Smoothing down that Rough Stone Rolling

I have been listening again to John Dehlin’s interviews with Richard Bushman on my iPod on the days that I travel to the office. Thanks again John, for bringing the archives back. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: those podcasts are now an invaluable part of history. I’ve enjoyed each one and have listened to some of them multiple times, including the Bushman interviews.

I have also been re-reading Rough Stone Rolling, especially the early chapters dealing with the First Vision, the visit of the angel Moroni and the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. I have thought deeply about this fascinating part of our early LDS history but John’s probing questions to Richard Bushman have got me thinking again about several of these rather complex issues.

The difficult questions of history

If you’re a student of our history then you know what the questions are and have most likely formulated your own answers long ago. I know I have. Through my blogging activities of the past couple of years I have been able to present my own answers to many of those more difficult questions. I have also been called on to defend my answers by those who don’t agree with them.

Here are just a few of those issues I have blogged about: multiple versions of the First Vision, God is an exalted man, God has a body of flesh and bone, the seer stone in the hat, objections to the Book of Abraham, the burning of the bosom, Joseph Smith was a Mason, plural wives of Joseph Smith, the new Mormon history, the only true and living church and Mountain Meadows.

Not taught in the classroom

As I’ve written in several of my blog posts of the past, I feel very blessed and grateful that I had an advantage that many who have studied our history did not have. I was exposed to almost all of the troublesome issues early in life and had come to understand even in High School that what is taught in the LDS classroom does not always tell the whole story of what really happened.

From the time I was fifteen I realized that there are some issues that are not taught in depth in our Sunday Schools, Seminaries and Institutes and certainly are not brought up from the pulpit. This was not a problem for me. I learned about the rest of the story by reading books that my mother provided for us in the family library. Although a convert, mother loved our unique LDS history.

Information from other sources

I hope John doesn’t mind, but I think his story is illustrative of what has happened to many of our young people in the church who have discovered at a later point in their lives things they didn’t know about our history. After the shock wore off, a feeling of betrayal replaced it. As John said, this feeling came because they loved and trusted the church too much, not too little.

In John’s case, he discovered many of these troublesome issues when he was called on to teach seminary. He studied the material in great depth in order to be prepared as he taught. He also supplemented his study of the official CES material with what he discovered on the Internet. And there is the big difference between my experience with this difficult material and John’s.

Learning Mormon history

You can learn more about the issues that trouble some of our members and investigators through a simple Google search than I could through many years of reading selected books provided by my mother. However, what you usually find on the Internet is someone’s interpretation of what they read and very little original research. That can taint the way you learn Mormon history

From mother’s library, I read books like No Man Knows my History by Fawn Brodie, Family Kingdom and the Kingdom or Nothing by Samuel Taylor, Great Basin Kingdom by Leonard Arrington and Joseph Smith, the First Mormon by Donna Hill. We also had the History of the Church and the Journal of Discourses in our home library in which I looked things up.

Learn details of history in personal study

My point is that I had the luxury of slowly reading one of these historical books, discussing what I had learned with my mother and then pondering why I had not learned these kind of details in my seminary classes. I came to the conclusion that there just wasn’t enough time to bring up in that 50 minute early morning Seminary class some of the more interesting stuff that I had read.

Having taught Seminary later in life, I have been impressed with the clear direction from CES that we are not to teach some of the more complex and difficult parts of our history. I think I can understand why and in fact, agree with this direction to teach our history in a manner that is both uplifting and faith-promoting. But leaving major parts of it out can cause problems for some.

It is human nature to discuss

One of the methods of those who are opposed to the work of the LDS Church is to present us with shocking statements about our faith, our beliefs or our history and then to accuse us of not wanting to accept the truth. It doesn’t matter how we respond – shock, indignation, dismay, anger, or even kindness, their desire is not to help us understand the truth but to destroy our faith.

That’s the problem with researching the church on the Internet. It’s common to want to discuss our new discoveries with others. That’s how we solidify our understanding – by sharing things with others and evaluating their response. Our young people turn to online discussion groups or forums because many of the older members of the church have never learned about these things.

True believing Mormons who know

Unfortunately, it is rare to find someone online who knows our history well and has no problem with the more difficult parts of that history. In fact, it is rare to find someone in your own circle of contacts who really knows our history. We are a church of lay leadership. There is simply no requirement that you know the history, only that you believe, are worthy and want to help others.

That’s why John’s interview with Dr. Bushman is so helpful to those who are struggling with understanding and accepting all the warts and imperfections of our history. Rough Stone Rolling is a great resource that tells our story without trying to whitewash it or cover anything up. Dr. Bushman is careful to provide the complete story with contemporary sources from that time.

A safe place to discuss our history

I don’t know if John has found the answer to what I feel was his best question. He asked, “Where can we go to find a safe forum in which to discuss our history?” In my experience, Sunstone is not the place. I think they tried forums but they didn’t take off. And the Mormon History Association has wonderful conferences and publications, but no online forums.

There are a plethora of online forums to which we can turn to discuss the church. I have listed them in a previous essay. You just have to choose what level of moderation you are going to accept. Some strive to keep the disaffected Mormons out, but what if you are simply going through a temporary crisis of faith? Who can you trust to guide you through your explorations?

Summary and conclusion

The Internet has done amazing things for the church. It has helped us share the message of the restoration in a way that allows us to reach millions, even billions with the story of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. It allows us to present our faith, our doctrine and our history in a manner that is faith-promoting and uplifting. That has been my objective in the essays I write.

John prepared and shared a wonderful presentation on how to stay in the church in spite of the loss of faith. I highly recommend it to all, no matter what your current level of belief. An updated version is available at the staylds forums, which I missed when I compiled my list of LDS-related forums. Thanks to John Dehlin for his work in helping those with a crisis of faith.

