Mormon Polygamy–BIG LOVE Brings Spotlight Back to Utah
I’ve had a lot of people write and ask me what I think about Big Love, HBO’s new series that is causing such a furor in Utah, and a lot of speculation elsewhere in and out of the United States.
Big Love features a polygamous family in the burbs of Salt Lake City, and is very clear that practicing polygamists today are NOT mainstream Mormons.
LDS President Wilford Woodruff issued a “manifesto” in 1890 decreeing that polygamy would no longer be practiced. There was one–and only ONE reason–for this manifesto. Brigham Young was dead, now Utah realized they could not have their own little country and they needed to become a part of the United States, and so they had to finally give in and follow the laws of the land.
Notice this was a manifesto, and NOT a prophecy. Any day now polygamy could start up again, and in fact, it is still believed that polygamy will be practiced in the Celestial Kingdom, the highest of God’s kingdoms, where only true believing Mormons will reside.
I’m always amazed at the angry emails I get from (mostly) young Mormons who have NO idea that this is true. They even argue vehemently against it until I show them proof. Then they shut up and go away.
It is true that today’s Mormons do NOT practice polygamy, and anyone who is caught doing so is excommunicated. But where the hell do they think it CAME FROM IN THE FIRST PLACE? Many of the fundamentalist groups that practice polygamy are actually LIVING THE LDS CHURCH WAY JOSEPH SMITH TAUGHT IT! If you wanted to get technical, you might say they are the “true Mormons” while the others have evolved into a modern-day mainstream church.
But KNOWING that so much of Mormonism’s past is tied into polygamy has made our legislature and leaders go easy on polygamists and polygamy. They are well aware, as happens every time, that whenever you bring up the subject of “polygamy” people start giving funny glances at the Mormons. If you just don’t TALK about it, maybe no one will look into the history.
Right now the Mormons are upset because Tapestry Against Polygamy is pointing a finger squarely at them for not doing more about polygamists and how they abuse the system and treat women, children, and even young boys.
Sorry, but I side squarely with Tapestry.
In an interesting and concluding paragraph in the Des News story, I saw this quote.
HBO Entertainment President Carolyn Strauss said “Big Love” will also draw a clear line between the LDS Church and polygamists.
“I think what the show does very clearly is, it makes a very big distinction between the mainline church and the characters in the show,” Strauss told Deseret Morning News television columnist Scott Pierce. “It is interesting how many people are ignorant about the Mormon Church and think that (it) actually does condone polygamy.”
Guess what, Strauss? In many ways, the Mormon Church DOES condone polygamy. By not stepping out and prosecuting polygamists, what are they doing? I know, I know, if they do it, they have to look uncomfortably at their own seamy past and their relatives, and all that. But Tom Green basically paraded his pedophile tendencies, and his bevy of Barbies, on national television for YEARS and authorities only did something when Utah was vying for the Olympic games.
Utah has ignored polygamy for years.
Now, back to the manifesto of 1890. According to Michael Quinn, esteemed historian, most people agree that the “manifesto” was little more than a tactical maneuver on the part of the LDS Church.
What was the 1890 Manifesto? After the document’s acceptance by the October general conference, the Salt Lake Herald (of which Apostle Heber J. Grant was publisher) editorialized that the anti-Mormon Salt Lake Tribune “pretends the declaration is a revelation . . . although no one to day has heard anyone except the lying sheet say it was a revelation.”
In other words, Mormons were still practicing polygamy well after the “manifesto” was issued.
More from the Quinn article.
Were new plural marriages actually performed after the 1890 Manifesto? In 1907, the First Presidency announced, “When all the circumstances are weighed, the wonder is, not that there have been sporadic cases of plural marriage, but that such cases have been so few.”13 In 1922, Church Historian Joseph Fielding Smith wrote that “some plural marriages had been entered into contrary to the announcement of President Woodruff, and also a statement made by President Lorenzo Snow.”14 Assistant Church Historian B. H. Roberts wrote in the Church’s centennial history that “the injunction of said Manifesto had not been strictly adhered to even by some high officials of the Church of Latter-day Saints and people misled by them.”
