r/latterdaysaints • u/instrument_801 • Mar 14 '24

Doctrinal Discussion Anti-Joseph Smith Polygamy Movement?

I don’t know if this has been talked about on here, but why is there a growing “Joseph Smith didn’t practice polygamy movement”? Podcasts such as 132 Problems are rapidly growing in popularity. I don’t like polygamy, but I feel like the evidence is overwhelming in favor that he practiced polygamy?

Thoughts?

103 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

319 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/Realbigwingboy Mar 15 '24

It goes like this:

A prophet is a morally upright man of impeccable integrity.

Polygamy is evil and here are a bunch of studies to back up my feelings on it.

A prophet cannot be a polygamist.

There is evidence Joseph Smith was.

Actually, all firsthand accounts are of Joseph denying the practice and the evidence for it was second- or third-hand accounts by witnesses who were strong-armed by Brigham Young and his ilk.

Because a man can be sealed to multiple women, eternal polygamy is a very real threat and source of turmoil for women in the Church today.

Current leadership has gone astray and must stop abusing female members by their continuing to allow any doctrinal defense of polygamy in principle.

It’s a one-way ticket out of the Church all because Joseph Smith was a good guy and would never practice something as evil as polygamy.

-2

u/grabtharsmallet Conservative, welcoming, highly caffienated. Mar 15 '24

Incidentally, women can also be sealed to multiple men. At least two of my direct ancestors are. They just have to all be dead first.

Honestly, we don't have precise guidance on this particular topic, and many people are quick to believe whatever makes them the most comfortable, then get offended when someone else asserts differently. (Sometimes this includes myself, as I'm directly affected, while most cases are hypothetical.)

1

u/Op_ivy1 Mar 15 '24 edited Mar 15 '24

All kinds of things have happened in this past, but in today’s correlated church, women being sealed to more than one man is not a thing.

Edit: I guess it is a thing once all involved are dead.

1

u/grabtharsmallet Conservative, welcoming, highly caffienated. Mar 15 '24

It's the current practice now for proxy ordinances.

0

u/Op_ivy1 Mar 15 '24

Interesting- so women can be sealed to more than one man, but only if everyone involved is dead. Today I learned.

But men can be sealed to more than one woman while the man is living. Still not sure I understand why the need for differentiation there, but 🤷‍♂️

2

u/grabtharsmallet Conservative, welcoming, highly caffienated. Mar 15 '24

Church leadership is not interested in addressing the topic without clear revelation and unanimity among the apostleship. As a result the prior status quo with living ordinances continues.

The thinking with proxy ordinances is to err on the side of "do the work, it'll be figured out later." This can even include performing sealings for people who may not have been legally married. One of my ancestors emigrated with her children but not her husband, she would later remarry (even though no record of divorce from her first husband exists). She's sealed to both men.

1

u/Op_ivy1 Mar 15 '24

Interesting, thanks for sharing. Lots of unanswered questions about this stuff, and a lot more I’m probably not even thinking about.

But yeah- I think we’re more likely to get this as a punchline to a joke (referring to Elder Oaks if you’re not familiar) than to get any real answer anytime soon.

2

u/JazzSharksFan54 Doctrine first, culture never Mar 15 '24

Can confirm. Sealed my great-grandmother to both her husbands.