After receiving a revelation commanding him to practice plural marriage, Joseph Smith married multiple wives and introduced the practice to close associates. This principle was among the most challenging aspects of the Restoration—for Joseph personally and for other Church members. Plural marriage tested faith and provoked controversy and opposition. Few Latter-day Saints initially welcomed the restoration of a biblical practice entirely foreign to their sensibilities. But many later testified of powerful spiritual experiences that helped them overcome their hesitation and gave them courage to accept this practice. 
 
 Latter-day Saints believe that monogamy—the marriage of one man and one woman—is the Lord’s standing law of marriage. 1 In biblical times, the Lord commanded some of His people to practice plural marriage—the marriage of one man and more than one woman. 2 Some early members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also received and obeyed this commandment given through God’s prophets. 
 
 Although the Lord commanded the adoption—and later the cessation—of plural marriage in the latter days, He did not give exact instructions on how to obey the commandment. Significant social and cultural changes often include misunderstandings and difficulties. Church leaders and members experienced these challenges as they heeded the command to practice plural marriage and again later as they worked to discontinue it after Church President Wilford Woodruff issued an inspired statement known as the Manifesto in 1890, which led to the end of plural marriage in the Church. Through it all, Church leaders and members sought to follow God’s will. 
 
 Many details about the early practice of plural marriage are unknown. Plural marriage was introduced among the early Saints incrementally, and participants were asked to keep their actions confidential. They did not discuss their experiences publicly or in writing until after the Latter-day Saints had moved to Utah and Church leaders had publicly acknowledged the practice. The historical record of early plural marriage is therefore thin: few records of the time provide details, and later reminiscences are not always reliable. Some ambiguity will always accompany our knowledge about this issue. Like the participants, we “see through a glass, darkly” and are asked to walk by faith.3 
 
 The Beginnings of Plural Marriage in the Church 
 
 The revelation on plural marriage was not written down until 1843, but its early verses suggest that part of it emerged from Joseph Smith’s study of the Old Testament in 1831. People who knew Joseph well later stated he received the revelation about that time.4 The revelation, recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 132, states that Joseph prayed to know why God justified Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon in having many wives. The Lord responded that He had commanded them to enter into the practice.5 
 
 Latter-day Saints understood that they were living in the latter days, in what the revelations called the “dispensation of the fulness of times.”6 Ancient principles—such as prophets, priesthood, and temples—would be restored to the earth. Plural marriage was one of those ancient principles. 
 
 Polygamy had been permitted for millennia in many cultures and religions, but, with few exceptions, was rejected in Western cultures.7 In Joseph Smith’s time, monogamy was the only legal form of marriage in the United States. Joseph knew the practice of plural marriage would stir up public ire. After receiving the commandment, he taught a few associates about it, but he did not spread this teaching widely in the 1830s.8 
 
 When God commands a difficult task, He sometimes sends additional messengers to encourage His people to obey. Consistent with this pattern, Joseph told associates that an angel appeared to him three times between 1834 and 1842 and commanded him to proceed with plural marriage when he hesitated to move forward. During the third and final appearance, the angel came with a drawn sword, threatening Joseph with destruction unless he went forward and obeyed the commandment fully.9 
 
 Fragmentary evidence suggests that Joseph Smith acted on the angel’s first command by marrying a plural wife, Fanny Alger, in Kirtland, Ohio, in the mid-1830s. Several Latter-day Saints who had lived in Kirtland reported decades later that Joseph Smith had married Alger, who lived and worked in the Smith household, after he had obtained her consent and that of her parents.10 Little is known about this marriage, and nothing is known about the conversations between Joseph and Emma regarding Alger. After the marriage with Alger ended in separation, Joseph seems to have set the subject of plural marriage aside until after the Church moved to Nauvoo, Illinois. 
 
 Plural Marriage and Eternal Marriage 
 
 The same revelation that taught of plural marriage was part of a larger revelation given to Joseph Smith—that marriage could last beyond death and that eternal marriage was essential to inheriting the fulness that God desires for His children. As early as 1840, Joseph Smith privately taught Apostle Parley P. Pratt that the “heavenly order” allowed Pratt and his wife to be together “for time and all eternity.”11 Joseph also taught that men like Pratt—who had remarried following the death of his first wife—could be married (or sealed) to their wives for eternity, under the proper conditions.12 
 
 The sealing of husband and wife for eternity was made possible by the restoration of priesthood keys and ordinances. On April 3, 1836, the Old Testament prophet Elijah appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple and restored the priesthood keys necessary to perform ordinances for the living and the dead, including sealing families together.13 Marriages performed by priesthood authority could link loved ones to each other for eternity, on condition of righteousness; marriages performed without this authority would end at death.14 
 
 Marriage performed by priesthood authority meant that the procreation of children and perpetuation of families would continue into the eternities. Joseph Smith’s revelation on marriage declared that the “continuation of the seeds forever and ever” helped to fulfill God’s purposes for His children.15 This promise was given to all couples who were married by priesthood authority and were faithful to their covenants. 
 
 Plural Marriage in Nauvoo 
 
 For much of Western history, family “interest”—economic, political, and social considerations—dominated the choice of spouse. Parents had the power to arrange marriages or forestall unions of which they disapproved. By the late 1700s, romance and personal choice began to rival these traditional motives and practices.16 By Joseph Smith’s time, many couples insisted on marrying for love, as he and Emma did when they eloped against her parents’ wishes. 
 
