What's a concubine?

[_beastie]

I've asked this now and again, and haven't gotten clear answers from believers.

What are concubines, I mean the sort that God approves of?


Sec 132: 37

Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him, and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods.

[_asbestosman]

Not that I can give an authoritative answer, but Abraham's concubines were his wives' maids as I recall.

As to whether or not they were in a sense lesser wives or not because of it, I really wouldn't know. I thought maybe it had something to do with birthright / inheritance in that day and age.

Maybe it's like having a civil union, but with an opposite-sex partner.

[_Trinity]

'Concubinage was practised in many ancient cultures, especially in Mesopotamia.....where a private citizen might have one or two concubines in addition to his primary wife.....a concubine was often a slave or part of the booty of war (Judges 5:30). A man might have a concubine simply as an economical form of marriage, since no dowry or bride-price was required. A concubine could add to a man's prestige by giving him two wives and thus an increased capacity for children. Such offspring were normally delivered onto the knees of the legal wife, thus establishing their legitimacy as family members. The concubine was also another servant to add to his work force.' (Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, 1997, Vol 1, p504).

[_beastie]

My impression from Bible commentaries is also that a concubine was the servant of the wife, but her duties included sex with the husband, hence bearing children.

I was always confused by the D & C scripture that seemed to sanction this. It almost reminds me of Bennett's accusations that polygamy entailed a caste system of wives.

[_The Dude]

My impression from Bible commentaries is also that a concubine was the servant of the wife, but her duties included sex with the husband, hence bearing children.

I was always confused by the D & C scripture that seemed to sanction this. It almost reminds me of Bennett's accusations that polygamy entailed a caste system of wives.

Shut your presentism-spouting pie hole!

[_Trinity]

My impression from Bible commentaries is also that a concubine was the servant of the wife, but her duties included sex with the husband, hence bearing children.

I was always confused by the D & C scripture that seemed to sanction this. It almost reminds me of Bennett's accusations that polygamy entailed a caste system of wives.

Hi Beastie,

That is exactly how I understood it. And though I know many of Joseph's additional wives were first servant helps in the Smith home, I am not aware that there was ever a distinction that these wives were concubines when the sealing ceremonies were carried out. Perhaps Joseph thought of them this way....D&C 132 certainly allowed for the concubine as well as the wife.

[_beastie]

Shut your presentism-spouting pie hole!

I was going to suggest you be more subtle to catch the MAD flavor, but on second thought, you just about got it down pat. :O

That is exactly how I understood it. And though I know many of Joseph's additional wives were first servant helps in the Smith home, I am not aware that there was ever a distinction that these wives were concubines when the sealing ceremonies were carried out. Perhaps Joseph thought of them this way....D&C 132 certainly allowed for the concubine as well as the wife.

Although Bennett engaged in hyperbole, no doubt, he did get some details right. I've often wondered if this is a detail he included that was based in truth, some sort of wife caste system.

I mean, really - 132 reflects Joseph Smith's desire to religiously absolve his involvement with other women. There is a reason he included the comment about concubines.

[_Trinity]

Shut your presentism-spouting pie hole!

I was going to suggest you be more subtle to catch the MAD flavor, but on second thought, you just about got it down pat. :O

That is exactly how I understood it. And though I know many of Joseph's additional wives were first servant helps in the Smith home, I am not aware that there was ever a distinction that these wives were concubines when the sealing ceremonies were carried out. Perhaps Joseph thought of them this way....D&C 132 certainly allowed for the concubine as well as the wife.

Although Bennett engaged in hyperbole, no doubt, he did get some details right. I've often wondered if this is a detail he included that was based in truth, some sort of wife caste system.

I mean, really - 132 reflects Joseph Smith's desire to religiously absolve his involvement with other women. There is a reason he included the comment about concubines.

Well, it certainly was a convenient catch-all explanation for the whole Fanny debacle.

[_beastie]

Well, it certainly was a convenient catch-all explanation for the whole Fanny debacle.

Now that's a thought. Taking a concubine may not have involved any ceremony, just the sexual act.

If I recall correctly, Van Wagoner explored that idea a bit in Mormon Polygamy, and postulated about one possible case of concubinage in early Mormonism. I'll have to look up the details, but If I recall correctly, the speculation was that no ceremony was involved, and instead the act of sex created this sort of relationship between the man and woman. He was still supposed to be responsible for her and her offspring in some way, but she was not a wife.

[_moksha]

So to be clear, a concubine is a member of the harem to which the master is not married.