I learned a lot in a closed thread (that went far afield), about the Community of Christ, its past and future prospects (thanks, Bruce McD!). Wading through that very involved thread brought up a few things I'm curious about.

How do the various splinter groups think of (or justify) themselves as "authentic" or "true" Mormon saints--if they do at all? Common to many breakaway religions is the belief that they are holding to truth (or scripture or something) in a way that others are not. Do you find this sentiment among various "restored," "reformed," or "reorganized" Mormon sects?

What do these smaller groups think of the "official" SLC (CoJCoLdS) group?

Do they have distinctive names and terms for the SLC group? I sometimes distinguish them by calling the "establishment Mormons." I'm interested in other terms, including derogatory names and slang.

Wiki has an interesting chart of the various sects and groups that came out of JS's original group. I had no idea how many! What do you people think in terms of its accuracy--think they got them all?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denominations_in_the_Latter_Day_Saint_movement#/media/File:Mormon_Denominations.png

in an area where I was living. They were usually polite when talking about the "Utah Church". They believed in the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith as a prophet. They thought that Brigham Young was an obvious false prophet and the whole polygamy thing was a rogue operation and that Brigham's group falsified a lot of the history ex-post facto to make it look like it was all Joseph Smith's idea. That's about all I can remember from them and I don't know if their views were representative of most RLDS members.

The SLC "Big Boys" and the members of the church they lead all seem to pride themselves on the fact that they're the biggest of all the organizations that trace back to Joseph Smith. They seem to take it as a given that their size and dominance is proof enough that they're the only really legitimate continuation of Joseph Smith's great work.

The offshoots/smaller splinters don't seem to be too impressed by the bigness of the SLC "Big Boys" church. The FLDS see it as a sell-out that buckled under pressure from the US Government on polygamy instead of staying true to the "new and everlasting covenant". Other smaller groups probably refer to the big church as being the great and spacious building warned about in the Book of Mormon. Each group no doubt has a whole set of well-developed rationalizations and memes that fit their particular circumstances.

The Polygamist groups just refer to it as "The Church". They refer to themselves as "the Work" usually. The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (i.e. Warren Jeffs/Short Creek/Colorado City) only came up with the FLDS Church name for tax purposes, so they could hide their finances (like the LDS Church does). The actually still refer to themselves as "The Work".

The Kinston clan refers to themselves as the "Latter-day Church of Christ" which is their name. Also "The Family". The "big men" get the the beautiful women. Uncles marry nieces. Brothers marry half-sisters.

The offshoots of the RLDS Church/Community of Christ continue to refer to the LDS Church as "The Utah Church" or "The Utah Mormon Church". They see the Church as mistaken. Even the tiny Church of Christ-Temple Lot and the Church of Christ with the Elijah Message does not see the success of "The Utah Church" as indicative of Divine Favour, no more than the early Church of Christ, which met in a log cabin in Fayetteville, New York, saw the success of the Roman Catholic Church as indicative of Divine Favour.

They see the LDS Church like you had a brother, who was kind of a swindler and cheat and con-man, but he left your family and moved to Cleveland, and bought land and became very successful. Would you think God was behind him? You probably wouldn't. That's how the little offshoots see the big bad LDS Church.

Just call all of them MORMONS - since L-d$,inc no longer wants the association with the name.

Most of the Smiths went off with them including Emma. They do have a major claim to legitimate succession (despite failing miserably later on due to a takeover by agnostics and the politically minded.)

The most amazing splinter is probably the Strangites. They resemble Jossph Smith's church more than any.

I think the rest just think of the Brighamites as the Great and Abominable Church. That used to be right but went apostate at some stage, mostly over polygamy.

There is a silly wee splinter in England run by a Joseph Smith wannabee called Gill. He seems to think he's restored the church... Again... Look up the Book of Jeraneck. The whole thing is like a really bad comedy parody of Smith. His mom and pop are his main witnesses, along witha couple of others. He couldn't scratch twelve together. Maybe many of them in take the apostasy and restoration thing to heart.

>>>Do they have distinctive names and terms for the SLC group? I sometimes distinguish them by calling the "establishment Mormons." I'm interested in other terms, including derogatory names and slang.<<<<

The irony here is that many of these groups do not see themselves as "splinter groups."

