Introduction and Breaking News Overview

John Dehlin [00:00:01] Hello, everyone, and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories podcast. I'm your host, John Dehlin. It is June 16, 2025 and we have super breaking news. What would you think if you're a believing Mormon or even a questioning Mormon or a non Mormon or never Mormon? What would you think if I told you that new evidence has surfaced that the third. It's possible. This is my understanding, we'll get into it, that the third president or prophet of the Mormon Church is actually now officially the founder of the fundamentalist polygamist movement within Mormonism. Now those are my words. My guest may choose to use different words, but that's the teaser based on my best understanding. Today we have back in studio the Brian Buchanan both of Signature Books and of Year of Polygamy Sunstone podcast. Hey, Brian, welcome back.

Bryan Buchanan [00:01:02] Good to be back. It's always fun to be here.

John Dehlin [00:01:05] I'm so happy you reached out to me.

Bryan Buchanan [00:01:07] Yeah. When this dropped, I knew this is going to be of interest to a lot of people. And it also can use some context. This is what historians love to do, obviously. Right. Let's talk about it more.

John Dehlin [00:01:17] Yeah. And you've been, you've done at least a few episodes with us so far. We're we with Lindsay. I think we did a couple episodes on the history of Mormon polygamy. We also, I think, did some stuff with. With signature books as well. Yep. So.

Bryan Buchanan [00:01:32] And then we did the second anointing one with Darren.

John Dehlin [00:01:34] That's right.

Bryan Buchanan [00:01:35] And that will come back today too.

John Dehlin [00:01:37] Okay, cool. Yeah. So really quickly, in terms of bombshells, I know that this stuff has been out there in the ether for. For generations, for those who are really in the know, as far as kind of last week's revelation being a bombshell, let's say 0 to 10. How much of a bombshell is this, in your view?

Bryan Buchanan [00:01:57] This is pretty fun. This has got to be close to a 10.

John Dehlin [00:02:00] Really?

Bryan Buchanan [00:02:00] Because. Because we got to see the original document that we're going to talk about as well as some other stuff that are part of the story. And for, you know, historians who have been working on this, like you said, the documents, we knew they were there, but we hadn't actually seen them, at least in nice good high res scans like they were. So.

Setting the Stage for the 1886 Revelation

John Dehlin [00:02:21] All right, so I thought we'd begin by me giving you my understanding of what the lay of the land was, you know, to the slight degree that I was paying attention over the past couple decades. And then you're going to bring us up to speed with. With actually what's been going on. Is that all right?

Bryan Buchanan [00:02:38] Yep. Okay, plan.

John Dehlin [00:02:39] So I grew up not knowing about fundamentalist Mormons at all. I grew up in Texas, devout Mormon, but had no idea that Mormon fundamentalists even existed. At some point, I think it was with the Olympics. And who's that green guy? What was his name?

Bryan Buchanan [00:02:54] Tom Green was everywhere.

John Dehlin [00:02:56] And I'm like, whoa, there are people still practicing polygamy today. And. And I'm told, don't worry, those are just weird fundamentalists, and they have nothing to do with the Mormon Church. I'm like, okay, these are not the droids you're looking for. Then at some point, I learned about the FLDS Church and Warren Jeffs before, you know, the big outbreak. And I'm like, whoa, there's lots of these fundamentalist churches, huh?

John Dehlin [00:03:17] And. And then at some point, I heard this rumor, and the rumor was that, you know, fundamentalist Mormons claimed that John Taylor, the third prophet or president of the church, you know, had this secret sort of letter that maybe he gave to his son that basically said, I received a revelation or something to that effect.

John Dehlin [00:03:45] You know, you need to. You. My son, and I don't remember the son's name. You need to go, you know, whatever you go do in, like, Utah or Arizona or wherever you go, keep the principle alive. You go, keep practicing polygamy, because it's probably going to have to end soon.

John Dehlin [00:04:03] And, you know, because the federal government's breathing down our back and. But it's a requirement for salvation. It's a requirement for exaltation. It's part of the new and everlasting covenant. So we can't just get rid of it, but we have to officially sort of distance ourselves from it. But you guys go keep living the principle in quiet.

John Dehlin [00:04:25] And then the only other stuff I knew was that there was a rumor of there being some letter, but that it wasn't ever really validated. And my understanding was that the church invalidated this story and invalidated the letter, and apologists questioned the authenticity of the letter. And as far as, like, faithful Mormon historians go, this was just all kind of poppycock, hogwash that members shouldn't pay attention to. There's no way on earth that the third prophet or president of the Mormon Church would have ever, either formally or even informally, you know, encouraged the continued practice of polygamy. Okay, so that's where I was as of a week ago.

John Dehlin [00:05:15] Tell me. You know, let's start off however you want to sort of take it from there, but that's also to give Our never Mormons, a little bit of an update and at least to kind of get on the ground level to learn what, what, what's going on. Really?

Bryan Buchanan [00:05:29] Yeah, I think that's a very fair and probably very representative understanding of what went on for most people because it wasn't talked about terribly often. Again, you would have in sort of nerdy historian corners, people talking about this in detail, but that's about as far as has gone really. It's only in the last, say, 20, 30 years that we've started to see good scholarly style publications on this part of Mormon history.

Bryan Buchanan [00:05:54] Now I love this part. That's when I was a kid in institute, way back when I had an institute teacher, John Peterson, son of Mormon historian Chaz Peterson. And he pointed me to Thomas Alexander's book Mormonism and transition that covers 1890 to 1930 as this crucial watershed period. And I loved it and I've always been enamored with this period. But it's a period that most people don't really talk about, aren't particularly interested in. Right. Because Mormon history stops and Joseph Smith dies. Everybody knows that there's nothing after, there's nothing fun. And, and, and I mean, I even joke with that with historian friends that focus on Joseph Smith and Nauvoo and

John Dehlin [00:06:32] I'm like, oh, there's so much more

Bryan Buchanan [00:06:33] and I love it anyways, but so I thought maybe we'd start with what was first, what was released, what actually happened, and then we'll talk about why it's important and how it happens. So over the weekend, as of Saturday morning, the Church History Library released a new collection of John Taylor's September 1886 revelation. So the first document immediately recognizable is the original September 27, 1886 revelation. First document, the very first one in there.

The John Taylor 1886 Revelation Document

Bryan Buchanan [00:07:06] My son John, you have asked concerning the new and everlasting covenant. I mean, that's for fundamentalists. This is, this is the core document. This is, this is their mission statement. This is their origin story. This is, this is everything, this document right there. And so it has been known, the text has been out there, photographs of it have been out there, but this is it. This is the original high res scans. It's in pencil, it's in John Taylor's handwriting. And it's interesting that the description to the collection says this is in John Taylor's handwriting. And that's important because for many, many years, like you'd kind of heard about, it was rumored to be inauthentic, spurious.

Bryan Buchanan [00:07:48] Whatever it was, it was never considered Legitimate. Now, it is important to point out, a friend of mine pointed out too, that saying the church says this is official is kind of problematic. This is the Church history library, obviously. This is historians. You know, it's not like Russell Nelson drafted the description to the collection.

Bryan Buchanan [00:08:08] I'm sure there were discussions about how to word it. But, you know, it is important to point out, like this is not exactly an official declaration that this is a revelation obviously binding on the church or anything like that.

John Dehlin [00:08:21] Right, right.

Bryan Buchanan [00:08:22] So that, that is important to point out, like it. It's easy to say the church did or the church said X when it's usually more complicated than that, or at least more nuance, let's say.

John Dehlin [00:08:33] Sure.

Bryan Buchanan [00:08:34] So anyway, so that's document one. That's really interesting. Then we also have a typewritten copy done by Joseph Fielding Smith, so son of Joseph F. Smith, church president during much of the time that we'll talk about, and grandson of Hyrum Smith, brother of Joseph Smith. So someone very much at the center of Mormon history. So he was both an apostle and would be church historian for many, many decades. And that's interesting. And it has a date, and that's fun because again, we knew that document existed. But to my understanding, the number of people that have actually seen that one, you know, maybe the fingers on one hand. So that was very interesting to see that copy because that will be part of our story today, too.

John Dehlin [00:09:16] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:09:17] And the dating of when he makes that 1909 is really important because that will come up too. Then we also have a really interesting memoir by J. Reuben Clark, another important figure in our discussion today. So he was a First Presidency counselor at the time he wrote this. So this is 1933, and it describes how the original came to be in the church possession. And the date on that, July 1933. Really important. We'll talk about that as well. Then we also have a copy of the original Revelation, again, a handwritten copy with a note on the back that said, this is from my father.

Bryan Buchanan [00:09:53] And so it's thought that it's probably comes from John W. Taylor, John Taylor's son. But it, it's. It doesn't seem to be in his handwriting for sure. So it's possible that one of his wives made a copy or someone else. It could even be someone else in the family, but it most likely stems from John W. Taylor. So that was really interesting. To my knowledge, no one has ever seen that one outside of, you know, maybe a few historian hands in, inside the, the historical department.

Bryan Buchanan [00:10:21] And then we also had a couple other typed copies of the Revelation that aren't dated and we don't really know a lot. We probably think they came from the Taylor family. But so again and high res scans of all of it and it's, it's digitized, it's out there. I'm sure we'll link that in the, in the show notes so everyone can now go look at the original Revelation in all of its glory.

John Dehlin [00:10:45] Okay, so first thing, let me just say thank. I want to welcome everyone who's in the chat. I want to ask everybody, if you'll please take a second to subscribe to this channel, to like this episode, to comment on it and to share it. We want to get this out. This is a big breaking news. It's really important and if you all will just take the time. We also just want to thank our regular donors who make all this possible. Thank you so much for all you do. We couldn't do this without you. And of course, if you want a question or comment to be visible by me, the best way to do that is included as a Super chat in YouTube and I'll make sure and share your comment or question. I'll try to share other comments and questions as well.

Bryan Buchanan [00:11:25] We got a lot of moving parts with this story. There'll be a lot of names and dates. We'll do our best to put context and explain who people are. Especially again for, for never Mormons or Mormons who aren't terribly familiar with this

John Dehlin [00:11:36] time period, which is most.

Bryan Buchanan [00:11:37] Which is going to be a lot of people.

Church Document Releases and What They Mean

John Dehlin [00:11:38] So, so is it fair to say, just to start with that all these documents that have just been. The church has had, has probably known they've had. And they've been, I don't know, to be nice sitting on them maybe to be less nice withholding them from the membership in the public for possibly generations. I mean, is that fair?

Bryan Buchanan [00:12:02] Couple thoughts on that. 1. They have had them for a long time. Sort of a two pronged comment. One is to me, this is a really good evidence of progress that's being made. I think there is clear, unmistakable evidence that the church generally and the historical department specifically is attempting to be much more transparent than in the past. And I think they deserve credit for that because they didn't have to digitize this. They don't even have to open it up for research, but they did. And so I think it is fair to say good work. That this is, this is a good decision for everyone.

Bryan Buchanan [00:12:40] Now the reason that I think that it has taken a Long time is, again, two pronged. One is they have a lot of stuff. And so I think over the years, there's been a tendency to too much say they're just sitting on everything when a big part of is it's just a lot of work. They have so much stuff, and they only have so much staff. And so I think they have. You know, if you look at how the historian's office has worked since the time of, say, Joseph Fielding Smith until now, it is night and day difference. They've professionalized, they have standardized. You know, they're.

Bryan Buchanan [00:13:14] They're working like a professional archive does. So I think, again, credit to them for that. But again, this is a difficult story. I mean, this. This is messy. This is problematic. This is not terribly satisfying to anyone to. To believing Mormons, to former Mormons, to fundamentalists like, this history is murky and messy. And so I think that was. There was definitely reluctance to release this. And the decision to release this now, I'm sure, was backed by a lot of conversations that were probably complicated because this, as everyone is going to see, this is. This is a very fascinating, messy story.

Why the 1886 Revelation Happened

John Dehlin [00:14:01] All right, well, where do we begin?

Bryan Buchanan [00:14:03] So let's figure out. Why does this revelation happen when it does? What's going on? Okay, so just a quick review of polygamy history, which, if people are interested, like you pointed out, Lindsay and I came on, we did a fairly detailed during Joseph Smith and Brigham Young's lifetime. So definitely go check those out for more of the detail of this. But briefly speaking, polygamy starts with Joseph Smith. I know that is not as cut and dried in a lot of minds as it. As it once was. But looking at the historical record, it is undeniable. Joseph Smith began polygamy. It starts very slowly. He introduces it to a trusted group of friends during Nauvoo.

Bryan Buchanan [00:14:40] It's a few dozen people at most. By his death in 1844, not a lot of people then following that. It really expands under Brigham Young. So even in the short period between Joseph Smith's death and. And leaving Nauvoo in 1846, the circle expands greatly. And then as they get to winter quarters, and then once they move to Utah, resettle, it really expands. And we get to the point where, you know, a majority of adult Mormons within the Mormon corridor are practicing polygamists.

Bryan Buchanan [00:15:11] I'm always a little iffy when people start throwing statistics out there that, you know, it was this, this, and this, because we just don't know. The best that we can say is based on very specialized studies. Right. Kathy Danes did a book that looked at specific small towns where you could get your hands around everyone living there and say, okay, of this many people, this many, this percentage of them were polygamous. But it's very safe to say that a huge portion of the Latter Day Saints in the Mormon corridor especially were polygamists. It's the worst kept secret on Earth until 1852, when it's publicly announced and acknowledged.

John Dehlin [00:15:51] All I can say is my grandmother was the daughter of a third wife. You know, I mean, that's. Yeah, that's an N of one.

Bryan Buchanan [00:15:57] Yeah.

John Dehlin [00:15:57] But, but on both my mother's sides, there was polygamy.

Bryan Buchanan [00:16:02] Of my ancestors who were in. Who were Mormons, you know, living here at that time, 100 were. And they're not cool, fun, interesting, notable people. So if you have long Mormon roots, you have polygamy in your family tree. You just do.

John Dehlin [00:16:16] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:16:16] So. So, yeah. So 1852, it's publicly announced, and in a Victorian era, polygamy is not well liked. Right. It's, it's kind of the, I mean, less so today, but it's, it's, it's the condition of being LGBT at that point. Like, most people think this is bad and weird and, and evil for most people. Right. And so there's active public campaigning. It's in newspapers all the time, and there's pressure in Washington to do something about this, like, you know, take action. You can't do this. And so in 1862, the first piece of federal anti polygamy legislation is passed under Abraham Lincoln, of course, in 1862. If you think back to your history books, he's got, he's got a couple

John Dehlin [00:16:59] things on his mind.

Bryan Buchanan [00:17:01] Polygamy out in, in, you know, Utah is not exactly high on his priority list. So this is passed. He signs off on it. He can now say, look, see, I did something. There is no money earmarked for enforcing it. They do nothing with. It's a, it's a debt issue. It's on the books. Everyone's happy, except everyone's not happy because they want him to do something. And what's so funny is a few years later, it seems to be Mormons that push the issue because they're like, hey, this law is on the books and we don't think it's fair. And they let's get it off the books.

Bryan Buchanan [00:17:31] Which spurs lawmakers in Washington to be like, oh, yeah, maybe we should actually do something about that. The history of polygamy during Brigham Young is a history of not being able to shut up. They cannot. Mormon leaders cannot resist preaching it from the pulpits because they believe it is essential for exaltation. It is such a corporate. It becomes known as the principle over time. So it is.

John Dehlin [00:17:57] They.

Bryan Buchanan [00:17:58] They believe in it, and they believe that everyone needs to do it. And so they are constantly talking, writing about it in America, not so much in Europe. That's a different story you don't want to talk about there.

Bryan Buchanan [00:18:10] So 1862, our first piece. Then in 1874, the next piece is passed. This is the Poland act. And this is a big one because this one does actually begin a period of enforcing it. And so this is where we start to see people being prosecuted and sent to jail for it. Mormon leaders feel that this is unconstitutional. And so this is taken all the way to the Supreme Court. And this might be a surprise to people that the freedom of religion discussion in America is very largely shaped by polygamy. And in 1879, the Supreme Court rules against George Reynolds, the test case, the sacrificial lamb, who is chosen to be the guy to push this all the way up.

Bryan Buchanan [00:18:49] And they. They. The Supreme Court is very clear. Nope, sorry. This is. This is unacceptable. And so then three years after that, 1882, a big one, the Edmonds act, is passed. And that's where people really start getting sent to prison. And so as a result, the 1880s are a very chaotic, very troublesome time for Mormon leaders because not only the. The people in the pews, but they themselves are targeted.

John Dehlin [00:19:15] As far as I know, my great grandfather was put in jail.

Bryan Buchanan [00:19:17] Yep. I have a picture of one of my ancestors on the wall, went to the pen, and it's a badge of honor. It's, you know, it's this very formative identity making time. Right. This is hunkering down. Do we believe it? Do we not? We're willing to go to prison for conscience sake. And so this is. This is where they find themselves. And like I said, it's Mormon leaders, too. There's, you know, very famous photos of George Q. Cannon in prison in his stripes.

John Taylor Goes Into Hiding

Bryan Buchanan [00:19:46] And John Taylor does not want to get thrown in prison, and so he goes into hiding. So for the last several years of his life, he is very much out of the public eye. No more speaking in general conference, nothing. So what he does is he will bounce from safe house to safe house with his counselor, George Q. Cannon, a secretary, and they will just kind of hide out. People will bring him the mail. They'll sort of conference among themselves occasionally. Some of the apostles will visit them, they'll talk about things, but it's the church being run from exile.

John Dehlin [00:20:17] Remind us when Brigham died, what year

Bryan Buchanan [00:20:18] Brigham young dies in 1887. Or, sorry, 1877.

John Dehlin [00:20:22] Okay, okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:20:22] So there's a three year gap, sort of like between Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, where they're kind of ironing out, you know, should the 12 be in charge? How does succession, how does it work again? And eventually 1880, it's official. John Taylor is now church president.

John Dehlin [00:20:36] Okay, so 1880.

Bryan Buchanan [00:20:38] Yeah. So for the, for five years, 1880 to 1885, it's more or less business as usual. But his rhetoric is increasingly strident. He believes in polygamy as fervently as any Mormon leader ever has. And will, will preach this from the pulpit in General conference, and, you know, every chance he has, and he's not going to give it up. This is, this is unequivocal, no conditions. This is an eternal law. This is a requirement for exaltation. We're not giving in. And this is obviously very appealing to have such a bold leader at the helm, but it's also a problem because if you're not going to give it up, a lot of you are going to jail.

Bryan Buchanan [00:21:21] And so there is to some level, some quiet dissent burgeoning because obviously some people, especially a younger generation who hasn't had this long history of having this forging process that starts to think, wait a minute, do we, is this an essential, Is this really that big of a deal? Why, do we really need to go to prison for this? Is this worth it?

Bryan Buchanan [00:21:47] And so within that milieu, John Taylor in 1886 is now at the John Woolley home in Centerville, So just north of Salt Lake City, if you don't know Utah. And while there, he writes a revelation that comes to him in his own handwriting in pencil on two sheets of paper.

Bryan Buchanan [00:22:10] That's about all we can say. What is so fascinating is, to my knowledge, currently there is no contemporary record of this revelation. George Q. Cannon does not mention it. John Taylor doesn't appear to be keeping diaries at this point. We don't see it appear in letters. So we really don't have a contemporary picture of what exactly is happening.

John Dehlin [00:22:35] Do we know what was going on in 1886 that might have been the motivation to write this letter in September of 86?

Bryan Buchanan [00:22:44] Yeah. Later, especially from, from fundamentalist point of view, they will argue that this idea of, of dissent from within, against polygamy is what pushes it. There doesn't seem to be much, if any of that. Like, they're constantly saying, there are letters pouring in saying, we, you know, we need to give this up. And the specific context of it is that a first version at what becomes a manifesto is presented that we are going to give up polygamy. And that's what prompts this revelation.

John Dehlin [00:23:14] Were most of the first presidency of quorum of the 12 polygamists at that time? Were there any known top church leaders that were polygamists? But then advocating for its, you know, abandonment.

Bryan Buchanan [00:23:27] About the closest thing you can get is there is a bishop in Salt Lake, James Sharp, who goes to prison rather, or, sorry, repudiates polygamy publicly rather than go to prison. And that is very much not acceptable.

John Dehlin [00:23:44] Are the Godbyites doing their thing at this point?

Bryan Buchanan [00:23:46] And they have mostly fizzled out by this point. They were largely a Brigham Young era. They're still sort of around, but they have, they've kind of faded.

John Dehlin [00:23:54] And was there any secular press or pressure in Utah trying to embarrass the church or shame it into abandoning?

Bryan Buchanan [00:24:02] Oh, yes. So this is, this is the, the last, you know, the first 20, 30 years of the Salt Lake Tribune are kind of the golden era of the Tribune. You'll hear today. Oh, the, the Tribune, it's this, you know, this anti Mormon rag. And go back in time, read some of the copy from, you know, the 1870s, 1880s. So there very much is an effort to, and even nationally to try to embarrass Mormons to, to say, you know, in a Victorian era, what are you doing? Guys like this is this antiquated. They'll often shame it as, like, these are something that, you know, that Muslims do.

Bryan Buchanan [00:24:37] These, this is not what good white people do. So there's certainly plenty of that. But that had been going on, you know, for decades. So I don't, I don't think that that really had much of an impact. If I had to put my finger on what spurs it. It is the idea that a lot of people are going to prison.

Bryan Buchanan [00:24:57] And there is one really interesting letter in the John Taylor collection, it's anonymous, that basically calls the top leadership cowards because they aren't going to prison as much. Which is interesting, because I think if he did see that, that might have stung a little bit. So my guess is that's, that's what it is, is there are people going to prison. Some of them may not be super happy. And Taylor realizes this is difficult. And so there's a revelation that says, nope, this is, this is an essential. How can I revoke an ever, you know, an eternal principle. So.

John Dehlin [00:25:29] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:25:29] To me, that's. That's the immediate context of it.

John Dehlin [00:25:32] Okay, got it.

Bryan Buchanan [00:25:33] So then the following year, Taylor's already in bad health. At the point of this revelation in September 1886.

John Dehlin [00:25:39] Is this something we should read yet? Or when should we.

Bryan Buchanan [00:25:43] Actually. Let's do. Yeah, let's read it right here so people have a sense of what. What the text is. Yeah.

John Dehlin [00:25:47] Okay, so I've got it here. I'm just gonna read it. So September 27th, and this is the document number one.

Bryan Buchanan [00:25:54] Original in Taylor's handwriting.

John Dehlin [00:25:55] But you're saying this is document number one.

Bryan Buchanan [00:25:57] Released, the first document in this collection that people can go.

John Dehlin [00:25:59] And this is the document that was. There was a copy of. It was rumored to be legitimate.

Bryan Buchanan [00:26:04] The document at the center of all these discussions that the original had not

John Dehlin [00:26:07] been seen, that the fundamentalist claimed was legitimate.

Bryan Buchanan [00:26:11] Yep. For a long time. Yep.

John Dehlin [00:26:13] Okay, here it is. My son John. So that's John Taylor, right?

Bryan Buchanan [00:26:17] Not John Dehlin. Just so we're all on the same page.

John Dehlin [00:26:20] It's John Taylor, the third president. Third president of the church writing to his son John.

Bryan Buchanan [00:26:26] No. So this is. This is a revelation. Very much in the. Oh, doctrine comes to.

John Dehlin [00:26:31] This is Jesus.

Bryan Buchanan [00:26:32] This is Jesus talking to him in the. The voice of. Of Jesus. Thus saith the Lord very much.

John Dehlin [00:26:39] This is Doctrine and Covenants level.

Bryan Buchanan [00:26:41] Exactly. Yep.

John Dehlin [00:26:42] I mean, this should have been added to the Doctrine and Covenants by my.

Bryan Buchanan [00:26:45] Keep that in the.

John Dehlin [00:26:47] All right, so sorry. This is Jesus talking. September 27, 1886, to third president of the church, John Taylor. My son John, you have asked me concerning the new and everlasting covenant. That's our. I'm already interested. Because nowadays Mormon apologists say the new and everlasting covenant has nothing to do with polygamy. So I'm already interested. Okay. You have asked me concerning the new and everlasting covenant and how far it is binding upon my people. Thus saith the Lord. And that's a. That. That's coded Mormon language.

Bryan Buchanan [00:27:22] That's OG Doctrine and Covenant style right there.

John Dehlin [00:27:24] What does that mean to a never Mormon? What does thus saith the Lord mean to a never Mormon mean?

Bryan Buchanan [00:27:28] This. This is how. This was one of the big central ideas of Joseph Smith era Mormonism is that the canon was not closed, the heavens were not closed. Jesus was still speaking to his prophet, and this is how they came. Thus saith the Lord is coded for

John Dehlin [00:27:44] how you know when it's a prophet speaking as a man versus a prophet

Bryan Buchanan [00:27:48] channeling revelation because this is as central and authentic as a gift.

John Dehlin [00:27:52] Thus saith the Lord. All right. So Thus saith the Lord. All commandments that I give must be obeyed by those calling themselves by my name, unless they are revoked by me or by my authority. And how can I revoke an everlasting covenant? For I, the Lord, am everlasting, and my everlasting covenants cannot be abrogated nor done away with. But they stand forever. Or do they?

John Dehlin [00:28:19] Have I not given my word in great plainness on this subject? I am guessing he's saying DNC 132 there. Yet have not great numbers of my people been negligent in the observance of my law and the keeping of my commandments? And yet have I. Is he compl. Is Jesus complaining that not enough Mormon men are practicing polygamy? Okay, that's interesting.

John Dehlin [00:28:46] Let's see. Yet have not great numbers of my people been negligent in the observance of my law and the keeping of my commandments. And yet have I borne with them this many years, and this because of their weakness, because of the perilous times. And furthermore, it is more pleasing to me that men should use their free agency in regard to these matters. Nevertheless, I, the Lord, do not change. And my word and my covenants and my law do not.

Bryan Buchanan [00:29:22] And.

John Dehlin [00:29:23] And as I have there heretofore said by my servant Joseph, all those who would enter into my glory must and shall obey my law. And have I not commanded men that if they were Abraham's seed and would enter into my glory, they must do the works of Abraham, which is coded language for spilligamy?

Bryan Buchanan [00:29:50] Again, unequivocally.

John Dehlin [00:29:51] Yeah. I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting. And those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof. Even so. Amen. Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:30:07] Pretty unequivocal language in this revelation.

John Dehlin [00:30:10] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:30:10] And as you. And as you. You picked up very quickly, and people talk about this, this is more or less a reaffirmation of the original polygamy revelation. July 1843. What will become Section 132 in the doctrine and Covenants? And you can see it as sort of, again, reaffirming, but sort of condensing the. The requirement nature of it. Right. And I mean, you could think functionally, like, it really doesn't do anything new. The original revelation talks about an everlasting covenant. This revelation essentially just defines everlasting. Just in case you weren't familiar, that means it doesn't change.

John Dehlin [00:30:45] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:30:45] Right.

John Dehlin [00:30:46] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:30:46] So functionally it's really not that different. And at one other point you mentioned, the idea of canonizing this is something that people definitely don't realize is John Taylor was a revelator. There are multiple revelations during his time that, that are very much like the ones in the Doctrine Covenants, Thus saith the Lord. Those kind of revelations. Now, what's so fascinating is some of those are canonized, just not in English. So there are several foreign language editions during this time period where they do have some of these revelations, but not this one. And the reason is because during this time they don't. The rest of the Mormon leadership, to my knowledge, from the historical record, do not know about it.

Bryan Buchanan [00:31:28] And it is fair, later on the church will say, well, it was never presented to the church, which is true. But. And see, that gets to the essential question of does a revelation need. Does it need to be canonized to have the same effect?

John Dehlin [00:31:43] I'm kind of thinking if Jesus says it to his prophet, my Mormon brain says, that's enough.

Bryan Buchanan [00:31:49] And that's where a lot of people will land. But a lot of people are saying, nope, sorry, that's, that's one of sort of the checks and balances is it needs to be. It needs to go before the full leadership. They all weigh in and then present it to the church for their vote so that everybody gets a say, essentially.

John Dehlin [00:32:06] But part of what's weird about that is DNC132, which was used as the premise to justify polygamy up through what, the 1870s, when it was actually added

Bryan Buchanan [00:32:17] to the DNC, 1876.

John Dehlin [00:32:19] When was that ever voted on, if it ever was?

Bryan Buchanan [00:32:22] Yeah, as I recall, they do, they do vote on it again. So in 1818 76, there's a new edition where like 30 new revelations are added under Orson Pratt's work. And I do, I think they, it's. I'm trying to remember when at some point, I think they do.

John Dehlin [00:32:36] But my point is for decades, for a long time, for decades, it was used to justify polygamy without any common consent.

Bryan Buchanan [00:32:43] Yep. Now that's, that's one of the other ideas percolating that I messaged you about is the idea of scripture canonization. Like, that's a very fun discussion.

John Dehlin [00:32:52] Yeah. So, okay, so the letter doesn't say, hey, my son. It doesn't say, hey, my prophet John Taylor, go tell your son John Jr. To go practice polygamy or anything like that.

Bryan Buchanan [00:33:06] Nope, it's left as is. And again, there, the only sort of hints we have of it being acted on is that John Taylor does marry a plural wife about a month after this.

John Dehlin [00:33:18] Prophet or son?

Bryan Buchanan [00:33:19] Prophet.

John Dehlin [00:33:20] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:33:20] Yep. As does John Willing at whose home Taylor is staying. So that's interesting. That could just be coincidence. Probably not. So that does seem to be. They're. They're taking this to heart. But again, as far as we can tell, currently there is no knowledge outside of that home that this revelation exists. We got a bunch of diaries from apostles during this time. We got a bunch of correspondence. Nowhere does this show up. And something that Lindsay and I, you know, phrase we use all the time is Mormons suck at secrets. They always talk. It doesn't matter how you can tell them specifically don't talk about this. Doesn't matter. Yeah, so if they knew about this and just no one mentions it, I find that hard to believe. So I really don't. I don't think it. It was shared with his colleagues.

