Reason(s) for plural marriage
Did Joseph Smith teach that there would be more righteous women than men?
No but he did teach that polygyny would be practiced in the celestial kingdom:
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.
39 David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my
servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these
things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen
from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world,
for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.
Without eternal polyandry, it is undeniable that there will be more worthy women than men.
Did Joseph Smith teach that plural marriage was a remedy for more exaltable women than
men?
IMPLIED
(1) Sealing required (D&C 132:16-17, 21)
(2) polygyny acceptable (D&C 132:61)
(3) polyandry unacceptable (D&C 132:63)
He taught polygyny is practiced in CK (D&C 132:37, 39)
Plural marriage for women (D&C 132:63):
(1) to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and
(2) to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the
world, and
(3) for their exaltation in the eternal worlds,
(4) that they may bear the souls of men (D&C 88:15 And the spirit and the body are the
soul of man.)
Is it a later justification of the practice and was not from Joseph Smith? Or were they
repeating Joseph's teachings?
What scriptural/revelatory basis is there for believing that women are more righteous than
men?
Why could this not have been solved in the Millennium?
Why did God not ensure that more males were created (or ensure to survive) to balance out
the numbers?
He could have predicted, but not controlled due to His dedication to free agency.
How is this teaching reconciled with human free will?
How does this reflect the shortage of single women in pioneer Utah?
The shortage was due to plural marriage. All single women were married off.
If it were the case that more men were righteous, would there have been celestial polyandry?
Insoluble question. All of JS's teachings, as well as those that followed speak only of the
practice of polygyny in the CK.
Could one counter that a woman's being single is evidence of her unrighteousness (as perhaps
a traditional Christian might argue for the unevangelized)?
As marriage is the result of individual choices of two individuals, holding one or the other
responsible for the transaction is unjust. Perhaps men need the priesthood to guard against
gender-specific weaknesses that render them less inclined to obedience?
Marriage before the Resurrection
According to Joseph Smith's teachings, all exalted beings will be sealed in eternal
marriage to a spouse. No man or woman will be exalted alone. Also due to God's justice and
mercy, no worthy man or woman will be denied exaltation simply because there is no spouse to
whom she or he can be eternally sealed. In addition, all marriages will need to be performed
prior to the resurrection because “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in
marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 22:30).
Joseph Smith's teachings regarding exaltation as couples generates logistical concerns
that will apparently be resolved prior to that moment when angelic trumps signal the
completion of the resurrection. Worthiness for exaltation is determined by individual
obedience to divine laws. God's dedication to free agency prevents Him from manipulating His
children to be righteous. Hence, the actual numbers of males and females available for
exaltation is independent of God's will. He can predict, but not control those numbers.
At the end of the millennium, three scenarios are possible with respect to the amounts
of worthy men and women. The ratio could be equal, or there could be more worthy males
than females, or more worthy females than males.
Equal Numbers of Worthy Women and Men?
One possible future state include equal numbers of worthy men and women. After
taking into account birth ratios and the salvation of unbaptized children, LDS scholar Eugene
England voiced this view: "I believe… that the number of males and females in the celestial
kingdom is essentially equal."1
Several theories support this belief. It could be that men and women possess equal
inherent tendencies to do righteousness, thus obviating the need for any sort of marriage
practice beyond eternal monogamy on any of God's creations.
Another possibility is that even though mortal men and women are not equally
obedient, God used his foreknowledge to choose specific premortal spirits to come to this
earth so that there would be equal numbers of worthy men and women to be exalted. Brigham
Young taught that the premortal spirits designated to come to this earth comprise but a portion
of all of the premortal spirit "beings that existed in eternity."2 Joseph Smith taught that
Heavenly Father has created "worlds without number" (Moses 1:33) for His children.
AOn Fidelity, Polygamy, and Celestial Marriage,@ in Multiply and Replenish: Mormon Essays on Sex and Family,
edited by Brent Corcoran (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1994), 118; printed originally in Dialogue: A Journal of
Mormon Thought 20 (Winter 1987): 151-52.
2
Brigham Young, June 22, 1856, Journal of Discourses, 3:368-369
1
If in all of God's creations, one gender consistently showed more disobedience during
their mortal probations, God omniscience would be insufficient to consistently create worlds
with equal numbers of exaltable men and women. Even if the righteousness of the two
genders differed only slightly among the billions of spirits inhabiting each earth, the discrepancy
would eventually require an adjustment or worthy mortals would eventually be unable to
marry eternally due to the lack of available spouses. Assuming that God used his omniscience to
organize equal numbers of worthy males and females on this earth assumes either this earth is
different from His other creations or that equal numbers are found on essentially all of God's
creations.
Another problem arises from scriptural reference to the existence of authorized
polygamy on earth and in the celestial kingdom even now. Joseph Smith taught: " 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" (D&C
132:37). Other verses explain that the "gods" refer to not just Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but
also to their wives (vv. 19-20) and that the man "inherits" those wives "out of the world" or in
the Celestial Kingdom (v. 39).
