Mormons and Polygamy: Practice Versus Belief

Only Abraham, asked to sacrifice his only son, is said to have received a more difficult command from God to follow than did the Latter-day Saints of the 1800s. Unfortunately, it what the church is best known for. When people hear the word Mormon or Utah, one word generally comes to mind.

Polygamy.

The collective Church of Latter-day Saints flinches every time this subject is brought up, and in recent years it has come up often. Each member is quick to denounce it and remind everyone that the church no longer practices polygamy and will excommunicate anyone found to be in a polygamous relationship.

The truth? Yes. The entire truth?

Not exactly.

No one is really sure when the practice of polygamy began. In Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, a biography lauded by both LDS and non-LDS alike, Richard Lyman Bushman concludes there is evidence enough to suggest Smith was a polygamist by 1835, but that he also kept this part of his life private at first.

History doesn't allow for much on the factual end of the spectrum for the early years. There is only speculation based on the various, sometimes polarizing, sources available. The biography does state, however, that Smith had between twenty-eight and thirty-three wives by 1844--a significant percentage of whom were already married, sixty percent of those to LDS men. The ages ranged from young teens to fifty-eight years old.

But what could possibly the justification in such activity? The most often referred scripture to answer such a question is in Genesis 15:2-3:

And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the LORD hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai. And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.

The Doctrine and Covenants, a book of modern LDS scripture of recorded revelations Smith and a few of his successors received, provides a similar answer. This particular revelation, Section 132, was recorded around July 1843. It addresses what is known as "the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, as also plurality of wives." It begins with God recognizing Joseph's concerns about why some in the Old Testament were allowed to have multiple wives.

Behold, and lo, I am the Lord the God, and will answer thee as touching this matter. Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same. For behold, I reveal unto you a new and everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory...God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises. Was Abraham, therefore, under condemnation? Verily I say unto you, Nay; for I, the Lord, commanded it. D&C 132:2-4, 34-35

The section continues on to discuss Isaac and Jacob's wives and concubines, David, Solomon and Moses, assuring Smith and the Church that polygamy is okay if the Lord commands it.

Though the Lord commanded what is believed to be an important revelation of its time, it wasn't until 1841 when Smith revealed the law of plural marriage to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the second highest group of leaders within the church. Soon thereafter the men of the Twelve began to take on additional wives as well. By the time Smith died, twenty-nine other men added at least one other woman to their family under his authorization. Bushman writes "Plural marriage was practiced secretly in 1843 and would be until well after Smith's death. The doctrine was not publicly announced until 1852." Even his first wife, Emma Hale, wasn't always aware when he married another woman, and with the ones she did know about, she "vacillated between acceptance and rejection...temporarily accept[ing] them before regretting her action and demanding that all [wives] leave." (490-91).

Though he worried about Emma's feelings regarding the matter, Smith believed this was a true revelation sent from God and as such, demanded his obedience. However, Bushman writes "Joseph ordinarily followed the commandments punctiliously, as if disobedience put him at risk. In the case of plural marriage, he held off for two or three years before marrying Fanny Alger [his first polygamous wife], and then after this one unsuccessful attempt, waited another five years. The delay showed an uncharacteristic reluctance, hard for one who feared God" (437).

It's good to note that not every member of the time accepted the doctrine. One of these members, fifteen year old Lucy, writhed under the idea when Smith approached her. Bushman quotes, "Lucy felt 'tempted and tortured beyond endureance until life was not desireable.' 'Oh let this bitter cup pass,' she moaned" (491-92). Lucy kept refusing the proposal until Smith relented and left, promising her a "manifestation," or direct answer by way of vision from God, which is said to have come that night. Lucy soon entered into the bonds of marriage with Smith. This, apparently, was the pattern with which most women responded to Smith's proposals.

