The Confusion Returns? – Plural Marriage – FLDS vs LDS

Apr 23

Recent events in Texas with the raid on the FLDS (Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) compound may bring back the confusion that led many people to perceive LDS as the same as the FLDS, in particular the issue of plural marriage.

I was watching a (Canadian) Global news report where a FLDS man was interviewed about the recent raid and removal of his children. During this interview this man clearly showed his inability to articulate his beliefs and justifications for plural marriage. He had referred to a passage in the Doctrine of Covenants, section 132, where God explained that King Solomon and King David were justified in the concubines given to them. This passage was his justification to practice plural marriage.

When hearing this from the FLDS man, I was dismayed, because the misuse of this passage from the Doctrine and Covenants was evidence of how his understanding of God’s word was very poor and showed me how corrupt FLDS really proved to be.

I wanted to speak on this matter of plural marriage, just in-case there are some LDS members who feel somewhat confused by these events with the FLDS. To assist them in understanding this doctrine of plural marriage, to sufficiently to deal with the flak that may come their way.

Plural marriage was prohibited by this Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also known as the “Mormon Church” or the “LDS Church”, back in 1890 by the prophet and president, Wilfred Woodruff (you can read about it here ). Plural marriage is not essential for salvation and exaltation. The passage(s) in Doctrine and Covenants S.132 refers to the explanation as to when plural marriage is not a sin. Plural marriage requires God’s approval and cannot be assumed just because it occurred within the scriptures.

The people at FLDS are those who denied the rightful Church Government, setup by God, through his chosen prophet Joseph Smith and went off to create their own, in accordance to their personal pleasures. By this spirit of denial came the same denial that a rightful authority must exist with a person who exercises any doctrine in the scriptures. Without that rightful authority, a person acts wickedly. This says that the FLDS beliefs that they can have plural marriage is a wicked belief, as they are acting without rightful authority from God, especially when plural marriage was prohibited by God’s prophet. Since they proclaim to follow the Book of Mormon, Doctrine of Covenants and Pearl of Great Price, which was established by God through Joseph Smith, who also established the rightful Church Government. With the current practices of the FLDS, they have clearly acted hypocritically and in defiance to the directions of God’s doctrines.

It is clearly shown within those books that Joseph Smith was the rightful prophet when his authority and position to lead the Church was challenged, where others took it upon themselves to give revelation to the Church circumventing the chosen prophet. This was clearly denounced by God through Joseph in the Doctrine of Covenants (section 28). This is one of many prime examples given in the scriptures to clearly tell us that there must be an assignment of rightful authority to exercise particular practices within the Lord’s Church. Yet some members did not abide in the rules of the Church and broke off to create their own church, hence the FLDS.

With this spirit of denial of rightful authority, the FLDS created their own beliefs about plural marriage and as a result misused the scriptures to justify polygamy. The use of DC 132 is the example of how they ignored the obvious manner in which God assigned plural wives to King Solomon and King David. For it was also in the scriptures that both of God’s kings were chastised for taking on other plural wives of their own choosing and did not get the right from God to do so.

This was the scriptural example of where the taking of God’s doctrine without rightful authority leads to sin.

Currently, whether or not the police in Texas are right in how they handled this issue of abuse and plural marriage, is a subject that is still under review, but what is clearly a sin is the act by FLDS to impose plural marriage as they did. I am sure this LDS Church denounces the actions of FLDS as much as I do.

Share|

denial of authority, deny the prophet, false beliefs, false doctrine, FLDS, Joseph Smith, plural marriage

Comments

Mark

October 2nd, 2008 at 11:47 PM

To Mr. ldsrevelations:

A note on Mr. Michael Quinn, I understand some of his conflicts with the Church. He is a practicing homosexual and for a person to accept his own homosexual state as “OK”, even to a small degree (as that was my impression from some of his writings), would lead himself into conflict with the policies of the Church. The Church will not accept the state of homosexuality within the doctrines and practices of the Church. If a person is not repenting his homosexuality, then he presents a problem to the Church.

I read a PBS interview with Mr. Quinn and some of the statements he made there are far fetched and not believable. He also claimed God told him that he was correct in publishing his research works and the apostles were wrong to correct him. Right there I saw the influence of the devil. The Holy Ghost does not promote conflict.

