How should we view the Manifesto?

[MikeWaters]

What do the apologists say about polygamy continuing beyond the Manifesto, directed by general authorities?

Is this something that can even be discussed by a professor at BYU?

[Mormon Red Death]

anything that is controversial in our history must never be talked about.

It simply didn't happen... besides even if it did (which I am not saying it did) they did it in areas of Mexico that were beyond the control of the evil American Government who was heck bent on destroying the mormons.

[SteelBlue]

I think "the Brethren" would acknowledge that it continued beyond if questioned on that matter. I remember Dan posting a speech given by Dallen Oaks on the topic of lying. I'm too lazy to look it up, but I'm fairly certain that Oaks mentioned the fact that it continued on past the manifesto in that speech. I believe they use the earlier manifesto date because it sounds better and it remains technically true as the marriages that continued on were out of the country (I think).

[MikeWaters]

but the manifesto doesn't have an "out of country" clause in it.

And I certainly not all of them were out of country since my memory is telling me that some of the apostles themselves took wives.

Let's face it. Most likely if we asked an apostle now, his true answer would be "I don't know."

[SteelBlue]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

but the manifesto doesn't have an "out of country" clause in it.

And I certainly not all of them were out of country since my memory is telling me that some of the apostles themselves took wives.

Let's face it. Most likely if we asked an apostle now, his true answer would be "I don't know."

I think that the most of the marriages took place in Canada, Mexico and offshore. But I did look up that article that Dan posted. The speaker was Dallen Oaks. Here are the few paragraphs I remembered. He clearly understands that it continued past the manifesto AND he seems to realize that though most of them were out of country, some may not have been.

"As far as concerns our own church and culture, the most common allegations of lying for the Lord swirl around the initiation, practice, and discontinuance of polygamy.

It is clear from the record of history that Joseph Smith introduced the doctrine and practice of polygamy to a select few in the 1830s and 1840s, but it was not announced publicly by the church until the revelation was read aloud at a Church conference in Salt Lake City in 1852. It is also clear that during the federal prosecutions of the 1880s, numerous Church leaders and faithful members were pursued, arrested, prosecuted, and jailed for violations of various laws forbidding polygamy or cohabitation. Some wives were even sent to prison for refusing to testify against their husbands, my grandfather's oldest sister being one of them.

It is also clear that polygamy did not end suddenly with the 1890 Manifesto. Polygamous relationships sealed before that revelation was announced continued for a generation. The performance of polygamous marriages also continued for a time outside the United States, where the application of the Manifesto was uncertain for a season. It appears that polygamous marriages also continued for about a decade in some other areas among leaders and members who took license for the ambiguities and pressures created by this high-level collision between resented laws and reverenced doctrines. "

[Robin]

Overall, the manifesto was a good move.

[fusnik11]

Post manifesto polgamy is an interesting ordeal....

A. John taylor said he was visited by jesus and joseph with both assuring him polygamy was right regardless the pressure they were feeling....

B. Wilford was attempting to 'beat the devil' at his own game by 'cessation' of the practice....

C. Many believed polygamy was necessary for exaltation and further progression....

D. 'Common consent' of the church was not entirely common. Many of the saints present did not manifest their approval.....

E. Leaders still commissioned marriages both within the us and outside the country.....(many believe they went to canada and mexico becuase it was not illegal in those countries which is false, as it was illegal in both mexico and can)

Manifesto as a divine revelation is a tough pill to swallow because of the actions of the leadership of the church. As an apologist you must reconcile the mouthpiece of the lord stating he was shown what would happen if polygamy continued, with the actions of the same man that ensued. Lest we forget the second manifesto of 1905 stating polygamy this time would stop.....Its also interesting to know the men given as fall guys.....

Becuase of this I empathize with the current polygamists as they can form a theological case that the church is/was wrong in its current position....

Anyone know about lorrin woolley? He claimed priesthood was given to him to continue on with polygamy even though the church had stopped.....

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

C. Many believed polygamy was necessary for exaltation and further progression....

This is the kicker for me. I cannot swallow the idea, logically or otherwise, that polygamy is essential for exaltation. I am sympathetic to the idea that the Lord would allow it under certain circumstances, but the idea that polygamy is a requirement for exaltation just makes no sense to me.

And I don't believe that the fact that it took some time for the practice to die off means that the church made a doctrinal "mistake" in stopping the practice. This was a major change in doctrine and it should not be surprising that the transition was messy.

[FMCoug]

Where is the change in doctrine? As I've said before, I can find no evidence anywhere that the DOCTRINE was changed, just the practice thereof.

Whether we can personally accept polygamy as doctrine or not is a personal choice, but to me, the evidence is very clear that polygams is LDS Doctrine that has not been rescinded.

Please point me in the right direction if you have a source that says otherwise.

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by FMCoug

Where is the change in doctrine? As I've said before, I can find no evidence anywhere that the DOCTRINE was changed, just the practice thereof.

Whether we can personally accept polygamy as doctrine or not is a personal choice, but to me, the evidence is very clear that polygams is LDS Doctrine that has not been rescinded.

Please point me in the right direction if you have a source that says otherwise.

Polygamy is definitely no longer LDS doctrine. The Church is doing all it can to pretend the whole mess never happened; did you hear GBH's response to Larry King when asked about polygamy? It was hardly a defense of the doctrinal soundness of polygamy. Perhaps the Church has not formally renounced polygamy, but by its actions it has effectively repudiated it.