Please consider supporting this podcast:

We have been raised on this claim as a central tenet of our church culture. Where did it come from? How should we understand it? What does it mean for us today?

Links

Official Declaration 1 Original Speech, Monday, October 6, 1890, Salt Lake City, Utah. Reported in Deseret Evening News, October 11, 1890, p. 2
“Priesthood”
Brigham Young, January 12, 1862, Journal of Discourses, Volume 9, page 150
Brigham Young, Deseret News, June 8, 1873
Brigham Young, August 29, 1852, Journal of Discourses Volume 6, Page 282
Brigham Young, August 1, 1852, Journal of Discourses Volume 1, Page 361
Brigham Young, June 18, 1855, Journal of Discourses Volume 11, Page 128
Heber C. Kimball, October 12, 1856, Journal of Discourses Volume 5, Page 203
Brigham Young, July 6, 1862, Journal of Discourses Volume 9, Page 322
Brigham Young, August 19, 1866, Journal of Discourses Volume 11, Pages 268-269
Brigham Young, August 31, 1873, Journal of Discourses Volume 16, Pages 166-167
John Taylor, April 7, 1866, Journal of Discourses Volume 11, Pages 221-224
Wilford Woodruff, December 12, 1869, Journal of Discourses Volume 13, Page 166
Orson Pratt, October 7, 1874, Journal of Discourses Volume 17, Page 224
John Taylor, August 20th, 1882, Journal of Discourses Volume 23, Pages 240-241
Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966, p. 578

Summary of the Transcript

In this episode, Michelle Stone delves into the origins and implications of the belief that the prophet can never lead the LDS Church astray. She explores how this doctrine emerged directly from the polygamy crisis and the pressures that early LDS leaders faced as they attempted to uphold or abandon polygamous practices.

Key Themes:

  1. Historical Context of “The Prophet Cannot Lead Us Astray”
    • This belief originated in 1890 with Wilford Woodruff, when he issued Official Declaration 1, marking the beginning of the end for officially sanctioned LDS polygamy.
    • Stone argues that this doctrine was a defensive mechanism, created to help justify the abrupt shift away from polygamy despite decades of church leaders teaching that it was essential for exaltation.
  2. Early LDS Teachings on Polygamy & Authority
    • Brigham Young, John Taylor, Heber C. Kimball, Orson Pratt, and other LDS leaders adamantly preached that polygamy was eternal and could never be rescinded.
    • John Taylor explicitly stated that if the church ever abandoned polygamy, it would lose its divine authority.
    • Orson Pratt argued that rejecting polygamy meant rejecting Mormonism itself, equating opposition to polygamy with apostasy.
  3. Wilford Woodruff’s Dilemma
    • As U.S. government pressure mounted, leading to legal consequences for polygamist leaders and potential confiscation of church property, Wilford Woodruff faced a crisis.
    • To justify the Manifesto of 1890, he introduced the idea that the Lord would never allow the prophet to lead the church astray, assuring followers that this change was divinely mandated rather than a surrender to external forces.
  4. Circular Reasoning & Faith-Based Control
    • Stone critiques the logical fallacy in the statement that “the prophet cannot lead us astray” because the prophet said so.
    • She compares this reasoning to blind obedience, arguing that it shifts personal responsibility away from individual revelation and onto institutional authority.
  5. Implications for Modern LDS Faith
    • Many members still struggle with cognitive dissonance when past prophetic statements contradict current teachings.
    • The episode encourages listeners to re-evaluate their faith in prophetic infallibility and consider whether their foundation is built on institutional loyalty or personal spiritual confirmation.
  6. Call for Independent Thought & Spiritual Responsibility
    • Stone urges LDS members to seek personal revelation, rather than relying solely on leaders to dictate truth.
    • She challenges the idea that faithfulness means unquestioning obedience, advocating instead for critical thinking and personal spiritual growth.

Transcript

[00:00:00] Welcome to 132 Problems revisiting Mormon Polygamy, where we explore the scriptural and theological case for plural marriage. I’m so glad you’re here. If this is your first time joining us, I always recommend listening to these episodes in order, especially for those who wish to engage, which I hope you will want to do, so that you can be up to date on our discussion so far. The points that we have already addressed. My name is Michelle Stone, and this is episode 25, where we will look at the history of the teaching that the prophet can never lead us astray and how it came to be a central feature of our church. Thank you for joining us as we take a deep dive into the murky waters of Mormon polygamy. A couple of quick items of business. First, I want to apologize that this episode is a full week late. It has been a very tough couple of weeks around here. And also, this is a very tough topic. So it’s taken a lot of thought and prayer and effort to be able to start to put it together. I also, again, um, need to thank those who have been so generous and helpful in supporting this podcast. It has meant so much to me. I, um, am still in the. of more support. I want to thank those for their ongoing support and if anybody else would be willing and able to um donate to this podcast at the links below, it would be very appreciated. Thank you so much. And so, OK, now we are diving in. So as I said, This is a tough episode. This is a topic that, um, is just really hard. It really is for members of the church today. It’s one of our sacred cows, and I hope that’s not offensive. Everything I say, I’m just like so aware that someone could be offended. So this is my request and my plea to all of those who are listening today. I just want to ask. To please, um, bear with me in patience and know that I am trying to share ideas that, um, I find important, but I am really not trying to give offense. I’m not trying to create, um, any sort of divisions or contentions. And I also, I had a good friend once. Well, I have a really good friend who one time we were in a conversation, and she was starting to feel some of the defensive feelings that can come up when People challenge some of our, um, long held ideas, and, um, and she was praying to say, OK, God, what should I say? What should I do? And she just had this clear impression that told her, do you think that those feelings of defensiveness and anger are from me? And she realized that they weren’t, that those are the tools of the adversary more than the tools of the spirit of God. And so I don’t think that God that needs to make us feel angry and aggressive and defensive generally in all of our relationships, we know that those aren’t the best feelings to act based on. It’s better to get centered, to really think about things, and then to come up with ideas or points of discussion that can be more helpful. So that’s my invitation here. I’m trying to be, now I’m setting it up that everyone’s going to be on edge. I hope not because I’m framing this in such a way.

