- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I had an interesting conversation with Anne Wilde on polygamy. (1) We discussed John Taylor’s uncanonized 1886 revelation supporting polygamy. I did not realize that Wilford Woodruff took a plural wife in 1897, seven years AFTER the Manifesto. Was that just a cover to get the government off the back. (Note Utah got statehood in 1896, so did WW think he was scot-free?) (2) There was a very interesting discussion about priesthood being separate from the church. It honestly reminded me of the famous Elder Poelman talk where he talked about the difference between the church and the gospel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_E._Poelman Can you lose priesthood with excommunication? (Anne says no.) What do you all think?
(3) Anne weighs in on whether the LDS Church is in apostasy. What do you all think?
https://gospeltangents.com/2017/10/25/taylors-1886-polygamy-uncanonized-revelation/ Sorry for so many questions, but it was a very interesting conversation, and I’m curious what you all think?
Question: What wife did WW take in 1897? As far as I could find, the last wife he took on record was in 1877. “Can you lose priesthood with excommunication?” Follow up question. Who will recognize an excommunicated member’s priesthood IF he has still it? The Church? No. The general membership? Probably not. God? Doubtful. A few random people? Of course. Authority of any kind only counts if it’s recognized.
“Is the LDS Church is in apostasy?” Apostasy, by definition, is the renunciation or abandonment of a religious belief. For the Church to be in apostasy, it has to have had a specific, correct belief in the past that it no longer follows in the present. For example, if God really wanted us to ban blacks from holding the priesthood, or to practice polygammy. Then, we would be in apostasy. Saying “The LDS Church is in apostasy for not allowing gays to marry” would be by definition incorrect, because we never allowed them to marry in the first place. I cannot think of doctrine we’ve abandoned, that I agree with. Therefore, I’d say we are not in a state of apostasy.
You could argue that what we’ve really apostasized from was Christ’s original Church. But that is more of an apostasy from an apostasy from an apostasy from an apostasy… And once that happens, you can pretty much say anything you don’t agree with is apostasy.
This was a good explanation of some of the fundy “doctrine” – or how they make it work. I didn’t know much of any of this until about 5 years ago. At first I just wrote if off as lunacy, but now that I don’t have much belief in the LDS church’s claims – I find it very interesting. Not from a religious perspective, but just more from an intellectual perspective. I have loved Lindsey Park’s “year of polygamy.” I over used the word “wow” while listening to those. She makes a point that Polygamy isn’t practiced by the LDS church, but the history of polygamy runs through most every part of Mormonism. Interesting history – that is still unfolding today.
gospeltangents wrote:
Can you lose priesthood with excommunication? (Anne says no.) What do you all think?
There are many ways to look at the function and purpose of the priesthood. If you look at it as the authority to steward/minister in the LDS church, then yes; if you’re excommunicated you lose the priesthood.
If you divorce the priesthood from the church, then we have a discussion. A discussion that for me would start with, “What is the priesthood?”
gospeltangents wrote:
Anne weighs in on whether the LDS Church is in apostasy. What do you all think?
Ha. I hate to play this game but “what is apostasy?”
Apostasy is relative. Employing hyperbole… the LDS church of October 27, 2017 is in a state of apostasy to the LDS church of October 26, 2017. The church evolves to survive, like we all do. Apostasy doesn’t have to be a pejorative term.
gospeltangents wrote:
I had an interesting conversation with Anne Wilde on polygamy. (1) We discussed John Taylor’s uncanonized 1886 revelation supporting polygamy. I did not realize that Wilford Woodruff took a plural wife in 1897, seven years AFTER the Manifesto. Was that just a cover to get the government off the back. (Note Utah got statehood in 1896, so did WW think he was scot-free?)(2) There was a very interesting discussion about priesthood being separate from the church. It honestly reminded me of the famous Elder Poelman talk where he talked about the difference between the church and the gospel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_E._Poelman Can you lose priesthood with excommunication? (Anne says no.) What do you all think?
(3) Anne weighs in on whether the LDS Church is in apostasy. What do you all think?
https://gospeltangents.com/2017/10/25/taylors-1886-polygamy-uncanonized-revelation/ Sorry for so many questions, but it was a very interesting conversation, and I’m curious what you all think?
1) There were so many weird things happening with polygamy that I’ve given up trying to explain it to even a small degree. It seems like in one of Juanita Brooks’ books she stated that John Lee loaned one of his wives to Q12 George Albert Smith for a while and that G.A. Smith fathered a child with Lee’s wife. I cannot find the reference. The only explanation I can find is that they practiced polygamy because they could.
