Comments on: Listen to the stories of those who hurt because of the ghost of eternal polygamy

By: Alison Moore Smith

Alison Moore Smith — Mon, 30 Jan 2017 09:18:52 +0000

#6 The Other Clark:

So many early church leaders spoke so passionately in favor of polygamy that is seems that disavowing the practice would shred the authority/aura of infallibility of the Church leadership…So I’m curious if she wrestles with the collateral damage that would occur by disavowing the practice.

#14 Snail, beautifully said. Quite sincerely, when I hear a woman say she’s not bothered by polygyny, I think she’s lying. Lying for the Lord, as they say. Lying for the cause. Lying in defense of wha they believe the gospel requires. Unless you’re talking about a woman who really doesn’t care much about her husband or intimacy or love—and who would just a soon have a business partner and sperm donor and let someone else take care of all that nasty stuff—I think she’s lying. Do any of you really know a woman who would be pleased to have her husband marry another woman? Let me see her! (And, please, M.R., it’s one thing to need help and another to grab another wife to get it.)

I think we have a real problem when we promote the romanticism of eternal marriage and forever families, all while under the shadow of a celestial marriage model that is the opposite.

By: al

al — Mon, 16 Jan 2017 15:21:28 +0000

After death a woman can be sealed to all the men she was married to in life (after their death). Whatever that means.

By: M.R.

M.R. — Sun, 01 Jan 2017 15:11:36 +0000

Polygamy, like all of God’s other laws (fulfilled here, or not) are made to lessen our burdens, not to increase them. Being a new mom, stuck at home all day with husband whom I couldn’t even call (no cell phones then) and with a treasured human infant that I didn’t even know what to do with, (or even feel worthy of having), I would have welcomed my husband to have, (or to have had), a second wife. I couldn’t ever shake the fear that I might endanger my own child out of some act of my own ignorance. In fact, these sad tragedies of ignorant and loney motherhood, is in the news all the time, and which only served to reinforce my fears, as I totally identified with these women. I was tired. I was forgetful. I didn’t feel that I had anyone to call to help relieve me of my burden, not even occasionally. Honestly, the sadness of people who lived in the time of polygamy, just for the sake of being in a polygamist family, is not really looking at the whole picture. If there is wickedness and breaking covenants of chastity to God, that is the source of pain. That happens today. And that happened in the very first generation of mankind.

By: MaybeNot

MaybeNot — Thu, 22 Dec 2016 16:00:26 +0000

An aside – I stumbled upon archived talks of the BYU Widows and Widowers conference held in May of this year. The bios of the various presenters were on the web page. There were several couples who were married for the second time after having lost their first spouse. Some, because they were younger, had “his, hers and ours.” Others simply had grown children to try and unite into a blended family. I listened to some bits and pieces of the various presentations, most of which concentrated on grief and mourning, the logistics of being widowed, and so forth. I did listen to the talk by Elder Robert E. Wells, (emeritus). He has a very interesting background. Around minute 8 he talks about being sealed to his first wife and his second wife, and admits he doesn’t know how that will work out in the eternities. (Elder Oaks said as much in an interview, too.) What struck me as I blew threw the presentations is that not a one of them addressed the elephant in the room. The bios gushed with how wonderful their second spouses were, literally begging the question — what will happen when those couples die, and someone seals the deceased wife to her second deceased husband. Can our doctrine of patriarchy support any notion of eternal polyandry?

By: Professor Lockhart

Professor Lockhart — Wed, 21 Dec 2016 01:15:41 +0000

I’m hurt by the accusation that the faith of my fathers and mothers is hurtful. Stop hurting my ancestry and posterity by deceiving them.

I’m hurt by others inability to “see it as a big deal”.

Why should I change my faith for your hurt if you won’t change for mine?

Did anyone tell Joseph that his revelation priesthood authority is hurtful he shouldn’t teach what’s true?

No one wants to hurt people. Stop telling people they should feel hurt and help them see why it’s not hurtful.

By: DavidH

DavidH — Tue, 20 Dec 2016 05:48:13 +0000

I agree with Clark. We don’t have to change priesthood ordination practices to solve the fundamental inequity of living males’ being sealed to multiple women, but living women only being permitted to be sealed to one. When work for the decease is performed, both men and women are sealed to multiple spouses. I don’t see it as a big deal to extend the same practice/policy to the living.

By: Moss

Moss — Mon, 19 Dec 2016 05:33:16 +0000

Thanks for this review. I found a great deal of solace in the book and I’ve finally let eternal polygamy go. I’ve loaned my copy out so many times I have no idea where it is now.

