- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
allquieton wrote:
It’s a relief to find a community that, although they might disagree with the Church on certain matters, are still pro-LDS.
Yes. This is the key.
I just wanted to mention that I believe that we should try not to “defame the dead”. Those that have departed from this life are not here to defend themselves. I truly admire Oliver Cowdery, Peter Witmer, Emma Hale Smith, W. W. Phelps and William Law – all of these persons had serious disagreements with JS over polygamy, but I don’t want to make villains of them. I am forever grateful for all of their contributions and sacrifices on behalf of the church.
We also have to be very careful when interpreting history. I want to tell you a story:
My great-grandfather was Samuel Rose Parkinson. He knew BY very well. My great-great grandmother gave her son a beautiful, hand made piano bench, complete with elegant, a hand-embroidered, needle-point seat cover. Inside the piano bench was a compartment used to store sheet music. There was also a note, hand-writing from Brigham Young to my great-great grandmother. It read, “thank you for hiding my wives from the Federal Marshals”. It went on to explain how BY feared that his wives and children would be harmed and the great measures he went to to protect them.
Samuel Rose Parkinson and his brother were arrested and taken to jail for practicing plural marriage. We have a picture of them (and many of the brothern) in striped, jail attire. Many of these men endured a great deal and suffered in those cold, dirt-floor, jails. None of their wives went to jail and their children were kept safe – all of them. Yes, they had to practice plural marriage secretly, to protect wives and children. To openly admit that a sister was a plural wife, was to publicly accuse her of adultery, and relegate here children to the social disgrace of being called, “bastard”. So, there was a great deal of secrecy about this practice.
All I can say is: learn your own genealogy. Honor your father and your mother. Strive to understand what they did and why they did it. I know that I wouldn’t be alive today except for the practice of plural marriage.
MWallace57 wrote:I know that I wouldn’t be alive today except for the practice of plural marriage.
I’ll bet that makes quite a few of us here!
allquieton wrote:I’m sure I will be around. This seems like a very interesting and helpful crowd. It’s a relief to find a community that, although they might disagree with the Church on certain matters, are still pro-LDS.
This has been a really interesting discussion. I don’t recall one like it, at least one doesn’t come to mind.
FWIW Allquieton, I totally support you if your opinion is that JS did not teach polygamy. Even though there was a vigorous debate about it, I think everyone here is sensitive and supportive of the direction people want to explore. I love that about everyone here. Really hard topics can be discussed openly and candidly.
allquieton wrote:I guess the book info didn’t ever make it into the new thread. Thanks for pointing it out Tom.
Joseph Smith Fought Polygamyby Richard and Pamela Price Also they have a website with the entire content of the book on it:
http://restorationbookstore.org/jsfp-index.htm Is this really the entire contents of the book? I was trying to get it through interlibrary loan at my University, but if it is available online I’d be happy to read it there.
allquieton wrote:I don’t need JS to be perfect, or financially gifted, or the stick pulling champion of New York. I don’t need him to be anything.
But based on the evidence, I don’t think he was a polygamist. And so I say it.
I also don’t need JS to be anything, polygamist or otherwise. My disaffection was never really about polygamy and I don’t think proving JS was not polygamist would really influence my overall opinion much. I think the evidence supports that he practiced polygamy, but I’d be happy to be proven wrong. This thread has definately caused me to re-evaluate things as I read Compton’s book “In Sacred Loneliness” which I am still reading. The biographies of the women seems to be well researched, but I pay particular attention when Compton presents the evidence supporting the claim that each woman was a plural wife of JS. Some of the evidence is a bit tenuous.
I do think that one has to be very careful in reading historical date from that time period. Just to give you one example of how historic records can be misinterpreted: The Prophet, Mohammad was well known to be a polygamist. Historical records show that he became betrothed to one of his plural wives when she was just 7 years old. He is believed to have married her when she was 9 years old. The problem is that birth records were recorded by hand (and often in error). One small error could have easily recorded this young girl’s birth date as a full decade later than it actually was. A more accurate account may have been that the young women was 17 when betrothed to Mohammad and 19 when wed. The problem is that these historical records were riddled with errors.
