Mormonism, Polygamy, and Warren Jeffs

[GaryTaylor]

“What really galls me is how, at least in CJ’s book, the men would hold the woman’s “salvation” over their heads and tell them that they can’t get into heaven without their (the man’s) blessing. Even though it seemed to me that Merril Jessop is going straight to hell. No passing Go. No collecting $200. Just straight to hell. That’s a corruption of the Mormon doctrine, an insidious and subtle corruption used to spread evil. Very disturbing to faithful LDS guys like myself to see. In the mainstream LDS church, men are warned over and over again about the proper use of their priesthood and to avoid “unrighteous dominion” but it seems like in the FLDS culture, unrighteous dominion was a virture! They obviously ignored that part of the D&C.”

Insightful post. Something how man continues to place himself on the vertical ladder above women. The desire to oppress must be resolved.

 

[soren1]

Insightful post. Something how man continues to place himself on the vertical ladder above women. The desire to oppress must be resolved.

I agree with RMcMullan that it is out of step with a correct construction of Mormon thought for men to lord it over their wives in this way. It is in interesting, however, to point out that this view of the FLDS does at least resemble a classical Mormon teaching. Brigham Young and others taught that righteous women will be resurrected not directly by Christ, but by their husbands (or fathers if they are unmarried) acting on Christ’s behalf. That, I think, is orthodox Mormonism. It doesn’t teach or imply, however, that husbands have some kind of special prerogative of choice to determine on their own what degree of glory their wives get to have. As far as I can tell, that judgment still belongs only to Christ, so the correct LDS doctrine does not provide a warrant for the FLDS version, even by the standards of nineteenth-century orthodoxy.

 

[RebeccaJ]

LDS still teach that a male priesthood holder must be obeyed.

It is still LDS teaching that a woman will not get into their celestial kingdom without their husband calling them. To this belief, the secret temple names that LDS have are not told to anyone else, except a wife tells her husband so that he can call her into their highest level of heaven.

LDS girls and women are taught how to treat male priesthood holders. Which includes, not criticizing male leaders, that they are to obey them because the counsel they give is from God and women should not act anything but supportive, meek and mild around their husbands.

see here

 

[soren1]

LDS still teach that a male priesthood holder must be obeyed.

We teach that too. And while we apply some reasonable limits to that teaching, so do they.

It is still LDS teaching that a woman will not get into their celestial kingdom without their husband calling them. To this belief, the secret temple names that LDS have are not told to anyone else, except a wife tells her husband so that he can call her into their highest level of heaven.

It’s not really fair to bring up temple rituals in a discussion like this, because Mormons believe they have a covenantal obligation to not to discuss such things outside the temple. Therefore, they cannot freely respond. Besides, there is no theology in their temple ritual that you can’t glean from other sources that they are able to talk about. In any case, I don’t see offhand what is so wrong with that in principle. I mean, I don’t think it’s true. I think everyone who is resurrected is resurrected immediately by Christ, but I can image that it could have been a different way. After all, if Eve was taken from Adam’s flesh, then man is a source of woman’s natural life. Why could he not play a similar role in the resurrection? Again, I am not defending the Mormon view. I am only saying that the charge of sexism is probably not the right criticism to use at this particular point.

LDS girls and women are taught how to treat male priesthood holders. Which includes, not criticizing male leaders, that they are to obey them because the counsel they give is from God and women should not act anything but supportive, meek and mild around their husbands.

That’s not too far from Catholic teaching either. And it isn’t strictly sexist, for some of the same reasons. For instance, male LDS who don’t have the priesthood are likewise subordinate to those who do.

On the whole, it is not enough to just say that there is subordination of women, and that is bad; you must show specifically that that subordination is servile in nature. I don’t think respect for priesthood authority or the fact of being resurrected by a husband automatically amounts to that. While I actually do agree that Mormon teachings on polygamy finally reduce to an extremely sexist position, and will make an argument to that effect in an upcoming post, I don’t see that the points you have been raising really amount to a case.

 

[RebeccaJ]

soren1, having been raised LDS, I’ll just say yes, that is my experience. Women are subordinate to men. It isn’t as bad as it was in polygamous times, or even 50 years ago, but it is still Mormon culture.

