Sidney Rigdon and Parley P. Pratt were probably the most qualified missionaries among the Saints to minister to the Shakers. Parley grew up in New Lebanon, New York, close to the largest and most important Shaker community at the Mount Lebanon Shaker Society. Records also show that Parley had several extended family members who were Shakers. Sidney had been a minister in the region for several years and was a strong proponent of communalism, making it likely that he traded and had economic connections with the Shaker communities in North Union, Ohio (Mario S. De Pillis, “The Development of Mormon Communitarianism, 1826–1846,” 1960, 56–62, 65–66).

The Shakers had been visited earlier by Oliver Cowdery and the missionaries sent to preach to the Lamanites (D&C 28:8). Several copies of the Book of Mormon had been circulated among the Shakers, but the Shakers appeared to show little interest. Ashbel Kitchell later wrote that the missionaries left him with a copy of the Book of Mormon before they departed: “They thought it prudent to wait on us a while for the leaven to work, so that thing moved on smoothly for sometime and we had time for reflection” (Lawrence R. Flake, “A Shaker View of a Mormon Mission,” BYU Studies 20, no. 1 (1979), 2).

According to Kitchell’s account of the meeting, there may have been some hesitation on Sidney Rigdon’s part to share the revelation. Initially, Sidney arrived accompanied only by Leman Copley, and the two men did not share the revelation right away. Kitchell recorded, “They tarried all night, and in the course of the evening, the doctrines of the cross and the Mormon faith were both investigated . . . Thus the matter stood when we retired to rest, not knowing that they had in possession what they called a revelation or message from Jesus Christ to us.” The next day, which was the Sabbath, Parley P. Pratt arrived and announced that “they had come with the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the people must hear it.” Shortly after, Sidney Rigdon read the message to the Shakers (Flake, 2–3).

The revelation shows no hesitation in addressing the most important teaching of the Church: the mission of Jesus Christ to redeem the world. This teaching may have been a sharp point of disagreement between the missionaries and the Shakers. According to some sources, early Shakers tended to reject the vicarious Atonement of Jesus Christ, instead seeing “the role of Christ as an example for Believers” (Stephen J. Stein, The Shaker Experience in America, 1992, 75). The Lord directly addresses this belief, unequivocally stating that He came to redeem the world and that acceptance of this mission is a matter of salvation or damnation.

Surprisingly, Latter-day Saints have been accused of similarly downplaying the importance of the atoning acts of Jesus Christ. A 1980 article in Newsweek magazine incorrectly reported that “unlike orthodox Christians, Mormons believe that men . . . earn their way to godhood by the proper exercise of free will, rather than through the grace of Jesus Christ. Thus, Jesus’ suffering and death in the Mormon view were brotherly acts of compassion, but they do not atone for the sins of others” (1 Sept. 1980, 68). In contrast to this claim, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have unanimously testified that Jesus Christ “gave His life to atone for the sins of all mankind. His was a great vicarious gift in behalf of all who would ever live upon the earth” (“The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles,” 2000).

Latter-day Saints must be careful to follow this example when introducing our beliefs to people of other faiths. We must begin by explaining clearly and carefully that Jesus Christ is the center of our faith. We are blessed to have a unique and expansive theology that embraces all facets of a person’s existence, but none of our beliefs hold meaning without a knowledge of the saving work of Christ. President Russell M. Nelson taught, “If we as a people and as individuals are to have access to the power of the Atonement of Jesus Christ—to cleanse and heal us, to strengthen and magnify us, and ultimately to exalt us—we must clearly acknowledge Him as the source of that power” (“The Correct Name of the Church,” October 2018 General Conference).

Here the Lord addresses the second great concern between the Saints and their Shaker neighbors, specifically that the Shakers believed no ordinances were necessary for salvation. The Lord makes reference to the “everlasting covenant” made possible through the ordinances of the gospel of Jesus Christ. In a later revelation, the Lord taught Joseph Smith that “in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest. And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh” (D&C 84:20–21). Simply put, the gospel of Jesus Christ is redemptive. As the Savior states in this revelation, the starting point of the gospel is an acknowledgement that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23–24; Alma 34:9–10). The ordinances of the gospel allow men and women to be cleansed of their sins by entering into a covenant relationship with Jesus Christ.

