Mormonism Research Ministry

,

Q&A: John Taylor’s 1886 Revelation on Polygamy

—

Aaron Shafovaloff

Summary

On September 27, 1886, John Taylor received a revelation on the permanence of the doctrine of plural marriage. In 1933 the First Presidency denied its existence and called the “purported text” for it a “pretended revelation.” The LDS Church finally conceded its existence on June 14, 2025.

What is the text of the revelation?

Sept 27 1886

My son John, you have asked me concerning the New and Everlasting Covenant how far it is binding upon my people.

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.

Have I not given my word in great plainness on this subject? 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 these 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, and as I have 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. 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.1

1909 typescript copy by Joseph Fielding Smith of the 1886 John Taylor revelation

What is the context of the revelation?

“As the nineteenth century was coming to a close, the United States government was putting more and more pressure on the Mormon Church to stop the practice of plural marriage. Several Mormon leaders brazenly defied federal intervention into what they believed was a divine doctrine, and several went to prison for their convictions… This revelation, given by then- President John Taylor on September 27, 1886, was in response to a question his son had regarding celestial marriage.” (Bill McKeever)

Does “new and everlasting covenant” in this context refer to plural marriage?

Yes. LDS scholar Stephen O. Smoot concedes:

“In the religious lexicon of pre-1890 Mormonism, ‘new and everlasting covenant’ almost always meant plural marriage. There are a few exceptions but most of the time that’s how the term was intended. Almost certainly that’s also the intention in this revelation.”2

Do other revelations use the language of “my son”?

Yes. D&C 90 opens with, “Thus saith the Lord, verily, verily I say unto you my son…” In D&C 121 Joseph Smith is addressed with, “My son, peace be unto thy soul…” (v. 7). D&C 130:15 includes, “Joseph, my son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old…”

Did John Taylor believe polygamy would be abrogated?

No.

“Taylor prefaces his remarks with the typical ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ and while he notes that his God can revoke a commandment, he made it clear that the doctrine of celestial marriage is not one of them. He insists that this teaching ‘cannot be abrogated’ but ‘will stand forever.’ Taylor is resolute in his belief that his God has not revoked this law nor will he.” (Bill McKeever)

Did LDS leadership know about the revelation before the 1890 Manifesto was formally accepted?

Yes. One week before the 1890 Manifesto was formally accepted, “Heber J. Grant record[ed] in his journal that John W. Taylor, John Taylor’s son, informed the Quorum of the Twelve about his father’s revelation.”3 Heber J. Grant records,

“John W. Taylor, Said that when he had read the Manifesto he felt ‘damn it’ He said that he remembered the Revelation that Prest. Woodruff had had from the Lord which was read to us some time ago in which he told us that He would sustain us in carrying out the law of plural marriage. He also remembered finding among his father’s papers the words of the Lord to him in which The Lord said that plural marriage was one of His eternal laws and that he had established it, that man had not done so and that he would sustain and uphold his saints in carrying it out. He said that this was given to his father in answer to prayer in which he had asked the Lord if it would not be right under the circumstances to discontinue plural marriage.”4

Heber J. Grant, Journal, September 30, 1890, 443, Church History Library
Heber J. Grant, Journal, September 30, 1890, 444, Church History Library

Did the LDS Church claim that “no such revelation exists”?

Yes. On June 17, 1933, the First Presidency (Heber J. Grant, Anthony W. Ivins, and J. Reuben Clark, Jr.) issued a statement:

“It is alleged that on September 26–27, 1886, President John Taylor received a revelation form the Lord, the purported text of which is given in publications circulated apparently by or at the instance of this same organization.

“As to this pretended revelation it should be said that the archives of the Church contain no such revelation; the archives contain no record of any such revelation, nor any evidence justifying a belief that any such revelation was ever given. From the personal knowledge of some of us, from the uniform and common recollection of the presiding quorums of the Church, from the absence in the Church archives of any evidence whatsoever justifying any belief that such a revelation was given, we are justified in affirming that no such revelation exists.”5

“An Official Statement from the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” Deseret News, June 17, 1933, Church Section, 4

This has been called by some the “Third Manifesto.”

When did the LDS Church receive the original?

Frank Y. Taylor presented the original handwritten revelation to Heber J. Grant “about July 15, 1933.”6

Did a member of the First Presidency inspect the document?

Yes. Anthony W. Ivins wrote on February 10, 1934,

“I have searched carefully, and all that can be found is a piece of paper found among President Taylor’s effects after his death. It was written in pencil and only a few paragraphs which had no signature at all. It was unknown to the Church until members of his own family claimed to have found it among his papers. It was never presented or discussed as a revelation by the presiding authorities of the Church.