John Dehlin [00:34:09] Yeah. So, okay, so I guess if a. If a revelation, it's like if a tree falls in the woods and no one's around to hear it, does it make a sound? If a revelation is given by Jesus to a prophet and no one receives it, does it matter?

Bryan Buchanan [00:34:23] So the next step in his existence. So the year after that I mentioned, he's in poor health. John Taylor, he passes away in 1887.

John Dehlin [00:34:29] Okay, so he dies in hiding.

Bryan Buchanan [00:34:31] Again, different house. Okay, now, just. Just to give your listeners a sense of how much I love this part of history, I have a brick from the home that he was staying at during the revelation. I have a brick from the home he was at when he died. My basement's a lot of fun. So, yeah, so he dies in hiding.

John Dehlin [00:34:49] Are you leaving that to a university or your bas.

Bryan Buchanan [00:34:52] I'm gonna. I'm gonna do. I think I'll do what Lucy Mack did. I'll charge a quarter. You can come. Come check it out. So. So, yeah, so he dies in hiding. It might have died there with him. So his son, John W. Taylor, who's been an apostle for three years at this point, is going through his father's papers, and according to his later account, he finds the revelation.

Bryan Buchanan [00:35:15] So if that is in fact accurate, he didn't even tell his son of this revelation. And again, because we have no other examples of it popping up, that seems to be the case no one knows about. So he finds it.

Bryan Buchanan [00:35:29] And then we have really interesting. A friend of mine is going through his ancestors journals who is a woolly from a different family. And my friend sends me this entry, and my eyes got Real big. Because this is now the first known reference to the 1886 Revelation.

John Dehlin [00:35:46] Really quick, any theory on why he didn't make this church doctrine? Maybe he didn't have full consent of the quorum of the 15 and they needed unanimous consent. Like, you know, maybe he was in hiding or was afraid. Like, why, why would he go to the trouble of, quote, receiving a revelation? Well, two, two, there's two ways to look at it. If you believe Jesus gave this revelation to John Taylor, why would he, why would he receive a revelation from Jesus and not tell everybody? If he just made it up or thought he was receiving it but wasn't confident about it for some reason, then why, why would he go to the trouble of writing this alleged revelation and then doing nothing with it? It's a real good question. You don't know?

Bryan Buchanan [00:36:31] There's no, I think that the, the hiding part of it, it's just extremely difficult to do anything.

John Dehlin [00:36:38] But, you know, because he's in hiding.

Bryan Buchanan [00:36:39] He's in hiding. You know, church is not functioning like it normally does. You know, General conference is weird. Sometimes it's in Provo and you know, sometimes they'll send messages for someone else to read. Like they have a monogamist has to preside because marshals aren't dumb. If you have a general Conference, guess who's going to be there? A bunch of law breaking polygamists.

John Dehlin [00:36:57] He's meeting at the upper chambers of the temple every Tuesday to eat chocolates with the quorum of the 15 in order. Yeah, okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:37:04] Yeah, it's a good question.

John Dehlin [00:37:05] Yeah, okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:37:06] Because you know, he could have copied it and sent it by letter. If nothing else, he could have summoned them one by one. And again, there's no evidence for any of that. It's a really good question. And that's, that's one of the more perplexing parts of this is why does nothing happen to it? Because it does seem to be legitimate, you know, that there's no reason to question its authenticity.

John Dehlin [00:37:27] Yeah, it's. And it doesn't. This document, is it part of the Joseph Smith papers project that it's released or just.

Bryan Buchanan [00:37:33] No, no. So this is just one of a zillion manuscript collections at the Church history library.

John Dehlin [00:37:38] Okay. And does it come with annotations at all from like the Church history department?

Bryan Buchanan [00:37:42] You know, there's, there's a very brief description saying, you know, these are the documents, if we know who's handwriting, you know, they, they say these come from the Taylor family, but that's about it.

John Dehlin [00:37:51] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:37:51] Partially because we don't. We just don't know anything more about their history, really. We can make some educated guesses on parts of it, but that's about it. Okay, but that's. That's a really good question is why doesn't anything happen with it?

John Dehlin [00:38:04] Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:38:05] No, that's. That's an excellent question.

The Decline of Plural Marriage and the 1890 Manifesto

John Dehlin [00:38:06] Okay, so.

Bryan Buchanan [00:38:07] Yeah. So two years after his death, the first known reference to him, my friend found this. It was amazing. So this guy's name is Samuel Woolley. He is a bishop in Salt Lake. He goes and has dinner at John W. Taylor's house. And John W. Taylor pulls out. Here's this revelation that my father read that received. And what's fascinating is then Woolly paraphrases it in his journal. And there's enough to know, like, he's looking at that. You know, he's not. He's not looking at something else. He's looking at this document, and he copies that. You know, he writes that down in his journal. So that's fascinating.

John Dehlin [00:38:43] He writes a copy of the letter, a paraphrase. Okay, okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:38:46] But, you know, he gets enough. And a few exact phrases. So clearly, when he goes home that night to write in his journal, you can tell that made a big impression on him, and he remembered it very well.

John Dehlin [00:38:56] And this is pre1890.

Bryan Buchanan [00:38:58] So this is 1889.

John Dehlin [00:38:59] Okay. One year before.

Bryan Buchanan [00:39:01] One year before the manifesto.

John Dehlin [00:39:02] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:39:03] Yep. So this is again, another kind of weird interim period where John Taylor dies. The quorum of the 12 as a whole is sort of in charge until in 1889, they finally decide on Wilford Woodruff. This one is extremely, extremely problematic. It's very cantankerous. They. They basically yell at each other. At one point, Woodruff says, I'd rather go to a funeral than another court meeting. It's ugly.

John Dehlin [00:39:27] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:39:27] But they finally kind of close the ranks, decide on Woodruff, and move forward, but it's. It's ugly. So the same year that John Taylor dies, another piece of legislation is passed. This one is even. Each one adds more teet to it. Right?

John Dehlin [00:39:41] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:39:41] And this one, we're. We're headed towards disenfranchising every single Mormon because they believe in polygamy. And. And church leaders are watching. There's a. A case about to go down in Idaho that is looming. And this. This essentially no Mormons can vote. All the property's gone. Like, the. The government is bringing the LDS Church to its knees, whether they like it or not. So it is. It is a very difficult period for Church leaders, Wilford Woodruff, now the church president, is up against a wall. And they, they have sort of two guiding principles. They want to be a state, and they want polygamy to continue.

Bryan Buchanan [00:40:21] And so there are discussions all the time in private now about what to do, what is the best course forward. You know, they've got. The church lawyer is giving them advice. They have friends in high places, non Mormon friends, especially within the Republican Party, that are, that are on their side. And they, they don't quite know what to do. And it's in the midst of this confusion and hopes of becoming a state that the manifesto occurs.

John Dehlin [00:40:51] And basically Woodruff buckles. Or Woodruff and his counselors buckle.

Bryan Buchanan [00:40:57] No, they don't. Well, that's how it's portrayed from there on after in fundamentalist circles. And the problem is how it is described. Because if you hear a description of the manifesto, how is it portrayed? Always it is the end of polygamy. Sometimes. Well, it's the beginning of the end of polygamy. It's neither. And I get really mad at historians that will describe the manifesto as the end of polygamy, or sometimes they'll say the end of authorized polygamy. No, absolutely not. The manifesto is a press release as part of a project to gain statehood. That's it.

John Dehlin [00:41:38] Because the top leaders of the church continue to not only sanction, but to perform plural marriages.

Bryan Buchanan [00:41:44] Right.

John Dehlin [00:41:45] For another, what, 15 years.

Bryan Buchanan [00:41:46] Over the next 15 years, more than 250 plural marriages take place.

John Dehlin [00:41:50] And those are just, we know about, at the approval.

Bryan Buchanan [00:41:53] And even with the approval, these are bishops, these are stake presence. These are most of the mission presence. It's a majority of the apostles. It's even Wilford Woodruff himself.

John Dehlin [00:42:02] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:42:03] So if you want to argue that the manifesto is the end of authorized polygamy, even then you got a problem. Because then why aren't we disciplining all of these guys?

John Dehlin [00:42:11] Yeah, yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:42:11] Because if that's how you see it, then they're clearly breaking church rules.

John Dehlin [00:42:15] It's clearly publicly acknowledged plural marriage by church leaders. Is that fair?

Bryan Buchanan [00:42:21] It's a press release. It's to get the government to calm down.

John Dehlin [00:42:24] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:42:25] And it works. Mostly. Yeah, they, they, you know, they start to, to grant pardons at a federal level. There's the. They start the process of returning church property to church hands.

John Dehlin [00:42:35] Is it a slowing of or reduction dramatically?

Bryan Buchanan [00:42:39] Fair. And see, part of that is if we had all the numbers, like if we legitimately knew there were X number of plural marriages that happened in 1888, and X in 1889, we can make better guesses. My guess is the reduction is already happening before 1890 because of all of this. And that's part of the context of the revelation. Right. These people have been negligent because people don't want to go to prison. And you're going to have a majority who are willing to do it, but you're going to have some, even if they won't say it out loud, that think, I don't know that I really want to be a polygamist if there is an extremely real chance of me having to go to jail.

John Dehlin [00:43:17] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:43:18] So I think the reduction, the drop is already happening.

John Dehlin [00:43:21] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:43:21] But describing it as a slowing, I think is definitely fair.

John Dehlin [00:43:25] You mentioned in your notes that John W. Taylor, son of John Taylor, brings up, I guess, this letter multiple times in meetings with the pop. In meetings prior to the manifesto.

Bryan Buchanan [00:43:37] So the first time is. Is 1889.

John Dehlin [00:43:39] Is this in a minute somewhere?

Bryan Buchanan [00:43:41] This is in. This is in trying to remember where this shows up. I think it shows up in a summary of the minutes in the. And what's called the journal history.

John Dehlin [00:43:49] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:43:50] And then again in 1890 and again in 1892. And those last two are from journals of quorum members. So if we have the actual minutes for these, it would be really interesting to see, because if, you know, if you read these journals, you see, like, they'll come home from a quorum meeting, and they'll often say, nothing. Like, I went to a quorum meeting. They don't mention anything. So when they mention specific things, like, that seems to be things that are. They're big. Right. That. That are notable. So the fact that they do record this to me indicates, like, they all. They picked up on this, that he was mentioning this, and he'll say, you know, there's a revelation given to my father that, you know, says, we don't. We shouldn't give in to the government, basically.

John Dehlin [00:44:33] So it's basically, hey, guys, I know we were. We issued this press release. Yeah, but we can't quit.

Bryan Buchanan [00:44:38] Right.

John Dehlin [00:44:39] That's got to be what he's believing.

Bryan Buchanan [00:44:41] Exactly.

John Dehlin [00:44:41] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [00:44:41] And the manifesto is. Is problematic because not everyone is on board. And part of that is because they don't really always say out loud, we don't mean it. And so you'll see very different messaging, public messaging in general conference press releases, editorials. Then you have private conversations. But even those private conversations have different messaging. Right. You know, if a church president is talking to one person who's more sympathetic to the continuance of polygamy, he'll talk one way, but if he's talking to someone else who thinks they need to give it up actually, then he'll, he'll speak differently to them. So you have to be very careful in taking any piece by itself at face value because it has to be put in context and, and judged against all these other moving pieces.

Bryan Buchanan [00:45:28] But what is important is that the apostles are told about this revelation there. I don't think there's ever an indication that he reads it or brings it even, but he tells them about it and you know, it may have just kind of gone over their heads or you know, it's John W. You know, I don't know. It's, it's hard to tell.

John Dehlin [00:45:49] Or maybe it's like, hey, your dad's dead now there's a new sheriff's new sheriff in town.

Bryan Buchanan [00:45:54] Right? Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. And that's, that's very important is the idea of once one church president dies, what do we do with what he did as a whole? Yeah. So, yeah, so it is, it is a confusing time and, and the trip

John Dehlin [00:46:10] and the Trib starts, you know, saying, hey, wait a minute, not all is well in Zion.

Bryan Buchanan [00:46:15] Yep. Again, this is the golden era of the Trib poking at the, the LDS church and they love to do it. And they seem to have some pretty good moles because they'll get some information that is very clear, came from the very top that snuck out somehow saying what? Saying, you know, oh well we heard that, you know, this guy is married, this wife. And we've heard that, you know, they're, they're saying X and meetings kind of thing.

John Dehlin [00:46:38] So after, after the manifesto.

Bryan Buchanan [00:46:41] Yeah, all around the manifesto, they're eager to jump on any of this because it's great copy. Everyone wants to hear about polygamy, especially in Utah, so, so fitting its role

John Dehlin [00:46:52] as it does even in modern times. The Deseret News has a response.

Bryan Buchanan [00:46:56] Deseret News will always have responses. One of my favorites is in, in 1901 there's an editorial from Charles Penrose who was at the time of stake president, will soon become a, an apostle and eventually even a first presidency counselor.

John Dehlin [00:47:10] And for our never Mormons, Desert News is the Mormon church owned official newspaper for the state.

Bryan Buchanan [00:47:17] Yep. And it is today.

John Dehlin [00:47:18] And it was back then.

Bryan Buchanan [00:47:19] The editor will get called in from time and, and, and yelled at and say I don't like what you're doing here on, you know, don't yell at this political thing. Why are we talking about this? Talk more about this. These kind of things. So they're very much reading, and they will copy bits and pieces of it into their kind of official scrapbook of things. So, yeah, what is being said on all fronts in the newspaper is very much. Because that's. That's your social media of the day, right? That's. That's where ideas are being thrown around.

John Dehlin [00:47:49] So Penrose.

Bryan Buchanan [00:47:50] So Penrose writes this editorial responding to a Protestant minister in Salt Lake City who has heard rumors that one of the apostles has taken a new life. By this point, it's 1901. And. And the. The unsigned editorial says that this, this, this rumor is groundless. Four apostles by that point in that year alone have married plural wives that we know of. That we know of. So, yeah, again, what is being said publicly and what's actually happening are very much different stories.

John Dehlin [00:48:24] And this. This stuff is the stuff that helped make Michael Quinn get excommunicated, at least in part. Right. Researching this stuff.

Bryan Buchanan [00:48:32] His article was the first time that this 1890-1904 first manifesto to second manifesto period was. Was understood. Well, yeah, huge, absolute groundbreaking article. And that's where a lot of this stuff still comes from 40 years later from that article.

John Dehlin [00:48:49] I just want to say this is like. I often try to look at, like, really troubling moments in church history just because I, you know, the church taught me honesty, right. And they taught me what honesty was, and they taught me what full honesty was versus partial honesty. But this idea of, like, knowing that there were plural marriages going on after the manifesto, having reports of it being printed up and then issuing from its official newspaper denunciations as late as 1901, it's kind of troubling to me because that's. They had to have known that they were misleading the public. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [00:49:35] Again, this is one of the messiest periods of Mormon history. And again, that's why I do want to give credit for them releasing this now because it's not any less messy to deal with now. And so, And. And there's. There's not good answers because you, as has often been done, portraying the manifesto in 1890 as the end of authorized political marriage is just absolutely not the case.

John Dehlin [00:49:56] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:49:57] And it's. And it's very complicated in detail to explain why that's not the case.

John Dehlin [00:50:01] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:50:01] So. Yeah.

John Dehlin [00:50:03] Okay. So.

Bryan Buchanan [00:50:05] And 1901 is a very important year for that to happen, too, because that is the year that Lorenzo Snow dies, under whose administration polygamy had been kind of tamped down somewhat. He seems to have been more of the opinion that we really should not do this. And so it is very much kind of suppressed during his time. But then once Joseph F. Smith is the new church president, he had been the counselor to Wilford Woodruff along with George Q. Cannon. And those two were responsible for sort of being the handlers of plural marriage. They didn't often per, you know, they almost never performed plural marriages, but they would give authorization sometimes in code.

Bryan Buchanan [00:50:45] So this is the period also where we have people starting to go to Canada, starting to go to Mexico because they can, they can, they can do it there. There are laws on the books in both places. Like, so you sometimes you see there's no law. There's 100% laws on the books. Canada is a little more interested in, in enforcing the laws. Mexico, they have pretty much handshake agreements that you guys come down here, stay here, which is often not followed. Go, go to town, you guys have money, you, you're going to build farms, you're going to pay taxes, blah, blah, blah. This is a great thing. Come down, just kind of shut up about it. We're not going to prosecute you.

John Dehlin [00:51:25] Everyone's like the Chihuahua.

Bryan Buchanan [00:51:27] Yes. This is all the Mormon colonies in northern Mexico. This is all in that for our never Mormons.

John Dehlin [00:51:31] This is literally where Mitt Romney comes from. He is a descendant of the Mormon polygamists. He doesn't even hide it. His dad literally was born there. Was born there, moves from Mexico to Michigan and then becomes an auto exec. And then Mittsborn. You know what I mean? Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:51:47] Cleon Skousen, another very important figure. His family comes from Mormon colonies. Like this is an interesting part. So, yeah, so there's, there's all these things going on and then Joseph F. Smith is made church president and he had been sort of a handler, so he's very much in favor of continuing it. And so there's now a bit of an uptick and marriages start to happen. And what's really interesting is you start to see specific.

John Dehlin [00:52:09] By the way, this is Joseph Smith's nephew.

Bryan Buchanan [00:52:12] Nephew.

John Dehlin [00:52:12] So Joseph's brother Hyrum's born during his lifetime.

Bryan Buchanan [00:52:16] Yeah, Knew him.

John Dehlin [00:52:17] He was alive when his dad and his uncle were assassinated in Carthage jail. So he's not going to want to abandon polygamy when he knows his dad and uncle or his dad and uncle died, you know, largely because of it. Yeah, yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:52:31] And that's a big factor in what? In the reason they're killed. Absolutely.

John Dehlin [00:52:34] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:52:35] So, yes, we see an uptick now. And but what's interesting is we start to see sort of a unofficial group of apostles that are dealing with this. So the mo. The big two names that you'll often hear, you have Matthias Cowley, and you have John W. Taylor. So this is the same John W. Taylor, son of church president John Taylor. So these are the. The two most known. You'll have a couple other guys. You have Owen Woodruff, son of church president Wilford Woodruff. You have a guy named George Teasdale. So you have a few of them that are responsible for most of the marriages that are performed.

Bryan Buchanan [00:53:08] But then you have other guys. So down in the Mexican colonies, you'll have patriarchs that are down there or stake presidents down there, and same kind of thing up in Canada. Patriarchs and stake presidents often. So you have this kind of loose network.

Bryan Buchanan [00:53:22] And this is where it starts to get murky. The closer you get to the second manifesto of 1904, the more confusing as it becomes because church leaders want to continue it, but also don't want it known that they want it to continue. And so they're, you know, and that's where you see they will send letters down of authorization that say, my friend Joe Skousen is coming down to the colonies. Would you please provide him with every, you know, benefit and provide him a guide.

Bryan Buchanan [00:53:54] So they'll have phrases. And the stake president, or whoever gets it down in the colony is like, oh, great, here comes Skousen. He's going to get married. He's going to have his wife with him, and then we're probably going to put him back on the train two days later, that kind of thing. So it starts to get very murky because you get information that's being siloed, and, you know, you, you don't necessarily want to know all of the details of things, because that's just going to get you in trouble.

John Dehlin [00:54:19] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:54:19] And so you'll, you'll. You'll see explicit things like, you know, don't put things in writing. And, you know, let's not talk about this too much kind of thing. So it's. They, they realize, like, this has to stay quiet. But then you'll have someone that, you know, just can't help themselves, and they get up in a state conference and they like, everybody has to be a polygamist. And of course, you've got a reporter from some newspaper in the audience that's like, ooh, lovely, let me write that down and publish it.

John Dehlin [00:54:46] It's like that second anointing guy in Idaho you talked about. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [00:54:49] Everybody needs to have their second Anointing Just. Can you shut up about it?

John Dehlin [00:54:54] That guy in Sunday school won't shut up. Yep.

Bryan Buchanan [00:54:56] Again, like, really, somebody not shutting up about it. Like, Heber J. Grant says he's at a fundraiser. He's like, I. I'm going to give $50 for each of my wives and I wish I could give more. Tribuna's like, thank you. Put that in the paper. Gets him in trouble. Right. So again, if they could just shut up about it, this would have been a little different history. So anyways, yeah, you have all these marriages taking place and they're, they're somewhat known. The Tribune is talking about them occasionally, but there really isn't a big impact yet. But then, 1903, huge thing. Reed Smoot is elected as U.S. senator

John Dehlin [00:55:32] from Utah, gets his statehood. What year?

Bryan Buchanan [00:55:35] 1896.

John Dehlin [00:55:36] Okay, okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:55:37] And part of that is we're not doing polygamy. That statehood thing did not work out the way they wanted. They thought, oh, we're going to be a state. We can pick all of our own leaders, judges, and we can just you know, essentially quietly do polygamy. That's not how it works. The government, the federal government knows what's going on. They're not going to just let them do whatever. Somewhat obviously they are still doing it, but it's not public. It's not seen as official really.

Utah Statehood and the First Manifesto

John Dehlin [00:56:04] But the first manifesto works. It gets a statehood.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:06] It gets statehood. Right, it gets that. But again, it doesn't work the way they want it. It doesn't have the effects that they want.

John Dehlin [00:56:12] They think that they can keep quietly. Now they have all the power. Keep practicing it.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:16] Exactly.

John Dehlin [00:56:16] Now they got what they wanted.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:17] Yep, they got what they wanted. Didn't work. So it's, it's quietly doing again and it does slow down. That is 100% fair. But to argue that it was the ending of an 1890.

John Dehlin [00:56:28] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:29] Doesn't work.

John Dehlin [00:56:29] So Smoots made a senator.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:31] Smooth has made a senator.

John Dehlin [00:56:32] 1903.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:33] 1903.

John Dehlin [00:56:34] The first senator from Utah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:36] Basically, we've got. I've had a few.

John Dehlin [00:56:37] Okay, okay.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:38] So this, you know, we're a couple terms into it now. But importantly, he is also an apostle. Has been since 1900.

John Dehlin [00:56:44] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:56:45] Now what's interesting about him is he is a monogamist and he doesn't really like polygamy. He's very interesting. You can kind of see him as like a, a progressive 20th century Mormon, you know, the proto version of this because, like, he seems to be somewhat embarrassed of polygamy and, you know, like he's, he's a businessman. Like, he's, he's kind of the image that Mormonism becomes later on, I think. And so when he's elected, the, the rest of the country is like, whoa, hold on. Because they have seen some of this coverage. Like they know polygamy is still going on. And so I think originally they, they think he is a polygamist, which he isn't.

Bryan Buchanan [00:57:26] That comes out. But then they're, they sort of change tactics like, well, okay, but he's part of this self perpetuating body that believes in polygamy and that is not okay. And so millions of names come in on petitions and finally they decide to have this lengthy series of hearings within the Senate as to whether Reed Smoot will actually be allowed to keep his seat as senator.

John Dehlin [00:57:46] Wait, millions of US Citizens mad at Utah.

Bryan Buchanan [00:57:50] They have continuing like roll petitions that. Wow. And you have Protestant ministers and other Christian churches here in Utah who are largely pushing this that are like, no, this is not okay. You know, we're now into the 20th century. Like this is this archaic thing that cannot happen within the American republic. And again, this is all newspaper copy because everyone wants to hear about Mormons. They always do.

John Dehlin [00:58:21] Well, this is one of the, this is a Mormon moment for the United States.

Bryan Buchanan [00:58:23] It is, it's a real bad one too for the LDS Church leadership because in PR terms this is terrible because they've tried to keep it quiet. They haven't been terribly successful at it. The Tribune of course, is very helpful in making us what is not private.

Bryan Buchanan [00:58:39] And so the hearings begin and they subpoena Mormon leaders to go back to Washington. Oh, actually I back up. This is really important because five years before his election, BH Roberts had been elected to Congress and was not allowed to take his seat because he was a polygamist. And so I don't know why they thought they're like, well, he's a monogamous, it's not going to be a big deal. This Joseph F. Smith was very adamant that Smoot should become a senator.

Bryan Buchanan [00:59:08] And there's this great story later that he's with Charles Penrose, they're on a boat, they're in England and they start talking about. And Penrose is like, I don't know, maybe, maybe this isn't the best idea. And according to him, Joseph S. Smith smacks the railing of the boat and says, I'm as sure of anything in my life that this is a good idea.

Bryan Buchanan [00:59:28] It wasn't. It was a very bad idea. I think again, they thought well, if he's a senator, then he can be in Washington, and he can kind of grease the wheels for us. Didn't work also. But so over the course of three long years, they have this series of hearings. Mormon leaders are subpoenaed back to Washington, including Joseph F. Smith, and under oath, they have to talk about polygamy, and they don't want to. And they dance around it. They play semantic games, and sometimes, honestly, they just lie through their teeth and they'll say, oh, yeah, no, John Henry Smith. Like, I. I never heard anything about polygamy.

Bryan Buchanan [01:00:04] Mike Quinn has a list of every quorum meeting where it came up Again, like, they are stuck between their theological wishes and practical realities. Right. They want polygamy to continue, but it's just not working. And so the hearings are a disaster.

Bryan Buchanan [01:00:26] And Reed Smoot is constantly writing back, being like, guys, this is not going well. Can we do something? Like, you wanted me to be elected. I want to be elected. And then we also have these fascinating journal entries and letters from his secretary, Carl Badger, that are very revealing. And so really, didn't.

John Dehlin [01:00:46] Didn't Joseph F. Smith get asked if he received revelation as a prophet?

Bryan Buchanan [01:00:50] Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:00:51] And didn't he give some squirrely answer?

Bryan Buchanan [01:00:53] He gives. He gives a Larry King answer. Right. And. And I think if you. Which is not really, you know, I had a revelation that the Jesus is the Christ kind of thing. And I'd be willing to bet if you, after came back from Washington, sat him down and said, well, what was the deal? I think it would have been very much like Hinckley after that, where he says, you know, in general conferences, like, I think I know the doctrine of the church pretty well. It's not meant to cast pearls before swine, basically. Right. I think they would have been very much that same kind of answer.

The Smoot Hearings and the Second Manifesto

Bryan Buchanan [01:01:23] I mean, during the hearings, it comes out that Joseph F. Smith has his last child with a plural wife. During the Smoot hearings couldn't have been a worse story. All he gets is a fine. Luckily, but, yeah. But early on, it's clear to Mormon leadership, this is ugly. This is not going well. And so the decision is made to issue another manifesto in general conference.

Bryan Buchanan [01:01:52] And so, April 1904, General Conference, they issue a manifesto that is largely the same as Woodruff's, but then says, if anyone is found in violation, they will be liable to be excommunicated. So there is public talk of church discipline for this. It won't happen yet, but that's at least what they're saying.

John Dehlin [01:02:16] And just a weird Oddity for our nevermormons. Many Mormons may not even know that a first declaration was given, but I certainly did. Like, I made it into my twenties knowing that the church had abandoned polygamy. It was in the back of the doctrine.

Bryan Buchanan [01:02:33] Yeah. It's in the scriptures.

John Dehlin [01:02:35] But most Mormons do not know that a second manifesto had to be released, again, probably as a result of the Smoot hearings. 100% as a way to say, okay, we really mean. We kind of didn't mean it before. It was kind of just a press release to pass.

Bryan Buchanan [01:02:51] We had crosses the first time.

John Dehlin [01:02:53] But now we really mean it right now. Now we mean it. No more. Plague me.

Bryan Buchanan [01:02:57] And part of that is because newspapers, people in Washington are like, wait, you already did a manifesto? So what? Yeah, so that really is. No, no, no, we're serious. We mean it this time. And this really does start to slow this. If you wanted to pinpoint the first time where they get serious about ending polygamy, this is it. So. But again, it's not complete because within a month of issuing the second manifesto, at least two apostles will perform plural marriages. So it's not like it ends here either. It does slow greatly.

John Dehlin [01:03:30] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:03:30] I mean, this really. It does drop off significantly.

John Dehlin [01:03:33] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:03:33] But again, like, these ones that do happen seem, at least in some cases, to have the authorization of Joseph F. Smith. Now it's even more murky now. And we'll get kind of winks and nods and. Well, there's a story. Specific one that we'll talk about here in a minute. That is the way that authorization is conveyed. And the problem with winks and nods is it's like George Costanza. If you get grapefruit in your eye and you wink at someone, that person takes that wink to be a real wink. Not, I have grapefruit in my eye. And we see some of that happening. Mixed messages and signals that are being improperly given, improperly received, interpreted, that kind of thing. So it's messy. All right, so we now have an official statement that has been given in general conference. But then we get a really interesting series of events later that year, October. So in one case.

John Dehlin [01:04:27] Okay, wait, I. I think I just totally missed this. And maybe I was just spacing. Right. Are you saying the first declaration wasn't read in general conference? Did I.

Bryan Buchanan [01:04:36] It was. It was.

John Dehlin [01:04:36] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:04:37] Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:04:37] So they both were.

Bryan Buchanan [01:04:38] They both were. Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:04:39] All right, keep going.

Bryan Buchanan [01:04:40] Yeah, this. But this one, though, like, it feels a little more concrete and in practice is more concrete, which is important because, again, public statements. Wonderful and this is. This is one of those places where, you know, this idea that Joseph Smith was not a polygamist. Well, in public, he was saying he wasn't a polygamist. That's wonderful. If you haven't experienced the idea of a public figure saying something publicly and. And their behavior is something different, I don't know what to tell you.

John Dehlin [01:05:09] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:05:10] This is par for the course. So. And. And this applies here. Public messaging and private behavior will frequently diverge for reasons that I think are very understandable in most cases.

John Dehlin [01:05:21] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:05:21] Doesn't mean that they're always easy to swallow, but we can understand why it's happening. Right. Okay. So in October 1904, there is this really very interesting man who is the president of the California Mission. His name is Joseph Robinson. Lindsay and I just did an episode where we talked a little bit about. He's one of these classic, super interesting people that no one's ever heard of. So he presides over the California mission for 20 years. And at that point, a mission president is even more important than it is now. Right. Because you only have a handful of them, not 300. And they're frequently relatives or good friends of the church leaders.