While some aspects of salvation, such as physical resurrection, come to all people without ordinances, the highest blessings of the gospel require ordinances. In an 1844 discourse, Joseph Smith declared, “The question is frequently asked, can we not be saved without going through with all these ordinances? I would answer no, not the fulness of salvation” (Discourse, 21 January 1844, as Reported by Wilford Woodruff, 183, JSP). The Savior invited the Shakers to enter into the most basic ordinance of the gospel—baptism—followed by confirmation and the gift of the Holy Ghost.

In our time, some have downplayed the importance of ordinances, in part because the majority of the human race has not been given the opportunity to receive them. However, the importance of ordinances in the teachings of the Savior and His prophets is indisputable (Matthew 28:9; Mark 16:16; John 3:5; Ether 4:18; D&C 112:28–29). Later revelations and keys given to Joseph Smith opened the door for all people, both the living and the dead, to receive the ordinances of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Addressing the Shaker belief that celibacy was a higher form of life, the Lord upholds the sanctity of marriage, even identifying it as one of the purposes of the creation of the earth. In the New Testament, one of the epistles written to Timothy highlights “forbidding to marry” as one of the signs of apostasy (1 Timothy 4:3). Subsequent revelations to Joseph Smith also emphasized the importance of marriage in the plan of salvation (see D&C 2; 131–132). In 1995, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles paraphrased this section of the revelation in proclaiming that “marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children” (“The Family: A Proclamation to the World”).

The Lord’s statement that “it is lawful that he should have one wife” was consistent with the Church’s teachings at the time this revelation was given. In the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, an article was included that specified “that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband” (Doctrine and Covenants, 1835, 251, JSP). The article was not presented as a revelation and was generally attributed to Oliver Cowdery. The article was removed from the Doctrine and Covenants when section 132, which was a revelation, was placed in the scriptural canon, supplanting it in importance. Doctrine and Covenants 132 further underlined the idea that marriage was sacred and established that marriages performed by the proper authority and sealed by the holy spirit of promise would endure in the next life (D&C 132:19).

The revelation next addresses vegetarianism among the Shakers. It should be noted that the Lord does not disapprove of vegetarianism itself, only the act of forbidding others to eat meat. He specifies that the use of animals for food and clothing is appropriate as long as men and women act as wise stewards to their environment (see Genesis 1:26; D&C 59:15–21). The Lord condemns the unnecessary shedding of blood or wasting of flesh. This is consistent with earlier scripture. The Lord instructed anciently that “surely, blood shall not be shed, only for meat, to save your lives; and the blood of every beast will I require at your hands” (Joseph Smith Translation, Genesis 9:11).

Several years after this revelation was given, Joseph Smith reported an incident that illustrated this teaching. While Joseph was traveling with Zion’s Camp, the men on the expedition encountered three rattlesnakes and were about to kill them when Joseph intervened. “I said let them alone, don’t hurt them, how will the serpent ever lose its venom, while the servants of God possess the same disposition, and continue to make war upon them,” Joseph later wrote in his history. He taught the brethren that “men must become harmless before the brute creation, and when men lose their vicious dispositions and cease to destroy the animal race, the lion and the lamb can dwell together, and the sucking child play with the serpent with safety” (Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, 8 [addenda], JSP).

Following the Prophet’s counsel, the men carefully lifted the snakes with sticks and carried them to a safe location. Joseph added, “I exhorted the brethren not to kill a serpent, bird, or any animal of any kind, during our journey unless it were necessary to preserve ourselves from hunger.” Illustrating that he was not against the use of animals for food, Joseph also spoke of another occasion when he saw a group of men observing a squirrel in a tree: “To prove them and know if they would heed my counsel, I took one of their guns, shot the squirrel and passed on, leaving the Squirrel on the ground.” Apostle Orson Hyde, who was present, “came up, picked up the squirrel, and said, ‘We will cook this, that nothing may be lost’” (Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, 8 [addenda], JSP).

The revelation to the Shakers establishes two things about the Second Coming: first, that “no man . . . neither the angels in heaven” know the time of the Savior’s coming (D&C 49:7), and second, that the Savior would not return to earth in the same manner as His first coming. The Christmas story, with a helpless baby in a manger, would not be repeated (D&C 29:11; 34:7; 45:16; 65:5). This time, the Savior would return to earth in a glorified, resurrected body. The most accurate model for the Savior’s return is found in the early chapters of 3 Nephi, where natural and societal upheavals led to disarray among the Nephites and Lamanites until the Savior arrived in glory.