“The fact is that neither of these pretended revelations (1880 and 1886) has any purport whatsoever so far as the Church is concerned.”7

Did LDS leadership continue to deny its authenticity?

Yes. In 1974 Mark E. Peterson wrote,

“To justify their own rebellion recalcitrant brethren devised a scheme which they hoped would frustrate the stand of the Church on plural marriage. They concocted a false revelation, allegedly given to President John Taylor in 1886, in which pretended secret authority was given to continue plural marriages.”8

Did the LDS Church continue to describe it as a “purported revelation”?

Yes. In volume 2 of Saints (2020) it is mentioned:

“After the death of his father, President John Taylor, John W. had found a purported revelation about marriage among the prophet’s papers. The revelation, dated September 27, 1886, seemed to suggest to John W. that the commandment to practice plural marriage would never be revoked.

“Although the revelation had never been presented to the Quorum of the Twelve or accepted as scripture by the Saints, John W. believed that it was the word of God to his father.”9

Have some Latter-day Saint scholars admitted that the LDS Church suppressed its existence?

Yes. Brian C. Hales, a prominent LDS historian of Joseph Smith’s polygamy, remarks,

“The greatest significance of the 1886 revelation is that the Church tried to suppress its existence.”10

When did the LDS Church acknowledge the revelation?

The LDS Church acknowledged the revelation on June 14, 2025, by posting it to the church history library catalog. The description reads,

“Revelation about the new and everlasting covenant as written by John Taylor. File includes John Taylor’s 1886 handwritten copy and a handwritten copy by a Taylor family member. Also includes an 18 July 1933 memorandum from J. Reuben Clark Jr. about the provenance of the copy in John Taylor’s handwriting, a 1909 typescript copy of the revelation by Joseph Fielding Smith, and additional typescript copies.”

The first page of John Taylor’s hand-written 1886 revelation on polygamy.

Who helped “spark its digitization”?

LDS scholar Stephen O. Smoot inquired about the document through the Church History Department. He writes,

“It’s been a privilege to work on this topic with the B. H. Roberts Foundation and to help spark its digitization by inquiring about the document through the Church History Department. After nearly two years of anticipation, I finally saw the scan of the original document in Taylor’s own handwriting this morning on the CHL catalog website—it was remarkable to see at last.”11

How did Mormon fundamentalists respond?

Benjamin Shaffer writes,

“The existence of mormon fundamentalism, with its over-sized presence in the public consciousness, and 100k adherents, is a direct result of a document, called the Third Manifesto, which denied the existence of this revelation document from 1886. If the first document actually exists as this link now admits, then the core claim of the schism be[t]ween these mormon sects is shown to be an intentional falsehood! Releasing this document is a quiet admission that the Third Manifesto contained intentional falsehoods. Correcting the record is su[r]prising but welcome.”12

How did former Mormon fundamentalists respond?

Mary Morrison Batchelor writes:

“This revelation was a very significant and important reason why I chose to live polygamy when I was 20. It is a driving force behind why fundamentalist Mormons have continued to live polygamy and why they distrust the mainline church. I have strong feelings about deception and the horrible costs of it. It steals people’s abilities to make informed decisions and consent (or not consent) to circumstances and events in their lives.”13

How did mainstream Latter-day Saints respond?

Latter-day Saints have offered a variety of (sometimes competing) arguments:

  • John Taylor didn’t know whether it was a true revelation.
  • It doesn’t distinctly concern plural marriage, but rather the more general idea of eternal marriage, which includes monogamy.
  • A commandment can be retracted, even after Christ promises just years earlier that it never will.
  • The revelation was not made official through proper channels.
  • It was only meant to be a personal revelation; it was not meant for the Church.

One Latter-day Saint concludes that they can “accept this revelation’s authenticity while fully supporting the First and Second Manifestos”:

“If, as John W. Taylor later claimed, he discovered it among his father’s papers years later, then the delay in its circulation is understandable. The secrecy and care with which it was handled echoes similar circumstances during the early days of plural marriage under Joseph Smith.

“In 1909, Joseph Fielding Smith, then a member of the Church Historian’s Office and later President of the Church, personally preserved and catalogued a copy of the 1886 revelation, demonstrating both its existence and its relevance within the Church’s archival records. Two years later, in a 1911 meeting with Church leadership, the document was reportedly discussed openly, with John W Taylor having brought it to be read aloud. Notably, no one in that meeting disputed its authenticity. Rather, it was affirmed that the 1890 Manifesto superseded it. This strongly suggests that while Church leaders didn’t view the 1886 revelation as binding at that moment, they did not consider it a forgery or irrelevant piece of history. It remained part of the ongoing record of how revelation, policy, and practice evolved over time in response to changing circumstances.

“Critics have pointed out that the 1933 First Presidency described the revelation as “pretended.” But that judgment was issued at a time when the Church was facing considerable pressure to distance itself from break-off groups and to affirm its alignment with federal law. It is not clear that ‘pretended’ meant ‘forged’ – only that the document was not to be used as authority outside the proper channels of Church governance…”

“I also believe it is possible to accept this revelation’s authenticity while fully supporting the First and Second Manifestos.”14

What is MRM’s take?

“We wonder, did God speak to Taylor, as his own handwriting attests? If so, then the Mormon God must be very fickle if he didn’t know he would change his mind just four years later. And if Taylor received this as a revelation, why doesn’t the LDS Church accept this in the Standard Works. Or was Taylor just laying out his own hope and desire that the winds of politics would not blow down a doctrine that the LDS leadership considered vital? Either way, this 1886 revelation ought to be disconcerting for those Mormons who hold that God can speak to their prophet.” (Bill McKeever)

We agree with ex-Mormon Christian Daniel Ortner:

“If Jesus told John Taylor directly in 1886 that polygamy would never be rescinded and was an everlasting covenant, then I think it’s very hard to reconcile that with Jesus allegedly giving the opposite revelation to President Woodruff just a few years later. It puts the Church’s claim to be not in apostasy and to be Christ’s true Church into serious question.”

See also

References

  1. John Taylor, Revelation, September 27, 1886, MS 34928, CHL. Link. ↩︎
  2. Stephen Smoot. Facebook comment. “Friends— Check out the latest from Mormonr…”, posted on June 14, 2025. Link to post. Comment posted on June 15, 2025. Link to comment. Screenshot. Accessed June 17, 2025. ↩︎
  3. “John Taylor’s 1886 Revelation.” Mormonr.org. Accessed June 15, 2025. Link. ↩︎
  4. Heber J. Grant, Journal, September 30, 1890, 443–444, Church History Library. See B. H. Roberts Foundation entry here.

    The 1890 Manifesto was drafted on September 23rd, presented to and edited by some General Authorities on the 24th, and published on the 25th. The Quorum of the Twelve discussed it on the 30th, and it was formally accepted in Conference on October 6th. ↩︎
  5. First Presidency Statement, 17 June 1933, in Messages of the First Presidency, vol. 5, p. 327. Link. ↩︎
  6. “About July 15, 1933 Frank Y. Taylor brought to President Grant the attached paper encased in the envelope which is attached to the paper.” J. Reuben Clark, Memorandum, July 18, 1933, MS 34928, CHL. See B. H. Roberts Foundation entry here. ↩︎
  7. Anthony W. Ivins, Letter, February 10, 1934, rep. Supplement to the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage, ed. Joseph W. Musser and J. L. Broadbent (Salt Lake City: Truth Publishing, n.d), 13, 15. Link. ↩︎
  8. Mark E. Petersen, The Way of the Master (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1974), 57. Link. ↩︎
  9. Saints: The Story of the Church of Jesus Christ in the Latter Days 4 vols. (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2020), 2:605–606. Link. ↩︎
  10. Brian Hales. Facebook comment. “Has any research been done…”, August 24, 2021, posted by J.J.W. on the Mormon Historians Facebook group. Post link. Comment posted on August 24, 2021. Comment link. Screenshot. ↩︎
  11. Stephen Smoot. Facebook post. “Friends— Check out the latest from Mormonr…”, June 14, 2025. Link to post. Screenshot. Stephen’s wife also publicly commented on the post, “It’s so exciting to see it finally released and to know you played such a key role in bringing this historical document to light.” ↩︎
  12. Benjamin Shaffer. Facebook comment. “Well, friends, coming out of my retirement from Mormon Studies because the day arrived”, by Cristina Gagliano, on June 14, 2025. Post link. Comment posted on June 14, 2025. Comment link. Comment screenshot. ↩︎
  13. Mary Morrison Batchelor, Facebook post. June 17, 2025. Accessed June 17, 2025. Link. ↩︎
  14. “My ‘Official’ Statement on the 1886 Revelation and Its Place in Latter-day Saint History and Doctrine.” July 17, 2025. Accessed July 17, 2025, 5:34pm EST. Link. ↩︎