[00:03:22] That I just want to introduce some ideas that we can start thinking about. And, um, as always, these are just my ideas. And, um, although the history that I’m sharing aren’t just my ideas, those are things that we can all grapple with and find our own ways to do it. So, anyway, I also want to clarify because I am addressing the idea that prophet can never lead us astray. So, um, that can get people’s, ah, get people intense right from the beginning. I want to clarify what I am not saying, particularly in this episode. And this, I guess I feel a little bit of need to be careful around this topic because it’s something that I started having my eyes open to, oh gosh, well over a decade ago, probably. 1716 or 17 years ago, and I’ve spoken about it with in conversation with friends, with family since then as I’ve been discovering and going, oh my goodness, and It has brought a lot of complication and confusion and rejection in my life, which has made me sad and been hard to deal with. So I want to clarify just from having learned in these conversations what I am not saying. I am not saying that we should not follow the prophet, not saying that at all. I am not saying that we should reject the teachings from our church leaders or even That we should approach them with skepticism or cynicism. I, I, that is not what I’m saying at all. I think that with all of our teachings from our leaders, from our primary teachers and our gospel doctrine teachers to our bishops and state presidents to our general leaders, we should start with an approach of faith, right? And a desire to believe and to obey and to be helpful. What I think we We shouldn’t do is put anyone else’s teachings above the inspiration that we receive. So I want to clarify what I’m not saying, right? OK. And then, um, what I am saying, however, and this is where it can start to get tough, is that my belief through much study and prayer is that this idea that the prophet can never lead us astray and how we have interpreted that and how it has come to be. Accepted culturally in our church, I believe that is a it is a false tradition, and I believe that it is not scripturally or historically sound, and I think it is actually spiritually dangerous. It establishes A false foundation of belief that um that we are taught to equate the leaders of the church with God. What church leaders say is what God would say if he were here, and And we’re taught it from such a young age and another in in another part on this, I’ll go in a little more to show how this, how we are brought up in this in a way that I find sets us up where our foundation is not necessarily on the rock of personal. Um, interaction and personal experience with God that I think it needs to be because we tend to get a lot of other teachings in there. And then when we start learning more things that we didn’t know when we were young, when this black and white foundation was established, we are not necessarily Suited and spiritually secure. I don’t wanna, I, I don’t want to offend anyone whose faith whose faith in the traditions they were taught with has been shattered. I’m not talking about our faith in God or I’m not saying that people didn’t have secure foundations in the church. I’m just trying to say that our foundation is

[00:06:54] When it, when we are taught from childhood and infancy, follow the prophet. The prophet will not lead you astray. It leaves us in a precarious situation that can later on cause a lot of cognitive dissonance that I think can be avoided if we understand these ideas in a different way. OK, there was way too much preamble. Let’s get onto it. Um, I also, I did have one, we’re not going to go as much into the scriptures in this episode. This This topic is so huge and so overwhelming that I am sorry to give a feminine metaphor. I have felt like trying to put this together is almost like being engorged with a newborn where you’re like there’s so much there that it’s hard to get it out into a into a um. You know, a usable format. And so that’s, that’s kind of how I’m feeling. I’m like, this is so, there’s so much here. So I’m just narrowing it down and we’re not going to go in the scriptures as much today, just the history. But the one scripture I do want to share that just has repeatedly come to mind is just 2 Nephi 2831, and that will show a little bit more where we’re going throughout this, um, this series of episodes. It’s Curse it is he that putteth his trust in man or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost, and that’s the key. The responsibility is always ours, always has been and always will be. The greatest truth to the claim that the prophet can never lead us astray is that nobody has the power to lead us astray without our. Um, willingness because we each have all of the tools and abilities that we need. We at least have access to them. And, um, while we’re brought up in these ideas, we can continue throughout our lives to grow in our ability to access God personally and directly so that nobody ever has the power to lead us astray. So, OK, we’re gonna go on to this topic now. So first, the, the first thing I want to do. I clarify these terms, and that’s something that each of us needs to do individually. Um, definitions are so extremely important. And so in this context, take a minute, if you don’t mind, and think to yourself, what for you does profit mean in the context the prophet can never lead us astray. Let’s, let’s define this as precisely as we can. What does profit mean and what does lead astray mean? Um, so maybe take a minute, and I really, really recommend writing this down. Anyone who’s familiar with the work of Byron Katie knows how essential writing is when you’re trying to get to the center of ideas, because our brains are so slippery. We’re so good at fudging our way in and out of things. So I would recommend If, if you are willing and able and not driving, take a second, pause this and write down exactly what you mean by profit and by lead astray when you say the prophet can never lead us astray, or when someone says that, and you believe it, how that, how you interpret that. Take a second and do that, really,

[00:09:55] um, really give that some thought. I think it’s important. So, um, let’s see. OK, so I, I had a couple of examples of how words are so important, because when this in this idea of the prophet can never lead us astray, we kind of take that in and imbibe it, and we have this broad, really, um, amorphous, ill-defined idea of what it means. And then as time goes by, we have to fudge and change and Um, redefine that for ourselves, and I want to be careful of that. An example I have for those of you like me, old enough to remember the 2008 election, right? And it was Obama’s first time running for office, and you can all stay with me, what was the slogan, Hope and change. Right? Could there be a more amorphous set of words that can mean whatever people want to interpret it. And I think we all remember, well, at least I do. I remember this woman that was all over clips at the time. So let me play this little clip. It was the most memorable time of my life. I, I. It was a touching moment because I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage, you know, if I, if I help him, he’s gonna help me. OK, right? And since then people have done interviews with her to, you know, to see how that worked out for her, her ideas of what hope and change meant. And, um, and so I think that the reason it’s so important to define words is to avoid disappointment and disillusionment and as I said before, cognitive dissonance, right? To really get clear on what those things on, on what those words mean. This is why lawyers are so important and legalese, because words are hard to really nail down. So that’s the first exercise I think is important so that everyone can agree on definitions, or at least you can know for yourself what you believe that that means. And then, OK. Let’s see. I have, I have, as I said, the idea that prophet can never leave this story. It does suffer, I believe, from my experience, from the same challenge as Hope and Change is that I even out of my own curiosity last week, um, I wasn’t necessarily planning to use it in this episode, but I did ask online, like, what that means to people? What does it mean to be led astray? And and it was fascinating, the variety of answers,

[00:12:16] and there’s just no common Um, understanding of what this means. We don’t hold these ideas in common. We each have, like, the church hasn’t told us exactly what that means. So we’re all left to understand it for ourselves. So, um, anyway, I’m, I’m going to skip this one part and save it for another episode. So we will go on and see, um, I, I do, I do want to just say one thing. Sorry, I was going to show a clip, but I’m gonna save it for a later episode, but I do want to make one of the points I was going to make is that I think we need to be patient with ourselves and others. When we have to struggle through this idea, or if our faith is shaken because we’ve always been taught the prophet can never lead us astray, and then we learn it, we hear things that previous prophets have said, or even that more recent prophets have said that we’re like, What? I, and, and that we are struggling with that cognitive dissonance that we, we have been raised on this. The, the song Follow the Prophet was added to the song to the children’s songbook in, um, 1987, I believe. And it was done by request. The writer of that song was called by the committee putting that together and asked to write that song. And we, you know, you go into nursery and see the children singing it. So we really have been raised on this idea. And it can be hard to break free from, so we need to have patience with ourselves and also I hope patience with those who have passed down this idea. I don’t think there has been any intent to deceive. We’re going to look today at the circumstances. The desperate circumstances where that idea was born and then it’s just been passed down as part of our, our culture. So we can all have a lot of charity for one another and for those who came before, while also looking at it and going, is this really true? Is this a solid foundation to build our faith on? So that’s what we’re going to look at. So, here’s the fascinating thing about this claim that blew me away when I first discovered it. The claim that the prophet can never lead us astray grew directly out of polygamy. I find that fascinating. It is amazing to me how central polygamy is to everything in our church. It’s just incredible to me. Like how we discussed, oh, I can’t remember which episode it was. You can, you can look it up as you go through them. But the idea of an Abrahamic sacrifice or an Abrahamic test, totally unique to Mormonism, totally grew out of polygamy. That’s where it is. And the idea of the prophet can never lead us astray. Also, Grew directly out of polygamy. So that’s what we’re going to look at. OK, here is the, um, the actual statement that is in our doctrine and covenants. It’s official declaration I. It was, it was given in 1890 is when Wilfred Woodruff said this, and you can read through the Declaration. I’ve actually gone and read through all of

