Polygamy ruling?

[taylorf]

I partially agree. I don’t think the Church will ever go back to the same level of support of polygamy that it fostered in the 19th century. I can however envision the Church readmitting excommunicated polygamists to the Church should the Supreme Court find a right to polygamous marriages. I could see the Church taking on a slightly more neutral position; something along the lines of “it’s a personal matter that all parties involved must make after much personal study of the Scriptures, and fervent prayer and fasting.” I could also see the Church recommending monogamy over polygamy, while simultaneously instructing members who decide to practice the principle of plural marriage to not draw any attention to themselves.

Do you really think they’ll play the “ignore the past” card again to reintroduce polygamy? They’re still having a tough time moving past a similar situation with 1800s polygamy and blacks/priesthood. This is why you don’t see anymore official revelation, and why I don’t think you will for a very long time. I think there is too much risk on public perception if they return to polygamy; however, I do think they’ll eventually move to a neutral position on same sex civil marriages.

 

[iepuras]

I agree with Taylor that reinstating polygamy would be a PR nightmare for the LDS church, so I don’t think it will happen anytime soon. Brandon, you make a very good point. I think if they did bring it back, it would be in the way you described. I do think that Mormonism will have to shrink and become a primarily intermountain west phenomenon again before they can realistically bring back polygamy. Descendants of polygamists are probably more likely to eventually accept or tolerate polygamy. When I was LDS I did believe that polygamy would be restored before the Second Coming. I’m not sure how widespread that belief is, but it was something I dreaded. I believe that there are some apostles who would like to bring polygamy back, but I doubt it is even close to a majority. Not that I have any basis for this belief other than the Mormon Holy Ghost told me it is true!

I do believe that there will be some new revelation eventually. I believe the LDS women will be ordained to some form of priesthood. They won’t have the same responsibilities as the men, but the women will have some form of priesthood ordination. It’s not like women will ever become bishops or general authorities, but they will have something and the women will eat it up. It won’t be a huge shock for women who have been endowed in the temple because women already administer priesthood ordinances in the temple to other women.

1Tim215Mommy, I tend to be more libertarian in my beliefs. I would prefer for the laws regarding marriage to reflect natural law in order to protect children. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed and it ain’t coming back in our lifetime. Now that the state has given in to our hedonistic culture and decided that marriage is merely about the happiness of the parties involved, it is important for us to truly have separation of church and state with regards to marriage.

I think the government should get out of the “marriage” business all together. The state should have civil unions for both heterosexual and homosexual couples. Civil unions would be performed by state officials at city hall or the courthouse. Religious ministers would cease to act as agents of the state when they officiate at weddings. If a couple wants to get married in a church, they can follow the rules set out by that church. The bifurcation of legal and religious marriage will become essential to protecting churches from even more interference by the state. Such an approach would actually make the US more like the rest of the world. Most countries perform civil marriages/unions in public at city hall and do not allow religious ministers to perform civil marriages. Those couples desiring marriage in a church would simply go to city hall first, get the civil marriage/union, then head off to the church.

 

[phil19034]

While they chastise others?

As I stated, if we are going to go off of the “piggybacking” theory then we must look to Moses first with allowing divorce.

I remember talking to a very devout Catholic lady that lives down the street. We were talking before the presidential election. She asked if I was voting for Romney and I said yes…she had a look on her face and stated…He will make this country a Mormon country so I am voting for Obama!..She judge him by his religious beliefs and yet wants her beliefs to be put into law?..pot calling the kettle black

She is not a devout Catholic. You cannot be a devout Catholic and vote for someone who is pro-abortion. It’s a mortal sin for a Catholic.

 

[Brandon_Cal]

Do you really think they’ll play the “ignore the past” card again to reintroduce polygamy? They’re still having a tough time moving past a similar situation with 1800s polygamy and blacks/priesthood. This is why you don’t see anymore official revelation, and why I don’t think you will for a very long time. I think there is too much risk on public perception if they return to polygamy; however, I do think they’ll eventually move to a neutral position on same sex civil marriages.

