Google "Joseph Smith's wives" or "Fanny Alger"

If you search for "Joseph Smith's wives" in Google, please take the time to scroll to the end of the names and pictures at the top. It looks something like this:

It would appear that Fanny's picture comes from my blog post about her. I got it from this AMAZING VIDEO. Amazing as it is, it's not entirely accurate. No angel with a drawn sword was needed to convince Joseph Smith to practice polygamy until the early 1840s, several years after he had hooked up with Fanny and a few others. That's right, it doesn't make sense and it's not the only thing about the sword story that doesn't make sense.

The doubters seem well pleased. Emma looks pissed.

I'm just happy to have helped make a slight difference in the world.

Temple prep - "The Power to Seal"

The following text is taken from the pamphlet "Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple" (2002) and annotated by me.

If we would understand both the history and the doctrine of temple work we must understand what the sealing power is. I'm pretty sure chemists and physicists are working on that right now. We will crack the code! We must envision, at least to a degree, why the keys of authority to employ the sealing power are crucial. Self importance, perhaps?

Nearly nine hundred years before Christ, the prophet Elijah appeared in the court of the king of Israel. He carried with him a sacred authority: the power to seal. You don't think this story's made up?? I mean, it's from the Old Testament for crying out loud.

Elijah worked out his ministry, ordained and anointed Elisha to succeed him, and then—and this is important—he did not die. Like Moses before him, he was translated. Could he also fly and see through walls?

After that, his name appears only once in the Old Testament, in the next to the last verse of the last chapter of the Old Testament. It is here that Malachi prophesies that Elijah would return and that he would “turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers,” lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse. (See Malachi 4:5–6.) I really and truly hate curses. Please tell me Elijah flew back in from wherever he flew off to.

When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matthew 16:13–19.)

You didn't transition at all to these verses. How did you get from Malachi talking hearts to Matthew talking stones and keys so fast?

When Peter, James, and John went with the Lord to the Mount of Transfiguration, there appeared with the transfigured Lord two personages. It's all true, isn't it? Please tell me there are dead people that can come back and float in the air as we levitate. They recognized them to be Moses and Elijah, who had come to convey to that presidency the sealing power. (See Matthew 17:1–8; note that Elias is the Greek translation of the Hebrew name Elijah and is often used in the New Testament to designate Elijah, the prophet of the Old Testament.) If only Joseph Smith knew what you just shared with us he wouldn't look like such an ass today.

Peter was to hold the keys. Is that a euphemism for touching one's cock and balls? Peter was to hold the sealing power, that authority which carries the power to bind or seal on earth or to loose on earth and it would be so in the heavens. He could make thinks in the sky the same as on the ground? You need to explain this better. Maybe what you mean is that he had a special glue for his model rockets so they wouldn't fall apart in the air.

In A.D. 34, after His crucifixion, the Lord ministered to the Nephites. That's miraculous because the Nephites are a fiction. He dictated to them—and this is remarkable in scriptural history—the last two chapters of Malachi (which contained the prophecy that Elijah would return), caused them to write them, and then expounded them. What's truly miraculous here is that the Lord dictated from the King James Bible, which was still about 1600 years in the making. Or Joseph just copied them down from his Bible at home and threw in his preferred interpretation.

When the Angel Moroni appeared to the Prophet Joseph Smith to tell him of the plates, he quoted Malachi’s prophecy that Elijah would return. According to one version of the story. This quotation is now section two of the Doctrine and Covenants. So thanks to Joseph Smith, Malachi is now canonized in Jacobian English in 3 different books of scripture. Impressive.

Thirteen years after Moroni appeared, a temple had been built adequate for the purpose, and the Lord again appeared and Elijah came with Him and bestowed the keys of the sealing power. He returned again? That's dedication! Unfortunately he got back too late to help Joseph authorize his first plural marriage. Oops.