Bryan Buchanan [01:06:02] Way more so than even now. Right. So they have an outsized impact and importance during this period. So Robinson is married to two plural wives himself in 1901, by Matthias Cowley. Especially then, like General Conference was the gathering of all the leadership. Most of the mission presidents would come in. Stake presidents along the Mormon corridor would come in. I mean, they do that now, too, but again, with a smaller church. Like, it really has an impact during that period. What that means is that's a great opportunity to marry a plural wife when you're in Salt Lake for conference. And that's exactly what happens to him.

Bryan Buchanan [01:06:40] So April and October, Matthias Cowley, they go to hotel, I think, and he marries Robinson to plural lives. But Robinson is. He hears that. Let's see. No, he's. Later.

John Dehlin [01:06:59] So you've got Penrose telling Robinson.

Bryan Buchanan [01:07:03] Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes. Okay, read it. So, yeah, so Robinson is talking to Charles Penrose, who is.

John Dehlin [01:07:09] Penrose guy is kind of important. His name keeps coming up.

Bryan Buchanan [01:07:11] Penrose is really interesting. He is very much part of the drafting process of the original manifesto. So he's. He's there. He's one of those guys that's elevated to the highest leadership level because at the second level of stake president, editor of the Deseret News. Like, he's really useful.

John Dehlin [01:07:30] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:07:30] And he's. He's very articulate. He's a very smart man. And so they. They use his talents everywhere they can.

John Dehlin [01:07:36] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:07:36] And so he talks to Penrose and he says, I don't like the second manifesto. He says, you know, I obviously, I was married to plural wives. I love them. I believe in the principle, and I think that this should still be available to people. And Penrose says what to him?

John Dehlin [01:07:52] Says, read it. Read doesn't mean anything. Meaning the second manifesto doesn't mean anything more than the other. Meaning the first manifesto. And that doesn't mean Mexico or any place where there is no law against polygamy. So basically a top church leader is

Bryan Buchanan [01:08:15] saying, business as usual.

John Dehlin [01:08:17] Yeah, don't worry about the second manifesto. We're going to keep doing polygamy in Mexico and Canada outside the U.S. yep. Okay, that's pretty interesting. And we have that, do we? Is that written?

Bryan Buchanan [01:08:28] That's in Robinson's journal.

John Dehlin [01:08:29] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:08:29] And his journals are digitized and available.

John Dehlin [01:08:32] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:08:32] They're fascinating. I'm in the process of transcribing them because, like, he is this wealth of information on this murky, confusing period.

John Dehlin [01:08:38] Got it. Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:08:39] So that's really fun. That same month you have Carl Badger. So this is Reed Smith's secretary back in Washington, who again is sort of this 20th century progressive Mormon who is seemingly embarrassed by polygamy and thinks that it should absolutely end, you know, no conditions, no ifs, ands, or buts.

John Dehlin [01:08:59] And he writes in his journal. You want me to read it? Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:09:03] A.B.

John Dehlin [01:09:03] irving told me that Apostle Woodruff told him that a certain number of worthy people had been commissioned to keep alive the principle of plural marriage. This was in reference to the new marriages about which gossip was rife. Irvine was son in law. This is you?

Bryan Buchanan [01:09:25] Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:09:25] Irvine was son in law of George Q. Cannon.

Bryan Buchanan [01:09:27] Yep.

John Dehlin [01:09:28] Okay, really quick. I want to make sure I understand this. So reed Smoot in D.C. his secretary is saying that he heard from this guy Irvine that Wilford Woodruff is it while possible. Woodruff.

Bryan Buchanan [01:09:42] Owen Woodruff. So son of Wilford, one of. One of these guys who. This group that's sort of coalesces, that performs contracts, new plural marriages.

John Dehlin [01:09:52] Okay. So in 1904, Badger learns that the son of Wilford Woodruff, who's an apostle, is. Is mentioning that there are still people practicing polygamy. They've been commissioned to keep the principal. Yeah. Now. Now one interpretation of that in my brain could be, you know, the weird stuff going on in Utah and Arizona. Right, right. That becomes the FLDS church and the shoot offs.

Bryan Buchanan [01:10:17] Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:10:18] Another interpretation in my Mind could be he means Mexico and Canada, not the U.S. do you have a sense for.

Bryan Buchanan [01:10:25] So this is really interesting and this is one of those cases where Mike Quinn would occasionally use this statement as sort of a piece of evidence that the later fundamentalist claims to it to authority, which we'll talk about. That's what he's referring to here. To me, I don't think so, because to me, Owen Woodruff knows very well. Yeah, there were guys commissioned. Who are those guys? Well, they're the guy that performed Woodruff's plural marriage. Guys like Matthias Cowley.

Bryan Buchanan [01:10:49] So he would know this. And obviously Irvine, as George Q. Cannon's son in law, is going to hear some of this that's going on. So that's really interesting. And notice, I thought it was fascinating that he used the word commissioned because, you know, Mormons are very specific about like we have these words called set apart, we have these words called ordained that he could have used here, but he doesn't. So to me that means it's not like a special priesthood calling. There's not like laying on of hands. It's authorization. It's a commission. Right. This is George Q. Cannon telling Cowley, go perform some plural marriages. Owen Woodruff, go perform some plural marriage.

John Dehlin [01:11:22] Are you saying commission might be code for like unofficially official? Is that what you mean?

Bryan Buchanan [01:11:28] Yeah, yeah, but I mean, I, it doesn't involve like something as, as, as concrete, as like a laying on of hands. Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:11:34] Formal. Something more.

Bryan Buchanan [01:11:36] It's. Yeah, it's less formal. That's, that's a good way to talk about it. Okay, so that's really interesting. And obviously Badger is as smooth secretary. Like he's constantly putting out fires. Right. Because they're trying to get Smoot's seat authorized so he can be in the Senate like he was elected to be. And so there's these great letters and journal entries and I mean, as smooth secretary, it's no less confusing to him than it would be to like some guy living in Panguitch. Like he doesn't know all the answers either and he keeps hearing things that make it even more complicated for him.

Bryan Buchanan [01:12:09] So that's fascinating. Okay, then the other piece from that month is they send out more or less a circular letter to all the apostles, especially your, your cows, your John W. Taylors, your George Teasdales, that says, all right, we're, we're pulling back any authorization, whatever that's being pulled back in now.

Bryan Buchanan [01:12:29] And that's interesting because again, you have to wonder, did they mean that 100% did they mean that like 95% did. They mean like we need a written thing that says we're pulling back this authorization, but there's still going to be some times where we're going to authorize you on the side to do like a special case.

John Dehlin [01:12:48] In my mind, one possibility is, like you said, they need a letter, but also they probably don't want top letter, top level church leaders involved. No fingerprints anymore. Yeah, it's kind of like in the mob, the top level leaders aren't assassinating people and they don't leave written record of assassinating people. In fact, they would have written letters saying, never kill anyone. But you get, you know, once you've given the nod to the lower level people, they know what they're supposed to do. I mean, Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:13:19] Like, and that's important because this is where we sort of see a transition from it being performed largely by apostles. Again, like you mentioned, especially in the, in, in Canada and Mexico, patriarchs and stake presidents, it will move largely to guys like that. So bishops, stake presidents, patriarchs especially. And, and that is exactly like you said, because they don't want to be responsible for it anymore, but they still

John Dehlin [01:13:41] want it to continue because certainly they could have issued the letter not just to apostles, but to all bishops, stake presidents, mission presidents, everywhere.

Bryan Buchanan [01:13:49] Absolutely.

John Dehlin [01:13:49] Temple presidents, everybody.

Bryan Buchanan [01:13:51] Any authority you think you might have. It doesn't exist and they didn't. It is being centralized and pulled back in. And they don't, they didn't do that.

John Dehlin [01:13:57] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:13:58] Yeah. And you know, they, they also have problems because the, the hearings are trying to subpoena these central guys. They want Cowley, they want Taylor, they want George Teasdale, they want another guy, Mariner Merrill, who is the president of the Logan Temple and who had also performed a bunch of plural marriages even in the temple through this period. And they make excuses like, oh, well, these guys are old, which is true. They're in poor health, which is true. But it doesn't apply to these other guys. And they're like, we, we have tried so hard. We literally have no idea where Taylor and Kelly are. We, we wouldn't, we wouldn't know how to get hold of them.

John Dehlin [01:14:34] Okay?

Bryan Buchanan [01:14:34] And amazingly, that works. If I, if, if I were on the hearing committee, I'd be like, really? You don't know how to get a hold of one of your apostles and get him here? You can't tell them to get on a train? So, yeah, it's, it's. Clearly, they know their testimony could be wildly damaging because that would demonstrate that the 1890 manifesto really was a press release.

John Dehlin [01:14:57] We're not sure where Taylor and Kelly are. We're not sure. Seems to have disappeared.

Bryan Buchanan [01:15:02] And, and, and it really pisses off some of the guys on this, this committee because like when Joseph F. Smith comes to test fight, like they can tell he's dancing around him and, and some of the time he's just, he's just better at it than they are and he outsmarts them. So. Yeah. So the hearings really are this watershed.

John Dehlin [01:15:20] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:15:21] If the read smooth hearings never happen. This whole discussion is wildly different.

John Dehlin [01:15:26] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:15:26] Like authorized polygamy might still be going on within the LDS church. Probably.

John Dehlin [01:15:30] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:15:30] Because this, this, this pushes it, this makes come to a head.

John Dehlin [01:15:33] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:15:34] Like this is, this is the, the do or die moment.

John Dehlin [01:15:36] And then Taylor and Kelly, that's, it's a busy month. There needs to be a book just about that month.

Bryan Buchanan [01:15:41] Oh, it's. So this is actually, this is a year later now. Okay, so this is 1904.

Apostles Removed Over Continuing Plural Marriages

John Dehlin [01:15:45] Okay. About. Okay, let's just say the year from October 1904 to maybe October 1905.

Bryan Buchanan [01:15:51] Constantly things are happening. So now it's become clear, like, and this is Reed Smoot pushing this. I think largely he's like, we got it. I'm getting constantly asked what. There's one telegram where it's like every day I'm getting asked, what about tnc? What about tnc meaning Taylor. So Taylor and Kelly, these are the two key people among the apostles. There's another guy here we're going to talk about in a minute who actually performs more marriages.

John Dehlin [01:16:14] I was going to ask about Moses Thatcher.

Bryan Buchanan [01:16:16] So Thatcher is out of it by this point?

John Dehlin [01:16:18] Well, he was excommunicated. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:16:19] So he had political differences largely. Okay, so in the 1890s. But he was, you know, he was really interesting. He's a polygamist. What's so fascinating is his daughter marries as a plural wife later on and he writes her out of his will. Oh, he does not like polygamy later in life.

John Dehlin [01:16:37] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:16:38] Yeah. But what's so interesting is he never comes up. Like if I'm on the committee, I subpoena Moses Thatcher.

John Dehlin [01:16:44] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:16:44] I mean he's again, not in great health either, but you know, I, I have him coming and testify. So. Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:16:51] So what happens to Taylor Kelly?

Bryan Buchanan [01:16:54] They have this, this closed door series of meetings and it's really hard to know exactly how the discussion plays out because there are apparently no minutes kept and there are only cryptic journal entries that talk about important discussion happens. What it is is that the apostles come together and say, all right, what are we doing? We got to do something.

Bryan Buchanan [01:17:16] And the result of it is that Taylor and Cowley will submit written resignations as apostles. They don't like it. They very much see themselves as scapegoats, which, to be fair, they mostly are. And what's interesting is that it, apparently they don't write the resignations. They are pre written and they just have to sign it.

Bryan Buchanan [01:17:41] But what's interesting about those resignations is then Joseph F. Smith sort of puts them in his back pocket. I think in his heart, he doesn't want to do anything. He loves these two, particularly Cowley. And that's what's so hard about these, is it's sort of like, imagine if Uchtdorf and Holland tree muskets and trowels.

Bryan Buchanan [01:18:08] Imagine like those two guys. Like these two are beloved. They're really good speakers. They're charismatic. They are, they're bold. Like, they're, they're kind of some of the last wave of 19th century Mormon leaders. And so, you know, no one wants to do this, but Reed Smoot is, keeps, keeps pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing. So Joseph Smith, he puts the resignations in his back pocket until finally, at the April 1906 General Conference, it is announced they have been dropped from the Quorum for being out of harmony.

John Dehlin [01:18:41] And what, what do you think happened in the room where it happens? You know what I mean? Like, do you think they were just asked to resign because they wouldn't buckle or what?

Bryan Buchanan [01:18:51] Yeah. And they, they have to do something. There has to be a public display. Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:18:58] Of, of sort of. It's kind of like John D. Lee.

Bryan Buchanan [01:19:03] We got to do something publicly with someone now.

John Dehlin [01:19:06] Show what?

Bryan Buchanan [01:19:07] To show that we mean it.

John Dehlin [01:19:09] Right. This is like these guys, we're. We're kicking a couple guys out of the Quorum to show that we're sorry or to blame some of the post manifesto polygamies on someone. Is that right?

Bryan Buchanan [01:19:22] I think that's fair. And again, in fairness, of the apostles, Cowley has performed the most plural marriages by far.

John Dehlin [01:19:28] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:19:28] I mean, we're talking like 50 plus marriages over the space of not even 10 years. So it's, it's a healthy amount of marriages.

John Dehlin [01:19:36] Is it also possible or likely that they were asked to resign because they said, we will not give up this practice. We will not go along with the rest of y', all apostatizing and giving up the new and everlasting covenant, which is polygamy. We're not going to stop performing these you know, serve the ceremonies. And we're not going to say that we no longer believe that they should be practiced. Is that possible?

Bryan Buchanan [01:20:06] Well, and when they're, they're described in conference, it stated they are out of harmony with their quorum. That's not wrong.

John Dehlin [01:20:13] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:20:14] If they do, if, if Joseph F. Smith and the first presidency really do mean we are done, if that's what they truly mean, hard and fast, 100%, then yes, they are out of harmony with that. But that's the question is, did they actually mean it a hundred percent?

John Dehlin [01:20:29] Yeah. Well, the one thing I can say is if my dad was the third prophet or president of the church, and then I stumbled on after he died, a revelation that I knew was from him, from Jesus, telling my dad as prophet that this practice should never be rescinded. And I'm a true believer. I'm not giving up that belief and I'm not giving up that practice because I believe my dad talked to Jesus and I'm going to obey Jesus and I'm going to instead think that my current leaders are selling out the church.

Bryan Buchanan [01:21:03] Well, and part of it too is because there has been this long history of double messaging.

John Dehlin [01:21:08] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:21:09] They have to think like, well, this is just, this is just one more instance of we're doing one thing in public, but we really mean this. And so I think those two are, are probably somewhat confused too, is like, what do we actually mean? What is actually going on? And it had to have been very hurtful at any level of meaning because it's Joseph F. Smith, a man that they both idolize. And that's the things I, people have to realize like how much Joseph F. Smith meant to all of these guys.

John Dehlin [01:21:38] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:21:38] You know, he again, he's Hiram Smith's son. He's Joseph Smith's nephew. He's been a Mormon leader at this point for like what, 40 years almost.

John Dehlin [01:21:48] Yeah, yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:21:49] And, and again, he's, he's, he's that, that 19th century Mormon leader. It's bold. It's, we don't compromise. It's, you know, it's a very appealing form of Mormonism because it's, it's clear except, you know, it's not. But you know, it's, it's, it's very bold and attractive thing that you can hit your wagon to. Right. Like this is a clear identity. Like we are a peculiar people.

John Dehlin [01:22:16] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:22:16] And he's, he's unapologetic about that.

John Dehlin [01:22:19] Yeah. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:22:20] So it's very hard. And I this, we get some hint of how Heart wrenching this is to the whole, the first presidency, the quorum of the 12, to Taylor and C. Like, this is unpleasant to every person involved.

John Dehlin [01:22:36] And just to not leave any stone unturned about, you know, the room where this happened in October of 1905. I guess somebody might theorize that in this meeting, Taylor and C. Were told, you need to resign. You're going to be pump going to, guys.

Bryan Buchanan [01:22:57] Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:22:58] However, we want you to keep the practice alive. Is there anybody that suspects that that might have been a conversation?

Bryan Buchanan [01:23:06] I don't think so.

John Dehlin [01:23:06] That's too conspiracy.

Bryan Buchanan [01:23:09] Mike Quinn, who of course knows this stuff as well as anyone has ever lived, argues that Taylor especially was pretty good about following the restriction. Like, there doesn't seem to be any evidence of. After that letter goes out saying we're pulling the authority back in, he doesn't seem to perform any more plural marriages

John Dehlin [01:23:28] after that or encourage their performance.

Bryan Buchanan [01:23:30] That's harder.

John Dehlin [01:23:31] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:23:31] That's harder.

John Dehlin [01:23:32] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:23:33] And Cali is a little bit different. There are probably a couple cases, including one real notable case we'll talk about in just a minute. Yeah. Now, to me, the interesting question too is why do Taylor and Cali feel the way that they do? Because this will pull us back now to the 1886 revelation. Clearly that has an impact on them. And this, this same year that their resignations are made public in conference and sustained, we have the first documented case of the 1886 revelation being circulated.

John Dehlin [01:24:12] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:24:12] This is our guy, Joseph Robinson, again, the president of the California Mission, Matthias Cowley, gives him a copy of the 1886 Revelation. That's really important because to me, that tells me definitely for John W. Taylor and seemingly also very much for Matthias Cowley, that has become their marching orders. So again, and this is, this is, as we were thinking about doing this interview, I started to think, in counterfactual history, what if John Taylor never has that revelation? What if we take that out of the mix? How much of this subsequent history still happens because you still have Joseph Smith's revelation, And again, like we talked about, functionally, it's the same thing.

Bryan Buchanan [01:24:53] So do they still do the same thing if there's no 1886 revelation, obviously, we'll never know. So I think it's fair to say that for these two, especially maybe others of the apostles, this revelation does have an impact on how they view the importance of continuing polygamy. But now it's clear they're giving it to others.

Bryan Buchanan [01:25:17] And that's fascinating because that means at least we now know there's another copy because Matthias Cowley had to have a copy of it. And the clear explanation there is obviously that his very good friend and colleague, John W. Taylor gave him a copy.

Bryan Buchanan [01:25:32] So if he's giving it to a mission president Cali, who else has he given it to? Probably others. And how many people has he talked about it to? Undoubtedly others. So quietly, the knowledge and text of this revelation is starting to circulate.

John Dehlin [01:25:51] And immediately the question is that you probably can't answer is, is Cowley going rogue here? Or maybe even in that conversation, was he sort of said, you need to go do this?

Bryan Buchanan [01:26:03] Yep.

John Dehlin [01:26:04] Or does someone know he's doing this? In the official leadership of the Church. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:26:09] Our understanding of his role is that George Q. Cannon gave him a commission. Again, there's no laying on of hands. It's not like a special ordination. It's not like a special kind of priesthood. It's just as a first presidency counselor, I'm authorizing you to perform plural marriages. And this is right after he's called as an apostle. And that's interesting, too. It's like he's new. He's called in 1897.

Bryan Buchanan [01:26:33] So, you know, he's got guys that are his colleagues that have been apostles for 20, 25 years longer than that. So he's sort of the new kid on the block. But again, he's, from what I can tell, universally liked and respected. Everybody likes Matthias Cowley.

Bryan Buchanan [01:26:51] During all of this craziness, after he's dropped, Joseph F. Smith pulls Joseph Robinson aside and says, listen, if there's one good guy, it's Matty Cowley. So, you know, it's, it's not let's. And that's what makes it hard is because it's, you know, if they disliked him, if he were constantly a fly in the ointment, in the way that Moses Thatcher had kind of become, in the way that at times, B.H. roberts was, this would have been way easier because they're like, he's already driving us nuts. You're done. We're kicking you to the curb. But they don't.

Bryan Buchanan [01:27:25] And again, you know, I really don't think there was winks and nods during this one. I think at least for those two specific individuals, it was, it was clear, like, you're done. No more plural marriages at all. In, in Cowley's case, he does perform probably a couple more. And I, I, my guess is he has the 1886 revelation in the back of his mind. He has this commission from George Q. Cannon that, like, listen, guys, I love all of you. I respect you, even if you really do mean this. I.

Bryan Buchanan [01:28:03] This commission, I think, on a limited case, supersedes what I'm hearing you telling me right now. I think that's probably the best way to read him during this period. But more and more, what that means is Cowley, because it's quietly known that he has performed plural marriages, he will have people approach him saying, hey, can you perform a plural marriage? And almost always after this period, he'll push them to someone else. And in some cases, it seems very specific. And this is where the period of patriarchs become really important.

Bryan Buchanan [01:28:40] And this is a fun story because this goes back to the second anointing interview we did. So, Darren, his wife is a Tolman. So she's a descendant of a guy named Judson Tolman, who is a patriarch up in Bountiful. And this is a period where guys like him become the officiators of plural marriage. And like Joseph Robinson, Judson Tolman is one of these classic examples of a guy, Samuel Robinson. He's a different guy.

John Dehlin [01:29:05] Okay, okay. Joseph Robinson. Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:29:06] Yeah, yeah. Oh, he's one of these classic guys that no one has ever heard of, but that is wildly important and wildly interesting. So this is actually the first time I went on year of polygamy with Lindsay is because I had gotten the transcript of Tolman's trial when he eventually gets yelled at, and that's. It just blew my mind. I was like, this is amazing. So Lindsay and I are actually going to present on Tolman at Sunstone this year because he's such a fun character. So this is the period of patriarchs. So this is distancing one level more from this is now paychecks. And this.

Questions of Authorization and Going Rogue

Bryan Buchanan [01:29:43] This brings the question of authorization even more to the surface. Are these guys going rogue? Are these guys authorized? And if they're authorized, what does that authorization even look like? Right. Okay. Samuel Robinson, this is a really interesting case. So this is now 1907. We're now three years removed from the second manifesto. Joseph Robinson records in his journal about talking to Samuel Robinson. So just to. So Joseph Robinson's the president of the California Mission. He's constantly in Utah for conference to hang out with his very good friend, Joseph S. Smith. He runs into Samuel Robinson, who is a bishop down in the Mexican colonies. And Samuel Robinson tells him. Do you want to read that?

John Dehlin [01:30:29] Yes. Samuel Robinson, bishop in Mexico colonies in 1907.

Bryan Buchanan [01:30:34] Oh, wait, sorry. This is not his actual journal. I forgot. This is just me summarizing. Yeah. So he basically Says Sammy Robinson reports to Joseph Robinson. He's just gone to Joseph F. Smith and asked about the possibly getting a plural wife. And according to Joseph Robinson's journal, president of the church Joseph F. Smith says, yeah, go for it. And now, this is what's interesting is later, John W. Taylor will describe it in these words.

John Dehlin [01:31:03] John W. Taylor writes, quote, I referred him, meaning Samuel Robinson. Right. I referred him to President Smith. Is it Samuel or Joseph Robinson?

Bryan Buchanan [01:31:16] John W. Taylor refers Samuel Robinson, who wants a plural wife, to church president Joseph F. Smith.

John Dehlin [01:31:22] I referred him to President Smith. And he said that President Smith told him to hunt out the way. And if he could find the way. The president said, God bless you. He said he had found the way. That's cryptic.

Bryan Buchanan [01:31:41] That's extreme. This, to me, I don't know if you could boil down the essence of this confusion to this diary entry better than that. Joseph S. Smith says, you want a new player life? Do you?

John Dehlin [01:31:52] Well, you know, if you can find the way.

Bryan Buchanan [01:31:54] Find the way. Wink, wink. God bless you, my boy. He said he found the way. So this is. This gets really cryptic because Joseph F. Smith definitely does not want to say out loud in the presence of anyone else. Yes, as church president, I authorize you to marry a new plural wife. You have my authorization. He's not going to say that. So it gets into wink and knob territory. And this is. This is very. This is very cryptic. And this is very problematic because if you have bad actors in this, they can go nuts because. And then later on, they can. They can. They can say, of course it was authorized. You know, it was a vibe. Right. Authorization becomes more of a vibe now. It's not documents, it's not letters, it's not recommends. It's a vibe.

John Dehlin [01:32:40] Yeah. It's like the mob boss saying, take care of that situation.

Bryan Buchanan [01:32:43] What did you mean? And again, like we talked about, you know, fall guys and, like, mountain meadows.

John Dehlin [01:32:49] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:32:49] Brigham Young does not send written authorization down to them. Hey, guys, go kill the whole wagon company except for the children. But there's a vibe there.

John Dehlin [01:32:58] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:32:59] And did they misinterpret the vibe on the ground in southern Utah? Maybe. Did they interpret the vibe quite accurately? Probably, but we don't know that.

John Dehlin [01:33:11] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:33:12] And that. And again, that's. That's hard, too. I. I thoroughly enjoyed the interviews with John Turner lately about Joseph F. Smith. And, you know, you guys have had, I think, a really good discourse about the idea of fraud and deception. Right. And it's so hard because to say, this is fraudulent, this is deceptive, you have to get into someone's head to do that. And then sometimes you can get pretty close. Right. You can say, as a betting man, this looks like fraud, but you can't always, because you can't get inside their head. And documentary records only do so much. Right. And so that's why it's both murky but also so fascinating, because you have to dig.

Bryan Buchanan [01:33:54] And every time we find a new piece, right, you get more to the story. Like when my friend sent me that. That first known example of John W. Taylor showing somebody the 1886 revelation, I was like, oh, that's fun. We now know he's showing it even earlier than we thought. So it's an ongoing puzzle.

John Dehlin [01:34:13] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:34:13] And that's why history is never boring.

John Dehlin [01:34:15] But the fact that Samuel Robinson is recording this, these are his impressions.

Bryan Buchanan [01:34:21] Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:34:22] This is what he understood.

Bryan Buchanan [01:34:23] Now, again, that's filtered through yet another party, Joseph Robinson.

John Dehlin [01:34:27] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:34:27] Did Samuel Robinson tell Joseph Robinson exactly what happened? Did he interpret what Joseph S. Smith told him exactly right. Maybe when he transmits that to Joseph Robinson and he writes in his journal, did he capture that accurately? Yeah, maybe so. Again, like, it's not exactly as cut and dried as would be fun. But that's fascinating. Three years after the second manifesto that this is happening. And right around that same time, Joseph Robinson, the mission president, also would like to take another. Marry another plural wife. And he goes to his good friend Joseph F. Smith, who tells him who's president of the church, who is president of the church, who was issued at the second manifesto three years earlier and has sent letters like, you know, we're not.

Bryan Buchanan [01:35:16] We're taking authorization away. And he tells him, essentially, you know what? Tell her your feelings. Be careful about putting anything in writing. And it's also around this time that we start to see differences within the quorum that seem to be materializing.

John Dehlin [01:35:36] But these are two people high in the church writing in their journals that it was their impression that the prophet of the church, Joseph F. Smith, was wink, wink, nod, nod, approving.

Bryan Buchanan [01:35:47] I can't tell you I authorize this in so many words, but also telling

John Dehlin [01:35:51] them not to write it down.

Bryan Buchanan [01:35:52] Just don't write it down. Shut up about it if you can. Keep it quiet.

John Dehlin [01:35:57] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:35:58] And again, like, part of this, I know it doesn't always look great from modern sensibilities, but if you think about it, if you put yourself in the shoes of people who believe that this principle is essential for exaltation and feel free to not pay attention to people who are like, no, they never said it was essential they 100% did over and over and over, over the course of decades. So if you have people who think and believe fervently that this is essential for exaltation, this is the principle. These kinds of discussions make way more sense because they can't do it openly or they're going to go to jail. The church is going to get in more trouble, but they still believe it.

John Dehlin [01:36:37] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:36:38] This is the way to do it.

John Dehlin [01:36:39] I just have to say when, when people nowadays in 2025 are like, how could the church, you know, protect sexual predators at the expense of victims or, you know, settle these claims or hide its history or whatever it is? Like all that stuff seems like small beans and small potatoes or another way to say it is. It's totally understandable if modern church leaders understand how leaders used to operate. It's the whole concept of lying for the Lord. There is such a long history and tradition of top level leaders having to lie or mislead or be two faced or to say one thing public and another thing private, believing that it was God or prophets who allowed it or sanctioned it. It's just a way to get things done.

Bryan Buchanan [01:37:34] It seems like, I mean, part of that is just organizational tendencies.

John Dehlin [01:37:37] Yeah. Not even just Mormon. Right, Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:37:39] Yeah. When scandals happen.

John Dehlin [01:37:42] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:37:42] The easiest thing to do, it seems in the moment, is to sweep it under the rug.

John Dehlin [01:37:47] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:37:47] It never is. It's always the bad idea. Yeah. I would draw a distinction because in the, in the case of this one, this is something they see as good, that should happen.

John Dehlin [01:37:56] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:37:56] But, but the, the behavior associated with. I see what you're saying. Yeah, definitely. So, yes, we're in this very, very murky period and it, it has slowed down for sure. There are significantly less plural marriages that are happening, but they are still happening. And again, we're left to wonder about the level and nature of authorization. What does that even look like? We get some real wonky ones later on. Our, our guy, Judson Tolman, one of his plural marriages, he says was done by a man in a mask. So the, the, the more something has to go underground, the greater the tendency for it to start to look real weird. And it does in some cases.

John Dehlin [01:38:40] Here Janine Taylor is asking if, if John Taylor Jr. Was excommunicated. No, we mentioned he is and we're

Bryan Buchanan [01:38:48] going to get there.

John Dehlin [01:38:48] Oh, wow. Okay. Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:38:50] Yep.

John Dehlin [01:38:50] But, but as of now, in the timeline he resigned from the quorum, he

Bryan Buchanan [01:38:53] is in weird limbo place. They have been dropped from the quorum. They are replaced as apostles does that mean they are no longer apostles?

John Dehlin [01:39:01] Oh,

Bryan Buchanan [01:39:04] that's not very clear.

John Dehlin [01:39:05] Interesting.

Bryan Buchanan [01:39:06] You know, there's. There's no specific language that's like, you are no longer an apostle. There's not even really functionally, you're not an apostle. What they do is eventually they will ask them to quit speaking in church meetings because again, remember, these are beloved guys. They don't stop being beloved. And people are really confused.

