|
While the Mormon Church continues to grow at a rapid rate (it now
has close to 9,000,000 members), it is obvious that internal problems
are also beginning to mount. Consequently, church leaders have decided
to take an uncompromising stand against Mormon historians who wish
to tell the unvarnished truth about church history and other dissenters
within the church.
Five Excommunicated
In an apparent show of strength just before the October, 1993,
General Conference of the Mormon Church, six prominent church members
were summoned to stand trial in church courts for apostasy. On October
2,1993, the Salt Lake Tribune reported concerning
the results of those trials:
Three men and three women have been charged with apostasy for
their writing and speaking about Mormon subjects. Paul Toscano,
Avraham Gileadi, D. Michael Quinn, Maxine Hanks and Lavina Fielding
Anderson were excommunicated. Lynne Kanavel Whitesides was disfellowshiped.
...
During the council, Ms. Whitesides was accused of 'creating friction'
with her Mormon feminist statements on television. She also was
charged with failure to support church leaders by saying, also
on TV, she couldn't 'find any evidence of Christ in [Elder] Packer's
last speech.'
She was disfellowshiped ... for 'conduct contrary to the laws
of the church.' ...
Lavina Fielding Anderson was excommunicated for a single article
in the independent Mormon journal, Dialogue. The LDS Intellectual
Community and Church Leadership chronicled episodes of intimidation
against Mormon thinkers for the last 20 years. ...
LDS historian D. Michael Quinn has had three such councils within
the last four months. ...
While he didn't attend the council, he wrote a defense.
'I vowed I would never again participate in a process which was
designed to punish me for being the messenger of unwanted historical
evidence and to intimidate me from further work in Mormon history,'
he wrote.
But he did reaffirm his faith that 'Jesus is the Christ, that
Joseph Smith was God's prophet of the Restoration and that Ezra
Taft Benson is the prophet, seer and revelator on the Earth today.'
The council was kind. They put him on probation. But in July,
the punishment was upgraded to disfellowshipment. This week, while
he was in California, his stake leaders excommunicated him. ...
Avraham Gileadi, a conservative theologian and writer, was excommunicated
for his writings about the Apocalypse and the Book of Isaiah.
He ... declined to talk with the press about his experience.
Some of those who were excommunicated used to write articles for
the church's official publication, The Ensign. D. Michael
Quinn, for instance, has written at least six articles for The
Ensign, and about the same number for Brigham Young University
Studies. It seems ironic that this man, who was once held in
high esteem within the church, is now considered to be an "anti-Mormon."
It was, in fact, D. Michael Quinn who lifted his pen in 1977 in
an attempt to refute our work. Dr. Quinn wrote a pamphlet entitled,
Jerald and Sandra Tanner's Distorted View of Mormonism: A Response
to Mormonism--Shadow or Reality? According to Richard Stephen
Marshall, Mormon historian Reed Durham gave him the following information:
He also said that due to the large number of letters the Church
Historian's Office is receiving asking for answers to the things
the Tanners have published, a certain scholar (name deliberately
withheld) was appointed to write a general answer to the Tanners.
... This unnamed person solicited the help of Reed Durham on the
project. The work is finished but its publication is delayed,
according to what Leonard Arrington told Durham, because they
can not decide how or where to publish it. ... It will probably
be published anonymously, to avoid difficulties which could result
were such an article connected with an official Church agency.'
('The New Mormon History," by Richard Stephen Marshall, A Senior
Honors Project Summary, University of Utah, May 1,1977, page 62)
As Dr. Durham predicted, Michael Quinn's work was 'published anonymously.'
The words, "By a Latter-day Saint Historian," appear where Quinn's
name should be found on the front cover and the first page of the
book. The coming forth of the anonymous rebuttal was shrouded in
secrecy. While we knew Zion Bookstore was the distributor of the
response, we were unable to find out where the booklets were printed.
In almost all books the name of the publisher is listed at the beginning
of the book. When we asked Sam Weller, the owner of the bookstore,
where he had obtained them, he replied that he did not know!
and that it was all a very secret operation. He claimed
that he received a letter giving details of how he could handle
the pamphlet, but that the writer was not identified. He maintained
that he received 1,800 free copies of the pamphlet
and was told that he could use any money he made to reprint the
booklet.
We talked with Wifrid Clark, who works for Mr. Weller. Clark claimed
that all he knew about the matter was that Zion Bookstore received
an anonymous letter containing a key to a room in a self storage
company on Redwood Road. He said that he personally
went to the company and picked up the books.
In our book, Answering Dr. Clandestine: A Response to the Anonymous
LDS Historian, pages 1-6, we show how we broke through the maze
to learn that D. Michael Quinn was the author of the rebuttal. This
identification was confirmed by David Mayfield, who worked for the
Historical Department of the church at the time the rebuttal was
being prepared.
Those who were in authority over Quinn must have had a great deal
of trust in him; otherwise, they would not have allowed him to work
on such a secret project which could cause the church great embarrassment
if the details of it became known.
An organization known as Mormon Miscellaneous, located at 8912
South 700 East, Sandy, UT 84070, still reprints and sells Dr. Quinn's
rebuttal to us. Now that Quinn has been excommunicated from the
Mormon Church, it will be interesting to see if this organization
will continue to sell the pamphlet. It would seem that there should
at least be some attempt to clarify what has taken place. Instead
of the words, "By a Latter-day Saint Historian" appearing at the
front of the booklet, it should read something like, "By an Ex-Latter-day
Saint Historian."
While D. Michael Quinn still maintains his belief that Joseph
Smith was a prophet, he has obviously become more critical of the
church leaders suppressing important documents. In the booklet he
prepared in 1977, he criticized us for being upset that the General
Authorities of the church were suppressing important documents from
their people:
"An extension of the Tanners' selective use of evidence is the
fact that they often make assertions and draw conclusions without
referring to evidence that qualifies, challenges, or refutes their
argument. For example, they berate the LDS Church for 'Suppression
of Records.'... the Tanners cast the LDS Archives in a sinister
light because it was closed to the public for many decades, but
fail to comment that this closed archive practice is not only consistent
with the policy of most businesses (including the richly historical
Hudson's Bay Company), but also with that of most religious and
charitable organizations.' (Jerald and Sandra Tanner's Distorted
View of Mormonism: A Response to Mormonism--Shadow or Reality? pages
13-14)
Not long after Dr. Quinn wrote the statement cited above, he had
his own first-hand encounter with the suppressive policies of the
church and did not like what he experienced. In his research Quinn
discovered that for a number of years after the 1890 Manifesto,
which was supposed to stop the practice of polygamy, a number of
prominent church leaders and others were secretly given permission
to take plural wives. Quinn pursued information concerning this
subject but found that church leaders would not allow him to examine
some important documents in the First Presidency's vault. In his
article, "On Being a Mormon Historian (and Its Aftermath)," D. Michael
Quinn wrote the following:
President Hinckley telephoned in June 1982 to say that he was
sympathetic about a request I had written to obtain access to
documents in the First Presidency's vault but that my request
could not be granted...
In May 1984 my college dean told me he had been instructed by
'higher authority' to ask me not to publish a paper I
had just presented to the Mormon History Association. It was a
historical survey of the public activity of general authorities
in business corporations. The dean apologized for having to make
this request. I agreed not to publish my presentation and told
no one about the incident.
In 1985, after Dialogue published my article 'LDS Church Authority
and New Plural Marriages, 1890-1904,' three apostles gave
orders for my stake president to confiscate my temple recommend.
