2007-11-30 17:24:00
Let us examine how the principle behind romantic relationships plays out in plural relationships. The question is -- can one or any of them achieve fulfillment? To answer this, we must examine it in an unbiased way. If a person has his mindset to the idea that plural marriage is completely right or completely wrong he will not be able to see clearly here. To see the truth we must look at it objectively without value judgments.
Let us say that Jim has three wives. On average each wife will only see one third of his romantic energy. You would think that Jim would be walking around with an overflow of energy in his direction because wives having three units of romantic energy and sending to him. But how much energy is actually sent in this situation? If wife number one sends more than a third of her energy she's going to have a surplus going into the universe and will only be getting about a third back. That surplus, which is lost, will cause her to feel vacant inside. Therefore, she is likely to hold back and only release a third of her energy. If each of the three wives consistently sends a third of their energy Jim will pretty much feel that all is well. The problem is this is not likely to happen on a consistent basis. And why is this? Simply because each person has their emotional ups and downs.
If a wife is sending out one third of her energies, as an average, but then has a day when her feelings are offended that one third may drop down to near zero. She becomes distant and Jim starts paying her a lot more attention than normal. Wife number two gets upset that she isn't getting much attention and her release of romantic energy drops to near zero. Jim then starts paying her a little bit more attention and then wife number three feels neglected and her romantic energy straw drops to near zero. For awhile then Jim finds himself in a situation where the romantic energy is receiving as a whole is less than 50 percent. Even though he feels blessed with three wives capable of sending him lots of attention and romantic energy he winds up getting less than the regular monogamous man receives. He is beside himself. The doctrine is they supposed to be enjoying three times the blessings as a person with one wife but he seems to be getting three times the trouble and at the same time not getting the fulfillment he craves.
The person with one spouse actually has a better chance for complete sharing of romantic energy than the person with two or more wives. The reason is that instead of just releasing one third of their energies they are capable of releasing 100 percent of the romantic energies toward each other. Once this is accomplished and there is perfect sharing they can continue to let the romantic energy flow and enjoy full interplay with each other. Once this is accomplished there will be a sublime peace, stability and well-being in the relationship. This cannot be achieved by a man that has three wives or woman that has three husbands. In this circumstance where the man has three wives only the man has the chance of receiving 100% of romantic energies. And this is only accomplished when he gets enough energy from the three wives to equal the 100 percent. This is not likely to happen on a consistent basis because when you're dealing with three people the chances of having an emotional up-and-down with one of them is greatly multiplied. The poor guy is going to be doing a balancing act on a regular basis. On the other hand, the relationship with one wife, if both are faithful -- and there is trust the relationship - goes on automatic pilot and can be peaceful for long periods of time. In addition the fulfillment can be great because they may be close to sharing 100 percent of the romantic energy.
So in the true light of reason and true principles how should we view plural marriage? Instead of seeing it as a great sin or a great virtue, as do Mormon fundamentalists, we need to just examine at as to whether it is a workable situation or not. At best plural marriage can reach a situation where all parties involved are content. But none will be completely fulfilled because there will never be 100 percent sharing among the females. If the females do feel unfulfilled because of a lack of complete sharing with their man they're likely to turn to each other. There are rumors in fundamentalist circles that Joseph Smith taught that the female plural wives are to have lesbian sex to achieve fulfillment. I understand that some fundamentalist teach this principle. I have found no evidence of Joseph Smith never taught this but the idea is a natural evolution that would take place among females that are unfulfilled with their man. By sharing romantic energy with each other they would be able to achieve a greater fullness but unfortunately it would not be a complete fullness.
Let's say Jim has everything under control and his family is running harmoniously and he is receiving a 100 percent plus supply of romantic energy from his three wives. Does he then achieve the same fulfillment as the man was one wife who has 100 percent sharing? No, he does not. This answer may sound puzzling and one may wonder why he does not receive the same fulfillment as the man with one wife.
The answer is basically this: romantic energy is shared through the solar plexus and the solar plexus is a source of not one energy but a number of different energies as if these energies is where in layers. Each of Jim's three wives taps in or shares with a different layer of energy. The layer of energy shared with wife number one will be off-limits to wife number two. The layer of energy shared with wife number two will be off-limits to the other two wives. This creates an obvious problem for the wives. Each will sense that there is a part of Jim they do not have access to and this will create a vacuum for making complete romantic fulfillment impossible. This situation also creates a problem for Jim in that he receives energy to his romantic center from three different sources. When one pays attention to any of these sources he can only absorb one at a time in full consciousness with the other two will be in the background. This creates a situation that stands in the way of complete fulfillment. The man with one wife only has to tune in to only one source and can put full attention on her and can bask in unity without distraction. This is the only situation in which a human being is capable of achieving a complete sharing on a romantic basis.
In the Garden of Eden God gave Adam one wife and it is written that he called their name Adam. In other words, it wasn't just the man that was called Adam but it was the male and female together that was called Adam. Isn't it interesting how close the word Adam sounds like the word atom? This is not a coincidence. In atom each positive charge is balanced off by one negative charge, not two negative charges. In the same light each male is balanced off by one female and not two females.
The LDS people reading this are likely to ask then if the original concept of plural marriage incorrect? The answer would be yes. Whoever was responsible for perpetrating this doctrine just did not understand the principle of plural relationships. On a mental or spiritual relationship a person can have an indefinite number of associations without the feeling of jealousy and lack of sharing being involved. For plural relationships to work it has to rise above the emotional level and also above the romantic level because romance is intensely emotional.
In other situations a man may have two female secretaries or associates and work with them all day then come home to his wife and have 100% romantic sharing. This is because his relationship with his female secretaries is on a different level. Plural relationships is a true principle, but it has to be applied detached from the romantic relationship. Where ever romantic energy is introduced to a relationship it should stay on a ratio of one to one or else many problems will be created. But on a spiritual or mental bases an indefinite number of relationships can be created and still work. If there was a revelation about plural marriage that would have been for spiritual purposes and not physical. The only reason to make plural marriage physical is in a dire situation where there is a great shortage of one of the sexes. We do not need plural marriage to multiply and replenish the earth because we've already multiplied and replenished the earth.
Suppose a person with more than one wife reads this and asks then what should he do. Should he send one or two of his wives away? Answer would probably be no. If the person has made a firm commitment to two or more females than he is under a moral obligation to fulfill these commitments but he should give his wives complete freedom to break off from that commitment once the true principle is understood. If all people in a plural relationship accept the situation and accept each other and are not forced into the relationship in any way then we should have no problem with that relationship continuing. But that doesn't stop us from seeking a full understanding of what works and what doesn't work.
The bottom line is that if a thing works and is practical and brings happiness then we pursue that thing. If it doesn't work that we do not pursue it. If true principles are taught and received over a period of time then eventually all people will gravitate to the true principle. Just a few years ago half of our country thought that slavery was acceptable but when the true principle became obvious the idea of slavery was dropped by virtually everyone.
The same thing goes with plural marriage. Without the religious authority behind it presenting the idea that God commands you to do it, it will lose its power and few if any will embrace it.
If a practice cannot bring heaven on earth then it will not be done in heaven.
Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. -- Franklin P. Jones
Copyright © 2007 by JJ Dewey, All Rights Reserved