Think about it. Many mothers delivered their babies at home and kept family birth records at home. Most people were illiterate or could barely read and write. There were no computers, no Department of Health Records, no professional clerks. Records were destroyed by fires, wars, floods, etc. We do not even have a single record of the Savior’s birthday recorded in ancient scripture. In some countries, calendars were not even perfected.
Professional archeologists and some historians use the term “circa” to mean approximate time. If you see a record of a women aged 14 sealed to JS, remember, she could be 15 or even 16. If you see a record of JS seemingly married to a women who is already married, that could also be an error. The women could be a Widow, with the date of her husband’s death improperly recorded.
Just a note of caution.
I left “In Sacred Loneliness” at school, so I don’t have it as a source, but I have been looking up evidence for Polygamy in “Mormon Enigma” by Linda King Newell and Valeen Tippetts Avery. Evidence for D&C 132 being dictated by JS:
William Clayton was the scribe for JS and had intimate knowledge of the dealings of the Prophet and the church (who in full disclosure became a polygamist, presumably because he believed JS teachings about polygamy, but should be noted that he isn’t unbiased in relation to polygamy). He gave a statement in 1874 about when JS dictated the revelation no known as D&C 132. While the Prices discount that JS revealed D&C 132 and claim BY and the apostles later wrote D&C 132 and attributed it to JS, William Clayton’s diary provides contemporary support for his statement (although without much of the detail of the statement), where he wrote in an entry dated 12 July 1843:
William Clayton wrote:This A.M. I wrote a Revelation consisting of 10 pages o nthe order of the priesthood, showing the designs in Moses, Abraham, David and Solomon having many wives & concubines &c. After it was wrote Prest. Joseph & Hyrum presented it and read it to E[mma] who said she did not believe a word of it and appeared very rebellious. (quoted in Mormon Enigma, page 335-336, endnote 89)
In William Clayton’s diary dated 16 August 1843:
William Clayton wrote:This A.M. Joseph told me that sin[c]e Emma came back from St. Louis, she had resisted the P[rinciple] in toto, and he had to tell her he would relinquish all for her sake. She said she would give him E[liza] and E[mily] P[artridge] but he knew if he took them she would pitch on him, & obtain divorce & leave him. He however told me that he should not relinquish anything. (quoted in Mormon Enigma, page 158)
Here is a Sunstone article about William Clayton and his journal entries, many of which give insight into polygamy during JS lifetime and specifically state that JS encouraged Clayton’s polygamous relationships. https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/086-32-35.pdfhttps://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/086-32-35.pdf” class=”bbcode_url”> allquieton wrote:I don’t have all the answers regarding Law. But:
1. The Higbees did confess to lying about Joseph. So did Bennett.
2. Bennett kept lying (indisputably) about Joseph as long as he lived. He was a sworn enemy of JS.
3. Bennett and the Higbees and apparently the Fosters are all close associates. Law is tied in with the Higbees and the Fosters.
Regarding Law and Bennett, according to “Mormon Enigma”, page 339, endnote 35:
Mormon Enigma wrote:William Law publicly defended Joseph’s character in the wake of John C. Bennett’s charges . . .[and] in September 1842 he left on a second mission to the Eastern states and this time preached against John C. Bennett.
Perhaps we will never know if Joseph practiced polygamy or not. The fact does remain however that he taught it (section 132), and Brigham ran with it. So wherever it came from we are left with a legacy that has perpetuated to this day where in certain offshoot Mormon sects young woman are indoctrinated from early that they are to be subject to men generally older men. They are virtual salves. They have no free will because it is the only life they have ever known. How do they choose differently. All the while the church acts like they have no responsibility for what is occurring in these sects. Perhaps current members do not have any responsibilities for the sins of former members, but unless we are willing to stand up and say it was wrong and move on we continue to support it. In fact we still practice it today. As far as I know a man can be sealed to multiple women in the temple as long as only one is living at a time. I for one think it was wrong and find the whole business regrettable. Think of the legacy it has left us with as a church. If you can find good that came out of it I will listen. So many have tried to state reasons like it helped the church to grow etc. I am pretty sure however the reason was sex. Sorry to rant so much, but it is frustrating to see a debate rage about Joseph and his culpability when it really does not matter now since we lived it and do not deny it, and even promote it as being from God. With so many good things about the church this continues to be lead anchor that drags us ever downward.
