Conference tecrus::mormonism

Obviously, this isn't a big-deal-issue, or it would have been raised 
before now in this conference, but I thought I'd bring it up since 
events will shortly catch up with us.

CBS will broadcast sometime soon - I don't know when - a TV version of 
a recent book entitled "The Mormon Murders." It is about Mark Hoffman, 
his forgeries, his dealings with the Church, and, of course, about the 
murders he committed to cover up his crimes.

I never was too concerned about any of this stuff. I live in New 
England, and it all happened in Salt Lake. It was a big media thing in 
Salt Lake, but even there it wasn't the type of thing to cause people
to whisper on street corners. When Hoffman's documents were revealed to
be forgeries, I shrugged my shoulders. It was no surprise. 

I do object, however, to the sensationalist, exploitive nature of this 
book, and by extension, the upcoming TV movie. Obviously I haven't 
seen the movie, but were I to guess whether making a TV movie out of
something makes it less schlocky or more, I'd guess 'more.' The title
alone - 'The Mormon Murders' - is, to me, highly distasteful. It sort
of reminds me of another guilt-by-association term: "Legionnaires
disease," a term that fails to indicate that the Legionnaires were
*victims* of the disease, not the perpetrators. 

The authors of this book were on a 'People Are Talking' show (local TV
talk show in New England) yesterday, mainly to promote their book.
There were some ridiculous statements made by the authors, among them
that there was a Watergate-like 'cover-up' by lying Mormon leaders,
that the Church was shaken to its core by the implications of the
documents that Hoffman produced, prior to their being exposed as
forgeries, etc. Silly charges such as these show that the obvious
thrust of the book is to tell this admittedly non-run-of-the-mill
story in the most sensational, romance-novel-like manner possible. 

The program also had a number of Mormons on the show, who provided a
strong - and needed - defense of the Church. They pointed out the
various comprehensive statements made by Church leaders, such as
Dallin Oakes, a member of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles, who BTW was a
member of the Utah Supreme Court prior to taking up his
ecclesiastical duties, a person hardly given to flouting the law.
They also pointed out that the Church cooperated fully and completely
with the authorities, and released all related documents and lists of
documents, etc. 

Hoffman's prosecutor was also on the show. While he spent most of the 
time complaining that Church leaders did not cooperate quickly enough, 
he finally admitted that he eventually got everything he asked for and 
more besides, without which Hoffman's prosecution would not have been 
successful.

The authors, who are non-members, denied having any axe to grind with 
the Church. However, when one of the Mormons on the panel pointed out
that the Church is good, holy, helps its people, is concerned about
God, life, and God's children, one of the authors said "This is a
perfect example of the distortions put out by the Mormon Church." To 
me, this hung a big sign on these guys as to their real bias.

The Church, its members, and leaders were among the victims in this
sorry episode. We are made victims yet again by a book of this sort.
Brace yourselves for yet another onslaught of silly innuendoes and 
exaggerated misinformation.

/kevin

  I too saw the show 'People are Talking' last week while I was home sick.

  Excuse the language, but I thought that *all* involved, both the Authors, the
  LDS there to defend the church, and the show's host were all dorks.

  The Authors were just trying to get free sensationalistic PR for their
  book.  The LDS were busy giving canned PR about the church being a great and
  loving organization and ignoring the allegations, and the host was busy
  stirring it up, not allowing anything to be discussed long enough to
  be of any interest.  He kept changing the topic.

CHad

    Glad I missed it.  I'm sure I'll miss the movie, too.  :-)
    
    Steve

    Kevin,
    
    Thanks for going into such detail on this Kevin.  My 19 year old
    daughter was at home having lunch last week with her/my non-active 
    father/husband and was VERY disturbed to see this show and how anxious 
    he was to 'soak up all the lies' some anti-Mormons presented on the show.
    She was especially displeased with the way the moderator introduced
    his upcoming show (i.e, "stay tuned folks so we can expose the
    world's richest church and some of their SECRETS" etc. etc. etc.)
    It was too late for her to pop in a VCR tape so I could listen to
    it later.  Now I'll print off this message and let her read your
    comments Kevin and it will give me some background and knowledge
    regarding the shows context.  Some day, when I least expect it,
    my husband will bring up this show to me with his 'darts' in his
    back pocket.  I want to become a "Boy Scout" regarding this show
    and "BE PREPARED"!
    
    Grateful as always for my STRONG testimony that the Mormon Church
    is the ONLY true and LIVING Church of Jesus Christ on the face of
    this earth today.
                                                                
    Sister Penny

The following information about Hofmann's forgeries was given as a handout
in a BYU class.

***********************

                           FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS

     (Mark Hofmann produced a greater variety of forgeries than any other
known forger in the history of mankind.  His forgeries included the
production of letters, the alteration of books and documents, the
counterfeiting of money, and the creation of printed works.  He possibly
produced a thousand or more fraudulent documents.  One of the purposes of
his deceit was to cause faithful Latter-day Saints to reject their belief
in the rise of Mormonism as described in the Pearl of Great Price.  The
following is a partial list of the fraudulent documents he produced and the
approximate dates the documents surfaced or were sold to individuals or
institutions.)

