Researcher,
I think it is great that you shared this with your kids. Hopefully, they will share it with other Church members. Eventhough I understand what your husband meant by “that’s why we have family home evening” I have to disagree somewhat. This is information that is suitable to be discussed in Institute classes such as Church history or D&C. I’ve had both at Ricks and BYU yet there was never any mention of JS’s polygamous practices. I am one of those people that thought the Church taught classes I took informed me completely about LDS history (after all it is called Church history) and doctrines. Unfortunately, I found out later much was left out, and not in a random way. All the things that would make the Church look bad were left out. This made me feel terribly betrayed. I’m still trying to come to grips with it all, after 3 years of studying myself. It has been extremely painful, but that’s not why I’m telling you this. I feel uncomfortable saying what the Church should do, however, the way things are going now is setting people up to feel betrayed. I think it is so sad. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to be changing. All I have control over is my family. Like you I will teach them all I know about Church history. I hope that when the day comes they can make an informed decision about being a member of the LDS faith. They deserve that much.

My children looked at me and one of them said, “You just said Joseph Smith.” (Figuring that I got someone’s name wrong again.) I said, “Yep.” They said, “You mean Brigham Young?” “No.” “You mean Lorenzo Snow?” My husband said, “She was his sister.” In concert, my two oldest children said, “But Joseph Smith was only married to Emma.”

I explained that she had been married to Joseph Smith and that he had other wives, and she was subsequently married to Brigham Young after Joseph Smith’s death. Then we had a brief discussion of polygamy (Jacob 2:30, Doc. & Cov. 132, Official Declaration) and I mentioned that anyone who doesn’t know that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy hasn’t read the scriptures, and if they have read them, they don’t understand them.

I didn’t attempt to give any rationale for polygamy or its cessation except pointing out what the scriptures said.

Questions from my kids: “I just read the entire history of Joseph Smith by his mother and it didn’t mention that.” (Answer: His mother didn’t like to talk about that. Neither did Emma.) “What happened to the polygamous families after the official declaration?” (Answer: They stayed together and took care of each other.) That’s the level of detail they were interested in. (Similar age to your Sunday School kids.)

In the discussion I had with my husband afterward, he said, “Well, that’s why we have family home evening, so that the kids can get some of this information that they won’t get in church” [we talked for a bit about how the church shouldn't be teaching polygamy, because it's not a commandment to us, so sometimes unfortunate misunderstandings like this happen] and “Next up: the revelation on the priesthood.” (He’s been reading the recent Kimball biography.)

Thanks for prompting this impromptu lesson, Tracy M!

“God said, “Thou shalt not kill;” at another time He said “Thou shalt utterly destroy.” This is the principle on which the government of heaven is conducted—by revelation adapted to the circumstances in which the children of the kingdom are placed. Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is,…

I like this quote because it reminds me to be humble. Perhaps that was the real intent of polygamy in the LDS Church?

To me, the above quote implies that there can be multiple truths. One person may be obligated to practice polygamy, while another person may be obligated to remain chaste for life.

Perhaps what I want to say is that the Church and its members often take the “milk before meat” concept to the extreme, so that there is no acceptable, widely-accessible outlet for dialogue on the “meatier” matters of doctrine, practice, history, etc. And yet, as anyone who has taught a class of youth recently knows, even children are capable of digesting meat, and will seek out deeper and deeper understanding if constantly fed. Church instruction, sadly, feels like we’re forcing a diet fit for an infant upon individuals capable of much more complex thought.

Ironically, anecdotal evidence suggests that when doctrine and history are presented honestly and without guile, but also without “whitewashing”, obfuscation, or tip-toeing over touchy issues, young minds seem much more ready to accept them than if they learn about it later, after years and years of “advanced” gospel instruction that didn’t touch upon any of the difficult topics.