Related Information to Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall...

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall... - Page 11

QUOTE

Finally, I really don't believe that the Church should be involved, in any way, with this discussion.  I think that this should truly be a matter of conscience, a matter between each person and the Lord

Nighthawk, but why do you think the Church should not be involved when Plural Marriage IS part of the LDS doctrine?.
Thanks for all your comments, we really appreciate your insight on this.

Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

QUOTE

Nighthawk, but why do you think the Church should not be involved when Plural Marriage IS part of the LDS doctrine?

Part of the problem is that it IS LDS doctrine.  Essentially, I see that the Church, as a whole, seems to be denying this important doctrine.  If a couple studies it out, prayerfully, and comes to the conclusion that they should practice it, they give up their membership in the Church.  The Church is meant to be a vehicle to help us attain the Celestial Kingdom.  It shouldn't be a hinderance to personal conscience.

Of course, anyone who really feels that they are called to live Celestial Plural Marriage (CPM) (not the OS  :-/ ) then they must leave the Church.  I think that this leads to the many abuses that we see within the "fundamentalist" community.

I know that Joseph F. Smith performed and participated in plural marriage after the Manifesto.  Apparently, he and other church leaders advised people to go to Mexico or Canada to have their sealings performed.  The implication is that the Lord didn't remove the practice, the people rejected it.  In fact, it wasn't until the 1920's (I think) that the first excommunications were performed.

The point is, that the Church is now between us and God in many ways.  This is in direct opposition to one of Joseph Smith's most famous quotes:
"I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves."

Personally, I believe that CPM is still requisite to become Celestial beings.  I just think that the Lord, in His Mercy, has taken this higher law away to reduce our condemnation for rejecting it.

NightHawk

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall... Studies Doctrine Mormon

QUOTE

I am interested to know how being from a line of ancestors that  practised this has affected/not affected you? Do you know of others who chose to practise anyway and still keep in 'touch' with the Church?

The major effect on me is the knowledge that my grandparents' generation is so significantly different than ours.  Not in the external circumstances that they experienced (that is a given), but rather in how they dealt with their experiences.

Up through the 1950's, when the first generation after plural marriage were still in strength, the statistics for the LDS church were significantly different than those for nonmembers.

Such things as an outrageously low divorce rate, a very low illegitimacy rate, low teen pregnancies, etc were common for Mormons.  Now, several generations removed, we are the same as the rest of the world in most statistics.

Right now, the members of the Church persecute those who choose to live this principle.  My cousins have had quite a difficult time in their lives.  It was members of the Church who prosecuted the polygamist recently.

Most, if not all, of the people who practice plural marriage WANT to stay close to the Church.  There are some strange groups who have gone off in strange directions, but the ones I know still consider themselves Mormons, although they reluctantly accept their estrangement from the organization.

NightHawk

Page 11 Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

QUOTE

The Church is meant to be a vehicle to help us attain the Celestial Kingdom

Although that is true I do not believe that Plural Marriage is necessary for salvation, Celestial Marriage is necessary, but doing it more than once, no.

QUOTE

Personally, I believe that CPM is still requisite to become Celestial beings.  I just think that the Lord, in His Mercy, has taken this higher law away to reduce our condemnation for rejecting it.

Although I see what you are saying, I am sure you do not voice this openly. I think one reason for the members then (an even members now) rejecting Plural Marriage is because secullar Christian belief is that a man should have only ONE wife. As an off topic... it easy to accept it in the Islamic faith, simply because they are not seen as Christians or believers in Christ.

Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

QUOTE

Although that is true I do not believe that Plural Marriage is necessary for salvation, Celestial Marriage is necessary, but doing it more than once, no.

I do believe it is necessary for entry into the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom.  Since the Church has rejected it, and the Lord has allowed this, He will make other allowances for those who would willingly live it, but are prevented from doing so.

QUOTE

Although I see what you are saying, I am sure you do not voice this openly.

That is for sure.  A few months ago, a man in Utah published an in-depth book exploring the history and practice of plural marriage.  The people who have read it have commented that it is very fair and balanced.  It doesn't promote or detract from the current practice among fundamentalists.

The author recently reported that his wife was pressured to leave him if he didn't denounce the book.  Then he was excommunicated.

As I said before, people who advocate plural marriage are persecuted today.  My own grandmother persecuted her own daughter (my aunt) who entered into it.

QUOTE

I think one reason for the members then (an even members now) rejecting Plural Marriage is because secullar Christian belief is that a man should have only ONE wife.

This is the main reason.  The other was brought up earlier in this thread - jealousy.

As was quoted earlier, Brigham Young pointed out that the idea of strict monogamy came from the most corrupt civilization of all time - the Romans.  Under Constantine, Christianity became acceptable to Rome.  As time went on, Rome took over Christianity.  Thus, monogamy became the norm.  Polygamy became anathema.

On the subject of jealousy, nobody who suffers this in their character will enter the Celestial Kingdom.  True love, such as should be within a marriage, does not "own" the object of its affection.  It builds up.  It also doesn't diminish when it is spread to others.

Having read a good bit about the families who experienced plural marriage, the successful ones always diminished the envy, jealousy, and strife.

Hence the reason the I, personally, am not ready to practice Celestial Plural Marriage.  I can't diminish these factors in my own, monogamous marriage.

NightHawk

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall...

QUOTE

Hence the reason the I, personally, am not ready to practice Celestial Plural Marriage.  I can't diminish these factors in my own, monogamous marriage.

So you are saying that if it were easy for Plural Marriage to be practised even though it were against current Church teachings that you would still do it?

Plural Marriage That Day Women Shall... - Page 11

Difficult question to answer.

In order for me to live this principle, I would have to personally receive a revelation about it.

Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner was the younger sister of my great-great grandfather.  Her story, which has already been told in this thread, has had a strong influence on my point of view.

If the principle of Plural Marriage were easy to practice, I don't think it would be an important principle eternity.  If it wasn't an important principle of eternity, the forces of opposition would not have gathered to destroy it.  Nor would the members have begged the Brethren to stop it.  So, if it were easy, it wouldn't be against Church teachings.

NightHawk

Plural Marriage That Day Women Shall... Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 11

QUOTE

Part of the problem is that it IS LDS doctrine.  Essentially, I see that the Church, as a whole, seems to be denying this important doctrine

I don't know if 'denying' it but I see a strong conviction of just 'leave it in the past' and 'move on' kind of thing which I don't understand. Yesterday in my sunday school class somebody said that when we 'dig' too much into the Gospel we are at risk of 'apostasy'. I got up and I said that was wrong but really, it doesn't amazed me that statement, I heard things like that all the time and maybe that's one of the reasons that the Church decides not to speak about. Definetly the members are NOT ready for that.

QUOTE

Of course, anyone who really feels that they are called to live Celestial Plural Marriage (CPM) (not the OS)

What OS stands for?

QUOTE

I know that Joseph F. Smith performed and participated in plural marriage after the Manifesto.  Apparently, he and other church leaders advised people to go to Mexico or Canada to have their sealings performed.  The implication is that the Lord didn't remove the practice, the people rejected it.  In fact, it wasn't until the 1920's (I think) that the first excommunications were performed

Any proof of that? anywhere where I can read about it? (Joseph F. Smith practising plural marriage after the manifesto).

QUOTE

The point is, that the Church is now between us and God in many ways

In what way?

QUOTE

Personally, I believe that CPM is still requisite to become Celestial beings

Every LDS doctrine that I have read including some Prophets said that Plural Marriage is NOT escential for salvation or becoming celestial beings. In what basis do you stand in that belief?.

QUOTE

That is for sure.  A few months ago, a man in Utah published an in-depth book exploring the history and practice of plural marriage.  The people who have read it have commented that it is very fair and balanced.  It doesn't promote or detract from the current practice among fundamentalists. The author recently reported that his wife was pressured to leave him if he didn't denounce the book.  Then he was excommunicated.

May I ask the name of the book and author?. I don't know what book is that but maybe just maybe the book doesn't talk only about Plural Marriage but his personal views on it that may contradict LDS doctrine.

QUOTE

On the subject of jealousy, nobody who suffers this in their character will enter the Celestial Kingdom.  True love, such as should be within a marriage, does not "own" the object of its affection.  It builds up.  It also doesn't diminish when it is spread to others

Easy to say it ;D hard to practise it

QUOTE

Having read a good bit about the families who experienced plural marriage, the successful ones always diminished the envy, jealousy, and strife.

I read the succesful ones a lil but I also read the ones who were not all nice and love : but sadness and jealousy.

QUOTE

In order for me to live this principle, I would have to personally receive a revelation about it.

A personal revelation or a Church revelation?


Nighthawlk, you brought some good poins in this thread! specially the one about God ending the practise of Plural Marriage since He gave the option to the members of continuing the practise or to die while practising it...so we can say that the members decided to end it not really God himself...He gave them two choices and they choose. Hmmm...good points to think about.