* Oct. 1980   Anthon Transcript (thought to have been the earliest known
                holograph written by Joseph Smith.)

* Mar. 1981   Joseph Smith III blessing.
* May  1981   Letter of Joseph Smith to Emma, March 6, 1833
  July 1982   Lucy Mack Smith Letter.
  Jan. 1983   1825 Joseph Smith letter to Josiah Stowell.
  Mar. 1983   E.B. Grandin (Book of Mormon) contract.
  Dec. 1983   1830 Martin Harris Letter, known as "White Salamander" letter
  Aug. 1984   Deseret Currency
  Mar. 1985   Oath of a Freeman, thought to possibly be one of the earliest
                publications in early America.  Hofmann tried to sell this
                for more than one million dollars to the Library of Congress.
  Apr. 1985   Rumors of collection of documents (that had not yet been forged)
                known as the McLellin collection.
* July 1985   1844 Letter of Joseph Smith to Gen. Dunham.
  Sep. 1985   Letter of Charles Dickens.
  Sep. 1985   Portion of Papyrus.
  Oct. 1985   Betsy Ross letter.
*             Letter from Joseph Smith to Hyrum Smith, May 25, 1838.
*             Letter from Joseph Smith to Emma, June 23, 1844.

Consequence of Forgeries
------------------------

  Oct. 1985   Steven Christensen and Kathleen Sheets killed by bombs.
  Jan. 1986   Plea bargain announced.  Hofmann pleads guilty to two counts of
                second-degree murder.
  July 1987   County Attorney's office releases 600 page transcript of
                interviews with prisoner Mark Hofmann.  Hofmann confessed
                that all documents listed above were forged.

Other documents given to or purchased by Church Historical Department that are
considered fraudulent documents by Hofmann:

   Solomon Spaulding-Sidney Rigdon land deed (deed in which Hofmann added the
   name Solomon Spaulding and Sidney Rigdon and changed date of document);
   White Notes (early handwritten material containing signature of Brigham
   Young); 1828 Letter of Peter and David Whitmer to Bithell Todd.

* Included in Personal Writings of Joseph Smith
              ---------------------------------

    Greetings from near the nations capital,
    
    I read the book "The Mormon Murders" and I was very impressed with
    it. I'm a convert from Conn. so I've always had an opinion about
    Utah Mormons which this tragedy and this book confirmed. The book
    was written by non-members and their slant was distinctly anti-mormon
    but not because they had anykind of axe to grind but if you view
    the evidence objectivly, the story comes out that way. 
    
    The evidence was that Hoffman is a criminal who conned us for years
    and he was able to do it because most of us were terrified that
    there were documents that would have proved that Joseph Smith wasn't
    a true prophet. Any con man in the world can only get away with
    the con is by working on something that gets a reaction. Hoffman
    did that to the max. He used the mormon insecurity about our roots
    to his benefit. As the book explains he also used this reaction
    during the investigation and trial. Bacsically Hoffman played us
    like a piano. 
    
    I hated the book because it was so faith demoting but I also loved
    it because it was so correct. It hurt to hear the General Authoritys
    doing such worldly and mortal things but realistically unless everyone
    involved is lying it made sense that they are suseptable to being
    mortal adn worldly. Now they have been saying that almost since
    the beginning that they can be mortal but, esspecially in Utah,
    that admission is not believed. Hey, wake up! Hoffman sold them bogus
    documents, they were had, we were had even many of the formost expert
    in old documents was decieved. Now the rest of the world can handle
    that. But geeze say that Gordon B. Hinckley made a worldly, mortal
    mistake look out for the bullets.
    
    So the book was teriffic, not fun. Hoffman is a murderer who ought
    to be spending the rest of life thanking God that I wasn't in charge
    because I beleive capital crimes deserve capital punishment. And
    all the Utah Mormons ought to lighten up. The crime was done by
    Hoffman against all of us not by the writters of "The Mormon Murders".
    
    FRED MUDGETT
    BJO/FS 
     
     

    Re: Note 174.4 by NEWVAX::BALT

    Hi Fred,
    
    I have not read the book in question, but I wanted to respond to a few
    of the comments you made.
    
>   The evidence was that Hoffman is a criminal who conned us for years
>   and he was able to do it because most of us were terrified that
>   there were documents that would have proved that Joseph Smith wasn't
>   a true prophet. 
    
    I grew up in Utah and have since spent my adult life out of Utah. I
    disagree with your above conclusion that most of us (in or out of Utah)
    are or were terrified that evidence will be found proving Joseph Smith
    was not a true prophet. This is not consistent with my experience. 
    
    However, we claim to believe in all truth, from whatever source, and we
    claim that truth is always consistent. When contradictions arise to
    things we know to be true by the witness of the Holy Ghost, we
    naturally become defensive. I don't think it is correct to say that
    this is a result of insecurity, so much as it is a desire to defend
    truth. When you combine this desire with Hoffman's success at deceiving
    experts, both LDS and non-LDS, with his remarkable forgeries, you get
    an extra measure of confusion. 
    