Although some claim Smith's relationship with his other wives was purely spiritual, Bushman says there is evidence to the contrary. Sensing this herself and unable to come to terms with her husband's revelation, Emma ultimately denounced the doctrine and threatened to leave her husband if he kept practicing (498). She and Joseph had a rather volatile relationship, both unable to reconcile their love for one another and their mutual, firm belief in Smith's calling as Prophet--the doctrine of polygamy being the core issue.

So if this is an eternal law from God's own mouth to His prophet, why did the church discontinue its practice back in 1890?

It has much to do with the struggle for Utah to become a state. According to an official Utah website, the initial applications for statehood came as early as 1849-1850, but Federal officials were not excited about the prospect of giving the Mormons control over such a large plot of land (then proposed from the Colorado Rockies to the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California and Nevada).

The LDS community continued to push for statehood anyway. The aforementioned site writes "This occurred during the Republican party's first presidential campaign featuring a platform plank denouncing the 'twin relics of barbarism,' slavery and polygamy, the latter of which the Latter-day Saint leaders had recently acknowledged to be part of church doctrine and practice." This combined with then U.S. President James Buchannan's concerns of a supposed "Mormon rebellion" did not help the Latter-day Saints to have their wish of statehood granted.

In 1876, the LDS people attempted once again to have the country recognize Deseret as a state (the name suggested before changed to Utah). At this time, the rest of the nation began to consider leveraging the Church's practice of polygamy against them. The practice was made illegal and, among other, lesser important requirements, the Saints were told that they were to abandon this doctrine, and then they could keep their church and their temples and also become a state.

Then President of the Church Wilford Woodruff is said to have entered into lengthy and tireless prayers over the subject, torn between obeying God and obeying the Twelfth Article of Faith, which professes loyalty and subjection to presidents and in obeying the law of the land. Woodruff's answer finally came in 1890 and is recorded in what is known as "The Manifesto"--it's important to note this is not considered a revelation. It states:

The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for ... any of the men in this temple ... for all (temple sacraments) would be stopped throughout the land. ... Confusion would reign ... and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice.

The church relented, discontinuing the practice and determining to excommunicate anyone who continues its practice.

So polygamy is no longer a part of the LDS people's lives--but is the belief? How can a so called "eternal law" be shut down so easily? Is God going against His own word?

Not exactly. Jacob 2:13 in the Book of Mormon states:

Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none. ... For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

This scripture, with regards to the Church's practice, says that that part of the Church's time is done. As there is a season for everything, there is a season for having many wives, and the Lord has His reasons to give and take it away. The year 1890 saw no need for it, the Lord having tested and proved all who He intended to.

Really?

Here's the interesting part that goes unnoticed by many, even within the church. While it is not taught that the membership should accept multiple wives in this life, it does and can occur in the hereafter.

Consider Molly and Peter are sealed, or marry, in the temple--the only place where a couple can marry for eternity. Now, if Molly were to pass away, Peter could marry another woman in the temple and still be married to Molly. In the eternities, Peter would have both wives--more, if circumstances permitted and he wanted to.

Rough Stone Rolling addresses this as well. "[Joseph's brother] Hyrum had been reluctant to accept the principle himself until [Smith's successor] Brigham Young explained that it allowed him to be married to both Jerusha Barden, his deceased first wife, and to Mary Fielding, his current spouse" (495).

There is no real understanding of why God would institute such a practice at any time, though many members strive to find one, ranging from the need to care for an older woman to the need to raise up a righteous generation of LDS people. The fact is that there is no real understanding of why God would authorize such activities.

No doubt many are grateful the practice has stopped, but to think it is gone from LDS doctrine completely would be inaccurate at best. I stop short at saying the Church hides this information, because that would be inaccurate as well. It is just not advertised.

Some say it's because of its sacred nature that we don't speak of it often. They don't want people who don't understand to desecrate what is believed to be a revelation from God. But it is because of its sacred nature that I believe this is information all current and prospective members should know. The problem is that few are aware-and, as a married LDS woman with no desire to share her husband even in the afterlife, I think they should be.