 Latter-day Saints’ motives for plural marriage were often more religious than economic or romantic. Besides the desire to be obedient, a strong incentive was the hope of living in God’s presence with family members. In the revelation on marriage, the Lord promised participants “crowns of eternal lives” and “exaltation in the eternal worlds.”17 Men and women, parents and children, ancestors and progeny were to be “sealed” to each other—their commitment lasting into the eternities, consistent with Jesus’s promise that priesthood ordinances performed on earth could be “bound in heaven.”18 
 
 The first plural marriage in Nauvoo took place when Louisa Beaman and Joseph Smith were sealed in April 1841.19 Joseph married many additional wives and authorized other Latter-day Saints to practice plural marriage. The practice spread slowly at first. By June 1844, when Joseph died, approximately 29 men and 50 women had entered into plural marriage, in addition to Joseph and his wives. When the Saints entered the Salt Lake Valley in 1847, at least 196 men and 521 women had entered into plural marriages.20 Participants in these early plural marriages pledged to keep their involvement confidential, though they anticipated a time when the practice would be publicly acknowledged. 
 
 Nevertheless, rumors spread. A few men unscrupulously used these rumors to seduce women to join them in an unauthorized practice sometimes referred to as “spiritual wifery.” When this was discovered, the men were cut off from the Church.21 The rumors prompted members and leaders to issue carefully worded denials that denounced spiritual wifery and polygamy but were silent about what Joseph Smith and others saw as divinely mandated “celestial” plural marriage.22 The statements emphasized that the Church practiced no marital law other than monogamy while implicitly leaving open the possibility that individuals, under direction of God’s living prophet, might do so.23 
 
 Joseph Smith and Plural Marriage 
 
 During the era in which plural marriage was practiced, Latter-day Saints distinguished between sealings for time and eternity and sealings for eternity only. Sealings for time and eternity included commitments and relationships during this life, generally including the possibility of sexual relations. Eternity-only sealings indicated relationships in the next life alone. 
 
 Evidence indicates that Joseph Smith participated in both types of sealings. The exact number of women to whom he was sealed in his lifetime is unknown because the evidence is fragmentary.24 Some of the women who were sealed to Joseph Smith later testified that their marriages were for time and eternity, while others indicated that their relationships were for eternity alone.25 
 
 Most of those sealed to Joseph Smith were between 20 and 40 years of age at the time of their sealing to him. The oldest, Fanny Young, was 56 years old. The youngest was Helen Mar Kimball, daughter of Joseph’s close friends Heber C. and Vilate Murray Kimball, who was sealed to Joseph several months before her 15th birthday. Marriage at such an age, inappropriate by today’s standards, was legal in that era, and some women married in their mid-teens.26 Helen Mar Kimball spoke of her sealing to Joseph as being “for eternity alone,” suggesting that the relationship did not involve sexual relations.27 After Joseph’s death, Helen remarried and became an articulate defender of him and of plural marriage.28 
 
 Following his marriage to Louisa Beaman and before he married other single women, Joseph Smith was sealed to a number of women who were already married.29 Neither these women nor Joseph explained much about these sealings, though several women said they were for eternity alone.30 Other women left no records, making it unknown whether their sealings were for time and eternity or were for eternity alone. 
 
 There are several possible explanations for this practice. These sealings may have provided a way to create an eternal bond or link between Joseph’s family and other families within the Church.31 These ties extended both vertically, from parent to child, and horizontally, from one family to another. Today such eternal bonds are achieved through the temple marriages of individuals who are also sealed to their own birth families, in this way linking families together. Joseph Smith’s sealings to women already married may have been an early version of linking one family to another. In Nauvoo, most if not all of the first husbands seem to have continued living in the same household with their wives during Joseph’s lifetime, and complaints about these sealings with Joseph Smith are virtually absent from the documentary record.32 
 
 These sealings may also be explained by Joseph’s reluctance to enter plural marriage because of the sorrow it would bring to his wife Emma. He may have believed that sealings to married women would comply with the Lord’s command without requiring him to have normal marriage relationships.33 This could explain why, according to Lorenzo Snow, the angel reprimanded Joseph for having “demurred” on plural marriage even after he had entered into the practice.34 After this rebuke, according to this interpretation, Joseph returned primarily to sealings with single women. 
 
 Another possibility is that, in an era when life spans were shorter than they are today, faithful women felt an urgency to be sealed by priesthood authority. Several of these women were married either to non-Mormons or former Mormons, and more than one of the women later expressed unhappiness in their present marriages. Living in a time when divorce was difficult to obtain, these women may have believed a sealing to Joseph Smith would give them blessings they might not otherwise receive in the next life.35 
 
 The women who united with Joseph Smith in plural marriage risked reputation and self-respect in being associated with a principle so foreign to their culture and so easily misunderstood by others. “I made a greater sacrifice than to give my life,” said Zina Huntington Jacobs, “for I never anticipated again to be looked upon as an honorable woman.” Nevertheless, she wrote, “I searched the scripture & by humble prayer to my Heavenly Father I obtained a testimony for myself.”36 After Joseph’s death, most of the women sealed to him moved to Utah with the Saints, remained faithful Church members, and defended both plural marriage and Joseph.37 
 