John Dehlin [01:39:25] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:39:26] Because some people know kind of what's going on. Most people have no idea what's going on. Remember when the 70 got excommunicated not too long ago?

John Dehlin [01:39:35] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:39:36] Yeah. We still don't know what happened there. Right.

John Dehlin [01:39:39] Well, I do.

Bryan Buchanan [01:39:39] Okay. Again, a guy in Kanab just sees that he got excommunicated. They have no idea what happened. Right.

John Dehlin [01:39:47] Most. That guy in cab probably didn't even know.

Bryan Buchanan [01:39:50] Probably didn't even know. Right.

John Dehlin [01:39:52] Nor did he.

Bryan Buchanan [01:39:52] Again, like, seriously, to under. To appreciate this. Like, imagine if this next general conference, Uchtdorf is dropped from the quorum of the 12. He's. All they say is that he's out of harmony.

John Dehlin [01:40:03] How about Uchtdorf is dropped from the first presidency? Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:40:06] Again, like, if you're paying attention and you're kind of better connected, like, we can make relatively educated guesses on why that happened. Right. But let's. If you're somebody in a new member in Mongolia and you've listened to translations of Uchtdorf's talks since you were baptized four years ago, and you love him, and then this happens, and you have no idea what's going on. Yeah, that's very much what's happening here.

John Dehlin [01:40:32] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:40:32] Like, these are beloved. I mean, he's. He's the son of a former church president.

John Dehlin [01:40:36] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:40:37] In. In Taylor's case. So.

John Dehlin [01:40:39] Yeah. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:40:40] So they do.

John Dehlin [01:40:40] Ask them who's got receipts, by the way.

Bryan Buchanan [01:40:42] He does.

John Dehlin [01:40:43] And.

Bryan Buchanan [01:40:44] Okay, now this is. This is. So all through this period, there, again, there is no evidence of John W. Taylor appealing to the 1886 revelation.

John Dehlin [01:40:53] Really?

Bryan Buchanan [01:40:54] Now, is this motivating him?

John Dehlin [01:40:56] Just.

Bryan Buchanan [01:40:56] Callie, you're saying both of them, either of them, like, you know, when they are dropped from the quorum? We have no record that in, like, a quorum meeting. One of them is like, whoa, guys, remember this revelation from John Taylor that says, thus saith the Lord. They don't seem to be appealing. Again, we are. We are left with what documents have survived, what documents are available.

John Dehlin [01:41:18] I'm just saying the mission president was given a copy.

Bryan Buchanan [01:41:20] He's given a copy.

John Dehlin [01:41:21] Okay, okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:41:22] But they don't seem to be, you know, flashing that around in the meetings. Okay, got it. As their. Their rationale. Right.

John Dehlin [01:41:30] Maybe one on one, but not.

Bryan Buchanan [01:41:31] Yeah, yeah, yeah.

John Dehlin [01:41:32] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:41:32] Quietly.

John Dehlin [01:41:33] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:41:34] Which is interesting because did they think about doing this? Like, this is. This is a good evidence I should do this, or did they think it's not going to work? I don't know. See, this is. Again, this is like you to. To. To say yes or no on a lot of things. You have to get in their head, which you just. You can't do.

John Dehlin [01:41:51] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:41:52] To me, it seems most likely that, yes, the 1886 revelation is very much at the center of how they are choosing to behave. Right.

John Dehlin [01:42:03] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:42:03] But it doesn't seem like they are. They are using this in their defense right now. Okay, hold that thought, because they will. Let's see. So.

John Dehlin [01:42:15] March 1909.

Bryan Buchanan [01:42:16] Okay. Yeah. This is fascinating. Taylor, again, he seems to be more inclined to follow along with what they're asking him to do. Right.

John Dehlin [01:42:27] He.

Bryan Buchanan [01:42:27] He seems to quit performing plural marriages cold turkey. He doesn't accept speaking assignments. Cowley does perform a couple. And he definitely is speaking all over the place. And, you know, I can totally see, like, he goes to visit a meeting in Loa, and the bishop is like, maddie, Cowley is here, obviously. We would like you to say a few words, Cowley. It's kind of embarrassing, right? To be like, no. Because then they're like, why not? I've been asked to. Why did they ask you to do, like, that's. That's kind of an embarrassing discussion. So he just. He does it. And every so often, he will continue to talk about plural marriage because he is an ardent, fervent believer in this.

Bryan Buchanan [01:43:15] None of this has changed his mind. And you can see, like, why would it. Like, if you truly believe this is an eternal principle, all of this other stuff is. Is worthless, right? This. This means nothing to you? Like, you still believe in this principle? That has to be. Everyone has to remember this. Like, these aren't. All this stuff is. Is not bad actors. It's. It's. On the other hand, people who fervently believe is what's going on. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:43:42] So Cowley is the instructor in a high priest group, and he says, here's the deal, guys. John Taylor had a whole bunch of revelations that weren't published. One of these is one that says that we should not give in to the government, essentially. It's clear he's talking about 1886.

Bryan Buchanan [01:44:01] One of the other instructors in the high priest group in that ward is Apostle Joseph Fielding Smith, son of Joseph, son of Joseph F. Smith. Actually, not quite yet. Right. Because he's trying to think it's around this time that he's made an apostle, but soon to be.

John Dehlin [01:44:15] But he is the son.

Bryan Buchanan [01:44:16] He is the son of Joseph Smith. And so the prophet's son, Prophet's son probably, almost certainly was there and had probably even heard about the 1886 revelation being quietly circulated elsewhere. So later that year, he will get the original revelation. Not from John W. Taylor, though. And this is so interesting because where the revelation, the original goes during this time period is hard. It's definitely found by John W. Taylor, who has it for some period of time, but then it goes into the hands of a guy named Rodney Badger. As best we can tell, he's really interesting because he is the father of Carl Badger. Reed Smoot, secretary father. The father of him. So earlier generation, you can totally see how the dynamics work. Rodney fervent believer in polygamy, continuing Carl son, kind of embarrassed by it. 20th century Mormon back in D.C. wants to be embarrassed. A powerful politician.

John Dehlin [01:45:16] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:45:17] You can see how these dynamics work.

John Dehlin [01:45:18] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:45:19] So Badger at this point has it because Joseph Smith or Joseph Fielding specifically says, I got the original from Badger. And that's where that typed copy comes from. Not from Cowley, not from Taylor, not from Cowley.

John Dehlin [01:45:31] Cowie gave this.

Bryan Buchanan [01:45:32] Badger has the original at this point.

John Dehlin [01:45:34] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:45:35] And that's important that we'll talk about later too, is why. So he makes a typed copy. And that's one of the documents that has just been released. Is this typed copy.

John Dehlin [01:45:43] That's one of the ones it released in the new document.

Bryan Buchanan [01:45:45] That's one of those released. And that's important because as far as we can tell, that is typed and then goes into the possession of the historian's office from that point, 1909.

John Dehlin [01:45:55] And that's like, I mean, if you want to know when, who knew when? Yeah. Joseph Philly Smith, who becomes church historian for decades.

Church Leadership Awareness of Ongoing Plural Marriage

Bryan Buchanan [01:46:04] Joseph Fielding Smith unequivocally knew of the existence and had seen the original in. In 1909.

John Dehlin [01:46:09] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:46:10] Did his colleagues know about it? Did he tell any of them?

John Dehlin [01:46:13] Don't know.

Bryan Buchanan [01:46:14] Yeah. Again, some of them are still around who had heard John W. Taylor talking about it before. Right. This, in theory, should not be news to them. Okay. So right before he makes that copy is one of the most important periods of Mormon history that no one knows about. In July 1909, a committee is formed to actively take care of new polygamy. So this is a varying Number of apostles. So these guys are tasked with basically carte blanche authority, right? You pull them in, you grill them, you deal with them, and they do.

Bryan Buchanan [01:46:54] So one of the most interesting cases is they bring in a guy named Joseph Summerhays. So Boyd Summerhays, the golfer. People might know that family, a Davis county family. Davis county is. Is a very much a hotbed of polygamy, which is fun. You know, the Barlows come from that. The patriarchs that are doing it. There's a lot going on in Davis County. I don't know why. It just does. So they bring in Summer Hayes, who had performed a marriage in 1906. So two years after the manifesto.

John Dehlin [01:47:24] Second manifesto.

Bryan Buchanan [01:47:25] Second manifesto. And that's really interesting because he. This couple has two very fun descendants, one of whom you have interviewed. That's Michelle Stone. This is her ancestors. The other descendant is a guy who's a little less savory. Mark Hoffman. Mark Hoffman discovers this, and this is painted as some of his cognitive dissonance growing up. How much, we don't really know, but it seems like he. He finds out about. And that troubles him, right?

Bryan Buchanan [01:47:55] Because what Joseph Summerhays will tell the quorum of the 12 is, no, no, no. This was totally authorized. This was not me going rogue. And he seems to be telling the truth. And this begins a really interesting period of. Of hearings. Essentially, this is. The quorum of the 12 is playing court. Like, it looks like court. There's minutes kept and motions are made. And so it kind of. It looks like a formal court proceeding. This is. This is the. A really interesting case of courts of love being being dealt with.

Bryan Buchanan [01:48:29] So Summer Hayes tells him he's authorized, and it seems to be the case, and so nothing happens to him. But then other guys start coming in, and slowly beans get spilled. And it's incredibly messy because in one case, the guy seems to have added, like, a postscript to a letter. They're forging documents.

Bryan Buchanan [01:48:50] Some of them are either not telling everything or, again, outright lying. And the quorum of the 12 has gotten enough information, particularly Quorum President Francis Lyman, who is a hardliner on this. And this is really interesting because you have Francis Lyman, who seems to be driving this, as the Quorum president. And this is. This is a fun case because I just talked to a friend, and apparently Joseph F. Smith seems to be much more on board with what's happening than I would have guessed. So this is part of this ongoing puzzle, is we need more documents to come out. There are the Francis Lyman journals that, when those are are released.

Bryan Buchanan [01:49:30] I think that will shed a lot more light on this. But this is fascinating because this is the first time where church leaders mean what they say about we're getting serious. Right. So this is where we see people actually getting excommunicated. And again, it's very painful because you have cases like a guy who was really good friends with Heber J. Grant, who had been his secretary in the British mission. They were really good friends. And Grant will later say, I had a specific talk with him about not getting caught up in this new polygamy stuff while we were. Before we left England. And he said, yes.

Bryan Buchanan [01:50:06] Well, turns out he married a plural wife. And it's big news because the Tribune hears about it and it's blown up everywhere. So they bring him in, they grill him. This guy skips town with his plural wife. And they will later get. They will be very much at the heart of the growing fundamentalist movement as it develops. So it's painful. These are cousins, these are friends. These are guys they've known and respected for a long time. And the guys that are being disciplined, you can see them being confused too. They're like, hold on here. I thought we were still doing the public messaging, but we didn't really mean it.

Bryan Buchanan [01:50:42] And so in private, they are. They are also feeling confused. But then the most interesting case of this that happens is in 1911, they bring in John W. Taylor and Matthias Cowley, this time to be. To be handled, as they called it, for their church membership.

John Dehlin [01:51:01] Can I mention a couple things that I'm not sure if we missed or if I just missed it. You mentioned Victor Hegstead and Anna Jacobson, married in April 1909.

Bryan Buchanan [01:51:10] Yep.

John Dehlin [01:51:11] Maybe by John Woolley.

Bryan Buchanan [01:51:12] Yes.

John Dehlin [01:51:13] Maybe by Judson.

Bryan Buchanan [01:51:14] Yes. Okay, let's. Yes. Thank you. So if nothing else.

John Dehlin [01:51:18] Well, that's the Anna from Richard Lyman, which we did an episode.

Bryan Buchanan [01:51:21] Yes. I was gonna say this is. We want people to go listen to other interviews.

John Dehlin [01:51:24] Right. Yeah, sure.

Bryan Buchanan [01:51:25] So the first time I, I came on and to support Gary Bergera, whose fantastic book justice and Mercy, talked about really interesting cases of high level church discipline. One of those being Apostle Richard lyman, who in 1943, turns out had a relationship with a woman for 20 years that probably was something like a plural marriage as opposed to a garden variety affair. That. That distinctly. That line between those two is really murky.

John Dehlin [01:51:58] I guarantee Lyman believes that his second wife was a plural wife. I guarantee.

Bryan Buchanan [01:52:04] Seems like it. I guarantee it. I. I think that's the best way to read it. Yeah. So anyways, One of these cases that comes up is this guy and this woman who have been married, maybe by John Woolley, which if you'll remember, is the house where John Taylor is staying in 1886. So this is where the threads start to come together here.

Bryan Buchanan [01:52:23] Probably determining who performed marriages here forward is super difficult and would be fascinating to know because it would help us nail down exactly what's going on. But anyways, these two, eventually she gets excommunicated first, he later. Which is weird because during this period, it's almost always the opposite. The men get excommunicated. Rarely, if ever, do the women get disciplined. Which is a really interesting point of this, I think. But yeah, so Anna later on wants to get rebaptized Richard Lyman, who is the son of Quorum president Francis Lyman, during all of this. And he, you know, meets with her, counsels with her, something develops, and eventually they begin this 20 year relationship. So it's interesting to see how seeds of later things are happening right now.

John Dehlin [01:53:14] Okay, so the Anna that ends up the mistress or second wife of Mormon

Bryan Buchanan [01:53:18] apostle Richmond, very much part of this,

John Dehlin [01:53:20] gets married in April of 1909 to her first husband, Victor, likely maybe by John Woolley. And Woolley's calling was Woolly at this

Bryan Buchanan [01:53:30] point is a high councilman. He will later become a patriarch.

John Dehlin [01:53:34] A stake high councilman.

Bryan Buchanan [01:53:35] Yes.

John Dehlin [01:53:35] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [01:53:35] Yeah. So that's really interesting because what is going on with him is very much the seed of all of this later story.

John Dehlin [01:53:44] But it's worth asking, why are patriarchs or stake high counselors performing plural marriages in 1909? Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:53:50] Patriarchs are a little easier because there's some language about them that, you know, they have something akin to the sealing power as part of their calling. It's not super defined ever. But that seems to be what's going on, is there's enough ambiguity around the nature of their calling that you can see the sealing power being sort of part of it. Again, very vague, very murky and.

Bryan Buchanan [01:54:19] But they seem to need authorization to do that. So this guy, Judson Tolman that we mentioned before, likely is commissioned by Cowley. Like there seems to be specific cases where Cali says, I'm not doing this anymore. But, you know, again, this is that if you can find a way, God bless you, and Tolman seems to be the way. So he pushes them to Tolman and Tolman performs the marriage.

Bryan Buchanan [01:54:49] So during this period, he'll perform a couple dozen, several dozen marriages, some of which he will cop to in his hearing. In fact, he provides a written list at One point. But then. Yeah. So John W. Taylor and Matthias C. Are brought in and grilled.

John Dehlin [01:55:07] Okay, wait, so in June 1909, John W. Taylor.

Bryan Buchanan [01:55:10] Oh, yes.

John Dehlin [01:55:11] Who resigns from the quorum. He marries a final plural wife, likely by Cowi.

Bryan Buchanan [01:55:18] This.

John Dehlin [01:55:18] So why is an ex apostle. Either he's rogue or he's not. You know, he's. He's very much authorized, operating under an understanding that this is supposed to continue.

Bryan Buchanan [01:55:32] Yeah, yeah, that's right. So that's the reason. That's what ultimately gets them brought back in is probably this marriage, because they have heard that Cowley performed it. In fact, they will ask him point blank and he denies it.

John Dehlin [01:55:44] Yeah. And that all this happens before the committee that you mentioned.

Bryan Buchanan [01:55:47] Yeah. So this is kind of the 1909. He gets married one last time. This is his final plural marriage. And. Yeah. So it seems to be Cowley that does it. It might be one of these patriarchs. Hard to know. Cowley. The family, I think the John W. Taylor family, I think, believes it's Cowley.

John Dehlin [01:56:08] I just have to say, clearly he's a true believer, both in the church and in polygamy. And like, the number one question I get these days is, do the current church leaders still believe? And I think the context is there's so much problematic history. There's so much shadiness going on. Clearly a leader can't, a high level leader can't maintain belief, knowing about all the messiness of the history and knowing about all the shadiness going on at the top levels of leadership. Well, I would say John W. Taylor is an example of someone who belief endures not only beyond seeing shadiness and knowing about problematic history, but being punished himself for just following what he believes is Jesus's own commandments. He's still believing.

Bryan Buchanan [01:57:00] Right. And also I would have to say that to him there's significantly less shadiness, because what he would see, what's going on is what you have to do to maintain this principle. Right. And these things are necessary and we have to. And so they're not shady. The practical realities. And that's the problem is because theology is constantly running into reality. And you can believe that you need to do something all you want, but if the government is saying, absolutely, you cannot do this, those two run into each other. And so something has to give on one side or the other.

John Dehlin [01:57:39] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [01:57:40] And so what's seen as shadiness to somebody is seen as the practical realities of maintaining an essential core tenet of your faith as a Mormon.

John Dehlin [01:57:52] Yeah, absolutely.

Bryan Buchanan [01:57:53] So anyways, yeah, so that's the context most likely for them being brought in is this final plural marriage.

John Dehlin [01:57:58] Okay, so there's this again. Now, going back, Sally, Tribune publishes a list of new polygamists.

Bryan Buchanan [01:58:03] Yes.

John Dehlin [01:58:04] And then in 1911.

Bryan Buchanan [01:58:05] Yep.

John Dehlin [01:58:06] They're called in Taylor and Cowley.

Bryan Buchanan [01:58:08] Yep. So, yeah, so the. The Tribune is publishing huge lists of, like, hundreds of people who are new polygamists. And again, these are guys. These are. These are bishops, stake presidents, mission presidents, the presidents of the ymmia. The ylmia. Right. The auxiliaries, board members of those, Alpha Higgs, the friend of. Of Heber J. Grant. And this is very embarrassing. And so that's. That's, again, part of this. Like, we really. We got to do something.

John Dehlin [01:58:37] And someone might say, oh, well, if Taylor is excommunicated and Callie is deprived of his right to use priesthood, that means for sure they were going rogue between 1904 and 1911. But I would probably guess that you would agree with me that just because a mob underling is told indirectly to kill someone, and then later the mob decides they may have to sacrifice that underling to the police for the benefit of the organization or the family, that doesn't mean he wasn't operating under the direction of the leadership. Do you see what I mean?

Bryan Buchanan [01:59:17] Absolutely. And again, like, from our. Our perspective, looking back on this, it looks fairly nefarious. But again, in the moment, like, these are all guys who believe in this and see this as just what they have to do. This is the way to maintain the existence of this principle that they love, cherish, and feel is necessary. And so you can see. And again, this is often why history is so helpful, because you can appreciate why someone did something even if you don't agree with it.

John Dehlin [01:59:50] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [01:59:51] So. And these hearings for these two are fascinating because Taylor is far more belligerent. Like, he's pushing back and he gets a little heated. And he basically says at one point, he's like, listen, if I start talking, you're not going to like the results, guys. So maybe don't pull on too many threads here. Let's just. Let's all just say, because he knows

John Dehlin [02:00:11] where the bodies are buried.

Bryan Buchanan [02:00:12] Yeah, this is. This was all authorized. This was all above board, but it's messy. And so, yeah, don't pull on too many of those threads. And what's so interesting is they copy the text of the revelation from 1886 into the trial record, because he does now bring that up. And I. My thing is, have we known about

John Dehlin [02:00:33] that trial record yes. Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:00:35] In very interesting ways. So during the 70s, it sneaks out of the historian's office.

John Dehlin [02:00:43] Oh, okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:00:44] And is published by Independent. Well, yeah, by that point I would say independent fundamentalists.

John Dehlin [02:00:51] Not the Tanners.

Bryan Buchanan [02:00:52] Not the Tanner. So this is Fred Collier, who you're. Some of your listeners might know. So is a man who will derive his authority in a, an interesting way through One of the LeBaron brothers, actually, but will publish the. A transcript of these trials, which is fascinating because up to that point even historians didn't know a whole lot of this history. Right. This is before Michael Quinn's dialogue article. There is essentially no scholarly treatment of this period yet. So this is huge.

John Dehlin [02:01:23] Was that the first sort of general historian based understanding of what the text of this revelation was?

Bryan Buchanan [02:01:30] Nope. Okay. Yep.

John Dehlin [02:01:32] We'll, we'll.

Bryan Buchanan [02:01:32] But this is yet another time where it's sort of like it's kind of faded. And then something else is. Oh yeah, that 1886 revelation comes back. Yeah.

John Dehlin [02:01:40] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:01:40] So Taylor's belligerent, he gets excommunicated. Cowley is a little less so. And there's actually a deadlock in the quorum because they don't want to do this again. They love these guys.

John Dehlin [02:01:50] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:01:50] And so the compromise position is he is deprived of his right to use priesthood.

John Dehlin [02:01:55] Wait, it's not just they love this guy, but they don't want a public scandal. And the more former apostles are excommunicating. That doesn't look good. Right. So it's. I don't know.

Bryan Buchanan [02:02:05] Yeah. And it will come out and it is messy.

John Dehlin [02:02:07] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:02:08] Yeah. So in the, the aftermath of that, now we've, we've started to excommunicate people. I think at this point you can truly say the LDS Church has officially decided we are done with polygamy. Right. We're not doing this anymore. Hard and fast. Anyone that we find out that that happens from this point forward will be excommunicated. And that is true. Like I, they will find out about some things that had happened earlier but then now come to light and they sort of grandfather those. But like if a plural marriage happens after 1909, they find out out about it. They excommunicate. So that it is true that, that now that is the official position. But again, like that took 20 years to get there with a lot of messiness, some casualties along the way, and, and, and lots of complexity.

John Dehlin [02:03:00] Okay.

New Characters and the Emerging Fundamentalist Network

Bryan Buchanan [02:03:01] So in the wake of that, now we start to hear interesting things about new people. This is where this John Willie comes back into the picture. So in 1912, his son, Lauren Woolley, who, you know, had. Will. Will become the central figure later on, drafts what he calls a statement of facts and gives it to the historian's office and signs it. And this is where he, for the first time, will kind of start to talk about more of what happens in September 1886. So he says John Taylor was. Was staying at my father's home, and a visitor came in all caps. He doesn't identify, but it's clear like he means some sort of divine, otherworldly messenger who conveys to John Taylor the idea that polygamy needs to continue.

Bryan Buchanan [02:03:51] He doesn't mention a revelation, though. That's very interesting. Then two years after that, these hearings keep going. Another guy, Reuben Miller, is brought in, and he will now report. Yeah, I mean, these are very much like. They take minutes of them.

John Dehlin [02:04:07] Not legal. Just not legal.

Bryan Buchanan [02:04:09] But it's seen as a church administrative court. Yeah, I mean, that's the term they will use.

John Dehlin [02:04:14] So it's like almost a deposition. Right, Lauren? Willie.

Bryan Buchanan [02:04:18] Yeah.

John Dehlin [02:04:19] Submits some sort of statement, or why

Bryan Buchanan [02:04:21] he does it is not entirely clear.

John Dehlin [02:04:24] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:04:24] It's not sure if. If someone asks him to do it or he feels like he needs to. Again, what. What exactly John and Lauren Woolley are doing in the, like, 1910 to 1920 period is.

John Dehlin [02:04:39] Why is the church wanting to create a paper trail about all this?

Bryan Buchanan [02:04:42] See, that's the thing. I. If I were to guess, I don't think they asked him to do that. I think Lauren Woolley did this.

John Dehlin [02:04:47] Okay. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:04:49] And for probably for reasons that are going to become clear here soon. Okay. So Reuben Miller, 1914, gets called in to get yelled at for new plural marriages. Right. And then he will say that. Well, I. I talked to John Woolley, and he expressed to me that John Taylor had said the following. If you.

John Dehlin [02:05:16] Oh, okay. You want me to read it?

Bryan Buchanan [02:05:17] All right, Read that, because this is real. This is a really interesting part of the story here. So Reuben Miller, 1914, says John Taylor conveyed this to John Woolley in 1886.

John Dehlin [02:05:27] Okay. So John Taylor staying at his home. He doesn't mention a revelation, nor even a visitor.

Bryan Buchanan [02:05:34] Yep. Which is interesting.

John Dehlin [02:05:36] All Miller reports was that Woolly and

Bryan Buchanan [02:05:38] this is Taylor, quote, John Taylor, quote.

John Dehlin [02:05:43] So Miller reports that was. Oh, yeah, Woolly.

Bryan Buchanan [02:05:47] So. So John Taylor will tell John Woolley the following.

John Dehlin [02:05:50] Okay. Quote. Said this principle was not to be done away with, but to remain on the earth. And this had strengthened Brother Woolley in believing that the practice should be maintained and had also influenced Brother Miller.

Bryan Buchanan [02:06:07] Right.

John Dehlin [02:06:07] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:06:08] So again, we see evidence. Like, clearly, John Willie is conveying the essence of the 1886 revelation. Right. I mean, that's. That's the. If you boil down the 1886 revelation text, that's the meaning of it. We don't give in. Polygamy keeps going. But he doesn't say there's a revelation and there's no visitor. There's. There's nothing else. It's just that Taylor had conveyed the essence of this to John Woolley. And like we mentioned, they both marry plural wives about a month after this revelation, September 1886. Which is interesting, but again, nothing about a revelation. And so through the rest, this is the murkiest period. From, like, this point forward.

Bryan Buchanan [02:06:44] There are plural marriages that are happening, but we have even less information. It seems to be some patriarchs. And this is where we start to see John Woolley likely performing plural marriages. Even some within the Salt Lake Temple. Not as like, an official thing. It seems to be, like, in a corner somewhere, but within the walls of the temple.

John Dehlin [02:07:08] Not. Lauren Woolley, John.

Bryan Buchanan [02:07:10] John Woolley, the father.

John Dehlin [02:07:11] Okay, yeah. Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:07:12] So.

John Dehlin [02:07:13] So many father son parallels that make it.

Bryan Buchanan [02:07:15] And again, because this is a period of time, like, you know, if I say Martin Harris, if I say Oliver Cowdery, like, you know, we have a pretty good working knowledge of who these guys are. If I say Reuben Miller, John Woolley, Lauren Woolley, you know, very few people have any idea who these guys are because we just. This is a period of Mormon history that's been not.

John Dehlin [02:07:34] Yeah, you know, super.

Bryan Buchanan [02:07:35] Well. Yeah, but it's fascinating, right?

John Dehlin [02:07:37] Yeah. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:07:38] So murky period. Something's going on.

John Dehlin [02:07:40] You just said that as far as, you know, there were plural marriages performed somewhere in the Salt Lake Temple as late as what?

Bryan Buchanan [02:07:50] So Mike Quinn gave two really interesting presentations. One at the Short Creek Sunstone and then at the main Sunstone Symposium a few years back. One on Lauren Woolley, one on John Woolley. And the John Woolley one was great because I was out at the book table with Chris. Right. Benchmark books. And we start hearing people filtering out that are blown away because Quinn, it was one of his characteristic, like, boom, boom, Boom, boom, boom. 1909. John Woolley did 1910. John. But as part of this, he's found evidence that within the walls of the Salt Lake Temple, John Woolley was. Was performing plural marriages. The late 19 odds into the 1910s period. And again, is he authorized? Yes or no?

John Dehlin [02:08:33] That's so funny. If there's just some rogue dude performing polygamous Ceilings in the Salt Lake Temple in some side room that no one knows about. Like, yep, meet me in the side room.

Bryan Buchanan [02:08:44] We're gonna do a little go in the corner there. I'll whisper the ceremony to you. You're sealed.

John Dehlin [02:08:48] Yes.

Bryan Buchanan [02:08:49] Now, again, you can see, like, if you believe in this, this is authorized. Right. This is totally above board. And you have to do this because of practical realities. The church officially is not doing this anymore.

John Dehlin [02:09:03] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:09:03] That doesn't mean that we still don't believe it. It just means the church officially. And this will become a really important distinction.

John Dehlin [02:09:08] But the church is also starting to punish people.

Bryan Buchanan [02:09:10] But they're starting to punish people, so you can't do this loudly. So then the next huge development is two pronged. First, we have a guy named Nathaniel Baldwin who is, on the one hand, this genius inventor. He's the guy that pretty much makes headphones commercially viable.

Bryan Buchanan [02:09:30] And he's also a covert believer in continuing polygamy. And so he starts a radio factory not too far from here in Mill Creek. And the guys that are drawn into the orbit of the radio factory are just like him, Guys that believe in continuing plural marriage.

Bryan Buchanan [02:09:51] At the same time, John Woolley's son, Lauren Woolley, starts telling the other half of what happens in September 1886. And he will start telling people that not only was there a revelation, but that John Taylor ordained men. Specific. Ordained. Like, this isn't like authorization. This is a specific ordination to make sure that polygamy continues and that that authority could be given to other people and perpetuated.

Bryan Buchanan [02:10:19] And that's very interesting because that. That now provides a vehicle for this to continue. Question is, the revelation is unquestioned. The revelation 100% happens. It's dated. It's in John Taylor's handwriting. This other story is a little more tricky because Loren Woolley is a guy who is telling people in his. This kind of slowly coalescing movement of what will become fundamentalists. A bunch of stories really quick.

John Dehlin [02:10:49] So when Nathaniel Baldwin publishes Times of the Gentiles.

Bryan Buchanan [02:10:53] Okay, we forgot. Yes.

John Dehlin [02:10:54] It says this is in 1917. It says the first published quotations from the 1886 revelation.

Bryan Buchanan [02:11:01] Yes. Thank you.

John Dehlin [02:11:01] This is the first time the 1886 revelation is cited or quoted in a written, published document.

Bryan Buchanan [02:11:09] So in his journal, Nathaniel Baldwin is so much fun because on one page, you have a diagram for, like, a pressure cooker with all, like, you know, measurements, blah, blah, blah. On the next page, he's. He says, I was at sacrament meeting today, and one of the speakers mentioned this revelation to John Taylor in 1886. And I was intrigued. So he gets a copy of it and then two years later publishes a pamphlet that, as far as I know, is the first published reference to this 1886 revelation. Okay, so how many people read it and saw it?

