LDS Freedom Forum

If you move a women from one man to another man, you change the children's priesthood lineage and are messing with the family unit.

The process for exempting a wife from the "Law of Sarah" is outlined in the 1843 revelation on the law of polygamy in Doctrine & Covenants 132:64-65

64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the [plural wife] law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.

65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law [of polygamy], for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take Hagar to wife.

Apostle Orson Pratt also explained this clause in the Lord's Law of Celestial Marriage:

Apostle Orson Pratt"When a man who has a wife, teaches her the law of God, and she refuses to give her consent for him to marry another according to that law, then, it becomes necessary, for her to state before the President the reasons why she withholds her consent; if her reasons are sufficient and justifiable and the husband is found in the fault, or in transgression, then, he is not permitted to take any step in regard to obtaining another. But if the wife can show no good reason why she refuses to comply with the law which was given unto Sarah of old, then it is lawful for her husband, if permitted by revelation through the prophet, to be married to others without her consent, and he will be justified, and she will be condemned, because she did not give them unto him, as Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham, and as Rachel and Leah gave Bilhah and Zilpah to their husband, Jacob." (The Seer, Vol.1, No.3, p.41)

When cross-examined during the Reed Smoot hearings, church president Joseph F. Smith gave the official church position on the necessity of a wife's consent to polygamy:

Prophet Joseph F Smith President Smith: The condition is that if she does not consent the Lord will destroy her, but I do not know how he will do it.
Question: Is it not true that ... if she refuses her consent her husband is exempt from the law which requires her consent.
President Smith: Yes; he is exempt from the law which requires her consent. She is commanded to consent, but if she does not, then he is exempt from the requirement.
Question: Then he is at liberty to proceed without her consent, under the law. In other words, her consent amounts to nothing?
President Smith: It amounts to nothing but her consent.

In 1875 Apostle Wilford Woodruff announced, "We have many bishops and elders who have but one wife. brigham youngThey are abundantly qualified to enter the higher law and take more, but their wives will not let them. Any man who permits a woman to lead him and bind him down is but little account in the church and Kingdom of God."

Brigham Young declared "Let the father be the head of the family … and let the wives and the children say amen to what he says, and be subject to his dictates, instead of their dictating the man, instead of trying to govern him."

Now for my proposition; it is more particularly for my sisters, as it is frequently happening that women say they are unhappy. Men will say, "My wife, though a most excellent woman, has not seen a happy day since I took my second wife;" "No, not a happy day for a year," says one; and another has not seen a happy day for five years. It is said that women are tied down and abused: that they are misused and have not the liberty they ought to have; that many of them are wading through a perfect flood of tears, because of the conduct of some men, together with their own folly.

I wish my own women to understand that what I am going to say is for them as well as others, and I want those who are here to tell their sisters, yes, all the women of this community, and then write it back to the States, and do as you please with it. I am going to give you from this time to the 6th day of October next, for reflection, that you may determine whether you wish to stay with your husbands or not, and then I am going to set every woman at liberty and say to them, Now go your way, my women with the rest, go your way. And my wives have got to do one of two things; either round up their shoulders to endure the afflictions of this world, and live their religion, or they may leave, for I will not have them about me. I will go into heaven alone, rather than have scratching and fighting around me. I will set all at liberty. "What, first wife too?" Yes, I will liberate you all.

I know what my women will say; they will say, "You can have as many women as you please, Brigham." But I want to go somewhere and do something to get rid of the whiners; I do not want. them to receive a part of the truth and spurn the rest out of doors.

I wish my women, and brother Kimball's and brother Grant's to leave, and every woman in this Territory, or else say in their hearts that they will embrace the Gospel - the whole of it. Tell the Gentiles that I will free every woman in this Territory at our next Conference. "What, the first wife too?" Yes, there shall not be one held in bondage, all shall be set free. And then let the father be the head of the family, the master of his own household; and let him treat them as an angel would treat them; and let the wives and the children say amen to what he says, and be subject to his dictates, instead of their dictating the man, instead of their trying to govern him.

No doubt some are thinking, "I wish brother Brigham would say what would become of the children." I will tell you what my feelings are; I will let my wives take the children, and I have property enough to support them, and can educate them, and then give them a good fortune, and I can take a fresh start.