Those keys belong to the President of the Church—to the prophet, seer, and revelator. Today it's a man who has neither prophesied, seen or revealed anything on behalf of the Church. Despite those shortcomings, don't doubt that he is definitely holding fast to those keys. That sacred sealing power is with the Church now. Says the Church. Nothing is regarded with more sacred contemplation by those who know the significance of this authority. What is that significance? You haven't really said. Nothing is more closely held. Because of greed or fear? What would happen if those keys were conferred on an evil man? Would God help you find these keys again if you accidentally lost them?  There are relatively few men who hold this sealing power upon the earth at any given time—in each temple are brethren who have been given the sealing power. Our holy chefs of the original recipe... No one can get it except from the prophet, seer, and revelator and President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or from those he has delegated to give it to others. This is why you have to go with LDS Mormonism. Don't settle for anything less than the most powerful sealing contractors in the business!

Temple prep - "Dressed in White"

The following text is taken from the pamphlet "Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple" (2002) and annotated by me.

When we do ordinance work in the temple we wear white clothing. This clothing is symbolic of purity and worthiness and cleanliness. No news here. Baptism clothing is white for the same reason.

Upon entering the temple you exchange your street clothing for the white clothing of the temple. No one wears everyday clothes to the temple. If by "street clothing" you mean "Sunday best", then yes. Actually, no. Men get to keep their why button up shirt they wear in, so not all "street clothing" is traded in. This change of clothing takes place in the locker room, where each individual is provided with a locker and a dressing space and is completely private. Kids, this is good, practical information, but it has absolutely nothing to do with knowing your temple covenants before you go. In the temple the ideal of modesty is carefully maintained. How scandalous it would be for men or women see any sexy skin of another man or woman! :S As you put your clothing in the locker you leave your cares and concerns and distractions there with them. You step out of this private little dressing area dressed in white and you feel a oneness and a sense of equality, for all around you are similarly dressed. Communist uniforms LDS style.

If you are going to the temple for the first time, counsel with your bishop. When he issues you a recommend he will explain something of the nature of the clothing that will be required in the temple. What "counseling" is there to be done? Just tell us what the clothing is! What's that? The Church now does tell everyone in the whole world about our temple clothing? Yeah! Excellent job, Church! Way to disclose! Obtaining this clothing need not be a worry to you. You can either buy it through Church Distribution Services or, in some cases, rent it at the temple. In the latter case a very modest fee is required which covers only the cost of laundering the clothing. Rental clothing is not available at the smaller temples. Good practical information here, kids, but chances are your parents will buy your clothes for you.

As with the ceremonies and ordinances of the temple, outside of the temple we say very little about the clothing worn inside. NOT ANYMORE, DUDE! We can say that it, like the ceremonies, has great symbolic meaning. You can say whatever you want when you prohibit everyone from talking about what you've said.

It is a mark of reverence and respect when the Church member visits the temple dressed and groomed in such a way that he or she would not be uncomfortable in the presence of the Lord. Why should anyone be ashamed to show up as they are to the Maker who made them? Maybe it's time the Lord took a good hard look at his handiwork. Suppose for a moment that you are invited to be the guest in the home of a prominent and highly respected leader. Now imagine you're the kind of fool to grovel at authority... You are given to understand that you will mingle with distinguished guests who have received similar invitations. And you're going to want to do some schmoozing... The invitation is an indication that the host holds you in very high regard. You realize that many others would highly prize such an invitation, but for one reason or another they have not likewise been invited and therefore are not able to attend. So relax, the "leader" already likes your shit. Under those circumstances it is doubtful that you would arrive in old work clothes or dressed as you do for recreation. It is doubtful that a man would go unshaven, or a woman with her hair unkempt. So please show your ability to follow all social norms for dress and grooming! This is one case where the ways of the world are indeed the ways of the Lord. Remember the Lord looketh on your lapels for dander and mustard dribbles, and your shoes for fresh polish.

People of dignity and refinement, upon receiving an invitation to an important gathering, frequently make inquiry as to what dress would be in order. Would you not prepare carefully for such a special occasion? This is rhetorical. You would. You most definitely would. You might even purchase new clothing in the hope that your appearance would not detract from the dignified nature of the setting. You don't want to stick out. Remember the parable of the nail.

Care would also be shown for the pressing and cleaning of your clothes. Holy shit, you're still talking about dressing prim and proper. You would feel uncomfortable if you were not properly attired. Unless that sort of thing doesn't bother you.