In contrast, the Shakers believed that Jesus had already returned to the earth, being born again in the form of Ann Lee, the most important leader among the Shakers. The words of the Lord to the Shakers establishes that a mortal person claiming to be the reincarnated or returned Jesus Christ is in error or is deliberately trying to deceive. The return of the Savior might occur in an unexpected way, but it will be unmistakable when it occurs. Ancient and modern scripture agree that the Savior’s return to earth will be a grand event seen by all the world (Matthew 24:30; Revelation 1:7; D&C 64:23).

Another error on the part of the Shakers is that they claimed the Savior’s gender was changed when He returned. The Shakers believed God had a dual nature that was both male and female. The Shakers’ emphasis on the equality of men and women was admirable, but their understanding of the eternal nature of gender was flawed. In contrast, modern prophets and apostles have testified that “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose” (“The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” 1995).

At the time the Book of Mormon was published, there was a long-standing tradition of people of European ancestry claiming a link to the lost tribes of Israel. When the Book of Mormon was published, it challenged its readers to consider the possibility that throughout history, God has sent inspired teachers to people in different locations around the world. The title page of the Book of Mormon directly proclaims that “Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations” (Book of Mormon Title Page). The Lord has directed the Saints to extend the blessings of the gospel to many groups, including the Lamanites, who were initially understood to be the American Indians.

While early Church members applied these promises directly to the American Indians, the common conception of Lamanite identity has broadened over time to include Pacific Islanders and other people of native ancestry. The term Lamanite is used fluidly in the Book of Mormon, sometimes speaking of ancestry (Mosiah 10:11–17) and sometimes speaking of an ideological alignment (4 Nephi 1:36–38). In the latter days, some Latter-day Saints have used the term Lamanite in a derogatory way, but for the most part it has been used as a term to extend and apply the scriptural blessings promised to the house of Israel. An official Church essay concerning Lamanite identity proclaims that “Saints who have identified as Lamanites have made substantial contributions to the Church and to their communities as they have aimed to realize the Lord’s promises to His covenant people” (“Lamanite Identity,” Church History Topics, churchofjesuschrist.org).

Larry Echohawk, a Church leader of American Indian ancestry, spoke about his experience with the Book of Mormon, saying, “As I read the Book of Mormon, it seemed to me that it was about my American Indian ancestors.” He further added, “I especially ask the remnant of the house of Israel, the descendants of the people of the Book of Mormon, wherever you may be, to read and reread the Book of Mormon. Learn of the promises contained in the Book of Mormon. Follow the teachings and example of Jesus Christ. Make and keep covenants with the Lord. Seek for and follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit” (“Come Unto Me, O Ye House of Israel,” October 2012 General Conference).

The Lord’s promise that “Jacob shall flourish in the wilderness, and the Lamanites shall blossom as the rose” (D&C 49:24) undoubtedly will be fulfilled in multiple ways. One of the most positive ways to apply the prophecy given by the Lord in this revelation is to see all people as potential heirs to the promises made to Israel, regardless of their background.

The Shakers rejected the revelation given to them. After Sidney Rigdon finished reading the revelation, Ashbel Kitchell announced that “I would release them and their Christ from any further burden about us, and take all the responsibility on myself.” Rigdon then asked to hear from the congregation who, according to Kitchell, declared “that they were fully satisfied with what they had.” Kitchell further recorded that “upon hearing this Rigdon professed to be satisfied and put his paper by; but Parley P. Pratt arose and commenced shaking his coattail; he said he shook the dust from his garments as a testimony against us, that we had rejected the word of the Lord Jesus.” Kitchell rebuked Parley and then accused Leman Copley of hypocrisy, reducing Copley to tears (Flake, 3).

The experience left Leman Copley shaken, and he began to vacillate between his commitment to the Church and to the Shakers. When he returned home, he refused to honor a prior agreement he had made to permit Church members migrating from Colesville, New York, to live on his farm (see D&C 54). Over the next few years, Copley went back and forth between the Saints and the Shakers, eventually settling with neither. He joined several different Christian churches and remained near his home in Thompson, Ohio, until his death in 1862 (“Leman Copley,” JSP).

As for the Shakers, they continued to grow throughout the nineteenth century, but in the twentieth century, their movement entered a sharp decline. At the movement’s peak, there were 2,000–4,000 Shakers living in 18 different communities. However, the Shaker belief in celibacy, combined with stricter laws making it illegal for religious groups to adopt children, meant that the Shaker population decreased swiftly. By the twenty-first century, there was only one remaining Shaker community, at Sabbathday Lake in Maine. Only a handful of Shakers (fewer than five individuals) remain today (Katherine Lucky, “The Last Shakers?” Commonweal, November 28, 2019).