Dream of Lorin C. Woolley as written by Joseph W. Musser

[Luke]

“He [Lorin C. Woolley] was on west side of Main Street between South Temple and 1st South when he was met by Joseph F. Smith (who had died some time before.) President Smith said, ‘Loren, aren't you going to the meeting?’ (A solemn assembly being held in the Temple.) Loren said, ‘No, I haven't been invited’ President Smith said, ‘Oh, yes, you must be there; you are expected to speak.’ President Smith then led Loren into the Temple and to the door leading into the Priesthood assembly room. He opened the door and told Loren to go in and go to the stand. As Loren advanced toward the stand he heard arguing between Brother Talmage and others to the effect that he (Lorin) should not be there. He had been handled and was not entitled to admittance. (This was before he had actually been handled.) The Voice of President Smith was heard from the door to the effect,—‘Oh, yes he is qualified to be here,—go ahead Loren.’ Voice whispered—‘That is President Smith speaking.’ Loren walked to the pulpit and the voice of the Prophet Joseph Smith was heard saying—‘Lorin will now give the history of the Church from the underground days until present.’ A voice in the assembly said,—‘That is the Prophet Joseph Smith talking;’ and the brethren who had been arguing against Loren’s admission into the assembly, shrunk and shriveled up.” (Joseph W. Musser, Book of Remembrance, pg. 2-4, 26 February 1931)

[Dusty Wanderer]

“He [Lorin C. Woolley] was on west side of Main Street between South Temple and 1st South when he was met by Joseph F. Smith (who had died some time before.) President Smith said, ‘Loren, aren't you going to the meeting?’ (A solemn assembly being held in the Temple.) Loren said, ‘No, I haven't been invited’ President Smith said, ‘Oh, yes, you must be there; you are expected to speak.’ President Smith then led Loren into the Temple and to the door leading into the Priesthood assembly room. He opened the door and told Loren to go in and go to the stand. As Loren advanced toward the stand he heard arguing between Brother Talmage and others to the effect that he (Lorin) should not be there. He had been handled and was not entitled to admittance. (This was before he had actually been handled.) The Voice of President Smith was heard from the door to the effect,—‘Oh, yes he is qualified to be here,—go ahead Loren.’ Voice whispered—‘That is President Smith speaking.’ Loren walked to the pulpit and the voice of the Prophet Joseph Smith was heard saying—‘Lorin will now give the history of the Church from the underground days until present.’ A voice in the assembly said,—‘That is the Prophet Joseph Smith talking;’ and the brethren who had been arguing against Loren’s admission into the assembly, shrunk and shriveled up.” (Joseph W. Musser, Book of Remembrance, pg. 2-4, 26 February 1931)

Luke, what do you think it means "from the underground days until present"? If I knew more about Woolley's background I'd probably know.

[blitzinstripes]

Screenshot_20220309-200534.png (279.6 KiB) Viewed 864 times

[blitzinstripes]

If you are proposing that Woolley was legitimate, then I suppose the same argument could be made for Warren Jeffs. And if not, why not?

I personally know a man who a few years after converting to (mainstream) LDS became infatuated with the idea of polygamy, proposed to his 14 yr old step-daughter, apostasized, and after a long legal battle which garnered the attention of national news headlines he ended up with Jeffs' movement in southern Utah and is now married to one of Jeffs' former wives (and several other women) while Jeffs cools his heels.

[Luke]

If you are proposing that Woolley was legitimate, then I suppose the same argument could be made for Warren Jeffs. And if not, why not?

I personally know a man who a few years after converting to (mainstream) LDS became infatuated with the idea of polygamy, proposed to his 14 yr old step-daughter, apostasized, and after a long legal battle which garnered the attention of national news headlines he ended up with Jeffs' movement in southern Utah and is now married to one of Jeffs' former wives (and several other women) while Jeffs cools his heels.

You could make the same argument for Warren Jeffs... but only if you accept the John Y. Barlow, Leroy S. Johnson and Rulon T. Jeffs succession line (and not any of the other ones, of which there are many). It doesn’t work like that. Thousands and thousands of people accept Lorin’s claims (including myself), but only a handful of those accept Warren’s.