... I was told that three apostles believed I was
guilty of 'speaking evil of the Lord's anointed.' The stake president
was also instructed 'to take further action' against me if this
did not 'remedy the situation' of my writing controversial Mormon
history. ... I told the stake president that this was an obvious
effort to intimidate me from doing history that might 'offend
the Brethren' [i.e.,the highest leaders of the church].. The stake
president also saw this as a back-door effort to have me fired
from BYU. ...
I find it one of the fundamental ironies of modern Mormonism that
the general authorities who praise free agency, also do their
best to limit free agency's prerequisites--access to information,
uninhibited inquiry, and freedom of expression. (Faithful History:
Essays on Writing Mormon History, Edited by George D. Smith,
1992, pages 90-93, 95)
D. Michael Quinn finally found the church leaders' attempt to control
their history so repressive that he felt he could no longer do research
at the church archives:
"In June 1986 the staff of the church historical department announced
it was necessary to sign a form which Elder Packer declared gave
the right of pre-publication censorship for any archival research
completed before signing the form. I and several others refused
to sign the form and have not returned to do research at LDS church
archives since 1986. (Ibid., page 109, footnote 52)
D. Michael Quinn has shown a great deal of courage throughout his
ordeal with church leaders and officials at Brigham Young University.
In 1981, he did something that very few Mormon scholars dared to
do: he publicly took issue with Apostles Ezra Taft Benson and Boyd
K. Packer, two of the most powerful leaders of the Mormon Church.
To make things even worse for Quinn, Benson became president of
the church in 1985.
It was on November 4, 1981, that Quinn delivered a monumental address
before a student history association at Brigham Young University.
In the Salt Lake City Messenger, March 1982, we called it
"One of the best speeches ever given by a Mormon historian." Newsweek
referred to it as a "stirring defense of intellectual integrity."
In this speech, Dr. Quinn revealed that church officials "viewed
with understandable misgiving this burgeoning exploration of Mormonism's
fluid past," and then went on to make these significant comments:
The concern of these Church leaders has not been assuaged by
the fact that contemporary with the proliferation of Mormon historians
and histories there has been a shift in anti-Mormon propaganda
from doctrinal diatribe to the polemical use of elements from
the Mormon past to discredit the LDS Church today. In reaction
to this confluence of developments, two members of the Quorum
of the Twelve Apostles (Ezra Taft Benson and Boyd K. Packer) have
specifically identified Latter-day Saint historians as the source
of difficulty.... General authorities in recent years have criticized
Mormon historians for republishing in part or whole out-of-print
Church publications such as the 1830 Book of Mormon,
the Journal of Discourses (edited and published
for thirty-two years under the auspices of the First Presidency),
and statements taken from former Church magazines published for
the children, youth, and general membership of the Church. It
is an odd situation when present general authorities criticize
historians for re-printing what previous general authorities regarded
not only as faith-promoting but as appropriate for Mormon youth
and the newest converts.
Elder Packer specifically warns against historians using 'the
unworthy, the unsavory, or the sensational' from the Mormon past,
merely because it has been previously published somewhere else,
and he berates historians for their 'exaggerated loyalty to the
theory that everything must be told.' But this raises the question
of personal honesty and professional integrity. If a historian
writes about any subject unrelated to religion, and he purposely
fails to make reference to pertinent information of which he has
knowledge, he is justifiably liable to be criticized for dishonesty....
In connection with Elder Packer's counsel to avoid reference to
previously published sensitivities, Elder Benson warns historians
against environmental explanations of the background of revelations
and developments in LDS history....
Like the questions of previously published items, a historian
writing about a non-religious subject would be considered inept
at best and dishonest at worst if he described someone's innovation
or contribution without discussing the significance of previously
existing, similar contributions and ideas of which the historical
person was undoubtedly aware. If a Latter-day Saint historian
discusses the revelation to Joseph Smith about abstinence from
tobacco, strong drinks, and hot drinks, and then fails to note
that during the 1830s religious reformers and social reformers
were involved nationally in urging abstinence from these identical
things, any reader has cause to criticize the historian's accuracy,
to question his motives, and to doubt any affirmation the historian
might give to the revelation's truth.... If we write Mormon history
as though its revelations and developments occurred without any
reference to surrounding circumstances, we undermine the claims
for the Restoration of living prophets.... Boyd K. Packer demands
that Mormon historians demonstrate and affirm that 'the hand of
the Lord [has been] in every hour and every moment of the Church
from its beginning till now.'... Mormon historians may share the
convictions of the Nephite prophets and Boyd K. Packer that the
'hand of the lord' operates throughout history and that 'His purposes
fail not,' but they also have an obligation to examine the evidence,
reflect upon it, and offer the best interpretations they can for
what has occurred in Mormon history....
A more serious problem of Mormon history is involved in the implications
of Boyd K. Packer's demand that historians demonstrate that 'the
hand of the Lord [has been] in every hour and every moment of
the church from its beginning till now.' Every Mormon historian
agrees with Ezra Taft Benson that 'we must never forget that ours
is a prophetic history,' but there are serious problems in the
assertion or implication that this prophetic history of Mormonism
requires 'the hand of the Lord' in every decision, statement,
and action of the prophets.... Central to the apparent demands
of Elders Benson and Packer is the view that the official acts
and pronouncements of the prophets are always the express will
of God. This is the Mormon equivalent of the Roman Catholic doctrine
of papal infallibility....
Mormon historians would be false to their understanding of LDS
doctrines, the Sacred History of the Scriptures, the realities
of human conduct, and the documentary evidence of Mormonism if
they sought to defend the proposition that LDS prophets were infallible
in their decisions and statements.... the Mormon historian has
both a religious and professional obligation not to conceal the
ambivalence, debate, give-and-take, uncertainty, and simple pragmatism
that often attend decisions of the prophet and First Presidency,
and not to conceal the limitations, errors, and negative consequences
of some significant statements of the prophet and First Presidency.
In like manner, however, the Mormon historian would be equally
false if he failed to report the inspiration, visions, revelations,
and solemn testimonies that have also attended prophetic decisions
and statements throughout Mormon history.
A few critics have been more specific in their criticism of Mormon
historians who portray the human frailties of LDS leaders. Ezra
Taft Benson observes that Mormon historians tend 'to inordinately
humanize the prophets of God so that their human frailties become
more evident than their spiritual qualities,' and Boyd K. Packer
has recently made the following comments about a Mormon historian's
talk: 'What that historian did with the reputation of the President
of the Church was not worth doing. He seemed determined to convince
everyone that the prophet was a man. We knew that
already. All of the prophets and all of the Apostles have been
men. It would have been much more worthwhile for him to have convinced
us that the man was a prophet; a fact quite as true
as the fact that he was a man. He has taken something away from
the memory of a prophet. He has destroyed faith.'
This is, in part, related to the infallibility question. Elder
Packer criticizes historians for eliminating the spiritual dimension
from their studies of prophets, and he accuses such historians
of distortion for failing to deal with such a fundamental characteristic.
Yet Elders Benson and Packer also demand that historians
omit any reference to human frailty (aside from
physical problems, I suppose) in studies of LDS leaders, and emphasize
only the spiritual dimension. Elder Packer quite rightly observes
that omitting the spiritual, revelatory dimension from the life
of a Church leader would also deny the existence of the spiritual
and revelatory, but it is equally true that omitting reference
to human weaknesses, faults and limitations from the life of a
prophet is also a virtual denial of the existence of human weaknesses
and fallibility in the prophet. Must Church history writing portray
LDS leaders as infallible, both as leaders and as men? This is
not the Sacred History we know.