Bryan Buchanan [02:11:40] Probably not a whole lot. But again, it's starting. The knowledge of this is starting to spread. Right. Quietly, slowly, gradually, but it's getting out there. So this is part of Baldwin's journey towards becoming this very influential central figure.

Bryan Buchanan [02:11:59] So as Lauren Woolley starts telling this story about how he, his father, three other men, were ordained by John Taylor to perpetuate plural marriage.

John Dehlin [02:12:09] John Taylor prophet or John Taylor.

Bryan Buchanan [02:12:12] John Taylor prophet. Yes.

John Dehlin [02:12:13] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:12:13] Okay. So there is a revelation text that is. That is copied and given to these men who are ordained to perpetuate it.

John Dehlin [02:12:20] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:12:21] And this is fun because this is very much a much more concrete origin story than just the revelation. Right.

John Dehlin [02:12:27] This is a claim that third president, prophet of the church, actually laid his hands on people's head and ordained them to continue the practice.

Bryan Buchanan [02:12:37] Yes.

John Dehlin [02:12:37] Now, this is the first time it appears.

Bryan Buchanan [02:12:39] This is the first time that we know of.

John Dehlin [02:12:41] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:12:42] Is he starts telling these at cottage meetings. Right.

John Dehlin [02:12:45] This is 30 years, 35 years after.

Bryan Buchanan [02:12:49] Right.

John Dehlin [02:12:49] That's late.

Bryan Buchanan [02:12:50] It's late. And so you can draw some parallels between this and the first vision. Right. So as the fundamentalist movement develops, it's sort of like taking earlier Mormon history as assumed. Like, we're all. We all agree that God and Jesus and Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon and the first vision, all of that is sort of assumed. Right. We're kind of talking more about this part of our. Our commission to continue plural marriage. Right. It's sort of like LDS worms get yelled at for not talking much about the Bible or God or Jesus. It's similar. It's like, that's all assumed. This is a distinctive part of our theology.

Bryan Buchanan [02:13:27] So we're going to talk more about this. It's kind of a parallel to that. So this idea that John Taylor ordained man is much more problematic in your mind. Yes. Treating this like any other historical event. Like, we have journals from that time. We have George Q. Cannon's journal. We have the journal of one of these guys that Woolley says was ordained, and they describe the events of September 27, 1886, just like any other Sunday on the underground in 1886. Right. We had a meeting, a couple people spoke. Nothing there.

Lorin Woolley and the Origins of Mormon Fundamentalism

Bryan Buchanan [02:14:03] So as a historian, I look at what happens and I just say, I don't think this happened. Like the historical evidence is just not there. There's a much better and much better documented trail of the 1886 revelation is found by John W. Taylor, who then gives it to Matthias Cowley, who then gives it to several other guys. And we have records of these guys, Cowley, Taylor, Owen Woodruff, the apostles, sometimes patriarchs, sometimes bishops, performing marriages. We have zero evidence of Loren Woolley, John Woolley, the other three men performing marriages up until about 1907, 1908, when we do see John Woolley start to perform marriages.

Bryan Buchanan [02:14:47] Now, the question is, is he doing that on the basis of this 1886 ordination that his son says happens, or is he just one of these mini guys who are doing it? That's the big question. As I see the evidence, he's just. He's like these other guys.

Bryan Buchanan [02:15:06] And only later, when there is this clear distinction between the Church officially saying we are not doing polygamy anymore, and a group that believes that it needs to continue, you see the fork in the road. I see later on, they will retroactively argue that they were ordained.

John Dehlin [02:15:24] But do they make that up? I mean, we don't know. But, like, one option is they're just making stuff up and lying and completely fabricating. I mean, that's a pretty big, big, bold lie to say the third prophet of the Church literally laid his hands on your head.

Bryan Buchanan [02:15:39] Yes.

John Dehlin [02:15:39] And. And told you to keep the practice. But we also know that people who. Who wrote in their journals, you know, late in their life, that they watched, you know, Joseph. They watched Brigham Young transfigure into Joseph Smith and believed it and believed it.

Bryan Buchanan [02:15:59] They weren't making it up in their minds.

John Dehlin [02:16:00] From what we see, they were in England at the time allegedly occurred. So they later in their lives believed that they witnessed an event that they couldn't have possibly witnessed.

Bryan Buchanan [02:16:11] Right.

John Dehlin [02:16:12] So, I mean, at least it's possible that the human brain could have tricked Lauren Woolley into thinking that John Taylor put his hands on his head and gave him permission.

Bryan Buchanan [02:16:21] Y.

John Dehlin [02:16:22] Or he could have, I guess, felt like it happened in a vision, kind of like Martin and Martin Harris and others claimed they saw the angel in the golden plates, but likely with their spiritual eyes. Maybe it could have been in a dream. Like, I'm just trying to.

Bryan Buchanan [02:16:37] Right.

John Dehlin [02:16:38] Put, you know, connect the dots here somehow. We don't know.

Bryan Buchanan [02:16:41] You're talking to John Turner about an earlier discussion of this exact nature. Right?

John Dehlin [02:16:45] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:16:46] Joseph Smith, John Turner says he probably did have some sort of spiritual experience that was legitimate, that he believed. Right. But beyond that, what can we say.

John Dehlin [02:16:56] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:16:56] As historians? Not a whole lot, because, again, like, that's. You're getting into his head. What does Lauren Woolley actually. What are his motives?

John Dehlin [02:17:03] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:17:04] Now, Lauren Willey is trickier because, like I said, he's telling a lot of things to. To people that are slowly gravitating to him. And you can see why, because part of it sort of like what Denver Snuffer does is a hearkening back to a charismatic Mormonism of spiritual gifts, of visions, manifestations.

John Dehlin [02:17:24] Good old days.

Bryan Buchanan [02:17:25] Yeah, the good old days. This is the Mormonism that Lauren Woolley is portraying to his followers.

John Dehlin [02:17:29] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:17:30] Jesus appeared at my father's home. Joseph Smith appeared to my father at the home. He will also tell about how he was transported in kind of like a spiritual journey to the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico, where he. He gives keys to what he calls an Indian prophet. He will say that I gave Teddy Roosevelt his endowment in the Black Hills in South Dakota. He will say that Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin D. Roosevelt were on this grand council.

John Dehlin [02:17:58] What the.

Bryan Buchanan [02:18:01] It's hard. To me, the best reading of Lauren Woolley is a. An ardent, 110% believer in Mormonism and plural marriage, who is very much of a kind of a visionary, revelatory. Like Mormonism is a charismatic, enthusiastic religion. Right. This is where. Where the other side very much has contact and is directing what's going on here on Earth. At the same time, I. I can pretty clearly see him placing himself at the center of everything. Like, I see a man who wanted to be important. I. I just. I don't. If you look at all of. All of the things that he tells people now, in fairness, we have nothing directly from him.

John Dehlin [02:18:49] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:18:50] And I mean nothing.

John Dehlin [02:18:51] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:18:51] He does not leave a journal. I haven't seen a letter. Like, the only time I think I've seen his handwriting is the signature on that 1912 document. That's it. So that's always problematic. But, yeah, to me, I clearly see him as a person who is placing himself at the center of a bunch of stories that naturally appeal to his listeners.

John Dehlin [02:19:15] And so if. If, if, like, again, with the conversations of John Turner and Dan Vogel and others, if Joseph Smith could have manufactured fake plates or put some brick in the box, you know, believing that he was, you know, doing God's will, but. But needing to give some sort of physical aspect to his claims so that people will follow.

John Dehlin [02:19:40] If Joseph Smith can allegedly do that, then it's possible that Woolley could be a total true believer in the Restoration and in polygamy. And in the modern gospel, but either through motivated reasoning, some sort of vision claim, or through lying, white lie, will say, he could say, John Taylor, prophet, third brother, president of the church, put his hands on my head and gave me this authority because he knew.

John Dehlin [02:20:07] He knew that. He probably knew that the brethren at some level wanted this practice to continue, but he probably knew that he needed to claim some sort of authority. And maybe just like John the Baptist and Peter, James and John, a story manufactured later to give some sort of tangible authority. Maybe he did that as well.

Bryan Buchanan [02:20:27] It's so hard. It's very much trying to assess Joseph Smith motives, reasoning, all of that. It's. It's exactly that.

John Dehlin [02:20:34] I guess I'm just citing precedent where similar things have happened that could be plausible explanation.

Bryan Buchanan [02:20:40] Yep. Now, again, on the other side of it, for Joseph Smith's followers, not Joseph Smith, they believe this is all literal and authentic and real. And Lauren Woolley's hearers, his listeners, same thing.

John Dehlin [02:20:54] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:20:54] They believe that all of these things that he is describing that happen at his father's house in Centerville in September 1886 are completely real and authentic. And that, again, like, to. To understand them, you have to remember that, like these, again, these are not.

Bryan Buchanan [02:21:11] These are not bad actors. These are people who are ardent believers and they see this as absolutely happening because, again, like this, this is the origin story of Mormonism. Angels visit people, they give them commissions. They are very much in contact with the material world that we experience.

Bryan Buchanan [02:21:30] And again, for historians, that is so difficult to deal with because that's not what historians do. Historians cannot say, yes, an angel visited, yes, the Book of Mormon plates were real. We can say what people were saying about them, and then we can draw some inferences. But like, again, spiritual experiences are really hard for historians because that's just not what they do. Those are not the questions they ask, and those are not the answers they're trying to find. So that's. It's been really interesting listening to John Turner and you talk about these things while we're trying to think about this

John Dehlin [02:22:12] later on, say, with your vast knowledge of everything. It blows my mind that you would spend two minutes listening to anything I'm involved with.

Bryan Buchanan [02:22:18] Oh, well, John Turner is one of my favorite people on earth.

John Dehlin [02:22:21] I love that guy. I do. There's a lot of Mormons are like, oh, he's not. He's not angry enough, or he's not criticizing the church or Joseph enough. What? What?

Bryan Buchanan [02:22:30] That's not what historians do.

John Dehlin [02:22:31] But they don't even think it's Interesting. The John Turner series. Yeah, but you do.

Bryan Buchanan [02:22:35] I love it. No, and it is interesting because you have to think something about Joseph Smith. Right. And, and again, like, I don't think anyone in this is saying you can't come out of that and you can't be a believer in him anymore. Yeah, it's just saying let's look at the history in as much detail as we possibly can, give you information and then you are free. Kind of like the revelation. Jesus apparently tells John Taylor, I want people to use the free agency, but you do need information. Right. So.

John Dehlin [02:23:07] So it sounds like around 1920s, somewhere between 1920s and 1922, the first full

Bryan Buchanan [02:23:16] text of the 1886 revelation is published.

John Dehlin [02:23:19] Where?

Bryan Buchanan [02:23:19] So that's a good question.

John Dehlin [02:23:20] Oh, so we don't know.

Bryan Buchanan [02:23:22] There are pamphlets that are published throughout this decade that are frequently under the title the Four Hidden Revelations, the Four Rejected Revelations. So like we mentioned earlier, John Taylor has a bunch of revelations. Some of them do get canonized, but not in English. Really interesting.

John Dehlin [02:23:38] Not in English.

Bryan Buchanan [02:23:39] Not in English. Yeah. So.

John Dehlin [02:23:40] So you're saying they're. They're foreign language versions of the Doctrine and Covenants with John Taylor revelations included in them that didn't get included in English.

Bryan Buchanan [02:23:50] That didn't. They're published as pamphlets in English, but they're not included in the English version of the Doctrine Covenants.

John Dehlin [02:23:56] Do we know about the conversations that led to that?

Bryan Buchanan [02:24:00] Nope. The best guess we have.

John Dehlin [02:24:02] Yeah. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:24:03] So this got some friends that have worked on this.

John Dehlin [02:24:07] Do these, do, do versions of these foreign language DNCs exist today? Yep.

Bryan Buchanan [02:24:12] Do I have one of those Benchmark books sell? Oh yes.

John Dehlin [02:24:15] Okay. Go to Benchmark book if you want to buy a foreign language version of the DNC that includes John Taylor revelations not included in the English version of the dnc.

Bryan Buchanan [02:24:24] So this is really fun. So this is again like at some point I want to have a discussion about like how Scriptures are made, published, you know, expanded, revised, blah, blah. But yeah, like you don't have to read Swedish or German or Danish are the languages they're done in to read section 137 and there's John Taylor's name in the heading to it. You don't have to know the languages.

John Dehlin [02:24:46] People are asking what languages?

Bryan Buchanan [02:24:48] Yeah, so Swedish is the first one. And this is fun because we do have some evidence of how this begins. So there's a really interesting man named Yanni Schodel. He's a Baptist convert, probably the smartest convert of the 19th century. All apologies, Carl Maeser. Whatever Like, Shodal has been to seminary. Right. He's kind of like this, a Sidney Rigdon level of education, if not more so. Like, there's killer letters from him where he's like, well, in first Nephi, it says this, but here's like, probably what it is in Hebrew with like, the vowel points and stuff. He's really interesting guy. So he is preparing the Swedish edition, a new Swedish edition of the Doctrine and Covenants.

Bryan Buchanan [02:25:27] And at like the 11th hour, he writes to Wilford Woodruff, church president at this point. And it's like, hey, what if we put a couple of these John Taylor revelations in? Which is fun because, A, he knows about them because again, like I said, they're. They're. They're published as pamphlets which are really fun. And Woodruff is like, yeah, sure, do it. So that's the first one. 1889.

John Dehlin [02:25:49] We have a record of that.

Bryan Buchanan [02:25:50] Yeah, they have his correspondence, but not the polygamy revelation. But not 1886. Okay, now is that because they are squeamish about it? Unlikely.

John Dehlin [02:26:01] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:26:02] The. The 1882 revelation that is included says it's fun because it says, I am calling Heber J. Grant and George teasdale to the 12 and Seymour beyond to the first council of the 70, provided they will conform to my law. What does that mean, John Dylan, what does that code for?

John Dehlin [02:26:20] Do polygamy.

Bryan Buchanan [02:26:21] Do polygamy. Okay. Everyone knows that's what it means, right? So that one talks about polygamy. So they're not squeamish about it. Why aren't they including this revelation? To me, the best explanation is because they don't know about it. This is, you know, this. You have to nail down the dates. Exactly. But I think this is. This could be before John W. Taylor ever brings it up in the quorum of the 12. So it's very likely that Wilford Woodruff, certainly, Yanni Shodel, have no idea this revelation exists. That's. That's my reading of happen.

John Dehlin [02:26:54] Interesting.

Bryan Buchanan [02:26:55] So, yeah, so, yeah, up until 1920, it is in foreign languages of the Doctrine and Covenants long after the second Portuguese, maybe. Nope. So Spanish is 1886. So it's before that. Oh, that's the Book of Mormon. Sorry. There is no Doctrine Covenants in Spanish yet. Nothing.

John Dehlin [02:27:14] Oh, yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:27:15] And, you know, so. So there are very few languages in play at this point.

John Dehlin [02:27:20] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [02:27:20] And of those languages, you don't have a Doctrine Covenants in all of those,

John Dehlin [02:27:24] even it's going to be white Western Europe languages.

Bryan Buchanan [02:27:26] Yeah. So it's. It's basically all foreign languages during this time period have those in there.

John Dehlin [02:27:32] Yeah. Interesting.

Bryan Buchanan [02:27:33] But not English.

John Dehlin [02:27:36] What the.

Bryan Buchanan [02:27:36] Isn't that wild? Yeah, that's. That's one of the most interesting. There's actually a really interesting chapter, a book published by the Religious Studies center at BYU with a whole chapter about John the Revelator, meaning John Taylor the Revelator. Oh, that talks about some of this stuff. And what's so fun is one of the co authors of that is Richard Holzapfel, who was a. See, he wasn't. I think he was an area authority. 70. So like a very much a loyal man and a good guy and a good historian. Fascinating chapter. We'll have to link that because again, like, if you, if you thought about what people know about John Taylor, the idea of him being a Revelator, not on the radar for people.

John Dehlin [02:28:18] Interesting.

Bryan Buchanan [02:28:19] So, yeah, it's really, really fun. So, okay, pamphlets are published during the 1920s with the text of all of these revelations, including now 1886, because people know it and have copies of it now. Right. And what's so interesting is one of those, actually probably in a couple different versions, is published by a man named Charles Kingston. So that's a name that your listeners will probably know, Right? This is what becomes the Davis County Cooperative Society, sometimes known as the Order. The Kingston Group is most often known by that. Right? So this is the father of the founder of that, that group, that Mormon group.

John Dehlin [02:28:55] Oh, man.

Bryan Buchanan [02:28:56] But then other people who are in this slowly gelling, slowly coalescing movement because they're like, we believe this. Here's our text. What better proof do we need than a thus saith the Lord to John Taylor? That gives us our origin story, right? So throughout this decade, we see this movement slowly coming together. And they have meetings at people's house. You know, they go to people who will later become figures of this. They'll go to John W. Or John Way Barlow's house. My shirt here. Mr. John Y. On my shirt here. They'll meet at their house and, and talk about what they call the fullness of the gospel.

Bryan Buchanan [02:29:34] Right? And they are mad that the church has given up polygamy most of all. But then other things, right? The Adam God doctrine, consecration. These core principles of early Mormonism that the LDS Church has gradually backed away from or and in this case officially stepped away from.

John Dehlin [02:29:53] What is uep again?

Bryan Buchanan [02:29:54] So this is the. The United Effort plan. So this is down in Short Creek. They put all their property into a trust that is very controversial.

John Dehlin [02:30:05] And your shirt says you down you

Bryan Buchanan [02:30:06] down with UEP in the back says,

John Dehlin [02:30:08] yeah, you know, me and that guy in the. In the T shirt. That's.

Bryan Buchanan [02:30:11] That's. That's John Y. Bartolo. So he will become the leader of the main fundamentalist group later on.

John Dehlin [02:30:18] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:30:18] And that's great because this is, of course, this is naughty by nature. And nothing delights me more than someone reading my shirt and then immediately start laughing because they get it.

John Dehlin [02:30:28] So it's a rep. Yep. Were you in a rap growing up? No.

Bryan Buchanan [02:30:32] Well, I mean, sort of like. Like 90s hip hop. Yeah, absolutely.

John Dehlin [02:30:36] Run DMC, like, that's beastie Boys.

Bryan Buchanan [02:30:38] That's a fun era. Yeah, yeah. While being as wide as possible, of course. That kind of goes without saying. Oh, yeah. So the 1920s are super important because we see these guys start coming together, and this is, of course, not unnoticed by church leadership. So beginning in 1918, church president is now Heber J.

John Dehlin [02:30:56] Grant.

Bryan Buchanan [02:30:56] And this is where the institutional response to this really starts to. To veer, because Grant had undergone a very distinct and very quick transformation. Grant is a polygamist. Grant will write Joseph S. Smith during the process of the Smoot hearings and dropping Taylor and Cowley, who he loves, and he loves Joseph F. Smith. But he says, basically, listen, this could have been any of us. It almost was me, right? Why are we going after these guys? Within a very short period of time, we get two interesting pieces that show his reversal. So he is over in England, largely, so he doesn't get arrested for being a polygamist and stake president of the Salt Lake Stake, the original Salt Lake Stake, Angus Cannon.

Bryan Buchanan [02:31:44] So at that point, that's an incredibly important position. That's the central, original Utah stake. Right. And he's over visiting Heber J. Grant, and they start talking about Taylor and Kelly. This is what. This is what everyone's on everyone's mind. And Grant tells Cannon they got what they deserved. And Angus Cannon is like.

Bryan Buchanan [02:32:03] He writes in his journal, I was like a man accused of stealing a sheep with a mouthful of mutton. Such a great image. It's like I knew too much. So he's like, I'm out. I'm not going to discuss this. And then Grant also writes, I think it's Anthony Ivins, his kind of distant cousin and who we'll talk about in a minute, too, and says basically the same thing. Taylor and Kelly got what they deserved, and they probably should have gotten it earlier.

Bryan Buchanan [02:32:35] So somewhere real quick, Heber J. Grant flips on a dime. And that's fascinating. Mike. Mike Quinn will talk about him as the most fascinating example of cognitive dissonance within church leadership.

John Dehlin [02:32:48] And he probably doesn't mean polygamy was bad. He just means they fell out of line with it's not authorized.

Bryan Buchanan [02:32:54] Right. That's. Later on, John Woolley will be quoted as saying someone will ask him about the idea of priesthood keys. So for non Mormon listeners, Mormons love to talk about the idea of priesthood keys, which means, like the authorization, the specific authorization to do X. Right. You're given priesthood keys to perform plural marriages. You're given keys for. For this, that and the other. Right. So somebody will ask John Woolley about keys, and he reportedly smiles and says, button, button, who's got the button? So the idea of authorization, it really

John Dehlin [02:33:24] does show the most sacred. I sometimes say, probably glibly, that the most sacred thing in Mormonism isn't doctrine, isn't theology. It is in scripture. It's obedience to authority. I mean, and who.

Bryan Buchanan [02:33:37] Who legitimately holds that authority.

John Dehlin [02:33:39] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:33:40] Is at the center of all of this history. Right. Because across the board, everyone in this whole thing, for the most part, believes in polygamy. Right. From church leaders who are officially denouncing it. They still believe in it and are

John Dehlin [02:33:56] practicing it because they're married to multiple wives still.

Bryan Buchanan [02:33:58] And what's so interesting is one way to do this is so one of the apostles who is appointed after Taylor and Cowley are dropped and another death. So we've got three spots to fill. Right. So it's David O. McKay, Orson Whitney, and George F. Richards. George F. Richards is really a fascinating guy. He's another classic example of someone who today hardly anyone knows about. Super interesting, super fascinating. And church historians press is releasing his journals online. So this is the point we'll talk about later. Like, it's a wonderful time to be a researcher, historian, interested observer in Mormon history because we have access to so many things that were locked down 10, 22 years ago.

John Dehlin [02:34:42] They're not out yet. Or they are.

Bryan Buchanan [02:34:44] They are. They're slowly doing okay.

John Dehlin [02:34:46] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [02:34:46] Yeah. And they had earlier released the George Cucana journals that were super helpful. So anyways, George F. Richards, during the period of the, you know, in the, the aftermath of the Smoot hearings and starting to discipline these new polygamists, he goes to quorum president Francis Lyman, who, like I said, is a hardliner against this, and says, all right, here's what we do. We will have dead women sealed to us. Again, these are not bad actors. They're not trying to do anything weird. Like they believe that polygamy is an Essential for exaltation.

Bryan Buchanan [02:35:18] So, okay, the government, practical realities. Institutionally, officially, we're not doing this. What about this? And he says to Lyman, I would not have my brethren lose out on their privileges. So, okay, we can't do lived polygamy, but we can do this.

Bryan Buchanan [02:35:36] So again, across the board, throughout this, everyone believes in polygamy, but the question of authorization. Who is authorized to. To perform plural marriages for the here and now, that is the. The central point of this whole history. Yeah, interesting. And so as. As Heber J. Grant now becomes church president, he will very much start to crack down because he's made that switch and he's like, in his mind, okay, we're done. We're officially done. There are no loopholes. There's nothing we're not doing because these

John Dehlin [02:36:08] pamphlets start going around, they're printed, and people are sharing them. And he's like, man, we don't want to go back to the food hearing days.

Bryan Buchanan [02:36:15] And again, like, the easiest thing in the moment seems to be just sweep it all aside, right? And this, in about a decade, is going to come back to bite them. So the institutional church response, like, Grant will start saying things in conference like, I'd be great if some of these guys were sent to jail. Which is wild. This is a guy who had gone to England so that he wouldn't go to jail. And people will look at this and be like, what a hypocrite. Yeah, not in his mind, because his plural marriages were authorized by church leaders. Totally above board. These guys are doing something wholly different.

Bryan Buchanan [02:36:54] They are going rogue. So this is where clearly you start to see, like, the institutional response hard and fast across the board is these are not authorized. These guys are going rogue. And that is the difference. And that if you don't. If you. If you don't see that principle, you can't make sense of this history. Who is authorized, who is not.

John Dehlin [02:37:16] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:37:17] Now, obviously, parties are going to disagree on who's authorized, but that's what they're arguing about is what constitutes authorization for a legitimate plural.

John Dehlin [02:37:24] It almost seems like Joseph F. Smith left a mess for Heber J. Grant to clean up by his likely unofficial endorsements of polygamy.

Bryan Buchanan [02:37:33] Sure does. And he was the other one that Mike Quinn brought up as the hardest one to get a handle on because he's doing different things. And again, like I mentioned earlier, once we get the Francis Lyman journals, and I think probably the Matthias Cowley journals, we're going to get more clarity on this, because what I'm hearing is Joseph F. Smith was actually far more supportive of disciplining new polygamists than I would have guessed. I mean, it's from the Joseph Robinson journals. Again, if he is reporting things accurately. Joseph F. Smith is way more complicated in how he's dealing with this. Like, he's telling different people different things.

John Dehlin [02:38:14] Yeah. Well, that's clear. It's like. It's like we got to denounce this publicly, have no association with us directly.

Bryan Buchanan [02:38:20] Yep.

John Dehlin [02:38:21] But still make sure it continues to be practiced.

Bryan Buchanan [02:38:24] But from 1909 forward, from the time that committee is formed, like, we're sending circular letters to every bishop and state presence. Like, we mean business. General conference. We mean business. And most importantly, of course, in practice, we mean business. We are actually excommunicating people. So. And he or J. Grant will. Will ramp that up. Again, there is no. From the. The second he starts as church president, it's unambiguous.

John Dehlin [02:38:48] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:38:48] There is no authorized plural marriage. But again, like, he. Then he starts to say things like, we need to legally deal with these guys. So, hey, government, if you want to go after these guys, that'd be really great. And to some level, hard to tell. We'll support you.

John Dehlin [02:39:05] Yeah. Because there's a difference between enforcement of the law, you know, a law existing and actually it being enforced.

Bryan Buchanan [02:39:11] Yes. Yep.

John Dehlin [02:39:12] And he's saying, come on, let's.

Bryan Buchanan [02:39:13] Let's enforce it.

John Dehlin [02:39:14] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:39:15] Which, you know, again, if you don't. If you don't have that backstory, it just looks like wild hypocrisy, which it still kind of is.

John Dehlin [02:39:22] Yeah. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:39:23] But again, like, you can see where he's coming from, even if you don't agree with what he's doing.

John Dehlin [02:39:27] Yeah. So this leads to 1923. Jerry Ruben Clark.

J. Reuben Clark and Internal Church Tensions

Bryan Buchanan [02:39:31] J. Reuben Clark. This, to me, was so interesting. This, of course, something Mike Quinn found as part of. Of his wildly unappreciated biography of Jared McClark. Elder statesman.

John Dehlin [02:39:42] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:39:42] It's on sale benchmark right now. It's great book because Clark is right at the center of all of this. And before I have you read. So what he does is 1923. He's not a church leader. He's barely Mormon.

John Dehlin [02:39:54] He's not in the first presidency. No.

Bryan Buchanan [02:39:56] This is 10 years before. He's absolutely nothing, has been nothing.

John Dehlin [02:39:59] Attorney. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [02:40:00] He is back in Washington, D.C. he's a government guy. He's ambassador to Mexico. He's under Secretary of State. He's kind of on the political rise. He's barely Mormon. Like, he, you know, he doesn't really go to church out there, which, in fairness, there's only minimal church presence there. But, like, he's kind of. He's very much like Reed Smoot and Carl Badger. This is what he wants to do. He doesn't want to be a Mormon farmer who lives in isolated, parochial Utah.

John Dehlin [02:40:30] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:40:30] This is the expansion of Mormonism becoming an American religion. Right. This great transformation after the Reed smooth hearings. Fascinating. That's why I love this period, because the Mormonism that you and I know.

John Dehlin [02:40:42] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:40:42] Is a result of these things that happened during this incredibly formative period that, again, people don't love to read about or talk about, which I'm like, guys.

John Dehlin [02:40:51] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:40:52] So interesting.

John Dehlin [02:40:53] When you read Greg Prince, maybe the way I remembered it, you get this impression that it all. All the modernization kind of started with David O. McKay, I would say the

Bryan Buchanan [02:41:02] globalization is what it is.

John Dehlin [02:41:04] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:41:04] Because that's. That's really when it starts to reach internationally on a scale. But we start to. We definitely see it modernize.

John Dehlin [02:41:11] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:41:11] During this period. Yeah. So, okay, so J. Reuben Clark is a government official. And to fully appreciate this, you have to know, like, always, his family ties. So he is J. Reuben Clark Jr. So he often would go by Reuben or Rube. His father, of course, then is J. Reuben Clark senior, who went by Joshua. That's what the J stands for.

John Dehlin [02:41:31] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:41:32] Dad is very much a believer in continued polygamy. So his journals, which I think are down at byu, you have. You have various references that I need to be. I mean, it's very clear I have to be a polygamist to be exalted. Like, post second manifesto, the doctrinal requirement doesn't change. How can it. Section 132 is still in the Doctrine and Covenants. Guess what? It's still there today. That's why this is so messy. So his journal is like, I really hope that I have the opportunity to become a polygamist right here, right now, because I need this to be exalted.

John Dehlin [02:42:08] And J. Reuben Clark's dad is writing that after writing this after the second manifesto.

Bryan Buchanan [02:42:12] The second manifesto, several years after.

John Dehlin [02:42:14] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:42:15] So that's one piece of it.

John Dehlin [02:42:16] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:42:17] His mother is a woolly. Guess who her brother is? John Willie. As all of this starts to go down for J. Reuben Clark. This is Uncle John and my cousin

John Dehlin [02:42:27] Lauren that are doing this family.

Bryan Buchanan [02:42:29] It's personal. It's embarrassing.

John Dehlin [02:42:31] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:42:32] He, again, he's more this modern Mormon. He's a believer. Yes. But he doesn't really like polygamy, and he wants Mormonism to become American accepted. Exactly the kind of thing that Brigham Young hated and said. You know, that's like my worst fear is for this exact thing to happen. Really interesting to see the evolution of that. Okay, so that's J. Reuben Clark's family background. In 1923, he drafts a statement that church leaders could potentially use. He's not asked to do this. He just says, I don't think anything ever comes of it.