I am a Fundamentalist. I converted from LDS thought to Fundamentalist thought. You don’t have to paint all of us as Warren Jeffs type people. We aren’t.

[Luke]

“He [Lorin C. Woolley] was on west side of Main Street between South Temple and 1st South when he was met by Joseph F. Smith (who had died some time before.) President Smith said, ‘Loren, aren't you going to the meeting?’ (A solemn assembly being held in the Temple.) Loren said, ‘No, I haven't been invited’ President Smith said, ‘Oh, yes, you must be there; you are expected to speak.’ President Smith then led Loren into the Temple and to the door leading into the Priesthood assembly room. He opened the door and told Loren to go in and go to the stand. As Loren advanced toward the stand he heard arguing between Brother Talmage and others to the effect that he (Lorin) should not be there. He had been handled and was not entitled to admittance. (This was before he had actually been handled.) The Voice of President Smith was heard from the door to the effect,—‘Oh, yes he is qualified to be here,—go ahead Loren.’ Voice whispered—‘That is President Smith speaking.’ Loren walked to the pulpit and the voice of the Prophet Joseph Smith was heard saying—‘Lorin will now give the history of the Church from the underground days until present.’ A voice in the assembly said,—‘That is the Prophet Joseph Smith talking;’ and the brethren who had been arguing against Loren’s admission into the assembly, shrunk and shriveled up.” (Joseph W. Musser, Book of Remembrance, pg. 2-4, 26 February 1931)

Luke, what do you think it means "from the underground days until present"? If I knew more about Woolley's background I'd probably know.

Lorin Woolley was one of the men who John Taylor set apart in September 1886 to keep the Principle of Celestial Plural Marriage alive, knowing what was going to happen in the future. John Taylor was, at the time, part of the “Mormon underground”, which was certain men who were constantly in hiding due to the persecution over plurality. He was staying at John W. Woolley’s house (Lorin’s father) when the aforementioned events happened.

[Baurak Ale]

“He [Lorin C. Woolley] was on west side of Main Street between South Temple and 1st South when he was met by Joseph F. Smith (who had died some time before.) President Smith said, ‘Loren, aren't you going to the meeting?’ (A solemn assembly being held in the Temple.) Loren said, ‘No, I haven't been invited’ President Smith said, ‘Oh, yes, you must be there; you are expected to speak.’ President Smith then led Loren into the Temple and to the door leading into the Priesthood assembly room. He opened the door and told Loren to go in and go to the stand. As Loren advanced toward the stand he heard arguing between Brother Talmage and others to the effect that he (Lorin) should not be there. He had been handled and was not entitled to admittance. (This was before he had actually been handled.) The Voice of President Smith was heard from the door to the effect,—‘Oh, yes he is qualified to be here,—go ahead Loren.’ Voice whispered—‘That is President Smith speaking.’ Loren walked to the pulpit and the voice of the Prophet Joseph Smith was heard saying—‘Lorin will now give the history of the Church from the underground days until present.’ A voice in the assembly said,—‘That is the Prophet Joseph Smith talking;’ and the brethren who had been arguing against Loren’s admission into the assembly, shrunk and shriveled up.” (Joseph W. Musser, Book of Remembrance, pg. 2-4, 26 February 1931)

Luke, what do you think it means "from the underground days until present"? If I knew more about Woolley's background I'd probably know.

Lorin Woolley was one of the men who John Taylor set apart in September 1886 to keep the Principle of Celestial Plural Marriage alive, knowing what was going to happen in the future. John Taylor was, at the time, part of the “Mormon underground”, which was certain men who were constantly in hiding due to the persecution over plurality. He was staying at John W. Woolley’s house (Lorin’s father) when the aforementioned events happened.

I had the spirit witness to me about the truth of that meeting very early on. I have since looked into the revelation received by Pres. Taylor on that day and also the journal entries of those present, all of which appear to corroborate that a special event indeed occurred. For example, among others present in that meeting was George Q. Cannon. His journal entry for the 26th seems to record the incident in purposefully masked terms: "Our meeting was a very interesting one."

[Luke]

“He [Lorin C. Woolley] was on west side of Main Street between South Temple and 1st South when he was met by Joseph F. Smith (who had died some time before.) President Smith said, ‘Loren, aren't you going to the meeting?’ (A solemn assembly being held in the Temple.) Loren said, ‘No, I haven't been invited’ President Smith said, ‘Oh, yes, you must be there; you are expected to speak.’ President Smith then led Loren into the Temple and to the door leading into the Priesthood assembly room. He opened the door and told Loren to go in and go to the stand. As Loren advanced toward the stand he heard arguing between Brother Talmage and others to the effect that he (Lorin) should not be there. He had been handled and was not entitled to admittance. (This was before he had actually been handled.) The Voice of President Smith was heard from the door to the effect,—‘Oh, yes he is qualified to be here,—go ahead Loren.’ Voice whispered—‘That is President Smith speaking.’ Loren walked to the pulpit and the voice of the Prophet Joseph Smith was heard saying—‘Lorin will now give the history of the Church from the underground days until present.’ A voice in the assembly said,—‘That is the Prophet Joseph Smith talking;’ and the brethren who had been arguing against Loren’s admission into the assembly, shrunk and shriveled up.” (Joseph W. Musser, Book of Remembrance, pg. 2-4, 26 February 1931)

Luke, what do you think it means "from the underground days until present"? If I knew more about Woolley's background I'd probably know.

Lorin Woolley was one of the men who John Taylor set apart in September 1886 to keep the Principle of Celestial Plural Marriage alive, knowing what was going to happen in the future. John Taylor was, at the time, part of the “Mormon underground”, which was certain men who were constantly in hiding due to the persecution over plurality. He was staying at John W. Woolley’s house (Lorin’s father) when the aforementioned events happened.

I had the spirit witness to me about the truth of that meeting very early on. I have since looked into the revelation received by Pres. Taylor on that day and also the journal entries of those present, all of which appear to corroborate that a special event indeed occurred. For example, among others present in that meeting was George Q. Cannon. His journal entry for the 26th seems to record the incident in purposefully masked terms: "Our meeting was a very interesting one."

Not to mention the fact that he lists all the same people that Lorin Woolley listed.

[Baurak Ale]

Luke, what do you think it means "from the underground days until present"? If I knew more about Woolley's background I'd probably know.

Lorin Woolley was one of the men who John Taylor set apart in September 1886 to keep the Principle of Celestial Plural Marriage alive, knowing what was going to happen in the future. John Taylor was, at the time, part of the “Mormon underground”, which was certain men who were constantly in hiding due to the persecution over plurality. He was staying at John W. Woolley’s house (Lorin’s father) when the aforementioned events happened.

I had the spirit witness to me about the truth of that meeting very early on. I have since looked into the revelation received by Pres. Taylor on that day and also the journal entries of those present, all of which appear to corroborate that a special event indeed occurred. For example, among others present in that meeting was George Q. Cannon. His journal entry for the 26th seems to record the incident in purposefully masked terms: "Our meeting was a very interesting one."

Not to mention the fact that he lists all the same people that Lorin Woolley listed.

Good point!

[Luke]

I was in the LDS Church Archives in SLC a couple of weeks ago, and found this, which corroborates what Lorin reported:

• “A B Irvine 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.”
  
  (Carlos Ashby Badger Journal, 8 October 1904, in LDS Church History Library, “Carlos Ashby Badger, 1878-1939” MS 2056 bx 2 fd 4)

1BC8D7C4-5FB9-4FE4-B876-814506B6FA2F.jpeg (242.33 KiB) Viewed 753 times

[Luke]

Screenshot_20220309-200534.png

Not sure why it says that he founded the FLDS Church. He didn’t. The FLDS Church was organised by Rulon Jeffs, over 50 years after Lorin was dead.

[Sarah]

If you are proposing that Woolley was legitimate, then I suppose the same argument could be made for Warren Jeffs. And if not, why not?

I personally know a man who a few years after converting to (mainstream) LDS became infatuated with the idea of polygamy, proposed to his 14 yr old step-daughter, apostasized, and after a long legal battle which garnered the attention of national news headlines he ended up with Jeffs' movement in southern Utah and is now married to one of Jeffs' former wives (and several other women) while Jeffs cools his heels.

