An Insider's Look at Mormon Culture

When I started seminary at Provo High back in dinosaur days, my friends and I were shocked at the things Brother Righteous taught. Jesus the Creator? Where did he get that? We all knew it was Heavenly Father who created the earth. “Seminary just teaches us the opposite of everything we’ve ever learned in church,” one friend lamented. And maybe this little story illustrates the need for the Correlation Committee which I love to hate. Before gospel principles were reduced to a handful of key topics and lesson manuals simplified to prevent individual interpretation of Church doctrine, teaching of key principles varied widely within the church. And I understand the rationale. Not knowing basic Mormon theology is a stumbling block for the “Every member a missionary” program.

But another stumbling block exists for Mormons who engage with non-Mormons. Ignorance of aspects of Church history. As a teacher moving into Washington State, I took a required class in Western American history and disagreed with my instructor when he told the story of Joseph Smith looking at a peep stone in a hat to translate the Golden Plates. Years later, I learned that story is authentic. On her mission, our daughter Jaycee argued needlessly with investigators who told her that Joseph Smith was a Mason and incorporated Masonic symbols and ceremonies in the Nauvoo temple. Teaching members facts about Church istory that are readily obtainable to any researcher would prevent Mormons from looking uninformed, even brain-washed, to knowledgeable people outside the faith.

And it’s not like the Church hasn’t revised aspects of its history in the past. All the time I was growing up, Church lessons and speakers presented Emma Smith as an apostate, a woman who lacked the faith to remain in the Church after Joseph’s death. The revision of Church history in the ‘80s, possibly precipitated by the publication of Newell and Avery’s Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smithwas a positive. Although the official revision falls short of presenting all of Emma’s problems with Joseph’s polygamy and Brigham Young’s authoritativeness, it allows members to honor this key woman in Church history who faithfully supported her husband throughout a difficult marriage.

Of course, some facets of Church History are tricky to portray without the risk of damaging faith. Are Mormons ready to read Heber Kimball and Jedediah Grant’s sermons advocating blood atonement? To learn that General Authorities were less than forthright in testifying of their involvement in the Salamander forgeries? Or to learn that many modern prophets have suffered mental decline for several years before their deaths? Still, varnished history, like varnished wood, weathers poorly. Bits flake off, exposing rough patches and giving a neglected, in-need-of-improvement appearance. I suspect the teaching of honest Church History would disarm critics and prevent members from feeling betrayed when they learn they haven’t been told the truth, or at least not the whole truth, in church.

Advertisements

Comments on: "Church History–the Unvarnished Truth" (5)

  1. I wanted to tell you that I enjoy your writing and your perspectives. I can’t begin to explain the pain that I went through when I discovered so many half truths and omitted church history. It did me in.

  2. A church is just a building. People who congregate inside are just people.

  3. The church is so much more than just a building. The reason why most people congregate at the building is because they believe that it is “the true church.” Church members base their lives and daily activities on the teachings. The church extends into the most personal aspects of a person’s life. I was asked to promise to give all that I have and am, even my life if necessary to the church. So, to me it’s WAY more than a building. The upper leadership of the church are not “just” people. Yes, they are human. But they are portraying themselves as special witnesses of Christ. They claim to be prophets and apostles. They teach the members to trust in them because they will never lead you astray. So, to me if they are who they claim to be then they can’t be “just” people. They have too much influence over too many to reduce half truths and omissions to being “just people.” Sometimes thinking of situations in a simple way brings clarity. Sometimes it just helps us to avoid thinking about something hard or painful.

    • adi– You summerized the position for devout Mormons very well. The total devotion to church and total faith in leaders taught by the church makes it very hard for Mormons to accept the church as just a building and the leaders as just people.

Leave a Reply to Alice Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud