Archive for March 2nd, 2007


Friday, March 2nd, 2007

I stumbled upon a friends, sister’s blog, who had been disgusted by this program on ABC. ( I won’t link to her blog out of respect, I already put a comment, which I’ll post later.) I found it interesting because I had the exact opposite reaction as this woman. I was refreshed to see a more normal polygamous sect.

In short there’s a community not far from Colorado City AZ which has modern facilities and houses, and is the home to a polygamous Mormon sect. Spouses are chosen by women saying whom they want to marry or feel they are inspired to marry and then family and ultimately the elders, or priesthood leaders of their church, decide if it is right. If it’s decided then the guy finds out he’s to have a wife. They practice a law that resembles the Law of Consecration which the Church practiced early on. For them this is a community of a lot of tradesmen and so they build homes for one another free of charge on the weekends. They are exposed to the world, but not in the world. Their is no dating or premarital sex, and a polygamous marriage is required to enter the highest kingdom, or Celestial Kingdom

The woman’s blog was disgusted by it. She, or commenter’s to her post, were upset that they mentioned the Church and Joseph Smith. But in reality they are a break off of the Church, and they believe the words of Joseph Smith literally, that a man must have at least two wives to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Where as we just believe you must be sealed by the holy priesthood to one man or one woman, depending on your sex, to enter the highest degree of glory.
In reality I felt they disclosed well that this sect was not apart if the main LDS church and that the LDS church had not participated in polygamous marriage for over a hundred years. Really you can’t keep repeating that the whole show. Once is enough. They showed The Book of Mormon, because this sect uses and believes The Book of Mormon. Someone was upset about that. Well to get upset at a polygamous Mormon sect for using The Book of Mormon is like the Christians getting upset at the LDS church for using the Bible. It’s apart of their beliefs and does not solely belong to the mainstream LDS church, though we have the publishing rights. It’s apart of their church’s heritage, just as it is ours. Just as we are still Christians for believing in Christ they are still Mormon’s for believing in the Book of Mormon. Just different Mormons and not the official Mormons.

I guess as you will read form the copy and pasted comment, that I thought this sect showed a normal and refreshing polygamous sect. They are peculiar for practicing yes, but they aren’t stuck in the 1800’s because of it, like Colorado City.
I saw them as a look into how the Church might practice polygamy in the present days, but hopefully with a little more dating and allowance of both spouses to chose. (Though I don’t know how I’d like it if my husband went on dates with other women….Luckily I don’t have to worry 😉 )
I thought it was good. She didn’t.

Here was my comment:

First I want to say they did disclaim that this sect is separate from the mainstream LDS religion.
Second I thought they resembled somewhat how polygamy would be if we still practiced it within the Church.
Third, they’re a break off sect of the LDS religion, of course they use The Book of Mormon. That was a major part of our religion in the early years.
Fourth I think this polygamous sect shows a hero worship of Joseph Smith, something that only until recently was widely practiced in our church. My BIL just yesterday told me how he heard more about Joseph Smith growing up than Christ; his interpretation of course.
Polygamy is an eternal commandment….It will be practiced again….I learned that in Institute. So will sacrifice and the Law of Consecration.
I was refreshed by a seeing a more normal break off sect. They were in the world but not of the world. They almost practiced the Law of Consecration in the way they helped one another. I did not agree with how they chose spouses, but still, they’re not inspired.
Really to be so critical of a polygamous sect only shows shame for our own religion’s past.
If polygamy weren’t illegal would the Church still be practicing?…I dare to say yes.
If it were to become legal might the Church practice it again?…Possibly not because of the stigma, but stigma is no reason to not practice something if God wants it.

I added the italics this time around. To be ashamed of a past because it is presently debated is to be a ashamed of the Church. To be disgusted by it shows little reverence for an eternal commandment. I feel sorrow for those sects who have broken away and will not be able to participate in the eternal glory I hope to have, or be worthy of receiving some day. Though I don’t know if I’m on any better grounds than they. I say we are all imperfect. We all like certain doctrines better than others. Get over it.