After the church declared that God decided to end polygamy, didn’t John Taylor, a prominent leader in the church, have a revelation from Joseph Smith and God saying that polygamy was not over and that he and a small group of people must continue it? Is this what most fundamentalists believe makes polygamy ok? And what does the church have to say about the revelation being true?
One Response to “After the church declared that God decided to end polygamy, …”
Jorge Prado
2010-11-08 08:35:46
Hi friend. This is a common justification used by polygamists to rationalize their behavior. The "revelation" to which you're referring is the so-called 1886 revelation that was found among john Taylor's papers after his death. Some sources believe the revelation is fraudulent. For example, President Heber J. Grant, a now deceased president of the LDS Church, said the following: "It is alleged that on September 26-27, 1886, President Taylor received a revelation from the Lord, the purported text of which is given in publications circulated apparently by or at the instance of this same organization [polygamists]. As to this pretended revelation it should be said that the archives of the Church contain no such revelation; nor any evidence justifying a belief that any such revelation was ever given. From the personal knowledge of some of us, from the uniform and common recollection of the presiding quorums of the Church, from the absence in the Church Archives of any evidence whatsoever justifying any belief that such a revelation was given, we are justified in affirming that no such revelation exists."
Members of the Church believe that marriages performed in temples are "sealed," or blessed to last for eternity.
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the revelation is authentic. If so, does it actually state that God will never revoke his commandment that the mormons should practice polygamy? Does it actually contradict later revelations given, regarding the cessation of plural marriage? No, it does not. In fact, the revelation only mentions the "New and Everlasting Covenant." Polygamy / plural marriage is not mentioned once by name. In an earlier revelation received by john Taylor in 1882, God made it clear that polygamy was only one part of the New and Everlasting Covenant. In a more general sense, the New and Everlasting covenant deals with eternal, celestial marriage, polygamous or monogamous. Even if the revelation is authentic, modern mormons have not abandoned the monogamist application of the New and Everlasting Covenant. We have abandoned polygamy, but we continue to believe in eternal, celestial marriage.
Let's assume erroneously, but for the sake of argument, that the revelation is authentic and that john Taylor was referring only to polygamy, and not to the New and Everlasting Covenant in general, though that's not what he wrote. Would such a revelation be binding on the whole Church? Joseph Smith made it very clear that new revelation should be accepted only after it is presented to Church leaders and the membership according to the law of common consent (D&C 26:2). That's how the revelations of the doctrine and covenants were first accepted as scripture in 1834, for example. As john Taylor never presented this revelation to the Church for approval, it's not a valid revelation according to the standards Joseph established. As a final nail in the coffin, the fact that additional prophets and apostles received subsequent revelation from God stating that polygamy should be rescinded makes the idea that this revelation is authentic and pro-polygamy all the less likely.
Let's assume very erroneously, but again for the sake of argument, that the revelation is authentic, that it is referring to polygamy, and that it is binding on the Church. Does that somehow justify the polygamous practices of the various splinter groups that have left the mainstream mormon Church? Absolutely not. Nowhere does this revelation authorize men to perform the sealing ordinance outside of the established priesthood of the Church. Nowhere is there any mention of Lorin C. Woolley or any of his colleagues receiving any kind of unique sealing authority, as polygamist groups claim. Everything taught in the church up to that point indicated that using the priesthood authority outside of the established boundaries of the church would constitute apostasy.
I hope this answer helps, anonymous friend. It was interesting for me to learn a little bit more about this topic. Best of luck to you.
Let's assume erroneously, but for the sake of argument, that the revelation is authentic and that john Taylor was referring only to polygamy, and not to the New and Everlasting Covenant in general, though that's not what he wrote. Would such a revelation be binding on the whole Church? Joseph Smith made it very clear that new revelation should be accepted only after it is presented to Church leaders and the membership according to the law of common consent (D&C 26:2). That's how the revelations of the doctrine and covenants were first accepted as scripture in 1834, for example. As john Taylor never presented this revelation to the Church for approval, it's not a valid revelation according to the standards Joseph established. As a final nail in the coffin, the fact that additional prophets and apostles received subsequent revelation from God stating that polygamy should be rescinded makes the idea that this revelation is authentic and pro-polygamy all the less likely.
Let's assume very erroneously, but again for the sake of argument, that the revelation is authentic, that it is referring to polygamy, and that it is binding on the Church. Does that somehow justify the polygamous practices of the various splinter groups that have left the mainstream mormon Church? Absolutely not. Nowhere does this revelation authorize men to perform the sealing ordinance outside of the established priesthood of the Church. Nowhere is there any mention of Lorin C. Woolley or any of his colleagues receiving any kind of unique sealing authority, as polygamist groups claim. Everything taught in the church up to that point indicated that using the priesthood authority outside of the established boundaries of the church would constitute apostasy.
I hope this answer helps, anonymous friend. It was interesting for me to learn a little bit more about this topic. Best of luck to you.