Whilst listening to the excellent Mormon Stories series with Mike from LDS Discussions, the topic of polygamy is the focus of multiple episodes. This is an incomplete collection of my thoughts on the things I’ve listened to and/or researched myself.

I want to credit the church for publicly hosting the sources I’m going to cite. It is right to be honest and transparent with history.

I would highly recommend the https://www.ldsdiscussions.com series for a more thorough citation of church history: Polygamy and Polyandry

I cover the points that have impacted me most as I’ve reflected on this.

Emma Smith was deeply hurt by Joseph’s practice of polygamy

Whether or not you believe that polygamy came from God, Emma Smith was deeply hurt by Joseph Smith’s practice of polygamy. Emma fluctuated in her “approval” of the practice. According to the Gospel Topics Essay Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo:

For Joseph Smith’s wife Emma, it was an excruciating ordeal.

There are two possible explanations of Emma’s turmoil that I see if you want to believe that polygamy came from God or not:

  1. Believing: Emma was deeply hurt over a necessary, eternal doctrine

  2. Unbelieving: Emma was deeply hurt as Joseph was intentionally deceitful and unfaithful to her

In either scenario, Emma was deeply hurt by Joseph’s practice of polygamy and it’s hard to view her position as a win.

Deception

There is ample evidence Joseph was not fully honest with Emma – whether you view this as necessary or malicious is subjective. Even the church admits this in the Gospel Topics Essay Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo:

But Emma likely did not know about all of Joseph’s sealings. She vacillated in her view of plural marriage, at some points supporting it and at other times denouncing it.

A more blatant example of intentional deception can be found in Joseph Smith’s letter to Sarah Whitney (one of his plural wives)[1] and her father Newel K. Whitney[2]:

let Brother Whitney come a little a head, and nock at the south East corner of the house at window; it next to the cornfield; I have a room intirely by myself, the whole matter can be attended to with most perfect saf[e]ty, I it is the will of God that you should comfort now in this time of affliction

when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect saf[e]ty: only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible,

I think Emma wont come to night if she dont dont fail to come to night

Sidestepping the optics of this looking like a booty-call by the 37 year old prophet in seeking “comfort” from a 17 year old he recently married, the intent is very clear to hide this from Emma – the only debate is whether or not you view it as necessary to preserve eternal, righteous doctrine or if you view it as an attempt to cover up an affair. I would argue Emma likely saw it as an affair.

Polygamy is a core doctrine that is not taught to converts

Imagine if converts were taught that if they got baptized they were agreeing to a model of heaven that includes polygamy. I imagine most Christian folk in the West would not be in favor of it.

As a former missionary and as a life-long member of the church with a very dedicated mother who taught me – I have known for a long-time that polygamy was a pivotal feature/doctrine of the Celestial Kingdom. Was it a feature I ever really thought much about? Not at all – nor did I intend to ever practice polygamy in the eternities when I thought about my future.

But, as I’ve been looking at it more objectively recently, it’s very weird that missionaries teach “eternal families” but that polygamy is not taught as a core feature of these eternal families: men (and only men) can be married to multiple women. At the time of writing (2024), the current prophet of the church Russell M. Nelson and at least one of the apostles (Dallin H. Oaks) are both sealed to more than one woman. They are eternal polygamists.

Converts should be taught this core doctrine and should know what they are opting into before baptism. I suspect this will never happen as most western cultures aren’t very in-favor of polygamy.

D&C 132 outlines plural marriage

Plural marriage is explicitly outlined in the scriptures of the church (D&C 132:61-62):

And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.

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.

To be clear, this doesn’t mean that you have to be a polygamist to get to the Celestial Kingdom – but it’s a feature of the Celestial Kingdom, nonetheless. And by aligning with the church through baptism, this is one of the key features of heaven you’re choosing to believe in!

Despite having no interest in it myself, I don’t think polygamy is inherently wrong. But, it’s hard for me not to view the church’s lack of transparency with potential converts about a core feature of the heaven they’re working toward as anything but misleading.