And no, I have never been taught as a Catholic that when I seek the counsel of a priest that he is speaking for God. Or if a priest asks me to do something I had better say yes because he is speaking for God. Or, that my husband is going to call me into heaven, and if he doesn’t, then too bad for me. You better believe that when I began questioning Mormonism in my teens, it was because I saw the cage that I was being groomed for and I wanted no part of it.

In Catholicism, the majority of men are not clergy. A married couple are equal, the man is not dominant because he has special authoritative powers that a woman does not possess. Special powers that she is taught to respect (not the man but the power he possesses).

You can’t compare the two, at all.

And you better believe I’m going to bring up temple rituals. Hello. That is where they make their marriage covenant, which before 1990 included the woman promising to obey her husband as her lord and god.

Sexism is institutionalized in Mormonism.

 

[Stephen168]

We teach that too. And while we apply some reasonable limits to that teaching, so do they…

. For instance, male LDS who don’t have the priesthood are likewise subordinate to those who do.

Are there adult Mormon males who do not have the priesthood?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Are there adult Mormon males who do not have the priesthood?

No.

 

[PaulDupre]

Are there adult Mormon males who do not have the priesthood?

Not since 1978.

 

[soren1]

soren1, having been raised LDS, I’ll just say yes, that is my experience. Women are subordinate to men. It isn’t as bad as it was in polygamous times, or even 50 years ago, but it still Mormon culture.

I notice you are from Salt Lake City. That might make some difference here. My wife grew up LDS, but that was in Southern California. Her family and ward are not like that. I don’t know the SLC scene at all, but people do tell me Mormons there are on a very different page.

But let me be clear: I have no kind words for male/female relations in Mormonism. I was questioning the adequacy of your post in really identifying the nature of the problem. My general philosophy in apologetics is to always assume, when I am making a negative argument, that I should attempt to carry the burden of proof. If it seems to me that some kind of principled response might be made to what I am saying, then I just keep mum. I suppose what it would really take to convince me here would be if you could give some documentation of an acceptable LDS authority defining female subordination in a way that clearly amounts to servility in principle, not just in practice.

 

[SteveVH]

soren1, having been raised LDS, I’ll just say yes, that is my experience. Women are subordinate to men. It isn’t as bad as it was in polygamous times, or even 50 years ago, but it still Mormon culture.

And no, I have never been taught as a Catholic that when I seek the counsel of a priest that he is speaking for God. Or if a priest asks me to do something I had better say yes because he is speaking for God. Or, that my husband is going to call me into heaven, and if he doesn’t, then too bad for me.

In Catholicism, the majority of men are not clergy. A married couple are equal, the man is not dominant because he has special authoritative powers that a woman does not possess. Special powers that she is taught to respect (not the man but the power he possesses).

You can’t compare the two, at all.

I think Soren1 is speaking of obedience to our priests and bishops as a principle of being Catholic, but I see your point. There is a huge difference when one feels dependent upon another person in order to reach heaven and that this can be used for purposes of manipulattion. I think of Joseph Smith’s first wife Emma and what was written in D&C concerning her salvation if she did not tow the line. That is something we would never hear from a Catholic priest and certainly not from a Catholic husband.

 

[SteveVH]

. I suppose what it would really take to convince me here would be if you could give some documentation of an acceptable LDS authority defining female subordination in a way that clearly amounts to servility in principle, not just in practice.

Do you think this might qualify?

Originally Posted by Jim Dandy

Doctrine & Covenants132:54-56: “And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith [Joseph’s wife], to abide and cleave unto my servant, Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not my law.”

In the next verse, 55, God tells Emma he will give Joseph “fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds.” God warns Emma that he will destroy her if she doesn’t accept Joseph’s many wives.

 

[bthomas4]

Warren Jeffs was convicted by a jury in San Angelo, Texas last week on two counts of sexually assaulting children. On Tuesday, he was sentenced to life in prison on one count and 20 years in jail on the other.

I think he got what he deserved. On NPR yesterday, a guest speaker was commenting on how there are still followers. I am amazed at that! however, his next comment was," Catholics do not stop being Catholic when they find out about priests that molest children".

Which brings me to this buring question that has bothered me for years:

Were the Catholic priests that were found guilty of molesting children in the United States, convicted by our court systems and sentenced as well?

To the best of my knowledge, I’m not aware of this having happened. The Catholic church seems to handle these situations and the only punishment to the priests is that he is removed from his position (though often times they resurface after years have gone by) that interacts with children.

In my opinion, the Catholic priests should be treated as any other person in America that is found guilty of molesting children. They should be put in jail for life!

Yes, they should be treated the same as Warren Jeffs. And he has only been convicted of molesting 2 children. Some of the priests that have been found guilty across the U.S. were found to have committed molestation of certainly more than 2 children.

 

[soren1]

I think Soren1 is speaking of obedience to our priests and bishops as a principle of being Catholic, but I see your point. There is a huge difference when one feels dependent upon another person in order to reach heaven and that this can be used for purposes of manipulation. I think of Joseph Smith’s first wife Emma and what was written in D&C concerning her salvation if she did not tow the line. That is something we would never hear from a Catholic priest and certainly not from a Catholic husband.

There is a difficulty I think in any comparison we could make here, because in Catholicism, very few men are both priests and husbands. There is a different dynamic implied in the unity of those roles in Mormonism, which doesn’t match anything in the Roman Rite. That doesn’t make comparison impossible, but it does mean comparisons need to be qualified in ways that account for the difference.

 

[Stephen168]

Which brings me to this buring question that has bothered me for years:

Were the Catholic priests that were found guilty of molesting children in the United States, convicted by our court systems and sentenced as well?

Do you know of a Priest found guilty of molesting children? In my Diocese, the victims went after the money not the Priests. The only Priest actually taken to trial was found innocent. I would hope that any Priest found guilty would be treated the same as anyone else found guilty.

Yes, they should be treated the same as Warren Jeffs. And he has only been convicted of molesting 2 children. Some of the priests that have been found guilty across the U.S. were found to have committed molestation of certainly more than 2 children.

Found guilty in a court of law like Jeffs was?

 

[RebeccaJ]

I notice you are from Salt Lake City. That might make some difference here. My wife grew up LDS, but that was in Southern California. Her family and ward are not like that. I don’t know the SLC scene at all, but people do tell me Mormons there are on a very different page.

But let me be clear: I have no kind words for male/female relations in Mormonism. I was questioning the adequacy of your post in really identifying the nature of the problem. My general philosophy in apologetics is to always assume, when I am making a negative argument, that I should attempt to carry the burden of proof. If it seems to me that some kind of principled response might be made to what I am saying, then I just keep mum. I suppose what it would really take to convince me here would be if you could give some documentation of an acceptable LDS authority defining female subordination in a way that clearly amounts to servility in principle, not just in practice.

Margaret Toscano suggested that Mormon women seem to have plenty of delegated responsibilities. It is their right within the organization to oversee and establish their responsibilities that is lacking. Responsibility devoid of rights is servitude.

(Margaret Merrill Toscano, excommunicated, questioning the status quo and challenging the patriarchal hierarchy)

“The priesthood is conferred upon worthy male members of the Church.” (“The Latter-day Saint Woman - Basic Manual for Women, Part B” © 2005 Intellectual Reserve)

"Brethren who hold this priesthood [Melchizedek] have the power and authority to hold positions of leadership in the Church and to direct the preaching of the gospel” (“Priesthood and Auxillary Leaders’ Guidebook” © 2005 Intellectual Reserve)

Auxiliary Organizations: “The auxiliaries are Relief Society, Young Men, Young Women, Primary, and Sunday School.” (Priesthood and Auxiliary Leaders’ Guidebook © 2005 Intellectual Reserve)

“As the governing ones, make no mistake about it, this decree was made to the priesthood. We love and need the auxiliaries. They are staffed by great, faithful servants. But the very name by which they are called, auxiliary, which means “helper,” should make it clear to us that the full weight of governing the Church rests squarely upon the priesthood.” (William R. Bradford, “The Governing Ones,” Ensign, Nov. 1979, 37 © 2005 Intellectual Reserve)

