Have any of you met any Mormons who are TBM and absolutely true believing in either Russell Nelson or Gordon Hinckley as a prophet,yet know nothing of polygamy in the history of the church,or either deny it plays any role in the modern church beliefs?I as a Mormon just thought it was practised to relieve a shortage of men in Brigham Youngs day.I thought current break away polygamists like the Colorado City people are just inspired of Satan to cause the current Mormon church a bad name.

They mostly minimize it and say the practice was relatively rare, which is nonsense.

The Community of Christ, formerly known as "The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints," denies that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy.

I tried to practice polygamy once, during the "trio skate" at a roller rink.

In retrospect, I felt not the least bit prophetic...and way stupid.

Polygamy has never interested me, but if it did, I would like to think I could get it right without any practice.

Edited to Add: I always sat out the trio skate. In retrospect, perhaps that was a mistake.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2021 03:18AM by scmd1.

I don't remember anyone ever denying it, but they downplayed it ("it wasn't very common") or they made excuses for it ("when the Mormon Battalion departed, there weren't enough men among the saints").

Once I knew my own family's history, I certainly couldn't deny it. My maternal grandmother was one of 10 wives of my grandfather. I never knew my grandfather (he died when I was an infant) and my grandmother died before I knew about the polygamy. I knew my mother grew up very poor, which can be explained by the fact that my grandfather had separate households for each of his families.

My least favorite excuse for polygamy was "It was done to protect the women, because there was a shortage of men due to the fact that so many men had been killed by anti-Mormons."

That excuse makes me want to VOMIT. No woman was ever "protected" by polygamy.

BTW, I recently found out that many of my neighbors in my middle class ward in SLC (Nibley Park) were "practicing polygamists."

So yeah, the Mormons believed in it, believed that it was so important that they had to keep on doing it, believed that they had to keep on lying about it to protect the menfolk.

Doncha know that it is the MENFOLK what need the protecting?

My high school friend, who was a convert, was fed the line that it was to take care of the widows.

Meanwhile, I remember doing the research and finding that contrary to myth, the number of men and women on the frontier was roughly equal.

I also heard the line that it was "to protect the widows" as men weren't just killed by "anti-Mormons," but died on the pioneer trek.

I went to elementary school with one of BY's g-grandchildren, and we thought it was kinda cool and interesting that she proudly said he had 56 wives (or whatever the number was). OTOH, we were 5th grade and it was the go-go '60's.

Anyway, what appears to me to be the latest phraseology, since there's no way they can get away with denying it, is using the "it was difficult to follow the Lord's commandment" tactic. When you read church-sanctioned bio bits about plural wives, they usually end with something like "they were faithful throughout the trials of this difficult commandment." IOW, no mention of Celestial Glory because, you know, D&C 132, but an angle that they were strong pioneers living a tough life as though polygamy was a natural thing they had to battle like harsh elements of snow and floods and heat.

Thanks. This one is new to me and I thought I had heard them all. Its' seriously lame though. OMG. I mean, how do you keep a straight face when saying that? Or do they just cross their fingers behind their backs?

LDS members aren't Mormons any longer, D'oh!

Downplayed. 'Give brother Joseph and Brother Brigham a break'... Something the righteous need not concern themselves with.

From the official Mormon website Mormon Newsroom (accessed 11/30/14):


"The standard doctrine of the Church is monogamy, as it always has been, as indicated in the Book of Mormon (Jacob chapter 2:27-30)".

I resigned 20 years ago, so can only speak for that time period but I only knew one person who didn't learn of polygamy until AFTER his mission, which boggles my mind.

That said, he wasn't the brightest guy I knew and grew up in the "mission field."

Most Mormons, as far as I knew, believed the "Brigham started it because of the shortage of men due to persecution" myth.

A handful knew Joseph Smith started it and practiced it but they were typically missionaries, bishops, scholars, etc.

But I don't think they knew much of the dirty details. I think they thought the same myth that it was because of shortage of men.

Which is worse, polygamy or the serial monogamy practiced by Henry VIII?


There's money riding on the answer, so don't be messing around!

The problem wasn't Hank's serial marriages: it was his serial divorces!

. . . not to mention a couple of ceremonial beheadings.

Dare I award you, whom I like and respect, a "whoosh?"

;-)

Award away! I accept any and all awards, which would include Darwin awards were being dead not a prereq.

Okay. . .

Well, I'll still give you the Darwin Award. I'll just postdate it by a few decades and expect you eventually to fulfill your side of the bargain.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2021 06:20PM by Lot's Wife.

You would never believe just how honored I am.

>>Which is worse, polygamy or the serial monogamy practiced by Henry VIII?

Polygamy. I hesitate to say what number of serial marriages is too many, because I know of people who got it right on the third try. But I think there comes a point when it would be better to give up on it. What was it that Liz Taylor said about herself, that she just liked being married?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2021 12:32PM by summer.

As a nevermo what I notice is downplaying. They never bring it up. If you do, they minimize it, e.g. "it was never common".

My perception is most Americans buy this, because they really don't know better.

To take one example, almost all Americans know who Mitt Romney his. Try finding even one American who knows that Romney's great-grandfather had five wives, That his great-great-grandfather had 12 wives. That the Mexican Romneys are descendants of Miles Park Romney, who fled to Mexico to practice polygamy with four wives and 30 children.

And why don't Americans know this? Because Mitt downplays it. Like a lot of Mormon downplaying. Which has something to do with how little most Americans know. Sure there's some giggling about Mormons and polygamy, but most buy that it was rare. Few understand it was integral to Mormon faith and life, that people like Miles were willing to become exiles rather than give it up, etc.

Your point is correct, but I am not sure Romney or anyone is downplaying things. Do any of us, for instance, know anything about Joe Biden's or Donald Trump's great-grandfather? Even their grandfathers?

Polygamy was a major phenomenon, a major difference between Mormonism and other faiths. But if you go back a few generations there are all sorts of skeletons in closets. I once asked a friend if her ancestors were polygamists, and she said "yes, but only the Irish kind," meaning her grandfather had several families at the same time.

Romney's beliefs and actions now are assuredly relevant and, to that extent, his family history. But virtually no one knows anything about politicians' great-grandfathers.

OK I'll bite: what does Biden downplay about his religion?

I didn't know I was saying he downplays anything. I'm not sure Mitt does either. Well, he doesn't talk about the temple ceremony but I don't think there is any obligation to reveal everything about one's religion.

My point was simply that we don't generally ask detailed questions about candidates' grandparents. No one volunteers that stuff, generally. So I'm not sure why anyone should expect Romney to say, "now this may be relevant, so I must disclose that my great-grandparents were polygamists who fled the United States."

I'm merely suggesting that voters and society do not generally expect disclosure regarding a candidate's ancestors.

Oh please: it's remarkable stuff.

Yet as far as I know Mitt has never mentioned it; certainly never brought it up. That's downplaying.

Now I can understand why. But that doesn't make it less downplaying; just explains the reason he's downplaying.

To bring it full circle: in my experience mormons don't deny polygamy, but they downplay it. Mitt was just an example. We could cite others: the mishies, temple murals, any public presentation of LDS, any private conversation I might have with a Mormon. You could go hundreds of these, and polygamy Just Wouldn't Be Mentioned.

If people want to ask, they can ask. Romney is under no obligation to say, "hey Americans, let me explain why you shouldn't vote for me."