You could make the same argument for Warren Jeffs... but only if you accept the John Y. Barlow, Leroy S. Johnson and Rulon T. Jeffs succession line (and not any of the other ones, of which there are many). It doesn’t work like that. Thousands and thousands of people accept Lorin’s claims (including myself), but only a handful of those accept Warren’s.

I am a Fundamentalist. I converted from LDS thought to Fundamentalist thought. You don’t have to paint all of us as Warren Jeffs type people. We aren’t.

So are you of the mind that only those who can trace their authority to Lorin Woolley are legal in the eyes of God? If not, and think that anyone can receive a revelation for himself/herself, then what do you think of the idea of the need for a Church established by Jesus, and a priesthood to direct the church. To me it looks like a mass of confusion to think that the Lord would have these plural families not under the direction of 12 apostles, organized in a church.

[Sarah]

“He [Lorin C. Woolley] was on west side of Main Street between South Temple and 1st South when he was met by Joseph F. Smith (who had died some time before.) President Smith said, ‘Loren, aren't you going to the meeting?’ (A solemn assembly being held in the Temple.) Loren said, ‘No, I haven't been invited’ President Smith said, ‘Oh, yes, you must be there; you are expected to speak.’ President Smith then led Loren into the Temple and to the door leading into the Priesthood assembly room. He opened the door and told Loren to go in and go to the stand. As Loren advanced toward the stand he heard arguing between Brother Talmage and others to the effect that he (Lorin) should not be there. He had been handled and was not entitled to admittance. (This was before he had actually been handled.) The Voice of President Smith was heard from the door to the effect,—‘Oh, yes he is qualified to be here,—go ahead Loren.’ Voice whispered—‘That is President Smith speaking.’ Loren walked to the pulpit and the voice of the Prophet Joseph Smith was heard saying—‘Lorin will now give the history of the Church from the underground days until present.’ A voice in the assembly said,—‘That is the Prophet Joseph Smith talking;’ and the brethren who had been arguing against Loren’s admission into the assembly, shrunk and shriveled up.” (Joseph W. Musser, Book of Remembrance, pg. 2-4, 26 February 1931)

Luke, what do you think it means "from the underground days until present"? If I knew more about Woolley's background I'd probably know.

Lorin Woolley was one of the men who John Taylor set apart in September 1886 to keep the Principle of Celestial Plural Marriage alive, knowing what was going to happen in the future. John Taylor was, at the time, part of the “Mormon underground”, which was certain men who were constantly in hiding due to the persecution over plurality. He was staying at John W. Woolley’s house (Lorin’s father) when the aforementioned events happened.

I had the spirit witness to me about the truth of that meeting very early on. I have since looked into the revelation received by Pres. Taylor on that day and also the journal entries of those present, all of which appear to corroborate that a special event indeed occurred. For example, among others present in that meeting was George Q. Cannon. His journal entry for the 26th seems to record the incident in purposefully masked terms: "Our meeting was a very interesting one."

Just because a meeting was held, doesn't mean Lorin's story is true. When was the first time he told his story?

[Luke]

If you are proposing that Woolley was legitimate, then I suppose the same argument could be made for Warren Jeffs. And if not, why not?

I personally know a man who a few years after converting to (mainstream) LDS became infatuated with the idea of polygamy, proposed to his 14 yr old step-daughter, apostasized, and after a long legal battle which garnered the attention of national news headlines he ended up with Jeffs' movement in southern Utah and is now married to one of Jeffs' former wives (and several other women) while Jeffs cools his heels.

You could make the same argument for Warren Jeffs... but only if you accept the John Y. Barlow, Leroy S. Johnson and Rulon T. Jeffs succession line (and not any of the other ones, of which there are many). It doesn’t work like that. Thousands and thousands of people accept Lorin’s claims (including myself), but only a handful of those accept Warren’s.

I am a Fundamentalist. I converted from LDS thought to Fundamentalist thought. You don’t have to paint all of us as Warren Jeffs type people. We aren’t.