[00:15:03] the state conference addresses that he gave. And but this is the part that is most pertinent to this episode. This is what Wilfred Woodruff said. The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of this church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so he will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty. OK, that’s the statement. So again, it’s so hard to know how to address this. We’re going to start here. Um, circular reasoning, right? For those of you who understand what circular reasoning is, it’s one of the logical fallacies, and it’s using the claim to prove the claim. So one of the most, I guess, famous ones in this world is what in the atheist and Christian debates, which were huge about a decade ago, I think, you know, that you can still find them all online. It’s the circular reasoning of the Bible that Christians tend to engage in. The Bible is the word of God because it claims to be the word of God, right? The Bible is infallible because it claims to be infallible. And, um, and it’s, it’s, I’ve, I’ve taught my children in, in our homeschooling, I’ve always taught them the importance of critical thinking and of, of us using a common foundation. It’s, um, you know, it’s frustrating when someone says, well, because I’m a Christian, this and this and this and tries to prove a claim to someone that doesn’t share that foundation. It’s just circular reasoning, and it never works to convince anybody of anything. And it’s not a good way to get to truth, right, because we have to already have the assumption before we can prove the assumption, because we’re using the assumption to pro to prove the assumption. So anyway, sorry, that was probably too big of an explanation, but that is the case in this um in this statement. The prophet can never lead us astray because the prophet said he can never lead us astray. And since we know he can never lead us astray, therefore we can trust him to not be leading us astray when he says he can never lead us astray. Do you get the point? Like, does that make sense? So you can’t, it can’t just be its own claim without having some other foundation to nail it to, and What’s interesting is when this was given in the original speech, which you can go read from the um 1980, um, is it the Journal of Discourses I can’t even remember where you read it. I, I, I will put the link below. But um, when you read that claim, he doesn’t give any scriptural support for it. He doesn’t give any other support. He just says it. As his own authority in his position. And so, um, so it really was given to us as circular reason we since then

[00:17:42] have gone on to find other scriptures to use to support it, but it’s a really messy job because there we can find way more scriptures that would um That would, what I can’t think of the word that would contradict it, that we can that that support it. And it’s really interesting. It was interesting to me to learn that this really is where this entire idea came from, was in this 1890 statement of Wilfred Woodruff. If you look in any church manual or lesson plan or general conference address anywhere that this claim is made, the footnote takes you back to this statement by Wilfred Woodruff as the authority for that claim. And then sometimes some other scriptures, as I’ve said, used, that we will go into the scriptures in another episode. Please don’t think I’m ignoring them. We will go to them later. So that’s the first challenge that we have is the circular reasoning. We need, um, scriptural support at least, or other prophetic support to support this statement because it can’t stand just as its own support. So, um, I want to quickly now, this episode Mostly going to be quotes, and I hope that it doesn’t get too old. Um, as always, I say, put this on 1.5 speed so you can listen more quickly, but we’re going to go through a lot of quotes in this episode because we’re just looking at the history of it. So first, I just want to read a few quotes from early leaders who taught something different. So this is from Eliza Snow’s journal that she recorded from an, an address that Joseph Smith gave to the relief Society. And he said that the people should each stand for himself and depend on no man. Let me see. I’m a little confused in how I wrote it. Um, he applied it to the state of the Church of Jesus Christ and, and said, if the people departed from the Lord, they must fall, that they were depending on the prophet, hence they were darkened in their minds, in consequence of neglecting the the duties to devolving upon themselves. So Joseph Smith taught that trusting too much in the prophet darkens your mind and you’re not fulfilling your own personal responsibilities. I, I will go into this in another episode as well, but I can’t help but Like Moses is the greatest example of this. Moses wanted all of the people to come up on the mountain and meet with God, right? And they said, No, no, that’s too fearsome. You do it and go tell us what he said. They wanted a pedestal. They wanted a middleman. But prophets aren’t supposed to be middlemen. They’re supposed to be people who have met God and say to all the other people, Hey, come meet God. Let me introduce you, right? That’s, that’s the goal of what prophets. want to do is lead us to Christ, to have a personal responsibility. I mean, a personal relationship with Christ, not to stand forever as intermediaries between us and the Lord. Moses said, What to the Lord that what to God that all the Lord’s people were prophets, right? That’s, that’s what we’re going for. And that’s what Joseph Smith was teaching. And interestingly, this is,

[00:20:37] OK, this is from, it’s an article entitled Priesthood, and it doesn’t, it’s not, um, Signed. We don’t know who to give credit for, but it’s generally attributed to Joseph Smith, I believe with input from Samuel Richards and Charles Penrose is where I’ve, where I’ve seen it, um, who I’ve seen it attributed to. So, um, anyway, I will put the link to all of these resources below. And here’s what it says. According to examples which are recorded in sacred writ and which have actually been witnessed by many of the saints to the present dispensation. Men are called to receive the priesthood and in virtue of it perform a certain work for which they seem adapted, and afterward they are suffered to to dishonor that priesthood by the by using the influence which they have gained to lead others astray and thereby dishonor and reproach have at times been brought up. On those who considered it a duty to listen to their counsel. So right there it’s saying priesthood holders can lead people astray, right? Because of these facts and the apparent imperfections of men on whom God confers authority, the question is sometimes asked to what extent is obedience to those who hold the priesthood required? Then it skips down. None are required to tamely and blindly submit to a man because he has a portion of the priesthood. We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who presided over them, if they, even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. And the man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly. A man of God who seeks for redemption with his fellows would despise the idea of seeing another become his slave who had an equal right with himself to the favor of God. See, that’s the point I was saying. People who know God don’t want to say, do what I said because God said. I want others to recognize that they have just as much access to God. Every single person has equal access to God. We don’t all have the same stewardship, right? The, um, like I’ve said this in other episodes, as a mother, I have special stewardship to receive revelation for my children and guidance for them. That doesn’t mean that I say, I speak for God. And what I Say is what God would say. And you can trust anything I say as if it came from God, because God won’t let me lead you astray. I, I would have just as much ability to say that in my stewardship as a mother. What I instead do is my best recognizing that my best is not perfect. And when I do receive strong, direct revelation from God in regard to my children, I still say, Hey, I really feel strongly about this, but I don’t say this is the word of God unto you, my child, and you have no, yeah, I like, you must submit to me, right? I still approach it with, with a lot of humility. And so I think that, as I’ve said, when you are serving as the primary president, you have the primary keys, the keys to that closet, right? You are the one that can receive. That has the responsibility and the stewardship to make decisions for the primary when you are serving as the state president,

[00:23:42] same thing, you have the stewardship to make decisions for the state. When you are serving as the as the president of the church, you have the enormous stewardship and responsibility to make decisions for the church. That is absolutely true, and um. That does not mean, however, that you have more access to God than someone does in whatever their capacity and stewardship is, even just as children of God, we each have complete access to God in whatever. Capacity we are able to abide it, right? And, and we continue to seek for that. So let’s see. Going on with this article, others in the in in the extreme exercise of almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary and that no matter what the saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without asking questions. I’m gonna skip ahead. None need be none need be imposed upon. If they understand the rights and privileges which it, meaning the government of God, guarantees to them, then if they do not avail themselves of those rights, they are left without excuse. Extreme exercise of power in such cases, in cases of such importance and upon matters of such infinite moment should be studiously avoided when we consider that everyone must render a faithful account of his stewardship. So that’s really interesting. I’ve heard, um, often that, you know, when the prophet speaks, the thinking has been done, or, um, that, that if you obey counsel, and that council was wrong, it’s your leader, not you, who is accountable. And I think there is definitely some truth to that. I think that if we, um, give counsel. And it’s wrong. You know, we, we have to pay a heavy price for that, even just in the regret and, you know, understanding that we have led people astray. But also, if we are led astray, we have to bear the consequences of that, right? We don’t get to not suffer the consequences of it because we say, well, so and so told me if If like, like for people who were um there have been some financial scandals in the church, right, at whatever level. So if someone says, well, that general authority said I should invest in this and that I would You know, like those people still lost sometimes their homes, their entire financial future. That happened in the Kirtland Safety Society, right? As I, again, this is something we can cover in a different episode. But as I said, define carefully what it means to be led astray, Joseph Smith and the other leaders of the church, like, it’s written, is it Sydney Britons? Oh, darn it,

[00:26:11] I don’t have it written down right at the top of my. But Joseph was told by an audible voice that the Kirtland Safety Society would succeed and it would, you know, the the members were taught to invest in it. And when it failed, many of them lost everything. That was a huge crisis in the church, a huge falling away of so many people and so many central figures. And so that idea that the prophet can never lead us astray needs to be carefully defined, and we need to recognize. That we never can give away our own personal authority and stewardship for ourselves because we are the ones that bear the consequences. So, OK. And then this, interestingly, is from Brigham Young. What a pity it would be if we, if we were led by one man to man to utter destruction. Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down into a state of blind self-security, trusting their e. Destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation and weaken the influence they could give to their leaders. Did they know for themselves by the revelations of Jesus that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know by the whispering of the spirit of God to themselves whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates. The Lord dictates or not. This has been my exhortation continually. Let all persons be fervent in prayer until they know the things of God for themselves and become certain that they are walking in the path that leads to everlasting life. Then will envy the child of ignorance vanish, for there there will be no dis disposition in any man to place himself above another, for such a feeling not meets no countenance in the order of heaven. I think it’s so fascinating because I find the same dynamic today that on the one hand. Our leaders are saying it is essential for you to receive personal revelation and to know for yourself and on the other hand, saying, follow me, I’m the leader, follow me, I’m the leader, right? It’s really a fascinating dilemma that has existed clear back from Brigham Young and that we find ourselves in today. And so I think it is important to, as I said, err on the side of faith, err on the side of obedience, but Never put someone else’s authority above your own, right? I think that we sometimes explain these things away by saying, yes, it is our responsibility to get a personal witness of the things we are taught. But it’s always, we’re only allowed to get a witness that what we are taught is correct and is true, right? That’s kind of how it’s like, no, you, the, the, the prophet will not lead you astray, but you need to get a personal witness to know for yourself that what he’s saying is true. I think it’s that, that, again, It doesn’t work very well, logically or in any other way. It’s, we need to get a personal witness of whether what our leaders are saying is true and all things without beginning with the assumption that what they are saying must automatically be true. So if we don’t get a personal witness of it, we are the ones that are lacking or that are in error, right? Does that makes sense. So we’re going to go on a little bit more. Um, I told the people, this is Brigham Young again, I told the people that if, if they would not believe the revelations that God had given,

[00:29:25] he would suffer the devil to give revelations that they priests and people would follow after. Have I seen this fulfilled? I have. Um, so he’s saying that the devil would give revelations to the leaders that they would all follow. Um, I told these people that as God, as true as God lived, if they would not have truth, they would have error sent unto them, and they would believe it. So it’s really interesting. Um, let’s see. OK, and as I said, we’re in a similar conundrum today because just as leaders of the past have taught those contradictory ideas, we have that today. And President Nelson. Maybe more than, well, more than any leader that I remember is his main message seems to be the need for personal revelation, right? This is from his um talk, um, hear him. He says it has been more it it has never been more imperative to know how the spirit speaks to you than right now. I renew my plea for you to do whatever it takes to increase your spiritual spiritual capacity to receive personal revelation. That’s from April 2020. And I love that message. And at the same time, it’s interspersed with other messages we’ll go into a little bit later that are pushing this follow the prophet and the prophet speaks for God idea more than that’s also being pushed more now than I’ve ever seen it pushed before. So it’s a really interesting Conundrum that we are in. So, um, OK, so now we’re already really deep into this episode, and we’re just beginning to look at the history of this claim and how it came about. So we’re going to read the quotes leading up to the polygamy crisis. So Wilfred Woodruff made the statement that I read above in, um, Official Declaration one as a direct result of the polygamy crisis. Oh, it is reading through all of these talks that I’m going to give some quotes from right now. It is heartbreaking seeing what these members of the church and church leaders were experiencing and what they were up against. So to set the stage from 1852, before that, Among many of the leaders, but for the entire church from 1852 to 1890, almost 40 years, every single president of the church, every member of the first presidency, every member of the quorum of the 12, and all local leaders who were not out of line unanimously, consistently, and repeatedly taught that polygamy was the eternal law of God. That it was the order of heaven and not only was it necessary for salvation, it was, I mean for exaltation, it was the very means of exaltation which could and would never be rescinded. That had been the universal message since the beginning of the church. So imagine I tried to come up with a similar with with like a comparison, and I couldn’t. It’s impossible to think of anything that is that central to us in the church today as this was to them. It was not only that it had been taught for 40 years. So if we put that in our, in our timeline, that would be from President Kimball. So since President Kimball, every single leader of the church had unanimously taught a central message. That was then going to be changed, right? But even that wouldn’t compare because there had been nothing before that. There were no leaders that they could quote before Brigham Young and all of the things that

[00:32:52] Brigham Young claimed that Joseph Smith taught that, you know, are up for grabs, right? Um, there was nothing else that they could look to. This was the church. The church was polygamy, as you will see from this quote, and these people not only had their entire lives been, they, they’ve been taught this unanimously from the pulpit. But, um, from every, every level of leadership from the church, they also had structured their entire lives. Their very families were based on this doctrine. It was more central to them than anything we can imagine. Now, that was the situation they were in. So it was, it was as central to their faith as the very idea of exaltation. And um to to change it was unthinkable. That was the situation they were in. So I just want to spend the rest of this episode reading the quotes to kind of establish this situation. I think my hope is that we can also have a lot more understanding and charity for current. Current polygamists, people who continue to believe in celestial marriage, the patriarchal order of marriage, the the plural marriage, these ideas, right? I know that many of them really don’t like me because of what they are doing, which I understand, but my plea is that we can have more understanding of how faithful they are being to the foundation of our church, really. I, I, I know again, like, just, just this is my perspective, but in so many ways they have a better claim to be living the foundation of our church than we have. Their, their ideas, while I argue very much that they are not consistent with God, not consistent with the scriptures, and I happen to think not consistent with Joseph Smith in many ways, in most ways, they are consistent with the early leaders of the church, with Brigham Young, John Taylor, Orson Pratt, or all of the original leaders. The people continuing on with polygamy are continuing that, those ideas and those teachings. And so it’s a really tricky situation that we’re in, and we should be very, um, slow to judge those who are continuing polygamy if we, in, in terms, in the context of the church, if that makes sense. It’s a really, really tricky situation. So, OK. So this is, um, we’re going to get into these quotes. This is Brigham Young, August 29, 1852. So that original meeting where, um, where the revelation, the revelation was released, was revealed to the people. Speaking of polygamy, he says,