I do not desire to keep a particle of my property, except enough to protect me from a state of nudity. And [p.56] I would say, wives you are welcome to the children, only do not teach them iniquity; for if you do, I will send an Elder, or come myself, to teach them the Gospel. You teach them life and salvation, or I will send Elders to instruct them.

Let every man thus treat his wives, keeping raiment enough to clothe his body; and say to your wives, "Take all that I have and be set at liberty; but if you stay with me you shall comply with the law of God, and that too without any murmuring and whining. You must fulfil the law of God in every respect, and round up your shoulders to walk up to the mark without any grunting."

Now recollect that two weeks from to morrow I am going to set you at liberty. But the first wife will say, "It is hard, for I have lived with my husband twenty years, or thirty, and have raised a family of children for him, and it is a great trial to me for him to have more women;" then I say it is time that you gave him up to other women who will bear children. If my wife had borne me all the children that she ever would bare, the celestial law would teach me to take young women that would have children.

Do you understand this? I have told you many times that there are multitudes of pure and holy spirits waiting to take tabernacles, now what is our duty? - to prepare tabernacles for them; to take a course that will not tend to drive those spirits into the families of the wicked, where they will be trained in wickedness, debauchery, and every species of crime. It is the duty of every righteous man and woman to prepare tabernacles for all the spirits they can; hence if my women leave, I will go and search up others who will abide the celestial law, and let all I now have go where they please; though I will send the Gospel to them.

This is the reason why the doctrine of plurality of wives was revealed, that the noble spirits which are waiting for tabernacles might be brought forth. ...

Sisters, I am not joking, I do not throw out my proposition to banter your feelings, to see whether you will leave your husbands, all or any of you. But I do know that there is no cessation to the everlasting whining of many of the women in this Territory; I am satisfied that this is the case. And if the women will turn from the commandments of God and continue to despise the order of heaven, I will pray that the curse of the Almighty may be close to their heels, and that it may be following them all the day long. And those that enter into it and are faithful, I will promise them [p.57] that they shall be queens in heaven, and rulers to all eternity.

"But," says one, "I want to have my paradise now." And says another, "I did think I should be in paradise if I was sealed to brother Brigham, and I thought I should be happy when I became his wife, or brother Heber's. I loved you so much, that I thought I was going to have a heaven right off, right here on the spot.

What a curious doctrine it is, that we are preparing to enjoy! The only heaven for you is that which you make yourselves. My heaven is here - [laying his hand upon his heart]. I carry it with me. When do I expect it in its perfection? When I come up in the resurrection; then I shall have it, and not till then. But now we have got to fight the good fight of faith, sword in hand, as much so as men have when they go to battle; and it is one continual warfare from morning to evening, with sword in hand. This is my duty, and this is my life.

But the women come and say, "Really brother John, and brother William, I thought you were going to make a heaven for me," and they get into trouble because a heaven is not made for them by the men, even though agency is upon women as well as upon men. True there is a curse upon the woman that is not upon the man, namely, that "her whole affections shall be towards her husband," and what is the next? "He shall rule over you."

But how is it now? Your desire is to your husband, but you strive to rule over him, whereas the man should rule over you. Some may ask whether that is the case with me; go to my house and live, and then you will learn that I am very kind, but know how to rule.

If I had only wise men to talk to, there would be no necessity for my saying what I am going to say. Many and many an Elder knows no better than to go home and abuse as good a woman as dwells upon this earth, because of what I have said this afternoon. Are you, who act in that way, fit to have a family? No, you are not, and never will be, until you get good common sense. Then you can go to work and magnify your callings; and you can do the best you know how; and on that ground I will promise you salvation, but upon no other principle.

If I were talking to a people that understood themselves and the doctrine of the holy Gospel, there would be no necessity for saying this, because you would understand. But many have been (what shall I say? pardon me, brethren,) hen pecked so much, that they do not know the place of either man or woman; they abuse and rule a good woman with an iron hand. With them it is as Solomen said "Bray a feel in a mortar among wheat, with a pestle, yet will not his foolishness depart from him." You may talk to them about their duties, about what is required of them, and still they are fools, and will continue to be.