So are you of the mind that only those who can trace their authority to Lorin Woolley are legal in the eyes of God? If not, and think that anyone can receive a revelation for himself/herself, then what do you think of the idea of the need for a Church established by Jesus, and a priesthood to direct the church. To me it looks like a mass of confusion to think that the Lord would have these plural families not under the direction of 12 apostles, organized in a church.

Nope, never said what you just said about those who trace their authority to Lorin Woolley. I was simply explaining that a belief in Lorin Woolley’s claims doesn’t equal a belief in Warren Jeffs.

As far as anyone being able to receive revelation on the subject, yes, this is what I believe, and it is what the Scriptures teach, and it is what the Prophet Joseph Smith taught. Christians honestly understand the concept of Priesthood more than Mormons do, I’ve come to believe. At least in certain ways. They understand that God isn’t only working with a X, Y, or Z group of people, and that He can work with whomever He likes.

[Luke]

Luke, what do you think it means "from the underground days until present"? If I knew more about Woolley's background I'd probably know.

Lorin Woolley was one of the men who John Taylor set apart in September 1886 to keep the Principle of Celestial Plural Marriage alive, knowing what was going to happen in the future. John Taylor was, at the time, part of the “Mormon underground”, which was certain men who were constantly in hiding due to the persecution over plurality. He was staying at John W. Woolley’s house (Lorin’s father) when the aforementioned events happened.

I had the spirit witness to me about the truth of that meeting very early on. I have since looked into the revelation received by Pres. Taylor on that day and also the journal entries of those present, all of which appear to corroborate that a special event indeed occurred. For example, among others present in that meeting was George Q. Cannon. His journal entry for the 26th seems to record the incident in purposefully masked terms: "Our meeting was a very interesting one."

Just because a meeting was held, doesn't mean Lorin's story is true. When was the first time he told his story?

The 1890s.

[Sarah]

If you are proposing that Woolley was legitimate, then I suppose the same argument could be made for Warren Jeffs. And if not, why not?

I personally know a man who a few years after converting to (mainstream) LDS became infatuated with the idea of polygamy, proposed to his 14 yr old step-daughter, apostasized, and after a long legal battle which garnered the attention of national news headlines he ended up with Jeffs' movement in southern Utah and is now married to one of Jeffs' former wives (and several other women) while Jeffs cools his heels.

You could make the same argument for Warren Jeffs... but only if you accept the John Y. Barlow, Leroy S. Johnson and Rulon T. Jeffs succession line (and not any of the other ones, of which there are many). It doesn’t work like that. Thousands and thousands of people accept Lorin’s claims (including myself), but only a handful of those accept Warren’s.

I am a Fundamentalist. I converted from LDS thought to Fundamentalist thought. You don’t have to paint all of us as Warren Jeffs type people. We aren’t.

So are you of the mind that only those who can trace their authority to Lorin Woolley are legal in the eyes of God? If not, and think that anyone can receive a revelation for himself/herself, then what do you think of the idea of the need for a Church established by Jesus, and a priesthood to direct the church. To me it looks like a mass of confusion to think that the Lord would have these plural families not under the direction of 12 apostles, organized in a church.

Nope, never said what you just said about those who trace their authority to Lorin Woolley. I was simply explaining that a belief in Lorin Woolley’s claims doesn’t equal a belief in Warren Jeffs.

As far as anyone being able to receive revelation on the subject, yes, this is what I believe, and it is what the Scriptures teach, and it is what the Prophet Joseph Smith taught. Christians honestly understand the concept of Priesthood more than Mormons do, I’ve come to believe. At least in certain ways. They understand that God isn’t only working with a X, Y, or Z group of people, and that He can work with whomever He likes.

Okay. That was what I thought you believed, but I wanted to rule out the Woolley needing to be in the line of authority thing.

Since of course the Lord can do whatever he wants and with whomever he wants, what about the Lord's desire to have us all be a part of his "Church of the Firstborn" the Church of Jesus Christ? How do all these Melchizedek priesthood holders work together, or do you believe they should only be involved in their own families. What was the purpose of Jesus ordaining Apostles and telling them to spread the gospel and baptize people into the church? What is the purpose of a church? Do you believe anyone can baptize? Do you believe he considers one or more churches to be more authoritative than the others, or that he has established more than one church here in the current day? Or do you think all churches are apostate one way or another and people will be gathered out (re-baptized?) into the future church of God established at a later date?

