Washington Post: Five myths about Mormonsim

[Paperback Writer]

Sorry I just don't get all this whining about what the church should teach. The church shouldn't lie when asked about things. The church shouldn't supress information. But that's about as far as the church has responsibility for any of this stuff.

While I agree for the most part, it's almost like one is saying that "white lies" are OK for the church. And this can be troublesome for a church that is hierarchal and authoritarian.

Specifically, it was doctrine at one time that a man had to be sealed to at least 3 wives to achieve the highest degree of exaltation. The Willie and Martin handcart companies were promised by their priesthood leader that they would be protected on their journey despite leaving Winter Quarters in mid/late August.

Since the LDS church emphasizes obedience to priesthood authority, I don't think they want to muddy the waters with historical narratives that would put into question the qualifications for exaltation that will prove to lead to marital unhappiness or begin a journey that will lead to death of one's family by hypothermia. Those parts are not necessarily faith promoting and might cause one to question priesthood authority...like when asked to volunteer time and money towards prop 8.

It's the exercise of authority that can be problematic. At one time I used to mock the Catholic Church for their position on birth control and how many American faithful Catholics simply ignore it. I don't do that anymore.

[LA Ute]

I look at this inoculation thing as a model that can be expressed this way...

X = active members who become aware (really aware, like the people on this board) of difficult historical issues
Y = portion of X who leave the church because of it

I'm going to throw out really ridiculous numbers just for illustration...

current state
X = 20% of church membership
Y = 30%

after inoculation
X = all
Y = 20%

On the question on how this would relate to new members, I think it would be a similar trend. A lot more would become aware and the church would only have marginal improvement on salvaging those who become aware.

I'm going to ponder this (I think you're on to something). The main difficulty is how to do the inoculation. I'm not saying it can't be done, just wondering how.

[wally]

Of course you don't understand. Some day, when you want to understand, you will.

There is not some gordian knot about how to teach facts and have a spiritually nourishing class. I appreciate you playing LA Ute's card with your "it can't be done" dismissive questions, but I also recognize when someone is exemplifying the problems I'm trying to address.

"Physician, heal thyself."

I like your idea of an institute class for discussing these issues. It perfectly fits the demographic and meets the need about when and where the need arises. (BTW if the SLC Institute offered a “Polygamy” class, you better believe that there would be a waiting list!) By keeping it in Institute as a voluntary class, you also avoid the potential of creating turmoil for the totally uninformed.

I think that part of what surfah was saying (if I might attempt to interpret) is that as with many church history issues even an intelligent and inquisitive mind reaches fatiguing point where the issue is no longer interesting or relevant, a point where someone simply moves on to something else even if there is myriad additional facets left to analyze. Only few people have the stamina to continue the analysis. In fact I don’t consider it a coincidence that many of the folks on this forum that contribute most to these particular discussions are those higher educators, or attorneys, etc., those professions which require such stamina!

I think that it is the same fatigue that sets in for all of us when we have occasion from time to time to <sigh> “have to explain polygamy….again” to an outsider. It is exhausting. It is like when a relative CUF noob (ahem) asks a CUF veteran to explain an inside joke, or some reference to Cougarguard drama. Who has the time or energy to retell the whole story? If he is lucky, he’ll get a one sentence synopsis, a link and the opportunity to try to figure the rest of it out on his own. So too with polygamy and church history issues, we generally regurgitate short, canned, incomplete (even partial) truths/explanations, for the convenience. Then again, sometimes that is all the inquisitor really even wanted: a short answer.

Maybe I am missing the mark here, but I just thought that I’d give the "serious answer" thing a whirl.

[jay santos]

With the explosion of information though, X is ever-increasing. It would probably never get to the point where innoculation is beneficial on the margin.

What would be optimal is if the Church could discriminate whom to innoculate. I think an apostate named Bob McCue has determined that people with INT (introverted, intuiting, thinking) personality types on Myers-Briggs are more likely to leave the Church. Give your children the MBTI and determine how much innocuation they need.

INTJ here.

[Jackrabbit]

INTJ here.

what about your kids?

