tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post7692004867584473686..comments2024-03-01T09:58:03.858-08:00Comments on READING FOR SANITY BOOK REVIEWS: The 19th Wife - David EbershoffMindySuehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10122081120154598894noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post-40284847047031677572011-03-23T13:06:39.821-07:002011-03-23T13:06:39.821-07:00Way after the fact, obviously, but to add my comme...Way after the fact, obviously, but to add my comment to this conversation - polygamy is no longer REQUIRED. Even when it was in practice, it was a calling - not everyone could take multiple wives, only those who the leadership called under the direction of the Spirit. <br /><br />Also, polygamy COULD one day be reinstated. It was not recanted, it was not revoked, it is simply no longer practiced. It could well be brought back in to practice.<br /><br />All things had to be restored when the Gospel was restored. To say that "polygamy is wrong" seems less...hm...informed than to say it is no longer practiced. It was necessary that it be restored so that all things from all dispensations would take place in the last dispensation. It's somewhat upsetting that the Church doesn't explain this more. You can find commentary on the subject by earlier General Authorities. <br /><br />About the book: At the risk of sounding like an old fuddy-duddy, I hated it. Foul language, messed up facts, fiction presented as history... Hated it. That's why I didn't write a review when asked. I knew it would have a great deal of bias.Sally T.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00747471877981036495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post-40687692760130570292011-01-10T13:45:29.889-08:002011-01-10T13:45:29.889-08:00It is not only no longer "required", but...It is not only no longer "required", but members are ex-communicated if they practice it. In my mind, this is a docrtinal change, but perhaps to you it is not. Do you think polygamy is bad or wrong, or is it acceptable to you? <br /><br />I acknowledge that my viewpoint may differ from other members of the LDS church. As far as my personal beliefs, I do think polygamy is wrong and is a part of LDS religious history but not part of current doctrinal structure. This does not mean that my faith is weak, simply my own conclusions after study and prayer. <br /><br />May I add that belief and faith are very personal and I am not trying to tell other people what they must believe. I'm just sharing my own viewpoint. Thanks for the discussion, I am interested in other LDS perspectives on this. Best, Clarec3thttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05202404863904896947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post-15314207771938034222011-01-10T11:29:35.225-08:002011-01-10T11:29:35.225-08:00I know this is a little late to respond, but here ...I know this is a little late to respond, but here goes anyway.<br /><br />I don't believe the LDS Church instituted a doctrinal change when we stopped polygamy. A doctrinal change, in my mind, would be that Joseph Smith said that polygamy was a good thing and subsequent leaders recanted that and said it was wrong. This was not the case. President Woodruff did not say that polygamy was suddenly wrong - he said that God no longer required the members of the Church to practice it. That's totally different. It was an administrative and procedural change, not a doctrinal change. <br /><br />Administrative and procedural changes happen as the people of the Church need them to for whatever reason to most effectively manage the Church. That doesn't mean previous practices were bad or wrong - they're just shifted to meet the needs of the people at that time.<br /><br />Polygamy is still a fundamental part of our doctrinal structure and our history. We just don't DO it right now.<br /><br />If the current mainstream LDS Church is the break-off and possibly no longer valid (??), in which church do you believe the true religion and practices reside? I've never heard this perspective from anyone before - I'm completely curious. Thanks!treenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15514375286563470593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post-67501446722184220452011-01-04T13:28:57.505-08:002011-01-04T13:28:57.505-08:00Thanks for the comments! Treen, as I mentioned, h...Thanks for the comments! Treen, as I mentioned, history can be fluid and subjective. However, I am of the opinion that it is well-recorded that Joseph Smith, the original founder of the LDS church, promoted, lived and believed polygamy to be a fundamental of God's church. A HUGE doctrinal change was implemented in order for Utah to be accepted as a state of the United States of America. So which is the sect? The church who held to Joseph's doctrine or the one who changed it? Respectfully, Clarec3thttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05202404863904896947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post-10768701971310339622011-01-03T22:31:31.285-08:002011-01-03T22:31:31.285-08:00Interesting. And a really interesting review. Than...Interesting. And a really interesting review. Thanks.Sheila Deethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13465615546936319164noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post-62000962986262079592011-01-03T13:29:54.021-08:002011-01-03T13:29:54.021-08:00"The LDS are actually the faction, the sect t..."The LDS are actually the faction, the sect that broke off from the original church beliefs."<br /><br />I'm sorry - what?treenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15514375286563470593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post-37040939852753885802011-01-03T11:08:37.666-08:002011-01-03T11:08:37.666-08:00great review! thanks for sharinggreat review! thanks for sharingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5367491918209452164.post-47923454851513540702011-01-03T10:38:36.324-08:002011-01-03T10:38:36.324-08:00This is a fantastic review. I've been thinkin...This is a fantastic review. I've been thinking about reading this one for awhile. I appreciate the honesty and perspective your review offers.Teresahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01337919035210017251noreply@blogger.com