Hi MB...
The problem with truthdancer's OP, and continued insistence that the Church is being disingenous with its statements about polygamy is that she is using terms rather more loosely than the Church uses them.
Well, I think the church uses various terms to present an untruth.
The church absolutely does believe in, and practice (to some extent) polygyny. To suggest it doesn't is disingenuous in my opinion.
For the Church, the term marriage refers to a legal and binding commitment between a man and a woman. There is no such thing as a spiritual marriage in the Church. That is an FLDS term that she is trying to impose on the Church.
Well, then lets go with whatever term you like... "sealing" if fine. (To be honest, it is frustrating to constantly have to play the definition game. We all know that LDS men were sealed to multiple women as wives). Nevertheless.... :-)
The point is, LDS doctrine in fact allows for men to have multiple women in heaven, it allows for men to be sealed to multiple women simultaneously while the women are alive, and clearly states in the D&C that men can have multiple women (sealed, spiritually married, plural marriage, whatever). Again for the LDS church to pretend that this is not true is disingenuous in my opinion.
Truthdancer is confusing the concept of sealing with marriage.
Again, to pretend that men are/were not sealed as husband and wives is to not be honest. (I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about the church). I'm not confusing the two at all.
The differences between a sealing and a marriage should be obvious to anyone with a rudimentary understanding of Church policies and practices.
Are you suggesting that Dallin Oaks doesn't think he will have two wives in the next life? Last I heard the LDS church believes a sealing means a man and woman (women) will be together in the CK, no?
Only married person may engage in sexual relations without violating the law of chastity. People who are sealed to one another but who are not married may not do so. The Church does not use the term eternal marriage when it refers to couples who may have been sealed but are divorced.
We are splitting hairs here. Women who are civilly divorced without a sealing cancellation are ETERNALLY SEALED to a man. There can be multiple women sealed to these men as husbands and wives. Again, ask Dallin Oaks. :-)
The thing is, FLDS women claim that they are NOT married to men who father their children, nor do they live with them, but ARE sealed (spiritually married) to these men. How is this different than what goes on in the LDS church? Now, obviously the living arrangements appear different between the FLDS and LDS for those in the know, but the point is, again, for the LDS church to claim they have nothing to do with polygamy is clearly misrepresenting the truth.
So, while it is true that a man may be sealed to more than one living woman, he can only be married to one woman.
Exactly as it is in the FLDS church. Exactly as it was in the early days of the LDS church. One legal marriage, multiple women on the side (spiritually married, eternally sealed, whatever term you want to use).
The eternal significance of being sealed to more than one woman is not really clear. People who consider the question with a purely temporal view risk making the same mistake truthdancer does in assuming that it has something do with sex.
No, take the sex out of it if you want. The point is, LDS men can be sealed to multiple women and as far as I know, the doctrine is that men can have multiple "wives" in eternity. Many LDS men believe they will have multiple wives in heaven do they not? Many women desperately want a sealing cancellation from their X husbands, but the church won't grant it to them hence they are sealed to a man they want nothing to do with. The man can remarry (without a sealing cancellation) and have multiple women sealed to him for eternity, just like other polygamous male members of the early LDS church.
My whole point is, the LDS church is not being honest in claiming that their church has nothing to do with polygamy. And, I find it amazing that no reporters have even looked into this.
If the LDS church wants to distance itself from polygamy, they need to change some doctrine/practice/teachings. I have a feeling that within twenty years there will be some changes. Anyone want to bet? ;-)
~dancer~