John Dehlin [02:43:05] Oh, this isn't published.

Bryan Buchanan [02:43:06] No, no, no, no. But it's fascinating because listen to how he deals with this. And just. P.S. if you don't pick this up within 10 words, he is a lawyer.

John Dehlin [02:43:17] This is Jerry Rubin Clark in 1923. I think five years into Heber J. Grant's administration. Resolved. It's like a debate.

Bryan Buchanan [02:43:26] There you go.

John Dehlin [02:43:27] Resolved. That the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in solemn conference assembled hereby reaffirms. By the way, it's weird that a lawyer who's barely active is basically drafting the words that are intended to be, you know, the words of prophets issued in general conference. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [02:43:47] Like he had a high opinion of his abilities.

John Dehlin [02:43:49] Well, no, I'm just saying, like, if you think about the proclamation on the family, it didn't start as words crafted by whatever prophet was prophet at the time. It started out as a legal brief that then got adopted by the church leaders. So I guess it's prophecy by legal briefs.

Bryan Buchanan [02:44:06] This is not a new concept.

John Dehlin [02:44:07] It's not a new concept. All right, sorry. Resolved. That the Church of Christ Latter Saints in solemn conference assembled hereby reaffirms the rule and order of the Church as it has always heretofore existed. We've always been at war with East Asia and as it does now exist, namely, that all delegated keys, powers and or authorities cease and determine and become of no force, value or efficacy whatsoever upon the death of the person making the delegation thereof. And that all ordinances, seals, bindings, promises or other acts who whatsoever made, done or performed under the pursuant to such delegated keys, powers.

Bryan Buchanan [02:44:47] Can you tell his lawyer?

John Dehlin [02:44:49] And made, done or performed after the death of the person who made the delegation are null, void, and no efficacy or effect whatsoever. And resolved. That no such delegated key power and or authority has or can be lawfully or effectively re delegated. Now, I'm just going to say, so far he's mentioned nothing about polygamy or plural marriage.

Bryan Buchanan [02:45:11] That again, like, if you didn't know what was going on here, you'd be like, what are you talking about? If you know what's going on, you Know exactly what he's talking about.

John Dehlin [02:45:21] He's basically saying whatever people are claiming, whatever keys or permissions, whatever you think

Bryan Buchanan [02:45:28] you have, you don't.

John Dehlin [02:45:29] Yeah, right, right, right. Yeah. And then he goes on resolved that the president of the church shall immediately appoint a committee of three, all members of the church, all holding a conviction of the fundamental soundness of the foregoing rules and orders.

Bryan Buchanan [02:45:45] Interesting word starting with F he used there.

John Dehlin [02:45:48] Fundamental. Yeah, interesting. And no one of whom shall be a general church authority, nor a stake nor ward authority, whose duty shall be to investigate. So they're saying not a general authority. This committee of three needs to be non general.

Bryan Buchanan [02:46:04] Not only, not general authority, but whose duties should.

John Dehlin [02:46:07] Wait.

Bryan Buchanan [02:46:08] So not general authority. Not even a ward level authority or stake.

John Dehlin [02:46:12] Yes, Stake or ward.

Bryan Buchanan [02:46:13] This just has to be three kind of randos from the pews.

John Dehlin [02:46:16] You're going to tell us why he's doing that?

Bryan Buchanan [02:46:18] I got a guess.

John Dehlin [02:46:19] Okay. Whose duty shall be to investigate all reported or discovered violations of the foregoing rules and orders. And said committee of three shall report to the proper authorities for the imposition of appropriate church discipline all persons implicated in any and all cases in which there have been violations of the foregoing rules and orders and any and all cases in which there's reasonable ground to believe that there have been such violations. Again, brilliantly. Never mentioning polygamy ever.

Bryan Buchanan [02:46:56] And you get, you get legalesed right into the ground there. So this is fascinating because if your listeners are familiar with what, what the official message will be in exactly 10 years from this time, notice what he says and what he doesn't say first. What does he say? He says that at the death of whoever gave the keys to whatever that authorization ends clearly saying. You know what, there might have been some commissions from George Q. Cannon, Wilford Woodruff, Joseph F. Smith even. But guess what? They're dead. That's the end of that.

John Dehlin [02:47:26] What about Joseph Smith? The original Joseph Smith?

Bryan Buchanan [02:47:29] Well, more, more, more problematically again, J. Revin Clark is not a chur leader at this point. Never has been. Has been outside of the Mormon corridor for basically his entire adult life.

John Dehlin [02:47:40] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:47:41] So what happens when a church president dies? What's that do with an apostles authority?

John Dehlin [02:47:47] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:47:47] It's not like they're getting reordained every time.

John Dehlin [02:47:49] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:47:50] So every key that they were given. Right. And no. What was so interesting too is he says the, the. Those keys definitely cannot be re delegated. Right.

John Dehlin [02:47:58] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:47:58] So to me it's pretty clear he understands the implications of what Lauren Woolley has been telling people Yeah. I find it very difficult to read this without thinking he's heard about this. Again, this is his cousin.

John Dehlin [02:48:11] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:48:11] So, yeah, I think it's got to him.

John Dehlin [02:48:13] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:48:14] So that's what it does. Says and on the face of it, like, okay, interesting now. But he says no church leader can be on the committee.

John Dehlin [02:48:21] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:48:22] To me, that's because he knows they've been entangled. Right. They have problematic histories. Like you might get an apostle and you put him on the committee. Problem is he's still very much sympathetic to it, even if it's only quietly. So we got to get three guys who are 100% in line with this.

John Dehlin [02:48:42] Are you saying that he's likely saying a current leader of the church is more likely than not to still be a believer in polygamy?

Bryan Buchanan [02:48:50] Seems like it. Right.

John Dehlin [02:48:52] Also, there would probably be a lawyer would want no official officer of the church to be involved.

Bryan Buchanan [02:49:00] We're not running the show. This is just three Mormons, independent Mormons who are saying, yeah, in our sort of unbiased. To me, this is the equivalent of what the NBA needs to do or sports in general. I call it actually the biased fan. So as a Utah fan, if I watch a Utah BYU game and there's a flag on Utah and I watch the replay and say, yeah, that was definitely right. Boom, done. We don't have to do review. That's it, move on. So this kind of thing, like these people, like they say, yes, we, these guys are guilty and the committee, as we say, they need to be disciplined.

John Dehlin [02:49:33] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:49:34] Really, really interesting idea. Compared to with what he's going to later do. This actually was not a terrible idea. But notice what he doesn't say. Like you said, he doesn't mention polygamy.

John Dehlin [02:49:45] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:49:45] He specifically doesn't mention the 1886 revelation, which again, I think has to have come to his attention by this point.

John Dehlin [02:49:54] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [02:49:54] So he doesn't say that 1886 revelation is a bunch of crap. It's bogus. It's a pretended revelation. He doesn't say that. That's a good move. They should have stuck with that plan. So put that proposed statement that again, nothing ever happens with it in the back of your mind because there's going to be another statement in 10 years that very much will have something happen with it.

John Dehlin [02:50:15] I just have to say one quick reflection. I love to apply this history to modern management of the church. And if you look at the way the church is dealing with lgbt, same sex marriage stuff today, the church right now in 2025 is in the situation where some same sex married couples are getting excommunicated, others like Charlie Bird and his husband are left alone. It's being left to local bishops and stake presidents to decide whether or not a same sex married couple should or shouldn't be excommunicated. And the church knows this because we among many others have put the whole world on record that this ambiguity happens like this here.

Bryan Buchanan [02:51:00] It happens like this here. Here's kind of a mix of the two approaches.

John Dehlin [02:51:05] And it, I would just for, for just coming up with the term. It's like this intentional ambiguity where the church needs this grace period. And I think you could argue, Matt Harris would argue they did the same thing with, with black people and the, the priesthood band.

Bryan Buchanan [02:51:21] If the stake president here is a hardliner, yeah, it's going one way. If this stake president is very much a different mindset, it's going a wholly different way.

John Dehlin [02:51:29] Right. Like Polynesians, maybe you're allowed to get, you know, baptized.

Bryan Buchanan [02:51:32] And from church president to church president, that evolves.

John Dehlin [02:51:35] Yeah, you don't want to jar the church. You've got people on the spectrum of belief, fundamentalists, conservatives, hardliners, old timers, and then you've got liberals and progressives, even in the quorum. So you don't want to make some jarring decision that's global soft landing that then causes a whole chunk of the church to break off and apostatize and fracture or to cause dissension. Yep. So you create this intentional multi year, sometimes multi decade period of intentional ambiguity where all this murkiness is allowed to happen. Formal denial.

Bryan Buchanan [02:52:14] Because you didn't want what to happen, John.

John Dehlin [02:52:15] Because you didn't want some big fracturing apostasy. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [02:52:19] Which is interesting because what happens during this period, a big fracture?

John Dehlin [02:52:23] Well, a little one. In other words, you, you could still argue they made the right decision because maybe like with Community of Christ, they could have lost a lot more, but instead maybe it was more isolated and localized than it could have been if they had gone too hard, too firm, too public, too quick.

Schism and the Fundamentalist Priesthood Council

Bryan Buchanan [02:52:46] Schism in Mormon history is endlessly entertaining because it happens on a bunch of different fronts. It happens on a bunch of different scales. Very, very interesting to see how it happens and again, like it. I, I, I, I do think that church leaders probably be given more benefit of the doubt more often than not, because again, there's not a good answer. Usually on things there are multiple answers.

John Dehlin [02:53:10] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [02:53:11] Often, many of which the out all outcomes are unpleasant and differing in genuine

John Dehlin [02:53:17] opinions amongst the top leadership of the Church. Like, we're told today that within the Quorum of the twelve Apostles, there's disagreement on how to handle the LGBT issue.

Bryan Buchanan [02:53:27] Yeah. Was everybody on board with the pox? Doesn't seem like it.

John Dehlin [02:53:30] Right, Right. So I guess I just want to make sure people know this intention. I'm sure there were meetings about LGBT stuff, about race in the priesthood and about polygamy where their brethren are. Like, we've got to have an era of intentional ambiguity to allow older people to die off and to allow the church to get used to these changes.

Bryan Buchanan [02:53:53] Yep.

John Dehlin [02:53:53] So I think it. I think it's easy to argue that's intentional.

Bryan Buchanan [02:53:57] Can be. Sometimes it's just simple physics of momentum. Right. Things just keep going of their own volition, and sometimes there seems to be more intentionality behind it. But again, like, that's. Frequently that boils down to getting in their head again, like, how much of that did you mean to do? How much of that simply just happened because of an unintentional decision? Right. You decided to do this thing. You didn't want this outcome. You didn't even envision this outcome. But that was the outcome.

John Dehlin [02:54:35] But at a minimum, there's this punting of, like, I don't want to deal with this now. We'll figure it out later, because.

Bryan Buchanan [02:54:40] Yeah.

John Dehlin [02:54:41] You know what I mean?

Bryan Buchanan [02:54:42] Well, and again, I mean, the fact

John Dehlin [02:54:43] that this statement wasn't released and used.

Bryan Buchanan [02:54:45] Right. Well, and again, like, I'm trying to remember from it if he. I don't even know if he submitted it.

John Dehlin [02:54:53] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [02:54:53] I'd have to double check that. Like, that may not have even come to he.

John Dehlin [02:54:56] That would be weird if he was writing that. Just. I think I'll write a. No, no. Write a revelation.

Bryan Buchanan [02:55:02] No, no, no, no. It's not a revelation. It's. It's a legal brief. But, I mean, that's what lawyers do.

John Dehlin [02:55:07] But he wrote resolves.

Bryan Buchanan [02:55:09] Yeah. No.

John Dehlin [02:55:10] Solemn conference assembled in his mind.

Bryan Buchanan [02:55:12] Like I told. At some level, he thought this could potentially be used. But it was just in his papers too.

John Dehlin [02:55:20] Okay. I know. So just saying.

Bryan Buchanan [02:55:21] No, no, it is fascinating. Like, because what if he did submit it? And what if they had gone that route in 1923? Like, all along the way, there's these counterfactual history questions, like, what if this. What if that.

John Dehlin [02:55:33] Well, I can see why they didn't approve it, because just as we mentioned. Yeah. You could use that same logic to say anything after Joseph Smith.

Bryan Buchanan [02:55:40] Yep.

John Dehlin [02:55:40] Whatever Joseph Smith did isn't relevant today.

Bryan Buchanan [02:55:42] Right. Oh, yeah. Okay. So that happens then.

John Dehlin [02:55:46] John Woolley.

Bryan Buchanan [02:55:47] In 1918, 1928, John Woolley dies. So this is the father. So this is the. Where John Taylor had stayed in 1886, according to what Lauren Woolley had been saying, like, that there were these five men ordained. Only he and his father had survived by this point. And then in 1928, John Woolley dies.

John Dehlin [02:56:04] John was the one who was. Was. Was there when.

Bryan Buchanan [02:56:08] That was his home, at whose home John Taylor had stayed.

John Dehlin [02:56:11] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [02:56:11] Okay. And he. He is the. The high councilman and the later patriarch. Importantly, he is excommunicated way back in 1914 for. For performing new plural marriage. So there are, as always, differing perspectives on what happened. The sort of institutional perspective on this is that Joseph F. Smith truly did not understand the scope of what John Woolley was doing and claiming. And once he figured it out, he excommunicated him.

Bryan Buchanan [02:56:42] That's. I. That's very plausible. John Woolley's is that it was done, again, as another fall guy. Right. And that they are at a state conference in Bountiful where John Willie lives, and Joseph F. Smith is there as church president and comes up and he's like, hey, man, I'm sorry. We had to do something. I didn't want to do it. And we did it. And you know what? What if we quietly brought you back in? And John Woolley allegedly responds, no way, dude. It. This was a big public deal. I will only be taken back in, in a very public manner.

Bryan Buchanan [02:57:19] To me, this, again, is the Woolly tendency to put themselves at the center of the story and inflate their importance to the narrative. Yeah, I don't think that's what happened. But again, we don't know. We have too many gaps in documentary records to definitively say what John Woolley was doing, by whose authorization anyway. But I think it is important to note that John Woolley, from what we have, never claims during the period he's performing these marriages, that it's because of 1886, this alleged origination from John Taylor. He never says this until later, and we never have. We have very minimum, minimal times where even in, like, somebody's journal, they're saying, later on, John Woolley said, I was ordained.

Bryan Buchanan [02:58:08] It's mostly from Lauren Woolley, his son, that we're getting this. And again, like I said, not directly from him, which is not great. We would like Lauren Woolley's journal from 1886 where he records this. That's the best thing. We would like a letter from Loren Woolley in, like, 1892, where he tells a friend about this. We would like a letter in 1908 where Lauren Woolley says this. Right. These are all pieces that would be super helpful in being able to say what Lauren Woolley is telling people actually happened. Yeah, we don't have any of this. Does that definitively mean it doesn't happen?

Bryan Buchanan [02:58:44] No, but again, as a historian, like, you have to say something. And as I look at it, I don't think that this ordination story happened. So, anyways, 1928, John Woolley dies, leaving Lauren Woolley as the sole survivor of this group that was, according to him, ordained in September 1886, and by now kind of the leader of a movement. It's gelled enough. Right. And more and more people have been excommunicated. Oh, okay. So that in 1929, the year after his father dies, Loren Woolley starts ordaining men as what they will usually call high priest apostles.

Bryan Buchanan [02:59:22] The gist of that is they are given the ordination that Lauren Willie says he was given to continue to perform plural marriages. And it's a very limited authority. By all accounts, in this early period, they are to do nothing more than keep the principle of plural marriage alive. They see the church as slightly out of order, right. In this, in. In limited regards, but it's still God's chosen church. They're just kind of not making great choices on a few things. So the way that they see it is the subject of another T shirt that I made that just says, I'm the one mighty and strong.

Bryan Buchanan [02:59:58] Because their belief is that at some point, per Section 85 of the Doctrine Covenants, the one mighty and strong will return and will set the church in order. This had a totally different context back in 1831, I think, when it was given. Like, there's a whole different set of circumstances. Then later they will see this as the church is out of order because they've given up polygamy. And so we need the one mighty and strong, probably Joseph Smith, to return, and we'll set things back in order. We're going to do polygamy again. We're going to get things back on track. Right. So they will sort of see themselves as a department of the church, a select group that will maintain this essential principle until we can kind of get everything back in order.

Bryan Buchanan [03:00:44] Right. So that's what these guys are given, is this authority. One of these men is incredibly important, this story. His name is Joseph Musser.

John Dehlin [03:00:53] So we're talking about high priest apostles.

Bryan Buchanan [03:00:56] Yeah.

John Dehlin [03:00:57] As part of the Council of Friends.

Bryan Buchanan [03:01:00] So they become, over time, a sort of a recognized group that will later have even greater importance as the fork in the road widens. And they admit that this growing fundamentalist movement sees and acknowledges that the LDS Church is just not. Is not going to get back on track. And so more and more, their group will start to look like the LDS Church while they will have formal meetings, and they will now see themselves as the legitimate key holder. So back to the idea of priesthood keys. Like they're now in charge. And the way that they talk about this is there is the church and there is the priesthood, and those are separate things.

Bryan Buchanan [03:01:44] And most of the time they were the same thing, more or less, but now they're two separate things, and the Church is out of order. Birth. The priesthood has maintained true Mormonism, but that's a split that takes a while to materialize and become more concrete.

John Dehlin [03:02:02] This is reminding me of the interview I did with Anne Wilde as my very first video interview ever on Mormon Stories podcast. I'm pretty sure back then she gave me her version of this.

Bryan Buchanan [03:02:14] She did.

John Dehlin [03:02:15] As the founding of the flds.

Bryan Buchanan [03:02:17] Guess where my interest in this history started? She worked working with Anne for years.

John Dehlin [03:02:21] She worked at Benchmark Books. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:02:23] And was. So she and Ogden Kraut were independent fundamentalists.

John Dehlin [03:02:26] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:02:27] Which the benefit of that meant that they were basically on good terms with everybody groups, independents, everything. So they knew literally everyone. Like hearing Ann tell stories about Irva LeBaron coming to their house in his fur coat and turning up the heat to sweat him out and get him out of there. That. That was my first interest in this history.

John Dehlin [03:02:46] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:02:46] And Anne very much has been a big reason why a lot of this history has been perpetuated, because she and Ogden published dozens and dozens of books that looked at various parts of this history and theology. Right.

John Dehlin [03:03:03] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:03:04] So, okay, so in 19, 20, 29, we get these guys that are ordained to what often is called the Council of Friends. And the guy right after John Barlow on my shirt is a guy named Joseph Musser. So a friend of mine, Christina Gagliano, wrote a short biography of him that won Best Biography at Mormon History association this year. So more people are appreciating how fun this history is. And then she and I are working on Musser's journals and correspondence because he is the reason fundamentalism exists.

Bryan Buchanan [03:03:39] Because Loren Woolley, like I said, left nothing. Joseph Musser was the person who recorded what Loren Woolley said and then expanded that and published it to the world. So, in fact, that same year that he's ordained High Priest Apostle, Joseph Musser will draft the kind of fullest, most detailed account of what Lauren Woolley said happened in September 1886. You could think of this as like the 1838 Joseph Smith history, right? This is the official account that we all sort of agree on with the most detail and the most going on.

Bryan Buchanan [03:04:18] So per this account, they're at the woolly house in 1886. And over the night of Saturday to Sunday the 26th to the 27th, John Taylor is visited by heavenly visitors. And Loren Woolley. Plural, Plural. So he can hear three distinct voices in the room. So Lauren Woolley, along with another guy, Dan Bateman, are bodyguards, which is true, but again, this is Lauren Woolley, like, kind of hyper, inflating his role, right? So he's outside the room, but he can hear John Taylor and these other voices. So it's in the morning, John Taylor comes out, his face is glowing, like he's had an intense spiritual experience.

Bryan Buchanan [03:05:00] And Lauren's like, what's going on? And. And John Taylor's like, well, Lauren, what do you know about this? And then he says, lauren, that was your Lord. So Jesus and Joseph Smith visit John Taylor overnight, all night, and essentially lay out the gist of the revelation that polygamy is essential, and it absolutely is an eternal principle that cannot be revoked. So the next day, what they would do is whatever house they were at, they would have church at the house. So John Taylor, his counselor, George Q. Cannon, bodyguards, the people who lived there, whoever was there, they'd gather together and have sacrament meeting, more or less.

Bryan Buchanan [03:05:38] Well, this one lasts for eight hours because John Taylor is laying out what he had been told overnight to these people. He writes down this revelation. So in. In this narrative, that is where the text of the revelation that we now have comes from is. John Taylor sits down in the meeting, writes it out, they make copies of it. Secretary John Nuttall is there. He makes copies and gives it to these five men who are then ordained with the authority to perform plural marriages, but also importantly to. To pass that authority on. So this is known as the eight hour meeting. This is the. This is the core story of most fundamentalists.

John Dehlin [03:06:18] And it sound, as. It sounds as problematic or more problematic than the 1838 version of the Joseph Smith first vision story. Like, it's just this tale by this point has just grown and grown and new characters introduced and new acts being performed and so much specificity. I'm not, I'm not buying this account.

Bryan Buchanan [03:06:40] Well, and. And personally, the way he describes.

John Dehlin [03:06:42] Fair enough, they're.

Bryan Buchanan [03:06:44] They. John Taylor describes this chaos and People want him to give up polygamy. And he says, you know, so this is. This is where we get that account of a proposed manifesto years before the. The manifesto we know of that he should sign and that. That should be the policy of the church. Sign that document. Never sanction that document. Never again. You can see why this is so appealing. This is a bold, charismatic, visionary account of why what they already believed. Right. Is correct. And John Taylor, he levitates off the floor due to the spiritual power. It's hard. And again, Lauren Woolley is telling a whole.

John Dehlin [03:07:27] Did the signers of the declaration have appeared too?

Bryan Buchanan [03:07:29] See, that's the thing. As a historian, you. You look at this, and now the difference.

John Dehlin [03:07:35] Did. Did John the Baptist and Peter, James and John also appear?

Bryan Buchanan [03:07:38] But. So Joseph Smith is there and.

John Dehlin [03:07:40] And Lauren William, choir of angels.

Bryan Buchanan [03:07:42] And I'm just being one other guy who hadn't known Joseph Smith during his life, meet him and shake his hand.

John Dehlin [03:07:49] Right.

Bryan Buchanan [03:07:50] So as a historian, you look at something like this and mostly throw up your hands, like, what do I do with this?

John Dehlin [03:07:58] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:07:59] Now, the difference between a first vision account of something happening in 1820 and this account in 1886 is we have a documentary record of what's going on in 1886. 1820. We have how many journals.

John Dehlin [03:08:13] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:08:13] How many letters do we have? We got nothing. Right. We are left entirely on reminiscent accounts this time. What do we have? We have George Q. Cannon's journal. Now, his journal is a little problematic because at the end of that month, there are pages torn out of the journal.

John Dehlin [03:08:30] Wait, this is the journal the Church has in its possession and historically hasn't been willing to even give to his own descendants.

Bryan Buchanan [03:08:38] So, again, yes, for years, Mike Quinn wanted to see that there were a couple descendants. In fact, there was a guy who was working on transcribing it so they could publish it. He didn't quite make it there, but that was the genesis of actually publishing it, which they did do. So again, to their credit, like, George Q. Cannon's journal is messy because we're talking about bribing federal officials as part of statehood and the messiness of polygamy and family affairs. Like, they didn't have to release it. They could have just continued to keep it in the first presidency vault. But they did publish it.

John Dehlin [03:09:12] As of when do you know?

Bryan Buchanan [03:09:13] So this was. Well, so they started publishing it, like, 20 years ago. So they were going to do all of it in print. Unfortunately, it didn't sell well because nuts and bolts Mormon history doesn't have a Real broad appeal.

John Dehlin [03:09:26] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:09:27] People don't want to sit down and read literally thousands of pages of a journal. Yeah, I do. I. This was like one of the greatest things when they released that. So it's all online. Very minimal redactions, usually just like names and identifying things.

John Dehlin [03:09:43] You said pages missing.

Bryan Buchanan [03:09:45] There are pages that are apparently torn out of his journal. They have not put up scans of it yet, which I hope and assume at some point will happen. So is that because he is describing this meeting in 1886, maybe. Oh, pages in the 18 at the end of September. It's like the last day of September, pages torn out.

John Dehlin [03:10:05] And the meeting was when?

Bryan Buchanan [03:10:06] September 27th. Whoa.

John Dehlin [03:10:08] So the pages that are missing from George Q. Cannon's journal could be talking about that.

Bryan Buchanan [03:10:14] Sure.

John Dehlin [03:10:14] Was he there?

Bryan Buchanan [03:10:15] He was there.

John Dehlin [03:10:16] He was alleged.

Bryan Buchanan [03:10:17] He was definitely there. Now his journal for those days is. Has survived. It's there. So the thought is, well, he wrote about it a couple days later. Sure. I mean, that's not impossible. It seems unlikely to me. There are a lot of things going on in his life. Like he has a son who wants to marry a plural wife, is essentially told he can't. Has sex with her anyways. It's messy. He will get excommunicated and then brought back in. Like. So there's a lot of things going on. There are other and in my mind, better explanations of why pages are torn out. But yes, it could be that he described that meeting.

Bryan Buchanan [03:10:58] He has a description of that meeting. And it's just like every other meeting when they're in hiding. And we also have Samuel Bateman's journal for that day, who is allegedly one of the men ordained, given a copy of same thing. And what's the same thing? What same thing as church? You can. It's just like every other Sunday meeting in hiding.

John Dehlin [03:11:15] No pages ripped out.

Bryan Buchanan [03:11:16] No, no pages ripped out here. And it's, you know, whoever spoke, this guy said the prayer. These are the people that were there.

John Dehlin [03:11:23] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:11:23] Now I'd have to. I have to go back. As I recall, a big problem is Lauren Woolley is not mentioned. And some of the other people that Lauren mentions as being there are not there.

John Dehlin [03:11:34] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:11:35] Now, could this be memory? Yes. You know, maybe he thought. I mean, they did a bunch of meetings and maybe this guy was usually there, but wasn't there that day. But the fact that we have contemporary journals that talk about that meeting in very bland, boring, just like every other meeting terms to me is pretty good evidence now.

Bryan Buchanan [03:11:57] Now, is it too sacred to reveal? Okay, that's that is a possibility. Again, Mormons suck at secrets because they have to not only not write about it, then they have to not mention this period until their death. George Q. Cannon never ever once talks about what Lorne Woolley describes. Samuel Bateman never once describes what Lauren Willie describes. Other people who have things never describe this.

Bryan Buchanan [03:12:26] So, you know, could it be that it's too sacred and that's why. And they, they, in some cases, you'll see, they made a covenant to not reveal the contents of that meeting. Is that an explanation? Yes. Is it the. The best, most likely explanation? I don't think so.

Bryan Buchanan [03:12:44] So. But yeah. So Joseph Musser is the one who starts going to these meetings where Loren Willie starts to talk about it. He copies the text of 1886 into his journal. He drafts the official account of what happens in 1886 that Lorne Willie then signs. So he is incredibly important because if he doesn't write all this stuff down, you know, the movement might have fizzled. It certainly doesn't have the impact because later on he will start a periodical called Truth. And that's fun because in that periodical they will publish photographs of the 1886 Revelation.

Bryan Buchanan [03:13:24] When and how did they get photographs of it? Great question. There's a couple stories that we talked about earlier that where the revelation is at any given point is kind of hard to nail down. But the Rodney Badger that we mentioned, there is one account that while it was in his possession, somebody photographed it and then there were negatives of it that were in a safety deposit box in Salt Lake. So that's probably what happens.

John Dehlin [03:13:49] Interesting.

Bryan Buchanan [03:13:49] Yeah. So Musser, super important. He is probably the father of the fundamentalist movement. I think he's the best person to call that.

John Dehlin [03:13:58] And does he start issuing this write up as like a pamphlet?

Bryan Buchanan [03:14:02] So truth starts in 1935.

John Dehlin [03:14:05] Truth is the.

Bryan Buchanan [03:14:06] Okay, so they will both publish this magazine where they publish photographs of it, but then they will also write books. So they'll write one on Adam God, the right one on celestial or. Or plural marriage, where they will talk about this Lauren Woolley account as being the reason that this movement exists.

John Dehlin [03:14:23] You said 1835.

Bryan Buchanan [03:14:24] Truth is 1935. And then 1938 is when they first published the photos of it. And that's huge. So that's the first time that photos of this are out there.

John Dehlin [03:14:34] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [03:14:35] But at this point, people are like, is it real? It looks like John Taylor's handwriting. Where is it? Right, yeah. Now back up in time just a little bit because in. In 1933, we get an official statement from the LDS Church drafted by J. Reuben Clark, who is a new member of the First Presidency. And the First Presidency at this point is really interesting. So church president Heber J. Grant we talked about changes his mind like that. J. Reuben Clark, who has messy family involvements. Kind of a modern Mormon who doesn't love politics, me. But then you also have Anthony Ivins. So Ivins had been down in the Mexican colonies and had performed so many plural marriages.

Bryan Buchanan [03:15:18] We have a partial record of them and it's dozens of people. He performed more marriages than anyone else during this period. He's called as an apostle in 1907, which to me is amazing that the, the, the press doesn't lose their minds over this. Like you're calling the guy who performed more plural marriages than anyone. Yeah, they were mostly in Mexico, but still after the Reed Smoot hearings, after all of this debacle, that's the guy you're bringing in. And there's not much noise about that. So anyways, he's the other counselor. So the First Presidency issues this statement that's a lengthy, very lawyerly pamphlet. And we've got the, the, the money part of the statement because it talks about the 1886 revelation. And this. Fundamentalists immediately are incensed because it says this.

John Dehlin [03:16:13] And really quickly, this is the 10 year anniversary of J. Reuben Clark's non published.

Bryan Buchanan [03:16:18] Notice the difference on how it is framed.

John Dehlin [03:16:22] Really quickly, wasn't Anthony Ivins mentioned by Shannon Caldwell Montez as being involved in the secret warm meetings of 1922? I remember his name coming up quite a bit trying to remember what it was, but she was pretty lit up about that guy. Anyway, it's been too long.

Bryan Buchanan [03:16:37] Decent possibility.

John Dehlin [03:16:38] He.

Bryan Buchanan [03:16:38] Okay, he's an interesting figure because he is. If you've performed zillions of plural marriages, you know, right up until the second manifesto.

John Dehlin [03:16:49] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:16:49] You can't see things as quite as cut and dried as maybe some of your colleagues do. And there are like letters in private where he's slightly kind of sympathetic, but again he's, he's a loyal soldier that will fall in line with the official policy. Yeah, he's an interesting guy because of that, but yeah. So this official statement, it's published in the Church News and as a pamphlet. And this is how it describes the 1886 revelation.

John Dehlin [03:17:20] All right, so this is a statement drafted by J. Reuben Clark, June of 1933, quote, published in the Church News as a pamphlet, quote. It is alleged that on September 26th through 27th, 1886, President John Taylor received a revelation from the Lord, the purported text of which is given in publications circulating apparently by or at the instance of this same organization. Now, I'm going to stop right there. Purported text. Wait a minute. Like, what the interpretations are is certainly in question. What happened at that meeting is certainly in question. But that text. That text is a valid text. Right? We know that now. Right? He's calling it a purported text.

Bryan Buchanan [03:18:13] This pisses off fundamentalists, and justifiably so.

John Dehlin [03:18:18] So does J. Rubin Clark know that that document is legitimate?

Bryan Buchanan [03:18:22] Because who writes it? It's not Grant. It's not Ivan's. Yeah, but they sign off on it. Yeah, they know better. Clark. I mean, I guess you could argue he's been outside of Church leadership still. But. But it gets.

John Dehlin [03:18:35] So you're saying that Brandon, Ivan's likely knew about the 1886 revelation?

Bryan Buchanan [03:18:40] 100%. Ivan's is a little trickier because he comes in later. Right, but Grant is in every single one of those meetings where John W. Taylor talks about it. He's there in 1911. Did he see the Joseph Fielding Smith copy of it? 1909, possibly. Decent chance of it, yeah.

John Dehlin [03:19:01] So to call it a purported text is slimy.

Bryan Buchanan [03:19:04] It gets worse.

John Dehlin [03:19:05] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [03:19:06] All right.

John Dehlin [03:19:07] As to this pretended revelation, okay, that's. I'm calling Val. Pretended revelation. That's just upright deception.

Bryan Buchanan [03:19:15] Your Church lawyer should have sat you down and said, guys, it's too strong. Guys, can I please suggest some revisions, please?

John Dehlin [03:19:23] Okay, so as to this pretended revelation, it should be said that the archives of the Church contain no such revelation.

Bryan Buchanan [03:19:33] Now, on the one hand, you could say they don't have the original yet. The next thing we're going to talk

John Dehlin [03:19:40] about because the Taylor documents maybe hadn't been.

Bryan Buchanan [03:19:43] So they don't have the original. The original is. Is 100 not in their possession at this point.

John Dehlin [03:19:48] At this point.

Bryan Buchanan [03:19:48] That.

John Dehlin [03:19:49] That is undeniable, exists and people know.

Bryan Buchanan [03:19:51] But they have a copy. They have Joseph F. Smith's 1909 copy.

John Dehlin [03:19:55] Right. Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [03:19:56] So. Yep.

John Dehlin [03:19:57] Okay, so. So the Church contains no such revelation. The archives contain no record of any such revelation.

Bryan Buchanan [03:20:06] Sorry there. And again, you don't. You don't have to say that sentence. You can leave that sentence out.

John Dehlin [03:20:15] The archives contain no record of any such revelation, which this is part of what the Church just released last week is the evidence that the archives did have a copy.

Bryan Buchanan [03:20:22] They 100% did.

John Dehlin [03:20:24] So I was totally lying. Y. Nor any evidence justifying a belief that any such revelation was ever given. They're jumping the shark here. This is Just Heber J.

Bryan Buchanan [03:20:33] Grant had absolutely no business signing. Again, he didn't write it. But if you put your name to something, you have to own up to what's in it, especially if you're the church president.

John Dehlin [03:20:44] So from the personal knowledge of some of us. Okay, that's weird. From the personal knowledge of some of us. From the uniform and Common recollection.

Bryan Buchanan [03:20:56] Uniform.

John Dehlin [03:20:59] From the uniform and common Recollection of the presiding quorums of the Church. Multiple. 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.

Bryan Buchanan [03:21:21] Boy, this was not a great idea. Now, to nuance this.

John Dehlin [03:21:25] I'm not done, but keep going.

Bryan Buchanan [03:21:26] Okay. Sorry. That's right. Yeah. Keep going.

John Dehlin [03:21:28] Is it okay if I finish?

Bryan Buchanan [03:21:29] Yeah, yeah. And then we'll talk about it.

John Dehlin [03:21:30] That's a whopper of a major lie. And you're saying the First Presidency signs this? Eventually.

Bryan Buchanan [03:21:35] I just want to publish it in the Church News. They publish it as an official statement. Like, this isn't.

John Dehlin [03:21:40] You can't say Grant.

Bryan Buchanan [03:21:41] This is Heber J. Grand is church president and Ivins and J. Rubin Clark as his counsel. Counselors.

John Dehlin [03:21:46] This is like. This is a major lie.

Bryan Buchanan [03:21:48] This is one of those where unambiguously. This was a very terrible idea. However, something.

John Dehlin [03:21:54] Okay, okay. All right. We'll finish this off. So, furthermore. They're not done. Furthermore, insofar as the authorities of the Church are concerned, since this pretended revelation, if ever given, was what they just said it wasn't, so why did they say if it was ever. If. If ever given.

Bryan Buchanan [03:22:13] Okay, now. Now, if it was given, it just. Just go on with me. Hypothetically.

John Dehlin [03:22:17] If it were given, if ever given was never presented to and adopted by the Church or by any council of the Church, and since, to the contrary and inspired rule of action, the manifesto

Bryan Buchanan [03:22:32] was ding, ding, ding, this is a much better line of reasoning.

John Dehlin [03:22:36] Yeah. Subsequently to the pretended revelation presented to and adopted by the Church, which inspired rule in its term purport and effect, was directly opposite to the interpretation given to the pretended revelation. This is still lawyer reading.

Bryan Buchanan [03:22:57] How many times can you use the word pretended?

John Dehlin [03:23:00] The said pretended revelation could have no validity and no binding effect and force upon Church members, and action under it would be unauthorized, illegal and void. He clearly knows that that revelation exists because why would he give the second alternative, you know, denunciation, justification. Why would he even bother? That's the whole second half? Yeah, that's. This is horrible. This is. What are the biggest. Whoppers ever told by church leaders this

Bryan Buchanan [03:23:35] was a real bad idea. This is one of those cases where you, you look at it and just shake your head. So I joke with people that I, I would be really good as a consultant to telemarketers because I could say, listen, guys, when the call starts, if I can hear 900 people in the background, it's not good. If I hear a ding, a few little tweaks, and I can make you so much more effective.

Bryan Buchanan [03:24:00] Somebody sitting over J. Reuben Clark's shoulder could have made this a lot better. Because what you do, you don't call the revelation, pretend it. You don't say that it doesn't exist, because guess what? It does. And there's no way that you don't know that. There's just. Maybe not you, Clark specifically, but your colleague Heber J. Grant has been in church leadership for 51 years by this point. 51 years before any of this stuff even starts. And well after it, he knew very well this was not true.

Bryan Buchanan [03:24:36] Now, if they had taken that paragraph out and gone with the idea that it was never presented to the church and accepted as binding upon the church, that's a much better line of reasoning. Now, earlier we talked about, does something have to be canonized to have the same validity? That's a separate discussion.

Bryan Buchanan [03:24:54] But yeah, this was a much better line of reasoning that a church lawyer should have sat him down. A lawyer shouldn't need to have been sat down by another lawyer. To say, this is like, this is. You're going to get thrown out on appeal here, friend.

Bryan Buchanan [03:25:08] This was a terrible idea. Now here's where my, however, comes in. I think probably what is in their minds is before Loren Woolley starts talking about ordinations, you have just the text of a revelation in September 1886. What Loren Woolley does that will change the discussion forever is he couples those two together.

Bryan Buchanan [03:25:31] And to adequately discuss those, you have to decouple them and discuss a revelation text in September 1886, which we can pretty much. I don't know of anyone that is currently arguing that this revelation didn't come from John Taylor, is not in John Taylor's handwriting, is not authentic. Like, there's no reason to doubt this. No, we're past that. That's that discussion. Now, the discussion of the ordinations that Lorne Willey tells, that's a wholly different discussion. And like we've talked about, based on standard historical practice, that's probably not happening. I think in the minds of the First Presidency, they haven't decoupled which they should have. Right. So they're attacking this as a whole and saying the whole enchilada here is not authentic and is inaccurate.

Bryan Buchanan [03:26:21] Which as a historian, you like. Okay. What you should have done is, is decoupled it. Is that going to be easy in 1933? No. Is that going to be messy? Yes. Will it ever be easier or less messy from 1933 on? No. The longer that you don't deal with it. I had a splinter in my finger and I was lazy and I didn't want to deal with it and eventually hurt and it got pus. And guess what? That's what happened here.

Bryan Buchanan [03:26:47] It's not fun to dig something out of your finger. It's not fun to deal with messy history. But guess what? It never gets easier. It only gets worse and harder and more problematic the longer you let it go.

John Dehlin [03:27:00] But you could argue that this is a highly effective response. It's a denial.

Bryan Buchanan [03:27:05] It's a bold denial. And, and it's an official denial.

John Dehlin [03:27:09] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:27:09] It's an unambiguous denial in what they're trying to do. So. Yes. Yeah.

John Dehlin [03:27:16] In the moment it gets messy. But it could have been a lot more messy is all I'm saying.

Bryan Buchanan [03:27:21] If you acknowledge that the September 1886 revelation is legitimate, what happens then? Yeah, to me, I think you could have done it easily by saying, you know What? So is 1843 and we don't not believe in polygamy. We're just. It's not authorized on earth right now. Because what do you have. You always have that idea of in the millennium, you can fix whatever you need to fix. Right. That is a very helpful.

John Dehlin [03:27:50] You can re. Restore the restoration.

Bryan Buchanan [03:27:51] You can re. Restore the restoration. Do all the temple work that we couldn't do because we didn't have the information. You know, like, you could very easily have addressed that. Or it's still problematic. But the 1923 statement is a lot better because it doesn't call the revelation pretended like 25 times. And so this is why fundamentalists are immediately incensed, because they know very well this is nonsense. At least the stuff about the. You can discount everything else, but what they say about the John Taylor revelation is demonstrably wrong.

John Dehlin [03:28:26] It makes you wonder. It makes me wonder if J. Reuben Clark was. Because this is such a horrendously horrific bald faced lie. If you're telling me that Jerry Rubin Clark was barely even active, you know, for many, many years, it almost just makes you wonder whether he's literally like, like the consigliere of of Don Corleone. And he'll just, he's the lawyer that will do and say anything more.

Bryan Buchanan [03:28:53] David's biography of him is regional. Originally called the Mormon Richelieu.

John Dehlin [03:28:58] What?

Bryan Buchanan [03:28:59] A French leader who does kind of those kinds of things, just will lie

John Dehlin [03:29:04] and steal and cheat.

Bryan Buchanan [03:29:05] He's, he's a, he's a statesman.

John Dehlin [03:29:08] Say that word again.

Bryan Buchanan [03:29:08] Richelieu. It's, it's the guy's name. So anyone who deals with Clark realizes that he is a very different sort of Mormon leader because of his background. He is plucked literally from government service and thrown into the first presidency.

John Dehlin [03:29:26] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:29:26] Because of his government service and his skills as a lawyer and a thinker. He has zero, and I mean zero, previous church experience. When he's pulled in, most people hear the news and are like, who is that guy? Like, imagine, I'm trying to think who's a, who's a Mormon guy in Washington? I don't know. Imagine if a Mormon was like the

John Dehlin [03:29:49] secretary of David Kennedy, but he's a believer.

Bryan Buchanan [03:29:53] Okay. Yeah. You pull David Kennedy into the presidency.

John Dehlin [03:29:56] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:29:56] Most Mormons hear that news and are like, who, who is that guy? Right. That's what happens. He's not an apostle.

John Dehlin [03:30:02] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:30:03] He will become later.

John Dehlin [03:30:04] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:30:04] But he isn't then.

John Dehlin [03:30:06] So you, you mentioned that, that, and I've heard this many times before that Michael Quinn's biography on Jerry R. Clark is totally underappreciated.

Bryan Buchanan [03:30:13] Oh, good.

John Dehlin [03:30:14] We need to have you back on if you're willing just to help us, you know, learn more about that. But I, I, Is there any indication this is a spoiler for those who want to read it? Is there any indication that he developed authentic belief late in his life or.

Bryan Buchanan [03:30:27] I don't think that he ever didn't. I just don't think he, for him, being a politician was the way he was a Mormon, if that makes sense. Like, he was, he was pushing the Mormon cause forward through what he was doing. Sort of like Wilkinson, Ernest Wilkinson, the longtime president and problematic figure at byu, is kind of a different sort of Mormon too. Like, he often didn't go to church because he would be in his office at byu, pushing forward byu, because that was his calling. That was his Mormonism, was BYU for those 20 odd years. Right. And that's, I think what Clark was, is his Mormonism was political service. Yes. As pure political service, but in the

John Dehlin [03:31:18] cause of Mormonism, sort of by any means necessary.

Bryan Buchanan [03:31:23] That that was the most important thing was pushing forward Mormonism and that was the way that he could help it so it wasn't that he didn't believe in Mormonism. It's just like that was how he envisioned and lived Mormonism.

John Dehlin [03:31:37] Yeah, it's just so.

Bryan Buchanan [03:31:39] It's just so foreign to our current version of Mormonism and how Mormon leaders look and feel and act.

John Dehlin [03:31:45] But what do you look at, like, what happened with whoever came up with the idea of City Creek? No, no, no. Of. Of Ensign Peak and to literally create shell companies and then hide them and, you know, file false tax returns and. Yeah, like, it's that same type of mentality of like, were they legitimately bad actors?

Bryan Buchanan [03:32:08] Maybe. Did in their minds, did they. Did they genuinely believe that this was pushing forward the goals of Mormonism and that was their calling, was to do this. You have to put yourself in their head and we won't satisfactorily know that. I mean, that one seems a little more problematic than a lot of those cases.

John Dehlin [03:32:30] What we do know is that they're lying in very overt, clear, specific ways and deceiving.

Bryan Buchanan [03:32:36] But are they lying for the Lord?

John Dehlin [03:32:37] Yeah, yeah, exactly. Yeah. Well, that still clearly continues to this day. Right. So this practice is not.

Bryan Buchanan [03:32:44] Yep.

John Dehlin [03:32:45] And this did not end in 1933.

Bryan Buchanan [03:32:47] You know, so this official statement becomes now the. The very d. I mean, this is like 30 pages. Like, this is very detailed, point by point things. Again, some points hold up better than others. Some points are the worst possible ways to deal with this. And I think basically everyone now looks at it and agrees, like, of all possible ways to address this, at least in the question of the nature of this revelation was the worst because it was out and out. Not true.

John Dehlin [03:33:20] Somebody's joking that this is the fourth manifesto.

Bryan Buchanan [03:33:23] And there are little ones along the way too. Like there's letters that go out. Right.

John Dehlin [03:33:28] Really quickly. Two. Two quick questions. Like, is. So is there any evidence of anyone interacting with Lauren Woolley? Any high level church leader interacting with Lauren Woolley at or around 1929 or later? Sort of. Again, wink, wink, wink.

Bryan Buchanan [03:33:51] Nope. Absolutely not. So, Lauren, Willie actually gets excommunicated in 1924.

John Dehlin [03:33:56] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [03:33:57] He is claiming that he is a secret servant. Secret Service agent.

John Dehlin [03:34:01] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:34:02] And he's arguing that church leaders are kind of living a double life. And so that's what. That's what? And again, notice what he's doing. He's putting himself at the center of a story by saying something that the Secret Service is like, no, you're not. You're not in the Secret Service, dude.

John Dehlin [03:34:17] Last question.

Bryan Buchanan [03:34:18] Yeah.

John Dehlin [03:34:18] Are there any high level church leaders that were involved in giving the wink wink nod nods to the the men who continued to perform polygamous marriages after the second manifesto that were alive at the issuance of the June 1933 denunciation, who sort of would have had to deal with the cognitive dissonance of either giving the wink week nod nods to the. To the fundamentalists or knowing about others giving the wink week nod nods to the secretly practicing fundamentalists and would have had to square their knowledge of those wink wink nod nods with this really bold statement issued by the first Presidency.

Bryan Buchanan [03:35:12] Yes, but. Okay, it's always yes, but here. Right. We mentioned that like within a month after the second manifesto in, in 1904, there are at least two apostles who perform plural marriages. One of those, Matthias Cowley, we've talked a lot about him. The other one is really interesting. He's a guy named Rutger Clausen. So he both marries a new plural wife performed by Cowley after the second manifesto. But then he also probably performs one. So the. The family claims that it's Cali. Quinn again demonstrates Cali is probably not in town. If that data is right, it's probably Ruder Clausen, who in his journal says, I had a very important appointment this morning on Ensign Peak.

John Dehlin [03:35:58] Was this a corner of the 12 member Clausen class?

Bryan Buchanan [03:36:00] And yes. Okay. Yep. So. But that's. That's way before most of this happens. Right. So Cali is really interesting because he is dropped from the Quorum 1905, officially 1906, and then deprived of the right to use priesthood in 1911. Thereafter, he continues to speak. But then what's so interesting is then he goes into the orbit of the Baldwin Radio Company and he will actually be an agent for them back in Chicago. And he is quietly, maybe sort of giving approval, but he's. He doesn't seem to be performing marriages anymore and the approval that he might be giving is minimal at best. So not really. And then he actually will kind of make a turn also and decide he wants to fully break with the growing fundamentalist movement and will eventually, after Heber J. Grant makes him grovel after for a period of years, he will be re. Baptized. He is not an apostle.

John Dehlin [03:37:04] Re Baptized? Wait, I thought just his ability to perform. Yeah, he.

Bryan Buchanan [03:37:10] His case is really odd. He is perpetually in a state of limbo from like 1905 onward to the rest of his life.

John Dehlin [03:37:18] Paul Dunn, like emeritus? Kind of. Emeritus Kind of, yeah. But also his membership authority. Questions.

Bryan Buchanan [03:37:24] Yep.

John Dehlin [03:37:25] Wait, so is Lauren Woolley claim that Matthias Cowley was kind of his authority?

Bryan Buchanan [03:37:32] Nope. Beginning from about 1921, he is very clear that his authority derives from his ordination from the hands directly of John Taylor in 1886. And that is consistent throughout the rest of his life.

John Dehlin [03:37:44] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [03:37:45] And his followers will understand his authority that he then gives to the high priest apostles, to this council of friends, to be directly from that. Those 1886 ordinations. And again, that is clear, unambiguous for the rest of time.

John Dehlin [03:37:59] But if Cali's interoperating with the Baldwin factory folks.

Bryan Buchanan [03:38:03] Yeah.

John Dehlin [03:38:03] Isn't Lauren Woolley also interoperating with the Baldwin?

Bryan Buchanan [03:38:07] He is factory.

John Dehlin [03:38:08] So the.

Bryan Buchanan [03:38:08] The Woolies are sort of on the periphery of it. They're not. They don't work there. They're not like, on the board of his company. Now, what's.

John Dehlin [03:38:16] Really sounds like a study group.

Bryan Buchanan [03:38:18] It is. So at the Baldwin factory, they would make radios and headphones. They had government contracts. Like, I bought a pair of headphones that have, like, his name stamped on the earphone. They're so cool. So Christina that I'm working with, she. She gave me this idea because she bought a set off ebay and then shadow boxed them and has them on her wall. Because it's. Yeah. I mean, it's historically important. If you're listening to this interview through headphones, it's Nathaniel Baldwin. If you like fundamentalist history, guess what. It's also Nathaniel Baldwin. And guess what, it's right here in Salt Lake, in Mill Creek. That is happening. Happening. Yeah. So they work during the day, they shut the doors, and they go in the office and they talk about the fullness.

John Dehlin [03:38:58] Is it possible Lauren and Cowley were both there in those.

Bryan Buchanan [03:39:01] Absolutely. Yep. So you have what's going on at the factory and then these cottage meetings that are going on at houses.

John Dehlin [03:39:06] Well, that's why I wonder whether Lauren could claim that Cowley kind of gave him the wink, wink, nod, nod.

Bryan Buchanan [03:39:11] It would be a much more defensible position. And I've often wondered why he didn't.

John Dehlin [03:39:16] But Lauren never said that.

Bryan Buchanan [03:39:17] He never says he's clear.

John Dehlin [03:39:18] I mean, it could be very clear to secrecy.

Bryan Buchanan [03:39:20] Now, John Woolley maybe tried to. It seems like. So when he's excommunicated in 1914, I think that's where he's going. Is that. And to me, that's. That very likely could have happened. That's. That's probably the best explanation for why he starts performing plural marriages. John Woolley. Okay. Is because, like Kelly had done with other people, he says, I probably shouldn't do it anymore. Go see my friend. Go see My friend Judson Tolman. Go see my friend John Woolley. If you can find the way, God bless you. And they find their way. I think that's probably where it starts, but then for some reason it morphs into this later on.

John Dehlin [03:40:08] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:40:09] And another question is, did John Woolley totally. Was he also. Did he also believe the story that largely comes from his son? Because that's less clear. There are kind of hints that he did tell people this, but it's not, it's nowhere near as detailed and as consistent as it coming from Lauren. This story of the 1886 ordinations. Okay, so, but, but then, so the Baldwin factory, they have a cousin Ernest Woolley, who gets involved, and then there's a big cantankerous lawsuit. Baldwin loses his company. He goes to jail for a few years, and it's, it's ugly. And Lauren is kind of on the side of his cousin. So Baldwin is very much soured on this, and he's done with the fundamentalist from there on out. So. Yeah.

John Dehlin [03:40:58] So is there any historical marker of this Baldwin factory in Mill Creek today?

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:02] The factory is still there.

John Dehlin [03:41:03] Oh, really?

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:04] If you go up 33rd, it's just off 2300 East.

John Dehlin [03:41:06] What?

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:08] If you go south of 33rd, it's really cool. They've, I, I, this is sad. I've never been there. Oh. But they've repurposed it into this really cool, like, complex. There's like a cafe and like, like an art.

John Dehlin [03:41:22] Oh, I've been there.

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:23] Okay.

John Dehlin [03:41:23] They've got like a barbecue joint and a taco joint. Yeah, yeah, that's the Baldwin.

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:27] That's the Baldwin factory.

John Dehlin [03:41:28] It's like a food court, basically. It's like a bunch of food trucks.

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:31] Yeah, no, it's, it's a building and it sort of has, like, stalls.

John Dehlin [03:41:35] Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:36] You've probably been like.

John Dehlin [03:41:37] No, it's like indoor.

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:38] I mean, right off 33rd.

John Dehlin [03:41:39] Yeah, yeah. So that's indoor food truck.

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:41] Yeah, that's there.

John Dehlin [03:41:42] Fascinating. So I've been there and you have it. No, that's cool.

Bryan Buchanan [03:41:46] I need to at some point, but yeah, so that's, that's the history of headphones and it's the history of fundamentalism altogether there.

First Presidency Statement and Historical Revisionism

John Dehlin [03:41:53] Well, this first presidency statement of June 1933 is going to go down as one of the biggest whoppers in my, my reading of, of, you know, Mormon church history. Let's go to July.

Bryan Buchanan [03:42:05] The aftermath a month after this galvanizes him because in private, we now have letters from church leaders Anthony Ivins and Melvin Ballard. People are writing them. Understandably, I'm like, hold on. You guys are officially saying this, but isn't, I think, the revelation? And they're like, nope, it is a pretended revelation. So that becomes the position. The revelation does exist, and they all, I think, know it.

John Dehlin [03:42:27] Wait, Melvin Ballard is Emerussa Ballard's dad.

Bryan Buchanan [03:42:29] That is his grandfather.

John Dehlin [03:42:31] And he's saying this first presidency statement is problematic?

Bryan Buchanan [03:42:35] No, he's saying that the revelation is pretended. Okay.

John Dehlin [03:42:38] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [03:42:38] It's made up so that they take that message and run with it.

John Dehlin [03:42:42] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [03:42:43] So again, in the moment, they decide the best course of action is to sweep it under the rug. Now, getting into their heads, did they actually think that the revelation wasn't in John Taylor's handwriting? That it didn't come from him? That it was indeed not authentic?

John Dehlin [03:43:00] Totally. Could be. Could be.

Bryan Buchanan [03:43:02] That could be. I think that they knew that it was real. But the way that they see it is that eventually, again, over time, the LDS Church got to the position that we are absolutely not doing this. And, you know, again, this is. Fundamentalists get. Will. Will constantly say, like, the revelation says, how can I revoke an everlasting principle? Well, that's kind of continuing revelation. Right. Like, things change over time. And the problem is, is you don't have a Thus saith the Lord ending polygamy. Right.

John Dehlin [03:43:40] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:43:41] Because the manifesto from Wilford Woodruff.

John Dehlin [03:43:43] Yeah, that's right.

Bryan Buchanan [03:43:44] It is written like, what, a press release? Because it is a press release. Even the second manifesto, it's. It's a policy statement. It's not a revelation. There is no Thus saith the Lord. Even anything that hints at that ending polygamy. That's a problem.

John Dehlin [03:43:58] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:43:59] And helpfully, section 132 was and is in the Doctrine Covenants. Now, a fun little tangent in the middle of all this is in 1930, this fun little condensed doctrine of Covenants appears called Latter Day Revelation. It's put together by James Talmage, though his name does not appear on it.

John Dehlin [03:44:18] Heard about this one?

Bryan Buchanan [03:44:20] Guess what? There's a facsimile of it that's available. Benchmark. It's cheap. It's really fun.

John Dehlin [03:44:23] Oh, you can buy that?

Bryan Buchanan [03:44:24] Yep. So it has. It's the first edition of Talmage's Articles of Faith, which is really fun because that's where he talks about the idea of progression between kingdoms.

John Dehlin [03:44:33] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:44:33] That later. In fact, Talmage. Later editions are like, nope. But at the back, it has this reprint of Latter day Revelation.

John Dehlin [03:44:39] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:44:40] Again, it's like a condensed Doctrine and Covenants and the. The introduction Is really interesting because it says the purpose of this is kind of like for missionary work. And it takes out a lot of the revelations that were for specific people in specific circumstances. Which is not untrue. Right. Like a revelation to one specific guy clearly about his life doesn't really have a lot of wide application. But intriguingly, what does not also appear in there is DC132, section 132. Guess who notices that immediately? Fundamentalists. And they're like, oh, does this not have wide application, guys? Why is this one not in there? And the book, for reasons that we don't really know yet.

John Dehlin [03:45:23] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:45:23] Quietly disappears and is a collectible.

John Dehlin [03:45:25] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:45:26] So anyways, yeah, they're. They're. They're very clearly distancing themselves. But section 132 is still in the doctrine covenants. It's right there. In 2025, you go down to the church distribution center and buy ad auction covenants. It's still there.

John Dehlin [03:45:38] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:45:40] Woodruff's manifesto, of course, is also there. But it's official declaration one.

John Dehlin [03:45:45] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:45:46] It's not a section, and it doesn't really say that section 132 doesn't apply.

John Dehlin [03:45:51] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:45:52] So, of course, the modern. The usual response to that is that section 132 isn't really about polygamy. It's about eternal marriage for monogamous couples, which.

John Dehlin [03:46:03] Well, this John Taylor, this Original John Taylor 1886 revelation destroys that apologetic argument.

Bryan Buchanan [03:46:11] Does it say polygamy in there? John says, the new and everlasting covenant.

John Dehlin [03:46:16] Oh, come on.

Bryan Buchanan [03:46:16] Again, like, if only by disregarding clear historical context, can you make that not be polygamy? Yeah, it's polygamy.

John Dehlin [03:46:25] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:46:25] It always has been.

John Dehlin [03:46:27] Yeah. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:46:28] So anyways, more and more that is the. The position is the 1886 revelation is. Is pretended. It's not authentic. We don't even know if it exists. Right.

John Dehlin [03:46:37] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:46:38] So the problem is, is because a month after the official statement happens.

John Dehlin [03:46:42] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:46:43] There is this unbelievably great memo from J. Rubin Clark. Now this Quinn mentions this in the biography, so it's not like it's new. But again, I think this flew under the radar for most people. Is in this memo. He says, okay, a month after this official statement, President Ivins started hearing that Nellie Taylor, who is one of the widows of John W. Taylor, again found the 1886 revelation in her husband's papers after his death.

Bryan Buchanan [03:47:13] It's a bit of a problem that it sounds exactly like how John W. Taylor found it. And Nelly is also kind of a problem because she also has an imagination is the kindest way I'm going to say it. She will say things that I think, no, that just didn't happen. And I think you knew that didn't happen. But I don't know. She's really interesting because she is apparently given a commission by her husband, John W. Taylor, to sort of be his, his historian. And there are family efforts to write a biography that get to the point of a draft that may be published at some point. But. So anyways, Ivan's hears that Nelly Taylor knows where the original of the 1886 is.

John Dehlin [03:48:02] Okay, so the church didn't this, we mentioned this earlier at the point of

Bryan Buchanan [03:48:07] this First Presidency statement arguably had a copy. They did not have the original.

John Dehlin [03:48:12] That's the original.

Bryan Buchanan [03:48:13] That is clear cut.

John Dehlin [03:48:15] But then a month after this, a

Bryan Buchanan [03:48:16] month released, they hear this.

John Dehlin [03:48:18] One of the, one of the wives,

Bryan Buchanan [03:48:20] so she says that she gave it to John W's half brother, Frank White Taylor, who is a fascinating guy. So he is the president of the granite stake. So another one of when they split up the original Salt Lake steak, they, they, they kind of carve off portions and make others. The granite stake is one of these. He is again a president of the stake for like 20 years, like they mostly were.

Bryan Buchanan [03:48:44] But he is a post manifesto polygamist. He's probably even a post second manifesto polygamist. So you can imagine having a stake president who's being asked to discipline post manifesto polygamists was a post manifesto polygamist is a wolf guarding the hen house. Right. He's not really inclined to go after guys like, you know him.

Bryan Buchanan [03:49:08] So Joseph Musser is a high councilman in his stake. Francis Lyman is like, we need to release him. And he's like, no, I don't, I don't think we do. And he's left in his position for a while longer. So interestingly, he is now the guy who apparently owns the revelation that Nelly has given him.

John Dehlin [03:49:27] Basically the John, the John Taylor.

Bryan Buchanan [03:49:30] John W. Taylor finds it in his father's papers after his death. He has it for some period of time. It then goes to Rodney Badger, at which point Joseph Fielding Smith makes the typed copy and then apparently goes back into John W. Taylor's possession until his death. That seems to be the best.

John Dehlin [03:49:46] And then it goes where.

Bryan Buchanan [03:49:47] And then Nelly apparently finds it and she has it, you know, going through his stuff after his death. She finds it and then at some point gives it to John W's half brother. So same father, different polygamous wives. Right? Frank White, Frank White, Taylor.

John Dehlin [03:50:04] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:50:05] And the memo is really interesting because Frank White, so, so Grant knows him. You know, they've. They've been friends forever. He goes golfing with him all the time, but yet he's a post second manifesto polygamist.

John Dehlin [03:50:16] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:50:16] Again, it's never. It's never cut and dried. So he goes and talks to Frank and Frank's like, man, I have absolutely no recollection of that. But if she did give it to me, I know exactly where I would have put it. That's a weird answer. Like, if somebody comes to me and says, like, hey, remember when I gave you that thing? And I'm like, nope, But I know exactly where it would be if you did.

John Dehlin [03:50:41] Well, it could just be in a stack of stuff. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [03:50:44] I guess. But he's very clear in this memo. Like, he says, I know exactly where I would have put it. Which I'm like, unless you have a file. That's like. Nelly Taylor gives me super fun stuff. It's an odd. It's an odd answer. So Grant talks to Frank, Frank brings it in and deposits it with the First Presidency, where it remains until it's recently apparently move. It moves from the First Presidency vault, I would guess, to the church history library. When at some point after it's created. Right. Because it's a better facility that's created for the purpose of holding records in archival conditions.

John Dehlin [03:51:22] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [03:51:22] And then thankfully they release it.

John Dehlin [03:51:26] But this, this month later would have been if, if the church were being as honest as it has taught its members to be, this July 1933 moment would have been the time to say, hey, hey, world. Hey, Global Church.

Bryan Buchanan [03:51:42] We already had a copy, but now we have.

John Dehlin [03:51:43] You know that First Presidency statement that we. We just released last month that basically said it's an alleged revelation, it's purported. It's not legitimate. It doesn't really exist. It wasn't real. Oops, we just got the original from the family and it does exist. Never mind. That revelation is legitimate and we have a copy. Tell us if they did that. Did they do that?

Bryan Buchanan [03:52:09] They did not do that, but they could have. And again, like, you could have framed it, but like, yep, the revelation is totally authentic. But functionally, in 1933, it means nothing because we have living prophets and we have decided as a church based on whatever that we aren't doing this and that all of these other plural marriages that are happening are not authorized because they don't have the priesthood keys.

John Dehlin [03:52:32] But it's not that simple because members, some members are smart enough to realize that if, if those prophets got it wrong, then maybe our current prophets are getting it wrong now. In other words, it's not trivial.

Bryan Buchanan [03:52:47] You don't even have to do that because you can frame this in a totally above board, authorized manner. Like you can say this was, you know, you could say something like this was a long process.

John Dehlin [03:52:58] No common consent, basically is what you're saying.

Bryan Buchanan [03:53:00] Yeah, like that line of reasoning that it was never brought before the Church. It was a way better argument. You could have run with that. And they should have, but they didn't.

John Dehlin [03:53:08] It's still the Church should have. That was a moment for the Church to say we made a mistake. That First Presidency statement was totally an error. We found the document, we have it in our possession now. And then not only did they not do that, come clean.

Bryan Buchanan [03:53:22] Yeah.

John Dehlin [03:53:23] But then for the next Almost, let's say 90 years, I'm just trying to do the math. They allowed Mormon apologists to continue creating plausible deniability on behalf of the Church by casting doubt and suspicion as to whether this revelation that the FLDS claimed was legitimate actually was legitimate. Right.

Bryan Buchanan [03:53:48] So is that right? Again, getting into their heads in the moment, this seemed like the best course of action, the easiest course of action, the most effective course of action. Now again, like, you can totally see this as being, as being good actors. And because they truly did not see this either the revelation text by itself as being authentic or again, I think what's most likely is. And, and if, if this is what they thought, then they definitely should have been a lot more specific in saying the whole enchilada of revelation and ordination story definitely is not authentic and not legitimate.

Bryan Buchanan [03:54:26] But they don't. And I think if they had gone one of those other routes, it would have taken a lot of wind out of the sails of the growing fundamentalist movement. You know, if you truly do see these as, as not authorized, that they don't have priesthood keys and this is going rogue, then you could have, I think, taken a lot of, of their thunder by doing something like that, but they don't. And then two years later, Joseph Musser starts publishing Truth, and guess who has a subscription to it? The historian's office. They want to keep tabs on what's going on. And just briefly, the fundamentalist movement starts to grow.

Bryan Buchanan [03:55:05] So you have, the way I describe it to people is if you picture three trains on parallel tracks in the middle, you've got the biggest train. Like this is the big group, centered originally in Salt Lake under Loren Woolley, then Joseph Muster, John Barlow, These guys, like, these are the ones you. You've heard about. That's the big train in the middle. On the other side, you have the LeBaron family. And they take a totally different route to authority. They say it goes from Joseph F. Smith to his friend Benjamin F. Johnson, who was in the Council of 50, and get some sort of authority directly from Joseph Smith.

Bryan Buchanan [03:55:40] It then goes from Joe's, from. From Benjamin F. Johnson to his grandson, Deyer LeBaron. So that's the father of the LeBarons you've heard about. This is the father of Irva LeBaron and the brothers and that whole part of the history. Right? So you have that train, then you have the Kingston family. So the Davis County Cooperative Society, similar kind of thing. Like they say, their authority comes essentially from a visitation, an angelic visitation to Eldon Kingston. So circumventing 1886. But largely it's. It's this main group that derived their authority from the Lauren Woolley account of 1886 ordinations. So that's why this revelation is so important, because that coupled with Lauren Woolley's narrative of ordinations, that is the. The. The founding origin story of this big group of fundamentalists. So they are.

John Dehlin [03:56:32] They all come out.

Bryan Buchanan [03:56:33] They are more or less cohesive until, Starting in the 1940s, a bunch of them are sent to prison under the. During the time of Heber J. Grant.

John Dehlin [03:56:43] Is that the Short Creek.

Bryan Buchanan [03:56:44] This is. This is so Short Creek. You have the headquarters in Salt Lake and then a growing group in the Crick that is the same group, just sort of. This is a colony largely to get people out of the way so they don't get arrested, but they still get arrested. So in 1945, a bunch of them go to prison and they sign a manifesto in prison so they can get out that basically says, we repudiate the principle of plural marriage.

Bryan Buchanan [03:57:13] It's so wild. It's like. It's. When they sign it, it's like almost 45 years to the day of the Woodruff Manifesto. That doesn't go over well with a bunch of fundamentalists who are like, whoa, hold on. Remember how we've been crapping on Wilford Woodruff for years for doing this? Except Woodruff did. Didn't mean it. Guess what? These guys don't mean it either. They. They want to get out of prison because prison sucks, and they want to go back to their families because they're big families and they need to take care of them. And, you know, so anyways, so that's sort of the beginnings of, of schism there.

Bryan Buchanan [03:57:47] So the main group will fracture into what becomes the AUB and what becomes the flds. So that's, that's today when you know, you know, we know, we know. Warren Jeff, the flds, the aub, often called the Allred Group. So that split happens in the 1950s. So that, that's where they come from.

John Dehlin [03:58:05] And I'm Mormon stories. We've interviewed, you know, people from members of the Apostolic United Brethren or the All Red Group, including one of the Sons of Ruling All Red.

Bryan Buchanan [03:58:16] Vance's interview is. Yeah, fascinating.

John Dehlin [03:58:19] And, and also, you know, former flds, you know, one of the former women married by Warren Jeffs as well. Yeah. From the FLDS group.

Bryan Buchanan [03:58:32] So anyways, that all of that later stuff goes back directly bright clear line to Lauren Willie and 1886.

John Dehlin [03:58:39] And this is the point Lindsay Hanson park made when I interviewed her about your polygamy a long time ago. The there's been a lot of really horrible, nasty abuse perpetrated by all of these fundamentalist offshoots of Mormonism. And I think she makes the argument that if the Mormon church had done a better job of owning this history and cleaning it up early on, a lot of abuse of not just women, not just children, but also of other men probably could have been, could have

Bryan Buchanan [03:59:17] been avoided because in 1935 Utah drafts a felony statute that now, let's see, moves polygamy from misdemeanor to felony. The author of that bill is Hubie Brown, who Matthew Harris, our common friend, is currently working on a biography of Brown that will be unbelievable. But he's an official.

John Dehlin [03:59:41] As good as second class Saints.

Bryan Buchanan [03:59:43] Yeah, yeah. Oh, Brown. Because of course Matt is this genius who finds all this stuff. I, I've told people like to me he's this generation's Mike Quinn. Like he goes out and he finds the stuff and he puts it together and he's a good writer and it's just everything he does is fantastic.

John Dehlin [04:00:00] But you're not so shabby yourself, Brian.

Bryan Buchanan [04:00:03] Well, let's see, that's the thing is like I, I, I am very happy to call all of these people friends because I respect what they do so much. But you know, Brown is in a weird place because his father is a patriarch who is on the board of Nathaniel Baldwin's company and has given people patriarchal blessings about how you will be blessed with wives. And he's old enough. And I think Matt has decided like his wife was very clear, we're not, we're not doing this, we're not doing polygamy, but he's very much a believer at the center of it. And now Hugh. And then Hugh's daughter Zola marries.

John Dehlin [04:00:36] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:00:36] Ruling Jeffs.

John Dehlin [04:00:37] Yeah. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:00:38] So he's caught in between two generations. So anyways, he drafts the felony statute that is then used to actively prosecute polygamists. And when the 1945 thing happens, when the 1953 raid happens, from what we can tell, there is quiet coordination behind the scenes from LDS Church headquarters, largely J. Rubin Clark. So, yeah. So all of this messiness could have been at least somewhat less messy down the road. Absolutely.

John Dehlin [04:01:09] We need a. We need to rename Michael Quinn's biography Mormon consigliere J. Reuben Clark.

Bryan Buchanan [04:01:16] Please, please, people. It's such a good biography, and it has such a fun history because he was asked to do it by Marion G. Romney, Clark's, you know, mentor and kind of keeper of his legacy. But then as he starts doing it, people don't love what he's doing.

John Dehlin [04:01:35] Wait, Mary G. Romney asked Michael Quinn to write the biography?

Bryan Buchanan [04:01:39] So there's a public year's biography, and Mike is in charge of the church years, and he's like, great, I'm gonna need to see the stuff. I need to see the first presidency minutes. I need to see this, this, this, and this. Because I want to write a good biography, which P. S. Is what you asked me to do. And, you know, the problem is, is Boyd K. Packer, not surprisingly, doesn't like the biography. And he sits Harvard Heath down in his office and says, that biography will never see the light of day. It's in the middle of this that Quinn stops keeping his journal, which I'm going to publish, where he talks about the messiness of this. He's like, I was asked to do this, and you won't let me do it. And pick a lane. Do you want me to write it or. Or do you not?

John Dehlin [04:02:22] So did he publish the J. Reuben Clark biography before he was excommunicated or after?

Bryan Buchanan [04:02:27] Yep. So it comes out. It comes out from BYU Press.

John Dehlin [04:02:29] That probably didn't help him. Wait, you publishes it even though apostles said it would never be shown the light of day? What?

Bryan Buchanan [04:02:36] Yeah, it's not quite what he wanted, but it's still pretty. And that's. People read it and are blown away. So he publishes that, and then his. His landmark dialogue article on the Manifesto to second manifesto, period comes out. That absolutely blows people's mind because he had had unparalleled access to the nuts and bolts that let you do that. He has minutes, he has journals. And he was this insatiable digger who was never satisfied and was snoopy and would, you know, find stuff everywhere and he was relentless. That's Matt. That's Matt Harris right there. So. And that's why their work is so interesting is because they have the gems. You know, you find this one journal entry that is so revealing that that makes it all so.

New Scholarship, Transparency, and Closing Reflections

John Dehlin [04:03:27] So you mentioned at the end that this. Right. There's a write up at Mormon R.

Bryan Buchanan [04:03:32] So are you in touch with the

John Dehlin [04:03:33] guy who started Mormon R?

Bryan Buchanan [04:03:35] Yeah, yeah. We don't know Josh super, super well, but yeah. And so. And we know some of the folks that have worked there. What's his name? Joshua Josh Coates.

John Dehlin [04:03:43] He's like a former tech guy, right?

Bryan Buchanan [04:03:45] Yeah, yeah.

John Dehlin [04:03:46] Who started Mormon R. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:03:48] B.H. roberts Society Foundation. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So anyways, they just posted a thing on this that is. Is very useful recently.

John Dehlin [04:03:56] Just barely almost they knew, almost like they knew this was going to be coming out.

Bryan Buchanan [04:04:00] So there's a great timeline of the 1886 revelation. And what's fun about their site is they will give you like a scan of the thing and a transcription and then a link to where the original is, if possible. So cool. No, it's. I think we put this in the show notes because that's. It's really useful because you go read, you know, here's, here's the link to the 1886, the original. Here's the link to Joseph Fielding Smith copy. Here's, you know, this, this, this and this.

John Dehlin [04:04:25] Why didn't that fetcher. Why does that fetch you to a podcast?

Bryan Buchanan [04:04:28] You know, it's a good question. I. Yeah, it'll be interesting to see. Maybe they will. Yeah. So anyways, that's useful. But then the other thing I want to talk about too is we, we touched on this. But people need to understand like there's a sea change in the historical department of the church. Like they are opening things up, they are digitizing. So all the credit. Like, would we have liked this 50 years earlier? Yeah, we would.

John Dehlin [04:04:54] But so why now?

Bryan Buchanan [04:04:57] There is.

John Dehlin [04:04:57] Why not 20 years ago?

Bryan Buchanan [04:04:58] Yeah.

John Dehlin [04:04:59] What's the. What happened in 20 years?

Bryan Buchanan [04:05:01] Somewhere there's been enough momentum towards transparency that's built up. So run very germane to this story. Not too long ago they released the complete Hebra J. Grant journals that are thousands of pages redacted. There are some minimal redactions, but again it's usually like the name of the person and like the ward they lived in.

John Dehlin [04:05:21] So was it the Kimball Redactions that related to the second anointing about Kimball.

Bryan Buchanan [04:05:26] There are more with Kimball. Part of that is just, you know, he's what, 40 years closer to the present by his death. But anyways, yeah, I don't love redactions, but overall, like, the climate towards transparency is night and day difference from even like 10 years ago.

John Dehlin [04:05:48] I think it's the Internet. That's my opinion. It's the Internet that's forcing this transparency. Yep.

Bryan Buchanan [04:05:52] And with the grant journals, they made this incredible policy statement where they said, you know, in 2018, a decision was made at the highest levels that we want to get things out there. So the policy they've gone to, which is fairly, you know, you can see this in other archives 70 years after the death of whoever the collection becomes eligible for release.

Bryan Buchanan [04:06:16] So, you know, that's privacy concerns and obviously in a Mormon context for believing Mormons, like, yeah, these people have died, but they're still very much around, which is an interesting wrinkle on, on privacy concerns. But anyway, like, it's, it's, it's pretty fun to see. Like, if you think about the last 10ish years, we've seen the council of 50 minutes, we've seen the George Q. Cannon journals, the Kimball journals, the Grant journals, the original this, like if you rewind the clock 20 years and tell somebody, hey, guess what? In 2025, all of these things are going to be available on the Internet. Like, that would blow somebody's mind.

John Dehlin [04:06:53] Any big ones yet to be released that we know of? William Clayton.

Bryan Buchanan [04:06:57] Clayton is a fantastic example. Not out yet. So from what I understand, in fact, they may have announced more of this at Mormon History Association. I believe they have, they have a publisher. It will not be in house, which I think is a good move for a lot of reasons, but yeah, within

John Dehlin [04:07:14] probably because it's going to be messy. Is that why?

Bryan Buchanan [04:07:16] Well, it's just, I think there'll be a little, they'll have a little more leeway in like introduction and footnotes to talk about things. Like it's, it's a tough dance because church leaders don't view transparency uniformly, you know.

John Dehlin [04:07:32] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:07:33] And, and, and then like the, the. So church departments have a, an executive director, if I'm getting this right, who's a general authority, but then they have a managing director who's like a professional.

John Dehlin [04:07:44] Right. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:07:45] Right.

John Dehlin [04:07:45] So my brother was one of those.

Bryan Buchanan [04:07:47] Yeah. So, you know, though, they don't always see things the same way, which is to be expected.

John Dehlin [04:07:53] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:07:54] So, yeah, I think the overall climate is Moving quickly towards more transparency.

John Dehlin [04:08:02] All right, I have a question that may feel a tiny bit like a curveball. It's not intended to be that way. And it's. I'm sure you're going to easily answer it. Given how shady clearly church leaders have been in terms of being willing to hide or lie or mislead people in certain specific cases, does this give credibility to the types of claims that Michelle Stone makes, which is that, you know, obviously her take is, is that Joseph Smith was a pure, honest, unadulterated.

Bryan Buchanan [04:08:42] His name was dragged into this and

John Dehlin [04:08:44] that really it was Brigham Young.

Bryan Buchanan [04:08:47] Right.

John Dehlin [04:08:47] And that Kimball and others, Joseph really revealed the pure gospel with the pure heart and never practiced polygamy. But starting with Brigham Young and Heber

Bryan Buchanan [04:08:59] C. Kimball, they come in and screw it all up.

John Dehlin [04:09:02] They maybe, maybe plan the assassination of Joseph Smith, but for sure imposed polygamy back on Joseph as a way to justify their own evil sexual machinations.

Bryan Buchanan [04:09:15] Right. Yeah.

John Dehlin [04:09:16] Like. Like, I mean, it seems like I wouldn't put it past a church leader to do something really deceptive. Sure. So does that make that type of theory more plausible when we find out that they certainly would do it in the 20th century, why wouldn't they have done it all the way back into the 19th century?

Bryan Buchanan [04:09:36] Sure. No, to me, it's. It's just the opposite. And that's. Quinn described Nauvoo polygamy and this, this messy end of polygamy. If you're fundamental, you're like, didn't end. Still going on. Still. Still very much alive, because guess what? It's still an essential.

John Dehlin [04:09:52] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:09:52] He described them as mirror images. I think I. Same thing. To me, it's like the way Joseph Smith was. Was making public declarations that, no, we're not doing polygamy, while privately he very much was doing polygamy. That's exactly what goes on from there forward.

John Dehlin [04:10:08] But she claims those public announcements should be taken at face value, that if. If Joseph publicly said he was a

Bryan Buchanan [04:10:14] practicing, why aren't we believing him? Why do we believe Emma?

John Dehlin [04:10:17] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:10:18] My question is then, do you believe Charles Penrose's editorial in 1901 that says the rumor that this one apostle. Maybe that's what he meant. Well, like. Well, it wasn't one, it was four. Do you take those public things at face value? I would hope not, because there's pretty good evidence that on private, it was definitely not that same thing. And that's why much of the discussion around the Nauvoo era has been to say that this, this evidence Is what pretended bogus. It's not. There's no reason to doubt the William Clayton journals. There's no reason to doubt the John Taylor revelation. It's the same kind of thing that's happening throughout.

John Dehlin [04:10:59] Really quickly. Your best. I mean, lots of people like to say John C. Bennett, total scalawag.

Bryan Buchanan [04:11:05] Which he was.

John Dehlin [04:11:06] Yeah. So. So for you, the best evidence, contemporary evidence that Joe Smith practiced polygamy was what?

Bryan Buchanan [04:11:14] Contemporary records? Yeah. I mean, Clayton's journal to me stands by itself. You don't need anything else. Like, he's right at his side. There is no evidence. Dan Vogel has been doing a really helpful series of videos that looks at some of the arguments that are being made and I think does a really good job of showing why they just don't hold up. And it's hard because it. It is very difficult to not make it personal. Right. Like I hope. And it should be the fact that it's not. It's not Michelle. It's not anyone who is. Is arguing things like it's not personal. It's just that using the historical method like you would with anything else, these arguments just do not hold up. And I guess based on evidence.

John Dehlin [04:11:57] I know, I know. Michelle would say that the William Clayton journals are copies of copies. The versions we have now.

Bryan Buchanan [04:12:02] Right.

John Dehlin [04:12:03] When they release the William, William Clayton diaries, they'll be originals or still copies.

Bryan Buchanan [04:12:08] There will definitely be a print component. My understanding is there. There will be scans of them at some point. Usually with. With things that projects we've seen, there's a lag. I really hope it's not very long. I. I think it is in everyone's best interest to have the scans of them available immediately.

John Dehlin [04:12:27] Do you think the church has the original Clayton diaries or copies?

Bryan Buchanan [04:12:31] And the thing is, is like we've seen, like, for example, there was a book published by the University of Utah Press called Producing Ancient Scripture that had a chapter about the Kinderhook plates. Because there's this incredible page and they were able to get a. A copy of the original page of that journal. On this page you have a tracing of the Kinderhook plate. Some of those survive. Guess what? It matches up exactly. So that's one of the claims is like, well, something, something, something. And Dan Vogel goes through that is like, what are you arguing here? Like you're arguing that they. They somehow predicted later that this would be an issue and later managed to get a tracing of it when they're not even in Utah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:13:14] Like, that doesn't work on the facing page. Is Is Clayton recording I married Lucy Walker to Joseph Smith. Like, again, like, treating this like this is not different. You don't use different rules to look at this historical evidence than you would other things. There's no reason to think that this journal is, Is the later fabrication.

John Dehlin [04:13:37] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:13:38] So, yeah. And there's other stuff. You know, there's. There's land deeds, there's. There's a family Bible. There's. There's all these things. Is there as much evidence, would you like? No. Why? Pretty easy to figure out. Like, this is illegal, frowned upon in Victorian era. Like, it's not surprising. There's not a whole lot of contemporary stuff about it because you don't talk

John Dehlin [04:13:58] about it or the people would lie about it.

Bryan Buchanan [04:14:00] Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, yeah, So I see very much what's going on publicly. There's, there's. Church leaders are saying one thing that's. That's great. This is no different than like a political thing that goes on and a politician says one thing behind the scenes. Like, you know, seeing what happened in Watergate. Are you going to believe what Nixon says publicly about Watergate? I would hope not. So again, like, and for a believer, like, there's nothing. Polygamy is, Is a divine principle. It's not. We're not doing something bad. It's just the world doesn't get it and so we're not talking about it to the world in all of its detail.

John Dehlin [04:14:35] Yeah. Perfect.

Bryan Buchanan [04:14:37] Yeah.

John Dehlin [04:14:37] Well, Brian Buchanan, we're four hours and 15 minutes in.

Bryan Buchanan [04:14:41] I hadn't looked at my watch. I knew it was long, but I've.

John Dehlin [04:14:45] I've been on the edge of my seat the entire time. We've had an audience of over 700 people. We've had thousands of people tuning in over the past four hours.

Bryan Buchanan [04:14:52] Cool.

John Dehlin [04:14:52] Please take a second. Everyone please subscribe to our channel. Like this episode. Comment on it, share it. We only had a few hundred people like this and thumbs up. Yet we had thousands of people watching it. So please take the time. Even if you're not watching or listening to the live stream like this episode, subscribe on Spotify or on Apple podcast or on YouTube or wherever. Comment. Share it because we would love this to go viral. Obviously. Please buy as many of your Mormon history books as you can from Benchmark Books. Check out Sunstone podcast year Polygamy. Is that. Are those both going or just.

Bryan Buchanan [04:15:31] Lindsay, occasionally we'll come back to your polygamy and do something. But largely done. So.

John Dehlin [04:15:35] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [04:15:36] Yeah. So the Sunstone History podcast. We are currently just about to Start doing some episodes on the Mountain Meadows Massacre. So this is Lindsay's favorite period. So, you know, Mormon history, this, like, early territorial period. Like, she love, you know, more than polygamy. Well, yeah. I mean, at least as much.

John Dehlin [04:15:55] Okay.

Bryan Buchanan [04:15:56] So. And to me, I'm like, wake me up when John Taylor comes on the scene. So that's why this is so fun, because I love this period of time.

John Dehlin [04:16:04] Really? Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:16:05] Yeah. I think it's fascinating.

John Dehlin [04:16:06] Eating. Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:16:06] It's so messy. And what's so fun is we have this massive documentary record, and we're still finding parts to the story.

John Dehlin [04:16:13] Yeah.

Bryan Buchanan [04:16:14] So I just. I think it's endlessly interesting, and I hope people do. That's the kind of thing, like, you know, I think people have heard hints and some rumors and some kind of vague details about some of this, and hopefully this was enough context to make a little more sense of it. And hopefully it made sense because, like we said, lots of names of lots, lots of dates, lots of moving parts.

John Dehlin [04:16:34] Well, for me, this is a smoking gun in terms of, like, who knew what, when, and then what was denied. This. This. This today adds this whole. This whole experience to my. My list of, like, smoking guns for, like, really big problems where. Where a large number of people were deceived and misled.

Bryan Buchanan [04:16:58] Honestly, I. I, you know, obviously it's complicated, but I. You can point to that 1933 official statement as a really good example of how not to deal with things. It's. It's. It's not a good idea in the immediate present, and it's a really bad idea down. Down the road.

John Dehlin [04:17:13] But I. I love it how you started, which is kudos to the Modern Mormon Church. LDS Church in 2025.

Bryan Buchanan [04:17:19] Yep.

John Dehlin [04:17:20] Because they're swallowing their pride, taking their lumps. They don't have these documents.

Bryan Buchanan [04:17:25] They. They don't have to.

John Dehlin [04:17:26] There's no.

Bryan Buchanan [04:17:27] There's no legal pressure. You know, there's nothing. Like, they chose to do it, and. And good for them. Like, so many other things that are happening, you know? Would historians like to see more stuff? Yep. Are there certain things I want to see? Yep. And. But honestly, like, given the track record, I'm thinking we're gonna get to see a lot of this real soon. Maybe more.

John Dehlin [04:17:48] More fun stuff to come.

Bryan Buchanan [04:17:49] Oh, 100.

John Dehlin [04:17:50] All right. Well, we'd love to have you back always. All right, thanks. Brian Buchanan. Thanks. Thanks to everyone. And check out Sunstone. Sunstone's coming up.

Bryan Buchanan [04:18:01] Yep.

John Dehlin [04:18:01] Sunstone Conference. Some Son symposium is late. Late July, early August, last week of July.

Bryan Buchanan [04:18:06] Yep. Lindsay And I will be presenting on like the core of this discussion with Judson Tolman.

John Dehlin [04:18:11] And you can meet Brian and learn that he's taller than me.

Bryan Buchanan [04:18:15] It's not.

John Dehlin [04:18:16] No, I'm six' six. But you're taller?

Bryan Buchanan [04:18:18] Yep. How tall are you? Six, nine.

John Dehlin [04:18:21] So people ever say you don't sound six nine? No.

Bryan Buchanan [04:18:23] It's funny. And I'm the opposite. Like, when I hear people, I always envision them taller. So when I meet them and they're like five, ten, I'm like, oh, you sound six two. Which is dumb. But no, we'll have. It's funny because Chris that I work with is about my same size. And what he's like, he's like, you know, six, eight and three quarters or something.

John Dehlin [04:18:42] So you're LeBron's height?

Bryan Buchanan [04:18:43] Yeah. I don't want to guard him, if that's what you're asking, but no, we've had people that will look around the counter that legitimately think it's like a pharmacist where we're on something.

John Dehlin [04:18:53] No, you guys make me feel short.

Bryan Buchanan [04:18:55] It's fun, right? You love it.

Closing Thanks and Support the Podcast

John Dehlin [04:18:58] All right. All right. Thanks, Brian. Thanks, everyone for joining us today on Mormon Stories. Thanks to our donors that make Mormon Stories podcast possible. They allow me to pay Brian and our staff keep the lights on. Thanks to Brooklyn and Julia and all those behind the scenes at Open Storage foundation that make all this possible, including our board donors who couldn't do without you. If you value this type of content, want to see it continue, please go to MormonStories.org click on the Donate button. Become a monthly donor. We had like four or five people cancel their monthly donations this month. If we don't replace canceled donations with new recurring donations, then we got to stop providing you with content like this.

John Dehlin [04:19:36] And you know, I'm getting tired. It's 12, I'm 20 years into this thing. Don't demotivate me from, from sharing this type of stuff because I think this, these stories deserve the in depth treatment that we give. And so that's. I love this stuff and I hope you do too. So please support us if you can. There are other ways to support us, as we've already mentioned, but most importantly, comment if you like this. If you have questions or thoughts or comments, Brian may read the comments on YouTube at least and weigh in or, you know, we'll figure out how to get them to them. We also love your email@mormonstoriesmail.com so please give us your feedback and let us know what you like and don't like and what you want to see in the future.

John Dehlin [04:20:18] Thanks, everybody. Be good to each other, be kind to each other, and we'll see you all again soon on another episode of Mormon Stories podcast. Take care.

Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.