 Joseph and Emma 
 
 Plural marriage was difficult for all involved. For Joseph Smith’s wife Emma, it was an excruciating ordeal. Records of Emma’s reactions to plural marriage are sparse; she left no firsthand accounts, making it impossible to reconstruct her thoughts. Joseph and Emma loved and respected each other deeply. After he had entered into plural marriage, he poured out his feelings in his journal for his “beloved Emma,” whom he described as “undaunted, firm and unwavering, unchangeable, affectionate Emma.” After Joseph’s death, Emma kept a lock of his hair in a locket she wore around her neck.38 
 
 Emma approved, at least for a time, of four of Joseph Smith’s plural marriages in Nauvoo, and she accepted all four of those wives into her household. She may have approved of other marriages as well.39 But Emma likely did not know about all of Joseph’s sealings.40 She vacillated in her view of plural marriage, at some points supporting it and at other times denouncing it. 
 
 In the summer of 1843, Joseph Smith dictated the revelation on marriage, a lengthy and complex text containing both glorious promises and stern warnings, some directed at Emma.41 The revelation instructed women and men that they must obey God’s law and commands in order to receive the fulness of His glory. 
 
 The revelation on marriage required that a wife give her consent before her husband could enter into plural marriage.42 Nevertheless, toward the end of the revelation, the Lord said that if the first wife “receive not this law”—the command to practice plural marriage—the husband would be “exempt from the law of Sarah,” presumably the requirement that the husband gain the consent of the first wife before marrying additional women.43 After Emma opposed plural marriage, Joseph was placed in an agonizing dilemma, forced to choose between the will of God and the will of his beloved Emma. He may have thought Emma’s rejection of plural marriage exempted him from the law of Sarah. Her decision to “receive not this law” permitted him to marry additional wives without her consent. Because of Joseph’s early death and Emma’s decision to remain in Nauvoo and not discuss plural marriage after the Church moved west, many aspects of their story remain known only to the two of them. 
 
 Trial and Spiritual Witness 
 
 Years later in Utah, participants in Nauvoo plural marriage discussed their motives for entering into the practice. God declared in the Book of Mormon that monogamy was the standard; at times, however, He commanded plural marriage so His people could “raise up seed unto [Him].”44 Plural marriage did result in an increased number of children born to believing parents.45 
 
 Some Saints also saw plural marriage as a redemptive process of sacrifice and spiritual refinement. According to Helen Mar Kimball, Joseph Smith stated that “the practice of this principle would be the hardest trial the Saints would ever have to test their faith.” Though it was one of the “severest” trials of her life, she testified that it had also been “one of the greatest blessings.”46 Her father, Heber C. Kimball, agreed. “I never felt more sorrowful,” he said of the moment he learned of plural marriage in 1841. “I wept days. … I had a good wife. I was satisfied.”47 
 
 The decision to accept such a wrenching trial usually came only after earnest prayer and intense soul-searching. Brigham Young said that, upon learning of plural marriage, “it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave.”48 “I had to pray unceasingly,” he said, “and I had to exercise faith and the Lord revealed to me the truth of it and that satisfied me.”49 Heber C. Kimball found comfort only after his wife Vilate had a visionary experience attesting to the rightness of plural marriage. “She told me,” Vilate’s daughter later recalled, “she never saw so happy a man as father was when she described the vision and told him she was satisfied and knew it was from God.”50 
 
 Lucy Walker recalled her inner turmoil when Joseph Smith invited her to become his wife. “Every feeling of my soul revolted against it,” she wrote. Yet, after several restless nights on her knees in prayer, she found relief as her room “filled with a holy influence” akin to “brilliant sunshine.” She said, “My soul was filled with a calm sweet peace that I never knew,” and “supreme happiness took possession of my whole being.”51 
 
 Not all had such experiences. Some Latter-day Saints rejected the principle of plural marriage and left the Church, while others declined to enter the practice but remained faithful.52 Nevertheless, for many women and men, initial revulsion and anguish was followed by struggle, resolution, and ultimately, light and peace. Sacred experiences enabled the Saints to move forward in faith.53 
 
 Conclusion 
 
 The challenge of introducing a principle as controversial as plural marriage is almost impossible to overstate. A spiritual witness of its truthfulness allowed Joseph Smith and other Latter-day Saints to accept this principle. Difficult as it was, the introduction of plural marriage in Nauvoo did indeed “raise up seed” unto God. A substantial number of today’s members descend through faithful Latter-day Saints who practiced plural marriage. 
 
 Church members no longer practice plural marriage.54 Consistent with Joseph Smith’s teachings, the Church permits a man whose wife has died to be sealed to another woman when he remarries. Moreover, members are permitted to perform ordinances on behalf of deceased men and women who married more than once on earth, sealing them to all of the spouses to whom they were legally married. The precise nature of these relationships in the next life is not known, and many family relationships will be sorted out in the life to come. Latter-day Saints are encouraged to trust in our wise Heavenly Father, who loves His children and does all things for their growth and salvation.55 
 
 Resources 
 
 The Church acknowledges the contribution of scholars to the historical content presented in this article; their work is used with permission. 
 