The truth of the matter is, polygamy is a very sticky issue even for the Church today. There are no easy answers, which is why they resort to apologists and blustering.
Many Mormons left the US and went to Canada and Mexico, according to the Quinn article.
But in 1947, President George Albert Smith told the general conference that since September 1890, “there have been no plural marriages solemnized in violation of the laws of this land by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”23 That statement was amplified in 1955 when the Church’s Deseret Book Company published a book endorsed by an apostle, wherein the author stated: “For several years after the Manifesto was issued, however, members of the Church in Mexico and Canada were allowed to practice plural marriages, but later it was discontinued throughout the Church.”
In short, polygamy was around a lot longer than LDS Inc. wants people to think, and it certainly explains why Utah’s leaders have been so loathe to prosecute polygamists.
And so loathe to have shows like Big Love come out.
March 19th, 2006 at 9:03 pm
Good post Natalie. I’ve been having a rather pointless back and forth on your pal Jeff Lindsay’s board. He’s educating us all with a link to a FAIR article.
Really, I know better than to post over there, but polygamy, related to the LDS church, always sets me off.
March 20th, 2006 at 12:06 am
Girl, where ya been?
I’ll have to scoot over there and check it out, even though my buddy Jeff often censors me just cuz.
We’ll have to see what comes of it….
March 20th, 2006 at 1:06 am
I tried to take a bit of an internet break. It didn’t last long.
March 20th, 2006 at 1:11 am
I just caught your post over on Mormanity–glad I read it before it goes “poof”!
I really, truly admire your frankness. It’s what people need to hear.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:50 pm
I do not get “Big Love” up here in Canada yet. BUT, I know a number of my girlfriends in the States who are members that have seen it and love it. Then again they fall into the same catagory as me and my views of the church.
I guess my question is why is this such a contentious issue for people? I really don’t get it. The LDS church doesn’t have anything to do with current sects of polygamists that exist in North America. There is a history of polygamy in the church, yes. Does it happen in the church now, no? The church has stated that it will not practice anything in contradiction to the laws of the land…so it goes to say that unless the governments of the world legalize polygamy that the church will not be practicing it again. And what does it matter if members of the church believe that polygamy will be practiced in the eternities…a good portion of people don’t even believe that there is anything after you die!? So what exactly is the issue? Is it conspiracy theory or what…seriously, I don’t get it.
Although I do have to say that since governments are now leaning towards legalizing same sex marriages (which I could care less about), that some idiot WILL say that s/he is being discriminated against (you know, fundamental rights in the Charter of Rights/Canada or Constitution/USA) because they want to practice polygamy. Now, I didn’t think this up…it was a big broohaha in the media up here in Alberta when the whole same sex thing was in full force (because there is a HUGE sect of crazy ass polygamists on the border between Alberta and British Columbia). AND it wasn’t member of the church that brought it up, and the LDS church wasn’t slagged about in the media as a result. As well, it was stated that if someone brought this to the courts they would probably win because (and I don’t know about yours) but the justice system in Canada is seriously f’d up!
I am well versed in the history of the LDS church. Actually, I am also well versed in the history of the Catholic church. What is apparent to me that many churches have histories that are not all daisies and roses and most church establishments will continue to screw up in the future…it is an inevitability.
An interesting post…and I am very much looking forward to seeing Big Love up here!
K.
March 20th, 2006 at 5:29 pm
Wendy: How about a link to Jeff Lindsay’s board.
Thanks,
Steve
March 20th, 2006 at 6:48 pm
Hi Steve, Jeff’s blog has been offline a lot today, but here’s a link:
http://mormanity.blogspot.com/2006/03/informed-perspective-on-polygamy.html#comments
I’ve left the debate. It’s pretty pointless.