>   It hurt to hear the General Authoritys
>   doing such worldly and mortal things but realistically unless everyone
>   involved is lying it made sense that they are suseptable to being
>   mortal adn worldly. Now they have been saying that almost since
>   the beginning that they can be mortal but, esspecially in Utah,
>   that admission is not believed. Hey, wake up! Hoffman sold them bogus
>   documents, they were had, we were had even many of the formost expert
>   in old documents was decieved. Now the rest of the world can handle
>   that. But geeze say that Gordon B. Hinckley made a worldly, mortal
>   mistake look out for the bullets.
    
    I don't think we can say that we know for sure that the General
    Authorities were completely deceived. I think that facts will show that
    the church leaders from the beginning warned that the authenticity of
    the documents Hoffman had 'found' was unknown. 
    
    So why did they buy the documents if their authenticity was unknown?
    The church has received a commandment from the Lord to preserve the
    records that pertain to the history of the church. They were merely
    doing their duty in obtaining these documents.
    
    Let's look at it from another angle. Let's suppose that the general
    authorities knew by inspiration that this or that document was not
    authentic. Unless they had a way to prove it, they would likely
    hesitate to come out and say so, or else they will be accused of
    rejecting documents that everyone else thinks are authentic just
    because they don't like what's in them. 
    
>   all the Utah Mormons ought to lighten up. 

    As we all should...
    
    Rich
        
                                            

    Hi, Matt.  I think that some day I will read about it.  But, first I
    want to hear what the Church has to say about it.  I am aware that an
    investigation has been underway for the past year or so.  I expect that
    results will come out when most everybody else is no longer interested. 
    ;^)  Anyway, what I hear is that it's controversial and that the Church
    has not yet had its say, so I'm in wait mode.  Does that put me in
    another category?  :)
    
    Steve

    > But, first I want to hear what the Church has to say about it.   Does
    > that put me in another category?  :)
    
      Just curious, but why do you want to hear what the Church says about
    it FIRST?
    
    

    Because the Church, being directly involved, is a primary source. 
    And, when I have the Church info in front of me along with info that may 
    contend with the Church position, I will be able to compare the two and 
    decide what I think is right.  The available information does not yet
    contain the official Church position, so I don't feel that I would be
    able to render a fair judgement.
    
    Steve

    
    In the book, "The Mormon Murders", the authors paint a less than 
    complementary picture of the GA's especially, Gordon B. Hinckley.
    The book claims that police were not able to do their investigation
    in an efficient manner, the church being in part responsible for
    some problems in the investigation. Also the problems inherent in 
    any case, say, where some of the investigators are LDS, and are 
    required to question GA's of the church. Can anybody here see a 
    conflict? Is justice here being served? This whole Hoffman affair
    REALLY bothers me.
                             (flame on)
           IMHO, Hoffman's punishment did not measure up to the
    crime. I don't care a whit whether the leader's got sucked into
    buying forged documents or that they helped finance some of his
    dealings. GA's are human, and they make mistakes. The thing that irks
    me is that justice was not served, and the name and repution of the
    church seemed to take on higher value than the human lives that were
    lost. Yeah, I bought the book and read it. I know, books are written to
    sell copies, we might question some of the facts here, but the fact
    remains that it happened. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to
    read between the lines. As far as I'm concerned, it's a black eye for 
    the Church, and I pray they don't get involved in such shenanigans
    again. 
                           (flame off)
    
    We must not forget, that any statement given by the brethren is going
    to paint the church in the most positive light possible, REGARDLESS
    of the facts of the case. Only the Lord knows the intent in the hearts
    of Hoffman and the LDS leaders he dealt with, and they will be judged
    accordingly.
    
    
    Kevin.......
    
    Sorry if this sounds a bit strong but this is a hot one with me. The
    Prophet Joseph was never afraid of the truth and we shouldn't be
    either.

	Hi Matt,
			I have not read the book or seen the movie, but I am
	a Mormon and I would like to make a comment on your thoughts.

		First let me say that Mr Hoffman, if he is indeed guilty of
	shedding innocent blood, is then a Son of Perdition, and there is 
	no forgiveness in this world or in the world to come.  How did he 
	come to this sorry state?  The same way King David did.  By allowing 
	the things of the world to become their God, their sole desire for 
	happiness.

		Now, the thing to always remember is that as a human being, 
	we are human.   The human nature of us is fleeting, and will be 
	destroyed.  That is the human body.  The real nature of us all is 
	contained in our immortal spiritual bodies.  That is which is 
	eternal.  That is what God gives light to.  How we conduct our 
	lives, develop our desires, control our passions - that is what 
	we are left with as the character or nature of our spirits.  
	However, human as we are, there are mistakes that are made.  We 
	can be fooled by others.  We can be fooled by ourselves.  
	Only God will not fool us.

		God is real.  His gospel is real.  His son, Jesus Christ, 
	is real.  They are perfect.  We, as humans, are not.  We make 
	mistakes.  My church is made up of humans.  They make mistakes. 
	I make mistakes.  But I have learned, and I have been commanded 
	by God, to not judge my fellow beings.  Now, I can apply 
	principles to situations, as in the case of Mr Hoffman and 
	King David, but the final judgment is left up to God.

