Criticism of Mormonism/Books/One Nation Under Gods/Use of sources/Calling All Mormon Scholars

Author's Preface, About Mormon History: Calling All Mormon Scholars

The Quote

One Nation under Gods, page xv (hardback)

According to Mormon scholar Allen Roberts, LDS leaders do indeed "attempt to control depictions of the Mormon past."5

One Nation under Gods, page ix (paperback)

According to Allen Roberts, a Mormon architectural history scholar, LDS leaders do indeed "attempt to control depictions of the Mormon past."5

The Reference

Endnote 5, page 477 (hardback), page 475 (paperback)

5. Allen Roberts, Private Eye Weekly, October 20, 1993, 12. Quoted in Jerald Tanner and Sandra Tanner, "Legacy: A Distorted View of Mormon History,: Salt Lake City Messenger (#88), May 1995, 4

The Problems

There are any number of people—the author included—who insist that the LDS Church is biased, wrong, dishonest, and misleading because it won't publish a history that tells every piece of trivia, uncovers every wart, and discloses every negative comment ever uttered about the Church. They refuse to admit that it is reasonable and acceptable for the Church to be selective in what it chooses to publish, and even in how that information is presented.

In reading the above quote by the author, where he quotes Allen Roberts, I couldn't help but think that perhaps there is a double standard at work. The author introduces Roberts as a "Mormon scholar," which is exactly as Roberts was introduced by the Tanners in the reference cited by the author. (They said "Mormon scholar Allen Roberts wrote...") This made me wonder exactly who Allen Roberts is, so I went looking for information. He is a published book author, and his publisher, Signature Books, has the following short vita about Roberts at their Web site:

Notice that there is nothing in the vita that would qualify Roberts as a scholar, unless (perhaps) he was writing about architecture or historical preservation. I am not dismissing Roberts' work, or even (in this single instance) saying that the author misused his source. What I do find interesting is the way that the author lends credence to his witness of choice—Allen Roberts—by indicating he is a "Mormon scholar."

It is ironic, indeed, that in a paragraph devoted to detailing the suppression that the LDS Church supposedly exerts on scholars, in a preface the bemoans the lack of objectivity in LDS histories, and in a book that seeks to bare everything about the LDS Church, the author would choose the term "Mormon scholar" to describe Allen Roberts, rather saying he is an "award-winning architect specializing in historical restoration." Consider, for a moment, if we recast the author's own wording to reflect the historical truth concerning Roberts:

According to the award-winning architect Allen Roberts, LDS leaders do indeed "attempt to control depictions of the Mormon past."5

Of course, it is possible that if the author was not selective in which words he used, and didn't promote Roberts as a Mormon scholar, Roberts' words would not have the intended affect on his readers. This recast isn't nearly as authoritative as the author's original choice of words.

Wait a minute... Isn't this one of the things that the author himself criticizes the LDS Church of doing? Of being selective in what is presented and always presenting things in the best light possible? Perhaps we should apply the same remedy to One Nation under Gods that the author recommends in relation to the LDS Church—recognize the bias, discount the source, and look for truth elsewhere.

In an attempt to defend his choice of adjectives for Allen Roberts on January 27, 2003, the author stated the following on the ZLMB message board:

...look at this guy's credits and the periodicals for which he has wrtten [sic]. Look up the word in a simple dictionary. Mine says: "A learned or erudite person. One considered an authority in a specific field. I think Roberts qualifies.

Does the paperback solve the problem?

An astute reader will also notice that in the updated paperback edition of One Nation Under Gods the author modifies the way he previously introduced Roberts. But, this still doesn't solve the problem because the author misses the point completely. There is no question that Allen Roberts is a scholar; as the definition states, he is "an authority in a specific field." Unfortunately, that field is architecture and architectural history, not necessarily LDS history. The author, as an author, has the right to choose the adjectives he uses in his writing. His choice of adjectives, in the hardback edition of his book, indicates a clear "inflation" of his source's credentials in a field far removed from his formal training. In the more correct reference to Roberts in the paperback edition one can only wonder why the author would rely upon the statement of a "Mormon architectural history scholar" to bolster a claim concerning LDS leaders relative to anything other than their choices in architecture.