You should have known better!

Sorry, but Dan Peterson’s argument is BS. Before the Internet, all I had was Truth Restored, and anything I read in lesson/institute manuals. If you wanted to go deeper, you had to visit a public library — and half the time there wasn’t anything there on church history. And of course, the number of times were told told not to read anything that doesn’t nourish faith, I don’t think I ever went beyond correlated church materials.

I certainly agree with you DBMormon. While I, too, was aware of the many controversial areas of church teachings and history, what I knew mostly did not come from manuals and actual church teachings, but from looking at materials outside the church and from conversations with knowledgeable members. The conversations with knowledgeable members were rare and the information was generally apologetic, not necessarily accurate, and generally smacked of folklore. Some scant information, perhaps like the general idea that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy, was clearly available in manuals and if your teacher decided to make that part of the lesson you could learn about it – without things like polyandry, marrying other men’s wives, and marrying 14-year-olds. Real, true information was available only to the select few who were permitted into the locked archives, and some of those who were bold enough to publish or teach some of that information that they had come across were excommunicated as heretics and apostates.

Let me propose one not uncommon scenario to you: A newly baptized sister is called to teach Primary soon after baptism (20 years ago there were not rules about attending SS class like there are now, but no difference, the stuff isn’t in that manual). The idea of her teaching Primary is that she can learn the basics of the gospel while teaching the young children – makes perfect sense. Turns out she’s really good at it and really likes it. She spends most of her 20 years in Primary as a teacher and eventually a leader, spending little time in adult classes and is a model member of the church. She holds a temple recommend, bears her testimony a few times a year, attends and helps out with activities, etc. She followed the warnings not to use outside materials in her lessons, and repeated that warning to teachers when she became a leader. Where, exactly, was she supposed to be exposed to information outside the Primary materials?

The assertion that people should have known actually tees me off. ❗ :thumbdown: The only way for the general go-with-the-flow member to know is if it is taught to them. I believe that is one of the purposes of the essays, yet even then so many are totally unaware of them and one has to know where to look to find them on the church site. “You should have known” is insulting BS.

I am more upset from how it was intentionally kept from me and insinuated that all of it was a bunch of lies by anti-Mormons.

Agreed. I think that is a major part of most people’s faith crisis – the feeling that they have been deceived or betrayed.

I never read what Brother Peterson writes. That’s my coping mechanism when it come to him.

Excellent post, Bill.

OK so we all made mistakes in the past, lets not focus on the blame game. The problem is now we know better. The leaders should know better. What are we going to do about it moving forward? Are we going to face the issues head on and let the chips fall? Or maybe we are going to try and weasel around and act like it was not big deal Joseph was manipulating women. Point is I am not so frustrated about the past because there is nothing I can do about that. The future however needs to be addressed, and how is the church going to deal with that?

OK so we all made mistakes in the past, lets not focus on the blame game. The problem is now we know better. The leaders should know better. What are we going to do about it moving forward? Are we going to face the issues head and and let the chips fall? Or maybe we are going to try and weasel around and act like it was not big deal Joseph was manipulating women. Point is I am not so frustrated about the past because there is nothing I can do about that. The future however needs to be addressed, and how is the church going to deal with that?

Where my struggle is in the present. How should I take what leaders are saying now? I am willing and even in a place in my heart where I can forgive much of what was done in the past, but the only way I have arrived at that point is to be what most TBM’s would say is a rather skeptical view of them. When I hear them near pound the pulpit and say, “This is the way it is!” I can’t help but think, “Bruce R. McConkie was quite sure also on several things.” As I have said before, I don’t feel myself as a leader basher. The vast majority of them even down to bishops are great men and women that give up a significant part of their life in service to the church. I try to put myself in their place before I judge them too harshly. But I can’t see myself saying some of the things I hear them say.

I am more upset from how it was intentionally kept from me and insinuated that all of it was a bunch of lies by anti-Mormons.

Agreed. I think that is a major part of most people’s faith crisis – the feeling that they have been deceived or betrayed.

I think it goes even deeper. Let’s say I pray and obtain a spiritual witness of something and much later I find out it was not factual. I might begin to second guess all the things that I had attributed to the spirit. I might lose my connection with the spirit altogether. Perceived deceit, highlighting the things that led me to develop an erroneous testimony while hiding the facts that would have helped me build on a more solid foundation, throws trust in the organization under that same bus.

Before the Internet, all I had was Truth Restored, and anything I read in lesson/institute manuals. If you wanted to go deeper, you had to visit a public library — and half the time there wasn’t anything there on church history.

I remember first reading about peep stones in one of the volumes of Doctrines of Salvation. I scoured many other materials that I had available to me at the time but could find next to nothing. Only the vaguest of references. It was an “oddity” that went on the shelf.

They also told me that I couldn’t swim because the devil had power over water (they thought I was being sarcastic when I asked, “can I drink it then since only a single mouthful could drown me?”) Where was I supposed to hear about it?

I believe that one came out of the history that surrounded Doctrine and Covenants section 61. Of course the missionaries weren’t allowed to swim because if no one ever swims, no one ever drowns while swimming, and no one has to tell a mom that their child died while swimming on their mission. I mean if satan had that much power over water you’d think that would be a church-wide policy. Handbook 2, section 5874, paragraph 4. No swimming, because satan.

Back to the topic of “You should have known better!”

I am a convert. There was a time that I didn’t know any of the things presented in the essays… even though I felt I knew enough to get baptized. I didn’t know 95% of the things mentioned in the essays even after I had come back from my mission. At some point before the essays were released I came to know everything that was in the essays (and possibly even more than what the people that published the essays felt comfortable revealing). For me it can come down to a question of timing. The essays were released in the last year or so, I might be tempted to think “Everyone should know these things” because I know them. What if the essays came out 20 years ago? Would I feel the same way? I’d probably say “What?!?!” because all of the information would be new to me at that time. Saying “You should have known better!” is a failure to have perspective… but good for the person making that statement for already knowing I guess.

You don’t have to be a convert; even with the essays released does someone in primary know the things mentioned in the essays? Will they at some point? It goes back to timing. When and how someone learns something is largely irrelevant. There’s a point where someone doesn’t know something, there’s a later point where someone might learn, that transition may cause pain.

The problem, as I see it, touches on some conversations that we’ve had here. We can’t project our good or bad experiences or the environment through which we have experienced church onto others. Maybe the truth was hidden from some people. How is anyone going to be able to definitively make the claim one way or the other for someone else? The phrase “You should have known” can blame a victim. I’d rather not go there.