To accept Quinn’s work as authoritative, I believe, is a stretch. A person who is in conflict with the Church will also research and write in the same manner. IN the same way you have done on your blog. He does not realize this and neither do you. Researching with conflict in your heart will result in nothing more but conflict. No truth exists in conflict.

This is not commenting on whether the information on the history of the Church is accurate or not. This is commenting on the fact that you are accepting “personal disagreements and conflict” as a basis for your dissent with the Church.

By the way, how is it that you found and chose only my blog among the thousands out there on the Internet?

Mark
LDSRevelations

September 30th, 2008 at 3:30 PM

Mark,

Found your old post. A few points here.

First, Fundamentalist Mormonism is closer to the Mormonism that Joseph Smith practiced than anything Thomas S. Monson is doing. Truth be told the modern church doesn’t know what to do with the plural marriage now. It obviously is doctrine but it has been socially unacceptable since Joseph Smith married Fanny Alger in 1833.

Gordon B. Hinckley on Larry King said polygamy is not doctrinal. What exactly did he mean?

The Manifesto in 1890 was just a PR document to get the US government off the churches back. Plural marriage continued amongst the broader leadership until 1904. Some apostles entered in to plural marriages as late as 1925.

Mormon Scholar Michael Quinn wrote the following on the topic:

http://www.ldshistory.net/pc/postman.htm

http://www.lds-mormon.com/quinn_polygamy.shtml#essay

And yes, Utah only became a state because of the 1890 Manifesto. The government allowed the territory in to the Union and then rumors began to surface that polygamy was still in practice. Apostle Reed Smoot was elected to the US Senate in 1902 but the Senate would not seat him because of the continued practice and began the Smoot hearings in 1904. In response, the Brethren issued the 2nd Manifesto in 1904 rejecting the practice (again) and actually excommunicated 2 GAs who still were practicing polygamy (one was Apostle John Taylor— son of prophet). Ironically, a number of Apostles continued to approve and enter into plural marriages for years after. See links above.

To the original point of your post—the confusion about polygamy and the LDS—the issue is less about whether the people confuse LDS and FLDS. People think of polygamy when the hear “Mormon” because in the American experience Mormons (both LDS and FLDS) own the practice. See my posts at http://www.ldsrevelations/blog
Mark

June 2nd, 2008 at 6:42 PM

Craig, thanks for the comment. Plural marriage was stopped in 1890 by President Wilford Woodruff. (see info here: http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/history/plural_marriage/manifesto_eom.htm )

According to this info, FLDS began in the 1930′s ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter_Day_Saints )

FLDS did not carry on what Joseph started, for that is assuming plural marriage is an idea favoured by Joseph Smith and started it on his own accord. That assumption also takes the position that revelation with God did not or cannot occur, forcing and making the “revelations” Joseph had into personal agenda’s and desires.

Plural marriage by the FLDS was wrong and against God. This because the FLDS is not God’s Church, it is merely the entity of apostate ideas that left the Church. When plural marriage was practiced by the LDS Church in the beginning, only select priesthood members were given the authority by God to practice it AND women were given the choice to accept it or not. No woman was forced to partake of plural marriage in the LDS Church. As much as Emma Smith was the Prophet’s wife, she did not accept plural marriage. Her reactions to it and her actions after the death of Joseph Smith, as toward the RLDS, show her disbelief.

Brigham Young partook of plural marriage because he was directed by God to do so, but he did not like it much.

The fact that God directed President Woodruff to cease plural marriage was to do with the protection of it’s members and had no political agenda attached. The fact that God directed his Church to practice plural marriage is a statement that politics was not in his (God’s) plan. This because God does not appease political plans of any person, in or out of the Church, and since God can see the future, surely his direction for starting plural marriage had spiritual reasons since he saw the opposition plural marriage would create.

The fact that Utah became a state is not because plural marriage was stopped, it was for other reasons. Do not forget that in the early days of the LDS Church, it was venomously attacked and rejected by many people, even those in the US government. So to think that ending plural marriage gained their favour over and above the bias and hatred that prevailed against the LDS Church, is not a reasonable claim.
Craig

June 2nd, 2008 at 4:58 PM

FLDS are just continuing what Joseph Smith started (in a revelation as a Prophet) and also Brigham Young among many of the early Mormons. The only reason Woodruff(had a revelation) changed the ” Doctrine” of the LDS was that the U.S. Government was pushing the Mormons on the issue and if they wanted to become a state, they had to declare Poligamy anti-Mormon.