Actually, Official Declaration 1 and Official Declaration 2 are part of the Doctrine and Covenants. I found it interesting that, instead of chapters, the D&C has sections–and, of course, the aforementioned Official Declarations. It’s just a matter of terminology. By the way, the Book of Commandments was incorporated into the Doctrine and Covenants.
Speaking of “proper designation,” I really like the way the Community of Christ (formerly known as the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) versifies their Doctrine and Covenants. They number the paragraphs and then use letters of the alphabet in order to designate the sentences in the paragraph. For example, D&C Sec 5:1c is the third sentence of the first paragraph of the fifth section.
{Yes, I have some odd hobbies. One of which is versification.}
The church didn’t outlaw plural marriage. The federal government did. OD1 is the authoritative church position on obeying that law.
I know. I wasn’t setting aside different items, but making a comment on the naming. “Official Declaration 1” still strikes me as too officious and bueaucratic a designation for something of this importance. But perhaps that was deliberate.
Yes, and we all know how import it is to “denounce and reject” things these days!
Are you sure about Canada?
BTW, Mitt Romney’s great-grandparents were among those polygamists who fled to Mexico. That was raised as an issue when his father ran for president because he was born there.
My understanding was similar to that of Ca3799’s. I had always believed that the public face of the LDS officially disavowed slavery, but looked the other way at it actually going on (if not even encouraged it).
No, it’s not well done at all. I wouldn’t recommend that tome even as toilet paper. If you want a good reference work about the various denominations that trace back to the church founded by Joseph Smith, Jr., a far better read is Divergent Paths of the Restoration by Steven Shields.
I’m not entirely sure what led you to direct that post at me, but thanks for the suggestion all the same. I think I already know enough about the history of the LDS, though.
I have some friends who descended from the Cardston Settlement and also have polygamous great{1,2} grandparents - but as far as I remember Canada made polygamy illegal pretty quickly but because many LDS families were out in the country, many or some multiple marriages still existed up into the early 1900’s because they were not known to authorities.
In the Glenbow museum in Calgary they have some pictures of some pioneer families - including quite a few polygamous families in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s.
Your post asking “Who else found this to be new information?” might have understandably suggested to some that you found this to be new information, even though the “Who else” was actually in reference to the OP.
The LDS Church is both publicly and privately opposed to the practice of polygamy (and slavery, too). Any member found to be practicing polygamy is subject to excommunication. One of my close friends works in the Church Public Communications Department (working with members of the media). She tells me that a tremendous portion of their work is devoted to battling the myth that the Church still practices and endorses polygamy, and that there is some connection between the fundamentalist sects seen in the news and the mainstream LDS Church (there is not).
To say that Warren Jeffs is a Mormon would be similar to saying that Martin Luther and his followers are Catholics, because they broke off from the Catholic Church.
Not to get all GD about this, but can you back that very strong statement up with some facts? I know that the book was criticized by the LDS leadership, but are there objective historians or academics in the field of religion that would support your view?
But, expanding on what people have said above, the LDS Church is opposed to the practice because, at the time it was abolished, the Church leadership was trying to become citizens of a country which had a law opposing polygamy, right? In principle, the Chuch does not oppose polygamy?
Yes, to be clear, this was far from new information to me. But that’s because I’ve married an ex-mormon and also as a child I would habitually read up on various religions and denominations.
)