Similarly, Isaiah predicted: “And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man,
saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy
name, to take away our reproach" (Isaiah 4:1). Wilford Woodruff reported a vision wherein he
saw Isaiah’s prophesy fulfilled during the millennium.i During that thousand year period,
women who realize the absolute need to be sealed to an eternal husband prior to the
resurrection, may be willing, if necessary, to share him with six others and provide for their own
maintenance. Brigham Young explained that Isaiah’s prophecy dealt with “the resurrection”:
It is written in the Bible, “and in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, we
will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel; only let us be called by thy name, to take
away our reproach”… It is the decree of the Almighty, that in the last days seven women shall
take hold of one man, &c., to be counselled and advised by him, being willing to spin their own
wool, make their own clothing and do every thing they can to earn their own living, if they can
only bear his name to take away their reproach. What is this order for? It is for the resurrection;
it is not for this world. I would not go across this bowery for polygamy, if it only pertained to this
world. It is for the resurrection.ii
In other examples, research shows that 115 men and women were married in polygamy
during Joseph Smith's lifetime and thousands more in the decades afterwards. If equal
numbers of worthy men and women exist, then these polygamous unions, called polygyny, with
one man having more than one wife, would need to be offset by other instances of worthy
women having more than one husband, called polyandry.
More Worthy Men Than Women?
A second possibility that this earth will produce more worthy men than women is
supported by observing the ratio of male-to-female live births over the past three centuries.
Demographers Graziella Caselli, Jacques Vallin, and Guillaume Wunsch observed: "The sex ratio
at birth (number of male births per 100 female births) is generally very close to 105. This is one
of the very rare demographic parameters that is virtually constant."3 Another way of looking at
this ratio is that 51.2% of births are male and 48.8% are female. Data supporting these ratios
has been extracted from nearly 300 years of statistical data. It could support the position that
at the end of the earth there will be a greater number of worthy men than women.
Several problems can be identified. Early records may have suffered from the potential
to under report female births due to prejudices of the time. Even more important are the
lapses arising from illiteracy and inadequate record keeping. Paris researcher Louis Sebastian
Mercier wrote in 1782: "All the infants who are born there [in Paris} go to be nursed, half die,
and the burial registers of the city's parishes are not filled with their names; therefore counts
should not longer be based on the register of baptisms, nor on that of deaths."4 Eric Brian and
Marie Jaisson acknowledge that "the imperfect nature of registration figures are all well-known
to specialists."5 Notwithstanding these potential weaknesses, more recent data from reliable
sources supports a near ration of 105 male newborns to 100 female.6
However, examining the ratio and extrapolating it to the entire 6000 year history of the
earth may not be justified. Scientists cannot explain the genetic causes of the discrepancy.7
Without understanding its etiology, data gathered during three centuries may not accurately
predict the preceding 5700 years. Brian and Jaisson also recognized the "oscillatory nature
around a near-equilibrium of the two sexes" that could ebb and flow over millennia, rather than
3
Graziella Caselli, Jacques Vallin, and Guillaume Wunsch, Demography Analysis and Synthesis: A Treatise in
Population, Burlington, Massachusetts: Elsevier, 2001, 36.
4
Louis Sebastien Mercier, quoted in Eric Brian and Marie Jaisson, The Descent of Human Sex Ratio at Birth: A
Dialogue between Mathematics, Biology and Sociology, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2007, 9.
5
Eric Brian and Marie Jaisson, The Descent of Human Sex Ratio at Birth: A Dialogue between Mathematics,
Biology and Sociology, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2007, 145-46.
6
More recent data supports even higher ratios due to infanticide and feticide in cultures that value male over female
babies.
7
Eric Brian and Marie Jaisson, The Descent of Human Sex Ratio at Birth: A Dialogue between Mathematics,
Biology and Sociology, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2007, 204. Charles Darwin wrote: "With mankind
polygamy has been supposed to lead to the birth of a greater proportion of female infants; but Dr. J. Campbell
carefully attended to this subject in the harems of Siam, and he concludes that the proportion of male to female
births is the same as from monogamous unions." (The Descent of Man, vol. 1, London: John Murray, 1871, 303.)
just centuries.8 Comprising only five percent of the total, and arising from unknown
reproductive physiological variations, assuming a constant trend for the previous millennia may
not be warranted.
For Latter-day Saints who believe in premortality, the distributions of male and female
births over any time span would in fact be completely dependent upon God's choices regarding
which premortal spirits would be born on this planet at that time, rather than to chance,
arbitrary physiology, or an ex nihilo creation according to God's dynamic will. Hence, the
observation of the 105/100 ratio for the past 300 years may not be representative of the
premortal numbers of the male and female spirits destined for this earth or the birth patterns
of previous centuries.