2) Who knows. But I contend that a stake president or bishop don’t have the necessary keys to break (through excommunication) a sealing that was performed in a temple by a sealer.
3) No comment except to say that the church today resembles to a small degree the church restored by Joseph Smith. It’s not necessarily a bad thing – it’s simply not the same church and same doctrines. In the past two years I’ve heard this phase a lot “the restoration is not over, but it still continues today.” I think that phrase 30 years ago would be frowned upon.
[Admin Note]: I re-changed the title by substituting “actual polygamist’s” for “fundy”. We don’t like when other people refer to us by using derogatory nicknames. We shouldn’t do it to others, no matter how we view them.
The same applies to beliefs.
1) Other than recognizing that polygamy was practiced after the Manifesto (including new Polygamous marriages) I have given up on details. I do believe the Manifesto was more about politics (the church keeping its property and Utah gaining statehood) than it was about actually ending plural marriage. 2) Interesting question and as others have pointed out it depends on what one believes the priesthood is. If the priesthood is a church given authority to act on behalf of the church in certain things like ordinances, then yes, one could definitely lose it if excommunicated. I don’t think that’s the general definition of priesthood in the church and that most believe is is actual power and authority to act in God’s name or on God’s behalf. I lean more toward the former than the latter, but I also recall being taught that once one holds the priesthood one always holds the priesthood (and in the case of excommunication the authority is suspended).
3) Related to # two, if there was indeed a great apostasy then it is possible in my mind that the church could be in apostasy. I’m not sure Joseph Smith would recognize it were he to visit a sacrament meeting or listen to a General Conference. Someone pointed out that change is necessary for the church to survive and I agree with that. The same could be said about Judaism and Catholicism – they were simply changing, adjusting, and evolving. But this is coming from someone who doesn’t believe there was a “great apostasy” in the way it is taught in the church.
First off, who’s Anne Wilde? Secondly, here’s a few ideas as to how the church could be in apostasy from an early viewpoint:
* Priesthood.
* Polygamy
* Altering scriptures.
* Not really doing the whole prophecy/revelation thing
* Mainstreaming
* Quasi-monotheism
* Not gathering to Zion
* United Order
* Business interests
* Succession by seniority not revelation
Of course no offense was intended by the use of the term “Fundy.” In talking with Anne, I’m not sure how useful the term “fundamentalist” is. It sounded to me that they weren’t super comfortable with the term, and perhaps polygamist would be better, given that (1) the FLDS church uses it, (2) Fundamentalist can refer to more doctrines that polygamy, (3) a person like Rock Waterman or Denver Snuffer is not a polygamist but could correctly be called a fundamentalist (or perhaps an originalist.) Anne didn’t really like the term “fundamentalist.” Anne is a polygamist, and a pretty well recognized expert on Mormon polygamy. She was the second wife of Ogden Kraut. She wrote a chapter in John Hamer’s book “Scattering of the Saints”, and has collaborated with Brian Hales. Here’s another post about her:
https://wheatandtares.org/2010/10/18/history-of-fundamentalist-mormons/ John Dehlin interviewed her for Mormon Stories back when it was new: I’ve always been fascinated by people who still practice polygamy. When I was young, I was disgusted, too. Then I learned about Joseph’s polygamy and had to work through that, becoming much less disgusted. Now that I don’t have to believe it was of God, I’m disgusted again.
One impression I got from John’s interview was that Anne was her husband’s favorite wife. Of course that would weigh heavily in her sentiments. I wonder if his other wives think as highly of polygamy as she does.
If this thread becomes a discussion of our views of polygamy, it will do downhill fast. Let’s stay away from that and focus solely on the interview. I think the favorite wife point is a valid concern when evaluating someone’s view as a practicing polygamist wife. It would be interesting to hear her take on that question.
Old Timer wrote:
If this thread becomes a discussion of our views of polygamy, it will do downhill fast. Let’s stay away from that and focus solely on the interview.
Good catch. Thanks.
I listened to this interview. I felt that she seemed very respectfully as a person that clearly sees herself and us as part of the divine movement of the restoration. She spoke of the scripture that talks about God setting His house in order. I got the impression that she would include all of us (SLC Mormons) as co-inhabitants of God’s house. Assuming that my impression was correct, it would be interesting to ask if she also felt that the Reorganized church, Strangites, temple lot church, and others are part of the house and kingdom of God.
Thank you.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.