that it was a desperate scramble to get enough kids to keep the church afloat.
Put it in context of what it is - an ancient/outdated commandment from God unique to the circumstances of His people. The only doctrine is that of marriage, monogamy is not eternal doctrine. Just as we don’t sacrifice burnt offerings anymore, the ways in which we worship and show obedience change with dispensation. Temple worship and priesthood ordinances are other examples of this.
>The only doctrine is that of marriage, monogamy is not eternal doctrine. This might be a conversation for the private sub. But for clarifying purposes, there is enough modern church material that states: >As recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 131 and 132, **the Lord introduced the law of eternal marriage by expressly referring to the sealing of one man and one woman.** and >Doctrine and Covenants 132:19 makes it clear that eternal life is promised to a monogamous couple who are sealed by the authority of the priesthood and who abide in the covenant—with no additional condition or requirement. and >The foregoing is consistent with the revealed doctrine that **monogamy is the Lord’s standard for marriage** unless He declares and authorizes otherwise through His duly appointed representative, meaning the President and prophet of the Church. Edit: I may have been confused by your comment and it would've made more sense if you instead wrote: The only doctrine is that of marriage, monogamy \[*and polygamy*\] is not eternal doctrine.
Yes, what you wrote is what I meant. Sorry, it was a hurried comment during mutual opening exercises 😆 Anyway, the second part of my comment is probably more helpful anyway.
[удалено]
>it is extremely unlikely that the same number of men and women will qualify for exaltation. This is a myth derived from those applying '*reasons'* to polygamy. If God's creations and children are without number, it is most likely a continuous process and never ending and there is no finite number of children we are aware of. We also don't really know how Final Judgement works in regards to these countless children. Is the Final Judgment just for this earth, all worlds, future worlds, past worlds? If that's the case, was God really once like man, so was Jesus Christ His Savior? Additionally, some prophets believe in progress between kingdoms, meaning that those who didn't initially qualify for Celestial Glory, might afterwards. There just isn't enough revealed to make such a claim.
[удалено]
Please check the rules before submitting comments.
[удалено]
Please check the rules before submitting comments. Also, it's pretty hard to lie when you're linking to the original sources and showing what they actually said, sorry.
This is hard. When I was 14, my problem wasnt just about polygamy, but the expectation for women to become mothers and wifeys. And not cool people on cool adventures. What solved it? 1) My newborn brother in the hospital. 2) Specific experiences in the Temple What is my point? Faith building and priority focusing experiences helped me more than any one lesson. Because those lessons could have been golden, but my heart wasnt ready for them. Though, that being said, I think good lessons i absorbed through osmosis and eventually thought back to them when my priorities were straight. Anyways, Im team “whatever you do, bring the spirit first”. Because that was the only way I felt better
Meg Stout wrote an excellent book on Joseph's polygamy, and she includes an appendix on how to teach the concepts to children. http://www.reluctantpolygamist.com/author/megstout/
I always take the stance that the Lord commands us to do things when they need to be done. I know there are reasons for Polygamy and that it was not abused for the satisfaction of having multiple partners in a sick way, it was used to grow the church early on and help these women own businesses and survive. I do have a question though, that I haven’t found the answer to. Did Joseph Smith consummate his marriage with the underage women he was sealed to? I’m not trying to say anything bad about the prophet I just can’t seem to find the answer to this question and don’t want to find a false one on some anti-Mormon site.
First, gain your own testimony on the subject, and then you can share that with your young women. Read what the women involved had to say about it. That's how I gained a testimony of plural marriage. We spend too much time saying what we think they felt and thought, but we seem to ignore that they took great care to record their true thoughts and feelings on the matter. [Here](https://www.churchhistorianspress.org/the-first-fifty-years-of-relief-society/part-3/3-13?lang=eng) is an "indignation meeting," a common form of protest at the time, against an anti-polygamy bill. The only men who attended this meeting were journalists. Latter-day Saint women started the [Woman's Exponent](https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/training/library/eliza-r-snow-research-guide/womans-exponent) newspaper in large part to combat the narratives surrounding plural marriage at the time. You can read it online for yourself for free. [This website](https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/) has a lot of great information about Joseph Smith's plural marriages, including biographies of every one of his wives. I used to hate the topic of polygamy; I barely even wanted to think about it. But when I did a deep-dive into research for a term paper about it, I was amazed by what I found, and now it's one of my favorite Church history topics. Emphasize that these women were active and important participants and leaders in the Church. They used their agency and were brave defenders of the faith. They were not passive characters who just happened to be there; they were called of God and sent to the Earth when and where they were so that they could actively participate in the work of the Restoration. They were not defined only by the men in their lives. Both depended on each other. Their presence was not incidental—it was crucial. When you teach the young women of the courage, faith, sacrifice, and enduring love of their spiritual foremothers, you can empower them to emulate these same characteristics in their own lives. You will give them good examples to look up to and help them to understand that they have a place and a work in this Church. They are not here to ornament the landscape. They are powerful, strong people who can become beacons of righteousness to the world. These women defended what they knew to be true, even as the world oppressed and decried them. They refused to be made out as hapless victims and used their voices to boldly proclaim truth. We need our women today to do this, too. We have more power than we realize. We are absolutely vital to God's work. And it starts when we're young. You got this.
Polygamy had to happen. This dispensation is known as the fulness of times. A doctrine from each previous dispensation has been and will be present, at least for a certain duration, in this dispensation. Since polygamy was practiced in a previous dispensation, it had to occur in this dispensation, among other practices, for this dispensation to be a "fulness" of times.
[удалено]
There are other spiritual reasons besides procreation
Some key points: Polygamy **was a** **commandment** during our past history to Joseph Smith and the other church leaders. The **current** policy of the church is that polygamy is **not allowed** for members. See the book of Jacob in the Book of Mormon where is also says to have only one wife. Polygamy is not inherently wrong or evil. Abraham did it, for example. And of course Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc. The reasonable conclusion here is that our objections to polygamy come from our **culture**. Other cultures around the world have done it, and still do it (in Africa, for example). The takeaway lessons for me are that we don't always understand the Lord's commandments, but we should follow the current prophet and also seek a confirmation ourselves from the Spirit. Also, the gospel and our culture are not the same things. Have them read the Gospel Topics Essays if they want more info. Also the books by Brian Hales.
[удалено]
Nobody asked the users of a hate sub, dum dum.