		The so-called "Mormon Murders" does nothing in regards to 
	trying my faith.  It has nothing to do with it.  I care for nothing
	about any "historical" documents that are dug up. (Not withstanding
	the Book of Mormon or other scripture.  I refer exclusively to the
	kind that Hoffman came up with.)  

		The church organization has nothing to do with my faith in 
	Jesus Christ!  Because of that faith, I follow the brethren.  BUT! 
	In all cases I still have my agency to determine whether or not 
	what the brethren say is right.

		In my opinion, anyone who feels that this incidence has
	anything to do or is potentially critical of my faith does not
	understand the underlying principles of the LDS faith.  Here is
	where we must separate "faith" as a church and "faith" as in Jesus
	Christ.

		Should what happened to Jimmy Swagart dampen anyone's faith
	in Jesus Christ?  No, it should not have anything to do with it.
	If your pastor were found in adultery, would that have anything to
	do with your faith in Jesus Christ?  No, it should not.  These people
	are as human as we are.  They make mistakes.  Jesus Christ died on
	the cross for those mistakes.

		I belong to the Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
	Is that a *faith*?  It is not what I have faith in, and anything
	that happens regarding it is separate from what caused me to join it.
	Even if the Church hierarchy is proven wrong in secular matters, it
	makes no difference.

		I believe my faith is based on truth, and it will hold up 
	to any test.  I also believe that the LDS church, or faith, is based
	on truth, and it will hold up until Christ comes to claim it.

	Charles

>		Should what happened to Jimmy Swagart dampen anyone's faith
>	in Jesus Christ?  No, it should not have anything to do with it.
>	If your pastor were found in adultery, would that have anything to
>	do with your faith in Jesus Christ?  No, it should not.  These people
>	are as human as we are.  They make mistakes.  Jesus Christ died on
>	the cross for those mistakes.

        No, but it would dampen my trust in Jimmy Swagart.  It would then
    be necessary to evaluate what I believe in light of where I had
    received my teaching and from whom.

	RE: 12


>        No, but it would dampen my trust in Jimmy Swagart.  It would then
>    be necessary to evaluate what I believe in light of where I had
>    received my teaching and from whom.

		NOTE: ALL QUESTIONS ARE RHETORICAL......

	WHY?  Did he lie?  Was the information or teaching incorrect?

	Elder Lee has been excommunicated from the LDS church, but the
	instruction he gave in stake conference two years or so ago is
	not invalidated.

	He, just as Jimmy Swagart, can be forgiven by the Lord if they
	repent.

	Can, or could, you forgive them?

The discussion of the Sin against the Holy Ghost has been moved to
note 343.

    Last night I happened to catch an article about this on "A Current
    Affair".  Sleazy program in general, but this time the article showed
    me things I didn't know.  Most of you are probably already aware of
    this.  
    
    First, it has apparently been proven by scientific means that
    the White Salamander letter and other documents produced by Mark
    Hoffman were forgeries that he created.  There are three proofs.  First,
    it can be seen under UV light that after the documents were created
    they were (rinsed and?) hung to dry.  This is apparent by streaking.
    Second, the ink cracks in a fashion that differs from authentic
    documents. Third, it was found that Mark had a book detailing how to
    forge such documents that included a recipe for making the ink.  The
    ink on the documents matched the recipe and exhibited the cracking.
    
    Next, an eyewitness description of the bomber's jacket links Mark with
    the bombing as he has a jacket matching that description.  Also,
    one or more receipts with the name of the bomber and his fingerprints on 
    them were found.
    
    What seems to be proven now are that Mark had motive, opportunity
    and means for doing the bombings.  Assuming that at least some of this
    is news, I expect that "soon" the Church will complete their investigation 
    as well.  
    
    
    Steve

    Has anyone practicing mormonism ever read the book "A Gathering of
    Saints."   It is about the Hofmann murders/forgeries.  It is supposedly
    a true account of Mark Hofmann.  It did go into alot of history of the
    chuch as well as Joseph Smith.  It gave various views that the church
    has/had on subjects like polygamy, homosexuals, blacks, etc.  I was 
    wondering if anyone who is familar with mormonism, and who has read this 
    book can let let me know if such views are/were indeed true.
    
    
    Thanks,
    
    Ricky
    

By way of information to those interested in this topic, notes 136 and 174
are also discussing Mark Hofmann.

    
    Sorry, but I haven't heard of it.  If you have a couple of minutes,
    perhaps you could describe what the book says in these regards.  
    
    This will help me (and others) to better answer your question.
    
    
    Best Regards,
    
    
    Frank

    Ditto.  More, I haven't seen the book but if I can know where to find
    it I'll buy a copy and go over it point by point if this is of value to
    you.  With this type of issue I think it best to use and to quote from 
    references (within copyright "fair use" guidelines) so as to reduce the 
    amount of misinterpretation or misunderstanding.  That way issues can be 
    dealt with directly.  Also, specific issues have probably been discussed 
    elsewhere.  So, pointers might be provided to those discussions allowing 
    this note to focus on issues not already discussed.
    
