I have never seen any text other than the declaration printed in the D&C. My take is the revelation was simply that “every worthy man in the church may receive the priesthood”, no additional revelatory text is necessary. Are you looking for something specific as part of this revelation?

In response to Cheryl’s comment about “the need”. I see it as a personality trait. Some people need all the details, others don’t. There are all kinds of different people in the world, which I see as a tremendous opportunity and blessing. I personally don’t understand how people don’t need all the details, but that’s me. I can’t imagine simply leaning on a faithful scholar. I realize you have what you need, and I appreciate respectful members close to me that don’t judge my personal need to research every nook and cranny of history. Following the counsel to “study it out in your mind” this is how I operate, and yes, spiritual things are verified by spiritual witness. Key word for me is verified, not found. But that’s me.

Can anyone tell me where I can find this revelation? And I mean the text of the revelation, not the declaration that a revelation had been received.

I was not inoculated, and have come down with a serious case of disbelief.

Well Bradley, I had a similar experience when I discovered Times and Seasons. Just knowing that “smart Mormons” had met tough issues and come through with their testimonies intact was rather comforting to me.

I’ve heard it said that a lot of people didn’t care to read what Hugh Nibley wrote. They were just comforted and reaffirmed because he existed. Surely HE knows about that other stuff, and if it doesn’t bother him, it doesn’t bother me. It is inoculation by proxy. I believe that was a vital step in my own inoculation.

Anti-mormonism lacked refinement then and “troubling” aspects of church history were presented the same as attacks on church doctrine. The main thing I noticed was the twisting, distortions, and down-right lies the anti’s were using. And, it seemed very curious to me why they found that tactic necessary. So, I looked suspiciously at their presentations MMM, polygamy, etc. also.

The general conclusion I reached was: “If Mormonism isn’t true, then neither is Christianity because it has similar or worse problems – historically and doctrinally.”

So, rather than being an atheist, I’m here blogging at the ‘nacle. My 10-year-old testimony was that because of continuing revelation, there were more blessings in this church than in any other – something I have found to be unwaveringly true over the past 43 years.

That said, I think the efforts the Church is making to respond to the increased press are worthwhile. I still don’t know that church meetings are the place to go into things like MMM, polygamy, the priesthood ban, etc., because I believe our manuals, etc. focus on the roots as they should. But the Church’s use of the internet has provided some ability to address some issues, and, as someone has mentioned, even church magazines have addressed things like MMM. Interviews with church leaders have also brought some of the issues out (I tell everyone I think the PBS interview with Elder Holland should be required reading — he answered questions I have had about the priesthood ban, including giving an answer I think we should all adopt “we don’t know why it happened” and he also suggests that past racist comments were incorrect).

I also think the Newsroom is one of the best things the Church has as far as its public face is concerned.

As a parent I’d rather teach my kids these truths. I think that the Church should also somehow teach about these subjects. It is our stuff and we have to own it. Converts should get controversial information from the Church rather than anti’s. How to go about it, is tricky. I like that they have had a few articles in the Ensign and Church News of late. This is a good start.

I think that just like sex education controversies in the church are best taught in the home. I am not going to leave these important issues to be taught to my children by someone else.

Cheryl, I generally agree that this is the best solution. However, we are rapidly approaching a point (if we are not already there) in the Church where most members will not have been taught the gospel by their parents, but will have been converted as adults. That changes the prescription some, I would think. (Just as the fact that many children have parents who can’t/won’t teach them about sex changes my opinion about sex ed. in school)