Mormon Infobia...

[_Drifting]

The OP is completely absurd is perpetuating an assumption that the Church "fears" information - which in fact are usually just criticisms.
We have actually been counseled by the First Presidency to not shy away from such things, but rather to be responsive "in the form of a positive explanation of the doctrines and practices of the Church" (Church News, Dec. 18, 1983, p. 2).

Then why is Jensen worried and advocating that the Church start to publish the material that is causing a great many members to apostatise when they see it and realise they haven't been told an accurate truth?

He must be worried about nothing, right?

Even Ben M acknowledges the Church does not do a good job of accurately presenting the historical facts surrounding Church history.

The Church has kept information away from members and portrayed things as Anti-Mormon that have subsequently been shown to be factually true and accurate.
Since the advent of the Internet, members have been able to find it themselves. They find it and realise the Church could've, should've, been the place where it was published.
Either the Church has been incompetent in accurately portraying its history, or, as the OP postulates - it has a phobia of this type of information being read by members.

[_moksha]

Mormon Infobia - the irrational fear of truthful discussion of all the salient facts pertaining to the truth claims of the Church.

1. The fear is not irrational. President Packer firmly believes that parts of the full story would be damaging to members beliefs.

2. Sequestering ourselves from the total picture is not something essential to the Mormon Church. The practice of limited information and legend promotion could be done away with tomorrow and life in the Church would still go on, perhaps better than ever.

[_Fence Sitter]

This is a more interesting subject in some ways. Our problem is compounded by a couple of issues. First, our professional teaching crew (CES/Seminary/whatever) isn't trained to teach history as such. They aren't equipped with the right skills and tools. They have traditionally maintained a more faith promoting exercise which often backfires. The same methods Grant Palmer used to build faith, he then used to tear it down. The problem wasn't so much the material - it was the bad method.

Second, the church is very wary of what I might term the cult of personality (while at the same time almost encouraging it). The church does not want members having unauthorized classes. There is always this fear that someone will develop a reputation or be held up as something special, and then lead a bunch of people right out of the church. It's perhaps an understandable concern. But, the limited availability of competent instructors makes the task virtually impossible in the current climate.

Finally, I think at the moment that the church is struggling with letting go of trying to be the sole arbiter of its historical narrative. Releasing documents like the Joseph Smith papers is a sign that this is starting to happen. We can perhaps move forward and create some uncorrelated material or lectures, or other types of venues in which this stuff can be discussed. Too many hands in the pie tend to make it taste bad ... I think this may be the struggle right now. Can we encourage faithful approaches without the corresponding urge to micromanage them.

Ben M.

It seems we agree after all.

Bushman for Church Historian would be a good start in my opinion.

[_Doctor Scratch]

The problem with your post, Drifting, is that it looks good on paper (perhaps from a certain perspective) but it doesn't occur in my world. I have never had any member of the church, or my leadership, tell me that what I read or look at is inappropriate. The church doesn't actually have that kind of control over its members.

Then you must somehow be ignoring what the Brethren say. Check out this post from Darth J:

viewtopic.php?p=547433#p547433

[_ldsfaqs]

A phobia (from the Greek: φόβος, Phóbos, meaning "fear" or "morbid fear") is a type of anxiety disorder, usually defined as a persistent fear of an object or situation in which the sufferer commits to great lengths in avoiding, typically disproportional to the actual danger posed, often being recognized as irrational. In the event the phobia cannot be avoided entirely the sufferer will endure the situation or object with marked distress and significant interference in social or occupational activities

The Church is permeated with a seemingly irrational fear of its members finding stuff out.
The amount of information that a member can have about the Church and its restoration has a cap. You are allowed a certain amount of fitered information from a single controlled source but anything else not only is frowned upon, but is actually feared.

You are discouraged from searching to deeply into historical or doctrinal matters and you are likewise discouraged from having too many or too searching questions. You are to believe what the Church tells you about itself and its doctrines and only what the Church tells you about itself and its doctrines.