"I want to say … to the Relief Society … and all the rest of the organizations in the Church, that not one of them is independent of the Priesthood of the Son of God, not any of them can exist a moment in the acceptance of the Lord when they withdraw from the voice and from the counsel of those who hold the Priesthood and preside over them. They are subject to the powers and authority of the Church, and they are not independent of them; nor can they exercise any rights in their organizations independently of the Priesthood and of the Church. " (“Teachings of Presidents of the Church Joseph F. Smith” © 2005 Intellectual Reserve)

 

[SteveVH]

There is a difficulty I think in any comparison we could make here, because in Catholicism, very few men are both priests and husbands. There is a different dynamic implied in the unity of those roles in Mormonism, which doesn’t match anything in the Roman Rite. That doesn’t make comparison impossible, but it does mean comparisons need to be qualified in ways that account for the difference.

Agreed.

 

[KathleenGee]

The intensity of the media was as such to destroy the Catholic Church.

There have been 1,000 priests falsely accused, with huge sums of settlement money given to false victims, and plenty of publicity. And no public apology or vindication. There is a priest in prison who is falsely accused.

One percent of the clergy were of the crime of pedophilia. Of course any cleric who commits such a crime not only has abused the body, but destroyed the person and their faith. Christ said these need to have a millstone tied around their neck and put in to the ocean.

Traditionally the problem goes back to Psalm 101, ‘Dare not touch My anointed ones’. The problem is the civil courts are now far reaching into the Church. A priest told me in times past, such priests were severely punished, and he said at the Vatican there were dungeons used for such crimes.

The vast majority of the crimes were homosexual oriented, and the Catholic laity has long been opposed to homosexual priests. I know there are ordained homosexual priests who live holy and celibate lives. But the four percent and the one percent of pedophilia out of the entire Catholic priesthood…95% normal…has caused tremendous damage to the integrity of ecclesial discipline and supervision.

So it is a matter of not taking chances with further homosexual ordinations because the tiny majority who would ever cause crimes would bring such damage to the Church as a whole.

We pray for vocations, and now many young men are deciding to listen more to promptings, and now entering the seminaries to restore the Church.

I think there was one particular priest back east who was given a long prison sentence. But it is never enough.

Four percent of the cases

 

[GaryTaylor]

Rebecca thanks for the link. I’m not sure how anyone could read that article and accept it. Especially the females. It obviously has established, authority, the self, control … “ego”. However in your situation raised in that atmosphere then it would be no surprize you accepted this. Or for anyone who was raised into this learned behavior.

How did you snap out of this? Safe to say the women would see this much faster than the men.

Peace

 

[GaryTaylor]

In other words the women would have to associate giving with sacrifice. So then you give because you somehow believe your getting something better in return. Therefore you do without, that which you give.

 

[RebeccaJ]

How did you snap out of this? Safe to say the women would see this much faster than the men.

A combination of things, but the deal breakers were two things. First, I was a teenager when the ERA was a hot political topic. When the Mormon Sonia Johnson was excommunicated for her support of the ERA and calling LDS leaders to task, I couldn’t understand why. I saw nothing wrong (still don’t) with paying women the same wage for the same work, and not discriminating in hiring based on the gender of a person. But, I had already had experiences where the “divine authority” of Mormon men was questionable to me, in a lot of ways.

A few years later, Pres. Kimball made a speech about how women should “leave their typewriters” and go home. I had at that time begun my career in I.T. All I heard was, your dreams and desires don’t matter and your accomplishments mean nothing. A woman I had worked with for a couple of years, put in her two week notice the day after that speech.

More than anything, I didn’t ever want to be put in a position where I could not care for myself. I wanted skills that put food on the table and clothes in my closet.

Anyway, by then, I was really questioning a lot of Mormon doctrines, and on the verge of atheism. A few years later I was sitting at a stop light, thinking on all these things I had been taught, and how they can’t be reconciled to reason, and had the wonderful idea that I didn’t have to believe any of it. Not even God. I never felt freer in my entire life, to that point, than that moment.

It took me another 20 years or so before I discovered Catholicism, and came to the realization the god I was raised to know, is a false god.