Sacred History (which is contained in the Bible, Book of Mormon,
Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price)
is an absolute refutation of the kind of history Elders Benson
and Packer seem to be advocating. Sacred History
presents the prophets and apostles as the most human of men who
have been called by God to prophetic responsibility. Sacred History
portrays the spiritual dimensions and achievements of God's leaders
as facts, but Sacred History also matter-of-factly demonstrates
the weaknesses of God's leaders. Examples are the scriptural accounts
of Abraham's abandonment of his wife Hagar and son Ishmael, Noah's
drunkenness, Lot's incest, Moses' arrogance, Jonah's vacillation,
Peter's impetuosity and cowardice... Moreover, the Doctrine
and Covenants contains frequent condemnations of Joseph Smith
by the Lord. Sacred History affirms the reality of divine revelation
and inspiration, but also matter-of-factly demonstrates that God's
leaders often disagree and do not always follow His revelations
consistently....
According to the standards of history apparently required by Ezra
Taft Benson and Boyd K. Packer, such a writer of Scriptural Sacred
History is suspect at best and faith-destroying at worst.... The
recent biography of Spencer W. Kimball is virtually Sacred History
in its presentation of a loveably human prophet of God, whereas
the Mormon history of benignly angelic Church leaders apparently
advocated by Elders Benson and Packer would border on idolatry.
Ezra Taft Benson, Boyd K. Packer, and Professor Midgley accuse
Mormon historians of writing Church history to accommodate non-Mormon
scholarship, but Elder Packer, in particular, advocates another
type of Accommodation History. He assaults the philosophy and
conduct of Mormon historians because their objective Church history
'may unwittingly be giving "equal time" to the adversary,' and
because such history may be read by those not mature enough for
"advanced history" and a testimony in seedling stage may be crushed.'...
Boyd K. Packer is not advocating the gradual exposure of the Saints
to historical truth. He excludes that possibility by warning historians
against publishing objective history even in professional journals
that 'go far beyond the audience that they have intended, and
destroy faith,' and he assails Mormon historians who 'want to
tell everything whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not.'
Elder Packer is not advocating Paul's dictum of milk before meat,
but he demands that Mormon historians provide only a Church history
diet of milk to Latter-day Saints of whatever experience....
a diet of milk alone will stunt the growth of, if not kill, any
child.
Aside from urging the kind of Church history that would not surprise
or offend even the newest convert, Boyd K. Packer urges that historians
write Church history from a siege mentality to deny any information
that enemies of the Church could possibly use to criticize the
Church. By this standard, most of the Old Testament, the Gospel
of John, many of Paul's epistles, and the Book of Revelation would
never be approved for inclusion in the Bible.... Why does the
well-established and generally respected Mormon Church today need
a protective, defensive, paranoid approach to its history
that the actually embattled earlier Saints did not employ?
Ezra Taft Benson and Boyd K. Packer want Church history to be
as elementary as possible and as defensive as possible. This is
Accommodation History for consumption by the weakest of the conceivably
weak Saints, for the vilest of the conceivably vile anti-Mormons,
and for the most impressionable of the world's sycophants....
'The Accommodation History advocated by Elders Benson and Packer
and actually practiced by some LDS writers is intended to protect
the Saints, but actually disillusions them and makes them vulnerable....
The tragic reality is that there have been occasions when Church
leaders, teachers, and writers have not told the truth they knew
about difficulties of the Mormon past, but have
offered to the Saints instead a mixture of platitudes, half-truths,
omissions, and plausible denials. Elder Packer and others would
justify this because we are at war with the adversary' and must
also protect any Latter-day Saint whose 'testimony [is] in seedling
stage.' But such a public-relations defense of the Church is actually
a Maginot Line of sandy fortifications which 'the enemy' can easily
breach and which has been built up by digging lethal pits into
which the Saints will stumble. A so called 'faith-promoting Church
history which conceals controversies and difficulties of the Mormon
past actually undermines the faith of Latter-day Saints who eventually
learn about the problem from other sources.... In warning Mormon
historians against objective history and against telling too much
truth about the Mormon past, Boyd K. Packer says, 'Do not spread
disease germs!' To adopt the symbolism of Elder Packer, suggest
that it is apostates and anti-Mormons who seek to infect the Saints
with disease germs of doubt, disloyalty, disaffection, and rebellion.
These typhoid Marys of spiritual contagion obtain the materials
of their assaults primarily from the readily available documents
and publications created by former LDS leaders and members themselves.
Historians have not created the problem areas of the Mormon past;
they are trying to respond to them. Believing Mormon historians
like myself seek to write candid Church history in a context of
perspective in order to inoculate the Saints against the historical
disease germs that apostates and anti-Mormons may thrust upon
them. The criticism we have received in our efforts would be similar
to leaders of eighteenth century towns trying to combat smallpox
contagion by locking up Dr. Edward Jenner who tried
to inoculate the people, and killing the cows he wanted to use
for his vaccine.
The central argument of the enemies of the LDS Church is historical,
and if we seek to build the kingdom of God by ignoring or denying
the problem areas of our past, we are leaving the Saints unprotected"
(On Being A Mormon Historian, by D. Michael Quinn, 1982,
pages 2, 8-10, 13-14, 16-22; revised and reprinted in 1992 in
Faithful History: Essays On Writing Mormon History, pages
69-111)
In the "Aftermath" which appears in Faithful History, Michael
Quinn stated that after he gave this talk he was warned by "active
and inactive Mormons and even non-Mormons" not to publish this essay.
Nevertheless, he gave Sunstone permission to publish it.
The "publicity resulted in meetings with my college dean and with
a member of the First Presidency.... Neither Dean Hickman nor President
Hinckley gave direct instructions, but both advised against publication
of 'On Being a Mormon Historian.' A few days later, I asked
Sunstone's editors not to print the already
typeset essay." (Faithful History, page 89)
When we discovered that Sunstone was not going forward
with the publication of this important speech, we suspected that
a great deal of pressure was being exerted to suppress Dr. Quinn's
essay. Since we felt that no publisher connected with Mormonism
would dare print the speech, we published it ourselves in early
1982. Quinn did not ask us to do it, and we had no communication
with him--either directly or indirectly--regarding the subject.
We published it because we believed the Mormon people had a right
to know what was going on in their church.
Church leaders were distressed with Quinn when Newsweek ran
a story entitled, "Apostles vs. Historians," on February 15, 1982.
Quinn reported that one of the church leaders warned him that Apostle
Boyd K. Packer, whom he had criticized in his speech, could remain
vengeful long after having a disagreement: "A few days later, a
general authority invited me to his office. He warned me that he
found Elder Packer to be easily offended and vindictive years
afterwards." (Faithful History, pages 89-90)
On page 103 of the same book, footnote 22, Michael Quinn told
of an experience he had with Apostle Boyd K. Packer:
"When Elder Packer interviewed me as a prospective member of
Brigham Young University's faculty in 1976, he explained: 'I have
a hard time with historians because they idolize the truth. The
truth is not uplifting; it destroys. I could tell most of the
secretaries in the church office building that they are ugly and
fat. That would be the truth, but it would hurt and destroy them.
Historians should tell only that part of the truth that is inspiring
and uplifting.'"
Although he did not use the same graphic example, in a speech given
in 1981, Apostle Boyd K. Packer made these comments:
"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.
"Historians seem to take great pride in publishing something new,
particularly if it illustrates a weakness or mistake of a prominent
historical figure....
"The writer or the teacher who has an exaggerated loyalty to the
theory that everything must be told is laying a foundation for
his own judgment....
"That historian or scholar who delights in pointing out the weaknesses
and frailties of present or past leaders destroys faith. A destroyer
of faith.. places himself in great spiritual jeopardy. He
is serving the wrong master, and unless he repents, he will not
be among the faithful in the eternities,...