 
The opportunity to visit the temple might be compared to such an invitation. I think every reader understood where you were going with this, but thanks for spelling it out.

There is one occasion only when members of the Church are invited into the temple proper in “street” clothing, and that is when they witness a temple marriage. Again, most people don't call their Sunday best "street" clothing. In that case only the shoes are removed, and these may be replaced with white footwear. Why? This sounds horribly superstitious. Years ago the Brethren authorized this to be so for the convenience of those family members and friends who would not be going through an endowment session immediately prior to the marriage. So there was a temple change? What else has changed?

Brides and grooms enter the temple to be married for time and all eternity. Ahem! ...The word you're looking for is "sealed". There brides wear white dresses that are long-sleeved, modest in design and fabric, and free of elaborate ornamentation. God hates immodest female arms and prideful embellishments! Grooms also dress in white. Brethren who come to witness temple marriages do not wear tuxedos. Unless they're all white tuxedos.

We have been puzzled and a little saddened at times, when attending the temple, to find that some have come to witness marriages or to attend a session in the temple dressed as though they were going to a picnic or an athletic event. Or in terrible black tuxedos like they're going to the Oscars.

The privilege to enter the temple deserves more from us than that. Why do you assholes always act to entitled! Argh! It is pleasing to the Lord when we bathe our bodies and put on clean clothing, however inexpensive the clothing may be. Yes, expensive clothing is of no consequence, but for the Lord's sake, please bath. He really wants to watch you bathe. We should dress in such a way that we might comfortably attend a sacrament meeting or a gathering that is proper and dignified. So you're saying Sunday best, right?

On occasions there has been one to witness a wedding who obviously has paid little attention to the counsel that the Brethren have given about dress and grooming, about taking care not to emulate the world in the extremes of style in clothing, in hair length and arrangement, etc. We wonder why it is that a person who is mature enough to be admitted to the temple would not at once be sensible enough to know that the Lord could not be pleased with those who show obvious preference to follow after the ways of the world. Bro, this entire section you have been hammering us about following American dress norms. How are those norms separate from the world? Are you suggesting that God's culture is mid-century American? This is ethnocentrism at it's finest.

How could a recommended member attend the temple in clothing that is immodest or worldly? Apparently they can't. How could one wear a style of hair that is not in keeping with refinement and dignity? How long has this stick been up your ass??

When you have the opportunity to go to the temple to participate in the temple ceremonies or to witness a sealing, remember where you are. It's very easy to forget because all these LDS places look just about exactly the same. You are a guest in the house of the Lord. He doesn't want to come home to see you lounging about in his favorite chair watching your damn shows on his celestial television! You should groom yourself and clothe yourself in such a way that you would feel comfortable should your Host appear. Exactly! Sit quietly with your arms folded and DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING! (By the way, God loves you and is happy to see you.)

Those who hold and share in the blessings of the priesthood should have their bodies covered as was revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith when the endowment ceremony was given to him. Temple change alert!

Members who have received their temple ordinances thereafter wear the special garment or underclothing. Garments are provided by an agency of the Church—and are generally available to members throughout the world through a distribution program operated by the Church. And they're very reasonably priced.

The garment represents sacred covenants. It fosters modesty and becomes a shield and protection to the wearer. Can we talk a bit about what you mean by "shield and protection"? I understand the Church is shying away from all those stories of how garments stop bullets and fire and bear claws and other such earthly annoyances, so are we to understand that they just somehow keep Satan out of our pants? Should we not be getting aroused in our garments? Going vague doesn't exactly help your case.

"I make all my clothes in my garage because 

I want to be sexy modest for the Lord."

The wearing of such a garment does not prevent members from dressing in the fashionable clothing generally worn in the nations of the world. Yes, it does. Mormon women have an extremely hard time buying fashionable clothing. That's why Utah fashion is it's own unfortunate thing. Only clothing that is immodest or extreme in style would be incompatible with wearing the garment. Don't laugh! Porn shoulders are a huge problem, man! Any member of the Church, whether he or she has been to the temple or not, would in proper spirit want to avoid extreme or revealing fashions. You keep using the word "extreme", isn't it past time for a definition? To me, Photoshopping sleeves on angels just might fit the definition.