Also, he said that higher IQ does not make one more likely to go apostate.

[jay santos]

what about your kids?

Also, he said that higher IQ does not make one more likely to go apostate.

INTJ, low IQ. Double whammy.

[Surfah]

Of course you don't understand. Some day, when you want to understand, you will.

There is not some gordian knot about how to teach facts and have a spiritually nourishing class. I appreciate you playing LA Ute's card with your "it can't be done" dismissive questions, but I also recognize when someone is exemplifying the problems I'm trying to address.

"Physician, heal thyself."

Another reason why I typically abstain from this forum.

If my questions seemed dismissive, I apologize then for their tone. But I was being genuine. I only chose the topic of polygamy because it was the genesis of this thread.

I don't know how the Church can correct this issue. That is all I said. I never said that it can't be done. Nor did I ever say it shouldn't be done. Rather, I actually think something should be done, I just don't know what or how.

Earlier you said the solution is no mystery and here you say it is no Gordian knot. So professor, how do you propose to teach uncorrelated material to a world-wide Church that is faith affirming and spiritually uplifting? What is the curriculum? What is the material? Who teaches the material? How does the Church source teachers and train them? And in the end, how do you keep all of this from just becoming correlated once again? These aren't meant to be dismissive questions. These are corresponding questions that I don't have good answers for and why I don't think the solution is as simple as you posit.

[TripletDaddy]

I will take a first cut at what a proposed correlated lesson plan on Polygamy might look like in the manual...

1. Provide names and dates of marriages, or at least confirm the numbers of spouses for prominent practitioners...ie, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc.
2. Provide a greater understanding of how polygamy was practiced in the NT....who practiced it? under what circumstances? Lay a foundation for the restoration of the same principle thousands of years later.
3. Some cultural references to other groups that have practiced polygamy and how there are similarities/differences
4. Read through Sec 132 and the Manifesto
5. Discuss our modern day practice of polygamy via sealings of multiple wives to one man and we why believe this to be in harmony with both the Manifesto and Sec 132. This is a paradox that must be addressed as we clearly practice something that we simultaneously claim to not practice.
6. Explain to members the question that everyone has but nobody seems to answer plainly..."all you women out there that are married to a guy that has been sealed to someone else....YES, when you are in Heaven you are going to share your husband with another woman. Or more." If this is what we believe and this is what we practice in our temples, then clarify to people now. My own MIL is in this situation. Her husband is sealed to his deceased wife and to my MIL. When the topic of polygamy comes up, she nervously says that "it will all work out." But she flatly refuses to acknowledge that she will be in a polygamous situation. Clearly our members as a whole do not understand what the heck is going on yet they are agreeing to participate in these ordinances without understand the eternal impact, if any. This needs to be explained plainly and clearly. Since we are talking about correlated material, it would not be speculation since the Church would be responsible for putting the lesson together.

There are other points, I am sure, that would not require the Church to speculate....avoiding topics of conjecture such as "why did Joseph ask women to marry him when they were already married to someone else?" That, we don't know, so leave it out of the lesson. But, "to whom will I be married in the afterlife?"...well, that one we should be able to answer. And so we should answer it.

[CardiacCoug]

I will take a first cut at what a proposed correlated lesson plan on Polygamy might look like in the manual...

1. Provide names and dates of marriages, or at least confirm the numbers of spouses for prominent practitioners...ie, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc.
2. Provide a greater understanding of how polygamy was practiced in the NT....who practiced it? under what circumstances? Lay a foundation for the restoration of the same principle thousands of years later.
3. Some cultural references to other groups that have practiced polygamy and how there are similarities/differences
4. Read through Sec 132 and the Manifesto
5. Discuss our modern day practice of polygamy via sealings of multiple wives to one man and we why believe this to be in harmony with both the Manifesto and Sec 132. This is a paradox that must be addressed as we clearly practice something that we simultaneously claim to not practice.
6. Explain to members the question that everyone has but nobody seems to answer plainly..."all you women out there that are married to a guy that has been sealed to someone else....YES, when you are in Heaven you are going to share your husband with another woman. Or more." If this is what we believe and this is what we practice in our temples, then clarify to people now. My own MIL is in this situation. Her husband is sealed to his deceased wife and to my MIL. When the topic of polygamy comes up, she nervously says that "it will all work out." But she flatly refuses to acknowledge that she will be in a polygamous situation. Clearly our members as a whole do not understand what the heck is going on yet they are agreeing to participate in these ordinances without understand the eternal impact, if any. This needs to be explained plainly and clearly. Since we are talking about correlated material, it would not be speculation since the Church would be responsible for putting the lesson together.