[Sarah]

Lorin Woolley was one of the men who John Taylor set apart in September 1886 to keep the Principle of Celestial Plural Marriage alive, knowing what was going to happen in the future. John Taylor was, at the time, part of the “Mormon underground”, which was certain men who were constantly in hiding due to the persecution over plurality. He was staying at John W. Woolley’s house (Lorin’s father) when the aforementioned events happened.

I had the spirit witness to me about the truth of that meeting very early on. I have since looked into the revelation received by Pres. Taylor on that day and also the journal entries of those present, all of which appear to corroborate that a special event indeed occurred. For example, among others present in that meeting was George Q. Cannon. His journal entry for the 26th seems to record the incident in purposefully masked terms: "Our meeting was a very interesting one."

Just because a meeting was held, doesn't mean Lorin's story is true. When was the first time he told his story?

The 1890s.

Do you have the reference?

[Dusty Wanderer]

I was in the LDS Church Archives in SLC a couple of weeks ago, and found this, which corroborates what Lorin reported:

• “A B Irvine 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.”
  
  (Carlos Ashby Badger Journal, 8 October 1904, in LDS Church History Library, “Carlos Ashby Badger, 1878-1939” MS 2056 bx 2 fd 4)

1BC8D7C4-5FB9-4FE4-B876-814506B6FA2F.jpeg

This is an interesting angle. Do you think that there are direct remnants of this charge still going today? Perhaps in Mexico or other locations? (By direct remnants I mean unlike those like Jeffs that have tried grafting themselves into the charge many years and detached from that original line from the charge.)

[diligently seeking]

You could make the same argument for Warren Jeffs... but only if you accept the John Y. Barlow, Leroy S. Johnson and Rulon T. Jeffs succession line (and not any of the other ones, of which there are many). It doesn’t work like that. Thousands and thousands of people accept Lorin’s claims (including myself), but only a handful of those accept Warren’s.

I am a Fundamentalist. I converted from LDS thought to Fundamentalist thought. You don’t have to paint all of us as Warren Jeffs type people. We aren’t.

So are you of the mind that only those who can trace their authority to Lorin Woolley are legal in the eyes of God? If not, and think that anyone can receive a revelation for himself/herself, then what do you think of the idea of the need for a Church established by Jesus, and a priesthood to direct the church. To me it looks like a mass of confusion to think that the Lord would have these plural families not under the direction of 12 apostles, organized in a church.

Nope, never said what you just said about those who trace their authority to Lorin Woolley. I was simply explaining that a belief in Lorin Woolley’s claims doesn’t equal a belief in Warren Jeffs.

As far as anyone being able to receive revelation on the subject, yes, this is what I believe, and it is what the Scriptures teach, and it is what the Prophet Joseph Smith taught. Christians honestly understand the concept of Priesthood more than Mormons do, I’ve come to believe. At least in certain ways. They understand that God isn’t only working with a X, Y, or Z group of people, and that He can work with whomever He likes.

Okay. That was what I thought you believed, but I wanted to rule out the Woolley needing to be in the line of authority thing.

Since of course the Lord can do whatever he wants and with whomever he wants, what about the Lord's desire to have us all be a part of his "Church of the Firstborn" the Church of Jesus Christ? How do all these Melchizedek priesthood holders work together, or do you believe they should only be involved in their own families. What was the purpose of Jesus ordaining Apostles and telling them to spread the gospel and baptize people into the church? What is the purpose of a church? Do you believe anyone can baptize? Do you believe he considers one or more churches to be more authoritative than the others, or that he has established more than one church here in the current day? Or do you think all churches are apostate one way or another and people will be gathered out (re-baptized?) into the future church of God established at a later date?