There may be occasions when endowed members of the Church face questions on the garment. Questions like "Why the fuck can't I every find ones that fit right?" and "Why the hell am I wearing an extra layer in 100 degree heat?"

On one occasion one of the brethren was invited to speak to the faculty and staff of the Navy Chaplains Training School in Newport, Rhode Island. The audience included a number of high-ranking naval chaplains from the Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish faiths. Yes! I love this very defensive story!

In the question-and-answer period one of the chaplains asked, “Can you tell us something about the special underwear that some Mormon servicemen wear?” The implication was, “Why do you do that? Isn’t it strange? Doesn’t that present a problem?”

To the chaplain who made the inquiry he responded with a question: “Which church do you represent?” In response he named one of the Protestant churches.

He said, “In civilian life and also when conducting the meetings in the military service you wear clerical clothing, do you not?” The chaplain said that he did. Yeah, dumb fucker, you sure do!

He continued: “I would suppose that that has some importance to you, that in a sense it sets you apart from the rest of your congregation. It is your uniform, as it were, of the ministry. Also, I suppose it may have a much more important place. It reminds you of who you are and what your obligations and covenants are. It is a continual reminder that you are a member of the clergy, that you regard yourself as a servant of the Lord, and that you are responsible to live in such a way as to be worthy of your ordination.”

He then told them: “You should be able to understand at least one of our reasons why Latter-day Saints have a deep spiritual commitment concerning the garment. He sure a fuck should be able to understand but he's a near-sighted, self-centered Mormon hater! A major difference between your churches and ours is that we do not have a professional clergy, as you do. Because Mormons are way above showing off their devotion like that, you superficial sack of shit! The congregations are all presided over by local leaders. They are men called from all walks of life. Yet they are ordained to the priesthood. They hold offices in the priesthood. They are set apart to presiding positions as presidents, counselors, and leaders in various categories. The women, too, share in that responsibility and in those obligations. Just at home though when their husband unload on them and ask for advice. We really don't allow any women to preside over men directly. The man who heads our congregation on Sunday as the bishop may go to work on Monday as a postal clerk, as an office worker, a farmer, a doctor; or he may be an air force pilot or a naval officer. The only thing he may not be is a woman. By our standard he is as much an ordained minister as you are by your standard. He is recognized as such by most governments. We draw something of the same benefits from this special clothing as you would draw from your clerical vestments. The difference is that we wear ours under our clothing instead of outside, for we are employed in various occupations in addition to our service in the Church. These sacred things we do not wish to parade before the world.” Because we're not self-righteous show offs!

He then explained that there are some deeper spiritual meanings as well, connecting the practice of wearing this garment with covenants that are made in the temple. Oh, do tell us what "deeper spiritual meanings" he explained! No one in the temple really bothers telling us anything more than that they represent the lamb skin garments God made for Adam and Eve and that they have some kind of protective power. We wouldn’t find it necessary to discuss these—not that they are secret, he repeated, but because they are sacred. Not secret, we just won't tell you about it because you're all swine.

The garment, covering the body, is a visual and tactile reminder of these covenants. Which covenants? For many Church members the garment has formed a barrier of protection when the wearer has been faced with temptation. Ah ha! They do keep Satan out of some Mormons' pants! (Just not mine.) Among other things it symbolizes our deep respect for the laws of God—among them the moral standard. Or more accurately they symbolize our tendency to shame God's creation and guilt those in our group who do not abide by this culturally specific dress standard.

Tom Perry criticized

LDS apostle LTP (L. Tom Perry) has recently lost a few potential LGB friends earlier this month when in a talk about "traditional" marriage and family he spoke out against the non-traditional.

"We [the leaders of the LDS Church] want our voice to be heard against all of the counterfeit and alternative lifestyles that try to replace the family organization that God Himself established," says he.

In case you didn't get that, let me say it another way, unless you're family is headed by just one person with a penis followed up by just one other person with a vagina, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. Thus sayeth an apostle of God. But everyone already knows that the LDS Church has been trying to keep gay marriage from legalization. My impression is that LTP simply pulled the wrong straw when everyone was getting assigned topics for General Conference this year because typically Perry doesn't have much of a reputation for saying offensive things. Most of what we remember him for falls into the category of "Same Old Same Old," probably because he cowedly bends to authority rather than daring to go out on a limb and say something unique enough to shock anyone.