At the time of the Manifesto, many people were set apart by the LDS hierarchy, to carry on the sacred tradition of polygamy which was not only a part of JS's Mormonism, it was the VERY CORE of the religion.

Only polygamists would get into the highest levels of heaven. That's just the way it worked. To be a TRUE polygamist you must have at least three wives.

Salvation was actually very easy for a woman. She only needed to be married to the right man, and she could choose the man, and if she changed her mind later she could do that too.

Some people believe in salvation by works and some people believe in salvation by grace, but if you were a woman in 19th centure Utah, salvation was made sure by being married to the right man.

These faithful Mormons who were "set apart" to carry on this tradition KNEW that they could be ex'd for doing so.

In other words they were told "You MUST carry on this practice even though we may ex you for it, and you must never speak ill of the prophet, and you must make sure that not a year goes by without childred (special, exceptional children) being born into this sacred institution of polygamy.

Now how you are supposed to obey that edict I don't know. The mainstream LDS church exes you and you are not supposed to organinze your own church?

The idea was that eventually polygamy would NOT be illegal and the ex-d polygamists would reunite with the mainstream church and all would be ewll in Zion

So what do the offshoot groups call the mainstream LDS church?

Their once and future family.

Dorothy Solomon, a child of polygamist Rulon Allred said her family prayed every morning, always facing the direction of the SLC LDS temple, where they would one day be welcomed with open arms.

Many polygamist families were told to continue attending local wards as long as they could.

Given their mandate to practice polygamy no matter WHAT the LDS church's public stance was on the issue, it is easy to see why when the LDS church says, "No more polygamy and this timee we really mean it" the FLDS'ers don't think they DO really mean it.

Camilla Kimball, who was born Camilla Eyring grew up in COlonia Juarez, Mexico, a colony that was established for the precise purpose of carrying on polygamy. My own ggrandfather fled to COlonia Juarez for that same purpose. No "splinter group" was formed, at least not for a long time. They were simply Mormons practicing post-manifesto polygamy because they had been told to do so.

Camilla Eyring Kimball is very candid about all this in her biography, which I highly recommend. She herself grew up in a polygamous household. There was no splinter group, at least not at that time.

Lois

They speak of the SLC mainstreamers as apostates, better than Catholics or other sects but not as good as their own group. Other plyg groups are more respected but are still on the lowly side.

Some spointer groups respect other similar groups somewhat and they would let their daughters marry into them.

I look at that Wiki chart of JS-sourced sects and branches, and wonder, "just who are these people and how do they spiritually position themselves?" You've provided a lot of insight.

Somewhere in the other thread's sidetrack mentioned tiny branches in Africa that were reportedly unhappy with the CoC's liberalization on LBQTTG issues. I was intrigued to note two short lines for "Independent LDS Church in Nigeria," and again, in Ghana, but the timeline depicted may be a bit on the early side.

The whole thing strikes me as a highly metastasizing cancer. I'd be happy to get anybody else's memories and anecdotes. Thanks!

My sister belongs to this group specifically because her husband wanted their recreational sex.

"Religious scholar J. Gordon Melton characterised the group as "the more liberal branch of the Fundamentalist movement", as the group allows sexual relations apart from the strict purpose of procreation.[1]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostolic_United_Brethren

One thing I found interesting is the revelation of Owen Allred about the mainstream Mormons. He deemed them the women in The Book of Revelations who has a child in the wilderness or some such nonsense and the AUB is that child keeping "The Principle" going.

In a nutshell, (and what I find interesting) is the AUB members basically following two prophets - Nelson and their highest apostle who guards polygamy.

When my sister and husband were shopping for polyg groups they naturally approached my grandfather Rulon Jeffs to talk about it. My sister loved Rulon and has the highest praise for Warren. It sickens me as well as her racism. Black people and people of other races are lesser in her religion. But she tries to blend in with mainstream Mormons.

She goes to the genealogy library, has women from the ward minister to her, she supports mainstream Mormons as much as possible.

Also some AUB (I think they don't do this anymore) people have been known to pretend to be mainstream to get a first marriage in the LDS Temple like my sister did before leaving mainstream Mormonism.

And everyone knows my sister in the AUB. She is a great great great granddaughter of Brigham and a granddaughter of Rulon. I believe she loves the influence her pedigree as given her with her group.

As I look at the Wiki chart (above, top post), I notice there's quite a few branches and twigs off the branches stemming (pun intended) from the AUB. Do they all consider themselves the "true" Apostolic Brethren, kinfolk to other AUB, or what?

