Consider the following instance of plural marriage recorded in the Bible in Genesis 29:21-30:

And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her. And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast. And it came to pass in the evening that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her. And Laban gave unto his daughter Leah Zilpah his maid for an handmaid. And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? Did not I serve with thee for Rachel? Wherefore then hast thou beguiled me? And Laban said, it must not be so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn. Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years. And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also. And Laban gave to Rachel his daughter Bilhah his handmaid to be her maid. And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.

Modern-day revelation as recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 132:34-35 further clarifies why the practice of plural marriages was allowed.

God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises. Was Abraham, therefore, under condemnation? Verily I say unto you, nay; for I, the Lord, commanded it.

The Practice of Polygamy in the Old Testament

The question of polygamy is thought-provoking as many people today view polygamy as immoral. The first recorded instance of polygamy in the Old Testament is recorded in Genesis 4:19, “And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.” Several notable men in the Old Testament of the Bible were polygamists – Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, and others all had multiple wives. In 2 Samuel 12:8, speaking through the prophet Nathan, God said, “And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.” And according to 1 Kings 11:3, Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (essentially wives of a lower status).

Having this knowledge brings to mind three important questions, “Why did God allow polygamy in the Old Testament?” “How does God view polygamy today?” and “Why did God’s views on polygamy change?”

Referring to the above information as a foundation or premise for a discussion on the subject of plural marriages (polygamy), the question that begs an answer is, “Was Joseph Smith commanded of God to institute the practice of polygamy in the early 1840s?” Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe that as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, Joseph Smith had received a revelation from God concerning the practice.

Why Did God Allow Polygamy in the Old Testament?

To answer this question adequately there are several key factors which need to be taken into consideration.

First, current statistics indicate that there has always been a larger number of women in the world than men. Assuming that the same statistics held true in Biblical times, there would have been tens of thousands more women than men. Second, the brutality of warfare in ancient times caused a high fatality rate. And third, due to the patriarchal nature of ancient societies, it was virtually impossible for an unmarried woman to provide for herself. Because women were generally uneducated and untrained, they relied on their fathers, brothers, and husbands for both provision and protection. It should also be noted that unmarried women were often subjected to prostitution and slavery. Given the significant difference in the ratio of women to men, many women would have found themselves in undesirable situations.

Therefore, it is plausible that God allowed polygamy to protect and provide for women who could not otherwise find a husband. Thus, a man would take multiple wives and serve as provider and protector for all of them. Albeit, this may not have been the idea or perfect situation, it overruled the dire alternatives of slavery, prostitution, or starvation.

In addition, polygamy also enabled the expansion of humanity at a faster rate, thus fulfilling God’s command, “And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein” (Genesis 9:7).

The Practice of Polygamy in Early Latter-day Saint History

Latter-day Saints do not profess to understand the full purposes of God for instituting the practice of plural marriage, through His prophets, during the 19th century. Of peculiar interest, however, the Book of Mormon, which Mormons testify is Another Testament of Jesus Christ, identifies one reason for God commanding the practice which is directly in line with why He allowed the practice in the Old Testament. The following words are recorded in Jacob 2:30, “For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.” Thus, the commandment was fulfilled as plural marriage resulted in a large number of children being born within faithful Latter-day Saint families.

According to the essay titled “Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah” on the official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

It [plural marriage] also shaped 19th-century Mormon society in other ways: marriage became available to virtually all who desired it; per-capita inequality of wealth was diminished as economically disadvantaged women married into more financially stable households; and ethnic intermarriages were increased, which helped to unite a diverse immigrant population. Plural marriage also helped create and strengthen a sense of cohesion and group identification among Latter-day Saints. Church members came to see themselves as a “peculiar people,” covenant-bound to carry out the commands of God despite outside opposition, willing to endure ostracism for their principles.

During the years that plural marriage was taught as a religious principle, all members of The Church of Jesus Christ were expected to accept the principle as a revelation from God, but not all were expected to live the principle. As in the times of the Old Testament, the practice of plural marriage (polygamy) could not have been a universal principle due to the fact that the number of women outweighed the number of men. Although Church leaders viewed plural marriage as a command for the Church as a whole, those who chose not to enter into the practice were still considered to stand approved of God.

A great deal of personal sacrifice was required of those who did enter into plural marriage as there were many challenges and difficulties that arose. Referring again to the essay “Plural Marriage and Family in Early Utah”:

Accounts left by men and women who practiced plural marriage attest to the challenges and difficulties they experienced, such as financial difficulty, interpersonal strife, and some wives’ longing for the sustained companionship of their husbands. But accounts also record the love and joy many found within their families. They believed it was a commandment of God at that time and that obedience would bring great blessings to them and their posterity, both on earth and in the life to come. While there was much love, tenderness, and affection within many plural marriages, the practice was generally based more on religious belief than on romantic love. Church leaders taught that participants in plural marriages should seek to develop a generous spirit of unselfishness and the pure love of Christ for everyone involved.

Women were free to choose their spouses, whether to enter into a polygamous or monogamous union, or whether to marry at all. Some men entered plural marriage because they were asked to do so by Church leaders, while others initiated the process themselves; all were required to obtain the approval of Church leaders before entering a plural marriage.

Although some leaders had large polygamous families, two-thirds of polygamist men had only two wives at a time. Church leaders recognized that plural marriages could be particularly difficult for women. Divorce was therefore available to women who were unhappy in their marriages; remarriage was also readily available. Women did marry at fairly young ages in the first decade of Utah settlement (age 16 or 17 or, infrequently, younger), which was typical of women living in frontier areas at the time.

Testimonies of the Righteousness of Eternal Plural Marriage

Some Saints viewed plural marriage as a redemptive process of sacrifice and spiritual refinement. According to Helen Mar Kimball, the daughter of Heber C. Kimball, Joseph Smith stated that, “the practice of this principle would be the hardest trial the Saints would ever have to test their faith.” She personally found plural marriage to be one of the “severest” trials of her life, but later testified that it had also been “one of the greatest blessings” of her life.

Brigham Young, the second President of The Church of Jesus Christ, stated that after learning about the principle of plural marriage, “it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave. I had to pray unceasingly, and I had to exercise faith and the Lord revealed to me the truth of it and that satisfied me.” It is further noted that Heber C. Kimball who served as First Counselor to Brigham Young, found comfort with the practice only after his wife, Vilate, had a visionary experience attesting to the rightness of plural marriage. His daughter, Helen, later recalled that her mother had told her, “she never saw so happy a man as father was when she described the vision and told him she was satisfied and knew it was from God.”

The following is a more vivid account of Vilate Kimball’s vision as recounted by her Helen:

My father’s heart was raised at the same time in supplication, and while pleading as one would plead for life, the vision of her mind was opened, and she saw the principle of Celestial Marriage illustrated in all its beauty and glory, together with the great exaltation and honor it would confer upon her in that immortal and celestial sphere if she would but accept it and stand in her place by her husband’s side. She was also shown the woman he had taken to wife, and contemplated with joy the vast and boundless love and union which this order would bring about, as well as the increase of kingdoms, power, and glory extending throughout the eternities, worlds without end.

Her soul was satisfied and filled with the Spirit of God. With a countenance beaming with joy she returned to my father, saying, “Heber, what you have kept from me the Lord has shown me.”

She related the scene to me and to many others, and told me she never saw so happy a man as father was, when she described the vision and told him she was satisfied and knew that it was from God. She covenanted to stand by him and honor the principle, which covenant she faithfully kept, and though her trials were often heavy and grievous to bear, her integrity was unflinching to the end. [H[elen] M[ar] Whitney, “Life Incidents” (15 July 1882): cited in Stanley B. Kimball, “Heber C. Kimball and Family, the Nauvoo Years,” Brigham Young University Studies no. 4 (Summer 1975), 461–462.]