March 20th, 2006 at 9:42 pm
If this repostes, soory.
I know this has nothing to do with your blog. But I just infinished your book Wives and Sisters. I have to say that book was GREAT! The plot build up, the character building. You could see how Allison’s personality and life changed and developed, and how she matured through the book.
I started the book at 3 am and finished it at 1am. I couldn’t put down the book. There are only a few books that I just can’t put down, and now yours is included. I can’t wait for your next book to come out.
I hope you continue to write, your a great author.
March 21st, 2006 at 7:13 pm
Wow, Gin, that is wonderful to hear! I’m so glad you wrote. Can I put your quote on the front page of my site?
March 22nd, 2006 at 1:07 pm
Hi Natalie…
My great-grandmother married the youngest son of a polygamist family. My grandfather was born, I think, 1910. My great-grandfather, after the birth of four of his children, brought a woman to the house that he wanted to marry.
My great-grandmother threw both of them out of the house and then divorced him, which at the time never happened. She homesteaded in Idaho Falls near her parents and brothers. She raised her four children by herself. I met her as a young child. Strong woman.
She died in the early 80’s at 98 years old.
March 22nd, 2006 at 9:37 pm
Natalie,
I read your blog weekly and love your insight and loved your book. I have never posted before but I simply cannot help myself on this one. I just returned from Jeff Lindsay’s blog and loved your posts but it I do not think that they where even read just the first fews lines until they can come up with a retort.
I am a shocked that the debate on that site has now turned to the fact that there is no solid proof that Joseph Smith had sex with his two fourteen year old wives. Now tell me who truly believes that you marry someone who is fourteen and do not have sex with them!!!! Come On.
Lora
March 23rd, 2006 at 11:10 am
I have not been around any mormon doctrine for a long time, so I was kind of curious about the Jeff Lindsay blog. It was horrible.
I could not believe that one of the guys who was attacking the woman right and left also accused those some women of attacking him. I think one of those women was Wendy.
It has always been my opinion that marrying 14 year old girls are wrong, no matter who does it… or what culture. But to say that it was different in the 1830’s… what a load of crock…
I come from original and old polygamist families. If you talk to any of the women of my family they do not really believe that polygamy will return. AND in fact it is only the men that look at those good old days with fondness.
I am happy to say that I have pulled myself from the Church’s tentacles. It took six years in the U.S. Navy and marrying a gentile. But even with the knowledge of my wickedness (LOL I drink coffee), my family has FAITH that I will come back when my husband’s influence wanes. I even had a sis-in-law tell me that I needed to leave my husband so that I could make it to the Celestial Kingdom.
(snort)
Cynthia
March 23rd, 2006 at 7:17 pm
Hi Kris,
I certainly agree that all churches have history, and a lot of them try to bury and hide those histories, and that is where I take issue. The spinning of the LDS Church is so far out of hand it’s ridiculous.
Now they are spinning about the church’s past racist teachings, claiming they didn’t know WHY God said no black could have the priesthood. PLEASE. It’s all there in the history books. Why the hell do you lie about things that can be easily shown to be true? I don’t get that….
March 23rd, 2006 at 7:30 pm
Dear Natalie,
Do you remember the Cain and Abel sermons before the 1980s? and then the Church became really quiet…
I had heard that there was a lawsuit or something happened. Most of the members did not hear or refused to hear what was going on.
And then, THE PROPHECY…
Gosh dang. Another reason why I am not a member. LOL
Yours, Cyn
March 24th, 2006 at 8:56 am
Hi Lora,
Thanks for being such a faithful blog reader! I hope that I am at least SOMETIMES entertaining!
March 24th, 2006 at 1:56 pm
I always find you entertaining and informative Natalie. I really do, because you make me think.
I guess I think about it like this, that you are right, all the church history is there in books and is easily acessed by anyone if they only look. It is easily “spun” for the good and the bad. The accuracy of many history books (LDS or not) is always suspect in my mind for the good and the bad for ANY topic..really, how many history books do we KNOW contain blantantly inaccurate information, quite a number. If there are that many blatantly historically inaccurate then do we manage to catch all the ones that just slightly “skew” things a tinge, or are biased in some way? I remember finding a “history” book once in high school about how the Holocaust didn’t really happen despite all the tangible/photographic/etc information out there. I digress…The problem with history books is that not enough people use their brains to weed out the crap from the substantial. People don’t look at the intention behind these books that are written either. Perhaps a book written by an anti-LDS person might just contain anti-LDS sentiments? I agree thought that more people should take the time to read books NOT from the church bookstore once in a while, and at least use their brains about it.
Generally speaking the church does not broadcast it’s history. Whether you want to call that spimming or not it is a moot point. Neither does the Catholic church (see the Inquisition/Crusades etc.) Neither does the Protestant Church (surrounding the Salem Witch Trials and that the KKK bases a lot of it’s teachings primarily from Protestant Fundamentalist churches). Don’t even get me started on Islam.
What I am trying to say is, does the past “sins” of the church currently affect my personal relationship with God? Not really. So currently I am a member of the LDS church who has a strong tesitmony in the gospel. If I, like so many of church members and ex-church members out there based my faith solely on church history and not upon a solid conviction in the gospel I can certainly see why so many choose to leave the church. As a member of the church do I exuse the mistakes that members of the church have made in the past, no. BUT my belief and conviction of the gospel is not based on people in the church, it is based on a personal conviction of the basic principles of the gospel that the church supports.
I hope that made sense. Thanks for indulging me a little.
K.
March 24th, 2006 at 1:58 pm
Sorry about my crappy spelling too…that one word is “spinning” not spimming…arrrrrgggghhh! LOL.
K.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:02 pm
I left mormonism when I was 29–from an 8th generation pioneer family with clear polygamous roots. Of course, my family disinherited me and shunned me, but what is all this fascination mormons have with polygamy? It clearly brings out the worst in human nature–both male and female.
God brings out the best. Satan brings out the worst. In the Bible God clearly tells the OT patriarchs “not to multiply wives”. Polygamy cannot be from God, and adulterers will never be with God according to Apostle Paul in the New Testament.
But apart from that, polygamy treats women and children very poorly. A friend of mine in L.A. worked on the editing for Big Love, and never having been around mormons or mormon doctrine, he was appalled at what he saw in The Big Love.
All you sweet little temple worthy mormons (I was also until I left) who pride yourself in yourself and your religion should study more of the history. Good fruit cannot come from a bad root or bad foundation.
EAM/L.A.
April 7th, 2006 at 9:44 am
I have a few questions regarding your statements above and why you have chosen to not label them as your own personal beliefs?
I would like to ask you to read the following statement and question that I have copied directly from you. And then please take the time to answer your own question….
It is true that today’s Mormons do NOT practice polygamy, and anyone who is caught doing so is excommunicated. But where the hell do they think it CAME FROM IN THE FIRST PLACE?
Best Regards,
JR
April 16th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
April 16, 2008
Allegedly Despite the Militant feminist CDAW in Edmonton Alberta with the Inner Faith Counsel they have never openly appealed to the Federal Government of Canada or the United Nations to come and clean out the Mormons and their Polygamy.
Allegedly People in Edmonton Alberta survive the Mormon infested Government by on invovlement in the system; the Inner Faith Counsell; the mental health professions Financial Benefits people have seriously aided and abetted the Mormons and their practices.
Allegedly their seems to be a connection between Catholic, Anglican and Mormon Illuminati as described in Goals of the Illuminati a the rise of the Vagina Talks were women are gathering and focusing on thier vaginas.
Signed Green/ Allegedly