Whatever the case may be, L. Tom, you've heaped shame upon thine own head this Conference season. Fortunately for you, your lesson to learn is an easy one:

In conclusion, let's learn to love one another better. Let's stand by each other's side in strengthening home life wherever and whenever love is the foundation that home.

My beloved brothers

Our dear matriarchs have often offered us men priceless advice on how to best prepare for the blessings and responsibilities the Lord has in store for us. I hope all of us with a penis find it within our hearts to wisely head their indispensable council.

My beloved brothers (and dear, young brothers), men of the Church, today I should like to speak about the role of manhood in this great Church. I would like to pay sincere tribute and give special encouragement to these special gents. I trust that what I say will be helpful and beneficial to you tonight. 

First of all I want you to be proud that you are a man. God made it clear that men are very special, and has also very clearly defined their position, their duties, their destiny. As a man you have been born with many unique endowments that are not common to women. 

Let me remind us all of man's primary responsibilities. One of your most important obligations is to be able to remain clean and pure. Be chaste and do everything in your power to help others to be. You young men must set the proper example. Help our young women stay morally clean. Young men should realize that the women they date will not honor and respect them if they have been involved in moral transgression. Equal Opportunity Promiscuity simply robs men of their moral influence. Always remember that you can go much farther on respect than on popularity.

Another contention raised is that a man is free to choose what he does with his own body. I would enlist the righteous Priestesshood of God to help such misguided young men, because a beautiful, chaste man is the perfect workmanship if God. Respect yourself. Most men naturally want to love and be loved by a good woman. What man could want any greater glory or tribute than that which comes from an appreciative, loving wife? She will largely determine the remainder of his life. You are expected to go with your wife wherever her employment or call may take her. You will even surrender your name to her name. 

The pursuit of a career instead of marriage and the caring for children is an increasing choice for many young men. Some of our brothers indicate that they do not want to consider marriage until after they have completed their degrees or pursued a career. This is not right! It's generally selfishness, cold and self-centered, which leads people to shun the marriage responsibility. Husbands, submit yourselves unto your own wives.

Much is said of the drudgery and confinement of the man's role in the home. You belong there! Some male rights thinkers view homemaking with outright contempt, but as men, the roles of husband and father are at the very center of your souls and cry out to be satisfied! This is the great, irreplaceable work of men; life cannot go on if men cease to make and care for children. Fortunately most men don't have to track a career like a woman does. Of course as a man you can do exceptionally well in the workplace, but is that the best use of your divinely appointed talents and masculine traits? The father who entrusts his child to the care of others that he may do non-fatherly work, whether for gold, for fame or for civic service, should remember that a child left to himself bringeth his father to shame. If you can be a full-time homemaker, be grateful! Do not feel denied and never complain about this unselfish service. Mormon men are the hardest working men in the world, but you do all these things willingly - because you are a man!

So my beloved brothers, please know how much we appreciate you. We love you and respect you. The Priestesshood leadership of this church at all levels gratefully acknowledges the service, sacrifice, commitment and contribution of the brethren. For the women of the Church, I say thank you. Thank you for making our lives so much better! Thank you so much. Never wonder if you have worth in the sight of the Lord and to the leaders of the Church.

In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Wasn't that a great message? Don't we feel so loved?

"Whuh the fuh?!?"

Gay Mormon Husbands on TV

The Daily Beast had a good article the other day questioning the ethics of a new reality TV show featuring gay men married to straight women. Read it up. The brief summary of homosexuality in Mormonism is worth it.

Wife #1

We typically place Emma Hale at the top of the long chain of Joseph Smith's wives because she was his first and only legal wife. However we need to keep in mind that today in LDS culture the first sealing indicates who the primary celestial spouse is. In the case of Emma and Joseph, they were not sealed until May 28, 1843 which means Emma is not wife #1 - she's something like wife #27. That's right, Joseph was sealed to well over twenty women before he was ever sealed to his dear Emma. WTF?

