Criticism of Mormonism/Books/One Nation Under Gods/Use of sources/Historical Suppression in the Church

FAIR Answers—back to home page

Response to Author's Preface, "About Mormon History: Historical Suppression in the Church"

The Anti-Mormon Articles of Faith

A FAIR Analysis of: One Nation Under Gods A work by author: Richard Abanes

Calling All Mormon Scholars

Author's Claims

One Nation under Gods, page xv (hardback)

The history of Mormonism — The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS)— can only be pieced together using a wide variety of historical sources. It is a complex tale that takes many surprising turns, has numerous divergent paths, and often becomes intertwined with other historical events of the same time period. Unfortunately, some of the least reliable reports on Mormon history, especially with regard to its earliest years, are those that have been produced by the LDS church.2

One Nation under Gods, page ix (paperback)

The history of Mormonism—The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS)—can only be pieced together using a wide variety of historical sources. It is a complex tale that takes many surprising turns, has numerous divergent paths, and often becomes intertwined with other historical events of the same time period. Unfortunately, some of the least reliable reports on Mormon history, especially with regard to its earliest years, are those that have been produced by the LDS church. Mormon leaders, especially since the 1970s, have repeatedly called for LDS historians to "tell only that part of the truth that is inspiring and uplifting."2 (emphasis added)

Author's Sources

Endnote 2, page 477 (hardback)

2. Mormon church officials have routinely insisted that any materials written on LDS history by Mormons must be "faith promoting," which means they must support Mormon beliefs and official teachings, even at the risk of being historically inaccurate. In 1981, for instance, LDS apostle Boyd K. Packer warned Mormon historians against publishing objective history, even in professional journals because such works destroy and weaken the faith of Mormons (Boyd K. Packer, "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect," BYU Studies [Summer 1981], vol. 21, 264-265). Eventually, in June 1986, the staff of the LDS church's historical department were made to "sign a form which Elder Packer declared gave the right of pre-publication censorship for any archival research completed before signing the form" (Smith, 109, footnote #52; quoted in Tanner and Tanner, 3, http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no85.htm).

Endnote 2, page 475 (paperback)

2. Boyd K. Packer, interview with D. Michael Quinn, 1976. Quoted in Smith, 105, endnote #22. In recent years LDS church officials have stipulated that LDS-written history must be "faith promoting," which means supportive of LDS beliefs and teachings, even if historically incomplete. In 1981, for example, LDS apostle Packer warned Mormon historians against publishing overly objective history, even in professional journals, because it could destroy and weaken the faith of Mormons (Boyd K. Packer, "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect," BYU Studies [Summer 1981], vol. 21, 264-265). In June 1986 members of the LDS church's historical department were made to "sign a form which Elder Packer declared gave the right of pre-publication censorship for any archival research completed before signing the form" (Smith, 109, footnote #52; quoted in Tanner and Tanner, 3, http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no85.htm).

Answer

How does one define "least reliable?"

The assertion by the author that "some of the least reliable reports on Mormon history" are those "produced by the LDS church" is very interesting in light of the fact that some of the source documents used by the author in his book include the Journal of Discourses, the Messenger and Advocate, the Millennial Star, the Evening and Morning Star, the Ensign, Conference Reports, and the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, to name a few. Each of these sources is viewed by members and non-members alike as being "produced by the LDS church." If they are so unreliable, why does the author cite from them? If there is a disagreement between two sources -- one from the Church and the other from someone viewed as an enemy of the Church -- how does the author know which one is more reliable?

The author of ONUG castigates sources produced by the LDS Church, but then uses many of those materials in constructing and expressing viewpoints. He also cites material from people who have a professed grudge against the LDS Church and its teachings. Reliability of documents, then, becomes an issue of acceptability to each individual.

Detailed Analysis

An examination of the reference provided above may prove insightful. There are two main parts to this reference. First, is the assertion that Church officials have "routinely" insisted LDS-authored historical materials be "faith promoting" at the expense of being historically accurate. To prove this assertion, the author provides the example of a talk by Boyd K. Packer that was published in BYU Studies. Elder Packer stressed four main points:

1. There is no such thing as an accurate, objective history of the Church without consideration of the spiritual powers that attend this work.
2. There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.
3. In an effort to be objective, impartial, and scholarly, a writer or a teacher may unwittingly be giving equal time to the adversary.
4. The final caution concerns the idea that so long as something is already in print, so long as it is available from another source, there is nothing out of order in using it in writing or speaking or teaching.

The only mention of "objectivity" in the talk was in relation to the first and third points, and Elder Packer said nothing about stopping historians or insisting that they not be objective. He simply said that no treatment of LDS Church history could hope to be objective without consideration of the spiritual powers that attend the work. In other words, he was telling LDS historians that to leave out consideration of God's Spirit was to leave out an important component of why and how things were done in the Church.

The second main part of the ONUG reference is the claim that the Church historical department staff were required to "sign a form" regarding the Church's right to censor anything the staff might publish. It appears that the author feels such a form is an example of ways in which the LDS Church suppresses scholarly work. The author never addresses the issue, however, of whether the Church has a right to control (a) access to their own historical records, and (b) how those records are used. If this were a discussion about business corporations, there would be no question that the businesses have the right to do both — control access and use of past business records.

Does The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or any church, for that matter) have the right to control its own records and how they are used? If businesses and governments do, why not churches?