The Great Mormon History Coverup

### Summary

Does the current church leadership know about the damaging information of the church? In 1981, Elder Boyd K. Packer gives a lecture to a Church Educational System (CES) conference in which he clearly proves that the upper leadership is indeed familiar with such damaging information, and advises the CES teachers and professors to suppress it.

### Background

In 2016, Gregory Prince co-authored a biography with Robert Wright about Leonard Arrington, who was the Church Historian from 1972 to 1982. The book was titled "*Leonard Arrington and the Writing of Mormon History"*. The Church Historian office was closed in 1982 with the release of Leonard Arrington. He was the first actual historian to hold the office, as prior it was held by General Authorities due to being a purely ecclesiastical calling. Since, they have had non-historians hold the position as "church historian", two recent of which were lawyers.

Prior to Leonard Arrington, the archives were restricted to research. When Leonard Arrington took the role, he really pushed the cause for history, cleaning up a lot of the records, making much of it available for public consumption. After his release, the church has again restricted access to its vault containing the historical documents, wanting only to teach one side of history- the faith promoting side.

According to Prince's biography on Leonard Arrington, some apostles were specifically named who were in favor of an open and transparent historical narrative. They included Elder David B. Haight, Elder Thomas S. Monson, and Elder Bruce R. McConkie.

Named apostles who were against an open history were senior apostle Elder Ezra Taft Benson, Elder Mark E. Peterson, and newly called, junior apostle Elder Boyd K. Packer.

Those who were in favor of an open history were over ridden by the more conservative voices in the Quorum of Twelve Apostles, so in 1981, the ball is already rolling on closing down the Church Historian's Office. This talk seems to be directly calling out Leonard Arrington, without mentioning him by name.

Leonard Arrington has a diary entry, which reads, written in July 1981:

> "*What is most disturbing is the apparent feeling on the part of some that we are letting some historical cats out the bag. What they aught to realize is that the cats have been out of the bag long before we came in, in 1972, and that our efforts have been to try to minimize the historical impact of those unfavorable facts, and to put the lid on other facts that can be found by intense study of archival material that would damage the church and all its officers."*
>
>

Even Leonard Arrington's own transparency had its limits, and was not willing to divulge some facts that would damage the church and its officers, in the present tense.

Leonard Arrington's biggest project was that he wanted to write a comprehensive history of the church that would cover 16 volumes. It has already been approved and arranged, where had had select different scholars who had expertise in different aspects of church history. Only the first volume was completed before the Church Historian's Office was shut down in 1982, and it was actually written by Richard Bushman, which covered the early years of Joseph Smith.

The first manuscript was complete for the first volume, which made its way up the chain in the church hierarchy, and it's likely this volume that was responsible for shutting down the Church Historian's Office. The reason was that this first volume discussed Joseph Smith's treasure digging and his use of peep stones to find treasure, as well as to translate the Book of Mormon.

Richard Bushman published this manuscript through the non-church publisher *University of Illinois Press* titled "Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism" in 1984. "Rough Stone Rolling" is a continuation of that book.

The Quorum of Twelve Apostles are privy to the information in that manuscript, and we know that they know about Joseph Smith's early history and controversies.

### The Mantle Is Far, Far Greater Than The Intellect

Boyd K. Packer gave a talk at BYU in August 1981 to a CES conference titled "The Mantle Is Far, Far Greater Than The Intellect". In it, Elder Boyd K. Packer demonstrates his knowledge about the damaging information of the church, advises the teachers to keep that information quiet, and to only teach the faith promoting narrative of church history.

RFM lists 14 points that jump out at him in this talk.

1. "When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done."
2. Only church leaders are allowed to be direct.
3. Scholars should view their field of study through the lens of the Church.
4. Only the faith promoting truth should be told.
5. Church leaders are better trained at church history than historians.
6. The truth isn't always useful.
7. Scholars destroy faith, break covenants, and serve Satan.
8. Satan wants objective truth, while God does not.
9. Historians who tell the whole truth are traitors to the Church.
10. Historians steal data and inflate egos.
11. Don't repeat everything; let some be forgotten.
12. Church historians must have testimonies, not be trained in history.
13. God wants only the faithful historical narrative taught.
14. Honest scholars need to repent and come back to the church.