Polygamy - unscrupulous seduction

The recent explanation of how the LDS Church got involved in polygamy mentions that:

A few men unscrupulously used these rumors [of Joseph Smith marrying multiple women] to seduce women to join them in an unauthorized practice sometimes referred to as “spiritual wifery.” When this was discovered, the men were cut off from the Church.

Couldn't this also apply to Joseph? His version might look something like this:

Joseph Smith unscrupulously used his prophetic authority and a story about being threatened by an angel to seduce women to join him in an unauthorized practice sometimes called "celestial marriage." When this was discovered, he was cut down by critics and eventually a violent mob.

History is written by the winners.

Polygamy - until Death do us unite

Now that the LDS Church has officially put up information on lds.org about Joseph Smith's polyandry, let's see what the Church has to say about it.

Joseph Smith was sealed to a number of women who were already married. Neither these women nor Joseph explained much about these sealings, though several women said they were for eternity alone. Other women left no records, making it unknown whether their sealings were for time and eternity or were for eternity alone. 

What's an "eternity alone" marriage? Here's the explanation:

Eternity-only sealings indicated relationships in the next life alone.

"Relationships" means sexual relationships; it seems that some of Joseph's marriages would only involve sex after death and resurrection. 

So relax, there's a chance that Joseph wasn't boning all of the already married women that he secretly married. BUT THEY'LL BE GETTING IT ON INFINITELY IN THE NEXT LIFE.

Does that sound any less weird? Does "eternity alone" even make sense given how long eternity is? What about postponing sex makes having multiple spouses sound more acceptable to Mormons? I wonder how the husbands feel about this arrangement? Wouldn't a "life alone" marriage at least offer the relief of knowing that your wife's relationship with another man will one day end?

Traditional marriage

It's nice to see the LDS Church recognized that the tradition of marriage is an ever-changing one:

For much of Western history, family “interest”—economic, political, and social considerations—dominated the choice of spouse. Parents had the power to arrange marriages or forestall unions of which they disapproved. By the late 1700s, romance and personal choice began to rival these traditional motives and practices. By Joseph Smith’s time, many couples insisted on marrying for love, as he and Emma did when they eloped against her parents’ wishes. (See here.)

It's a small admission, but it's a hell of a lot better than their usual homophobic bullshit about "traditional marriage" going back to Adam and Eve. Here the Church admits that women have long been considered property of a man (like in D&C 132:62) and an important trade commodity (think of the tradition of asking for a father's permission and his agreement to "give away the bride"). Kudos.

Let's do what we can to avoid reinstating that tradition where it has fallen out of use.

Polygamy - empty explanations

In addition to God needing believing babies, the early saint's apparently needed learn some shit the hard way.

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. (See here.)

Why was polygamy the preferred didactic method for teaching "the pure love of Christ"? I have no clue. Back in Jesus' day his approach was telling people to give all they had to the poor and not judging and stuff like that. The Church seems to be suggesting that God doesn't really care or want us to understand his motives.

Like the participants, we “see through a glass, darkly” and are asked to walk by faith. (See here.)

The only real important thing is that we believe God will give us something for our efforts:

They believed it was a commandment of God at that time and that obedience would bring great blessings to them and their posterity. (See here.)

We view our current polygamous practices the same way.

[T]he Church permits a man whose wife has died to be sealed to another woman when he remarries. Moreover, members are permitted to perform ordinances on behalf of deceased men and women who married more than once on earth, sealing them to all of the spouses to whom they were legally married. The precise nature of these relationships in the next life is not known, and many family relationships will be sorted out in the life to come. (See here.)

In other words, we don't know what the fuck we're doing or why exactly we're doing it, but we trust it's from God and we trust that he'll sort all this shit out even though it's absolutely absurd. Considering all the sealing combinations we've tried out (and the probability that many of those sealed souls won't even make it to Celestial glory), it's safe to say the tapestry of eternal families we've woven will look something like this:

Keeping sealing, dear Saints, but whatever you do do not stop to consider the idea that Joseph Smith made this all up so he could take advantage of several women (and girls).

Get 'em young

God likes his vessels young and tender. Joseph Smith, for example, was (according to LDS Church speak) an innocent, uneducated young lad of only 14 who couldn't possibly have known the ways of the world. That's important for us Mormons to believe because it's an example of the way God works. He took something weak but pure and made it strong! That's the kind of generous god we worship.

So is it any wonder that God commanded Joseph to marry a girl "several months before her 15th birthday" (OK, more than one actually)? We all know how strong these chosen teen brides (OK, there were a lot more than just two) became, right? I mean, they were pivotal in the highest ordinances revealed to Joseph! No?

I guess being shuffled about like chattel in life only to be completely swept under the rug after death and then dredged up only reluctantly because you're a major liability might not feel especially great.

Why God requires polygamy

The LDS Church did something big. It finally opened up to discussing its lesser-known polygamist past. Congratulations, Mormons. Truly and sincerely.

But I do have a few questions:

1. What is inherently righteous, holy or godly about plural marriage? Where is the divinity in this principle?

2. Why is polygamy part of the Gospel Restoration? What does it have to do with the Fall, the Atonement and the Final Judgement? How does it fit into the salvation of humankind?

3. What good did plural marriage accomplish either for God or Joseph or any of his wives or anyone else involved in a plural marriage or the Mormon community in general or humanity at large?

From what I can tell the article offers no answers. Why not?

Russell's call to arms

Last month our dearly beloved apostle of the THE LORD JESUS CHRIST gave an impassioned commencement speech at Brigham Young University. It was pretty awesome and really hard to improve upon, but that doesn't mean there weren't complaints or that it wasn't improved upon.

Humble yourself before the Lord's anointed and learn at his feet, brothers and sisters.

Exclusively for singles

I always hated singles wards. To me they felt as though a couple of grandparents got together for a chat, realized that they all had grandchildren who were single and possibly having a hard time dating, and decided to find a way to coral all these grandchildren together in good faith that all penises would eventually meet a vagina. Seriously, get enough young single adults together in a chapel bumping into each other and sooner or later they'll want to move things to the bedroom. It's a foolproof plan. And naturally (because they're all such wonderful kids) they'll make sure to stop by the temple for a quick sealing before they run off and make babies.

These singles wards are a real hit. The kids are so bonkers about the whole thing that they even organize gigantic summer vacations together so they can have more opportunities to bump into each other, only this time without being dressed for church. It's like EFY only better.

The only problem is that Mormons aren't marrying as early as they used to (but probably not because they don't want to) which means a lot of the penises finding vaginas are doing so out of wedlock. And that's very bad.

In effort to catch people at the new marrying age, the Church has created some very popular singles wards for people over 30. How's it all working out?, you might ask. Not great. The problem: the men. They're not hanging around. Instead they're flocking to their computers to play games and jerk off.

The plus side to all of this is that now those few older men who are hanging around can go back to marrying a handful of lovely young maidens. Polygamy, your time for open practice has returned!

Eternal progression

Like so many other aspects of Mormonism, eternal progression was one of those things that sounded great on the surface but got weird enough fast enough that I had to stop thinking about it. I've already brought up the conundrum of eternal learning in another post. We don't know how we're going to learn everything in the Universe, but we have faith that we will. And after we've become all-knowing beings, just like God, we'll be fully progressed and ready to build our own perfect universes, right? Who knows?

The real problem here is that once we've become like God, who is perfect (complete) in all things, what progression is left to be had?

The idea that had been conveyed to me was that because saving human beings is God's work and glory, the more people get saved the more glory God gets. So, in a sense, God, despite his perfection-completion, is somehow becoming ever more glorious by making us, his children, like him, and when we, in our perfect, completed state, make and populate our own worlds, and save the human inhabitants of those worlds, we will be not just adding glory to our own perfect selves but also to God's glory because we wouldn't be saving anyone had he not saved us first, so really everyone we saved was saved by God. Then when the humans we save become like us (and God) and start saving their own human children the glory still goes straight back to God to glorify him all the more.

In other words, eternal progression is equivalent to the endless perpetuation of God's salvation scheme. The more people you bring into the club the more respected you'll be. The more obedient children you have the more impressive you look to your neighbors.

Pyramid scheme? No way! This is a sacred law of the Universe.

Heavenly fatherliness #18 - Exemplary behavior

According to popular wisdom, a good father leads by example and stands true to set principles and values he would like his children to follow.

At face value this appears to be God's exact nature and attitude: He's perfect and requires us to try to be perfect like Him.

Then again Heavenly Father turns out to be a very mobile target.

Let's start with God's standard for the family if only because a couple of recent posts mention a husband's attitude and behavior toward his wife. His standards for the family are all over the place. Adam gets it on with his own rib, Abraham sires children through a servant, Lot had children with his daughters, David has a shitload of concubines, Jesus says divorce is adultery, Paul says marriage is for the weak, and Joseph says let me fuck your wife/sister/daughter/mother.... So what's the standard? What are we supposed to do exactly? Whatever it is, you won't figure it out from the scriptures. Or from semi-scripture either.

The easiest example of a broken standard is God's disobedience to the commandment to not kill people. He kills selectively at times and at others indiscriminately, sometimes with natural disasters, other times with is chosen people, like when he ordered the Israelites to kill all the Canaanites - men, women, children, and livestock - and then there was that one time he used bears. Children and livestock? These are beings who cannot think critically and don't know any better (it's not like the Canaanite children had any opportunities to learn about and worship the One True God of Israel), so why should they die? Where is God's understanding and mercy? Who cares? Fuck 'em all! He even orders the killing of unborn babies and their mothers. The only thing more vile would have been if he had ordered his murderers to defecate into the victims' mouths or something like that. Then again he once wanted to make children eat shit pies. Jesus didn't exactly set things straight either. He gave us a pretty weird example to live up to when he cursed that fig tree for not having figs out of season. Are we supposed to be like that?  

When it comes to owning slaves the Bible's pretty clear. You can have them! Hooray!

Marriage, killing, and slavery only make up three examples but they're pretty heavy issues, aren't they? Just think how confusing things get once you get down to the small stuff. 

*These attributes represent the popular thoughts of Ask Men’s Jullian Marcus, examiner.com’s Tanya Tringali, and Open Talk Magazine’s Glenn Silvestre as per their respective articles on what makes a good father. 

Heavenly fatherliness #16 - Alone with his wife

According to popular wisdom, a good father spends quality time alone with his wife.

It's the wife thing again. Does God have a wife to spend quality time with? Mormons want to think he does, but have to admit that they have no idea. Most Christian folks will say he doesn't because he'd not married. So where does that leave us? Square one. What our Sky Parents do together is only speculation. 

So much for setting a good example for us when it comes to nurturing a loving marriage! Thanks, Dad.

*These attributes represent the popular thoughts of Ask Men’s Jullian Marcus, examiner.com’s Tanya Tringali, and Open Talk Magazine’s Glenn Silvestre as per their respective articles on what makes a good father. 

Heavenly fatherliness #15 - Fighting in front of family

According to popular wisdom, a good father does not fight with his wife in front of their children.

Heavenly Father doesn't do anything with his Wife in front of his children, so I guess he gets a point on this one. Then again, we don't know anything about Heavenly Mother. God keeps her from us. 

But when it comes to family fights, we do know that God has a very strained relationship with most of his children and fights with them daily. Maybe we should give our Father in Heaven a half point instead of a full one when it comes to domestic aggression.

*These attributes represent the popular thoughts of Ask Men’s Jullian Marcus, examiner.com’s Tanya Tringali, and Open Talk Magazine’s Glenn Silvestre as per their respective articles on what makes a good father. 

Consummation

One of the most horrible ideas I grew up with had to do with making a matrimonial union official. It's a practice called consummation and the idea is that a couple has to have sex to make their marriage legitimate. The man must "take" the bride for her to "be his" in very fact. No sex, not a real marriage.

It's not a Mormon-born concept and I'm not sure if it counts as Mormon doctrine, but belief in it was alive and well in the Church during my formative years (but probably even more alive in the years Joseph Smith was prophet). My friends and I would sometimes talk about how soon after being sealed we were going to go consummate the marriage. Sometimes we would joke about doing it right away because we'd obviously be so horny right after the ceremony, but just as often we would choose the ASAP option because, according to our logic back then, you wouldn't want a terrible tragedy to happen and not have the marriage count. Either way, there was no time for delay.

Let's get some virgin blood on the sheets!