There are other points, I am sure, that would not require the Church to speculate....avoiding topics of conjecture such as "why did Joseph ask women to marry him when they were already married to someone else?" That, we don't know, so leave it out of the lesson. But, "to whom will I be married in the afterlife?"...well, that one we should be able to answer. And so we should answer it.

I like that. A few of the reasons we don't see a lesson like that (again, specific to polygamy but I think you could say something similar on other topics as well):

1. Even at the highest levels of the Church I think there are differing opinions on what exactly the Church doctrine on eternal polygamy really is these days. I think some even orthodox Church leaders would consider it sort of an accidental relic of the past.

2. The desire not to highlight controversy because of fears that it will be "bad for business." (see above)

3. Leaving the doctrine in this murky state allows it to be whatever an individual Church member wants it to be. Church members who think the doctrine of eternal polygamy is set in stone find it easy to believe that. People like your MIL who reject it don't hear anything to the contrary so they are OK, too.

[NorthwestUteFan]

RE: #2 - were there any prominent practitioners in the NT? The OT is full of them, but I can't recall any in the NT. At least I don't remember any church leader-types.

#6 - I don't know whether this is a dreaded 'correlated' answer, but I understand the temple sealing ceremony to be in force for each individual person as well as for the couple. When one spouse dies things can get tricky.

But when a couple divorces, their sealing ordinance is left intact until such time as the woman remarries. Just because the marriage is dissolved s no reason to punish the individuals by removing promised blessings. My SIL (finally) was able to get the 1st presidency to grant her temple divorce the week before she was to marry my brother, although her official divorce was finalized years earlier.

[jay santos]

I will take a first cut at what a proposed correlated lesson plan on Polygamy might look like in the manual...

1. Provide names and dates of marriages, or at least confirm the numbers of spouses for prominent practitioners...ie, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc.
2. Provide a greater understanding of how polygamy was practiced in the NT....who practiced it? under what circumstances? Lay a foundation for the restoration of the same principle thousands of years later.
3. Some cultural references to other groups that have practiced polygamy and how there are similarities/differences
4. Read through Sec 132 and the Manifesto
5. Discuss our modern day practice of polygamy via sealings of multiple wives to one man and we why believe this to be in harmony with both the Manifesto and Sec 132. This is a paradox that must be addressed as we clearly practice something that we simultaneously claim to not practice.
6. Explain to members the question that everyone has but nobody seems to answer plainly..."all you women out there that are married to a guy that has been sealed to someone else....YES, when you are in Heaven you are going to share your husband with another woman. Or more." If this is what we believe and this is what we practice in our temples, then clarify to people now. My own MIL is in this situation. Her husband is sealed to his deceased wife and to my MIL. When the topic of polygamy comes up, she nervously says that "it will all work out." But she flatly refuses to acknowledge that she will be in a polygamous situation. Clearly our members as a whole do not understand what the heck is going on yet they are agreeing to participate in these ordinances without understand the eternal impact, if any. This needs to be explained plainly and clearly. Since we are talking about correlated material, it would not be speculation since the Church would be responsible for putting the lesson together.

There are other points, I am sure, that would not require the Church to speculate....avoiding topics of conjecture such as "why did Joseph ask women to marry him when they were already married to someone else?" That, we don't know, so leave it out of the lesson. But, "to whom will I be married in the afterlife?"...well, that one we should be able to answer. And so we should answer it.

You're assuming all these points are clear and accurate doctrines. You're assuming there are clear, logical, and known reasons and answers. I dont think this is the case.

