Spinning
Jean-François Millet
(1614-1675)

My daughter loves the fiber arts. She knits, crochets, weaves, and spins.

Therefore she looked forward to seeing the movie Maleficent because, surely, she thought, they would correct the heinous error of depicting Sleeping Beauty pricking herself on the distaff of a foot-treadle machine.

The rage when she saw Disney repeat the stupidity of the original was amusing to behold. I made sure I drove home, so that her rage would not in any way compromise our safety.

It’s as though you said that Samson could only die when his hair was shaved, and they proceeded to cut off his hair with a piece of rope. Continue reading →

In this third discussion, we are asked to read a large number of scriptures and several recent talks by leaders of the Church, mainly male but also female. There are no talks from Dialogue or Sunstone in the suggested pre-requisite reading for this discussion. The decision to frame the third discussion solely around official church sources was because the organization publishing these discussions “takes seriously the words of church leaders and holds sacred the scriptures.”

Having read the scriptures and talks, I was then confused at the way the discussion proceeded to wrest those talks and scriptures to suggest that women must necessarily hold priesthood keys because all are alike unto God.

Looking at the end of the discussion, the authors added references to several articles examining women and priesthood that have been published in Dialogue and in books published by Signature Books. Continue reading →

[This post is part of a series on Joseph Smith’s Polygamy. To read from the beginning or link to previously published posts, go to A Faithful Joseph. As originally posted, this article was written without benefit of my normal stack of books and liberal access to the internet. References will be added at a later time.]

Desdemona Fullmer (1867, age 59)

In D&C 132, The Lord tells Emma:

And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.[ref]D&C 132:52[/ref]

The Lord then goes on to say:

Let no one, therefore, set on my servant Joseph; for I will justify him; for he shall do the sacrifice which I require at his hands for his transgressions, saith the Lord your God…

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.

…for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.[ref]From D&C 132:60-62[/ref]

Who were these virgins, virtuous and pure? There are many women who appear to fit this description, women Emma is in some cases known to have given to Joseph.

Why specify the number ten? And why call out “those who are not pure, and have said they were pure?”

I suggest the number ten came from the parable of the ten virgins of the marriage parable in Matthew 25. As for the concern with those who might be lying about being pure, recall the illicit sex and known presence of venereal disease among the practitioners of the illicit sex of Bennett’s era. Thus the purity of the women Emma was commanded to accept as Joseph’s wives was not merely a matter of morality, but potentially a matter of life and death.

If Joseph was ever intimate with any of his plural wives, I suggest we look to this group of ladies, those virtuous and pure. Continue reading →