Prepare yourselves for two weeks from to morrow; and I will tell you now, that if you will tarry with your husbands, after I have set you free, you must bow down to it, and submit yourselves to the celestial law. You may go where you please, after two weeks from to-morrow; but, remember, that I will not hear any more of this whining. - JoD 4:55-57 (September 21, 1856)

"Many may think it very strange that I would consent for my dear husband, whom I loved as I did my own life and lived with him for years, to take more wives," wrote Sarah D. Rich, wife of Apostle Charles C. Rich. "This I could not have done if I had not believed it to be right in the Sight of god, and believed it to be one principal of his gospel once again restored to earth, that those holding the priesthood of heaven might by obeying this order attain to a higher glory in the eternal world." (spelling corrected)

annie clark tannerAnnie Clark Tanner was similarly certain that "women would never have accepted polygamy had it not been for their religion. The principle of Celestial Marriage was considered the capstone of the Mormon religion. Only by practicing it would the highest exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom of God be obtained."

George S. Tanner, prominent Utah educator and polygamous son, reasoned: "I doubt there was a woman in the church who was in any way connected with Polygamy who was not heartsick. They would not admit it in public because of their loyalty to the church and their brothers and sisters." Tanner was persuaded that "the women try to be brave, but no woman is able to share a husband whom she loves with one or more other women. Only a few of the women involved in polygamy asked for a divorce simply because it was not a popular thing to do."

Mrs. Hubert Howe Bancroft, a prominent visitor to Salt Lake City in 1880, commented on the ability of polygamous women to maintain appearances. She observed that Mormon women viewed polygamy as "a religious duty and schooled themselves to bear its discomforts as a sort of religious penance, and that it was a matter of pride to make everybody believe they lived happily and to persuade themselves and others that it was not a trial; and that long life of such discipline makes the trial lighter."

3. What Mormon Women Really Felt About Polygamy

Phebe Woodruff
Phebe Woodruff, first wife of Apostle Wilford Woodruff, also shared the ambivalent feelings of Mormon women in polygamy. Called upon to defend the principle in a mass meeting of Mormon women, Phebe bore testimony that "If I am proud of anything in this world, it is that I accepted the principle of plural marriage, and remained among the people called 'Mormons' and am numbered with them to-day." A few days later in a conversation with a long-time friend she was asked, "How is it Sister Woodruff that you have changed your views so suddenly about polygamy? I thought you hated and loathed the institution." "I have not changed," was her response: "I loathe the unclean thing with all the strength of my nature, but Sister, I have suffered all that a woman can endure. I am old and helpless, and would rather stand up anywhere, and say anything commanded of me, than to be turned out of my home in my old age which I should be most assuredly if I refused to obey counsel."

mary ann youngMary Ann Angell Young
Mary Ann Angell Young, Brigham Young's second wife, was a patient, uncomplaining woman. But even she reportedly remarked to a friend, "God will be very cruel if he does not give us poor women adequate compensation for the trials we have endured in polygamy."

The highly favored Emmeline Free Young experienced, as Mary Ann put it, "the torments of the damned" over being displaced by Brigham's younger wife, Amelia Folsom. When a friend asked one of Mary Ann's daughters if it did not grieve her mother to see Young's devotion to his new wife, she replied, "Mother does not care. She is past being grieved by his conduct, but, on the other hand, it gives her most intense satisfaction to see Emmeline suffer as she does. She can understand now what mother had to undergo in past years. In fact, all the women are glad that Emmeline is getting her turn at last."

zina youngZina D. Jacobs Smith Young
When a woman whose husband had taken a second wife went to Zina in great anguish of mind to ask, "Does the fault lie in myself that I am so miserable; or is the system to blame for it?" Zina reportedly replied, "Sister, you are not to blame, neither are you the only woman who is suffering torments on account of polygamy. There are women in this very house [Brigham Young's] whose hearts are full of hell, and in that room … is a woman who has been a perfect fury ever since Brother Young married Sister Amelia Folsom. Brigham Young dare not enter that room or she would tear his eyes out. It is the system that is to blame for it, but we must try and be as patient as we can."

