The LDS Church might believe in both 1] polygamy and 2] subordination to legitimate civil authority as religious requirements. Then if these came into conflict, some resolution would have to be reached, and it might give precedence to subordination. I take it this is the thrust of Nelson Lund's suggestion -- as distinguished from the more descriptive Realist point that religious authorities might be expected to bow to secular pressures, and then to bounce back when those pressures eased.
On subordination to civil authority, here's a snippet from a 1987 address by Dallin Oaks expounding the Mormon doctrine that the U.S. Constitution is divinely inspired (a doctrine I recall being questioned on when I gave a talk at BYU Law School some years back.) See http://saugus.byu.edu/publications/oaks.htm U.S. citizens have an inspired Constitution, and therefore, what? Does the belief that the U.S. Constitution is divinely inspired affect citizens' behavior toward law and government? It should and it does. U.S. citizens should follow the First Presidency's counsel to study the Constitution.17 They should be familiar with its great fundamentals; the separation of powers, the individual guarantees in the Bill of Rights, the structure of federalism, the sovereignty of the people, and the principles of the rule of the law. They should oppose any infringement of these inspired fundamentals. They should be law-abiding citizens, supportive of national, state, and local governments. The 12th Article of Faith declares: "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." The Church's official declaration of belief states: We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them. . . . We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside. (D&C 134:1, 5) Tom Grey Stanford Law School [EMAIL PROTECTED] Frank Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .EDU> cc: Sent by: Discussion Subject: Re: "Agenda" and persecution of Mormons list for con law professors <[EMAIL PROTECTED] v.ucla.edu> 07/16/2003 07:14 AM Please respond to Discussion list for con law professors I don't see how one can argue that the LDS church hasn't changed its religious views on polygamy. We know that they now excommunicate someone for engaging in polygamy. To say that this was just a concession to civil authority is pretty demeaning to the church, I think, suggesting that they would so greatly compromise their religious beliefs to this degree to civil authority. Perhaps they would accept the law as against their beliefs but if those beliefs are sincere they would not aggressively enforce the law. The law certainly didn't require that they excommunicate those who practiced polygamy. Also, to Paul Finkelman, how do you compel polygamy? Do you punish men for having only one wife? Frank Cross Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law CBA 5.202 University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX 78712