[00:35:25] it is all connected with the exaltation of man, showing how he becomes exalted to be a king and a priest, yeah, even a god, like his father in heaven. Without the doctrine that this revelation reveals, no man on earth could be exalted to be a god. Brigham man nailed, they, they nailed. polygamy to exaltation in a way that it cannot be separated if we are going to believe the things that Brigham Young taught. It also can’t be separated from ceilings, eternal ceilings, if we’re going to believe the get into the mindset of these early leaders. So here again is Brigham Young from that meeting. Admit for argument’s sake that the Mormon elders have more wives than one, yet our enemies have never proved it. So they were still living. They were still living in in secret. If I had 40 wives in the United States, they did not know it and could not substantiate it. Neither did I ask any lawyer, judge, or magistrate for them. I live above the law, and so do this people. Do the laws of the United States require us to crouch and bow down to the miserable wretches who violate them? No. So, um, We don’t have to, you know, that was Brigham Young’s approach to, well, article of faith is at number 12, you know, it’s interesting. So this is the Journal of Discourses. Well, this is June 18, 1855. Again, I’ll put these links below. Now congressmen, now congressmen say, if you will renounce polygamy, you shall be admitted unto the union as an independent. State and live with us. We shall live anyway and increase and spread and prosper, and we shall know the most and the best looking people there is on earth. As for polygamy or any other doctrine, the Lord has revealed, it is not for me to change, alter, or renounce it. My business is to obey when the Lord commands, and this is the duty of all mankind. Um, again, this, this same meeting. Those who are acquainted with the history of the world are not ignorant, that polygamy has always been the general rule and monogamy the exception. Not true. Since the founding of the Roman Empire, monogamy has prevailed more extensively than in times previous to that. The founders of that ancient empire were robbers and women’s stealers, and made laws favoring monogamy in consequence of The scarcity of women among them, and hence this monogamic system which now prevails throughout Christendom, and which has been so fruitful a source of prostitution and whoredom throughout all the Christian monogamic cities of the world of the old and new world until rottenness and decay are at the root of their institutions, both national and religious. Brigham Young and and all polygamists seem to go here. They can. cannot fathom anything other than polygamy or prostitution. And, oh, in another episode, we will get into how those claims still exist today. It’s really, they cannot fathom that there could be monogamist men. It’s really interesting. And we’ll get into explaining these claims he’s making. Polygamy did not have its origin with Joseph Smith, but it existed from the beginning. Again, Not true according to the scriptures, right? Adam had one wife.

[00:38:30] Um, OK, continuing on, I say this at the present time for the satisfaction of both saint and sinner. Now, here are the commandments of the Lord, and here are the wishes of wicked men, which shall we obey? It is the Lord and them for it. Um, OK. Now, Hebrewsy Kimble, he was the first counselor. In the first presidency. This is October 12th, 1856. You might as well deny Mormonism as turn away from it, it meaning polygamy. Oh, and turn away from it as to oppose the plurality of wives. Let the presidency of this church and the 12 apostles and all the authorities unite and say with one voice that they will oppose that doctrine and the whole of them would be damned. So he’s saying whatever position you were in, if you reject polygamy, you will be damned. Um, this is Brigham Young again, 1862, 10 years later. Why do we believe in in practice polygamy? Because the Lord introduced it to his servants in a revelation given to Joseph Smith, and the Lord’s servants have always practiced it. And is that religion popular in heaven? It is the only popular religion there, for this is the religion of Abraham. And unless we do the works of Abraham, we are not Abraham’s seed and heirs to. And airs according to the promise. So it’s so interesting. I’m, I’m gonna read another one about Rome. It’s so interesting as I have engaged with polygamists over these, um, last years. Their arguments have been so surprising to me. Like the idea that Rome was where monogamy came from. And, you know, it’s been like, what? And I’ve studied out these ideas cause I’ve never heard them before. But it’s been fascinating studying out, um, the The original quotes from the church leaders. So I’ve done that before preparing for this episode. But as I found where these ideas that polygamists still say came from, like, polygamists really have nothing new. There’s nothing new coming from them. All of their arguments are based in these original claims by our early church leaders, and it’s just so strange. So this is another one about Rome from Brigham Young, that was one of his big topics. So this is from July 6, 1862. Monogamy or restrictions by law to one wife is no part of the economy of of heaven among men. Such a system was commenced by the founders of the Roman Empire. Here we are again, wandering brigands. When these robbers founded the city of Rome, it was evident to them that their success in attaining a balance of power with their neighbors depended upon introducing females into their body politic. So they stole them from the. ine s who were their near neighbors, the scarcity of women gave existence to laws restricting one wife to one man. Rome became the mistress of the world and introduced this order of monogamy wherever her sway was acknowledged. Thus, this monogamic order of marriage, so esteemed by modern Christians as a holy sacrament and divine institution, is nothing but a system established by a set of robbers. Now this claim is so. I mean, it’s just hilarious to me. First of all, I, when I was studying this out, I did just learn in preparing this episode that the Sabine women are not in the Bible.

[00:41:30] I, I guess this is what happens when you get your theological training apart from Howard Keel and Jane Powell, because this clip right here is how I knew about the Sabine women. You know they’d never let us marry down 1 1000 years, and I do like the Romans did with the sobbing women or Sabine women or whatever they call them. Those Romans were in the same fix you’re in. They was opening up new territory and women were scarce just like here. And it was these sobbing women down in town. So what did the Romans do? They went down there and they carried them off. Now you can’t do as good as a bunch of old Romans. You’re no brothers of mine. Of course this, this be an organ in God-fearing territory. You’d have to capture Parson along with them. Hey, them Romans. They’re the ones I heard about settled up north of here. No, no, this was in olden days. I read about it here in Milly’s book. A book. Oh, this is history. This really happened. Tell you about them sobbing women who lived in the Roman days. OK, so those of you like me who were raised on Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, which I think I’m going to go watch after this episode so I can just relax cause I love that show and it’s hard to turn it off. Um, I, I thought the book he was. Referring to was the Bible, and I watched it again to realize, oh, it was a different history book. Apparently they were being careful about that. So anyway, so it’s not talked about in the Bible, but it’s actually one of the founding myths of Rome. It’s now considered by most historians to be a myth. It’s also so funny because Brigham, Brigham Young always taught that, um, if we live polygamy, it will take, will take over the world. It will go like, like this is the blessed order of God, and it’s what will go everywhere and expand and And yet he’s saying Rome lived monogamy and Rome took all over the world and Rome spread, so it’s kind of like the promises he claimed about polygamy were actually true about Rome, which I find really ironic and interesting, but more importantly, Um, Polygamy didn’t come from Rome. It came from Greece. The story of the Sabine women with Romulus leading the men to kidnap the women. Also, it’s so funny that we That he like condemned that and looked down on it when he loved the Old Testament so much, cause how many stories in the Old Testament do we have of stealing women? Quite a few. We even have some in the Book of Mormon that are at least looked down on, but the children of Israel were the ones that were stealing women consistently repeatedly, frequently in the Old Testament, even sometimes like we talked about in a previous episode with the tribe of Benjamin, even from their own people, they were, they were wife snatchers, and so it’s hard to condemn Rome for that when the children of Israel did it as well, but also It didn’t come from Rome. It came from Greece. Rome came up with very few of their own ideas. They except for the war, they were really good at war, which is why they took over the world, right? But it was Greece that established monogamy as part of their social and governmental system. And it was because Greece was a democracy

[00:44:31] where all people, all citizens. were seen as equal and given equal rights where there was a value for equality. That is where monogamy comes from is Greece, which is where also the foundations of our government come from. Polygamy totally favored the king, right? David and Solomon had how many wives? 1000 wives, Solomon. That meant there were literally 1000 men because we’ve already discussed the birth rate who didn’t have wives. So if we want anything like an egalitarian society where we view the individual rights of each person, we have to recognize the brilliance of Greece, which is the the foundation of our entire society, including monogamy. So That idea is just silly from top to bottom, but it was a big one that many polygamists still talk about today. So, OK, going on, sorry, it’s just interesting to see these claims and realize how not accurate they are. OK, this is, um, the beneficial effect of polygamy, a talk this portion was, um, that this portion of the talk is titled that in the Journal of Discourses. It’s August 19th, 1866. I think this is still Brigham Young, I believe. So, um, Jesus Christ is the only begotten of the Father, and He is the Savior of the world and full of grace and truth. It is not polygamy that men fight against when they persecute this people, but still, if we continue to be faithful to God, He will defend us in doing what is right. I’m not sure if this is Brigham, and if I didn’t write. Who it is, I will write it down or I will correct it in the notes. I’m sorry, but um, it continues. I wish to say to the elders of Israel and to all members of this church and kingdom that it is in the hearts of many of them to wish that this doctrine of polygamy was not taught and practiced by us. It may be hard for many and especially for the ladies. Oh, this is Brigham, yeah, yeah, especially for the ladies. It may be especially hard for the ladies, but it is. harder for them than it is for the gentlemen. So maybe it’s harder for the women. No, no, it’s not harder for the women than it is for the men. It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you and all the world that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessing which the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists, at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. This dwelling in the presence of, um, this is as true, sorry, this is as true as that God lives. You who wish that there were no such thing in existence, no such thing as polygamy, will come short of dwelling in the presence of the Father and the Son in celestial glory. The only men who become gods, even the sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. So, um, Interestingly, right, this claim from Brigham Young would disallow any later presidents from the church from

[00:47:20] enjoying the blessings that the church promises, right, the blessings of exaltation and the things that they teach. So it’s, it’s an interesting contradiction to deal with. Um, this is continuing on. Let’s see, this is a different talk, and I don’t have the date of it. Um, I heard the revelation on polygamy, and oh, this is still bringing them. I heard the revelation on polygamy and I believed it with all my heart, and I know it is from God. I know that he revealed it from heaven. I know that it is true and understand the bare. Beings of it and why it is. Do you think these people shall ever, someone asks, do you think that people shall do you think that we shall ever be admitted as a state into the union without denying the principle of polygamy? He had just been speaking about the twin, the twin relics of barbarism. This was in 1866, so, um, One of the relics of barbarism had been done away with, um, slavery, right? So now he’s defending the other relic of barbarism. He’s talked about that quite a bit in his talk. You’ll remember we talked about that in a previous episode that the Republican Party was established to fight the twin relics of barbarism, right, um, slavery and polygamy. So he had just been speaking about that. He says, if we are not admitted until then, until we get rid of polygamy, we shall never be admitted. These things will be just as the Lord will. Let us live to take just what he sends to us. And when our enemies rise up against us, we will meet them as we can and exercise faith and pray for wisdom and power more than. Bower more than we have and contend continually for the right. Go along, my children, sayeth the Lord, do all you can and remember that your blessings come through your faith. Be faithful. Um, let’s see. Take care of yourselves, and they will destroy themselves, your enemies. Be what you should be, live as you should live, meaning with polygamy, and all will be well, so that they, they were facing this battle of polygamies from the very beginning, right, the Um, the Republican Party came on and came around and the pressure against polygamy mounted and mounted and mounted, and they continued and continued to defend it. So this is 1873, August 31st, 1873, Brigham Young, um. Let’s see. 000, OK. Sorry, this was too long to read, so I’m just, um, summarizing a talk he gave in 1873 where he taught that men with one wife would not be committed to keep their one wife in heaven, and they would not be exalted. He compared a man with one wife. He, the wives were the talents, and the man with one wife is the one who says, Lord, here’s that that is thine, and it’s taken from him and given to a man with many wives. So no man.

[00:49:57] With just one wife can expect to be sealed to his wife in heaven. He won’t get to keep her. So that’s what that talk was all about. Then this is John Taylor, our religion is from God, April 7th, 1866. Where did this command come from in relation to polygamy? It also came from God. It was a revelation to Joseph Smith from God and was made binding upon his servants. Joseph Smith told others, he told me, and I can bear witness of it. That if this principle was not introduced, this church and kingdom would not proceed. So without polygamy, the church and the kingdom could not proceed. When this commandment was given, it was so far binding upon the elders of the church that it was told them that if they were not prepared to enter into it and to stand the torrent of opposition that would come in consequence of it. The keys of the kingdom would be taken away from them. This is where John Taylor is really the one who established that if the church gets rid of polygamy, it is no longer the Church of God. It is a it is an apostasy and has lost the keys, which is what many polygamists believe. When I see any of our people, men or women, opposing a principle of this kind, I had I have years ago set them down. As on the high road to apostasy, and I do today, I consider them apostates and not interested in this church and kingdom. Why is it that Joseph Smith said that unless this principle was entered into, the kingdom could not proceed? Our position was just as Joseph said, if we could not receive the gospel, which is the everlasting gospel, if we could not receive the dictum of a priesthood that administers. an eternity. If we could not receive a principle that would save us in the eternal world and our wives and our children with us, we were not fit to hold this kingdom and could not hold it, for, for it would be taken from us and given to others. So if we get rid of polygamy, the kingdom, the keys will be taken from us and given to others. This is really what they were so firmly establishing. And, um, continuing on. And I really, all of these talks, it’s really hard to narrow down and just find little parts to read because the entire talk or entire large portions of the talks are dedicated to this, to this idea and this teaching. So I, anyone who wants to take the time to read through the talks, it is just so, I don’t know, I just came away with so much compassion for these people and these leaders who truly, with all of their hearts believed this and dedicated everything to it. And, um, yet we’re not, we’re not teaching truth. And so it didn’t, it couldn’t, it couldn’t be, it couldn’t stand, right? They were, they were wrong in the things that they were teaching. So, um, it can he continues on. Hence, it is emphatically a religious, a religious subject, so deep, sacred and profound, so extensive and far reaching that it is one of the greatest principles that was ever revealed to man. And shall we treat lightly these things? No. Um, continuing on every principles associated with the gospel which we have received is eternal. Hence, our marriage covenant is an eternal covenant given to us of God. Then, when poor, miserable corrupt men would endeavor to trample us