Sarah—listen to this free audio book. D&C 10 the last 15 some odd verses will make much more sense to you after listening. If you really want the answers you seek, that is? I’m confident this man’s beyond compelling true story will bless and illuminate your mind with the answers you seek.

https://youtu.be/05rUd9p6vfE

[TheDuke]

Now I did a little research on Lorin and I don't believe he followed the right spirit. He may have felt he was right, but I don't believe god wanted polygamy to continue as implemented by the brethren for numerous reasons, unrighteous dominion, human frailties, laws and growth, just to name a few.

The gospel evolved (still does but in some cases it feels like it also contracts in other areas), and celestial laws are given, after we fail to live them properly, they are revoked with that set of promised blessings. Some just become rare, others become taken away. That is the case with polygamy. Now if the Lord comes to you and commands YOU to enter into it and it is really the Lord (not David Koresh's god) go for it, but I'd say keep it private as it would be no ones business, otherwise if you enter into it you will be punished IMO.

[diligently seeking]

Duke, a careful review of D&C 88 will more than inform you on what living celestial law looks like. Correlation teaching does not give credence to it, so it goes unremembered and is too often tucked under the rug. Read Ether 4 before you read D&C 88 is my encouragement to you.

[TheDuke]

diligently: in 1832 when 88 was given, either Joseph didn't understand or didn't teach exaltation. It was later he would teach about becoming like god and celestial marriage, etc.. I've read all these scriptures many times. 88 is pretty fuzzy about everything. The very best it offers is verse 19 For after it hath filled the measure of its creation, it shall be crowned with glory, even with the presence of God the Father; where you can be in the presence of god and a member of the church of the First born. Nothing about exaltation within CK. Dig deeper my friend. And further, Ether 4says nothing about the next live.

[Dusty Wanderer]

I was in the LDS Church Archives in SLC a couple of weeks ago, and found this, which corroborates what Lorin reported:

• “A B Irvine 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.”
  
  (Carlos Ashby Badger Journal, 8 October 1904, in LDS Church History Library, “Carlos Ashby Badger, 1878-1939” MS 2056 bx 2 fd 4)

1BC8D7C4-5FB9-4FE4-B876-814506B6FA2F.jpeg

I'm genuinely curious and only ask because I assume you've done the research. Do you think there is an unbroken line from Woolley to present day keeping the principle alive?

[JLHPROF]

I was in the LDS Church Archives in SLC a couple of weeks ago, and found this, which corroborates what Lorin reported:

• “A B Irvine 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.”
  
  (Carlos Ashby Badger Journal, 8 October 1904, in LDS Church History Library, “Carlos Ashby Badger, 1878-1939” MS 2056 bx 2 fd 4)

1BC8D7C4-5FB9-4FE4-B876-814506B6FA2F.jpeg

I'm genuinely curious and only ask because I assume you've done the research. Do you think there is an unbroken line from Woolley to present day keeping the principle alive?

There are several groups claim that. But given one is Warren Jeffs/FLDS and another is the incestuous Kingstons I'm not sure an unbroken line claim is all that's needed.
The Church claims an unbroken line back to Joseph and so does the CoC.
Unbroken lines absolutely matter, but not in isolation. Other considerations matter too.

[Luke]

I was in the LDS Church Archives in SLC a couple of weeks ago, and found this, which corroborates what Lorin reported:

• “A B Irvine 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.”
  
  (Carlos Ashby Badger Journal, 8 October 1904, in LDS Church History Library, “Carlos Ashby Badger, 1878-1939” MS 2056 bx 2 fd 4)

1BC8D7C4-5FB9-4FE4-B876-814506B6FA2F.jpeg

I'm genuinely curious and only ask because I assume you've done the research. Do you think there is an unbroken line from Woolley to present day keeping the principle alive?

Sorry for not replying, my internet has been broken and I’m trying to get it working. I do believe that there are those who hold the authority that came through Woolley. Most notably the Allred Group (Apostolic United Brethren).

The Allreds do have a Temple in Southern Mexico. I’m not aware of anyone else who claims Woolley-derived authority in Mexico that exist now (unless there are a few of the Margarito Bautista people still around). The only other organised group (hence not including the independents) who practice polygamy are various LeBaron sects, but they don’t claim authority via Woolley, they claim it through Benjamin F. Johnson and then Alma Dayer LeBaron (I do not believe this story though).