By: Jonathan Green

Jonathan Green — Sat, 17 Dec 2016 05:43:29 +0000

Go away, asdf.

By: Wowbagger

Wowbagger — Sat, 17 Dec 2016 05:05:08 +0000

Wow asdf. Just wow. That is unkind and pretty sure at odds with LDS beliefs.

By: jennifer Rueben

jennifer Rueben — Sat, 17 Dec 2016 02:22:15 +0000

Sister Pearson is a gifted writer. I have enjoyed her poetry and pose for years. I do ,however. question the current actual application of the sealing policy that is the bases for the book. This has not been my experience nor that of others I know. Every couple’s situation needs to be addressed individually. Support the comments of Clark #28. As individuals and collectivity as a church we learn line on line and all things are not revealed at this time. We tend to superimpose our limited experience on situations that need a more “eternal” viewpoint. I am sorry if individuals feel limited or hurt by current applications of temple sealing policies. It seems dismissive and disrespectful to state that this is a temporary situation. Wait in faith, God knows all things and works for your good and your eternal happiness. Best advice I can give to individual in this situation is please contact the appropriate priesthood authority to discuss your personal situation and feelings. This may require that you seek an appointment above the level of your local bishop, or stake president . To other who are not involved personally in such a situation, this is a personal and sacred issue and should be treated with tenderness and complete privacy.
The same type of respect need to be extended to our pioneer ancestor who lived polygamy. Don’t take your personal modern experience and standards and superimpose it on their experience. It was a different time and a different environment. My personal female ancestor were greatly blessed by having sister-wives.

By: David Evans

David Evans — Fri, 16 Dec 2016 21:48:31 +0000

Tomw: Thanks for the tip to the Interpreter review. I’ve added it to the list above.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Fri, 16 Dec 2016 21:21:12 +0000

That’s an interesting review although I think he dodges a lot of issues. i.e. while there may not have been a formal equating plural marriage to exaltation there certainly was a lot of rhetoric on that in the 19th century Utah period. The fundamentalists didn’t get that idea out of thin air.

However he raises a pretty good point that we really don’t understand what sealing means in the hereafter nor do we quite understand how marriage/children sealings relate to what seems a question of priesthood line of authority and accountability. My sense is that’s why some like Dave K (18) above seem to see the issue completely related to ones ordination to priesthood offices. It’s one of those areas we think we have it clearly figured out but a closer glance shows there’s actually a lot unrevealed.

Our intuitions about marriage make that kind of sealing make sense. We want to be with who we love in the hereafter. Mormon sealing doctrine thus seems much stronger than say traditional mainstream Christian doctrine. On the other hand, surely there’s nothing limiting people from associating with whom they want – at least for Celestial beings. So the doctrine in practice gives us far less than it first appears.

By: Tomw

Tomw — Fri, 16 Dec 2016 18:23:08 +0000

For what it’s worth – http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/opportunity-lost/ – A review by Brian Hales (author of Joseph Smith’s Polygamy).

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Fri, 16 Dec 2016 17:51:50 +0000

Wally, I’ve not read the book so I can’t comment on that. But it seems the position you take entails there being no doctrine at all. i.e. completely relativist. Even acknowledging some disagreement over what is or isn’t doctrine I’m not sure we can take the position that because understanding changes that no one can make the charge of “that isn’t Mormon doctrine.”

By: Wally

Wally — Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:40:52 +0000

Two comments. First, I have an aunt, long deceased, who is sealed to three different husbands. The first lived only a couple of months, the second a couple of years, and the third was with her for most of her adult life. So, whatever that means, it apparently goes both ways in the hereafter, or there’s going to be a lot of sorting out to do, which I firmly believe. Consider, for instance, that we are constantly sealing together deceased husbands and wives who did not get along in this life and would have gladly divorced (or maybe even did).

Second, regarding Valerie Steimle’s criticism that the book is full of false doctrine, that’s a pretty difficult claim to back up, since LDS doctrine is all over the board and has shifted over time. The Book of Mormon also has some “false” doctrine in it, if we consider Joseph Smith’s later revelations to be the final word. But even those do not always line up with each other or with current orthodoxy. So be careful about tossing the “false doctrine” bomb at anyone. I hear false doctrine all the time from the pulpit in general conference. It just depends on your own definition of what true doctrine is, because the Church hasn’t laid out a definitive theology, and most Mormons I know don’t believe the same things.