"In the Church we are not neutral. We are one-sided. There is
a war going on, and we are engaged in it." (Brigham
Young University Studies, Summer 1981, pages 263-64, 266-67)
Interestingly, many Mormon intellectuals feel that Apostle Boyd
K. Packer is the moving force behind the present purge going on
in the church. An Associated Press article mentioned that,
"The actions came just months after Elder Boyd K. Packer of the
Quorum of the Twelve Apostles identified feminists, homosexuals
and intellectuals as the three dangers facing The
Mormon Church." (Salt Lake Tribune, September 20, 1993)
Church officials, however, have denied that the excommunications
have been directed from the highest levels of the church and claim
that it is local leaders who have instigated the trials. It seems
highly unlikely, however, that so many prominent people would be
called in by local leaders in such a short period of time. The whole
thing seems to be orchestrated from above. As indicated above, it
appears that the timing of the purge was related to the General
Conference of the Mormon Church. Church leaders seem to be making
a statement that those who continue to question the authority and
policies of church will be cut off.
Some important information regarding Apostle Packer's involvement
in the purge came to light on October 10, 1993, when the Arizona
Republic printed the following:
"...a small but influential number of 'saints' claim their leaders
are silencing legitimate internal debate in the name of maintaining
doctrinal purity, conformity, obedience and faith....
"The situation is complicated by the fact that the church's president
and prophet, 94-year-old Ezra Taft Benson, is silenced by infirmity.
"Benson's counselors and quorums run church affairs. Critics claim
that the void has robbed the church of direction and perhaps even
of divine inspiration, and that ambitious elders may be leading
the Brethren astray....
"Dallin Oaks, 61, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
said the sanctions were not part of an orchestrated effort to
silence critics.
"'There is no purge' said the former BYU president who has dismissed
critics as 'publicity hounds' and 'wolves.'
"However, Oaks did not deny that Boyd K. Packer, a senior apostle
may have improperly met with the leader of a church
court hearing excommunication proceedings against author and lawyer
Paul Toscano.
"Toscano 48, an outspoken women's rights supporter, was 'ex'd,'
as church members call excommunication, on Sept. 19.
"In addition, Oaks acknowledged that the Strengthening theMembers
Committee, which some members liken to an intelligence agency
but which Oaks calls a 'clipping service,' may have monitored
speeches, writings and activities of those suspected of apostasy
and passed on material to church officials.
"'Elder Packer does not have the authority to make church policy,'
Oaks said of the man many dissident believe plays a key role in
the crackdown....
"Oaks said that 'if Elder Packer is having any conversations with'
the court, 'it is outside the normal channels and...
if he gave a directed verdict (against Toscano), that is contrary
to policy and irregular, and it is contrary to what I know about
Elder Packer and the way he operates.'
"Packer acknowledged Thursday that he met in July with fellow
church leader Loren Dunn and Toscano's stake president,
Kerry Heinz, to discuss Toscarno. He said Heinz,
requested the meeting.
"'We talked doctrine and philosophy,' Packer said. 'I did not
instruct him to hold a disciplinary council and absolutely did
not direct a verdict. That is against church policy. When he (Heinz)
left, I did not know what he would do.'...
"Last month, John Beck, 33, of Provo, resigned the church and
quit his job as a BYU business professor.
"'My problems had to do with the ethics of the university,' he
said, 'which comes down to their not telling the truth. They are
firing people not for the reasons they say.'
"His wife, Martha Nibley Beck, 30, daughter of tamed pro-church
scholar Hugh Nibley, said she left her job as a BYU sociology
professor in July after the school removed Carol Lee Hawkins as
leader of the Women's Symposium....
"'The church is moving toward social isolation,' Martha Beck said....
"BYU spokeswoman Margaret Smoot said that the removal of Hawkins
was routine...
"However, Smoot's predecessor, Paul Richards, 57, who left BYU
last year, ridiculed that notion.... 'The church wants to portray
this image of being unified in all it does.... It wants Mormons
to be unquestioning--something I believe goes against church teachings
and portrays a great insecurity.
"'I worked in public affairs for the church for 13 years, and
I had to lie all the time, and this has really battered
my faith.'" (Arizona Republic, Oct. 10, 1993)
The same issue of the Arizona Republic revealed that
the Mormon prophet's grandson had decided to leave the church because
of the church's misrepresentation of the facts:
"Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Steve Benson--first grandchild
of Ezra Taft Benson, the ailing head and prophet of the Mormon
Church--has resigned from the church.. His wife of 16 years, Mary
Ann Benson, 36, also resigned.... The Bensons said they resigned
to protest what they believe is an increasingly intolerant church
leadership....
"He said the example set by his conservative, outspoken 94-year
old grandfather... gave him the fortitude to make an emotionally
wrenching split from the church.
"There is an old Mormon hymn,' he said in explaining his resignation.
'"Do what is right, let the consequence follow,. battle for freedom
in spirit and might."'
"'In order to be truly obedient, one must be allowed the right
to think, question, doubt, and search for truth. The modern church
is intolerant of these God-given rights I didn't leave the church.
The church left me.'
"Mary Ann Benson said leaving the church was 'painful, yet exhilarating.'
"'Since I've left, I feel very empowered and free, free to define
my relationship with God, follow my purpose in life and free to
finally find peace,' she said
"Steve Benson said he believes one sign of the church's 'dysfunctionality'
was reaction to his statements in July on his grandfather's infirmity.
"At that time, Benson said he believed that due to his failing
health, his grandfather was incapable of exerting any true leadership.
"'I hated to see the church manipulate him and... use him to falsely
prop up the notion that he is actively leading the church,' he
said.
"'Local church leaders called me in to explain my actions. I received
anonymous letters, some hateful, from church members--in essence
damning me to hell and telling me I was possessed by the devil.'"
(Arizona Republic, Oct.10, 1993)
The following day, October 11, 1993, the Salt Lake Tribune
reported some other statements made by Steve Benson:
"'I could not, in good conscience, be in an organization that
was destroying the spirituality of the very souls of its members,'
Mr. Benson said Sunday. 'In the name of freedom of religion, the
church has turned freedom of speech on its head.'
"'[I left] because of the current atmosphere of fear, intolerance
and intimidation in this dark period of the church we're groping
through now,' he said...
"'I felt the church had put a theological plastic bag over my
head that was spiritually and intellectually suffocating me,'
he said....
"Be [by?] refusing to be silenced, and by leaving a church he
believes to be run by a 'corrupt' leadership, he said he has lived
up to his grandfather's expectations."
The next day an article written by Vern Anderson of The Associated
Press reported a new development. The article was captioned, "Oaks
Lied To Protect Fellow Apostle":
"The grandson of Mormon Church President Ezra Taft Benson contends
that a church apostle lied in order to cover up
a more senior apostle's role in the excommunication of
a Mormon dissident.
"Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Steve Benson said Monday his
decision last week to resign from the church was based in part
on Elder Dallin H. Oaks' statements to a reporter about Elder
Boyd K. Packer.
"Elder Oaks admitted late Monday he 'could not defend the truthfulness
of one of the statements' about Packer, who is considered
by many to be behind the church's recent crackdown on dissidents....
"Oaks told Arizona Republic reporter Paul Brinkley-Rogers
on Oct. 1 that he had "no knowledge" of whether Packer had met
with Kerry Heinz, the local ecclesiastical leader for... Paul
Toscano, before Heinz excommunicated Toscano on Sept. 19....
"However, in a 'personal and confidential' letter to Oaks on Oct.
6, Benson reminded the apostle that in a private meeting Sept.
24, Oaks had told Benson he was 'distressed and astonished' that
Packer had met with Heinz.