I consider the Kingstons the most fascinating of all polygamist groups. I notice they split off from the Council of Friends in th early 1920s.

If you look at the chart's overall pattern, you notice there is a large proliferation of groups breaking off of other groups, separating into even more subsects, starting in 1930, increasing in the 1940s, and expanding greatly in the 1950s and later. Anybody have any thoughts as to why? I gather LDS/SLC *finally* got serious about cracking down on polygamy in the 1920s, but the pattern I'm noticing comes 20 years later.

Any thoughts, folks?

caffiend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As I look at the Wiki chart (above, top post), I
> notice there's quite a few branches and twigs off
> the branches stemming (pun intended) from the AUB.
> Do they all consider themselves the "true"
> Apostolic Brethren, kinfolk to other AUB, or
> what?

Other than Musser's council I don't think so.

> I consider the Kingstons the most fascinating of
> all polygamist groups. I notice they split off
> from the Council of Friends in th early 1920s.

Most groups trace priesthood from this group because of John Taylor's son.

> If you look at the chart's overall pattern, you
> notice there is a large proliferation of groups
> breaking off of other groups, separating into even
> more subsects, starting in 1930, increasing in the
> 1940s, and expanding greatly in the 1950s and
> later. Anybody have any thoughts as to why? I
> gather LDS/SLC *finally* got serious about
> cracking down on polygamy in the 1920s, but the
> pattern I'm noticing comes 20 years later.
>
> Any thoughts, folks?

I don't think LDS has ever cracked down on polygamy other than excommunicating those who perpetuate the principle.

My thoughts are that with "prophets" claiming to be under recognized "apostolic brethren" splinters are going to happen. My grandfather surprisingly didn't have any that I'm aware of because he thought of himself as a prophet and his son warren fulfilled their shared dream of a temple. Luckily that put Warren in prison for life (hopefully.)

Mormonism's founding principle of like any group - strong leadership splinters less. LDS has strong leadership. RLDS didn't. Many splinters formed under strong leadership and than splintered or got disbanded by government intervention in their efforts for their principles and egoistic efforts to rule their followers.

They are all MORMONS - SLC is not.

Please--Big Boy references should only be about the awesome recently restored Union Pacific steam engine...

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

I shall kneel at the feet of Dave the Atheist for absolution.

caffiend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> How do the various splinter groups think of (or
> justify) themselves as "authentic" or "true"
> Mormon saints--if they do at all?

As indicated on that chart, there are two main "clusters" of LDS splinter groups. Those that formed before the migration to Utah, and those that formed in Utah.

The pre-Utah groups generally believed the Book of Mormon was inspired but took issue with Joseph Smith. The two main points of contention were power/leadership struggles and polygamy.

The post-Utah groups generally wanted to keep practicing polygamy. The Edmunds-Tucker act (1887) outlawed polygamy, LDS inc fought in court and eventually lost at the Supreme Court. They abandoned polygamy in 1890 only because Edmunds-Tucker ordered the confiscation of all LDS property and assets.

Most of the post-Utah groups trace their origin to John W. Wooley (1831 to 1928), and/or his son Lorin C. Wooley (1856 to 1934). Both claimed that John Taylor gave a mandate/revelation in 1886, amid the to keep plural marriage going forever.

HWint Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> caffiend Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>

>
> Most of the post-Utah groups trace their origin to
> John W. Wooley (1831 to 1928), and/or his son
> Lorin C. Wooley (1856 to 1934). Both claimed that
> John Taylor gave a mandate/revelation in 1886,
> amid the to keep plural marriage going forever.

oops, typo ...

the supposed 1886 revelation by Taylor came amid the struggle with the Federal Government.

HWint Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> caffiend Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
> The pre-Utah groups generally believed the Book of
> Mormon was inspired but took issue with Joseph
> Smith. The two main points of contention were
> power/leadership struggles and polygamy.
>

there were also a bunch of splinters after Joseph smith's death, those who contended someone other than Brigham should be the boss. The RLDS church, Strangites, etc.

A few before Smith's death even. I think the Rigdonites saw him as a fallen prophet and were operating when JS was alive - correct me if I'm wrong about that.

The Bickertonites split off early as well (after JS' death?). If I remember rightly Alice Cooper spent some time with them as a boy