A breakdown of each item follows below.

#### "When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done"

President George Albert Smith, in the 1945 *Improvement Era* said:

> "*When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done... when they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy."*
>
>

The context surrounding this quote is in reference to the doctrine that black skin was a curse from God as a sign of unrighteousness, and that the Native Americans were Lamanites from the Book of Mormon. However, it has become a cynical mantra among some Mormons that you are not allowed to think for yourself. This follows along with the quote by President Wilford Woodruff when speaking about the end of polygamy:

> "*The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God."*
>
>

In other words, blind faith in the leaders of the church is rewarded over critical thinking, analysis, research, and debate on the doctrinal topics of the church. "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than The Intellect" is Elder Boyd K. Packer's fancy way of saying the same thing.

The "mantle" refers to a piece of ecclesiastical clothing in the Old Testament that was worn as a sign of prophetic authority. Boyd K. Packer is using the word here to signify the authority that church leaders have over their members. So what he is saying is those who have the mantel of prophetic leadership have a greater capacity for intellect than lay members who do not have the prophetic mantle.

#### Only Church leaders are allowed to be direct

The opening paragraph of his lecture mentions that he will be direct to the CES teachers and professors as a reward for their loyalty to the church:

> "*The fact that I speak quite directly on a most important subject will, I hope, be regarded as something of a tribute to you who are our loyal, devoted, and inspired associates."*
>
>

However, throughout the rest of the talk, he makes it clear that the CES teachers and professors are not allowed to be direct to their students. This is something of a hypocritical position on the part of Boyd K. Packer; "do as I say, but not as I do".

#### Scholars should view their field of study through the lens of the Church

Rather than looking at the church through their academic training, Boyd K. Packer argues that they should be looking at their academic training through the lens of the church. He says:

> *"It is an easy thing for a man with extensive academic training to measure the church using the principles he has been taught in his professional training as his standard. In my mind, it aught to be the other way around. A member of the church aught always, particularly if he is pursuing extensive academic studies, to judge the professions of man against the revealed word of the Lord."*
>
>

This implies that geologist should believe the Earth is 6,000 years old, a biologist should believe all human life began with Adam and Eve, and there was no death before the Fall, and linguists should believe that languages originated from the Tower of Babel 2,500 B.C.

However, Boyd K. Packer isn't really concerned with the physical sciences as much as history, specifically as it relates to the church. On page, before the first caution, he says:

> *"You seminary teachers and some of you institute and BYU men will be teaching the history of the Church this school year. This is an unparalleled opportunity in the lives of your students to increase their faith and testimony of the divinity of this work. Your objective should be that they will see the hand of the Lord in every hour and every moment of the Church from its beginning till now."*
>
>

So the objective is rather to tell a faith-promoting version of church history that "shows the hand of the Lord in every hour and every moment", instead of a fully transparent history. This raises questions about whether or not church history events that do not show the hand of the Lord should be taught.

#### Only the faith promoting truth should be told

Boyd K. Packer then lists 4 cautions that should be noted when teaching church history:

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.
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 first caution is the fourth point that stood out to RFM. The problem with "[t]here is no such thing as an accurate, objective history of the Church without consideration of the spiritual powers that attend this work." means to imply that there is the only narrative of the church history that should be discussed is a one-sided, biased, and subjective version of the truth. That one-sided narrative is the faith-promoting side. It's the side that doesn't deal with the parts of church history that are controversial, mundane, or even damaging.

The problem however, is that this one-sided version of the truth is not "the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". If you purchased a used car from a dealership, only to find out later that had several problems, and turned out to be a lemon, is it honest and truthful for the salesman to keep that information from you when selling you the car? Is it the whole truth if the salesman only tells you what is necessary to sell you the vehicle, leaving out the notable problems that might give you pause, and rethink making the purchase?

### Conclusion

This talk proves conclusively in 1981 that church leaders knew damaging information about the church, are actively suppressing it, and are advising the CES teachers to suppress it as well, under penalty of losing their exaltation.

If there are parts of church history that do not show the hand of the

### Resources

https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/mantle-far-far-greater-intellect