Zina was quoted in the 19 November 1869 New York World. "They expect too much attention from the husband, and because they do not get it, or see a little attention bestowed upon one of the other wives, they become sullen and morose, and permit their ill-temper to finally find vent." Zina felt that "a successful polygamous wife must regard her husband with indifference, and with no other feeling than that of reverence, for love we regard as a false sentiment; a feeling which should have no existence in polygamy."

vilate kimballVilate Kimball
Vilate Kimball, first wife of Heber C. Kimball, also recognized the value of romantic distance in a plural marriage. Counseling an unhappy plural wife, she advised the woman that "her comfort must be wholly in her children; that she must lay aside wholly all interest or thought in what her husband was doing while he was away from her" and be as "pleased to see him when he came in as she was pleased to see any friend."

Sarah Pratt
Sarah Pratt insisted that the first wife "should be it, and resented her husband's affections toward his other wives. Being away from home on church assignment was a hallmark of dedication for Mormon males, and during the years 1839-68, Orson Pratt was absent from his home for a total of nearly eleven years. Thirteen children were born during this period. Death took many, and other hands than Orson's usually buried them.

Ultimately Pratt's preoccupation with church work and his habit of marrying much younger women dealt a fatal blow to his relationship with Sarah. After returning from England in early 1868, the fifty-seven-year-old man began courting a sixteen-year-old girl who would become his tenth wife on 28 December 1868. At fifty-one, Sarah could no longer bear children, and she had come to resent bitterly Pratt's relationships with women younger than their oldest daughter. In an 1877 interview she lashed out at him. "Here was my husband," she said, "gray headed, taking to his bed young girls in mockery of marriage. Of course there could be no joy for him in such an intercourse except the indulgence of his fanaticism and of something else, perhaps, which I hesitate to mention."

Sarah castigated polygamy as the "direst curse with which a people or a nation could be afflicted. It completely demoralizes good men, and makes bad men correspondingly worse. As for the women—well, God help them! First wives it renders desperate, or else heart-broken, mean-spirited creatures; and it almost unsexes some of the other women, but not all of them, for plural wives have their sorrows too."

martha cannonMartha Hughes Cannon
Dr. Martha Hughes Cannon, twenty-seven-year-old resident physician at Deseret Hospital in Salt Lake City and later the first female state senator in the United States, became the third plural wife of fifty-year-old Angus Cannon, Salt Lake City stake president and one of Deseret Hospital's directors. She described her polygamous marriage as "a few stolen interviews thoroughly tinctured with the dread of discovery." In a 3 February 1888 letter to her husband while she was in Europe, she wrote that the trials of polygamy would be unendurable without "a thorough knowledge from God, that the principle for which we are battling and striving to maintain in purity upon the earth is ordained by Him, and that we are chosen instruments in His hands to engage in so great a calling." She added that "even with this assurance grounded in one's heart, we do not escape trials and temptations, grievious at times in their nature."

Martha was acquainted with several monogamous families and yearned for an exclusive relationship. She described such a marriage as "a joy and comfort to witness, where the wife and Mother is proud and happy in the devotion of a noble husband, while he in turn is equally contented and happy in the possession of the partner he has chosen for life; while at home in each other's association is where their greatest joys are centered." "Oh for a home!" she lamented in a 30 December 1891 letter to Angus: "A husband of my own because he is my own. A father for my children whom they know by association. And all the little auxiliaries that make life worth living. Will they ever be enjoyed by this storm-tossed exile. Or must life thus drift on and one more victim swell the ranks of the great unsatisfied!"

Martha wrote her polygamous husband: "How do you think I feel when I meet you driving another plural wife about in a glittering carriage in broad day light? I am entirely out of money—borrowing to pay some old standing debts. I want our affairs speedily and absolutely adjusted—after all my sacrifice and loss you treat me like a dog—and parade others before my eyes—I will not stand it."

Sadie Jacobs
"If anyone in this world thinks plural marriage is not a trial," Sadie Jacobson said, "they are wrong. The Lord said he would have a tried people."

Daughter of Jedediah M. Grant
"Polygamy is alright when properly carried out—on a shovel."

emmeline wellsEmmeline B. Wells
Emmeline's marriage to Daniel was unhappy. "O, if my husband could only love me even a little and not seem to be perfectly indifferent to any sensation of that kind," she wrote in her 30 September 1874 diary. "He cannot know the craving of my nature; he is surrounded with love on every side, and I am cast out.… O my poor aching heart when shall it rest its burden only on the Lord.… Every other avenue seems closed against me." On their twenty second wedding anniversary she wrote in her diary, "Anniversary of my marriage with Pres. Wells. O how happy I was then how much pleasure I anticipated and how changed alas are things since that time, how few thoughts I had then have ever been realized, and how much sorrow I have known in place of the joy I looked forward to."

SwissMrs&Pitchfire wrote:Yes, that is as pertaining to adoption.

And why wouldn't all the women be sealed to Christ? I've raised that here, the polygamists cannot answer it as it fits with their logic.

SwissMrs&Pitchfire wrote:You should take up your issues with the brethren. The assertions are not mine they belong to them. That being both as to marrying up and to procreation being point and purpose of polygamy.

patriotsaint wrote:Yes, funny (and I appreciate keeping the discussion light), but I still am hoping to find a satisfactory answer as to why polygamy exists in the celestial world.
I still mantain that something about the law must bring hapiness to God's children. People aren't asked to endure burdens, and they certainly don't need to be tested in the celestial world.
We've covered that procreation is out, as well as marrying up. It must exist for another reason.

Raindrop wrote:I can't think of any reason it would exist in the Celestial world if we are to become "one" with our spouse. And many of those quotes above by the plural wives indicated the way they dealt with it was by turning off their romantic or loving feelings for their husbands. And as was mentioned, we have eternity, why the race for more kids? Didn't John the Baptist say God could raise children for Abraham out of these stones here? And aren't the kids all in existence now, as intelligences? And how is it decided which intelligences become their "spirit children?" What do people reference when they claim it is a celestial law or it will return on the earth some day? Because you can find Taylor's quotes and others' that have said it will never be done away. They've obviously been proven false with time.

Here's a bit of a tangent, but it might have something to do with something...
Men must have an orgasm, or there is no reproduction. Women do not need to orgasm in order to conceive. I've always wondered why that is. Could that be the "desire shall be to your husband" curse?

Another thought - if this was a test, like many at the time knew it was, that makes me think it is all the LESS likely to be "brought back" as some suggest. By nature, a test is something difficult, not something people are chomping at the bit for.

sbsion wrote:

patriotsaint wrote:Yes, funny (and I appreciate keeping the discussion light), but I still am hoping to find a satisfactory answer as to why polygamy exists in the celestial world.
I still mantain that something about the law must bring hapiness to God's children. People aren't asked to endure burdens, and they certainly don't need to be tested in the celestial world.
We've covered that procreation is out, as well as marrying up. It must exist for another reason.

I really don't think one mother wants to nuture a few billion children while Father has another world created for them to inhabit

patriotsaint wrote:[
This could be part of the reason, but I doubt it. Let's say for argument's sake that someone has 50 wives. I doubt 50 wives would be that much more effective at nurturing a family in the billions than 1 would be.

sbsion wrote:

patriotsaint wrote:[
This could be part of the reason, but I doubt it. Let's say for argument's sake that someone has 50 wives. I doubt 50 wives would be that much more effective at nurturing a family in the billions than 1 would be.

but, let's say each of the 50 had 10,000 "ministering angels" to help, that would make each wife VERY important........hmmmm

patriotsaint wrote:

sbsion wrote:

patriotsaint wrote:[
This could be part of the reason, but I doubt it. Let's say for argument's sake that someone has 50 wives. I doubt 50 wives would be that much more effective at nurturing a family in the billions than 1 would be.

but, let's say each of the 50 had 10,000 "ministering angels" to help, that would make each wife VERY important........hmmmm

or just give 500,000 ministering angels to one wife? Speculation is all too easy.

NoGreaterLove wrote:Glory comes in the continuation of the seeds. The more seeds, the more glory. Some may be satisfied with slower increasing glory than others. But I think once we have seen what it means, we will all embrace it.

NoGreaterLove wrote: Some may be satisfied with slower increasing glory than others.

Your argument lacks understanding.

62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.