"He quoted Oaks as saying of Packer, 'You can't stage manage a
grizzly bear,' and added that 'it was a mistake for Packer to
meet with Heinz and a mistake for Heinz to ask for the meeting.'...
"Benson said he was making his letter to Oaks public because he
was fed up with church leaders shading the truth....
"In an interview Monday evening, Oaks declined to confirm or deny
most of Benson's assertions about a pair of private interviews
the church prophet's grandson had in September with Oaks and Elder
Neal A. Maxwell, another member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles...
"However, Oaks, a former Utah Supreme Court justice, acknowledged
that his single statement to reporter Brinkley-Rogers about having
no knowledge of the Packer-Heinz meeting was one 'I could not
defend.
"'It was not a truthful statement,' Oaks said.
"Benson's letter to Oaks had warned the apostle that unless he
set the record straight, Benson would feel no obligation to honor
the promise of confidentiality he had earlier given Oaks and Maxwell.
"Oaks called The Republic's reporter that night and retracted
the 'I have no knowledge of whether he [Packer] did' statement....
"Oaks did not retract other statements in the interview... that
Benson had alleged--and Oaks denies--were false or deliberately
misleading....
"Oaks... stressed that Benson at least three times had assured
him and Maxwell that their meetings... were confidential and would
never be publicly discussed.
"'I think that Steve Benson is just going to have to carry the
responsibility for whatever he relates about a confidential meeting,'
Oaks said.
"Benson said he felt acutely the moral dilemma of having promised
confidentiality, but then having seen deliberate efforts to mislead
the public about Packer's role in the Toscano affair.
"'I had to decide to be a party to the coverup or be faithful
to my own convictions.' Benson said. 'I had to let Elder Oaks
walk a plank of his own making.'"(Salt Lake Tribune, October
12, 1993)
The more church leaders said on the subject, the worse it began
to look for Oaks, Packer and other church leaders. Apostle Packer
eventually revealed that he had the approval of the Council of the
Twelve Apostles to meet with Heinz. On October 17,1993, the Salt
Lake Tribune reported:
"Mormon Church Apostle Boyd K. Packer said he had the endorsement
of the Council of the Twelve Apostles when he met with an ecclesiastical
leader who later excommunicated a member of the church.
"Packer told the church-owned Deseret News Friday that
when stake president Kerry Heinz asked through a midlevel church
official to meet with Packer, Packer asked his fellow apostles
in a meeting whether he should.
"'...I felt there may be some sensitivity about his request,'
Packer said."
Since Apostle Oaks is a member of the Council of the Twelve Apostles,
he must have known about this meeting even before it occurred. The
fact that he told Steve Benson about the meeting after it took place,
shows that it was on his mind and that he was deeply concerned about
the matter. In light of the above, the fact that Oaks was not forthright
about the matter casts a very bad light on the whole affair.
Apostle Dallin Oaks allowed his own church's newspaper to interview
him about the matter. Notwithstanding the fact that Oaks had shot
himself in the foot, he proceeded to attack the Associated Press:
"'Life isn't fair,' Elder Oaks said. 'Somebody said that time
heals all wounds. But it's also true that time wounds all heels,'
he added in jest. But in a serious tone, Elder Oaks... said he
feels 'wounded' by an Associated Press story that he said dwelled
on his admission that he made a statement he couldn't defend,
and downplayed his efforts to promptly correct his unintentional
error.
"'It impugned my integrity and seriously distorted the account
of the facts as it was presented,' Oaks said in an interview this
week.
"The apostle said he didn't willfully mislead a news reporter.
He explained that he had misspoken during an hour-long interview
and when he was notified of that, he called the reporter to retract
a 'statement I could not defend.'...
"In his interview with the Deseret News, [Steve] Benson
said what Elder Oaks told him didn't square with what was said
to the reporter.... he transmitted a confidential letter to Elder
Oaks pointing that out. Benson said he also warned that if the
apostle did not 'set the record straight' he would no longer feel
obligated to keep their discussion confidential.... Elder Oaks
said, he reviewed the transcript of his interview with the reporter
and found he couldn't defend his comment about having no knowledge
of Packer meeting with Heinz.
"'How do you make a statement like that? I can't give any better
explanation than the fact that I was talking a mile a minute and
I just said something that on mature reflection I (concluded),
"I can't defend the truthfulness of that,"' Elder
Oaks said.... after later learning that Elder Oaks left intact
the other comments that troubled Benson, Benson said he followed
through on his threat to go public." (Deseret News, Oct.
16, 1993)
Apostle Oaks would apparently like people to believe that he merely
made a mistake when he said he did not know Apostle Packer met with
Heinz. This, of course, is very difficult to believe. Ironically,
Oaks himself has released a partial transcript of his interview
with The Arizona Republic which establishes beyond all doubt
that he was not forthright about the matter:
"Oaks: 'As for Elder Packer, Elder Packer does not have a specific
responsibility for any area in the church.... So, if Elder Packer
is having any conversation with Kerry Heinz, it is outside the
normal channel. That's all I can say. I have no knowledge of whether
he did. But if he did and if he gave a directed
verdict or anything like that, that is contrary to policy. It
is irregular and it's contrary to what I know of Elder Packer
and the way he operates." (Salt Lake Tribune, October 17,
1993)
As we have shown, Apostle Oaks tried to divert attention away
from his fallacious statement by attacking the Associated Press.
Oaks claimed the story "impugned my integrity and seriously distorted
the account of the facts ..." The Associated Press responded as
follows:
"Bill Beech, bureau chief for The Associated Press in Salt Lake
City, said the AP story was based on a tape-recorded interview
with Oaks, was accurate and made no distortions.
"Though Packer said Friday that he had the support of the Council
of the Twelve in meeting with Heinz, Benson wrote in an Oct. 6
letter to Oaks that Oaks had told him 'it was a mistake
for Packer to meet with Heinz and a mistake for Heinz
to ask for the meeting.'... in another letter Friday to Oaks,
Benson appealed to the apostle to correct what Benson believes
are other conflicts between Oak's private version and the public
statements about Packer's involvement.
"'You were provided an opportunity to set the record straight
completely,' he wrote. 'You chose only to correct one of three
falsehoods.'"(Salt Lake Tribune, October 17, 1993)
Apostle Dallin Oaks finally became so upset over the charge that
he had lied that he did something very few General Authorities have
done in recent years: he wrote an article regarding the matter which
was published in the Salt Lake Tribune on October 21,1993.
In this article Apostle Oaks said, "I did not 'lie'
to the reporter," and went on to declare: "My perception of this
matter is simple. I have been the victim of double-decker deceit:
1, betrayal of promises of confidentiality, and 2, false
accusations of lying."
While Apostle Oaks maintained that there is no orchestrated effort
to silence critics in the church and that, "There is no purge,"
the evidence all seems to point in the opposite direction.
Allen Roberts, coeditor of Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought,
commented as follows:
"Elder Dallin Oaks has attempted to persuade the public that
'there is no purge' on the reasoning that six lost people are
of no numerical consequence given the church's membership of 8.5
million. Recently excommunicated historian Michael Quinn had this
to say about Elder Oaks' notion that it takes more than six people
to constitute a purge: 'That is like saying there wasn't a purge
at Tiananmen Square because only 200 people were killed out of
one billion Chinese.'... The purge is more widespread and far
greater in scale than any have heretofore reported." (Private
Eye Weekly, Oct. 20, 1993)
The Religion Section of the Salt Lake Tribune, Oct. 16,
1993, contained an article entitled, "More Stories Point to LDS
Leaders As Source of Dissident Crackdown." In this article Peggy
Fletcher Stack presented some important information which seems
to establish that there is indeed a "purge" going on and that it
is being directed from the highest levels of the church. In our
new book, The Mormon Purge, we have more information regarding
this important subject.
