JLHPROF

There are enough things in the text of the revelation that it couldn't reasonably be construed to refer to eternal/temple marriage.

Thank you for that honest breakdown. I always appreciate an honest approach to historical events. I dislike prevarication. I think your analysis here is pretty accurate. And to be clear my post of this news was about the Church being willing to admit to the provenance of the revelation with John Taylor as author VS previous statements that it didn't exist or it was made up. The content and application of this revelation is an entirely different topic of discussion. For now it's sufficient that the Church has made it available to read and acknowledged that President Taylor wrote it and it exists.

Except the timeline shows: 1890 Pres. Grant writes in his journal that he was informed about the revelation. 1909 Joseph Fielding Smith states he put a copy in the Historians Office 1911 John W. Taylor presented the revelation to the Quorum of the 12 THEN the post 1933 statement Frank Taylor event you referenced. How can they claim not to know it existed? The Quorum new before that event.

I'm sure that such semantics is how they justified the 1933 statement. The same as Pres. Woodruff in 1890 "We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory." You and I both know better.

As I said, the Church is being more open now. But there are still the fuzzy statements: "John W. had found a purported revelation" "seemed to suggest" "the revelation had never been presented to the Quorum of the Twelve" (the timeline you posted said it was presented to the Quorum as early as 1890). I don't know why the urge to cage history in so much ambiguity. But I appreciate the improvement over "we are justified in affirming that no such revelation exists" and "the interpretation given to the pretended revelation, the said pretended revelation". Baby steps in the right direction.

It's also in the record that Joseph Fielding Smith placed the revelation in the Church Archives in 1909. This is a direct contradiction to the 1933 First Presidency statement. Almost all of the 1933 statement is contradicted by the historical record. Hopefully the public catalog publication of the original in John Taylor's own handwriting means an end to denials of its existence by the Church.

Heber J. Grant, George F. Richards, David O. McKay, Anthony W. Ivins, and Joseph Fielding Smith were present when John W. Taylor had the revelation read during a meeting of the Quorum of the Twelve on February 22, 1911.

I mean no denigration but speaking historically the only thing about the 1886 revelation to the then prophet John Taylor that the Church has ever been honest about is that it was never presented to the Church and so is not binding. But other than that they have not been up front. That's historical fact.

The big news is that it has been provided by the Church (who claimed not to have it) AND it is in John Taylor's handwriting which proves authorship. 😂 You really believe that? Heber J. Grant, George F. Richards, David O. McKay, Anthony W. Ivins, and Joseph Fielding Smith were present when John W. Taylor had the revelation read during a meeting of the Quorum of the Twelve on February 22, 1911. During the following meeting on March 1, 1911, Joseph Fielding Smith said “It is true I obtained a copy of this revelation from Brother Rodney Badger. He let me take the original and I made a copy and filed it in the Historian’s Office, this was but a short time ago.” (Doctrine of the Priesthood vol. 4 no. 1 “The Trials of Apostles John W. Taylor and Matthias F. Cowley” <1987> pages 7–8, 12)

Nobody is claiming this is an endorsement or changes anything in Church teachings. But by publicly providing an original historical document in President Taylor's own handwriting that the Church had officially claimed did not exist but apparently had in their possession all along absolutely represents a reversal of position.

They've learned it's better to control challenging elements of Church history than to deny or pretend they didn't happen.

1886 Revelation - Church Catalog The LDS Church has officially acknowledged the 1886 revelation to President John Taylor instructing the continuation of plural marriage by providing it in President Taylor's own handwriting. While this changes nothing in Church teachings on polygamy this is very significant. The Church has at times denied its existence, called it bogus, and while never presented for acceptance this marks a reversal of position on its historical existence.