I agree with Taylor that reinstating polygamy would be a PR nightmare for the LDS church, so I don’t think it will happen anytime soon. Brandon, you make a very good point. I think if they did bring it back, it would be in the way you described. I do think that Mormonism will have to shrink and become a primarily intermountain west phenomenon again before they can realistically bring back polygamy. Descendants of polygamists are probably more likely to eventually accept or tolerate polygamy. When I was LDS I did believe that polygamy would be restored before the Second Coming. I’m not sure how widespread that belief is, but it was something I dreaded. I believe that there are some apostles who would like to bring polygamy back, but I doubt it is even close to a majority. Not that I have any basis for this belief other than the Mormon Holy Ghost told me it is true!

I based my opinion on nothing more than my own experience as an LDS. I can’t say that any particular GC talks, or talks by the Brethren have necessarily led me to believe that the Church would in fact reinstate plural marriage should secular authority allow it. I’ll concede that my “experience” may no longer be typical though. I’m an 82 year old, White, male, Utah-born BIC Mormon and naturally polygamy is probably far less upsetting to me than it would be to, say, an 18 year old, non-American convert. That’s not to say that I positively agree with the practice, but it wouldn’t really shock me either if it were to be reinstated. My grandfather was a polygamist for goodness’ sake! I’ve been sort of conditioned to accept it. I suspect (though don’t have positive proof) that the majority of Mormondom is the same, and while the news that the Church were to re-embrace plural marriage would be tumultuous for some, I believe most members of the Church would eventually come to terms with it (whether rightly or wrongly).

Due to the very PR concerns that both of you have brought up (iepuras and TaylorF), I believe the Church, if it were to reinstate the practice of plural marriage, would do so on the conditional basis I outlined in my previous post. I could also see the Church refusing to solemnize plural marriages outside of the fundamentalist circles that already perform them, while simultaneously readmitting them to full membership in the Church (to steal Catholic terminology for a second: the LDS Church would grant a “dispensation” to the excommunicated members who were ex’ed for polygamy).

I fully understand that the LDS Church is no longer “Your Grandfather’s Mormonism”, but to think that Mormonism has completely shunned its roots, I honestly believe is naive. If the United States legalized polygamy I’d bet my house that the LDS Church would allow for plural marriage in some way, shape, or form. I don’t expect it to be spoken of as a necessary qualification for the Celestial Kingdom, as Brother Brigham did, and I would in fact expect the Church to do all in its power to draw attention away from it. It would nevertheless be back.

iepuras:

I do believe that there will be some new revelation eventually. I believe the LDS women will be ordained to some form of priesthood. They won’t have the same responsibilities as the men, but the women will have some form of priesthood ordination. It’s not like women will ever become bishops or general authorities, but they will have something and the women will eat it up. It won’t be a huge shock for women who have been endowed in the temple because women already administer priesthood ordinances in the temple to other women.

I agree. I also believe that the LDS Church will begin solemnizing gay marriages before any of the Apostolic churches do (if they ever do). Maybe it’s my old age and I’ve succumbed to cynicism, but as I look back on our very short 183 year history, the LDS Church seems more concerned with political expediency than what it believes to be the Gospel.

 

[iepuras]

Brandon, thank you for your insight. You touch on a lot of things, and I agree with a lot of what you say.

When I was LDS, I firmly believed that polygamy would be brought back before the Second Coming, and I dreaded it. Like you, I never heard such things from general authorities or in general conference, but the understanding was there. I definitely believe Mormons are conditioned to accept polygamy in some way or another. I was in a YSA ward until I was 30 and some of my friends from those days are still faithful, single LDS women. Even though they don’t normally think about it, they are conditioned to accept polygamy. The LDS church teaches single women that if they are faithful, they will be blessed with a husband, and polygamy will be how they get their husbands if they don’t marry in mortality. I was an ordinance worker in the temple for a few years and after performing all those washings and annointings, I started to understand the necessity of polygamy in the context of LDS theology even though I was still repulsed by it.