While we believe that the Mormon Church and other organizations
have every right to excommunicate those who will not conform to
its teachings, it is extremely disturbing that the Mormon leaders
would work in a clandestine manner to accomplish their purpose.
As one of the dissidents has pointed out, the top officials have
tried to shield themselves, giving the appearance that they are
benign, good-natured individuals, while those on the lower levels
have to take all the blame for the excommunications. It may be true
that the top leaders of the church felt that it is necessary to
remove some members to preserve the church, but they should have
had the courage to stand up and accept responsibility for their
actions.
Now that the cover-up seems to be unraveling, the First Presidency
and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have issued a statement which
seems to indicate that the excommunications will continue. In this
statement we find the following:
"We have the responsibility to preserve the doctrinal purity
of the church. We are united in this objective....
"The longstanding policy of church discipline is outlined in the
Doctrine and Covenants: 'We believe that all religious
societies have a right to deal with their members... according
to the rules and regulations of such societies... They can only
excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw
from them their fellowship.' (Doctrine and Covenants 134:10.)...
"The general and local officers of the church will
continue to do their duty and faithful church members
will understand." (Salt Lake Tribune, Oct. 17, 1993)
Although a statement like this coming at a time of tenseness in
the LDS Church is likely to silence many church members, it could
also cause further dissension. In view of the backlash which has
already occurred because of the excommunications, it remains to
be seen whether church leaders will continue with the purge.
One thing that is obvious about the whole affair is that many
members of the church are becoming polarized over the issues and
the rhetoric is becoming louder. For example, Allen Roberts wrote
the following:
"All fingers seem to point to Elder Boyd Packer, acting president
of the twelve apostles, as the prime force behind what has been
called the 'Mormon Inquisition.' While Elder Packer, nicknamed
'Darth Packer' by the irreverent because of his
cold and detached personal style, is a far cry from Torquemada
(the 15th century Inquisitor General of the Spanish Inquisition),
his speeches, instructions to lower ranking authorities, and direct
contacts with local leaders have shown him to be the prime orchestrator
of top level-organized punishment,... Raised by an authoritarian
German father, Packer and his brothers entered the military during
World War II instead of serving missions. This military influence
had an indelible impact on Packer's view of the church, according
to a close family acquaintance, 'He sees the church as an army.
He is one of its generals and the members are privates who should
march in step and do what they are told without question.' (Private
Eye Weekly, Oct. 20, 1993)
On October 18,1993, the Salt Lake Tribune revealed the following:
"A threat apparently intended for excommunicated LDS historian
D. Michael Quinn was delivered by phone Saturday night to the
home of the wrong Michael Quinn.
"The baby sitter of Michael D. Quinn answered the phone call...
Michael D Quinn, who is a member of the Elders Quorum in his ward
in Bountiful, explained:
"'The 15-year-old baby sitter answered the phone and a male voice
asked for Michael Quinn. She said he I could not come to the phone....
"'The man told her to give me this message, "I'm tired of the
statements he's making about the LDS Church. I'm tired of hearing
him criticize the church. He'd better start keeping to himself.
If he doesn't, I have his phone number and I know where he lives.
I'll come get him. I hate him. He stinks. Then he hung up.'...
"Angered by the threat after he spoke to the nonhistorian, Mr.
Quinn, the historian, said Sunday:
"'Threatening phone calls are a new low in the current atmosphere
of repression in the LDS Church. I hold Apostle
[Dallin H.] Oaks personally responsible for inciting such sick-minded
Mormons. Apostle Oaks publicly stated that the feminists and scholars
excommunicated in September were actually wolves. Utan
sheepherders kill wolves rather than allow them to wander around
and kill sheep. Elder Oaks has increased the paranoia of Mormons
toward differences of opinion and dissent. I refuse to remain
quiet while... Oaks and [Apostle] Boyd K. Packer demonize anyone
they don't agree with. It would have been more Christian of Apostle
Oaks to describe excommunicated persons as "lost sheep." That
might have avoided giving encouragement to the self-appointed
vigilantes in the Mormon community.'"
The Thinking Has Been Done
In our book, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? pages 183-84,
we present a number of statements from Mormon leaders which clearly
teach blind obedience to the authorities of the church. One of the
most controversial is a Ward Teachers' Message which appeared in
the official organ of the church, The Improvement Era, in 1945:
"Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively
or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the 'prophets,
seers, and revelators' of the Church is cultivating the spirit
of apostasy. Lucifer... wins a great victory when he can get members
of the Church to speak against their leaders and to 'do their
own thinking'....
"When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they
propose a plan--it is God's plan. When they point the way, there
is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should
mark the end of controversy." (The Improvement Era, June
1945, page 354)
Mormon apologists, who do not want to face the fact that their
leaders require very strict obedience to their counsel, have found
a letter written by the eighth president of the church, George Albert
Smith, which they feel invalidates the quotation cited above. It
was published in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring
1986, pages 38-39. President Smith was responding to a question
by a Unitarian minister who was upset by the article which appeared
in the Mormon Church's official organ.
In response, President Smith wrote: "I am pleased to assure you
that you are right in your attitude that the passage quoted does
not express the true position of the Church."
President Smith's letter raises a very serious question: why did
Smith write this letter to a private individual, who was not a member
of the church instead of making a public correction in the church's
Improvement Era? If the article did not really represent
the position of the church, Smith should have demanded a retraction.
Mormon apologists have been unable to point to any public statement
by Smith repudiating the article.
It should be noted also that this notorious Ward Teachers' Message
was also printed in the church's newspaper, Deseret News,
Church Section, on May 26, 1945. It is clear, then, that the Latter-day
Saints read this message in both the Deseret News and The
Improvement Era. Moreover, the ward teachers presented this
lesson in the homes of the Mormon people.
Unfortunately, the Mormon Church has a history of giving out false
statements to those who are not members of the church when embarrassing
information comes to light. Moreover, there have been times when
even members of the church have been deliberately deceived about
what was going on by church leaders to protect the image of the
church. It was Joseph Smith himself who set the example in this
regard.
Mormon Church records clearly show that Joseph Smith was deeply
involved in the secret practice of polygamy while he was in Nauvoo,
Illinois, yet on May 26,1844, just a month before he was murdered,
he absolutely denied any connection with the practice:
"What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery,
and having seven wives, when I can only find one, I am the same
man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove
them all perjurers." (History of the Church, vol. 6, page
411)
Joseph Smith actually had far more than seven wives when he made
this statement. Those who will take the time to examine the church's
own Doctrine and Covenants, Section 132, will find that Smith
had already received plural wives when he gave the revelation on
the subject in 1843. In that revelation we find the following:
"And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith [Joseph's wife], receive all
those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are
virtuous and pure before me...
"And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood--if any
man... have ten virgins given unto him by this law,
he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are
given unto him; therefore is he justified." (Doctrine and Covenants
132: 52, 61-62)
For more information on the false statements regarding polygamy
by Joseph Smith and other Mormon leaders see Mormonism: Shadow
or Reality? pages 245-248. After the Manifesto, almost fifty
years later, the top Mormon leaders publicly proclaimed that they
were not allowing any more polygamous marriages. These statements,
however, were absolutely false (see pages 231-244b of the book cited
above). As noted above, D. Michael Quinn found himself in serious
trouble with church leaders for revealing the truth about this matter.
The belief that the interests of the Mormon Church are sometimes
more important than the truth has continued right up until the present
time. We have already shown that Apostle Dallin Oaks told Steve
Benson in private that he knew Apostle Packer met with Kerry Heinz,
but when Oaks was asked about the matter by the press, he claimed
he had no knowledge about such a meeting.
While we may never know exactly what was on President George Albert
Smith's mind when he wrote the letter to the minister, it is obvious
that his public silence concerning this serious matter left the
Mormon people with the strong impression that they should never
question the decisions of the leaders of the church.
The purge which is now going on in the Mormon Church tends to
demonstrate that the present leaders of the church want their people
to believe that, "When our leaders speak, the thinking has been
done. When they propose a plan--it is God's plan.... When
they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy."
The statement made in The Improvement Era in 1945 appears
to be the basis for a statement which appeared in the church's publication,
The Ensign, some thirty-three years later. In an address
given by Young Women General President Elaine Cannon in 1978 we
find the same type of reasoning:
"Tonight President Kimball extends an invitation... for all of
us as women to follow him as he follows the Savior.... He is our
leader, in all the world of would-be leaders, who can guide us
back to the presence of God.... Personal opinions may vary. Eternal
principles never do. When the prophet speaks, sisters, the debate
is over.... we emphatically and happily declare,
'I will be obedient! I will help strengthen others that they may
be so too!'" (The Ensign, November 1978, page 108)
The following year, 1979, the First Presidency Message, written
by President N. Eldon Tanner, First Counselor in the First Presidency,
endorsed Elaine Cannon's statement as an Important truth regarding
Mormonism:
"Recently... Young Women President Elaine Cannon made the following
statement: 'When the Prophet speaks,... the debate is over' (Ensign,
Nov.1978, p.108).
"I was impressed by that simple statement, which carries such
deep spiritual meaning for all of us. Wherever I
go, my message to the people is: Follow the prophet....
"It is difficult to understand why there are so many people who
fight against the counsel of the prophet...
"Latter-day Saints should be able to accept the words of the prophets
without having to wait for science to prove the validity of their
words. We are most fortunate to have a living prophet at the head
of the Church to guide us...
True Latter-day Saints... know that the messages of the prophet
have come from the Lord and have the concurrence of all the General
Authorities... Whose side are we on? When the prophet speaks the
debate is over." (The Ensign, August 1979, pages 2-3)
The reader will notice the close agreement between the statement
made in 1945 and the one which appeared in 1979. The 1945 Ward Teachers'
Message contained this statement: "When our leaders speak, the thinking
has been done.... When they give direction, it should mark
the end of controversy."
The 1979 First Presidency Message reads: "When the prophet speaks
the debate is over." As far as we can determine, the
same basic message--that church members are to give
unquestioned obedience to the pronouncements of the church--appears
in both statements.
Non-functional Prophets
Mormon leaders maintain that the LDS Church is "the only true church"
upon the face of the earth. Moreover, it is claimed that the church
is led by direct revelation from God through the "living prophet,"
who is also the president of the church. No one else can give revelations
to the church.
In our book, The Changing World of Mormonism, published by
Moody Press in 1980, page 439, we pointed out that the Mormon Church
had been confronted with some serious problems and that the ability
to deal with these issues was complicated by the fact that some
of the Mormon leaders were very old. David 0. McKay, the ninth prophet,
lived to be ninety-six years old. He was in very poor health toward
the end of his life and was hardly in any condition to function
as prophet, seer and revelator for the church.
Instead of appointing a younger man after Mckay's death, church
leaders chose Joseph Fielding Smith who was ninety-three years old.
Smith lived to be ninety-five, and the leader ship of the church
passed to Harold B. Lee who was seventy-three years old. Lee lived
less than two years and Spencer W. Kimball became president. Kimball
lived to be ninety years old, but was in very poor health toward
the end of his life and could not really lead the church. Ezra Taft
Benson became president of the church in 1985. Although he is now
ninety-four he is still sustained as the living prophet.
The way the Mormon hierarchy is structured there seems to be little
hope of younger leadership and even less hope for any new revelations
from the "living prophet." The problem is that the president of
the Council of the Twelve Apostles always becomes prophet of the
church. Since this system is based on seniority, it is almost impossible
for younger men to move to the top.
Interestingly, the average age of the last five prophets of the
church was eighty-one years when they attained that
position. This should be contrasted with the fact that Joseph Smith
was only in his twenties when he assumed the role of prophet of
the Mormon Church. The present system, therefore, seems to insure
that a man who is already old can become prophet. The effect of
this policy is that those who are appointed prophets are very likely
to become senile or in bad health during their presidency.
The Mormon system works in such a way as to bring a man into the
highest office in the church at the very time when he is least competent
to adequately perform his duties. While the highest leaders
of the church have forced many of those on lower levels to retire
(i.e., go on emeritus status), they will not retire themselves and
the "living prophet" is never removed no matter how incompetent
he becomes.
It has become very obvious that at time present time the Mormon
Church does really not have a functioning prophet. The whole claim
that the church is superior to all others because it has a "living
prophet" now seems to be in jeopardy. Although church leaders have
tried very hard to cover up the seriousness of the situation, the
truth is becoming widely known to the Mormon people.
As we have shown above, when Steve Benson publicly questioned
the fact that his grandfather was capable of running the church,
he was called in to explain his actions. On July 10, 1993, three
months before Steve Benson left the Church, Vern Anderson of the
Associated Press reported that President Ezra Taft Benson's grandson
was deeply concerned regarding his grandfather's growing problem
of senility:
"As Mormon Church President Ezra Taft Benson approached his 94th
birthday, the years have stilled his voice, clouded his mind and
raised questions about the faith's rigid order of succession.
"Attired in a sweatsuit and fed by others, Benson spends his days
in supervised seclusion in an apartment overlooking Temple Square.
He is an infirm retiree in a church that doesn't officially retire
its 'prophet, seer and revelator.'
"The incongruity struck a 13-year-old Benson great-grand-son the
other day as he poured his breakfast cereal: 'Dad, why do they
call him prophet when he can't do anything?
"The boy's father is Steve Benson, a practicing Mormon who won
a Pulitzer Prize this year for the political cartoons he draws...
"His son's question is one reason Benson decided to speak openly
for the first time about his grandfather's decline....
"A more compelling motivator, however, is what he believes are
misleading efforts by the church's hierarchy to preserve an image
of a more vibrant Ezra Taft Benson, an image less problematic
for the core Mormon belief in a literal prophet of God.
"'I believe the church strives mightily to perpetuate the myth,
the fable, the fantasy that President Benson, if
not operating on all cylinders, at least is functioning effectively
enough, even with just a nod of the head, to be regarded by the
saints as a living, functioning prophet,' he said.
"That is not the grandfather Benson saw when he visited in March
from Arizona, or whom he has seen struggle with encroaching senility
during much of his 7-year administration.
"'The last time I saw him he said virtually nothing to me,' said
Benson... 'He looked at me almost quizzically as if he were examining
me.'
"In earlier visits, the former U.S. agriculture secretary... could
manage at least a word or two....
"Benson, who has not spoken in public for more than three years,
was already suffering memory loss when he assumed the presidency
in 1985 at age 86. His grandson said facing church audiences became
a frightening experience for a man who once had relished the pulpit.
"While some church 'general authorities' are retired at 65, the
granting of emeritus status does not extend to the faith's 12
Apostles or three-member First Presidency, the belief being God
will choose his leaders and the length of their service.
"Steve Benson sees the practice as needlessly impractical.
"'I don't think God would expect us to be bound legalistically
or structurally to a system that obviously isn't working,' he
said.
"Gordon B. Hinckley, Benson's first counselor, has taken pains
in recent sermons to stress the church does not face a leadership
crisis...
"A request to interview Hinckley or an apostle about the church's
pattern of succession was declined through spokesman LeFevre...
Steve Benson, 39, said it has been some time since his grandfather
has been capable of participating in any way in the administration
of the church's affairs, although that is 'an image that people
deeply, almost desperately want to believe.
"'And I'm not demeaning or ridiculing that desire to believe.
I'm just saying that what the church is presenting to the members
to believe is not factual,' he said." (Salt Lake
Tribune, July 10, 1993)
The Arizona Republic, July 13,1993, published an article
containing the following:
"The grandson of the Mormon Church's president is being battered
and praised by Mormons for revealing last week that the aged Ezra
Taft Benson cannot physically or mentally lead the Church... The
Arizona Republic's political cartoonist, has received numerous
telephone calls from Mormons, who clearly are split on the issue....
"One woman left a message for Benson saying that although he spoke
the truth, he never should have made his opinions public.
"Some members in wards... prayed Sunday for their church leader,
affirming their faith in his leadership despite Benson's statements
that his grandfather, at 93, is "not in the loop" and
cannot attend to church affairs....
"Don LeFevre, spokesman for the 9 million-member church, said...
that Benson's counselors review major church decisions with the
prophet at his home, where he must be tended with round-the-clock
care.
"Steven Benson said the notion that the president's two counselors,
Gordon Hinckley and Thomas Monson, could review anything with
his grandfather is nonsense.
"'The debate is so emotional because it is a matter of trust,'
Benson said. 'If the church hides the truth about nonfunctional
prophets, members then may ask, 'What else is the church hiding?'"
In an article appearing in the Salt Lake Tribune, July 21
1993, Steve Benson was quoted as saying:
"'The point I was trying to make is that President Benson is
the prophet in title only, not in role. President
Benson is not carrying out his role. He can't,' the grandson,
an active Mormon, said Tuesday."
The fact that President Benson's counselors did not have a great
deal of confidence in his ability to function became evident when
documents filed with the state of Utah were examined by the Salt
Lake Tribune:
"Documents on file with the state of Utah are strong evidence
that the parent corporation of the Mormon Church no longer is
being directed by its president, Ezra Taft Benson.
"It is the first time since the corporation was founded 70 years
ago that anyone other than the church president has obtained total
authority over Utah's most powerful corporation.
"The documents, at the Utah Department of Commerce, were signed
with a machine that duplicates the signature of 94 year-old President
Benson. They were filed six months before President Benson...
made his last public speech.
"Church leaders said this week the filings and the use of a signature
machine were routine, and done with President Benson's approval....
Today, the corporation owns all church assets--including a multibillion-dollar
portfolio of financial and property holdings....
"Entitled 'Certificates of Authority' and dated May 23, 1989,
the documents say Presidents Hinckley and Monson can keep those
complete powers--even if President Benson becomes disabled or
is determined by a court to be incompetent.... the church made
no announcement of the change. It has continued to portray President
Benson as the ultimate power behind church affairs....
"Fran Fish, notary public administrator for the state Department
of Commerce, said signatures written by machine are legal...
"Still, Ms. Fish... said use of a signature machine on state corporate
filings 'is certainly out of the norm.'... Steve Benson... has
said that his aging grandfather no longer possesses the mental
faculties to handle church affairs.
"'The church has misrepresented the condition of President Benson
and stated flatly that his role as prophet has in no way been
impeded,' Steve Benson said this week. 'My grandfather has become
a storefront mannequin while the business of the
store is conducted behind closed doors.'
"He said a signature machine has replaced his grandfather's hand
on all personal and family correspondence. 'Evidently,' Steve
Benson said, 'the signature machine had not been programmed to
sign, 'Grandpa.'"(Salt Lake Tribune, August 15,1993)
Mormon Church leaders appear to be on the horns of a dilemma with
regard to their non-functional prophet, Ezra Taft Benson. On the
one hand, it is maintained that only a revelation given to the prophet
could change this extraordinary policy of the church. On the other
hand, however, President Benson is obviously incapable of giving
such a revelation. Vern Anderson observed:
"The strict apostolic succession--which church spokesman Don
LeFevre said would require a revelation from 'the Lord to his
prophet' to change--has fostered a gerontocracy."
(Salt Lake Tribune, July 10, 1993)
While the present situation with regard to President Benson must
be very perplexing to the General Authorities of the Mormon Church,
a worse scenario might be if the apostle with the most seniority
were already mentally incompetent when installed as prophet. In
view of the way medical advancements are lengthening people's lives,
it is even conceivable that a "prophet" might live for a quarter
of a century without contributing anything to the church.
It is apparent that the Mormon Church's claim to be led by a "Prophet,
Seer, and Revelator," is not substantiated by the facts. The Bible
relates that the prophet Moses lived to be extremely old, but it
goes on to say that "his eye was not dim nor his natural force abated."
(Deuteronomy 34:7) We certainly cannot say this of most of the recent
prophets of the Mormon Church. While it is claimed that these men
are "living prophets," they seem to become mere figureheads as they
advance in age.
The Mormon forger Mark Hofmann put the "living prophet," President
Spencer W. Kimball, to the acid test and demonstrated that the so-called
"living oracles" are just as fallible as other men. At a
time when revelation was really needed in the church, Kimball seemed
to be completely oblivious to what was really going on. President
Kimball was unable to detect that the documents Hofmann was selling
to the church were forgeries.
Two of the documents even contained revelations purportedly written
by Joseph Smith himself, yet Kimball had no knowledge that they
were spurious. After President Kimball died, the prophet Ezra Taft
Benson had no spiritual insight regarding the matter. He failed
to realize that the documents were forgeries, and church officials
made it very difficult for investigators to examine the documents.
Moreover, during the criminal investigation that followed after
Hofmann killed two people, the Mormon Church discovered that it
had the real McLellin Collection in its vault. This would have provided
very important evidence of fraud on Mark Hofmann's part because
he was trying to sell them items they already had in their own vault.
Instead of coming forth with information regarding the collection,
church leaders decided to suppress this evidence from investigators.
Mormon Church official Richard Turley has acknowledged that this
matter was brought to the attention of the First Presidency, and
Apostles Boyd K. Packer and Dallin H. Oaks.
While one would assume that only the "living prophet" could make
such an important decision, we do not have any hard evidence that
Benson made the decision to cover up the existence of the collection.
If Ezra Taft Benson was responsible for the cover-up, it was a terrible
decision which caused embarrassment to the church. On the other
hand, if his counselors in the First Presidency and Apostles Oaks
and Packer did not consult him, it would tend to provide further
evidence that the "living prophet" is only a figurehead. For much
more information regarding this matter see our book, The Mormon
Church and the McLellin Collection, pages 1-16.
As we have shown, Mormon leaders tell their people that "When
the prophet speaks the debate is over. "We feel that
this type of absolute obedience can be very dangerous. In Jeremiah
17:5 we find this admonition: 'Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the
man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, whose
heart departeth from the Lord."
As we were preparing this newsletter, it became more obvious all
the time that we would not have the room to include many significant
items concerning the purge that is going on in the Mormon Church.
It seems that new developments are occurring almost every day.
Consequently, we decided to do a book on the subject which should
be of great interest to our readers. A very important part of this
book will deal with the suppression of the 16-volume sesquicentennial
history of the Mormon Church. Extremely important church documents--including
a secret memorandum to President Gordon B. Hinckley--have been turned
over to us detailing the duplicity Mormon officials used when they
squelched the history which many trusting Mormon historians had
spent untold hours preparing.
Our new book regarding the Mormon Church's attempt to silence
its historians and other dissidents is entitled, The Mormon Purge.
|