    Steve

And ditto from me.  I would enjoy finding out about this book and reading and
discussing it if I can borrow a copy (my budget is down to zero at the
moment :-(

Allen

Ricky is sending me his copy of the book, so we'll be able to discuss it in
detail.

Note 138 has a lot of information about the Mark Hofmann situation, but 
because that note concerns another topic, it is likely people interested in
this topic wouldn't discover that note.  In the next three replies I will post
this information so it will be more readily available for our research; it
is likely this information will be relevant to our discussion of this new
book.

================================================================================
Note 138.33              REPLIES TO NOTE 38.8 - THE END!                33 of 84
CACHE::LEIGH                                         87 lines   5-JUL-1988 08:31
                           -< the Hofmann forgeries >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re 38.8

>MORMON CHURCH NOT DIRECTED BY REVELATION
>----------------------------------------
>
>Proof of this is the fraudulent documents sold to the Mormon leaders by 
>Mark Hoffman.  Since the letters would have proved that Joseph Smith was 
>involved in some shady deals, the Mormon leaders paid Hoffman thousands of 
>dollars to buy the documents so they could cover-up the incident.  It was 
later proved that the letters were frauds and that Mark Hoffman had dupped 
>the Mormon leaders.
>>
>If these Mormon leaders live in the divine revelation of God, why wouldn't 
>have God told them that Mark Hoffman was a deceiver and to not go along 
>with the cover-up?  I am reminded of a story of Ananias and Sapphira who 
>tried to lie to God.....

We do not claim that our General Authorities are inspired in 100% of everything
they do, and the General Authorities do not claim to be so inspired.  Also,
we do not claim that our Authorities follow with 100% accuracy the inspiration
they do receive.  Indeed, if our Authorities were so inspired they would be
infallible!  Only Christ was infallible!

Referring to the Hofmann forgeries, Elder Dallin H. Oaks said that ministers of
the gospel function best in an atmosphere of trust and love.  "It is better for
a Church leader to be occasionally disappointed than to be constantly
suspicious."  (BYU Today, October 1987, p. 39)

Hofmann was very skilled in his forgeries.  He used period paper stolen from the
Niles Register in the University of Utah library.  To make the paper look old,
he treated it with chemicals, sprayed it with a milk-gelatin mixture, stomped
on it, and treated it with bread-mold.

He used iron gallitannic ink from a recipe from a book he stole from the Utah
State University library. He burned paper from the correct period, collected the
carbon, and mixed it with the ink to foil carbon-14 testing.  He sealed some
of the documents with a wax seal which was made from a real wax seal that had
been melted down.

To see if it was authentic, Steven Christensen sent the "Salamander Letter" to
Dean Jessee, historian with the Joseph Fielding Smith Institute for Church
History at BYU.  Jessee sent it to a prominent document examiner Kenneth
Rendell in Massachusetts (he was the man who exposed the forged Hitler diaries).
After a year, he reported no indication of forgery.  Albert Lyter, the
forensic chemist who checked the ink, also reported no evidence of forgery.  

The Josiah Stowell letter was authenticated by Charles Hamilton, author of
"Great Forgers and Famous Fakes".  Hamilton is a world-renowned forensic
handwriting expert and is considered as the foremost authority on Joseph
Smith autographs.

    In a letter published in the June 1987 issue of the Maine Antique Digest,  
    Hamilton said Hofmann was the flawless low-key con man.  "He was always
    a little astonished that what he had was worth so much, and he played
    the role of the modest researcher--pleasant, soft-spoken, eager to learn."

    When Hofmann showed Hamilton the Josiah Stowell letter, "A one-second
    glance (about as long as I took with the Hitler papers) told me it was not
    Smith."  The handwriting was stiff, labored, upright, like a man walking,
    Hamilton said.  Smith's was bent over, like a man running and leaning 
    forward.

    "But you never even read it," Hofmann said.  He put it away in his briefcase
    and looked doleful, Hamilton said.  Then he said, "Would you look at it
    once more?"

    Normally, Hamilton refuses to look twice at a document, but in this case,
    he said, "I allowed myself to be seduced into taking a second look."  He
    looked at the date, 1825, and realized Smith would have been only about 19.
    The earliest letters he had seen until then were from 1835; his handwriting
    might have changed.  As Hamilton looked at the letter, he found more
    reasons to believe it might have been written by Smith.  Eventually, he
    authenticated the letter.

    Hofmann was successful in diverting the attention of these experts and
    scholars from their normal view to a narrow view involving the forged
    documents.

    "He appeared to be the quintessential scholar, immersed in his love of the
    arcane when, in fact, he was the quintessential con man whom we all liked
    and completely trusted," said Hamilton in a paper he prepared for the
    BYU symposium.  "It's easy to swindle someone who likes and admires and
    trusts you.  I never questioned anything he told me."