[TripletDaddy]

You're assuming all these points are clear and accurate doctrines. You're assuming there are clear, logical, and known reasons and answers. I dont think this is the case.

Most of my questions don't require doctrinal answers. How many wives did joseph have? What other cultures practice polygamy? These arent doctrinal questions.

As to why we claim to not practice polygamy yet still practice it in the temple, that is a doctrinal question, yes. One that deserves an answer. The church should come up with one. if the church cannot, that is pretty embarrassing. At the very least, the church should stop claiming that we don't practice it and, as you say, simply say "we apparently don't know whether we are still practicing it and we don't really know who will be your spouse in the future." that sounds like an uninspiring answer, but if you are correct that the Prophet and the leaders of the Church don't know the reasons, then it also happens to be an accurate answer.

[TripletDaddy]

RE: #2 - were there any prominent practitioners in the NT? The OT is full of them, but I can't recall any in the NT. At least I don't remember any church leader-types.

#6 - I don't know whether this is a dreaded 'correlated' answer, but I understand the temple sealing ceremony to be in force for each individual person as well as for the couple. When one spouse dies things can get tricky.

You are right, I meant OT.

Also, you did give the dreaded correlated answer because you totally sidestepped my MILs question. You did it well, though, by acknowledging that you don't really know (saying it can be "tricky" in the event of a death) and then proceeding to expound on the scenario of temple divorce, which was never at issue in the question. You must work for CES.

[SeattleUte]

I will take a first cut at what a proposed correlated lesson plan on Polygamy might look like in the manual...

1. Provide names and dates of marriages, or at least confirm the numbers of spouses for prominent practitioners...ie, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc.
2. Provide a greater understanding of how polygamy was practiced in the NT....who practiced it? under what circumstances? Lay a foundation for the restoration of the same principle thousands of years later.
3. Some cultural references to other groups that have practiced polygamy and how there are similarities/differences
4. Read through Sec 132 and the Manifesto
5. Discuss our modern day practice of polygamy via sealings of multiple wives to one man and we why believe this to be in harmony with both the Manifesto and Sec 132. This is a paradox that must be addressed as we clearly practice something that we simultaneously claim to not practice.
6. Explain to members the question that everyone has but nobody seems to answer plainly..."all you women out there that are married to a guy that has been sealed to someone else....YES, when you are in Heaven you are going to share your husband with another woman. Or more." If this is what we believe and this is what we practice in our temples, then clarify to people now. My own MIL is in this situation. Her husband is sealed to his deceased wife and to my MIL. When the topic of polygamy comes up, she nervously says that "it will all work out." But she flatly refuses to acknowledge that she will be in a polygamous situation. Clearly our members as a whole do not understand what the heck is going on yet they are agreeing to participate in these ordinances without understand the eternal impact, if any. This needs to be explained plainly and clearly. Since we are talking about correlated material, it would not be speculation since the Church would be responsible for putting the lesson together.

There are other points, I am sure, that would not require the Church to speculate....avoiding topics of conjecture such as "why did Joseph ask women to marry him when they were already married to someone else?" That, we don't know, so leave it out of the lesson. But, "to whom will I be married in the afterlife?"...well, that one we should be able to answer. And so we should answer it.

polygamy in the New Testament?

There is no part of traditional Christianity that has practiced polygamy. The Romans and Greeks condemned and outlawed it. Christianity's roots are really more Classical than Judeo, ancient Christianity as we know it and informed the Christianity that made Europe was more Classical then Jewish, and even the Jewish part was Hellenized. These were civilized people. They were repelled by polygamy.

Polygamy was practiced by Christians in antiquity only to the extent that the Euro tribes (and maybe, say, Bedouins before Islam) practiced it after conversion. But Christianity worked to eradicate it. It was a real probem. In late antiquity Augustine wrote compellingly against it, to his European Christian brethren.

It was not unlike trying to eliminate slavery from the New World. Polygamy is barbarism pure and simple. It has not been practiced in urban, literate societies. Societies that practiced it have been backward, tribal, often nomadic, and usually existing a really long time ago.

[LA Ute]

You are right, I meant OT.

polygamy in the New Testament?

A failure to communicate....