From what I understand, JS was very familiar with the Methodist Church and BY had also been acquainted with them. JS considered the Wesleyn sects. I have posted this before, but I wanted to repost it for those who may not have read it: Martin Madan was no stranger to the fact that many, if not most of the prostitutes suffering from venereal diseases at the London Lock Hospital, were abandoned mistresses who had been forced to enter prostitution rather than see their children starve. After years spent ministering to the abandoned and now diseased mistresses of the London “gentlemen,” Madan released his book called Thelyphthora [miracle 8]. Attorney that he was, he put forth his case, from the Bible, that polygamy must be accepted by the church and society. Part of the book also set forth the case that the men who impregnated these prostitutes must be forced to support them as wives. His years as an attorney had served him well. He so forcefully exposed the hypocrisy of the day that his book was met by no less than 19 rebuttals written by prominent English moralists. None, however, could match his prowess in biblical exposition and his book remains unmatched to this day in its full treatment of the arguments favoring the acceptance of polygamy as a valid form of Christian marriage.
http://www.christianmarriage.com/home/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=112 END OF COPY AND PASTE:
One must remember that an entire Methodist Congregation was converted to the LDS Church and baptized. No doubt, many of these early converts practiced polygamy. BY had once been associated with these people and was likely very familiar with the practice and principles behind polygamy.
Now the question: “What was to be done with these early converts who obviously had more than one wife?
MWallace57 wrote:Now the question: “What was to be done with these early converts who obviously had more than one wife?
Do you have any examples of these people? Polygamy/bigamy was against the law in the US. Yes, there were pockets of people practicing forms of “spiritual wifism” and open sex, but I have a hard time believing there were any actual polygamists. I’d love to see an article or something, though!
The LDS form of polygamy offered no more legal recourse for a woman than being a mistress. Just look at the women who divorced BY.
If we take a look at some examples of Utah wives we will find several who died of neglect and lack of necessities. There were also several who committed suicide. Many turned to alcohol and opium to deal with the pain and depression. Another wife was left to freeze to death on a porch. These are not “good fruits.” I could point out several men who were murdered over polygamy-directly and indirectly. So, I am not convinced it relieved any suffering. We also know that there were plenty of men to sustain the community-women would not have been helpless without polygamy.
There were brothels in Salt Lake, too, from what I have read. The divorce rate was one of the highest in the country. It would be interesting to see how the STD rate compared to the rest of the US. I think in one of Quinn’s books it says that the majority of women were not virgins when they got married.
It is one thing for consecting adults to choose this lifestyle, it is quite another to claim that it is commanded by God and required for exaltation (ie salvation). The journals, autobiographies and letters we have from the polygamy years of the church indicate that the saints were taught it was
requiredfor salvation. That right there breaks my heart. Well, and the child brides. 
So many broken homes and broken hearts. I’m just not sure if the data supports polygamy as being beneficia.
I don’t think that Madan’s reasons are why it was introduced by Joseph OR Brigham.
Dear Justme, The link I was referring to was:
http://www.christianmarriage.com/home/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=112 I’ll try to post a few more links.
MWallace57 wrote:Dear Justme,
The link I was referring to was:
http://www.christianmarriage.com/home/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=112 I’ll try to post a few more links.
Thanks! I’ll check them out.
Justme, There is also an entire book on the subject. I haven’t bought this book, just read the reviews. The book is available for purchase from Amazon.com:
Samuel Wesley – Polygamist, May 24, 2007
For those who are unfamiliar with 18th and 19th century England this book can give insight into the fact that among ministers there was no unanimous opinion concerning marriage. Samuel Wesley’s letter to his sister in defense of polygamy and in defense of his famous godfather, the Reverend Martin Madan are one example. The fact that his godfather, the Reverend Martin Madan had the most famous church in the English speaking world for the performance of hymns, musical concerts, and choral productions is not glossed over as in so many history books that want to give no praise to the man who wrote the most complete book in defense of Christian polygamy. Lightwood does not pretend that Samuel…
From:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A2NC6CXE2GYBER We still have a small group of Methodist Polygamists living in Utah and one gentlemen has applied to be a professional minister. There stories have appeared and been featured on the KSL news site, but I cannot find the archived article just yet.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.