By Jerald and Sandra Tanner
For a number of years we have been predicting that Mormon scholars are in for some very rough times. For instance, in the January 1979 issue of the Messenger, we wrote that, “There is reason to believe that Benson [Ezra Taft Benson, the man who will become the next president of the Church if he outlives Kimball] wants to remove Arrington from his position as Church Historian.” As our readers now know, Dr. Arrington was removed from his position and the 16-volume History of the Latter-day Saints, which had been approved by Church leaders, was aborted because it proved to be too revealing. When we made our assessment of the situation four years ago, a number of Mormon scholars disagreed with us. They felt that we were exaggerating and that there was no need for concern. Recent developments, however, prove beyond all doubt that Mormon scholars who print the truth stand in danger of being punished by the Church. One scholar has been forced to resign from his job with the Church, and theSalt Lake Tribune for May 26, 1983, said that there has been an “‘Inquisition’ Reported.”
One of the reasons for this “inquisition” is that Mormon leaders feel that Church scholars are putting too much ammunition into the hands of critics. The so-called “anti-Mormon” movement is now prospering to the point that Mormon leaders feel drastic action must be taken to save the Church. They want to isolate us from Church scholars, and to be sure that nothing they print will help our cause. This was made very plain in an article which recently appeared in the Provo Herald:
Latter-day Saint stake presidents and bishops are warning Mormon writers who publish intellectual material to write faith-promoting stories or their church membership will be in jeopardy.
The writers say the stake presidents and bishops are acting under orders from high-ranking general authorities, a charge LDS officials neither confirm nor deny. . . .
Linda and Jack Newell, co-editors of Dialogue, a 17- year old independent historical journal, say the intregrity [sic] of Mormon writers is being questioned.
“We are aware that some Mormon scholars have recently been questioned by (LDS) church authorities about their research, some of which has been published in Dialogue,” said the Newells in a prepared statement.
“We are gravely concerned that the faith of any Latter-day Saint would be questioned on the basis of his or her commitment to legitimate scholarship.”
James Clayton, a Utah professor of history, says, “This type of behavior is despicable. Interviewing writers will have a chilling effect on scholarly research and it will drive intellectuals out of the church.”
Scott Faulring, a writer for Seventh East Press, an independent student newspaper banned at Brigham Young University, said his stake president warned him to be cautious in his writings.
“My stake president refused to tell me who had asked him to talk to me,” says Faulring. “He admitted, however, that he had never read my stories.”. . .
Gary Bergera, who has published articles in Seventh East Press and Dialogue, also has been questioned by his stake president in Provo.
“My stake president told me that if the prophet told me to do something wrong, I would be blessed if I obeyed,” said Bergera. “He said what I had written was anti-Mormon because it wasn’t uplifting.”
Bergera says his stake president objected to the headline of an article Bergera had written entitled “Anti-Mormons Prompt Better Church History.” He says the stake president also disapproved of an article Bergera had written about anti-Mormon publishers Jerald and Sandra Tanner.
“My stake president said it was clear in the article that I didn’t support the Tanners,” says Bergera. “But because I interviewed them I came close to supporting them.”
Free-lance LDS history writer George Smith, from San Francisco, says he knows of eight writers who have been interviewed by their stake presidents, and three “told me told me [sic] LDS Church general authorities had initiated these interviews.”
“The writers felt intimidated,” says Smith. “We say we value honesty but to intimidate those who are honest is to discourage integrity in the Mormon community.”
David Buerger, a free-lance LDS history writer from Campbell, Calif., says his stake president questioned him about his writings.
“At the recent request of a member of the LDS Church Council of the Twelve, my stake president initiated an inquiry with my bishop regarding my writing of LDS Church history,” says Buerger. “I was informed that this apostle was concerned about me and the possible negative impact my writing might have among some church members.” (The Herald, Provo, Utah, May 22, 1983)
We have always maintained that the original records of the LDS Church are the most “anti-Mormon” documents in existence. In other words, these records are extremely embarrassing to the Church and also contain doctrines that are diametrically opposed to the teachings of present-day Church leaders. The attempt by the General Authorities to suppress these records and the present “inquisition” against church scholars who want to study these documents certainly shows that the Church’s own documents are far more damaging than the vicious attacks of anti-Mormons like John C. Bennett.
The Salt Lake Tribune for May 26, 1983, contained this interesting information:
In a Wednesday article in the Provo Daily Herald newspaper, reporter Dawn Tracy said she had talked to 14 Mormon writers in four states who said they had been questioned by their local bishops or stake (diocese) presidents and told the church was worried about their faithfulness.