To further strengthen this point, the Joseph Smith Papers project has part of the original transcript for D&C 132 which says the following[3]:

the principle and doctrin of their having many wives, and concubines. Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as t[o]uching this matter Therefore prepare thy heart to receive and obay the instructions which I am about to give unto you, for all those, who have this law revealed unto them, must obey the Same, for behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant,1 and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned

The purpose behind polygamy

Ultimately, the church can’t conclusively state what the exact purpose of polygamy was, but gives the following potential reasons[4]:

  1. Birth of more children
  2. Support economically disadvantaged women
  3. Create a unique culture
  4. A test of obedience

I think one could go either way with the evidence whether or not Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and other notable church leadership aligns with these reasons so I won’t debate that. However, I think that there are multiple data points that seem to conflict with rationalizing I’ve done regarding doctrinal reasons around polygamy.

Sex is a clear reason for polygamy

I think it’s nonsensical to argue that sex wasn’t a motivator with polygamy (whether or not you view it as moral). First, we have the following snippet from Jacob 2:24 & 30:

Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

So, the Lord states polygamy as a reason to “raise up seed”.

Adoptive Sealings: an argument against those who claim Joseph’s sealings weren’t sexual

For those who argue that sealings were “dynastic” – meant to bring families together and not a sexual relationship in nature – Joseph Smith introduced “adoptive” sealings (which is no longer practiced) as explained by the church[5]:

Rather, some Saints participated in “adoption” sealings that bound them to other adult Latter-day Saints

If sex/”raising up seed” wasn’t a factor, why couldn’t Joseph Smith and Brigham Young just performed adoptive sealings?

Polyandry

Polyandry, the practice of a woman being married to multiple men is another difficult data point to deflect the sex argument, in my perspective.

Joseph Smith was sealed to women who were already married to faithful members. One could argue this practice would break up their family in the eternity since their kids wouldn’t be sealed to their biological father. One example of this is Zina D. H. Young – who was not only sealed to Joseph Smith but also married to Brigham Young after Joseph died while being legally married (and likely very in love) to an active missionary Henry B. Jacobs.

If sex wasn’t a driving factor, Brigham Young had no reason to marry an already sealed woman. The weak argument of “economic disadvantage” could be made but polygamist marriage wasn’t legal in the United States anyway so why would Brigham Young need to be married to Zina in order to help a person in need?

I found this article to be helpful in identifying which of Joseph Smith’s wives were married to faithful husbands: Polyandry and Joseph Smith

The article lists the following as Joseph’s polygamist spouses who were married to faithful husbands (not including Zina):

Agency lost for women in polygamy

The agency of women seemingly vanishes when it comes to Joseph Smith’s practice of polygamy. On multiple occasions extreme loss was a concern for the women Joseph solicited. Threat of death and loss of exaltation for families was on the line for many of the women he proposed to.

Additionally, there is no way for women to guarantee exclusivity with their spouses, for example, if they die first. They also do not have a choice to marry multiple men.

With the examples I’m going to give, keep in mind that the women Joseph proposed to believed he was a prophet who talked to God.

Threat of damnation

In a revelation directed to Emma Smith regarding her acceptance of Joseph Smith’s polygamy practice, God says the following in D&C 132:54

And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.

According to this revelation, Emma will be destroyed if she does not accept polygamy.

Threat of death: the angel with the drawn sword

Growing up in the church, I had heard the anecdote of Joseph Smith being threatened by an angel with a sword if he didn’t practice polygamy. What I didn’t know was that he had this experience with Zina D. H. Young (Zina Jacobs at the time) after she had refused his initial proposal, this is according to the source cited in the Church’s paper on Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo: Encouraging Joseph Smith to Practice Plural Marriage: The Accounts of the Angel with a Drawn Sword

Zina D. Young told of Bro. Joseph’s remark in relation to the revelation on celestial marriage. How an angel came to [him] with a drawn sword, and said if he did not obey this law he would lose his priesthood; and in the keeping of it he, Joseph, did not know but it would cost him his life

Helen Mar Kimball, another of Joseph’s plural wives said the following (according to the same source):

This fact [plural marriage] the Lord revealed to His prophet, Joseph Smith, as early as the year 1831. And yet, had it not been for the fear of His displeasure, Joseph would have shrunk from the undertaking and would have continued silent, as he did for years, until an angel of the Lord threatened to slay him if he did not reveal and establish this celestial principle.

What choice do you have if the person you believe to be the prophet of God tells you the only options you have to choose between are the following:

Conclusion

That’s all, I’m not sure how to wrap this up. Might update later. :)