Polygamists fight to be called Mormon

[Moksha]

Polygamists Fight Church to Be Called Mormon
Thursday, July 10, 2008

SALT LAKE CITY — Polygamy-practicing fundamentalists with religious roots in early Mormon theology are rankled by the mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' campaign to direct the way news organizations define those sects.

"We strenuously object to any efforts to deprive us and others of the freedom to name and describe ourselves by terms of our own choosing," the Principle Voices Coalition said in a statement issued Wednesday. "Fundamentalist Mormons have been referred to by that name since the 1930s, often by the church itself. We are proud of our Mormon heritage."

Fundamentalists revere the same prophets as the mainstream Mormon church, including founder Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, both of whom practiced polygamy. They also share the mainline church's use of the Book of Mormon as a primary text, along with the Doctrine & Covenants, in which plural marriage remains part of scriptural teachings.

I don't know how you can't call them fundamentalist Mormons," said John Walsh, a Mormon and religious scholar, who served as an expert witness for the state of Texas during the FLDS case. "A Mormon is someone who believes in the Book of Mormon ... who has a belief that Joseph Smith was called of God in some way."

From the fundamentalist point of view, they are the "real Mormons" because they continue to adhere to Smith's original teaching that polygamy brought exaltation in heaven, said B. Carmon Hardy, a polygamy expert and retired history professor at California State University-Fullerton.

FOXNews.com - Polygamists Fight Church to Be Called Mormon - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News

Fundamentally, we're Mormon, coalition asserts - Salt Lake Tribune

[Fiannan]

If Mormons are unwilling to accept that breakaway churches can still call themselves Mormon then they should not gripe when various Protestant groups refuse to call LDS people Christian.

These breakoffs took place in the late part of the 19th. Century and the early part of the 20th. Century -- when the main body of the LDS Church stopped practicing polygamy. Prior to this people in the Church were called Mormons -- so when they broke off, since they have the same scriptures and were called Mormons beforehand, why shouldn't they be called Mormons now?

True, there should be a distinction made so the term fundamentalist is as good as any or FLDS or whatever specific church is being referred to. Bit there is no reason to deny them the right to call themselves whatever they please under these circumstances.

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

Fiannan, it's like the Church of England trying to get the Pope to recognize them as "Catholics"..... Similar kind of situation I think; The Church of England broke off from the Roman Catholic church over a difference in marital doctrine (specifically divorce). I've never heard anyone trying to get the Church of England to be called "Roman Catholic"....

As far as I'm concerned they can call themselves whatever they want, but that doesn't mean we have to accept the label of their choosing. If they want to be called Mormons, it's their right to want that; just as it's our right to call them fundies.

And fundamentally, polygamy was a calling. A person would be selected, interviewed, and if found worthy set apart in the calling, just as with any other calling in the church. It was NOT a volunteer exercise like service projects and choir membership. So fundamentally, there's a fundamental difference between fundamentalist Mormons and "true" fundamental mormonism.

[WANDERER]

My interpretation is that fundamentalist Christians are a whole different ballgame to the general line of Christians therefore I would expect the same from fundamentalist Mormans. Many Christian groups do diverge from and disagree with fundamentalist groups.

However, what does happen is that people only identify with the Morman name because they don't understand the fundamentalist attachment and may associate Mormons with the same practices due to a lack of knowledge. I actually came across a situation the other day where someone did call them Mormans and I wasn't quite ready to assume the Mormon expert title because I didn't know what to say. No one corrected them either..so I assume most people don't know that there is a difference...at least within my social context...or don't care. I think if I was presented with another situation I'd just mention that Mormons wear normal clothing and only have one spouse. I just panicked over discussing polygamy LOL...and the whole they don't practice it but they did practice it at one stage kind of thing that was the only response I could think of at the time...and that would have not been much clear assistance in understanding things.

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

Originally Posted by WANDERER

My interpretation is that fundamentalist Christians are a whole different ballgame to the general line of Christians therefore I would expect the same from fundamentalist Mormans. Many Christian groups do diverge from and disagree with fundamentalist groups.

However, what does happen is that people only identify with the Morman name because they don't understand the fundamentalist attachment and may associate Mormons with the same practices due to a lack of knowledge. I actually came across a situation the other day where someone did call them Mormans and I wasn't quite ready to assume the Mormon expert title because I didn't know what to say. No one corrected them either..so I assume most people don't know that there is a difference...at least within my social context...or don't care. I think if I was presented with another situation I'd just mention that Mormons wear normal clothing and only have one spouse. I just panicked over discussing polygamy LOL...and the whole they don't practice it but they did practice it at one stage kind of thing that was the only response I could think of at the time...and that would have not been much clear assistance in understanding things.

The best preperation for a situation like that, I think, is knowledge. I think many Mormons don't know the full story about polygamy so, like you, they're afraid to speak up for fear of getting it wrong or not being able to explain it right or just making the situation worse. Unfortunately, polygamy isn't something that gets a lot of time spent on it in seminary or institute programs.

The best defense I've found that doesn't require an in depth study of LDS Church History is just to mention the biblical patriarchs - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (Israel) and on and on and on - who all had multiple wives. Another good reference is Jacob 2:27 and 30 which clearly states the purpose of polygamy and affirms it as a limited and commanded practice. You could also use this scripture to demonstrate how FLDS and other groups have strayed from the Gospel by continuuing in the practice after the commandment has been revoked.