Three of the 14 writers are faculty members at the church-owned Brigham Young University. All of the authors had contributed to Dialogue, a bimonthly magazine called Sunstone, or a former independent BYU student newspaper called the 7th East Press.
Earlier this year, BYU officials banned the 7th East Press from campus sales outlets, and the paper soon folded.
Roy Doxey, former BYU dean of education, said Mormon Church Apostle Mark E. Peterson ordered the investigations of the writers.
Richard Cracroft, dean of BYU’s College of Humanities and a stake president in Provo, said recent anti-Mormon activities prompted church leaders “to closely examine Mormon writers.”
Cracroft said, “All good LDS (Mormons), including scholars, must accept the judgment of the church’s General Authorities. If this is what the brethren want, then good LDS must say it is appropriate. This may be difficult for scholars, but obedience is an important concept of the Mormon Church.”
However, University of Utah political science Professor J. D. Williams called the questionings of writers “an inquisition.”
Williams, who is a member of the church, said, “Passing ecclesiastical judgment on writers who have conducted serious, historical research is a denial of everything the church stands for.”
We have been asked by one Mormon scholar for our assessment of what the future holds for historians in the Mormon Church. While we do not really know the answer to this question, an examination of the seniority structure in the Church points to a grim future for thinking Mormons. To begin with, President Spencer W. Kimball seems to be close to the point of death. The first in line to succeed him is Ezra Taft Benson, a man who has constantly fought the advancement of true historical research in the Church. Benson seems to have been instrumental in the suppression of the book The Story of the Latter-day Saints. The Sunstone Review, March 1983, page 2, maintains that Benson was the one responsible for stopping the sale of the Seventh East Press at Brigham Young University:
Whether the decision to ban Seventh East Press was made by the Board of Trustees . . . or the school administration, Richards wouldn’t say. Our sources confirm that it was . . . the initiative of one man—Ezra Taft Benson. . . . His efforts to ban the Press were resisted by President Holland, but finally Holland bowed to the demand. Huffaker also said that at least two sources have confirmed that Benson was responsible for the banning.
However this may be, the reader will find more information concerning Benson’s anti-historical views in our publication Answering Dr. Clandestine, pages 40-43.
Mark E. Petersen is second in line to the presidency of the Church. Petersen has spent a great deal of his time searching for heretics in the church. We have already quoted the Tribune as saying that Roy Doxey, former BYU dean of education, claimed that Petersen “ordered the investigation of the writers.”
As we go on down the line, we find three others who have given historians a bad time. Gordon B. Hinckley, for instance, is fifth in line. We have seen documents linking Hinckley with the suppression of the 16-volume history. Boyd K. Packer, who is seventh in line, made a scathing attack on Church historians who want to “tell it like it is” (see BYU Studies, Summer 1981, pages 259-278). In position number nine we find Bruce R. McConkie. McConkie, of course, is the Apostle who warned the Mormon scholar Eugene England that he held “the scepter of judgment” over him. In the same letter McConkie stated:
. . . It is not in your province to set in order the Church or to determine what its doctrines shall be . . . It is my province to teach to the Church what the doctrine is. It is your province to echo what I say or to remain silent. . . . If I lead the Church astray, that is my responsibility, but the fact still remains that I am the one appointed with all the rest involved so to do. . . . if I err, that is my problem; but in your case if you single out some of these things and make them the center of your philosophy, and end up being wrong, you will lose your soul. . . .
Now I hope you will ponder and pray and come to a basic understanding of fundamental things and that unless and until you can on all points, you will remain silent on those where differences exist between you and the Brethren. . . . if you do not, perils lie ahead. (Letter from Apostle McConkie, dated February 19, 1981, photographically reprinted in our publication LDS Apostle Confesses Brigham Young Taught Adam-God Doctrine)
It would appear that the Apostles who believe in absolute obedience and suppression of history are now in full control of the Mormon Church, and there in nothing to indicate that there will be any change for the better in the near future. In fact, these same Apostles can also keep any who are sympathetic to the historian’s point of view from coming into leadership positions in the Church.
In June 1945, the church’s official publication, Improvement Era, counseled Mormons to blindly follow their leaders: “When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done” (page 354). Today, many members of the Church are faced with a situation where they must choose between blindly following their leaders’ suppressive policies or stand up for the truth and face excommunication. The General Authorities are asking them to follow a course which they know is morally wrong. We must agree with James Clayton’s observation that the inquisition now taking place will tend to “drive intellectuals out of the church.”
The Bible warns against putting trust in men. It says that we are to rely only on God and put our trust in Him:
Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord.
Jeremiah 17:5
Originally appeared in: