FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Array
Detailed response to CES Letter, Polygamy and Polyandry: Difference between revisions
| Line 158: | Line 158: | ||
*{{Fact}} However, Joseph Smith did not restore the practice of plural marriage according to Mosaic law—plural marriage was practiced prior to the institution of the Mosaic law without these restrictions. A well-known example is Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel: He was married to the two sisters Rachel and Leah. | *{{Fact}} However, Joseph Smith did not restore the practice of plural marriage according to Mosaic law—plural marriage was practiced prior to the institution of the Mosaic law without these restrictions. A well-known example is Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel: He was married to the two sisters Rachel and Leah. | ||
*{{Fact}} It should also be noted that the biblical practice of levirate marriage, as defined by Hebrew law, required a man to take his childless deceased brother's wife as his own wife in order to produce offspring for his brother. This was also a case of marrying two sisters. | *{{Fact}} It should also be noted that the biblical practice of levirate marriage, as defined by Hebrew law, required a man to take his childless deceased brother's wife as his own wife in order to produce offspring for his brother. This was also a case of marrying two sisters. | ||
}} | |||
===="President Hinckley publicly stating that polygamy is not doctrinal"==== | |||
{{CESLetterItem | |||
|claim=The author states, "A lot of members don’t realize that there is a set of very specific and bizarre rules outlined in Doctrine & Covenants 132 (still in LDS canon despite President Hinckley publicly stating that polygamy is not doctrinal) on how polygamy is to be practiced." | |||
|answer= | |||
{{Church answer | |||
|link=https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-and-families-in-early-utah?lang=eng | |||
|title=Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah | |||
|author= | |||
|publication=Gospel Topics on LDS.org | |||
|date=2013 | |||
|summary=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, any person who practices plural marriage cannot become or remain a member of the Church. | |||
}} | |||
*Gordon B. Hinckley made the following statement on ''Larry King Live'' on September 8, 1998 with regard to the practice of polygamy: | |||
<blockquote> | |||
I condemn it [polygamy], yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal. It is not legal. And this church takes the position that we will abide by the law. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, magistrates in honoring, obeying and sustaining the law. | |||
</blockquote> | |||
*Despite the fact that rules regarding polygamy are outlined in D&C 132, the Church no longer teaches it as doctrine. It ''was'' taught as doctrine in the 1800's, it is ''not'' taught as doctrine today. There is no doctrine that allows the present practice of plural marriage in the Church. Its practice is "not doctrinal." Polygamy is illegal today, and Church policy is to respect the law on the matter. For most of the practice of plural marriage, the Church fought the anti-polygamy laws, and regarded them as violations of the Constitution. Any decision to disobey secular law for conscience sake must be specifically commanded by the Church's leaders. At present, that has not happened. | |||
*Many constitutional law scholars--LDS and non-LDS--regard the Supreme Court decisions on the legality of plural marriage as clearly biased and motivated by religious prejudice. The nineteenth century Saints had good grounds for believing that the law was unjust and would eventually be overturned. | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 03:22, 28 February 2014
Response to "Polygamy & Polyandry Concerns & Questions"
| [[../Book of Abraham Concerns & Questions|Book of Abraham Concerns & Questions]] | A FAIR Analysis of:
[[../|Letter to a CES Director]] |
[[../Prophets Concerns & Questions|Prophets Concerns & Questions]] |
- Response to section: "Joseph Smith was married to at least 34 women"
- Response to section: "Of those 34 women, 11 of them were married women of other living men"
- Response to section: "Joseph was 37-years-old when he married 14-year-old Helen Mar Kimball"
- Response to section: "Among the women was a mother-daughter set and three sister sets"
- Response to section: "D&C 132 is unequivocal on the point that polygamy is permitted only 'to multiply and replenish the earth' and 'bear the souls of men'"
Response Section
"Joseph Smith was married to at least 34 women"
"Of those 34 women, 11 of them were married women of other living men"
| Mother | Brodie’s claim (‘’No Man Knows My History’’, p. 301, 345, 465) | Modern evidence |
|---|---|---|
Buell |
Brodie claims that “the physiognomy revealed in a rare photograph of Oliver Buell seems to weight the balance overwhelmingly on the side of Joseph’s paternity.” | Oliver Buell is not the son of Joseph Smith, Jr.
DNA research in 2007 confirmed Presendia Huntington Buell’s son Oliver, born sometime in 1838-1839, was the son of Norman Buell.[1] "Only 9 of the 23 genetic markers match when comparing the inferred Oliver Buell haplotype to that of Joseph Smith. Such a low degree of correlation between the two haplotypes provides strong evidence that they belong to two unrelated paternal lineages, thus excluding with high likelihood Joseph Smith Jr. as the biological father of Oliver N. Buell. Further weight is given to this observation by the close match of the inferred haplotype of Owen F. Buell to the independent Buell record in the SMGF data base, which genetic relationship dates back prior to Joseph Smith's era. Additionally, the two genetic profiles were run through a haplogroup predictor algorithm that assigned the Smith haplotypes to a cluster known as R1b and the cluster for the Buell's haplotypes to I1b2a, two deeply divergent clades that separated anciently, thus providing further evidence that the Oliver Buell and Joseph Smith lineages are not closely related" [2] |
Alger |
Brodie states that “[t]here is some evidence that Fannie Alger bore Joseph a child in Kirtland.” | DNA research in 2005 confirmed Fanny Alger’s son Orrison Smith is not the son of Joseph Smith, Jr.[3] |
Hancock |
”Legend among the descendants of Levi W. Hancock points to another son of the prophet. If the legend is true, the child was probably John Reed Hancock, born April 19, 1841.” | Nothing is yet known regarding the patrilineage John Reed Hancock.
John Reed's brother Mosiah is not the son of Joseph Smith, Jr. DNA research in 2007 confirmed Clarissa Hancock's son Mosiah, born 9 April 1834, was the son of Levi Hancock.[4] "A 12-marker haplotype was already available for a paternal descendant of Mosiah Hancock, generated by an independent commercial laboratory. A comparison of the 12 markers to the shortened Joseph Smith haplotype showed only 5 matches, indicating a low likelihood of a biological relationship between Mosiah and Joseph. Additionally, we queried the SMGF database with the 12 Ycs Hancock markers. Six independent records returned matching all 12 markers, all having the surname Hancock with documented connections to Mosiah's grandfather Thomas Hancock III." [5] |
Lightner |
The son of Mary Rollins Lightner “may as easily have been the prophet’s son as that of Adam Lightner.” | George Algernon Lightner, born March 22, 1842, died as an infant and therefore had no descendants. DNA testing cannot help determine paternity. |
Hyde |
Mrs. Orson Hyde’s sons Orson and Frank “could have been Joseph’s sons.” | Orson Washington Hyde, born November 9, 1843, died as an infant and therefore had no descendants. DNA testing cannot help determine paternity. |
Pratt |
Mrs. Parley P. Pratt’s son Moroni “might also be added to this list.” | Moroni Llewellyn Pratt is not the son of Joseph Smith, Jr.
DNA research in 2005 confirmed Mary Ann Frost Pratt's son Moroni, born 7 December 1844, was the son of Parley P. Pratt.[6] |
Snow |
”According to tradition,” Emma beat Eliza Snow and caused her to abort Joseph’s child. | Both LDS and non-LDS reviewers have found several flaws in the story about Eliza.[7] Emma's biographers note that "Eliza continued to teach school for a month after her abrupt departure from the Smith household. Her own class attendance record shows that she did not miss a day during the months she taught the Smith children, which would be unlikely had she suffered a miscarriage."[8] |
Jacobs |
Zina was “about seven months pregnant with Jacobs' child at the time of her marriage to the prophet.” (Brodie, p. 465) John D. Lee and William Hall stated that Zina had been “pregnant by Smith.” | Zebulon Jacobs is not the son of Joseph Smith, Jr.
DNA research in 2005 confirmed Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs's son Zebulon was the son of Henry Bailey Jacobs.[9] |
"Joseph was 37-years-old when he married 14-year-old Helen Mar Kimball"
"Among the women was a mother-daughter set and three sister sets"
"President Hinckley publicly stating that polygamy is not doctrinal"
"D&C 132 is unequivocal on the point that polygamy is permitted only 'to multiply and replenish the earth' and 'bear the souls of men'"
== Notes ==
- [note] Samuel Katich, "A Tale of Two Marriage Systems: Perspectives on Polyandry and Joseph Smith," Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, 2003.
- [note] DNA Tests rule out 2 as Smith descendants, Deseret News Nov. 10, 2007.
- [note] Ugo A. Perego, Jayne E. Ekins, and Scott R. Woodward, "Resolving the Paternities of Oliver N. Buell and Mosiah L. Hancock through DNA," JJHWA, 133.
- [note] Ugo A. Perego, Natalie M. Myers, and Scott R. Woodward, “Reconstructing the Y-Chromosome of Joseph Smith Jr.: Genealogical Applications, Journal of Mormon History Vol. 32, No. 2 (Summer 2005) 70-88.
- [note] Deseret News, 2007.
- [note] Ugo A. Perego, Jayne E. Ekins, and Scott R. Woodward, "Resolving the Paternities of Oliver N. Buell and Mosiah L. Hancock through DNA," JJHWA, 134-135.
- [note] Perego, Myers and Woodward, 2005.
- [note] This bit of folklore is explored in Maureen Ursenbach Beecher et al., "Emma and Eliza and the Stairs," Brigham Young University Studies 22 no. 1 (Fall 1982), 86–96.. RLDS author Richard Price also argues that the physical layout of the Mansion House makes the story as reported by Charles C. Rich unlikely, see "Eliza Snow Was Not Pushed Down the Mansion House Stairs," in Richard Price. "Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy: How Men Nearest the Prophet Attached Polygamy to His Name in Order to Justify Their Own Polygamous Crimes." (n.p.: Price Publishing Company, 2001), chapter 9. Price's dogmatic insistence that Joseph never taught plural marriage, however, cannot be sustained by the evidence.
- [note] Linda King Newell and Valeen Tippetts Avery, Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, 2nd ed. (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1994), 136. See also discussion in Danel Bachman, "Plural Marriage Before the Death of Joseph Smith (Master's Thesis, Purdue University, 1975), 140n173.
- [note] Perego, Myers and Woodward, 2005.