[skalenfehl]

This would be a good opportunity for a knowledgeable member to make a post with a historical and scriptural account of polygamy and how and why it started in the Old Testament, how and why it started again through Joseph Smith, including who he was sealed to (both women and men), the ties that it has with eternal families, etc, and the difference in doctrine and practice between the LDS church and others such as the FLDS church. This would make a good sticky topic for many members and visitors alike and to assist in quickly quelling heated debates. Would anyone like to give it a try?

[Fiannan]

Fiannan, it's like the Church of England trying to get the Pope to recognize them as "Catholics".....

Well, it is my understanding that the Catholic Church recognizes baptisms by Anglicans if the Anglican decides to convert to the Catholic Church. Also, isn't it true that if a priest in eithre the Anglican or Lutheran or Episcopalian Church decides to convert to the Catholic Church he can keep his family and be considered a Catholic priest -- only with some special limitations as he has a family?

[Tough Grits]

Polygamy (Plural Marriage)

The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. At certain times and for His specific purposes, God, through His prophets, has directed the practice of plural marriage (sometimes called polygamy), which means one man having more than one living wife at the same time. In obedience to direction from God, Latter-day Saints followed this practice for about 50 years during the 1800s but officially ceased the practice of such marriages after the Manifesto was issued by President Woodruff in 1890. Since that time, plural marriage has not been approved by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and any member adopting this practice is subject to losing his or her membership in the Church.

The Bible indicates that Abraham, Jacob, and others of the Lord’s servants had multiple wives (see Genesis 16:1–3; 29:23–30; 30:4, 9; Judges 8:30; 1 Samuel 1:1–2). Joseph Smith asked God why He had permitted this practice and was told that God had commanded it for specific purposes. One reason given by the Lord for plural marriage is mentioned in the Book of Mormon: “If I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall [have only one wife]” (Jacob 2:30; see also v. 27).

After God revealed the doctrine of plural marriage to Joseph Smith in 1831 and commanded him to live it, the Prophet, over a period of years, cautiously taught the doctrine to some close associates. Eventually, he and a small number of Church leaders entered into plural marriages in the early years of the Church. Those who practiced plural marriage at that time, both male and female, experienced a significant trial of their faith. The practice was so foreign to them that they needed and received personal inspiration from God to help them obey the commandment.

When the Saints moved west under the direction of Brigham Young, more Latter-day Saints entered into plural marriages.

Influenced by rumors and exaggerated reports, the United States Congress, beginning in 1862, enacted a series of laws against polygamy that became increasingly harsh. By the 1880s many Latter-day Saint men were imprisoned or went into hiding.

In 1889 in the face of increasing hardships and the threat of government confiscation of Church property, including temples, Wilford Woodruff, President of the Church at the time, prayed for guidance. He was inspired to issue a document that officially ended the sanction of plural marriage by the Church. The document, called the Manifesto, was accepted by Church members in a general conference held in October 1890 and is published in the Doctrine and Covenants as Official Declaration 1 (see also “Excerpts from Three Addresses by President Wilford Woodruff Regarding the Manifesto” following Official Declaration 1).

Just as the practice of plural marriage among the Latter-day Saints began gradually, the ending of the practice after the Manifesto was also gradual. Some plural marriages were performed after the Manifesto, particularly in Mexico and Canada. In 1904, President Joseph F. Smith called for a vote from the Church membership that all post-Manifesto plural marriages be prohibited worldwide.

More recently, President Gordon B. Hinckley has reiterated that plural marriage is “against the law of God. Even in countries where civil or religious law allows [the practice of a man having more than one wife], the Church teaches that marriage must be monogamous and does not accept into its membership those practicing plural marriage” (“What Are People Asking about Us?” Ensign, Nov. 1998, 72).

Groups who teach polygamy today are not part of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Genesis 29:23–30; 30:4, 9; Judges 8:30; 1 Samuel 1:1–2; Jacob 2:27–30; D&C 132

• "What Are People Asking about Us?" Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, Nov. 1998, 71–72
  President Hinckley answers the question, "What is the Church's position on polygamy?"
• "This Thing Was Not Done in a Corner" Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, Nov. 1996, 51
  President Hinckley answers a question from Mike Wallace on revelation, particularly as it related to the ending of the practice of polygamy in the Church.
• Clarifying Polygamy Confusion From Newsroom.lds.org

[prospectmom]

The " fundementalist's " quit folloiwng the teachings of the prophet......... Chose to stay frozen in time with no more prophacy from God to guide and direct them......... Mormons still follow thr Prophet and prophacy we continue to grow and move forward to our goal to return to our Father in Heaven.....

Am I right or wrong?

Please forgive spelling errors

[Fiannan]

Originally Posted by prospectmom

The " fundementalist's " quit folloiwng the teachings of the prophet......... Chose to stay frozen in time with no more prophacy from God to guide and direct them......... Mormons still follow thr Prophet and prophacy we continue to grow and move forward to our goal to return to our Father in Heaven.....

Am I right or wrong?

Please forgive spelling errors

From our perspective, yes. However, I believe the subject is whether groups like the FLDS should be called Mormons. In a strict sense they are if we accept that the people in the Church were Mormons up until Willfred Woodruff. They follow just about all the teachings of the Church except they break off at that point. So yes, they are Mormons but they are not mainstream LDS.

By the way, a few years ago it seemed our Church was trying to shed the name "Mormon" and now we are trying to take it back and not share???