Lucy Walker recalled her inner turmoil when Joseph Smith invited her to become his wife. She wrote, “Every feeling of my soul revolted against it.” It was not until after several restless nights spent on her knees in prayer that she was able to obtain relief concerning the matter.

My room became filled with a heavenly influence. To me it was in comparison like the brilliant sun bursting through the darkest cloud…My Soul was filled with a calm, sweet peace that I never knew. Supreme happiness took possession of my whole being. And I received a powerful and irresistible testimony of the truth of the marriage covenant called ‘Celestial or plural marriage.’ Which has been like an anchor to the soul through all the trials of life. I felt that I must go out into the morning air and give vent to the Joy and gratitude that filled my Soul. As I descended the stairs, President Smith opened the door below; took me by the hand and said: ‘Thank God, you have the testimony. I too, have prayed.’ He led me to a chair, placed his hands upon my head, and blessed me with every blessing my heart could possibly desire.

Another of the early Saints, Sarah Levitt, testified:

..I thought that the Anointed of the Lord would not get more wives unless they were commanded to do so. But still I wanted a knowledge of the truth for myself. I asked my husband if he did not think we could get a revelation for ourselves on that subject. He said he did not know….[That evening] my mind was carried away from the earth and I had a view of the order of the celestial kingdom….I have seen so much wrong connected with this ordinance that had I not had it revealed to me from Him that cannot lie[,] I should have…doubted the truth of it, but there has never a doubt crossed my mind concerning the truth of it since the Lord made it known to me by a heavenly vision. [“Autobiography of Sarah S. Leavitt, from her history,” ed. Juanita Leavitt Pulsipher, June 1919, 23, Utah State historical Society Library, Salt Lake City; cited in George D. Smith, Nauvoo Polygamy, 359–360.]

And Margaret Cooper West who saw herself as valued by God testified:

We were living in Nauvoo when I first heard that it was right for men to have two wives. I never thought then of their having more than two [sic]; it looked an awful thing to me, and I said I would not believe it was right, if an angel from heaven should tell me so, And again, I said that if I should hear the Almighty tell and angel to come and tell me it was right, I would not believe it. I knew very well what I thought. I thought it would only be to try my virtue, as Abraham’s faith was tried, when he was told to offer his son as a sacrifice, and I thought the Lord would love me better if I refused to believe in such a heinous thing, for the Lord loves virtuous women….

I was perplexed; I did not have much to say. I felt very serious over it, and made it a matter of prayer.

On the Sunday morning following, after my husband and I were ready to go to meeting, we walked out through our gate, and he said, “Let us call in at John’s (his brother’s); perhaps some of them will go to meeting.” As we passed through the gate, all creation was opened in vision to my view, as it seemed to me; we were as the grass of the field. I can see now how it looked as it ran off in the distance. Then I saw plurality of wives, the celestial order of marriage, open to my view, and knew it was right, and a virtuous principle, and pertaining to the everlasting Gospel of Jesus. Then I saw the authorities of the Church, and what they had suffered to establish this peculiar doctrine. It was a grand point in the Gospel, and had to be established in this generation; there was no getting around it, it had to come forth. When I saw the labors of the brethren, and their toils and sufferings, my heart was pained for them, and I loved and pitied them. I was no longer an opposer of the two-wife system. I did not speak of these things, but pondered them in my heart. I realized the beauty and glory and exaltation connected with this heavenly principle; it was grand and glorious, and I felt rapt in joy. [Margaret West, “Testimony of Margaret West,” 35 cited in Hales, Joseph Smith’s Polygamy Vol. 2, 185–186.]

How Does God View Polygamy Today?

Even though God allowed polygamous relationships at certain times, the Bible clearly teaches that monogamy, one man married to one woman, is the plan which conforms to God’s idea for marriage. Genesis 2:24 teaches, “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” The consistent use of the singular should be carefully noted – man, wife, and flesh, not men, wives, or fleshes. Scriptures also warn about the problems that can arise from having multiple wives as seen in the life of Solomon, “And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart. For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father” (1 Kings 11:3-4).

In the New Testament, 1 Timothy 3:2, 12, and Titus 1:6 all render “the husband of one wife” in a list of qualifications for spiritual leadership. If these qualifications are set forth for the leadership of the church, should they not also apply to all Christians? For all Christians have been called to be holy (see 1 Peter 1:16).

Ephesians 5:22-33 speaks of the relationship between husbands and wives. When referring to a husband (singular), it always also refers to a wife (singular).

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: for we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

If polygamy were allowable, the entire illustration of Christ’s relationship with His body (the church) and the husband-wife relationship falls apart.

The Changing Dynamics of Polygamy

Toward the end of the 19th century, the experience of plural marriage was considerably different than that of earlier decades. Commencing in 1862, federal laws were passed against the practice of plural marriage in hopes to protect Mormon women and the American civilization in general.

Nevertheless, there were many Latter-day Saint women who publicly defended the practice of plural marriage, arguing that they were willing participants in such practice. Following the 1879 finding of the United States Supreme Court that anti-polygamy laws are constitutional, federal officials began prosecuting polygamous husbands and wives during the 1880s. Some Latter-day Saints felt that the laws were unwarranted and became civilly disobedient by continuing to engage in the practice of plural marriage and attempting to avoid arrest. Once they were convicted, they paid fines and spent time in jail. Plural wives often separated into different households or went into hiding under assumed names when pregnant or right after giving birth in order to prevent their polygamous husbands from facing prosecution.

Referring again to the essay “Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah” on the official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

By 1890, when President Woodruff’s Manifesto lifted the command to practice plural marriage, Mormon society had developed a strong, loyal core of members, mostly made up of emigrants from Europe and the Eastern United States. But the demographic makeup of the worldwide Church membership had begun to change. Beginning in the 1890s converts outside the United States were asked to build up the Church in their homelands rather than move to Utah. In subsequent decades, Latter-day Saints migrated away from the Great Basin to pursue new opportunities. Plural marriage had never been encouraged outside of concentrated populations of Latter-day Saints. Especially in these newly formed congregations outside of Utah, monogamous families became central to religious worship and learning. As the Church grew and spread beyond the American West, the monogamous nuclear family was well suited to an increasingly mobile and dispersed membership.

Why did the dynamics change? The question should be viewed not so much as God no longer allowing something He had previously allowed, but rather as God restoring marriage to His original plan. Polygamous relationships were never a part of God’s original plan for marriage. God allowed polygamy for a time to “raise up seed” unto Himself. In most modern societies, there is absolutely no need for polygamy.

According to Romans 13:1-7, we are to obey the laws of the land. The only instance when disobeying the law is permitted by scripture is if a law, or laws contradict God’s commands (see Acts 5:29). Therefore, since God only allows for polygamy at times that He designates, and does not command that it be practiced, any law prohibiting the practice of polygamy should be upheld.

The Aftermath of the Practice of Plural Marriage

The essay “Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah” concludes with these comments which serve as a capstone to this discussion:

For many who practiced it, plural marriage was a significant sacrifice. Despite the hardships some experienced, the faithfulness of those who practiced plural marriage continues to benefit the Church in innumerable ways. Through the lineage of these 19th-century Saints have come many Latter-day Saints who have been faithful to their gospel covenants as righteous mothers and fathers, loyal disciples of Jesus Christ, and devoted Church members, leaders, and missionaries. Although members of the contemporary Church are forbidden to practice plural marriage, modern Latter-day Saints honor and respect these pioneers who gave so much for their faith, families, and community.

Keith L. Brown

Keith L. Brown is a convert to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, having been born and raised Baptist. He was studying to be a Baptist minister at the time of his conversion to the LDS faith. He was baptized on 10 March 1998 in Reykjavik, Iceland while serving on active duty in the United States Navy in Keflavic, Iceland. He currently serves as the First Assistant to the High Priest Group for the Annapolis, Maryland Ward. He is a 30-year honorably retired United States Navy Veteran.

of-common-sense.site123.me/

Polygamy Is No Longer Practiced Today

First of all, to clear up a common misunderstanding, polygamy is not practiced today by any member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. To practice polygamy today will lead to excommunication. Gordon B. Hinckley, fifteenth president of The Church of Jesus Christ, said the following in October 1998:

Gordon B Hinckley

I wish to state categorically that this Church has nothing whatever to do with those practicing polygamy. They are not members of this Church. Most of them have never been members. They are in violation of the civil law. They know they are in violation of the law. They are subject to its penalties. The Church, of course, has no jurisdiction whatever in this matter.

If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church. An article of our faith is binding upon us. It states, “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law” (Articles of Faith 1:12). One cannot obey the law and disobey the law at the same time.

There is no such thing as a “Mormon Fundamentalist.” It is a contradiction to use the two words together.

Illegality of Polygamy Then and Now

This statement by President Hinckley may confuse some. Wasn’t polygamy always illegal in the United States? Wouldn’t this mean that when it was practiced those who practiced it were breaking the law? The short answer is yes, they were, but it is far more complex than that.

Bigamy was illegal in Illinois when the Saints were living in Nauvoo. Polygamy was declared illegal during an anti-polygamy (and largely anti-Mormon) crusade when the Saints were in Utah. Many Saints who practiced polygamy, and who firmly believed that they were being commanded by God to participate in this practice, were put in a difficult situation. Thus, for them, living the law of polygamy became a case of civil disobedience.

The decision to defy the [anti-polygamy laws] was a painful exception to an otherwise firm commitment to the rule of law and order. Significantly, however, in choosing to defy the law, the Latter-day Saints were actually following in an American tradition of civil disobedience. On various previous occasions, including the years before the Revolutionary War, Americans had found certain laws offensive to their fundamental values and had decided openly to violate them. . . . Even though declared constitutional, the law was still repugnant to all [the Saints’] values, and they were willing to face harassment, exile, or imprisonment rather than bow to its demands. (James B. Allen and Glen M. Leonard, Story of the Latter-day Saints [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1992], 401.)

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also felt their right to practice polygamy was protected by the United States Constitution’s protection of religious liberty. They argued in courts all the way up to the Supreme Court for their rights, but when the Supreme Court ruled against them in 1879, finding the anti-polygamy laws constituional, they continued to practice civil disobedience, believing God’s law was higher than man’s and that when man’s law contradicts God’s law, a faithful person’s conscience requires him or her to follow God’s law.

Constitution of the United States of America

Why did the Saints abandon the practice of polygamy if they believed it was a commandment from God to practice it? Was it really just an excuse for men to justify immorality?

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints continues to receive criticism both for the fact that it ever promoted the practice of polygamy and, ironically, that it abandoned it. Some say it was weak of Church leaders to abandon the practice once pressure from the government peaked. Critics say it must be obvious it was never really part of God’s commandment because it brought so much grief to those who practiced it, as well as the Church as a whole. In addition, if leaders gave up, so to speak, obviously God was not on their side.

A full answer to this idea is beyond the scope of this article, but a summary is included here, along with suggestions for more in-depth reading for the interested. The short but firm answer to this argument is that those who were called to live this law did so after receiving very personal and unquestionable verification that God was commanding them to do so. Looking at just a sampling of personal accounts on this matter soon put this to rest. Whether or not the observer believes that God issued the commandment or not, it is clear that those who lived it believed God had. While it may seem to the outsider that God abandoned those who lived polygamy to the vengeance of its opponents, there are many undeniable benefits that came to the Saints for living the law despite fierce opposition. These benefits will be discussed later, but first, here are some personal accounts of people who lived the law of polygamy.

John Taylor, an apostle in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints remarked:

I had always entertained strict ideas of virtue and I felt as a married man that this [polygamy] was to me . . . an appalling thing to do . . . Nothing but a knowledge of God, and the revelations of God . . . could have induced me to embrace such a principle as this . . . We [the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles] seemed to put off as far as we could, what might be termed the evil day. (Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy, 89.)

Brigham Young, who succeeded Joseph Smith as president of the Church following Joseph’s martyrdom, said of his initial reaction to the doctrine of polygamy:

Some of these my brethren know what my feelings were at the time Joseph revealed the doctrine; I was not desirous of shrinking from any duty, nor of failing in the least to do as I was commanded, but it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave, and I could hardly get over it for a long time. And when I saw a funeral, I felt to envy the corpse its situation, and to regret that I was not in the coffin, knowing the toil and labor that my body would have to undergo; and I have had to examine myself, from that day to this, and watch my faith, and carefully meditate, lest I should be found desiring the grave more than I ought to do (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 3:266).

Margaret Cooper West, a convert to the Church, recorded her own experience with being converted to the law of polygamy:

One day one of my sisters said to me, “Do you believe in the Spiritual Wife Doctrine? I said, “No.”

She said, “If Brother Joseph was to tell you he had a revelation and you must be his spiritual wife, [what] would you say?” I would say, “You may go to hell with your revelations.” And I was raving mad and said I would not believe it if I was to hear the Lord tell an angel to come and tell me, I thought he would do it for a trial as he did to Abraham in telling him to offer up his son.

In such ways I fretted. My husband did not believe it was right and it appeared that the devil had the advantage. I was taken sick and also several of the children and the doctor was called for the first time since we joined the Church. I came near to death though I was convinced of my wrong before I was taken sick. It came to me like this.

My husband and I were going to meeting and as I opened the gate all creation came before me and they seemed as the grass of the field for multitudes. I saw Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob living the Celestial law. Then Joseph and his brethren stood before me and I could feel as it were the pain that pierced their heart when they were told that Principle must come forth in this generation. I said in my heart, “It is enough, I will never fight that Principle again.”

Sometimes full acceptance of the principal took time. The people living this and other commandments were not perfect, and they made mistakes. Tamer Washburn struggled for a long time after her husband took a second wife, even though she liked the woman. Her daughter recorded in a biography of her mother:

Tamer was a social person, and usually very optimistic, yet she was capable of very intense feelings. Flora’s daughter Lorena related, “Tamer told me how hard it was to live in plural marriage, and for a long time she was unkind to my mother although she loved mother. She prayed often for strength, and God finally gave her victory over herself. After that, plural marriage ceased to be a trial, and my mother became one of her best earthly friends.”

Such is a few of the trials and only a few that she with others passed through because they believed that God lived and had a Soul and Body like unto that of Man whom He had created and because they believed that He had the right and privilege to converse with the men He had created and that He did make known His mind and will and they believed it and would not deny it and troubles were multiplied upon them.

Joseph Smith himself was not excited about the idea of practicing polygamy and put off as long as possible sharing the doctrine that had been revealed to him about restoring the principle. Lorenzo Snow, who became the fifth president of the Church recorded the first time Joseph Smith revealed the doctrine to him, which gives some insight into how Joseph felt about it himself.

 In the month of April, 1843, I returned from my European mission. A few days after my arrival at Nauvoo, when at President Joseph Smith’s house, he said he wished to have some private talk with me, and requested me to walk out with him. It was toward evening. We walked a little distance and sat down on a large log that lay near the bank of the river. He there and then explained to me the doctrine of plurality of wives; he said that the Lord had revealed it unto him, and commanded him to have women sealed to him as wives; that he foresaw the trouble that would follow, and sought to turn away from the commandment; that an angel from heaven then appeared before him with a drawn sword, threatening him with destruction unless he went forward and obeyed the commandment (Lorenzo Snow affidavit, 28 August 1868; cited by Joseph F[ielding] Smith, Jr., Blood Atonement and the Origin of Plural Marriage: A Discussion (Independence, Missouri: Press of Zion’s Printing and Publishing Company, 1905), 67–68).

The comments above show that no one was really excited about living the law of plural marriage. However, as the Book of Mormon tells us, it is against God’s commandments to have concubines or more than one wife unless He specifically commands it.

Therefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none; For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts. Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things (Jacob 2:27–30).

The law of monogamy was an integral part of society in the United States. All members of the Church had been taught monogamy from the time they were children. It was not an easy thing for them to live the law of plural marriage. However, each person who was called to live the law was given a personal witness that it truly was a commandment from God.

After sacrificing a great deal to live the law of plural marriage, the Saints eventually abandoned the practice. Wilford Woodruff, fourth president of the Church, issued a declaration which came to be known as the Manifesto in 1890 announcing plural marriage would no longer be practiced. Why would the Saints give in to pressure at this point, after having already endured so much persecution for their beliefs?

Contrary to some critics’ views, it was not pressure from the government that made Wilford Woodruff decide to end the practice. For years he had prayed about God’s will concerning the matter. In the late 1800s, things had finally reached such a point that the government was about to dissolve the Church and take over everything, including the Saints’ three temples—their most sacred edifices. This time, in response to a great deal of prayer, pondering, and fasting, Wilford Woodruff received revelation from God that it was no longer expedient for the Church to continue living the law of plural marriage. God withdrew His commandment and sanction to live the law. Those who had already entered plural marriage still had the responsibility to provide for their families, but no new plural marriages were to be performed.

After the Manifesto, monogamy was advocated in the Church both over the pulpit and through the press. On an exceptional basis, some new plural marriages were performed between 1890 and 1904, especially in Mexico and Canada, outside the jurisdiction of U.S. law; a small number of plural marriages were performed within the United States during those years. In 1904, the Church strictly prohibited new plural marriages. Today, and person who practices plural marriage cannot become or remain a member of the Church (Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah).

Why Were the Saints Commanded to Practice Plural Marriage?

Since God is the one who commanded the Saints to live this law, only He is qualified to answer this question, and no revelation has been given concerning this question. The only answer we can give as to why the Saints lived the law is because they were commanded to. As to why the commandment was given, no one today has that answer.

In hindsight, however, there are many clear blessings that came from the Saints living this law. It can be instructive to look at some of the benefits they received for their obedience, though we are not stating that any of these blessings was a specific reason for the commandment of plural marriage being given in the first place.

Obedience, Latter-day Saints (“Mormons”) believe, is an eternal principle. Strict obedience to God’s commandments will always bring blessings, even if the only immediately obvious one is to strengthen one’s relationship with God by proving that one’s loyalty lies with Him. For the Saints, obedience to the law of plural marriage irrevocably separated them from the rest of the nation. While this certainly had major drawbacks, a benefit was to strengthen a feeling of unity in the Church and to draw a clear line between God and the world. This helped the Church to grow stronger and to develop faith in its members.

Another result of the Saints practicing plural marriage was sacrifice. By living a life that was more than repugnant to the rest of their society, they were asked to sacrifice their reputations as moral, upstanding Christians; they were stripped of their civil rights; many times they were forced out of their homes and lost all their material possessions. Many people lost loved ones on the trek west. Then they were told God no longer required them to live the law which they had given so much to try and live. None of this was easy.

Helen Mar Whitney provides some valuable insight into the feelings of those called to live this law:

Those who have not the knowledge and assurance that the course which they are pursuing is according to the will of God, cannot endure all these afflictions and persecutions, taking joyfully the spoiling of their goods and even if necessary to suffer death, by the hands of their foes. They will grow weary and faint and fall by the way unless they have unshaken confidence and a perfect knowledge for themselves. They cannot make a sacrifice of their character and reputation; and give up their houses, their lands, brothers, sisters, wives and children; counting all things as dross, when compared with the eternal life and exaltation, which our Savior has promised to the obedient; and this knowledge is not obtained without a struggle nor the glory without a sacrifice of all earthly things. In the last days (we read) the Lord is to gather together his Saints who have made covenant with Him by sacrifice and each one must know that their sacrifice is accepted as did righteous, Abel and Abraham the father of the faithful. Every Latter-day Saint knows this to be true, and that according to our faith so are our blessings and privileges. [Helen Mar Whitney, A Woman’s View: Helen Mar Whitney’s Reminiscences of Early Church History (Provo, Utah: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1999), 187.]

The only reason which God has ever clearly stated for why He may command the practice of plural marriage is to “raise up seed” unto Himself as quoted above from the Book of Mormon. In Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants (a collection of revelations given to Joseph Smith from God on specific points of doctrine), the Lord says:

Abraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins—from whose loins ye are, namely, my servant Joseph—which were to continue so long as they were in the world; and as touching Abraham and his seed, out of the world they should continue; both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the stars; or, if ye were to count the sand upon the seashore ye could not number them.

This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham, and the promise was made unto Abraham; and by this law is the continuation of the works of my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself. Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved. But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham. God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.

Was Abraham, therefore, under condemnation? Verily I say unto you, Nay; for I, the Lord, commanded it (Doctrine and Covenants 132:30–34).

This discussion of Abraham having lived the law of plural marriage (and there are other Old Testament prophets who also lived this law with God’s approval) shows that periodically, God has commanded His people to live it. Having it be culturally uncomfortable or unacceptable is of no concern to God, because His law is eternal. When He commands it, it should be lived; otherwise, it is expressly forbidden.

Whether or not it was God’s single purpose to raise up seed unto Himself when He commanded the Saints to practice plural marriage, that was certainly a result. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was a young, fledgling church when the doctrine of plural marriage was first revealed to Joseph Smith. All its leaders and members were converts to the gospel. There were more women than men who were faithful members of the Church. By having one faithful man marry multiple faithful women, a much larger faithful generation was raised in a shorter period of time than would have otherwise been possible.

At a time when women were not given many opportunities in society in general, and when a lack of technology restricted them to home life because running a household was so time-demanding, plural marriage gave many women the opportunity to pursue other interests and to contribute in their communities in ways they would have otherwise been unable to. Responsibilities of housework and childcare could be shared among women, lifting many burdens. Women were even given the right to vote in Utah long before a constitutional amendment was passed. In fact, when Utah sought statehood, its government had to rescind the right the right it had already given women to vote.

Contrary to what many think today, no one was forced to live the law of plural marriage. In fact, it was a relatively small percentage of Church members who did live the law, up to 30 percent at its highest in 1870, and it decreased after that. No woman was forced to enter a marriage she did not wish to. In addition, women who found themselves unhappy with the situation after entering a plural marriage were allowed to divorce and either remarry or stay single, as they chose. For men, however, divorces from plural wives were not so easy to obtain. It was difficult for a woman to support herself. Therefore, if men found themselves in difficult situations, they were counseled to make it work.

Again, since the Lord has not revealed His purpose for having commanded the Saints to practice plural marriage, no one today can point to a reason and say, “This is why it was a commandment.” However, it can be very enlightening to look at all the benefits that came to the Saints for their obedience to this law.

An official statement from The Church of Jesus Christ offers the following summary of the positive effects of polygamy for the early Saints:

Plural marriage did result in the birth of large numbers of children within faithful Latter-day Saint homes. It also shaped 19th-century Mormon society in other ways: marriage became available to virtually all who desired it; per-capita inequality of wealth was diminished as economically disadvantaged women married into more financially stable households; and ethnic intermarriages were increased, which helped to unite a diverse immigrant population. Plural marriage also helped create and strengthen a sense of cohesion and group identification among Latter-day Saints. Church members came to see themselves as a “peculiar people,” covenant-bound to carry out the commands of God despite outside opposition, willing to endure ostracism for their principles.

For a much more in-depth view on polygamy, read Gregory Smith’s comprehensive article “Polygamy, Prophets, and Prevarication: Frequently and Rarely Asked Questions about the Initiation, Practice, and Cessation of Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”

Script: Why did Mormons practice polygamy?

Before answering that, let’s deal with the other question that often comes up first.

Do some Mormons still live with multiple wives?

No.

The practice of polygamy, also known as plural marriage, is not practiced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, often called Mormons, today.

Obeying the Lord’s command, Mormons followed this practice
for about 50 years during the nineteenth century, but it is often a misunderstood part of Church history.

These early Latter-day saints obeyed revelation to the Lord’s prophet Joseph Smith as it was given, out of their great love for the Lord, and their faith in His eternal plan.

Even at the time, it was a very difficult commandment from God and was a great test of faith for many involved.

Polygamy dates back to the Bible.
At times and to fulfill His specific purposes, God, through His prophets, sanctioned the practice of plural marriage.

Several scriptural figures like Abraham, Jacob, David, Moses and others had more than one wife.

The Lord restored many things through revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith, including eventually, polygamy, but it was not instituted for the purpose of sexual license as some critics have accused.

It was practiced only by the command of the Lord to bring forth a new generation, as a trial of faith for the saints at that time, and to allow all worthy women the chance to be sealed into eternal families.

Towards the end of the nineteenth century, times became extremely difficult politically for the members of the Church. It was then revealed to the prophet Wilford Woodruff, fourth president of the Church, that the Church should stop the practice of polygamy in order to avoid more difficulties.

The practice officially ceased around 1890, and has not been practiced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for over a century.
At the time, however, some members of the Church did not follow the prophet’s call to end the practice, and started their own churches, often with similar names, which still practiced polygamy.

Some of these sects still exist today and may even call themselves Mormons, but these groups have no relationship to
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The Church today, in accordance with the law of the land, prohibits living in polygamy, and focuses on strengthening families and marriages between one man and one woman.

The Church has always taught the supreme importance of the family in God’s eternal plan, and that families can be sealed and live together forever – the highest blessing possible through
the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

dwhite

Doris White is a native of Oregon and graduated from Brigham Young University with a degree in English and a minor in Editing. She loves to talk with others about the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Ephraim Knowlton Hanks was born on 21 March 1826 in Madison, Lake County, Ohio.  He left home at age 16, worked for a while on the Erie Canal, served in the Navy for three years (seeing France, Spain, Gibraltar, Italy, Brazil and other countries), and upon returning home, found that his brother Sidney had joined The Church of Jesus Christ.  Ephraim himself was baptized in 1845.  He migrated with the Latter-day Saints to Nauvoo, Illinois, and then, when the Saints were driven out, headed west to Utah Territory with Brigham Young.  He was among those men, however, who separated from the group in order to answer the call to serve in the Mormon Battalion.  His service to the Martin Handcart Company was performed in 1856.  Hanks had four wives and 26 children. [1] [3] Elder Hanks became a patriarch in The Church of Jesus Christ.  A patriarch gives a once-in-a-lifetime blessing to worthy members that reveals to them their lineage in Israel and pronounces a prophetic blessing of guidance that is a beacon throughout their lives.  Ephraim Hanks, during his church service, worked on temples, developed land, founded colonies, dealt with Indians, and all things he was requested to do by the prophets and the Lord.  He died on June 9, 1896.

In the fall of 1856, I spent considerable of my time fishing in Utah Lake; and in traveling backward and forward between that lake and Salt Lake City, I had occasion to stop once over night with Gurnsey Brown, in Draper, about nineteen miles south of Salt Lake City. Being somewhat fatigued after the day’s journey, I retired to rest quite early, and while I still lay wide awake in my bed I heard a voice calling me by name, and then saying: `The handcart people are in trouble and you are wanted; will you go and help them?

I turned instinctively in the direction from whence the voice came and beheld an ordinary sized man in the room. Without hesitation I answered `Yes, I will go if I am called.’

I then turned around to go to sleep, but had laid only a few minutes when the voice called a second time, repeating almost the same words as on the first occasion. My answer was the same as before. This was repeated a third time.

When I got up the next morning I said to Brother Brown, `The handcart people are in trouble, and I have promised to go out and help them;’ but I did not tell him of my experiences during the night.

I now hastened to Salt Lake City, and arrived there on the Saturday, preceding the Sunday on which the call was made for volunteers to go out and help the last handcart companies in. When some of the brethren responded by explaining that they could get ready to start in a few days; I spoke out at once saying, `I am ready now!’ The next day I was wending my way eastward over the mountains with a light wagon all alone.

The terrific storm which caused the immigrants so much suffering and loss overtook me near the South Pass, where I stopped about three days with Reddick N. Allred, who had come out with provisions for the immigrants. The storm during these three days was simply awful. In all my travels in the Rocky Mountains both before and afterwards, I have seen no worse. When at length the snow ceased falling, it lay on the ground so deep that for many days it was impossible to move wagons through it.

Being deeply concerned about the possible fate of the immigrants, and feeling anxious to learn of their condition, I determined to start out on horseback to meet them; and for this purpose I secured a pack-saddle and two animals (one to ride and one to pack), from Brother Allred, and began to make my way slowly through the snow alone. After traveling for some time I met Joseph A. Young and one of the Garr boys, two of the relief company which had been sent from Salt Lake City to help the companies. They had met the immigrants and were now returning with important dispatches from the camps to the headquarters of the Church, reporting the awful condition of the companies.

In the meantime I continued my lonely journey, and the night after meeting Elders Young and Garr, I camped in the snow in the mountains. As I was preparing to make a bed in the snow with the few articles that my pack animal carried for me, I thought how comfortable buffalo robe would be on such an occasion, and also how I could relish a little buffalo meat for supper, and before lying down for the night I was instinctively led to ask the Lord to send me a buffalo.

Now, I am a firm believer in the efficacy of prayer, for I have on many different occasions asked the Lord for blessings, which He in His mercy has bestowed on me. But when I, after praying as I did on that lonely night in the South Pass, looked around me and spied a buffalo bull within fifty yards of my camp, my surprise was complete; I had certainly not expected so immediate an answer to my prayer. However, I soon collected myself and was not at a loss to know what to do.

Taking deliberate aim at the animal, my first shot brought him down; he made a few jumps only, and then rolled down into the very hollow where I was encamped. I was soon busily engaged skinning my game, finishing which, I spread the hide on the snow and placed my bed upon it. I next prepared supper, eating tongue and other choice parts of the animal I had killed, to my heart’s content. After this I enjoyed a refreshing night’s sleep, while my horses were browsing on the sage brush.

Early the next morning I was on my way again, and soon reached what is known as the Ice Springs Bench. There I happened upon a heard of buffalo, and killed a nice cow. I was impressed to do this, although I did not know why until a few hours later, but the thought occurred to my mind that the hand of the Lord was in it, as it was a rare thing to find buffalo herds around that place at this late part of the season. I skinned and dressed the cow; then cut up part of its meat in long strips and loaded my horses with it. Thereupon I resumed my journey, and traveled on till towards evening.

I think the sun was about an hour high in the west when I spied something in the distance that looked like a black streak in the snow. As I got near to it, I perceived it moved, then I was satisfied that this was the long looked for handcart company, led by Captain Edward Martin. I reached the ill-fated train just as the immigrants were camping for the night. The sight that met my gaze as I entered their camp can never be erased from my memory. The starved forms and haggard countenances of the poor suffers, as they moved about slowly, shivering with cold, to prepare their scanty evening meal was enough to touch the stoutest heart.

When they saw me coming, they hailed me with joy inexpressible, and when they further beheld the supply of fresh meat I brought into camp, their gratitude knew no bounds. Flocking around me, one would say, `Oh, please, give me a small piece of meat;’ another would exclaim, `My poor children are starving, do give me a little;’ and children with tears in their eyes would call out, `Give me some, give me some.’ At first I tried to wait on them and handed out the meat as they called for it; but finally I told them to help themselves. Five minutes later both my horses had been released of their extra burden-the meat was all gone, and the next few hours found the people in the camp busily engaged in cooking and eating it, with thankful hearts.

A prophecy had been made by one of the brethren that the company should feast on buffalo meat when their provisions might run short; my arrive in their camp, loaded with meat, was the beginning of the fulfillment of that prediction; but only the beginning, as I afterwards shot and killed a number of buffalo for them as we journeyed along.

When I saw the terrible condition of the immigrants on first entering their camp, my heart almost melted within me. I rose up in my saddle and tried to speak cheering and comforting words to them. I told them also that they should all have the privilege to ride into Salt Lake City, as more teams were coming.

After dark, on the evening of my arrival in the handcart camp, a woman crying aloud pass the camp fire where I was sitting. Wondering what was the matter, my natural impulse led me to follow her. She went straight to Daniel Tyler’s wagon, where she told the heart-rending story of her husband being at the point of death, and in pleading tones she asked Elder Tyler to come and administer to him. This good brother, tired and weary as he was after pulling handcarts all day, had just retired for the night, and was a little reluctant in getting up; but on this earnest solicitation he soon arose, and we both followed the woman to the tent, in which we found the apparently lifeless form of her husband.

On seeing him, Elder Tyler remarked, `I cannot administer to a dead man.’ Brother Tyler requested me to stay and lay out the supposed dead brother, while he returned to his wagon to seek that rest which he needed so much. I immediately stepped back to the camp fire where several of the brethren were sitting and addressing myself to Elders Grant, Kimball and one or two others, I said: `Will you boys do just as I tell you?’ The answer was in the affirmative.
We then went to work and built a fire near the tent which I and Elder Tyler had just visited; next we warmed some water and washed the dying man, whose name was Blair, from head to foot. I then anointed him with consecrated oil over his whole body, after which we laid hands on him and commanded him in the name of Jesus Christ to breathe and live. The effect was instantaneous. The man who was dead to all appearances immediately began to breathe, sat up in his bed and commenced to sang a hymn. His wife, unable to control her feelings of joy and thankfulness, ran through the camp exclaiming: `My husband was dead, but is now alive. Praised be the name of God. The man who brought the buffalo meat has healed him.’

This circumstance caused a general excitement in the whole camp, and many of the drooping spirits began to take fresh courage from that very hour. After this the greater portion of my time was devoted to waiting on the sick.

`Come to me,’ `help me,’ `please administer to my sick wife,’ or `my dying child,’ were some of the requests that were made of me almost hourly for some time after I had joined the immigrants, and I spent days going from tent to tent administering to the sick.

Truly the Lord was with me and others of his servants who labored faithfully together with me in that day of trial and suffering. The result of this our labor of love certainly redounded to the honor and glory of a kind and merciful God. In scores of instances when we administered to the sick, and rebuked the diseases in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, the sufferers would rally at once; they were healed almost instantly. I believe I administered to several hundreds in a single day; and I could give names of many whose lives were saved by the power of God. But I will only give the details in one more instance.

One evening after having gone as far as Fort Bridger I was requested by a sister to come and administer to her son, whose name was Thomas. He was very sick, indeed, and his friends expected he would die that night. When I came to the place where he lay he was moaning pitifully, and was almost too weak to turn around in his bed. I felt the power of God resting upon me, and addressing the young man, said, `Will you believe the words I tell you?’ His response was `Yes.’ I then administered to him, and he was immediately healed. He got up, dressed himself, and danced a hornpipe on the end-board of a wagon, which I procured for that purpose.

But notwithstanding these manifestations of the Lord’s goodness, any of the immigrants whose extremities were frozen, lost their limbs, either whole or in part. Many such I washed with water and castile soap, until the frozen parts would fall off, after which I would sever the shreds of flesh from the remaining portions of the limbs with my scissors. Some of the emigrants lost toes, others fingers, and again others whole hands and feet; one woman who now resides in Koosharem, Piute Co., Utah, lost both her legs below the knees and quite a number who survived became cripples for life.

But so far as I remember there were no fresh cases of frozen limbs after my arrival in camp. As the train moved forward in the day time I would generally leave the road in search of game; and on these expeditions killed and dressed a number of buffaloes, distributing their meat among the people. On one occasion when I was lagging behind with a killed buffalo, an English girl by the name of Griffin gave out completely, and not being able to walk any further, she lay down her head in the snow. When I saw her disabled condition I lifted her on my saddle, the horse being loaded with buffalo meat, and in this condition she road into camp.

Soon more relief companies were met and as fast as the baggage was transferred into the wagons, the handcarts were abandoned one after another, until none were left.
I remained with the immigrants until the last of Captain Martin’s company arrived in Salt Lake City on the thirtieth day of November, 1856.

I have but a very little to say about the sufferings of Captain Martin’s company before I joined it; but it had passed through terrible ordeals. Women and the larger children helped the men to pull the handcarts, and in crossing the frozen streams, they had to break the ice with their feet. In fording the Platte River, the largest stream they had to cross after the cold weather set in, the clothes of the immigrants were frozen stiff around their bodies before they could exchange them for others. This is supposed to have been the cause of the many deaths which occurred soon afterwards. It has been stated on good authority that nineteen immigrants died one night.

The survivors who performed the last acts of kindness to those who perished, were not strong enough to dig the graves of sufficient depth to preserve the bodies from the wild beasts, and wolves were actually seen tearing open the graves before the company was out of sight. Many of the survivors, in witnessing the terrible afflictions and losses, became at last almost stupefied or mentally dazed, and did not seem to realize the terrible condition they were in. The suffering from the lack of sufficient food also told on the people. When the first relief teams met the immigrants, there was only one day’s quarter rations left in camp.  [2]

Gale

Gale is a former fibro and CMP sufferer. She hopes this information will help other sufferers on their journey to good health.

Although my father [Silas Smith] had received the testimony of his brother Joseph [Smith, Senior] concerning the Latter-day work, and of his nephew William Smith, yet he was slow about yielding obedience to the Gospel, owing to the determined opposition of his brother Jesse, of my mother, and of his older children. Meanwhile my uncle Asahel Smith with all his family, who also lived at Stockholm [NY], had gathered with the Church at Kirtland, Ohio. They did not emigrate till the spring of 1836. My uncle John Smith and family who lived at Potsdam, 15 miles from Stockholm, emigrated the spring of 1833.

My father received a letter from the Prophet Joseph, which I here transcribe:

                                                Kirtland Mills, Ohio, Sept. 26, 1835.

Respected Uncle Silas:

It is with feelings of deep interest for the welfare of mankind which fill my mind on the reflection that all were formed by the hand of Him who will call the same to give an impartial account of all their works in the great day to which you and myself in common with them are bound, that I take up my pen and seat myself in an attitude to address a few though imperfect lines to you for your perusal.

I have no doubt but you will agree with me that men will be held accountable for the things they have, and not for the things they have not, or that all the light and intelligence communicated to them from their beneficent Creator, whether it is much or little, by the same they in justice will be judged, and that they are required to yield obedience to, and improve upon that, and that only, which is given, for man is not to live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord.

Seeing that the Lord has never given them to understand by anything heretofore revealed, that He has ceased to speak, forever, to His creatures, when sought
unto in a proper manner, why should it be thought a thing incredible that he should be pleased to speak again, in these last days, for their salvation? Perhaps you may be surprised at this assertion, that I should say for the salvation of His creatures in these last days, since we have already in our possessions a vast volume of His word, which he has previously given. But you will admit that the word spoken to Noah was not sufficient for Abraham, or it was not required of him to leave the land of his nativity, and seek an inheritance in a strange country upon the word spoken to Noah, but, for himself he obtained promises from the hand of the Lord, and walked in that perfection that he was called, “the friend of God.” Isaac, the promised seed, was not required to rest his hope alone on the promises made to his Father Abraham, but was privileged with the assurance of his approbation in the sight of Heaven, by the direct voice of the Lord to him.

If one man can live upon the revelations to another, might I not with propriety ask, why the necessity then, of the Lord’s speaking to Isaac as he did, as is recorded in the 26^th chapter of Genesis? For the Lord there repeats, or rather, promises again to perform the oath which he had previously sworn to Abraham, and why this repetition to Isaac? Why was not the first promise as sure for Isaac as it was for Abraham? Was not Isaac Abraham’s son, and could he not place implicit confidence in the veracity of his father as being a man of God?

Perhaps you may say that he was a very peculiar man, and different from men in these last days, consequently the Lord favored him with blessings peculiar and different, as he was different from man in this age. I admit that he was a peculiar man, and was not only peculiarly blessed, but greatly blessed. But all the peculiarity that I can discover in the man, or all the difference between him and men in this age, is, that he was more Holy and more perfect before God, and came to him with a purer heart, and more faith than men in this day.

The same might be said of Jacob’s history, “Why was it that the Lord spake to him concerning the same promise, after he had made it once to Abraham, and renewed it to Isaac? Why could not Jacob rest contented upon the word spoken to his father? When the time of the promise drew nigh for the deliverance of the Children of Israel from the land of Egypt, why was it necessary that the Lord should begin to speak to Moses? The promise or word to Abraham was, that his seed should serve in bondage, and be afflicted 400 years, and after that they should come out with great substance. Why did they not rely on this promise, and when they had remained in Egypt, in bondage 400 years, come out without waiting for further revelations, but act entirely upon the promise given to Abraham that they should come out?”

Paul said to his Hebrew brethren, that God might more abundantly show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel; He confirmed it by an oath. He also exhorts them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

Notwithstanding, we (said Paul) have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us, which hope we have an an anchor to the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the vail, yet he was careful to press upon them the necessity of continuing on until they, as well as those who then inherited the promises, might have the assurance of their salvation confirmed to them, by an oath from the mouth of Him who could not lie; for that seemed to be the example anciently, and Paul holds it out to his Hebrew brethren as an object attainable in his day. And why not? I admit by reading the scriptures of truth, the saints, in the day of Paul, could learn, beyond the power of contradiction, that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, had the promise or oath was no assurance to them of their salvation; but they could by walking in the footsteps and continuing in the faith of their fathers, obtain, for themselves an oath for confirmation that they were meant to be partakers of the inheritance, with the saints in light.

If the saints in the days of the apostles were privileged to take the Ancients for examples, and lay hold of the same promises, and attain to the same exalted privilege of knowing that their names were written in the Lamb’s Book of Life and that they were sealed there as a perpetual memorial before the face of the Most High, will not the same faithfulness, the same purity of heart, and the same faith, bring the same assurance of eternal life, and that in the same manner, to the children of men now in this age of the world? I have no doubt that the holy prophets and apostles and saints in ancient days, were saved in the Kingdom of God; neither do I doubt but that they held converse and communion with Him while they were in the flesh, as Paul said to his Corinthian brethren that the Lord Jesus showed Himself to above five hundred saints at one time after His resurrection.

Job said that he knew that his Redeemer lived and that he should see Him in the flesh in the latter days. I may believe that Enoch walked with God and by faith was translated. I may believe that Noah was a perfect man in his generation and also walked with God. I may believe that Abraham communed with God and conversed with angels. I may believe that Isaac obtained renewal of the covenant made to Abraham by the direct voice of the Lord. I may believe that Jacob conversed with the holy angels, and heard the voice of his Maker, that he wrestled with the angel until he prevailed and obtained the blessing. I may believe that Elijah was taken to heaven in a chariot of fire with fiery horses. I may believe that the Saints saw the Lord and conversed with Him face to face after His resurrection. I may believe that the Hebrew church came to Mount Zion, and unto the city of the Living God the Heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels. I may believe that they looked into eternity, and saw the Judge of all, and Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant. But will all this purchase an assurance for me, and waft me to the regions of eternal day, and seat me down in the presence of the King of Kings with my garments spotless, pure and white? Or must I not rather obtain for myself by my own faith and diligence in keeping the commandments of the Lord, an assurance of salvation for myself? And have I not an equal privilege with the ancient saints? And will not the Lord hear my prayers and listen to my cries as soon as He ever did to theirs, if I come to Him in the manner they did? Or, is He a respecter of persons?

So I must close this subject for want of time, and I may with propriety say at the beginning—We would be glad to see you in Kirtland, we would be glad to see you embrace the New Covenant and be one with us. We sometimes think you are now one with us in heart.

I remain yours affectionately,

To Silas Smith.                            Joseph Smith, Jun.

My father was baptized in 1835 by Hyrum Smith, and in the spring of 1836 emigrated to Kirtland, Ohio; my mother had not yet joined the Church, but took with her a certificate of membership from the Presbyterian Church, and a recommend from the same.

Jesse N. Smith, Journal of Jesse N. Smith 1834-1906           

After her arrival in Kirtland, Mary Aikens Smith attended the Presbyterian Church. Jesse N. Smith and his two older brothers were with their mother the last time she attended the Presbyterian Church. “The sermon was not inspiring and was continually insulting of the Mormons [then] gathering in Kirtland.” Finally, Jesse, just a little tot learning to talk, turned to his mother and said, “Get your dumbelly (meaning umbrella) and let’s go!” She did just that and soon after was baptized a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by her nephew Hyrum Smith on July 18, 1837.

Janis Smith Pryor,  A Children’s Storybook of Jesse N. Smith, published by the family organization for the children of Jesse N. Smith 

Delisa Hargrove

I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I have moved 64 times and have not tired of experiencing this beautiful earth! I love the people, languages, histories/anthropologies, & especially religious cultures of the world. My life long passion is the study & searching out of religious symbolism, specifically related to ancient & modern temples. My husband Anthony and I love our bulldog Stig, adventures, traveling, movies, motorcycling, and time with friends and family.

I was born in the State of New York, town of Parishville, Lawrence Co., March 30th, 1832. When I was about 12 years old my father moved to Ohio and settled at Fairport in Geauga Co., fifteen miles from Kirtland. My father said to mother one day, “They say the Smiths live at Kirtland and are Mormons.” They had been acquainted with the Smiths before the Book of Mormon was found and lived neighbors to John and Silas Smith, Joseph Smith’s uncles. Father said, “I’m going to see them and if honest John Smith tells me the Book of Mormon is true I will believe it for I don’t believe he has ever told a lie in his life.”

I mention this to show how well they were liked for honesty before they were Mormons. He went and brought a Book of Mormon and read it in a short time. Then he took mother and went to Kirtland and they were both baptized…[by] Joseph Smith, Senior.

Delisa Hargrove

I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I have moved 64 times and have not tired of experiencing this beautiful earth! I love the people, languages, histories/anthropologies, & especially religious cultures of the world. My life long passion is the study & searching out of religious symbolism, specifically related to ancient & modern temples. My husband Anthony and I love our bulldog Stig, adventures, traveling, movies, motorcycling, and time with friends and family.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (often misnamed the “Mormon Church”) purchased some land in May 2012 from the Community of Christ, a splinter group from the LDS Church formerly known as the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The 6,000 acres purchased from the Community of Christ is of historical significance to both churches.

