Related Information to Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall...

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall... - Page 48

Tena, it is obvious that it was only a public statement to appease the Federal government, otherwise why he (Pres. Woodruff) will choose to enter a new Plural Marriage after the Manifesto which he signed himself?

What do you think about that? (about Pres. Woodruff entering a new plural marriage after the Manifesto). It is clear to me that it is all a matter of appeasing politics and pressure from the US government.

Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

Tena, sorry, but for me, you just do not get what I am saying, but I will leave it at that, continue as you will.

As for the rest of this discussion it seems we are repeating the same thing over and over. I was reading over the parts recorded in the D&C and noted the following:

1. Besides the declaration, what we have as the reasons behind the manifesto in our scriptures are just excerpts as it says. Notice the date between the official declaration and some of these excerpts, a year or more had passed.

2. On page 293 of the D&C, I am reading the third paragraph and the Prophet is saying that he was commanded of the Lord "to do that" (make the declaration) and then he emphasizes that he went before the Lord and wrote what the Lord told him to write.

3. So now what comes up is this... continue with Plural Marriage and be stopped forcefully or stop of your own accord and live peaceably to talk about it and continue with Temple work. The question in my mind is this... the Lord is basically saying that the US government at that time was stronger than the dictates of the people of the Church in that He could have given a way for them to continue but instead choose to stop it rather than fight for the Saints. Maybe, as was discussed before, the Saints at the time were not worthy or faithful enough. Or as some believe, this is proof the Plural Marriage is not all that necessary to live now for Salvation.

Now, consider this, the Saints in earlier times had their Temple burned, and were forced to move from place to place but they still chose to keep this law. I wonder, why did they not move again, something to think about. The same US constitution that was supposed to afford them protection of their belief instead turned against them.

4. Again as has been brought up a number of times in this thread, why does the Church take the position of not teaching this principle, it is they are afraid of the US government still? Do they not want to look like a cult? Is it that the Lord knows we are not ready? To me we are not ready and just hearing of how Members take this topic with a huge double edged sword and shield one can easily know that it will not be accepted easily. However, to act as though this never happened is a surprise to me and people today still think that Plural Marriage was as a result of crossing the planes and having a need for widows and single women to be under the care of a man - false.

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall... Studies Doctrine Mormon

When President Woodruff wrote about how he saw the temples and meeting houses taken, the leadership in prison or hiding, etc, what was the real message? Was it that we should submit to Babylon's requirements?

Personally, I think it was a great condemnation upon the Church. He was saying that since the members were relying on the arm of flesh (the US) to make their decisions, and were submitting to Babylon in all things, that if they continued the way they were going they would see these things.

In reality, didn't the members show a distinct lack of faith in God by their overwhelming rejection of this principle? They were unwilling to accept a difficult principle, and were especially unwilling to rely on the Lord to fight their battles for them. They got what they wanted. The Celestial Laws of Celestial Plural Marriage (along with the more mundane simple plural marriage) and the United Order were taken from the members as a whole. Later on, the first President to reject plural marriage for himself boasted that his goal was to see every polygamist member of the church put into prison. Thus the church changed from being persecuted to being the pesecutor.

I still believe that plural marriage is a true and eternal principle, and it has not been removed. The strong condemnation has been removed from the people, as we damned ourselves by rejecting it, but He has mitigated the punishment. However, I believe that there is still, somehow, a way for those who really want to obey Him to be able to obey those Celestial Laws. Remember, the only way to receive a specific blessing is to obey the law upon which the blessing is predicated. And several prophets and apostles explained that the highest glory in the Celestial Kingdom is unavailable to those who do not live Celestial Plural Marriage.

Some final questions to consider. The overarching purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, under Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, was to creat a Zion people, people who lived the Celestial Laws, saw into the eternities for themselves, and walked and talked with angels and gods. Are we closer to this ideal than we were in 1890, or further away? Are we, as a people and a culture, closer to Zion or Babylon? Can we live the Celestial Laws without a major change in our culture?

From what I see, we are much further away from the ideals that Joseph and Brigham taught. We are caught up, as a culture and society, fully in Babylon, with only a token nod to Zion in our hymns. Our sacred symbols, ordinances, and practices have been changed and diluted. Many special teachings have been denied.

So, are we closer to Zion than in 1890? I think not.

Page 48 Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

What about all the righteous people in the Book of Mormon? Aren't they going to enter the highest glory because they were not taught and practise this principle?.

I believe we are closer to Babylon. We are wasting too much time trying to look good in the eyes of the world and I think that is the main reason that the Church will never establish Plural Marriage ever again.

Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

I understand this law and that we will one day have it returned. For me, the answer to our current mortality with this however is thus... there may be a day when we are called upon to live this law, but for now I will concern myself with those things that will enable me to live that and other future laws such as the United Order when it returns. I cannot hope to be worthy of any blessing that I do not prepare for and I honestly feel that those who will be asked to live it will almost be those who may have least considered it. Let us ensure we look towards the Prophet for guidance and not become overwhelmed with the probabilities of what may be or should be. In my small and tiny perspective I feel that I cannot question the current way the Church chooses to deal with it, because the Lord is in charge and I have not all the facts. He runs the show, in this too I must acknowledge Him and His purpose, His timing.

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall...

When I recently attended my uncle's funeral, we visited a little cemetary in Utah where several generations of my family rest. There are two grandfathers ( great and great-great, I believe) who both have two wives lying beside them. I didn't know until recently that my mother's side of the family had been in plural marriages, and it was very interesting to see it literally carved in stone.

Plural Marriage That Day Women Shall... - Page 48

Does that make you feel any different in any way or form (positive or negative) towards this subject knowing that you come from ancestry that practised it?

Plural Marriage That Day Women Shall... Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 48

I don't know if it really changes my opinion about plural marriage, as I've stated my opinions here previously. However, it makes me realize that without that particular practice, I may not exist -- at least not within this family group.