Schizo over polygamy

[Jeff Lebowski]

The FLDS fiasco and Sooner's poll got me to thinking. We haven't really abandoned polygamy as a church. We still practice celestial polygamy (see Elder Nielson's recent sealing) and Section 132 is still in the D&C. It is most definitely part of our heritage. And yet, we never talk about it at church in any official capacity. When is the last time you heard a conference talk on polygamy? In the famous Sixty Minutes interview, GBH avoided the topic like a plague ("It's in the past!"). How about a sacrament talk on polygamy? To my knowledge (maybe I missed something - correct me if I am wrong), it is not discussed in any of the official lesson manuals. It seems to be a taboo topic for discussion.

Ironically, it is the arguably the single issue most identified with our religion by non-LDS. We send our young missionaries out in the field and they are bombarded with questions about polygamy and they have precious little background on the topic.

It's an odd contradiction. Should the church address the issue in a more direct fashion? Or is the current strategy appropriate?

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

It's an odd contradiction. Should the church address the issue in a more direct fashion? Or is the current strategy appropriate?

What issue?

[splitbamboo]

We don't talk about living the law of consecration as well (but we do get a lot of talks about tithing, service, etc.).

It's not current practice so why dwell on it?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by creekster

What issue?

If you are being sarcastic, bravo.

Otherwise, I am referring to the fact that we still "believe" in polygamy, but we don't practice it at the moment (actually, we partially practice it). So it seems to be a core doctrine in many ways, yet the topic is taboo in official settings. Hence the term "schizo" in the thread title.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by splitbamboo

We don't talk about living the law of consecration as well (but we do get a lot of talks about tithing, service, etc.).

It's not current practice so why dwell on it?

We don't currently practice the Law of Moses either, but we discuss it all the time.

[splitbamboo]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

We don't currently practice the Law of Moses either, but we discuss it all the time.

The law of Moses in context with the higher law.

Not in the sense that "geez, you used to hoist cows over the alter..."

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

If you are being sarcastic, bravo.

Otherwise, I am referring to the fact that we still "believe" in polygamy, but we don't practice it at the moment (actually, we partially practice it). So it seems to be a core doctrine in many ways, yet the topic is taboo in official settings. Hence the term "schizo" in the thread title.

I was being a smart aleck, but it was very patient of you to respond.

[MikeWaters]

Forget talking about it, START THAT BABY UP AGAIN!!!

[Archaea]

For those older gentlemen, with other children, RC, Creekster and Lebowski, how have you introduced the intricacies of the Gospel to your children.

Let me explain. As you three have read, unlike their dimwitted father, my children have some abilities. So I discuss matters age specific with them.

I even in a cautious manner discuss some of the more prickly issues, and so far it hasn't shaken their faith. For example, all my kids know that Joseph Smith had at least 33 wives, with the littlest saying, "that's a lot of women."

We discuss the NRSV together with the King James version. Surprisingly my 14 year old stated, "I don't know why people find the KJV so hard, it isn't hard, it's just poetry like."

And I told him he's going to read the scriptures in total this year. So one weekend he'll read the BoM and some others the Bible which we'll discuss. So far so good. But how far into history do you go with a fourteen year old?

How does one prepare a future missionary? My daughters never wanted to go, even though we have frank discussion, they do the scripture study at their own pace.

[SoonerCoug]

Yeah, the Church needs to clarify its stance on polygamy. A lot of people are confused about where the Church really stands on the issue. The topic is totally neglected. It's especially confusing for new converts, I think.

Denial of polygamy as a divinely inspired law would diminish Joseph Smith's authority. I'm sure this debate has raged within the Q of the 12.

I'm willing to bet that Pres. Monson does something about the issue within the next 12 months. Polygamy has haunted the Church for far too long. The FLDS case has made it far too obvious that polygamy can often become an abusive, cultish practice. (I do think the Texas CPS have grossly overstepped their boundaries here. But...whether there were child brides or not, there is no doubt that the polygamist wives are mentally + emotionally abused.)

In my opinion, here is what needs to be done if church leaders want a clean break from polygamy as doctrine:

They have to remove or modify D&C 132, and then say they don't understand it. They would have to state that they do not agree with or endorse polygamy on any level. Then allow all men AND women to be sealed for eternity when they remarry after divorce or death of a spouse. Tell people that everything will be sorted out in the hereafter, which is what we already believe.