Is this a phobia or is this just a sensible way of treating this type of information?

In terms of German history and in particular the Nazi party - would you consider it reasonable for questioning Nazi party members, or people contemplating joing the Nazi party to be restricted in their searching of Nazi history, to just the materials sanctioned and produced by the Nazi party themselves?

Is this a phobia or is this just a sensible way of treating this type of information?

What has God's true Church on earth got to fear from the documented history of its divine restoration and the open and frank discussion of its doctrines past and present? If it's the truth and God's word then it should not be hiding from discussion, witholding information that members seek about it. It should have nothing to fear and everything to gain from people investigating properly and thoroughly the claims of the Church.

Is this a phobia or is this just a sensible way of treating this type of information?

When a jury is faced with making a difficult decision about the future of the person placed before them. Would it be fair and reasonable for them to consider only the evidence placed before them by one of the parties involved?

Mormon Infobia - the irrational fear of truthful discussion of all the salient facts pertaining to the truth claims of the Church.

You comments are the fantasy of your own warped mind, not the truth about the Church.
The Church or anyone in it encouraging people to not study things because they might be "scary" occurs so little, that I don't actually remember the last time someone said it.

In contrast, almost every Sunday someone says something about learning, growing in wisdom, etc. seeking out the best information, etc.

Anyway, nothing like more anti-mormon lying.....

[_ldsfaqs]

Benjamin, thank you for your response.

Our experiences are obviously different.

Perhaps you might consider trying a little experiment.
Approach your Sunday class teacher and ask them where, other than LDS.org, you might find the historical details of Joseph Smith's polygamy and marriages to already married women (which you believe to be contrary to section 132 of the D&C) and the details of actually how the Book of Mormon was translated. Explain that you have perused MormonThink.com and the information on there doesn't tally up with what the Church teaches nor what it says in the LDS canon and you want to get to the bottom of it.

See how that goes for you and let us know.

The problem is your ignorance and willing BELIEF of the crap..... not that a person study's things in order to learn. They are concerned about your soul, not that you're learning things contrary to the claims of the Church.

The fact is, claims against the Church ARE false, are evil.... as such, one should be aware.
Ones soul if not properly prepared could be a stake. For good reason, I'm the exception to the rule of someone being a former anti-mormon and returning to the Church. That demonstrates the danger anti-mormonism is.

[_ldsfaqs]

This is easy to test. Just take a copy of " No Man Knows My History "to church. Lay it on a pew or table and watch reactions to it.

For good reason, it's full of lies and half truths.....

Why do you think anyone with a brain would be happy seeing something so vile?

Would you be happy with a book on your Living Room Table claiming your father was a Pedophile when you know very well he wasn't, that this book perverts and lies about many things of your family history?

Please.... spare us the double standard. :(

[_Runtu]

For good reason, it's full of lies and half truths.....

Why do you think anyone with a brain would be happy seeing something so vile?

Would you be happy with a book on your Living Room Table claiming your father was a Pedophile when you know very well he wasn't, that this book perverts and lies about many things of your family history?

Please.... spare us the double standard. :(

I heard all these awful things about Brodie's book. And then I read it. The notion that her book is some sort of perverted religious porn is laughable.

[_ldsfaqs]

For the most part I agree. The Church is loosing people for a variety of reasons.

Religions, groups, organizations, etc. loose people for all kinds of reasons, generally for the same kinds of reasons, especially among similar groups such as religions.

Religions such as the Church are also gaining people, and are in fact GROWING......

As much as anti's feel good that the Church looses members, we gain much more.
Get a life anti's, and fight against evil for a change, rather than good.

[_Runtu]

Religions, groups, organizations, etc. loose people for all kinds of reasons, generally for the same kinds of reasons, especially among similar groups such as religions.

Religions such as the Church are also gaining people, and are in fact GROWING......

As much as anti's feel good that the Church looses members, we gain much more.
Get a life anti's, and fight against evil for a change, rather than good.

I would, but I'm a LIAR!!!