Tuesday, May 18, 2021

On Post-Manifesto Marriages and the Authority Question

 

 

. . . by the 1880s the saints had a well-established hierarchy, and government persecution of the saints for plural marriage made it better for John Taylor to uninvolved himself from plural marriage. In 1884, President Taylor was subpoenaed to answer questions at the trial of Rudger Clawson about the Church’s priesthood authority and records pertaining to plural marriage. In the trial, he made a number of interesting and informative remarks about these subjects:

 

“Q. Now are there no other places than those you have mentioned [i.e. the temples and the Endowment House] where the church authorizes the rite of plural marriage to be performed?

A. The right of plural marriage can be performed in other places. There is no place set part specifically for it. . . .

Q. Is there any other proper places for the performance of these rights?

A. The ceremony of marriage can be performed outside of any of those places.

Q. Would [members] not require a [special] dispensation from the church to authorize its celebration elsewhere?

A. Yes.

Q. What are the circumstances necessary to the obtaining of a dispensation?

A. It would be very difficult for me to say. There might be twenty or thirty different circumstances.

Q. Well, do you know some circumstances that would authorize such a dispensation?

A. I do not know particularly.

Q. Did you say it would require a dispensation?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. For the performance of the act, but not for a specific place?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Who gives the authority?

A. I gave that authority.

Q. In call cases?

A. Generally in all cases.

Q. Is there any other person authorized to grant the dispensation?

A. There are persons I might appoint.

Q. Have you conferred upon any person that authority within the past three years?

A. Yes, Sir.

Q. Who?

A. Sometimes Joseph F. Smith, sometimes George Q. Cannon.

Q. Do you remember any others upon whom you conferred that authority within that time?

A. I do not remember any at present.

Q. When this authority is conferred upon any one by you, is it an authority limited to some particular case, or a general authority?

A. It would be a general authority until rescinded. . . .

Q. I understand it is you from whom the authority comes?

A. Yes, sir; but I have nothing to do with the details of the matter.

Q. But you are the person who confers the authority?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then you do know upon whom you do confer authority?

A. There are hundreds of people who have authority.” (Published in the Deseret Weekly News, 22 October 1884 and re-published in Saints’ Herald vol. 31 page 723)

 

In the above excerpt, President Taylor makes it clear that he was the ultimate source of authorizing “dispensations” of the sealing power, and indicated that an individual’s authorization could be “rescinded” by him. He indicates that he did not personally confer the ”dispensation” of this “authority” but that he had authorized Joseph F. Smith and George Q. Cannon to do so, and that “hundreds” had been given authority to seal by them. Later on this testimony he would reiterate this:

 

“Q. Who in this city is authorized to celebrate plural marriages?

A. A great many have been appointed—hundreds.

Q. Could you give me the names of those in this city who are now authorized to perform plural marriages?

A. I could not.

Q. Do you mean there are so many?

A. There are a great many that would be authorized under certain circumstances.” (Deseret Weekly News, 22 October 1884 and re-published in Saints’ Herald vol. 31 page 724)

 

In cross examination, he further explained that this delegated authority that “hundreds” held to perform plural marriages was the authority to perform all temple ordinances in general (This is with the possible exception of the second anointing. John Taylor likely believed that this delegated sealing authority was not enough to perform the “highest” ordinance unless an individual had received their second anointing themselves), that delegated plural marriage sealing authority was not a distinct or separate authority:

 

“Q. President Taylor, in your direct examination you spoke of having appointed or authorized persons to celebrate plural marriages. State whether or not such authorization of appointments extended only to plural marriages, or whether the appointees had had the authority to celebrate first marriages also. In other words, was the authorization general as to marriage or confined to plural marriages only?

A. It was general in all these matters, and things performed in the house.

Q. And as to all classes of marriage, Mr. Taylor?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Whether plural or first marriage?

A. Yes, sir.

. . .

Q. You stated in answer to Richards’ question as to the scope of the authority?

A. My answer was that it pertained to all matters performed in the house. I refer to the Endowment House or to the Temple.” (Deseret Weekly News, 22 October 1884 and re-published in Saints’ Herald vol. 31 page 724)

 

Shortly after President Taylor’s testimony, George Q. Cannon was called on the stand and gave similar answers, including an interesting comment that “formerly the apostles were the ones who attended to these marriages, but latterly a great many others have been authorized” (Deseret Weekly News, 22 October 1884 and re-published in Saints’ Herald vol. 31 page 726) Cannon’s statement that “formerly the apostles were the only ones who attended to these marriages” is a telling echo of the Nauvoo statement of Wilford Woodruff to William Smith on October 9, 1844 that marriage sealings were a “right exclusively belonging to the quorum of the Twelve or the president of the quorum” and the reality in the early 1850s that marriages were almost universally only sealed by the Quorum of the Twelve.

 

Thus President Taylor originated the policy that would be adopted by his successors—Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, and Joseph F. Smith—where they would publicly deny performing plural marriages and uninvolved themselves from the details of new polygamist unions, all while privately indicating approval of the secret perpetuation of plural marriage. (Jacob Vidrine, “The One Anointed and Appointed over the Sealing Power,” One Eternal Round: A Magazine Dedicated to Mormon History and Theology, issue 7 [15 December 2019]:44-48)

 

Blog Archive