6 thoughts on “Smoothing down that Rough Stone Rolling”

  1. Nice post, and blog–this is my first time here. I plan to look around more.What did you think about Brodie’s book when you read it as a teenager? I have a lot of LDS history books on the shelf, including Quinn, Bushman, and etc., but I try to keep my collection as balanced as possible.I don’t completely agree with you on the idea of keeping the difficult stuff out of seminary or Sunday School. On the contrary, I think including it (along with a balance of everything else) can lessen the feelings of betrayal later on… and I know plenty of active members who felt like they were betrayed–it’s not just those who leave. For example, when I was teaching the 11 year-old boys last year about the translation of the Book of Mormon, I taught them about the stones in the hat, almost like it was just common knowledge. Hopefully, the next time this comes up they’ll think “Yeah, duh, I heard that, no big deal” rather than “why didn’t anyone tell me that before?”What do you think?

  2. Hi Adam,Thanks for the visit, the compliment and the questions. The first time I read No Man Knows my History I could not put it down. I was fascinated. I was an avid reader in High School – lots of Science Fiction. Her book was an exception. Even at that young age I thought she stretched a few things…no, she stretched a lot of things. But she introduced me to a lot of the same things that you find on the Internet today.I have mixed feelings about the idea of bringing up difficult parts of our history in the LDS classroom. As a called and set apart teacher, we are under very strict guidelines to only teach that which can be found in the manuals. I like the example you used in teaching the 11-year olds.I also taught course 11 in Primary a couple of years ago. I always responded to the questions of the kids as honestly as possible when they asked, but I never brought up the difficult parts of our history if it wasn’t in the manual. I know the parents of these kids well. If something came up that might be problematic for the other kids, I suggested that they go home and discuss it with their parents. I think that’s best.An example I just read this evening on the staylds board is from a YW leader who was talking with another YW leader after a meeting about Joseph’s plural wives. The 2nd YW leader had just discovered it on the Internet. A young 13-year old overhead and exclaimed, “What! Joseph Smith practiced polygamy?” What would you say to this young girl?In all my essays where this has come up over the years I have always expressed gratitude that I learned this stuff when I was a teenager. It never bothered me because I was able to talk it over with my mother, who was really into church history. I think that is the ideal – parents teaching their children about our history – warts and all.Unfortunately, the percentage of active LDS adults today who know about the things that trouble those who discover it on the Internet is very small. When I taught gospel doctrine classes, the number who could discuss some of the more problematic areas of our history with any detail was maybe five in a class of sixty.That’s a constant anxiety I always have in the back of my mind when I write my essays. I am a little concerned that my blog might be the place where someone’s son or daughter from my ward or stake might first discover that there are some very difficult issues on our history. I know this stuff is all over the place and I write my essays in such a way that I hope encourage faith, but still…So to answer your question, I think it would have been helpful in the life of someone like John Dehlin if he had been exposed in seminary to all the pieces of church history that bothered him when he started teaching seminary as an adult. It is my practice when teaching teenagers to hint at problem areas and if they show interest, to suggest that we talk about it after class one on one.I don’t want to be spouting off about Joseph’s plural wives or how Joseph didn’t translate the Book of Abraham in the same way that Egyptologists do today. The seer stone in the hat is mild compared to a discussion about Masonic influence on the Temple ceremony but that usually only comes up in an adult classroom. I usually talk about details of the issues one-on-one, and not in front of everyone else.But I’ll bet you’ve had the same experience I have had in a class where a member who is learning about these issues and wants to talk about it tries to dominate the discussion. You don’t want to shut him down. Where else can he go to talk in a safe, open forum? That was John’s big complaint as he related in his crisis of faith. It takes real talent to get someone like that to agree to defer to a one-on-one situation.Nevertheless, I have seen it done successfully. Usually, there will be a few others who will join in the discussion. I love to see that. Too many adult members of the church just don’t know the history or the doctrine. There are too many cultural and social members who have no depth and no real understanding of what we really believe. Sorry, I’ll get off my soap box now.Thanks again for adding to the dialog. I hope that answers your question of what I think about the right way to deal with all the things that our youth and others who dig on the Internet are going to find. It would be so helpful if the church had a class in apologetics but not call it that, but rather something like, “How to deal with the difficult questions.”Instead, we teach our members to say, “Well, I don’t know but I know a couple of nice young men who can answer that question.” Unfortunately, that is simply not always true. I bought and studied anti-Mormon books for years after my mission because I wanted to be able to have ready answers. There’s no way I could have done that on my mission.I still study the issues today. After thirty five years I’m still learning new details that need explaining. OK, I’m really done now. I look forward to getting to know you a little better as I read through your blog. Feel free to comment on any of my essays from the past. Hopefully our differences on social issues will not be a hindrance to dialog.

  3. Pingback: General Authority training – advanced subjects | Mormon Bloggers

  4. Closet Doubter


    You said above “Unfortunately, the percentage of active LDS adults today who know about the things that trouble those who discover it on the Internet is very small.”

    What I have found even more Unfortunate is that people in leadership will refuse to even read things like Bushman’s book. I once asked somebody (who held a very high leadership position) if he had read the book. This brother said yes, he started to, but then stopped because he didn’t want to know those things about JS.

    How is this leader going to answer questions from members over whom he has stewardship if he refuses to know the facts? How can he minister to his flock? How can I do anything but remain in the Closet with leaders like this?

    Closet Doubter

  5. Pingback: Latter-day Commentary · An Evening with Richard Bushman

Comments are closed.