I am with you that the LDS church has not completely abandoned its roots. They still talk about the pioneers every chance they get. They seem to push pioneers so that the converts will identify with them and make them part of their “heritage”. I think it would be much easier for descendants of the pioneers to accept and tolerate polygamy than for more recent converts. The glorified pioneer ancestors did it and Heavenly Father can ask current LDS to sacrifice and do it too. The ties between pioneer ancestors and their descendants is very strong.

I can see polygamy coming back in the way you described. It will cause a PR problem but with all the ridiculous polygamy shows on tv and same sex marriage, I think the public may become desensitized from the inherent problems with polygamy to make much fuss. It’s just another “lifestyle” after all and so long as everyone is a consenting adult, who cares, right? Polygamy wouldn’t go over well in Europe, but the LDS church could do it in some countries in Africa since polygamy is part of some cultures there already. Not sure how it would go over in Latin America. It is entirely plausable that if the U.S. legalizes polygamy, the LDS church could reinstate it as an option but not a requirement. I cannot tell you how many members of the LDS church I have heard say that the LDS church stopped practicing polygamy when it became illegal. We’ll just forget the fact that it was illegal the whole time. Legality will enable those who want polygamy to agitate.

Polygamy was always problematic to me because having the doctrine of polygamy, essentially means that women are not equal to men before God. There are so many aspects to LDS theology that indicate this and it is all over the endowment and sealing ordinances. Women access Heavenly Father through their husbands. Men covenant with Heavenly Father to obey him. Women covenant with their husbands to obey him. Eve never covenants with Heavenly Father. She only covenants with Adam. Women have to share their new names with their husbands. In the sealing ordinance, women give themselves to their husbands. Husbands merely receive their wives and do not covenant to give themselves to their wives. There is also the belief that husbands will call forth their wives from the grave using their new names. Women are entirely dependent on their husbands for their place in eternity. It is disgusting.

I completely agree with you that the LDS church will one day solemnize same sex marriages in the temple. Maybe they will bring back polygamy and institute same sex marriage at the same time. I think women ordination will come first.

The Catholic and Orthodox churches will never allow same sex marriage even if they are persecuted. They have been managing persecution at some point in time in some place in the world for almost their entire existence. Americans tend to be limited in their historical thinking and only seem to go back about 300 years for their collective history. My husband is from southeastern Europe and the cultural identity of his people been Christian for 2,000 years. We as Americans have a harder time understanding that the Catholic and Orthodox churches have been around longer than pretty much anything else and still haven’t changed their beliefs with all the fads that have come and gone over the centuries.

 

[zaffiroborant]

She is not a devout Catholic. You cannot be a devout Catholic and vote for someone who is pro-abortion. It’s a mortal sin for a Catholic.

Yes a Catholic can vote for someone who is pro-abortion, but the decision to vote for him/her can not be based on his/her pro-abortion stance.

 

[Djames581]

Interesting article…!

 

[cmodrmac]

Upset a bit-it appears

the Moslem world allows polygamy-that is about 1 billion people-South Africa allows it as well as a number of countries in Africa

so it’s been around a long time-(read Old Testament)-

It becomes emotional when religion is connected to it-which is rather unnecessary -it has zero to do with pedophilia-bestiality-same sex marriage-incest-child rape or other states

Moslems feel that polygamy provides cultural stability-though you would think from the state of the modern Moslem world there is little stability to be had

the ruling did not legalize Polygamy-

 

[livingwordunity]

Someone who is for so-called same-sex “marriage” has absolutely no moral high ground basis for calling anyone else immoral since they had to throw the entire concept of objective morality out the window for their own position.

 

[taylorf]

Similar to the article on blacks and the priesthood, the church recently released an article on Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah. Very disappointing. I thought these articles were supposed to honestly and openly address some of the more difficult topics of church history, but it’s still traditional white-washed material.

 

[iepuras]

Upset a bit-it appears

the Moslem world allows polygamy-that is about 1 billion people-South Africa allows it as well as a number of countries in Africa

so it’s been around a long time-(read Old Testament)-

It becomes emotional when religion is connected to it-which is rather unnecessary -it has zero to do with pedophilia-bestiality-same sex marriage-incest-child rape or other states

Moslems feel that polygamy provides cultural stability-though you would think from the state of the modern Moslem world there is little stability to be had

the ruling did not legalize Polygamy-

Upset about a family structure that is inherently abusive? You betcha. Just because something has been around a long time doesn’t make it right. Slavery and the treatment of women as property have been around a long time too but that doesn’t make it right.

Any emotion felt regarding polygamy has nothing to do with religion per se but rather its inherent abusive nature. The justice in British Columbia did an exhaustive review of polygamy in history and modern times and found the practice to be abusive and unjust. Sorry, but being a woman and a mother, I do get a bit upset over the abuse of women and children. I grew up in a faith where even though polygamy is technically not practiced it is still an accepted doctrine. That doctrine permeates everything in the LDS faith an its culture. You can read some of my other posts about the treatment of women in the LDS church. It may not appear bad on the surface. Women are placed in a gilded cage. It may look nice and pretty but it is still a cage.

Polygamy, whether it is practiced because of a religious or a cultural tradition, devalues women and makes them unequal partners in the marital relationship. It devalues children because they are not entitled to their father always being present. It also devalues young men because they are not powerful enough to marry women who are their peers. Polygamy, even as it is practiced in the best possible way like the Browns do, is inherently abusive.

Just because the adults are consenting, doesn’t make polygamy ok. If someone consents to be the slave of another, is that ok too?

I get that the ruling only decriminalizes polygamy, but now it is only one step away from being made legal. Women and children who are trapped in polygamy now have fewer legal protections.

 

[iepuras]

Similar to the article on blacks and the priesthood, the church recently released an article on Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah. Very disappointing. I thought these articles were supposed to honestly and openly address some of the more difficult topics of church history, but it’s still traditional white-washed material.

This is a very disappointing article. Like you said, more white-washing. No mention of Joseph Smith and his plural wives or how he exchanged eternal salvation to entire families for young teenage brides or sent men on missions and married their wives while they were gone. I guess the current strategy is to blame Brigham Young for anything that makes the LDS church look bad.

 

[cmodrmac]

I certainly was not defending polygamy - I was citing the statistics worldwide as to this practice-

There is fairly little that the law can do-I guess we could pass a law that it is illegal for adults to coinhabit without a Marriage licence-how then would one enforce this-?

wait for neighbors to inform on each other and then breakdown the doors and arrest people?

Or force all children to be schooled in Public schools so the government can question them as to whether they are beinga bsued

Or perhaps just ban the LDS for even thinking about it-?

The reality is that nothing can be done under the pesent laws of the USA and in the West in general-

Besides commenting on this situation what concrete steps would you have our government do?

Traditonal marriage is not dead or moribund -

 

[stewstew03]

I certainly was not defending polygamy - I was citing the statistics worldwide as to this practice-

There is fairly little that the law can do-I guess we could pass a law that it is illegal for adults to coinhabit without a Marriage licence-how then would one enforce this-?

wait for neighbors to inform on each other and then breakdown the doors and arrest people?

Or force all children to be schooled in Public schools so the government can question them as to whether they are beinga bsued

Or perhaps just ban the LDS for even thinking about it-?

The reality is that nothing can be done under the pesent laws of the USA and in the West in general-

Besides commenting on this situation what concrete steps would you have our government do?

Traditonal marriage is not dead or moribund -

The government could refuse to recognize any marriage (other than between one man / one woman) as valid. Such a refusal has all sorts of implications for families that fall outside the traditional model.