[00:52:55] under their feet because of the principle of truth which we have received from God, shall we falter in the least? No, never, um, continuing with John Taylor. In relation to all these matters, the safe path for the saints to take is to do right and by the help of God seek diligently and honorably to maintain the position which they hold. Are we ashamed of anything we have done in marrying wives? No, we shall not be ashamed before God and the holy angels, much less before a number of corrupt, miserable scoundrels who are the very dregs of hell. We care nothing for their opinions, their ideas, or notions, for they do not know God. Nor the principles which he has revealed. They wallow in the sink of corruption, as they would have us do if, if we give up polygamy. That’s what we’ll do. But the Lord being our helper, we will not do it. We will, we will, but we will try to do right and keep the commandments of God, live our religion and pursue a a course that will secure to us the smiles and approbation of God, our Father. Inasmuch as we do this, he will take care of us, maintain his own. Cause and sustain his people. We have a right to keep his commandments. But what would you do if the United States were to bring an army against you on account of polygamy or on account of any other religious subject? We would trust in God as we have done. What, um, would you have no fears? None. All the fears that I am troubled with is that these people do not do rightly, that they will not keep the commandments of God, meaning mainly polygamy. If we will only Faithfully live our religion. We fear we fear no earthly power. Our safety is in God. Our religion is is an eternal religion. Our covenants are eternal covenants, and we expect to maintain the principles of our religion on the earth and to possess them in the heavens. As if our wives and and if our wives and children do what right, and we as fathers and husbands do right in this world, we expect to have our wives and children in eternity. So remember that John Taylor. Kind of was a martyr for polygamy. He lived much of his life in hiding, and he ended up dying of illness because of the hardship of that. So he was just adamant that we will not give up polygamy, that Edmunds Tucker’s acts were coming along. All of these things were happening, that were taking the church property. Many of the leaders were in prison, and still, God will protect us. We will be faithful, right? Just as Just as the Jeffs were teaching recently, right? We keep seeing the same pattern happen. The leaders are saying, God will sustain us in this cause it is of God, and then we see them not being sustained because it’s not of God. So it’s, it’s a conundrum, right? So Wilfred Woodruff, 1869, sorry, I know this is going long. We’re gonna read a few more of these cause I think they’re important. If we do away, if we were to do away with polygamy, then we must do away with the prophets and apostles with revelation and the gifts and graces of the gospel. So this is Wilfred Woodruff himself, but, um, in 1869 instead of 1890. And finally we must give up our religion altogether and turn sectarians and do as the world does. Then we’d all be right. We can’t just,

[00:56:00] we just can’t do that, for God has commanded us to build up His kingdom. And to bear our testimony to the nations of the earth, and we are going to do it come life or come death. This is the position that we occupy. This warfare is not between man and man, but between God and the world. If the Lord does not defend the latter-day saints, we cannot defend ourselves. We can do what is required for us, but God Himself has to defend us. He has done it, and he will. Continue to do it until the coming of Jesus Christ or until His kingdom triumphs on the earth. This is my faith, and I would rather today lay down my life honoring the faith once delivered to the saints than turn round and fear men who have power only to kill the body instead of fearing Him who has power to cast both body and soul, both soul and body into hell, um, continuing on with Wilfred Woodruff. We could not obtain a fullness of celestial glory without this ceiling ordinance or the institution called the patriarchal order of marriage. Which I know we try to redefine that to claim that it is um monogamy. That’s impossible to do if we actually read what our previous leaders were saying. They were adamant, completely adamant that it was polygamy. Completely polygamy. The new and everlasting covenant of marriage, patriarchal order of marriage, the ceiling ordinances were were inextricable. I mean it was polygamy. The idea that those could be separated out would have been apostasy to them. Um, the patriarchal order of marriage, which is one of the most glorious principles of our religion, I would just as leave the United States government leaf means like I would just as gladly, I would just as willingly, I would just as leave the United States government would pass a law against my being baptized for the remission of my sins or against my receiving the Holy Ghost or against my practice as against my practicing the patriarchal order of marriage. I would just as leave they take away any other prince. of the gospel as this. So he’s saying that it’s impossible to give it up and really reading these talks, like I would recommend reading any of these that you can in a whole, because it becomes more and more clear than just the snippets I’m trying to pull out. So Orson Pratt, he was the senior apostle. He was the last living apostle who was ordained by Joseph Smith. He and It’s funny, in 1875, some of the apostles who were higher up in seniority, so higher in the order to become president, they were demoted in the order of seniority and because they had at one point been excommunicated or Apostatized or whatever, so the, the rankings were shifted to kind of control who had seniority and who would become the later president. So, but Orson Pratt was the the most senior apostle and um this was in 1874. Now, after having so much in relation to the reasons why we practice polygamy, um, and now after having said so much in relation to the reasons why we practice polygamy, I want to say a few words in regard to the revelation on polygamy. God has told us, latter-day saints, that we shall be condemned if we do not enter into that principle. And yet I have heard now and then a brother or sister say, I am a latter. A saint, but I do not believe in polygamy. Oh, what an absurd expression. What an absurd idea. A person might as well say, I am a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, but I do not believe in Him. One is just as consistent as the other, or a person might as well say, I believe in Mormonism and in the revelations given through Joseph Smith, but I am not a polygamist and do not believe in polygamy. What An absurdity that is foolishness in the extreme. It is an absurdity that exists because of the ignorance of some people. I have been astonished at it. I did hope there was more intelligence among the