An excess of worthy men in the plan of salvation that rewards couples with exaltation,
would require polyandry to provide wives for the extra males. As discussed in the first volume,
chapter 12, the Apostle Paul condemned polyandry (see Romans 7:2-3). Brigham Young
agreed: “What do you think of a woman having more husbands than one? This is not known to
the law.”9 Orson Pratt echoed: “God has strictly forbidden, in this Bible, plurality of husbands,
and proclaimed against it in his law.”10 Nowhere in Christian doctrines or in the theology of
Joseph Smith is there any acceptance of polyandry. In fact, the idea that heaven contains more
men than women and all inhabitants are married contradicts important teachings on eternal
marriage the Prophet expounded (see below).
More Worthy Women Than Men?
Eugene England is highly critical of the third scenario, that of more worthy women than
men:
Another popular rationale for polygyny is that there are and will be more righteous women than
men. This rather patronizing and certainly unprovable sentiment cloaks a sexist assumption,
demeaning to both men and women… Even if women were naturally more righteous, it would
take a huge disproportion in that righteousness to merely equalize those numbers, to say
nothing of creating a situation that required plural wives.11
Despite his concerns, several observations seem to contradict England's view. Just as
the birth ratios favor males 105 to 100 over the past few decades, just opposite tendency for
8
Eric Brian and Marie Jaisson, The Descent of Human Sex Ratio at Birth: A Dialogue between Mathematics,
Biology and Sociology, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2007, 181.
9
Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 1:361, August 1, 1852.
Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, 18:55-56, July 11, 1875.
10
AOn Fidelity, Polygamy, and Celestial Marriage,@ in Multiply and Replenish: Mormon Essays on Sex and Family,
edited by Brent Corcoran (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1994), 118; printed originally in Dialogue: A Journal of
Mormon Thought 20 (Winter 1987): 138-54; see esp. 151-52.
11
participation in Christianity has favored women to a greater degree. In his 1958 book, Religious
Behavior, Michael Argyle, concludes: "It is obvious that women are more religious on every
criterion."12 Included were Church attendance, claimed religious beliefs,
support that Joseph Smith's heaven, the celestial kingdom, is filled with more women than
men.
Two reasons could explain why the celestial kingdom is occupied by more women than
men. In one scenario, God purposefully surveyed the premortal spirits and then ignoring the
general propensities of the genders to choose righteousness, He used his foreknowledge to
gathered a group of men and women whom He knew would need polygyny in order to permit
all worthy women to be exalted. He might have also chosen equal numbers of worthy males
and females, or have even selected more worthy males than females, all based upon his
omniscience and ability to foresee the decisions they would make in mortality.
A second possibility is that throughout the eternities,
While Joseph Smith did not specifically state that there would be more worthy women than
men in the celestial kingdom, the theology discussed in his dictated revelation on celestial
marriage only provides for this one option. It describes the need for all exalted beings to be
married (D&C 132:16-17) and that plural marriage is already present in the celestial kingdom (v.
37) while describing authorized polygyny (v. 61), but not polyandry (vv. 42, 63). It appears that
those who disagree must view section 132 as containing inaccurate or superfluous teachings.
Did Joseph Smith State the Plural Marriage was Needed for Excess Worthy Women?
Did Joseph Smith plainly state that plural marriage was needed to allow all exaltable
women to be sealed to a worthy husband? The answer is no, so far as historical records
indicate. However, LDS historian Ronald Barney observed: “Everything we say about Joseph
Smith and polygamy, regardless of our personal biases and beliefs, must be qualified by the
basic premise that we cannot know some of the most important things that we would like to
know, because all we have are fragments, shards, crumbs, etc… We don’t know what he was
thinking; we don’t know how he came to consider the principle; and we don’t know any of the
whys that are so salient to this topic.”13 Upon finishing the dictation of the revelation celestial
marriage (D&C 132), he added that "there was much more that he could write, on the same
12
Michael Argyle, Religious Behavior,
13
Ronald O. Barney to the author, email correspondence, July 10, 2007.
subject, but what was written was sufficient for the present."14 One of final sentences of the
revelation states: "now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more
unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present" (D&C 132:66).
i
See Scott G. Kenny, ed., Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, 1833-1898, typescript, 9 vols., Midvale, Utah: Signature Books, 1983-85,
7:423; entitled “A vision,” June 15, 1878.
ii
Brigham Young, August 19, 1866, Journal of Discourses, 11:271.
Joseph F. Smith reported: “After it was done, Joseph said there that is enough for the present, but I have a great deal more,
which would be given hereafter.” (Comments of Joseph F. Smith, at Quarterly conference held March 3-4, 1883, USHS #64904,
page 271; CD manuscripts series 11, reel 2.) It does not appear that any additional information was later given. It is was, it was
not recorded.
14