    Hamilton said no one in the LDS Church should be faulted for being taken in
    by Hofmann.  "He was, after all, a fellow Mormon scholar and, to all
    appearances, above suspicion."  (BYU Today, October 1987, p. 42)

================================================================================
Note 138.52              REPLIES TO NOTE 38.8 - THE END!                52 of 84
CACHE::LEIGH                                        128 lines   6-JUL-1988 19:58
                    -< No suppression of Hofmann documents >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re 38.8

>Since the [Hofmann forged] letters would have proved that Joseph Smith was 
>involved in some shady deals, the Mormon leaders paid Hoffman thousands of 
>dollars to buy the documents so they could cover-up the incident. 

The following is from a talk by Elder Dallin H. Oaks at BYU on August 6, 1987.
(Ensign, October 1987, pp. 63-68)

******************************************

I will comment first on the charge of suppression.

One week after the bombings, in an effort to answer public questions, the
Church made known that it had acquired "forty-some documents" from Hofmann
by purchase, donation, or trade."  (Gordon B. Hinckley, remarks at 23 Oct.
1985 press conference.)  The Church operates under a divine mandate to acquire
and preserve the documents and artifacts that show its history, and these
acquisitions were part of that effort.  In succeeding weeks, and exhaustive
inventory of the Church's huge collections revealed the extent of Hofmann's
transactions with the Church.  These follow-up details were immediately
disclosed to the authorities making this criminal investigation.

In the midst of these efforts to inform its members and to aid in the pending
investigation, the Church's openness on its dealings with Hofmann was used
against it.  For example, the 'New York Times Magazine' of 12 January 1986
states:

"Hinckley said at a press conference that, starting in 1980, he had purchased
about 40 documents from Hofmann.  Only a few of them have been made public;
others are in a church vault.  Whether they cast any new light on the
church's past is not known." (pp. 43, 46)

What President Hinckley said was that he had purchased *two* documents, and
Church History Department personnel had acquired the rest.  Furthermore, the
unknown documents were mostly innocuous, unknown not because they were hidden
in a vault--they were not--but unknown because they were unimportant.

During this same month of January 1986, the Church turned all of its
Hofmann-acquired documents over to the prosecutors, at their request.  As a
result, the Church could not make its Hofmann documents public to answer
these innuendoes of suppression without seeming to try to influence or impede
the criminal investigation.

On 11 April 1986, after months of searching through its records and collections,
the Church published a complete list of the forty-eight documents and groups
of court records then known to have been acquired from Mark Hofmann.  That list
spoke for itself: It was a mixture of the already-published, the intriguing, the
routine, and the trivial.  Now, over a year later, we know that some of the
forty-eight are forgeries, because they were named in the criminal charges and
confessed by Hofmann during his questioning by prosecutors.

But Hofmann handled many documents that were not specifically listed in the
criminal charges and covered in the subsequent questioning.  So like most
owners of Hofmann-handled documents, the Church is still unsure how many of
such documents are forgeries and which are genuine.  As of this date, the
Church does not even have possession of all of the forty-eight it acquired.  The
prosecution has not yet returned the last thirteen, which include the documents
of greatest interest to the public.

Despite the Church's publication of a complete list of its acquisitions from
Hofmann, the allegations of suppression continued.  for example, an 11 February
1987 'New York Times' feature states:

"According to investigators, the church leaders purchased from Mr. Hofmann and
then hid in a vault a number of 19th-century letters and other documents that
cast doubt on the church's official version of its history."

This kind of character assassination attributed to anonymous "investigators"
has been all too common throughout the media coverage of this whole event.
One wonders why the 'New York Times' would not mention in its long article
that almost a year earlier the Church had published a detailed list of its
Hofmann acquisitions?  Is the 'Times'' motto still "All the news that's fit
to print", or has it become "All the news that fits a particular perspective"?

Also conveniently omitted from mention in most of the repetitious media recitals
of the Church's "suppression" of documents is the fact that the most prominent
Hofmann documents used to attack the origins of the Church--including Martin
Harris' so-called Salamander letter, Joseph Smith's treasure-hunting letter to
Josiah Stowel, and the Joseph Smith III blessing--were all made public by the
church many months before the bombings triggered intense public interest in
this subject.  We should also remember the Church's repeated cautions about the
authenticity of these documents.  For example, President Gordon B. Hinckley
said this about the Martin Harris letter:

"No one, of course, can be certain that Martin Harris wrote the document.
However, at this point we accept the judgment of the examiner that there is no
indication that it is a forgery.  This does not preclude the possibility that
it may have been forged at a time when the Church had many enemies."
(News Release, 28 Apr. 1985)

Another document that has been headlined in these charges of suppression is the
so-called Oliver Cowdery History.  This mythical manuscript has been the
subject of hundreds of column inches of newspaper speculation and innuendo
because an anonymous source claimed to have seen it in the Church's possession.
The so-called "deep throat" source also claimed that the manuscript's contents
were embarrassing to the Church--specifically, that it was Alvin Smith, not
Joseph, who found the golden plates.  This was the basis for the critics'
reasoning that the church had an Oliver Cowdery History and was suppressing it.