The land purchased is located in Missouri and Ohio and includes both operating farmland and several other non-farmland properties, which include Haun’s Mill and the Far West Burying Ground (both in Missouri) and the Joseph Smith Sr. home in Kirtland, Ohio.

At the time of the purchase, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints had no plans to develop the land. They planned to continue farm operations on the farm land and maintain historic sites.

Haun’s Mill is of historic significance as the place where 18 Latter-day Saints (“Mormons”) were massacred on October 30, 1838, when the sheriff of Caldwell County, William Jennings, led an armed militia of more than 200 men to the settlement and opened fire without warning on its citizens. Far West is also located in Caldwell County and is the settlement the Saints founded in 1836 which served as church headquarters during 1838. An estimated 200 early Latter-day Saints are buried at the Far West Burial Grounds. The Joseph Smith Sr. home in Ohio is where Joseph Smith’s parents lived from 1831–1838. This is where Joseph Smith Sr. lived when he was called to be the LDS Church’s first Presiding Patriarch.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a desire to preserve sites significant to its history and organization in order to help living members of the “Mormon Church” remember the sacrifices and miracles which occurred at that time. The history of the “Mormon Church” holds a noteworthy place in United States history as well, and it is important that many people learn what happened in order to make sure the same mistakes are not made again.

Keith L. Brown

Keith L. Brown is a convert to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, having been born and raised Baptist. He was studying to be a Baptist minister at the time of his conversion to the LDS faith. He was baptized on 10 March 1998 in Reykjavik, Iceland while serving on active duty in the United States Navy in Keflavic, Iceland. He currently serves as the First Assistant to the High Priest Group for the Annapolis, Maryland Ward. He is a 30-year honorably retired United States Navy Veteran.

of-common-sense.site123.me/

Captain Jens Martin Christensen was a faithful convert to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (which church is frequently misnamed the Mormon Church). Jens was born on April 29, 1843, in Hammerholt, Denmark, the seventh of eight children, to Christen Oveson and Kirsten Marie Andersen. When Jens grew up, he proudly wore his red military uniform jacket, black trousers, and large black fur hat as a member of the Danish queen’s guards. Jens was known for keeping his boots polished and looking smart.

When Jens heard the gospel preached in Denmark in 1866, he gained a personal testimony of its truthfulness and was baptized on February 4 of that year by Elder S. Petersen. Not long thereafter, Jens boarded a three-mast ship called the Kenilworth and sailed to New York from Germany. He brought his fiancée, Maren Johanne Rasmussen with him, having snuck her out of her home against the wishes of her parents. Her mother had locked her in her bedroom, but Jens tied bed sheets together to help her escape. They then took a train to Hamburg, Germany, where they sailed from.

After arriving in New York, Jens and Maren travelled up through the Great Lakes and came down the Missouri River by rail, trying to avoid the inflated prices of the direct rail tickets. They travelled further to North Platte, Nebraska, where other Saints arrived to walk the rest of the way across the plains to Utah. The tradition of Jens’ descendants is that Jens kept his boots shiny all the way to Utah.

Maren became very sick with cholera. Jens was a volunteer to help the many sick pioneers, and he would carry Maren around with him, sometimes holding an umbrella over her to protect her from the sun. Maren survived the trek to the Salt Lake Valley, and she eventually recovered fully. They were married on October 22, 1866, and moved to Fairview, Utah, where they built their first home. They were sealed a few months later, on May 8, 1867 in the Endowment House in Salt Lake City (the Salt Lake Temple was not yet complete). Their faith was tried when church authorities asked them in 1878 to relocate to the Manasseh-Ephraim area of Colorado, 500 miles away. Then, after moving, Jens was called on a mission to Denmark. He sought reconciliation with his in-laws, but they refused to acknowledge they had a daughter.

After returning home from his mission in April 1887, Christensen’s health began to fail. He and his family moved to Murray, Utah, where he stayed until he passed away on July 8, 1908, at the age of 65. Jens’ descendants look to their ancestor for faith and determination to remain clean and pure, even in the face of adversity.

If you wish to read the full account of Jens Christensen, it is told in Erastus Snow Christensen, 1874–1943, A Family History, by Steve Mecham and Verda Christensen Murphy, accessible at The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Family History Library on Film No. 142703, Item 2.

Keith L. Brown

Keith L. Brown is a convert to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, having been born and raised Baptist. He was studying to be a Baptist minister at the time of his conversion to the LDS faith. He was baptized on 10 March 1998 in Reykjavik, Iceland while serving on active duty in the United States Navy in Keflavic, Iceland. He currently serves as the First Assistant to the High Priest Group for the Annapolis, Maryland Ward. He is a 30-year honorably retired United States Navy Veteran.

of-common-sense.site123.me/

Before departing Illinois with the first group of Saints, President Brigham Young had seen a vision in answer to his prayer seeking guidance about where to lead the Saints. In this vision, he saw an angel standing on a “conical hill.” The angel was Joseph Smith (martyred prophet), and he was pointing to where the Saints’ city and temple should be built. Upon arrival in the Salt Lake Valley, Brigham Young recognized Ensign Peak as that conical hill.

The name given to the hill, Ensign Peak, comes from Isaiah 11:11–12:

And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left . . . And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

From the time the first brethren climbed the hill, Ensign Peak has held special significance for the inhabitants of the Salt Lake Valley. Many festivals and celebrations have been held there, and in 1934, a monument was erected memorializing its significance. The 18.47-foot monument (the Saints arrived in 1847) was built of stones collected from stakes (organizational units of congregations) along the Mormon Trail.

Decades later, the Salt Lake City Public Services Department and the Ensign Peak Foundation (a non-profit organization of private citizens), and the Mormon Historic Sites Foundation banded together to raise money to build a historic trail up the peak and a nature park of 66 acres surrounding it. This immense project, which included hiking trails, historic signs, two vista points, and the reclamation of eroding soil, was completed in 1996. President Gordon B. Hinckley dedicated the Ensign Peak Nature Park on July 26 of that year, setting it apart to be “a place of pondering, a place of remembrance, a place of thoughtful gratitude, a place of purposeful resolution” (“Park at Ensign Peak Dedicated,” LDS Church News, (August 3, 1996).

Latter-day Saints believe their pioneer forebears were led to the Salt Lake Valley by God. Brigham Young had the vision of Joseph Smith standing in the valley where they were supposed to go, but the Saints had no other pilot or guide. None of them had ever been to the Utah wilderness or knew anything about it, but they were led by a living prophet of God who knew the place when he arrived because he had been shown it previously. After climbing Ensign Peak with those eight men, he said, “This is Ensign Peak. Now, brethren, organize your exploring parties, so as to be safe from Indians; go and explore where you will, and you will come back every time and say this is the best place” (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. London: Latter-day Saints’ Book Depot, 1854–1886), 13: 86). These men did explore many other areas in the Utah Territory, but all returned to declare their original stopping point the “best spot.”

Ensign Peak also served as a temple for at least one of the early Saints. Because the Saints had left their temple in Nauvoo, and it took several years for them to complete another temple, Addison Pratt had no temple to go to in order to receive his endowment before leaving to serve a mission. He “was taken to the summit of Ensign Peak and given his endowments, that he might return to those islands of the sea in which he had labored, with greater spiritual power” (Brigham H. Roberts, Conference Report, April 1915, 130). Brigham Young specially consecrated the peak for this purpose.

Additional Resources:

“A Defense and a Refuge,” Boyd K. Packer, Ensign, October 2006.

“A Banner Is Unfurled: Mormonism’s Ensign Peak,” Ronald Walker, Dialogue—A Journal of Mormon Thought.

Ensign Peak Park

Mormon Historic Sites

dwhite

Doris White is a native of Oregon and graduated from Brigham Young University with a degree in English and a minor in Editing. She loves to talk with others about the gospel of Jesus Christ.