[00:59:40] latter-day saints and a greater understanding of of principle than to suppose that anyone can be a member of this church in good standing and yet reject polygamy. The Lord has said that those who reject this this principle reject their salvation. They shall be damned. So right now they don’t only reject their exaltation, they reject their very salvation. They shall be damned, sayeth the Lord, to those whom I reveal this law, and they do not receive it, shall be damned. Now, here comes in our conscience. We have either to renounce Mormonism, Joseph Smith, Book of Mormon, Book of Covenants, and the whole system of things as taught by the latter-day saints and say that God has not raised up a church and has not raised up a prophet and has, um, has not begun to restore all things as he promised. We are obliged to do this or else to say with all our hearts, yes, we are polygamist. We believe in the principle, and we are willing to practice it because God has spoken it from the heavens. Now I want to prophesy a little. It is not very often that I prophesy, though I was commanded to do so when I was a boy. I want to prophesy that all men and women who oppose the revelation which God has given in relation to polygamy will find themselves in darkness. The spirit of God will withdraw from them from the very moment of their opposition to that principle until they will finally go down to hell and be downed if they do not repent. This is so interesting to me to read because I have heard these exact things said to me, and these exact what I see is just like arrogant mocking attitudes are so common still when you exchange and engage with um polygamists today because they still cling to these teachings and they still hold them and I, I think it’s probably so ironic for polygamists to hear me reading these things because they are saying, yep, that applies to you, that’s you. But I want all members of the church to recognize these things apply to all of us, right? If Orson Pratt, who was the senior apostle for many years, if what he said is true, then that’s all of us. All of us are darkened in our minds and we all need to reject the entire Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, the entire gospel, if we reject polygamy. Um, meaning we don’t live it, right? That’s, that’s what he was taught. This is, this is the last one I’ll read, and I’m sorry that this is so long, but this is a discourse by President John Taylor, delivered at Ephraim Sanpete County Sunday morning, August 20th, 1882. I guess I just read that whole thing cause this is just eight years before the change was made by Wilfred Woodruff and It just shows and, you know, this was published in the Deseret News. This was given to all of the members of the church. He said this was the president of the church just before a little while before he died saying, we believe in celestial marriage and celestial covenants and Men and women being united for time and for all eternity. Are we going to surrender? Are we going to suffer a surrender of this point? No, never, no, never. We intend to be true to our covenants in time and in the eternities to come. So that Was the situation that was the context. That’s what the saints had been taught again, consistently, repeatedly, profoundly in the strongest language available that

[01:02:57] polygamy could never the church could never leave aside polygamy, that they would be going against God, they would be in apostasy, both individual members and the church as a whole could not and would not ever lead aside polygamy. And then comes 1890 and Wilfred Woodruff, who himself had contributed repeatedly to these teachings, found himself in this horrible situation where, um, God showed him this is what’s going to happen if you don’t get rid of this. I think that these early leaders had been so sincere, so genuinely. Committed to what unfortunately was a false teaching, a false tradition to this idea of polygamy that they had given everything to it, and this is why Satan is the father of lies, because bad ideas are the root of the problem, right? We can have so much faith and so much sacrifice, but if that faith is founded. On a lie, on a false idea, we are doomed. We are, it it it isn’t good. And so that’s why it’s so important to make sure that our faith is founded on truth, on, um, not on false traditions. That’s the amount of damage they can do. And so Wilfred Woodruff, that was the situation he was in and I, I just, I wanted to point, like to point out the magnitude of this crisis and why Wilfred Woodruff felt so desperately that he had to say, I promise I’m not leading you astray. I promise I can’t lead you astray. That was how desperate he was because The church again was split, was ripped, just like with the succession crisis. And the banking crisis, we, the, the Kirtland banking crisis, not our more modern ones, the, the church was just being severed. And so polygamy had been the central doctrine of the church. So now these people who had dedicated their entire lives to this practice, believing wholeheartedly as they had been universally taught that it was essential and indispensable to their religion. That and that individuals who rejected it were apostates and would be damned. And if the church ever rejected it, it was an apostopostasy and rejected by God. Now these people were being asked to accept the dissolution of polygamy. And we even know that Wilfred Woodruff still didn’t buy it. He still kept polygamous marriages going. He Just was trying to claim that he wasn’t. And even that’s why they had to again issue another, um, um, manifesto in 1904 that again said, we’re not doing polygamy. We really, really, we mean at this time, we’re not doing polygamy because even though they were going along with what the The government was telling them to do. They still didn’t believe they could give up polygamy and be the kingdom of God. So they did another manifesto in 1904, and my great grandfather was married after that one. He was married in 1906. They just at that point were doing it mostly in Canada and Mexico and thinking, and not the United States, but that wasn’t what they were tell anyway, it’s really complicated, right? And so, So they did not see how it could possibly be done away. We started then to get other members of the quorum of the 12 who hadn’t been polygamists,

[01:06:15] and things started to gradually shift, and these old teachings were forgotten. And but we kept this new central doctrine. So anyway, and I keep getting aside myself, but this was the the crisis that Wilfred Woodruff. facing the utter destruction of the church if they continued polygamy, or the rejection of all the previous prophets and church leaders if they did not continue polygamy. And in so many ways, as I said before, the current polygamists have the stronger claim because they’re more consistent with the original teachings of the original Utah church leaders, the original leaders of the church in Utah. And so, um, we have to Let’s see, oh yeah, our, our current claim in the church today really is rather tenuous. We have to ignore and excuse and deny and redefine a lot to try to. Make this claim. It doesn’t really work that well, and the confusion still continues. This is another example of the of the confusion. This is from Mormon doctrine. Bruce Aragonki said, Obviously the holy practice will commence again after the second coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium. That’s what I used to believe, right? Like we can’t live it now, but it will be part of Zion and it will be part of the celestial kingdom, and I think that’s what Some of our current current church leaders teach and believe, like President Oak’s talk, and others like Elder Cook said, nope, we think it’s done its job, it’s not coming back. So we’re still in this state of confusion. So the reason that I wanted to go into all of this is to explain, so I hope that you’re still with me, even though this is so long. Explain where we are, why we are where we are. This became the new dividing line, right? There was a huge division in the church. Um, under Wilfred Woodruff that continued on after that when John W. Taylor, the son of John Taylor, who was a member of the Forum of 12 Apostles, a beloved member of the Corps 12 Apostles who kept polygamous marriages going, he was later excommunicated when the actual purge really happened in earnest and um. So polygamists believe this, right? And so at this time in this division, the separation, the polygamy crisis, those who stayed in the what we call the mainstream church, those who stayed, their new central doctrine became the prophet cannot lead us astray, right? The central doctrine had been the polygamy of God and it can never go away. The those who continued to believe that the polygamy is the central doctrine and can never go away. They went and formed other like FLDS churches, right? They went to the FLDS church and whatever different branches there were, I think it started with the Woolies, we’ll get into that in another episode. But that was the division. So those who who kept polygamy as the central doctrine left, and those who stayed, the new central doctrine was the prophet can never lead us astray. That is when it was established, that was why it was established, and that is how it was established, and we have gone on from there.

[01:09:13] So it’s been really interesting. It was really interesting to study that out and learn the desperate situation that led to the establishment and the um. The establishment of this doctrine and the centralization of it as a core idea in our church that has continued on today. So again, just like we are studying out to see if polygamy is a false tradition, I think it’s important for us to recognize at least the possibility that the idea that the church leaders can never lead us astray, that the prophet can never lead us astray, which again, we’ll go in other episodes into the scriptures, studying that out. It’s important to consider whether that also is. Another false tradition that, you know, it’s my mom wrote a song. When you tell one lie, it leads to another. So you tell two lies to cover each other. It goes on from there. And it’s kind of like one false idea leads to another false idea, leads to another false idea. We might be seeing that same thing playing out. So, again, thank you. I, I was gonna give a little bit of a follow up. Just again, I want to say, I’m not saying don’t follow the prophet. I’m not saying the prophets are leading us astray. I’m not saying any of that. I am saying this. The idea is one that should be investigated that you really need to ask yourself some tough questions about. And so we’re going to leave it there for now. Please join us next time. I don’t know if the next time will be part two on this topic, because I might need a little bit of time and break from it cause it’s been so difficult, but we will get back to it. There will be more parts to follow on this topic. So I hope to see you again. Thank you so much again. This is 132 Problems, and my name is Michelle Stone.