 Originally published October 2014. ||||| Latter-day Saints believe that the marriage of one man and one woman is the Lord’s standing law of marriage. In biblical times, the Lord commanded some to practice plural marriage—the marriage of one man and more than one woman. 1 By revelation, the Lord commanded Joseph Smith to institute the practice of plural marriage among Church members in the early 1840s. For more than half a century, plural marriage was practiced by some Latter-day Saints under the direction of the Church President. 2 
 
 Latter-day Saints do not understand all of God’s purposes in instituting, through His prophets, the practice of plural marriage. The Book of Mormon identifies one reason for God to command it: to increase the number of children born in the gospel covenant in order to “raise up seed unto [the Lord].”3 
 
 Plural marriage did result in the birth of large numbers of children within faithful Latter-day Saint homes. It also shaped 19th-century Mormon society in many ways: marriage became available to virtually all who desired it; per-capita inequality of wealth was diminished as economically disadvantaged women married into more financially stable households; and ethnic intermarriages were increased, which helped to unite a diverse immigrant population. Plural marriage also helped create and strengthen a sense of cohesion and group identification among Latter-day Saints. Church members came to see themselves as a “peculiar people,” covenant-bound to carry out the commands of God despite outside opposition.4 
 
 The Beginnings of Plural Marriage in the Church 
 
 Polygamy had been permitted for millennia in many cultures and religions, but, with few exceptions, it was rejected in Western cultures. In Joseph Smith’s time, monogamy was the only legal form of marriage in the United States. 
 
 The revelation on plural marriage, recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 132, emerged partly from Joseph Smith’s study of the Old Testament in 1831. Latter-day Saints understood that they were living in the latter days, in what the revelations called the “dispensation of the fulness of times.”5 Ancient principles—such as prophets, priesthood, and temples—would be restored to the earth. Plural marriage, practiced by ancient patriarchs like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses, was one of those ancient principles.6 
 
 The same revelation that taught of plural marriage was embedded within a revelation about eternal marriage—the teaching that marriage could last beyond death. Monogamous and plural marriages performed by priesthood power could seal loved ones to each other for eternity, on condition of righteousness.7 
 
 The revelation on marriage stated general principles; it did not explain how to implement plural marriage in all its particulars. In Nauvoo, Joseph Smith married additional wives and authorized other Latter-day Saints to practice plural marriage. The practice was introduced carefully and incrementally, and participants vowed to keep their participation confidential, anticipating a time when husbands and wives could acknowledge one another publicly. 
 
 If you would like to learn more about the beginnings of plural marriage in the Church, click here. 
 
 Plural Marriage and Families in 19th-Century Utah 
 
 Between 1852 and 1890, Latter-day Saints openly practiced plural marriage. Most plural families lived in Utah. Women and men who lived within plural marriage attested to challenges and difficulties but also to the love and joy they found within their families. They believed it was a commandment of God at that time and that obedience would bring great blessings to them and their posterity. Church leaders taught that participants in plural marriages should seek to develop a generous spirit of unselfishness and the pure love of Christ for everyone involved. 
 
 Although some leaders had large polygamous families, two-thirds of polygamist men had only two wives at a time. Church leaders recognized that plural marriages could be particularly difficult for women. Divorce was therefore available to women who were unhappy in their marriages; remarriage was also readily available. Women sometimes married at young ages in the first decade of Utah settlement, which was typical of women living in frontier areas at the time. At its peak in 1857, perhaps one half of all Utah Latter-day Saints experienced plural marriage as a husband, wife, or child. The percentage of those involved in plural marriage steadily declined over the next three decades. 
 
 During the years that plural marriage was publicly taught, not all Latter-day Saints were expected to live the principle, though all were expected to accept it as a revelation from God. Indeed, this system of marriage could not have been universal due to the ratio of men to women. Women were free to choose their spouses, whether to enter into a polygamous or a monogamous union, or whether to marry at all. Some men entered plural marriage because they were asked to do so by Church leaders, while others initiated the process themselves; all were required to obtain the approval of Church leaders before entering a plural marriage. 
 
 If you would like to learn more about plural marriage and families in Utah, click here. 
 
 Anti-Polygamy Legislation and the End of Plural Marriage 
 
 Beginning in 1862, the U.S. government passed laws against the practice of plural marriage. After the U.S. Supreme Court found the anti-polygamy laws to be constitutional in 1879, federal officials began prosecuting polygamous husbands and wives during the 1880s. Believing these laws to be unjust, Latter-day Saints engaged in civil disobedience by continuing to practice plural marriage and by attempting to avoid arrest by moving to the homes of friends or family or by hiding under assumed names. When convicted, they paid fines and submitted to jail time. 
 
 One of the anti-polygamy laws permitted the U.S. government to seize Church property. Federal officers soon threatened to take Latter-day Saint temples. The work of salvation for both the living and the dead was now in jeopardy. In September 1890, Church President Wilford Woodruff felt inspired to issue the Manifesto. “Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages,” President Woodruff explained, “I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.”8 
 
 The full implications of the document were not apparent at first. The Lord’s way is to speak “line upon line; here a little, there a little.”9 Like the beginning of plural marriage in the Church, the end of the practice was gradual and incremental, a process filled with difficulties and uncertainties. 
 
 The Manifesto declared President Woodruff’s intention to submit to the laws of the United States, and new plural marriages within that jurisdiction largely came to an end. But a small number of plural marriages continued to be performed in Mexico and Canada, under the sanction of some Church leaders. As a rule, these marriages were not promoted by Church leaders and were difficult to get approved. Either one or both of the spouses who entered into these unions typically had to agree to remain in Canada or Mexico. On an exceptional basis, a smaller number of plural marriages were performed within the United States between the years 1890 and 1904. 
 
 The Church’s role in these marriages became a subject of intense public debate after Reed Smoot, an Apostle, was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1903. At the April 1904 general conference, Church President Joseph F. Smith issued a forceful statement, known as the Second Manifesto, making new plural marriages punishable by excommunication.10 Since President Smith’s day, Church Presidents have repeatedly emphasized that the Church and its members are no longer authorized to enter into plural marriage and have underscored the sincerity of their words by urging local leaders to bring noncompliant members before Church disciplinary councils. 
 
 If you would like to learn more about the end of plural marriage in the Church, click here. 
 
 Conclusion 
 
 Plural marriage was among the most challenging aspects of the Restoration. For many who practiced it, plural marriage was a trial of faith. It violated both cultural and legal norms, leading to persecution and revilement. Despite these hardships, plural marriage benefited the Church in innumerable ways. Through the lineage of these 19th-century Saints have come many Latter-day Saints who have been faithful to their gospel covenants as righteous mothers and fathers; loyal disciples of Jesus Christ; devoted Church members, leaders, and missionaries; and good citizens and prominent public officials. Modern Latter-day Saints honor and respect these faithful pioneers who gave so much for their faith, families, and community. 
 
 Resources 
 
 The Church acknowledges the contribution of scholars to the historical content presented in this article; their work is used with permission. 
 
 Originally published October 2014. ||||| From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
 
 The Community of Christ (formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS Church)) and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) are two denominations that share a common heritage in the Church of Christ founded by Joseph Smith on April 6, 1830. Since Smith's death in 1844, they have evolved separately in belief and practices. The LDS Church is headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, and claims more than 15 million members worldwide;[1] the Community of Christ is headquartered in Independence, Missouri, and reports a worldwide membership of approximately 250,000.[2] 
 
 Community of Christ transformation since 1960 [ edit ] 
 
 Significant doctrinal, organizational, and attitudinal changes in the Community of Christ since 1960 have narrowed the similarities that remain between it and the LDS Church. While the doctrine and belief system of the LDS Church is highly centralized, systematic, and static, the Community of Christ has adopted an adaptive, decentralized, and progressive approach to doctrine. In 1997, the Community of Christ initiated a three-year period of transformation entitled “Transformation 2000,” that was seen by its president W. Grant McMurray as the culmination of a series of changes dating back to 1960.[3] McMurray identified these changes as a movement away from a belief that the denomination was "the restored church" and towards a position within mainstream Christianity. At the World Conference of 2000, by vote of 1,979 to 561, the name of the church was changed from the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to Community of Christ. In so doing, the church was attempting to distance itself from comparisons with the LDS Church and in the process transform itself into a unique body among mainstream Christian denominations. 
 
 McMurray was the first president of the Community of Christ who was not a direct descendant of Joseph Smith. He sought to formalize developments in thinking about prophetic leadership, the historical basis of the Book of Mormon, and the concept that priesthood authority had been restored in the 1820s and 1830s after centuries of apostasy. During his presidency, the church moved from a closed to an open communion and McMurray began to open the door to priesthood ordination for LGBT individuals, something which he acknowledged was already occurring. At the time, negative membership response to this issue forced McMurray to reaffirm the official policy prohibiting the ordination of sexually active gays and lesbians. The church allowed those who were ordained against policy to continue in their priesthood offices. Since 2010, gay rights have been formalized in Community of Christ doctrine.[4] 
 
 Prior to 1960, the RLDS Church's identity was primarily tied to its differences with the larger LDS Church, which RLDS Church members usually referred to as the "Utah Church" or "Mormon Church". McMurray cited a 1960 world tour by former president W. Wallace Smith as a pivotal event impacting the evolution of RLDS Church beliefs. Leaders such as Roy Cheville had already been teaching a new generation of church members a more ecumenical and open-minded system of beliefs. But it was the church's proselytizing of cultures in countries outside North America that knew little about Christianity, much less Mormonism, that forced a reassessment of denominational practices and beliefs. RLDS apostle Charles Neff, a leading church missionary, pushed fellow leaders and field ministers towards a relativistic doctrinal viewpoint motivated by a combination of practical missionary concerns and an attitude of theological openness. These significant moves of the Community of Christ towards alignment with liberal Protestant doctrine were influenced in part by many in church leadership who pursued theological studies at St. Paul School of Theology in Kansas City, Missouri. While the RLDS Church had long been known for its strong anti-polygamy stance, its outreach efforts amongst the Sora people in India brought a re-examination even on this issue. 
 
 Church president Wallace B. Smith’s 1984 call for the ordination of women to the priesthood was a milestone in the doctrinal evolution of the church towards progressive Christianity. During his term in office, greater attention was brought to peace and justice issues. The call to dedicate the Independence Temple to the "pursuit of peace" is widely regarded as both symbolic and practical evidence of the differences between the two denominations. While the LDS Church has a set of highly standardized temple rituals and regards temples as sacred space for the creation of covenants, the Community of Christ understands temples to be a less formalized center for spirituality, ministerial education, and church administration. 
 
 These changes constituted a broad shift in theology of the Community of Christ from Restorationism to mainline Protestant Christianity. They also widened the scope of long-standing doctrinal differences between it and the LDS Church. Nearly all of the traditional differences between the two groups can be seen as aligning the Community of Christ more closely with traditional Christian teaching and neo-orthodoxy, which further isolates the LDS Church within Christianity as a whole. 
 
 Historical differences between the churches [ edit ] 
 
 The RLDS Church was founded by the confederation of a number of smaller groups that declined to migrate with Brigham Young to Utah Territory or follow any of the others vying to become the successor to Joseph Smith. Prior to the 1860 Amboy Conference, in which the church was formally "reorganized" into the RLDS Church, numerous doctrinal differences were espoused by the leaders of the various splinter groups. Following the reorganization, these differences were solidified into a litany of what might now be called "wedge issues" that would distinguish it from Young's LDS Church in Utah.[5] 
 
 The differences enumerated below characterize the major differences between the Community of Christ and the LDS Church.[6] 
 
 Scriptures [ edit ] 
 
 Both churches believe in an open canon of scripture founded upon the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and revelations of God to the church recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants. 
 
 Bible [ edit ] 
 
 The Inspired Version of the Bible is part of the Community of Christ's canon of scripture,[7] although it does not mandate a single translation of the Bible.[8] 
 
 The LDS Church has officially adopted the Authorized King James Version for English speakers, and has produced its own edition which is extensively footnoted with clarifications from the Inspired Version. The LDS Church refers to the Inspired Version as the "Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible." For Spanish-speaking members, the LDS Church publishes a slightly modified version of the Reina-Valera version, including footnotes and annotations comparable to those found in its official King James Version. For other languages, the LDS Church recommends usage of specific traditional translations that are selected based on doctrinal integrity with the other official standard works. 
 
 Book of Mormon [ edit ] 
 
 Title page of the first edition of the Book of Mormon (1830). 
 
 Both the Community of Christ and LDS Church accept the Book of Mormon as a second canon of scripture[9] and views it as an additional witness of Jesus Christ that complements the Bible. The Community of Christ publishes two versions of the book through its official publishing arm, Herald House. The Authorized Edition is based on the original printer's manuscript and the 1837 Second Edition (or "Kirtland Edition") of the Book of Mormon. Its content is similar to the Book of Mormon published by the LDS Church, but the versification is different[10] The Community of Christ also publishes a 1966 "Revised Authorized Edition", which attempts to modernize some of the language.[10] 
 
 The LDS Church publishes a single version of the Book of Mormon, which is extensively footnoted to the church's other standard works. Its chapter and versification is based upon the 1879 edition edited by Orson Pratt. 
 
 At a 2007 World Conference, Community of Christ President Stephen M. Veazey ruled that a resolution to "reaffirm the Book of Mormon as a divinely inspired record" was out of order.[9] He stated that "while the Church affirms the Book of Mormon as scripture, and makes it available for study and use in various languages, we do not attempt to mandate the degree of belief or use. This position is in keeping with our longstanding tradition that belief in the Book of Mormon is not to be used as a test of fellowship or membership in the church."[9] The LDS Church regularly emphasizes the importance of the Book of Mormon and encourages its members to read from it daily. 
 
 Doctrine and Covenants [ edit ] 
 
 Both churches publish a book called the Doctrine and Covenants and accept it as scripture.[11][12] The Community of Christ has removed several early sections[13] and has regularly added new revelations and other inspired documents to the book since the death of Joseph Smith. The LDS Church has added some material to the Doctrine and Covenants since Smith's death, but less than that of the Community of Christ. The Community of Christ version currently contains 166 documents, 51 of which were produced after the death of Joseph Smith. The LDS Church version currently contains 140 documents, five of which were produced after Smith's death. 
 
 Pearl of Great Price [ edit ] 
 
 The LDS Church includes the Pearl of Great Price as part of its standard works. The Community of Christ has never published or considered this book to be scripture.[11] However, the Community of Christ does accept two portions of the Pearl of Great Price—the Book of Moses and Joseph Smith–Matthew—as scripture: 
 
 Chapters 2–8 of the Book of Moses are included within the Book of Genesis in the Community of Christ's Inspired Version of the Bible; 
 
 Chapter 1 of the Book of Moses is accepted as section 22 of the Community of Christ's Doctrine and Covenants; 
 
 In addition to appearing in the Inspired Version of the Bible, chapter 7 of the Book of Moses is accepted as section 36 of the Community of Christ's Doctrine and Covenants; and 
 
 Joseph Smith–Matthew is accepted as part of the Book of Matthew in the Inspired Version of the Bible. 
 
 Portions of the Pearl of Great Price that are not accepted as scripture by the Community of Christ are the Book of Abraham, Joseph Smith–History, and the Articles of Faith. 
 
 Presidential tenure and succession [ edit ] 
 
 Joseph Smith III, the successor to Joseph Smith as the Prophet-President of the Community of Christ 
 
 Both the Community of Christ and the LDS Church are headed by a President of the Church, a position created and held by Joseph Smith. In the LDS Church, succession to the presidency has been based on apostolic seniority. In the Community of Christ, the president has the power to appoint a successor; if the outgoing president does not appoint a successor, the Council of Twelve Apostles nominates a successor. 
 
 After Smith, the next three presidents of the Community of Christ served as President of the Church until their deaths. In 1978, W. Wallace Smith broke this tradition and retired from the presidency, designated himself as "president emeritus", and appointed Wallace B. Smith as his successor. Wallace B. Smith and his chosen successor—McMurray—also retired from the position. In the LDS Church, every President of the Church has served until his death and none have selected a successor prior to death. 
 
 The first five[14] successors to Joseph Smith in the presidency of the Community of Christ were direct descendants of Smith.[15] McMurray was the first president of the church who was not a member of the Smith family.[15] While never formally accepting a principle of lineal succession, the denomination teaches that Smith had designated his son, Joseph Smith III, as his successor.[16] In 1996, the appointment of McMurray by retiring president Wallace B. Smith was the justification used by schismatic groups that abandoned the Community of Christ. This schism led to the creation of the Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. The president of the Remnant Church, Frederick Niels Larsen, is a maternal great-great-grandson of Joseph Smith. 
 
 The LDS Church determines its presidential successor by principles of apostolic seniority combined with inspiration from God.[17] When a church president dies, the member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles who has been an apostle the longest—the President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles—becomes the new president of the church.[17] Prior to making the succession official, the apostles individually and collectively pray for divine guidance and confirmation of their proposed action.[17] 
 
 While this is an area that marked a traditional difference between the two denominations, a 2004–05 succession crisis prompted the Council of Twelve Apostles of the Community of Christ to utilize an inspiration-seeking procedure similar to that adopted by the apostles of the LDS Church.[18] When McMurray stepped down as president in 2004, he chose not to name a successor, as previous retirees from the position had done. In 2005, Stephen M. Veazey—who was president of the Twelve, but not the senior member—was selected as successor by the Council of Twelve.[18][19] 
 
 Godhead [ edit ] 
 
 The Community of Christ teaches about the Trinity, which they define God as a community of three persons.[20] The LDS Church teaches that the Godhead is composed of three physically distinct personage Gods who are united—or "one"—in purpose.[21][22] 
 
 Exaltation [ edit ] 
 
 The LDS Church teaches the principle of exaltation;[23] this doctrine is not accepted by the Community of Christ.[5] 
 
 Adam–God doctrine [ edit ] 
 
 According to Brigham Young, the Adam–God doctrine was first taught by Joseph Smith before his death in 1844. However, the evidence that Smith originated the doctrine consists only of Young's own assertions,[24] an 1877 recollection of Anson Call,[25] and some circumstantial evidence collected by Mormon fundamentalist writers.[26] LDS Church President Spencer W. Kimball officially denounced the Adam–God doctrine in 1976.[27][28] 
 
 Because the Community of Christ was founded by the confederation of a number of smaller groups that declined to accept Young's leadership, the Adam–God doctrine has never been a part of Community of Christ teachings, and it has maintained that the doctrine was first enunciated by Young, not Smith.[5] 
 
 Priesthood eligibility [ edit ] 
 
 Both churches have a tradition of bestowing the priesthood on adult male members of the church. The priesthood of the Community of Christ has always been open to persons of all races,[29] and was opened to women in 1984.[30] The LDS Church's priesthood is open to males only[31][32] and from the mid 1800s until 1978 was not open to people of black African descent,[31] who were sometimes characterized as "descendants of Cain".[33][34] The LDS Church routinely gives its Aaronic priesthood to boys 12 years of age and older, while the Community of Christ generally restricts its priesthood to adult men and women.[35] 
 
 Temples [ edit ] 
 
 Both the Community of Christ and the LDS Church operate temples, which for both groups are separate and distinct from church chapels or meetinghouses. The Community of Christ operates two temples, the Kirtland Temple and the Independence Temple, while the LDS Church has more than 140. 
 
 The Community of Christ does not practice and has traditionally objected to the idea of sacraments or rituals being performed in its temples.[5] The Community of Christ's temples are open to the public[36] and are dedicated to the pursuit of peace, spiritual learning, and church history and administration. LDS Church temples are open only to approved members and are primarily used for the performance of rites such as the endowment, celestial marriage, and baptism for the dead; these ordinances have never been embraced by the Community of Christ.[5] 
 
 Historically, the Community of Christ did include documents in its Doctrine and Covenants[37] which sanctioned baptism for the dead and other temple rites.[5] However, the Community of Christ considers that the institution of baptism for the dead was made conditional on the completion of the Nauvoo Temple in a reasonable amount of time.[38] Because the membership of the church failed to complete the temple during Smith's lifetime, the Community of Christ teaches that the right to perform baptisms for the dead was withdrawn and has not been reinstituted.[38] 
 
 The 1970 World Conference of the Community of Christ concluded that sections 107, 109, and 110 (regarding baptism for the dead and temple rites) had been added to the 1844 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants without proper approval of a church conference. Thus, the conference removed[13] those sections to a historical appendix.[13] The World Conference of 1990 subsequently removed the entire appendix from the Doctrine and Covenants.[13] 
 
 Use of cross and other symbols [ edit ] 
 
 The Community of Christ utilizes the symbol of the Christian cross on its buildings and temples.[39] The LDS Church currently does not use the cross[40] on the grounds that "because the Savior lives, we do not use the symbol of His death as the symbol of our faith",[41] although this aversion to the cross only became dominant in the 20th century.[42][43] 
 
 Most temples of the LDS Church include a statue of the Angel Moroni on a spire,[44] but the church does not consider Moroni to be an official symbol and "has no policy regarding the use of statues of the angel Moroni atop temples", but rather includes or excludes a statue from each temple based on local circumstances.[45] The Community of Christ does not use the Angel Moroni as a symbol. 
 
 In the United States, the Veterans Affairs (VA) emblem for headstones for LDS Church members is a stylized Angel Moroni. For the Community of Christ, the VA emblem is a stylized representation of a child standing between a lion and a lamb, which is an official logo of the Community of Christ. 
 
 Polygamy [ edit ] 
 
 In the 19th century, the differences between the LDS Church and the RLDS Church regarding polygamy was the principal distinction between the two churches. The LDS Church openly practiced plural marriage from 1852 to 1890 and taught that the practice was instituted by Joseph Smith and taught in secret to members of the church before his death. For many years, the leaders of the RLDS Church were vocal critics of the LDS Church's polygamy and argued that the practice had been introduced by Brigham Young and falsely attributed to Smith after Smith's death. Polygamy was frequently denounced by RLDS leaders and the practice was never accepted by the church.[46] Smith's son Joseph Smith III and widow Emma Smith repeatedly taught that Smith opposed the practice and was not a polygamist.[47][48][49] 
 
 Today, although the Community of Christ has no official position on whether Smith was a polygamist,[46] some members now accept the historical consensus that Smith had multiple wives. Some members have argued that Smith was wrong to introduce polygamy;[46] in any case, most Community of Christ members continue to reject polygamy.[5][46] Today, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints opposes the practice of polygamy, its church presidents have repeatedly emphasized that the Church and its members are no longer authorized to enter into plural marriage.[50] 
 
 Tithing [ edit ] 
 
 Traditionally, the Community of Christ taught that tithing should be calculated as one-tenth of a member's discretionary income.[51] The LDS Church teaches that it is ten percent of one's annual income,[52] with it left to the member to determine how to calculate it (e.g., what constitutes "income" and whether it is ten percent of income after or before tax).[53] Recently, the Community of Christ has adopted a program known as Disciples' Generous Response, which encourages financial generosity as a response to God rather than as a set calculated obligation.[51] 
 
 Apostasy and Restoration [ edit ] 
 
 The LDS Church teaches that Joseph Smith restored the fullness of the gospel after a centuries long period known as the great apostasy.[54][55] The LDS Church therefore characterizes itself as a restoration of fallen Christianity and the one true church that exists.[54] In contrast, the Community of Christ has abandoned its traditional tenet that it is the one true church and has adopted a viewpoint that all faith traditions can offer a pathway to spiritual enlightenment.[56] Barbara McFarlane Higdon has called the Community of Christ a "unique member of the body of Christ, the universal community of believers."[57] Higdon also suggests that prior claims that the church had been "restored" were tantamount to idolatry. The Community of Christ has therefore moved towards ecumenism and inter-faith dialogue. Nevertheless, the Community of Christ "steadfastly affirms the primacy of continuing revelation instead of creedal rigidity". The Community of Christ's Doctrine and Covenants continues to contain documents that declare that the church is the one true church.[58] 
 
 Today, the Community of Christ generally refers to Joseph Smith's First Vision as the "grove experience" and takes a flexible view about its historicity,[59] emphasizing the healing presence of God and the forgiving mercy of Jesus Christ felt by Smith.[60] In contrast, the LDS Church strongly affirms the reality of the First Vision and emphasizes its role as the beginning of the restoration of the gospel through God's chosen prophet. 
 
 Summary chart [ edit ] 
 
 Notes [ edit ]
– The Mormon church's big revelations didn't stop with its sacred undergarments: In an online essay titled "Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo," the church for the first time declares that founder Joseph Smith was a polygamist, with a footnote stating that "careful estimates" put his tally of wives at between 30 and 40. The essay explains that Smith was ordered to take multiple wives by an angel who visited him three times between 1834 and 1842; in the last instance, the angel was armed with a sword and threatened a reluctant Smith. The leader, then married to first wife Emma, took his first plural wife, Fanny Alger, in Kirtland, Ohio. Smith and Alger ultimately separated, and the church relocated to Nauvoo, Ill., where he married many more women. The oldest was 56, and the youngest was 14-year-old Helen Mar Kimball; some were already married, a revelation the New York Times describes as the "biggest bombshell for some." The essay explains that a number of marriages, including that with Kimball, were sealed "for eternity alone," suggesting sexual relations weren't involved (the ones that did involve sex were "for time and eternity"). What did Emma think of all this? Per the essay, she was none too pleased, though at one time she did accept four of Smith's wives into their home. And what was the reasoning behind what the essay describes as the "wrenching trial" of polygamy? Kimball said Smith told her that "the practice of this principle would be the hardest trial the Saints would ever have to test their faith." Two more essays discuss plural marriage in the church's later years; they're part of an effort the church is making to share "reliable, faith-promoting" info about its past, the church's historian tells the Times. (Part of that effort: an explanation of its undergarments.)