In a few minutes I will describe the conclusion of this particular allegation
of suppression.  Suffice it to say now that as far as we were able to determine
in the months that followed, the so-called Oliver Cowdery History was a figment
of someone's fertile imagination.  Mark Hofmann has now admitted that he was
the one who invented the story.  Hofmann's claims that the Church possessed a
damaging document acquired a life of its own because too many unsophisticated
persons were quick to repeat and embellish sensational rumors hurtful to the
church, and too many newspapers and television stations were eager to trumpet
the unauthenticated claims of an anonymous informant....In the transcripts
released 31 July 1987, Hofmann admitted that he fabricated the story about
the Oliver Cowdery History, lying in his interview with a 'Los Angeles Times'
reporter....

Did the Church seek to obtain the so-called McLellin Collection in order to
keep it from public scrutiny?

No!  At the decision-making level, Church authorities consistently made clear
that the Church was not interested in purchasing the so-called McLellin
Collection or in loaning money for its acquisition by another person.  In
the circumstances that prevailed in June 1985, to have the Church involved
in the acquisition of the papers of a prominent opponent of the Church would
simply fuel the then-current speculation that the Church was seeking to
acquire the McLellin Collection in order to suppress it.

In his interviews with the prosecutors, Mark Hofmann has recited conversations
he said he had with President Hinckley, claiming the President asked him to
help the Church purchase the McLellin Collection directly or indirectly.
President Hinckley has denied this.

================================================================================
Note 138.53              REPLIES TO NOTE 38.8 - THE END!                53 of 84
CACHE::LEIGH                                         65 lines   7-JUL-1988 08:29
                            -< Trust not suspicion >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re 38.8

>MORMON CHURCH NOT DIRECTED BY REVELATION
>----------------------------------------
>
>Proof of this is the fraudulent documents sold to the Mormon leaders by 
>Mark Hoffman.  Since the letters would have proved that Joseph Smith was 
>involved in some shady deals, the Mormon leaders paid Hoffman thousands of 
>dollars to buy the documents so they could cover-up the incident.  It was 
>later proved that the letters were frauds and that Mark Hoffman had dupped 
>the Mormon leaders.
>
>If these Mormon leaders live in the divine revelation of God, why wouldn't 
>have God told them that Mark Hoffman was a deceiver and to not go along 
>with the cover-up?  I am reminded of a story of Ananias and Sapphira who 
>tried to lie to God.....

The following is from Elder Dallin H. Oaks in a talk given at BYU on August 6,
1987 (Ensign, October 1987, pp. 65-66)

********************************************

Some have asked, how was Mark Hofmann able to deceive Church leaders?

As everyone now knows, Hofmann succeeded in deceiving many: experienced Church
historians, sophisticated collectors, businessmen-investors, national experts
who administered a lie detector test to Hofmann, and professional document
examiners, including the expert credited with breaking the Hitler diary forgery.
But why, some still ask, were his deceits not detected by the several Church
leaders with whom he met?

In order to perform their personal ministries, Church leaders cannot be
suspicious and questioning of each of the hundreds of people they meet each
year.  Ministers of the gospel function best in an atmosphere of trust and love.
In that kind of atmosphere, they fail to detect a few deceivers, but that is the
price they pay to increase their effectiveness in counseling, comforting, and
blessing the hundreds of honest and sincere people they see.  It is better for a
Church leader to be occasionally disappointed than to be constantly suspicious.

The Church is not unique in preferring to deal with people on the basis of
trust.  This principle of trust rather than suspicion even applies to
professional archives.  During my recent visit to the Huntington Library in
Pasadena, California, I was interested to learn that they have no formal
procedures to authenticate the many documents they acquire each year.  They say
they consider it best to function in an atmosphere of trust and to assume the
risk of the loss that may be imposed by the occasional deceiver.

********************************************

Elder Oaks explained in that talk that "almost all of his [Hofmann] contacts
with the church were with the professional personnel in the Church Historical
Department." (p. 65)  He explained further that "Church *leaders* made the
purchase or received the donation of only three documents from Hofmann or
his intermediary.  Acting for the Church, President Gordon B. Hinckley purchased
the Joseph Smith letter to Josiah Stowel from Hofmann.  At about that same time,
President Hinckley received from him as a gift to the Church a draft letter
of Thomas Bullock, dated 27 January 1865.  Third, Hofmann sold the Martin
Harris-W. W. Phelps letter to Steven F. Christensen.  Some months later, after
Christensen completed his research and authentication, he delivered this
letter to President Hinckley as a gift to the Church.  Church Historical
Department personnel were fully informed about all of these transactions."
(p. 65)

The remaining documents were purchased by Church Historical Department
personnel.

"A Gathering of Saints" was reviewed in BYU Studies (see note 125.2) by
David Whittaker, Associate Librarian in the Harold B. Lee Library, BYU,
with responsibilities for Mormon manuscripts.  He also reviewed 
"Salamander" and "Mormon Murders".

The following quotations are from this review, given in BYU Studies, 
Volume 29. Number 1, Winter, 1989.

***************************************************************************

The third volume, Robert Lindsey's "A Gathering of Saints" appeared in
September 1988.  In many ways it is the best of the three books.  As a
story, it reads better than the others, and on balance it presents a more
complete account of all the aspects of the case.  Lacking the vituperative
approach of "The Mormon Murders," it moves deftly through the story with
insight and compassion.  And it is well organized.  By providing several
introductory chapters that survey early Mormon history, Lindsey responsibly 
prepares his readers to better understand the historical import of
Hofmann's "discoveries."  Thereafter the story proceeds chronologically.
In general, this volume is much more evenhanded than the others 
in dealing with the role of the LDS church in the Hofmann story.  Lindsey
suggests in one place that the issues of separation of church and state
could be one explanation for the hesitancy of Church leaders to readily
turn over its files or the manuscripts in its possession to state investigators.

A key source for Lindsey was Michael George (see 283), an investigator for
the Salt Lake County Attorney's office.  George was clearly the source for
the interesting final interview with Hofmann presented at the end of the
volume.

Of course there are problems:  Lindsey just repeats the old, inaccurate
stories of the Danites (see, for example, 204, 249-50), and no serious
Mormon historian would agree with his claim that Jerald Tanner (following
Fawn Brodie) gave birth to the "new Mormon history" (128).  But these flaws
can probably be ascribed to his status as an outsider to Mormon country and
culture.

Lindsey's volume has more detail on the documents Hofmann "found" and sold
than do the other two books.  Particularly valuable is his discussion of the
"Oath of a Freeman," in which he gives the full story of the one potential sale
that might have solved Hofmann's financial problems.  Lindsey reprints the
letters from the Library of Congress and from the American Antiquarian Society
that reveal the behind-the-scenes developments.  The other volumes do not
present this dimension of the case as fully.  Lindsey also peppers his study
with ample quotes from the diaries and journals of many of the key participants
in these events, material that is either summarized, hinted at, or entirely
ignored in the other volumes.  By using these primary sources he gives the
reader a fuller picture of the thoughts and feelings of the main actors, even
though we are never told where we can examine these documents.

Lindsey's story is well told and presents realistic portraits of the key
participants.  Where Robert Stott, the chief prosecutor, is presented in
very negative terms by Naifeh and Smith [authors of "Mormon Murders"],
Lindsey gives a more believable view of a man who tried to be very thorough
and very cautious.  Stott surely was not the political country bumpkin that
comes across in "The Mormon Murders."  The same applies to Naifeh and Smith's
caricature of Brent Ward.

One thing that all of these volumes lack is a sense of historical perspective
on forgery.  Forgery is ancient business....Even in Mormon history, Hofmann
is not the first forger.  Consider the clear evidence that the Oliver
Cowdery pamphlet "Defense in a Rehearsal of My Grounds for Separating
Myself from the Latter Day Saints", allegedly printed in Ohio in 1839 is a
forgery.  Then too, some Mormons continue to use the fraudulent Archko Volume
in their New Testament studies.  And recent discoveries in the Texas rare book
and manuscript market surely ought to help us place Hofmann's activities in
a broader context.

Another problem stems from these volumes' way of treating contemporary history.
In telling their stories, these authors would have us believe they were in 
the Office of the first Presidency when Hofmann met with President Hinckley;
or in the back seat of the car when Yengich and Stott drove around Salt Lake
City initially discussing a possible plea bargain.  Of course, we know this was
not the case. but by adopting a "you were there" writing style, the authors
betray their work as journalism, not history.  Can we really believe that all
the players in the Hofmann drama spoke in publishable dialogue, as if every
sentence were accompanied by quotation marks?  "Mormon Murders" shows this
tendency at its worst.  Not only are dialogues invented out of whole cloth, but
the authors also manage to climb into the minds of key players so they can tell
us what each person was feeling and thinking.  This fantasyland approach
to reconstructing historical events eliminates all serious methodological
roadblocks; the narrative can go wherever the authors wish because truth
and evidence are never allowed to get in the way of a good story.  And since
no source citations are given, the reader has no way to check up on the sources
the authors used.  One suspects, in fact, at least for the Naifeh and Smith
volume, that sources were not identified precisely because their fictions would
be found out.

Most people, as these three volumes show, get their history, not from scholarly 
journals or monographs, but from journalists who control the public media.  As
Neil Postman has pointed out in his book "Amusing Ourselves to Death", the very
nature of modern news media has created the idea of context-free information,
the idea that the value of information need not be tied to any function it
might serve, but merely to its novelty, interest, and curiosity.  But more
than that, modern journalism is characterized by its capacity to move
information, but not to collect it, explain it, or analyze it.  "Knowing the
facts" in the media has come to mean knowing of things, not knowing about them.
Hence the stress on images, stereotypes, and headlines, on the sensational and
on the push for quick answers and conclusions without study or evaluation.
The bottom line is entertainment and marketing, not education; what results
is triviality, not understanding.  Without a doubt, a show business atmosphere
permeated most of the newspaper and television coverage of the Hofmann case,
and this approach has helped to decontextualize and sensationalize the whole
case.  None of these books escapes this tendency, although "Mormon Murders" is
again the most outrageous example.