The Saints footnote on Cumorah-Packer's Master's Thesis

In a previous post, we saw that the only two references to Cumorah in the book Saints (apart from a bizarre Index line) are to a Master's Thesis by Cameron Packer.

I suppose, given the censorship of the word Cumorah in the book Saints, it makes sense that the editors of Saints relegated Cumorah to these obscure footnotes that refer to an even more obscure Master's Thesis.

What was once a simple, plain teaching--that the Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in New York, a few miles south of Palmyra--has become a multi-faceted, complex issue. But the complexity has arisen solely because of the objections of a handful of M2C intellectuals.

M2C (the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory) should never have been allowed to censor the history of the Church.

That's the tragedy of Saints.

I still think Saints should be revised and reissued to correct all the misleading (and false) revisionist Church history it contains. But since that probably won't happen, and since Packer's Master's Thesis is the only reference Church members have been given, we need to take a closer look at it.
_____

Overall, Packer's thesis is an excellent overview of the history of the Hill Cumorah.

However, I call your attention to something. Beginning on p. 43, Packer discusses the geography issue with a lengthy footnote "regarding different models of Book of Mormon geography that include the Book of Mormon Hill Cumorah being in Central America."

Throughout his paper, he cites President Cowdery's letters for their factual content.

But notice how he introduces Letter VII on page 44. Before quoting the key passages, Packer writes:

"A common experience seems to be that when the members of the Church visited the Hill Cumorah, they would reflect upon the hill [sic] Cumorah as depicted in the Book of Mormon, and experience certain emotions that they directly associated with the geography of that Manchester hill."

Notice that? He says people would "experience certain emotions."

Only then does he quote President Cowdery's declaration:

When one reflects on the fact that here, between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed...By turning to the 529th and 530th pages of the book of Mormon you will read Mormon's account of the last great struggle of his people, as they were encamped round this hill Cumorah... In this valley fell the remaining strngth and pride of a once powerful people, the Nephites... From the top of this hill, Mormon, with a few others, after the battle, gazed with horror upon the mangled remains.

Framing this as a product of "certain emotions" is a less than subtle way to reject what Oliver declared was a fact.

Or, as our M2C intellectuals frame it, President Cowdery was merely speculating, giving his own uninformed (and incorrect) opinion. And, of course, President Joseph Smith passively went along with it and made sure all members of the Church would learn and perpetuate this false tradition.

As we've discussed before, Oliver could state this as a fact because he had actually been in Mormon's depository in the hill.

Moreover, Packer does not ever mention that these letters, including Letter VII, were copied into Joseph's personal history, or that they were republished by Joseph's brothers in the Times and Seasons and The Prophet, as well as in the Millennial Star and Gospel Reflector.

Needless to say, none of those facts are mentioned in Saints, either.
_____

As long as we're looking at this closely, you'll notice the quotation from W.W. Phelps just below the Cowdery quotation on p. 45: "Around that mount died millions of the Jaredites." Unlike Oliver, Phelps was not a personal witness of Book of Mormon artifacts or angelic ministers. His comment here directly contradicts what Oliver wrote in Letter VII (and, in my view, the language of the text of Mormon 6). Mingling the speculation of Phelps with Oliver's statement of fact, in my view, serves to de-legitimize Oliver's direct statements.

Footnote 22 on p. 46 perpetuates the theory that Joseph (or John Taylor) was the editor of the Times and Seasons in 1842 when the anonymous articles about Central America were published. There's no historical evidence to support that theory, apart from a boilerplate legend appearing at the bottom of each issue. I've argued that, based on the actual historical evidence, William Smith was the actual editor, probably in conjunction with W.W. Phelps, and Joseph was merely the nominal editor. Either way, Packer's reaches this conclusion: "It therefore appears that in the minds of the early Church leaders, these new ideas did not contradict the concept of Cumorah being in New York."

Is is really merely a concept, though? On what basis do these scholars decide that Oliver was wrong when he declared it was a fact that Cumorah is in New York?

Packer also quotes Heber C. Kimball, but oddly omits Kimball's statement about visiting the Hill Cumorah after his conversion and observing the embankments still around the hill. These have since been plowed under, but his observation explains at least in part why he continued to teach that the Hill Cumorah was where "both of the former Nations were destroyed."

Packer spends considerable time discussing the teachings of Orson Pratt, but fails to note how Joseph edited out all of Pratt's speculation when he adapted Pratt's pamphlet to write the Wentworth letter.

[Current members of the Church will never know what Joseph wrote in the Wentworth letter because the key passage was censored in the lesson manual, Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, apparently for the same reason that motivated the censorship in Saints; i.e., Joseph specifically identified the Lamanites as the Indians living "in this country."]
_____

A highlight of Packer's thesis is his citation on p. 49 of a BYU Professor to declare "the official position of the Church." I've blogged about that notion elsewhere.

Nowhere in his paper does Packer cite or quote President Marion G. Romney's 1975 General Conference address, which unambiguously declared that Cumorah is in New York.
_____

Packer offers an interesting section titled "The Hill Cumorah Cave Accounts," beginning on page 49.

He writes, "In the second half of the nineteenth century, a certain teaching about a cave in Cumorah began surfacing in the writings and teachings of several Church leaders." What he doesn't mention is that Oliver Cowdery discussed Mormon's depository right in Letter VII in 1835.

Then he paraphrases Heber C. Kimball this way:

Heber C. Kimball said that Joseph and others went into a cave in the Hill Cumorah and had a "vision" wherein they "saw more records than ten men could carry... There were books piled up on tables, book upon book."

He goes on to say "Where Heber C. Kimball received his knowledge of the cave is not known. Brigham Young is a likely source simply because three other accounts can be traced to him; however, it is possible that Elder Kimball got his information from Oliver Cowdery, as Brigham Young possibly did."

Had Packer read the entire context, he would have seen that Kimball cited his source: Joseph Smith himself. Here is the full quotation: http://jod.mrm.org/4/105:

Brother Mills mentioned in his song, that crossing the Plains with handcarts was one of the greatest events that ever transpired in this Church. I will admit that it is an important event, successfully testing another method for gathering Israel, but its importance is small in comparison with the visitation of the angel of God to the Prophet Joseph, and with the reception of the sacred records from the hand of Moroni at the hill Cumorah.

How does it compare with the vision that Joseph and others had, when they went into a cave in the hill Cumorah, and saw more records than ten men could carry? There were books piled up on tables, book upon book. Those records this people will yet have, if they accept of the Book of Mormon and observe its precepts, and keep the commandments.

Again, how does it contrast with Joseph's being sent forth with his brethren to search out a location in Jackson County, where the New Jerusalem will be built, where our Father and our God planted the first garden on this earth, and where the New Jerusalem will come to when it comes down from heaven?

I mention these few things by way of contrast with the handcart operation; they are events that I have heard Joseph speak of, time and time again.of contrast with the handcart operation; they are events that I have heard Joseph speak of, time and time again.

According to Kimball, Joseph spoke of these things time and time again, although we have no direct record of what he said apart from the accounts given by those who heard him and/or Oliver.

Is it reasonable to interpret Kimball's statement as referring merely to a spiritual vision, as Packer tries to do starting on page 53?

Or, in the context, was he relating a "view," "spectacle," or "eye full" that Joseph and other had when they entered the cave? These are synonyms for "vision" that fit better in the context of the very physical description of the contents of the cave.

Notice also that Kimball promised we would have these other records if we accept the Book of Mormon and observe its precepts.
_____

On p. 50, Packer relates Woodruff's account of what President Brigham Young taught. This brings up the two sets of plates. According to Brigham Young, Joseph "did not return them [the plates] to the box from whence he had received them" but "deposited those plates upon a table or shelf" in the cave in the hill Cumorah. Yet in JS-H, Joseph says he gave the plates to the messenger.

We know he gave the plates to the messenger before leaving Harmony. Then, in Fayette, he received the plates of Nephi, which he translated there. Naturally, it was the plates of Nephi that he returned to the Hill Cumorah, after showing them to the Eight Witnesses.

Later, on p. 52, Packer includes the statement by David Whitmer that the plates were no longer in the Hill Cumorah "but not far from that place."

In my view, David was among those who helped move all the plates from the Hill Cumorah to another location "not far from" Cumorah (probably the Hill Shim, but that's another topic). Kimball said there were more plates than ten men could carry, an odd description unless someone actually tried to carry them. Brigham spoke of wagons.

Packer explains this by saying David "may have been referring to the exact place that the plates were found, and, therefore, the cave, which was nearby, could have still been in the hill proper." I don't think this explanation makes sense because David specifically said the plates were not in the Hill Cumorah.
_____

After an excellent explanation of how the Church came to acquire the Hill Cumorah, Packer describes the address given in General Conference by President Anthony W. Ivins of the First Presidency in April 1928, after the purchase was completed. On p. 87, Packer writes, "President Ivins then spent the majority of his talk attempting to establish what he termed as 'facts' regarding the geography of the Hill Cumorah."

In my view, this characterization of President Ivins' talk is inappropriate because it frames the address as merely President Ivins' opinion. Anyone can read the talk and decide whether President Ivins was merely speculating instead of speaking formally in General Conference as a member of the First Presidency.

Besides the issue of the New York Cumorah, are there any other teachings announced by the First Presidency in General Conference that LDS intellectuals characterize as mere "false traditions" and "opinions of men" that they reject? 
_____

To me, the Cumorah issue is a clear choice between the prophets and the intellectuals, as represented most recently by the revisionist Church historians responsible for Saints. 

Saints in Seminary and Institute classes

The Saints book is an awesome contribution to Church literature--which makes the tragedy of Saints all the worse.
_____

By making Church history more interesting and accessible, the book will do a lot to improve Gospel scholarship among Church members, especially those who;

(i) don't speak/read English and therefore have never had much material available to them; and

(ii) do read English but have never taken the time to study Church history.

This includes tens of thousands of Seminary and Institute students around the world.

Here's an announcement of how the book will be used.

In addition, S&I is publishing new teacher material for the Latter-day Saint History: 1815–1846 (Religion 341) institute course. Saints: Volume 1 will provide the student readings for this course, which covers key events from the early years of the Restoration through the dedication of the Nauvoo Temple in 1846.
_____

Here's the tragedy.

Because the book Saints purges certain aspects of Church history, all these unsuspecting Latter-day Saints will never learn the actual history, including specific elements of early Church history that Joseph Smith considered so important he had it copied into his own personal history and republished multiple times during his lifetime.

Some critics think I'm obsessed with the New York Cumorah, but I'm only using this specific issue as a concrete example of what our revisionist historians are doing. The problem extends beyond just the New York Cumorah and Letter VII, but the censorship of Cumorah is so obvious that it's a good topic to start the discussion.
_____

Everyone in the world can read Saints and see how the term Cumorah has been censored from the text. 

The modern prophets have taught from the beginning that the Hill Cumorah is in New York, but revisionist historians inexplicably reject their teachings, so they censored the term in the text of the Saints book.

(Well, it's not inexplicable. There is an influential group of intellectuals in the Church who insist the prophets were wrong about the New York Cumorah. Instead, they promote the idea that the "real Cumorah" is in Mesoamerica. They developed M2C--the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory and they have persuaded the revisionist historians to erase the New York Cumorah from the record as much as possible. The censorship in Saints is merely part of a long-term trend.)

This isn't an opinion. You can see it for yourself.

And to do it, the revisionist historians had to work around some obstacles--such as the early Church documents they needed to cite for other details. I'll show how they did this in a future post.

The editors of Saints claim they were merely writing a narrative history without all the details, so naming the "hill in New York" was not important.

Let's consider that claim.

The book is subtitled "The Standard of Truth." That phrase is taken from the Wentworth letter. One of the most egregious examples of censorship in recent Church history was the lesson manual that censored a key paragraph from the Wentworth letter, as I discussed here.

The Wentworth letter was originally published in the March 1, 1842, Times and Seasons, just a year after Joseph's brother Don Carlos published all of President Cowdery's historical letters, including Letter VII. In fact, the Wentworth letter was adapted from Orson Pratt's missionary pamphlet that quoted extensively from Letter VII.

A few months later, Joseph Smith wrote the letter that became D&C 128, with its direct reference to Cumorah in verse 20. Joseph and his contemporaries were all familiar with Letter VII, to the reference was crystal clear.

But thanks to Saints, future generations will have no idea to what D&C 128:20 refers. They won't understand Hymn #13, which, as President Hinckley pointed out in a message titled "The Power of the Book of Mormon, is one of our favorite hymns.

(BTW, don't be surprised if Hymn #13 doesn't make the cut in the new hymn book.)

If Saints is intended to entertain people, I suppose it's effective. It is definitely easy to read. But if it's intended to educate people so they can understand the teachings of the prophets, there are serious omissions that need to be corrected.
_____

For now, if you have the Kindle version, do a search for Cumorah. Here's the result I got on my desktop Kindle reader.

Search results for "Cumorah" in Saints

"3 Results Found."

That's it. Three. And none of them in the body of the text.

The first two entries are footnotes that refer to a 2002 "Master's thesis" by Cameron J. Packer. We'll discuss more that in a separate post.

The last entry is to the Index.

Click on that link and you will go to the Index.

The graphic below shows what that looks like.

You can click on each of those pages (22, 24, 25, 25, 29 and 34) but you won't find a single mention of Cumorah.

Only a "hill."

At first, you might think this index makes no sense. If you've been a member of the Church and can read English, you know the prophets have consistently and persistently taught that the Hill Cumorah is in New York. Why would the index give page numbers for "hill" with the term "Cumorah" in parenthesis? What is this strange terminology?

Actually, I take that back. If you've been a member for less than, say, 30 years, you wouldn't know what the prophets have taught about Cumorah unless you did some research on your own.

You certainly won't learn about the New York Cumorah at BYU or in CES, because both institutions now teach that the Book of Mormon took place in a fantasy world where "Cumorah" is nowhere near anyplace that looks like New York, but instead is near a seacoast that looks just like the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in Central America, albeit rotated 90 degrees.

Nevertheless, as of this writing (October 2018) there's still a visitors center outside of Palmyra, New York, called the "Hill Cumorah Visitors Center." https://www.lds.org/locations/hill-cumorah-visitors-center?lang=eng. There's still an annual event titled "Hill Cumorah Pageant."

[Note: the missionaries assigned to Palmyra are not allowed to tell visitors anything about the "hill in New York" except that it's the place where Joseph found the plates. They can't read Mormon 6:6 to visitors to explain its significance. They can't read or even refer to Letter VII or Letter VIII or the teachings of the prophets about the significance of the Hill Cumorah. Instead, they have to show visitors illustrations of Christ visiting the Nephites in Mesoamerica.]

Of course, none of this makes sense to visitors, and now, thanks to Saints, future generations will have no idea why this hill is called Cumorah in the first place.

If the revisionist Church historians get their way, that facility will soon be renamed to "A Hill in New York Visitors Center." We'll have "A Hill in New York Pageant."

In this context, the censorship in Saints makes sense. Readers just need to realize that the basic premise for M2C is that the prophets are wrong and the hill from which Joseph obtained the plates is "just a hill in New York," as this index and the text of Saints teaches.
_____

Contrast this revisionist Church history approach to actual Church history.

In 1834-5, with the assistance of President Joseph Smith, Jr., President Oliver Cowdery (then Assistant President of the Church) wrote a series of eight letters about Church history. Among these was Letter VII, which declared it was a fact that the hill from which Joseph obtained the plates was actually the Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6.

Joseph made sure every member of the Church had access to these letters. During Joseph's lifetime, they were published in Church newspapers in Kirtland, Nauvoo, England, Philadelphia, and New York City (and, later, in Salt Lake City by Joseph F. Smith). Joseph's own brothers, Don Carlos and William, both published them in their respective newspapers (the Times and Seasons in Nauvoo and The Prophet in New York City). Apart from verses from the Book of Mormon and Bible, few if any documents in Church history were more widely known and accepted than these historical letters.

The editors of Saints recognize the importance of these letters by citing them often in Saints. They even refer to the "hill" Oliver described--yet without actually displaying the forbidden term Cumorah, even though that name appears in the letters themselves.

BYU's fantasy map of the
Book of Mormon that
teaches the prophets are wrong

IOW, during Joseph's lifetime, the New York Cumorah was a ubiquitous, unquestioned teaching. Joseph himself referred to it in D&C 128 (which is also censored from Saints).

Today's Church members have no idea about the New York Cumorah, unless they search beyond what BYU/CES and Saints are teaching.

Worse, if they attend BYU or CES, they learn that Cumorah is located in a fantasy land--along with all the rest of the events in the Book of Mormon.
_____

I'm told the Church historians are telling people there is no historical evidence that Joseph ever identified the "hill in New York" as Cumorah.

That's simply false.

What they really mean is, they don't want members of the Church to know about this historical evidence. 
_____

Go back to your Kindle edition and click on one of the Cumorah links that takes you to Packer's Master's Thesis. Open the file and go to page 29. At the top of the page you will see an indented quotation from Lucy Mack Smith.

This is the passage in which Lucy quotes her son, Joseph, referring to the "hill of Cumorah, where the plates are," before he had even removed the plates.

Stop, father, stop.. .it was the angel of the Lord: as I passed by the hill of Cumorah, where the plates are, the angel met me, and said that I had not been engaged enough in the work of the Lord; that the time had come for the Record to be brought forth; and that I must be up and doing, and set myself about the things which God had commanded me to do. But, father, give yourself no uneasiness concerning the reprimand which I have received, for I now know the course that I am to pursue, so all will be well.

You can see the original version of this history in the Joseph Smith Papers. It looks like this:

Remember, Joseph had not translated a single word from the plates when this event took place.

Yet he knew the hill was named Cumorah.

How did that happen?

Packer's thesis explains that Moroni tutored Joseph for several years before allowing him to take the plates.

We infer that Moroni told Joseph the name of the hill, and there are other references to corroborate that inference, but the inference merely involves how Joseph knew the hill was named Cumorah.

It doesn't matter how Joseph knew the name; what matters is that he did know it, long before anyone else (outside of his family) did.

Plus, on page 39, Packer notes that Lucy said that on the night of his first visits in 1823, Moroni told Joseph, "the record is on a side of the hill of Cumorah, three miles from this place."

Packer observes, "depending on the accuracy of Lucy Mack Smith's history, it is possible that the family of Joseph Smith could have been aware of the name 'Cumorah,' and referring to the nearby hill by that name as early as 1823."

When assessing the accuracy, credibility and reliability of a historical account, we usually consider any information that contradicts the account. So far as I know, there is zero historical evidence that contradicts Lucy's accounts.

If there is any, I'd love to have someone point it out.
_____

As it stands, we have direct first-person testimony by a reliable witness--Joseph's mother Lucy--who everyone acknowledges was in a position to know what she was talking about.

There is no historical evidence that contradicts Lucy's statements about the identification of the "hill in New York" as Cumorah.

There is substantial historical evidence that corroborates her statements--including Letter VII, but lots of other evidence.

All the prophets and apostles who have ever addressed the issue have affirmed Lucy's statements.

The only people who reject Lucy's statements are the M2C advocates and the revisionist Church historians who support them.
_____

Direct, clear, and corroborated quotations from Joseph's mother are solid historical evidence by any standard.

All the authors/editors of Saints had to do to be accurate was to quote Lucy's statement.

But they can't do that because it contains the forbidden word Cumorah. And while that word has been frequently taught by the prophets and apostles, the word offends the M2C proponents.

Hence, you won't find this quotation in Saints; instead, the editors misled readers by citing an earlier version of Lucy's history that was crossed out, as I've explained before.

Those who promote the M2C narrative, and those who accommodate the M2C advocates such as our revisionist Church historians, are telling people that Lucy's history, on this one point, is not even historical evidence.

And yet, they cite Lucy's history throughout Saints on other issues.
_____

When challenged, our revisionist Church historians say that they linked to Packer's thesis so people can read this more detailed history. Therefore, they claim, they are not misleading anyone.

Think about that a moment.

First, they censored the word Cumorah from Saints. Then they translated the book into many languages and distributed throughout the Church.

But have they translated all the footnotes?

Of course not.

They want us to believe they are accurately portraying Church history, when they know they have buried a critical point in an obscure Master's Thesis that is available only in English.

They know, as we all do, that most people will not look up the footnotes. And they also know that non-English speakers will never have access to the truth.

Hence, the tragedy of Saints.
_____

And now this tragedy is being institutionalized through CES so that no Seminary and Institute students will know what the prophets have taught about the Hill Cumorah.

The Mary Whitmer problem

Long term, the biggest tragedy of Saints is the censorship of everything the early Church leaders said about the New York Cumorah.

But in the short term, the story of Mary Whitmer is an inexcusable error.

Volume 1 commits a considerable amount of words to relate this account, which is great because it's a fascinating account of a female witness of the plates. In the Ensign, the account is even accompanied by an illustration to draw attention to it.

The problem is, Saints relates a false version of the account.

Now, thanks to Saints, future generations will believe it was Moroni who showed Mary the plates, solely because of (i) a mistake made by her descendants and (ii) the M2C agenda. 

This has several repercussions.

- the inclusion of this false account undermines the credibility of Saints.
- people who read Saints and believe this account will be confused when they read the actual history.
- the false account in Saints will undermine belief in the reliability and credibility of David Whitmer, one of the Three Witnesses.
- readers will wonder why Joseph and Oliver described Moroni so much differently than Mary Whitmer did.
- readers will miss the far more fascinating aspect of the account that links the Book of Mormon to Church history.
- the false account enables Saints to omit a key event in Church history that teaches us about the Hill Cumorah and the two sets of plates.
_____

Here is the passage in blue, with my comments in red:

Once Joseph, Emma, and Oliver moved to Fayette, David’s mother had her hands full. Mary Whitmer and her husband, Peter, already had eight children between the ages of 15 and 30, and the few who did not still live at home resided nearby. Tending to their needs filled Mary’s days with work, and the three houseguests added more labor. Mary had faith in Joseph’s calling and did not complain, but she was getting tired.17

Note 17 reads: 

Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith, Interview with David Whitmer, Sept. 7-8, 1878, [10], in Joseph F. Smith to John Taylor and Council of the Twelve, Sept. 17, 1878, draft, Joseph F. Smith, Papers, Church History Library.

image 44

If you click on the link, it takes you to the hand-written version of the account. This is image 44 in the series, as you see in the right column when you go to the link.

It's not easy to read, but it's a nice link because this relates David Whitmer's account of the messenger taking the plates to Cumorah. Saints did not include this account. 

There are printed versions of the account that are easier to read and translate.* I put the printed version at the end of this post.

The heat in Fayette that summer was sweltering. As Mary washed clothes and prepared meals, Joseph dictated the translation in an upstairs room. Oliver usually wrote for him, but occasionally Emma or one of the Whitmers took a turn with the pen.18 Sometimes, when Joseph and Oliver tired of the strain of translating, they would walk out to a nearby pond and skip stones across the surface of the water.

Mary had little time to relax herself, and the added work and the strain placed on her were hard to bear.

One day, while she was out by the barn where the cows were milked, she saw a gray-haired man with a knapsack slung across his shoulder. His sudden appearance frightened her, but as he approached, he spoke to her in a kind voice that set her at ease.

“My name is Moroni,” he said. “You have become pretty tired with all the extra work you have to do.” He swung the knapsack off his shoulder, and Mary watched as he started to untie it.19

This is a phony quotation that doesn't belong in Saints.

 If you read the Skousen article in footnote 19, you will see this quotation was made up by Mary Whitmer's descendants (or by Andrew Jenson), decades after she passed away. 

The Skousen article refers to the Historical Record, compiled by Andrew Jenson. The relevant page is shown on the left here. Look at the passage in the middle of the left column. This is what it says:

"I have heard my grandmother (Mary M. Whitmer) say on several occasions that she was shown the plates of the Book of Mormon by an holy angel, whom she always called Brother Nephi. (She undoubtedly refers to Moroni, the angel who had the plates in charge.)"

Do you see that parenthetical? You can see what happened. Mary Whitmer always referred to the messenger as "Brother Nephi." This is consistent with what David Whitmer said about the messenger who took the Harmony plates to Cumorah; i.e., that he was one of the Nephites. 

The grandson (or Andrew Jenson) simply inferred Mary was wrong!

The grandson (or Andrew Jenson) didn't accept his grandmother's statement about the name of the messenger, but instead assumed she was wrong because it had to have been Moroni, according to his belief. True, we don't know the names of the Three Nephites (3 Ne. 28:25-32), but one of the disciples Christ called was named Nephi. (3 Ne. 19:4), so the chances are 3 in 12 that one of the Three Nephites was Nephi.  I think the grandmother was correct, but the grandson made a huge mistake when he misunderstood.

Subsequent descendants relied on this 1878 account and elaborated, inventing this quotation: "My name is Moroni. You have become pretty tired with all the extra work you have to do," etc. 

Recall that this account describes the so-called "Moroni" as "a short, heavy-set, gray-haired man," which matches David Whitmer's description of the messenger taking the plates to Cumorah. Joseph and Oliver never described Moroni as anything of the sort. Instead, Joseph said that messenger was one of the Three Nephites.

It is disturbing and astonishing that Saints omits the important and oft-repeated direct testimony of David Whitmer about the messenger taking the plates to Cumorah and then inserts this phony quotation about Moroni. I suppose they think readers will like the idea of a female witness of the plates, which is definitely awesome, but why change Mary Whitmer's testimony with a phony quotation and then state it as a fact? It is much more interesting that she named one of the Three Nephites. 

This editorial treatment does not inspire confidence in the accuracy of Saints.

“You have been very faithful and diligent in your labors,” he continued. “It is proper, therefore, that you should receive a witness that your faith may be strengthened.”20

Moroni opened his knapsack and removed the gold plates. He held them in front of her and turned their pages so she could see the writings on them. After he turned the last page, he urged her to be patient and faithful as she carried the extra burden a little longer. He promised she would be blessed for it.21

The old man vanished a moment later, leaving Mary alone. She still had work to do, but that no longer troubled her.22

The Mary Whitmer account does belong in Saints, but not this false version.

It would be far better to relate the actual history instead of the invented quotations from people who were not there.
_____

David Whitmer related this account several times, as I've discussed before on another blog. On one occasion, he was interviewed by Edward Stevenson.

I obtained a copy of Stevenson's journal and here's what his entry says:

Page from Stevenson journal

"I wish to mention an Item of conversation with David Whitmer in regard to Seeing one of the Nephites, Zina Young, Desired me to ask about it. David Said, Oliver, & The Prophet, & I were riding in a wagon, & an aged man about 5 feet 10, heavey Set & on his back, an old fashioned Armey knapsack Straped over his Shoulders & Something Square in it, & he walked alongside of the Wagon & Wiped the Sweat off his face, Smileing very Pleasant David asked him to ride and he replied I am going across to the hill Cumorah. Soon after they Passed they felt Strangeley and Stoped, but could see nothing of him all around was clean and they asked the Lord about it. He Said that the Prophet Looked as White as a Sheet & Said that it was one of the Nephites & that he had the plates."**

________________________________

Edward Stevenson was a general authority (one of the seven presidents of the Seventy). He was a well-known missionary (one of the MTC buildings is named after him). There's no reason to doubt the credibility of his interview with David Whitmer.

What I find fascinating is that Zina Young asked Stevenson to ask David Whitmer about seeing one of the Nephites. That was the focus of the interview, not the Cumorah question.

_____
* You can google a phrase from the account and find lots of printed versions. One I like is here:
http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/ut/utahmisc.htm
Just go to the page and in your browser, search for "suddenly approached."

**You can find printed versions of this account in these references, although not transcribed exactly: "Edward Stevenson Interview (1) 22-23 December 1877, Richmond, Missouri Diary of Edward Stevenson," LDS Church Archives, Lyndon W. Cook, ed., David Whitmer Interviews, 1993, p. 13; also Dan Vogel, ed., Early Mormon Documents, 2003, vol. v, p. 30.
_____

Transcript of the handwritten passage:

[Bottom of image #44]

When I was returning to Fayette with Joseph and Oliver, all of us riding in the wagon, Oliver and I on an old fashioned 

[image #45]

wooden spring seat and Joseph behind us, we were suddenly approached by a very pleasant, nice looking old man in a clear open place, who saluted us with 'Good morning, it is very warm,' at the same instant wiping his face or forehead with his hand. We returned the salutation and by a sign from Joseph I invited him to ride if he was going our way, but he said very pleasantly, 'No, I am going to Cumorah.' This was something new to me, I did not know what Cumorah meant, and as I looked enquiringly at Joseph, the old man instantly disappeared so that I did not see him again." 

Joseph F. Smith: "Did you notice his appearance?" 

David Whitmer: "I should think I did. He was, I should think, about 5 feet 9 or 10 inches and heavy set, about such a man as James Vancleave, there, but heavier. His face was as large. He was dressed in a suit of brown, woolen clothes; his hair and beard were white, about like Brother Pratt's, but his beard was not so heavy. I also remember that he had a sort of knapsack on his back, and something was in it which was shaped like a book. It was the messenger who had the plates. 

"Soon after our arrival home, 

[image #46]

I saw something which led me to the belief that the plates were placed or concealed in my father's barn. I frankly asked Joseph if my supposition was right, and he told me it was. 

"Sometime after this my mother was going to milk the cows when she was met out near the barn by this same old man, (as I suppose from her description of him) who said to her `you have been very faithful and diligent in your labours but you are tried because of the increase of your toil, it is proper therefore that you should receive a witness, that your faith may be strengthened' and thereupon he showed her the plates. My Father and Mother had a large family of their own. The addition to it therefore of Joseph, Emma and Oliver very greatly increased the toil and anxiety of my mother and altho she had never complained she had sometimes felt that her labor was too much or at least she was beginning to feel so. This circumstance however completely removed all such feelings and nerved her up for her increased responsibilities." 

Orson Pratt: "Have you any idea when the records will be brought forth?" 

David Whitmer: "When we see things in the Spirit and by the power of God they seem to be right here present. The signs of the times indicate the near approach of the coming forth of the other plates, but when it will be, I cannot tell. 

The Three Nephites are at work among the lost tribes and elsewhere. John the Revelator is at work, and I believe the time will come suddenly, before we are prepared for it." 

Chapter 4 - Be Watchful

Chapter 4 of Saints, titled "Be Watchful," covers the events leading up to the time when Joseph obtained the plates. You can read Chapter 4 here: 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2018/06/chapter-4-be-watchful?lang=eng

At one point, the chapter relates an account of Joseph being chastised.

Here's the quotation:

One day, Joseph went to town on an errand. Expecting him back for dinner, his parents were alarmed when he did not return. They waited for hours, unable to sleep. At last Joseph opened the door and threw himself into a chair, exhausted.

Lucy Mack Smith, History, 1844-5
the part quoted and cited in Saints is lined out

“Why are you so late?” his father asked.

“I have had the severest chastisement that I ever had in my life,” Joseph said.

“Who has been taking you to task?” demanded his father.

“It was the angel of the Lord,” Joseph replied. “He says I have been negligent.” The day of his next meeting with Moroni was coming soon. “I must be up and doing,” he said. “I must set myself about the things which God has commanded me to do.”19

Note 19 goes to this link: 
http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1844-1845/59

This is Lucy Mack Smith's history from 1844-5. If you go to the link, you'll see that the quoted section is lined out.

We wonder, why would Saints misquote and cite a source that was lined out in the original?

_____

Here is the later, corrected version from 1845:

Lucy Mack Smith, History, 1845
The revision that quotes Joseph referring to
Cumorah before he even got the plates is not
mentioned, quoted or cited in Saints.

Presently he smiled, and said in a very calm tone, “I have taken the severest chastisement, that I have ever had in my life”. 

My husband, supposing it was from some of the neighbors, was quite angry; and observed, “I would would like to know what business any body has to find fault with you.”

“Stop, father, Stop.” said Joseph, “it was the angel of the Lord— as I passed by the hill of Cumorah, where the plates are, the angel of the Lord met me and said, that I had not been engaged enough in the work of the Lord; that the time had come for the record to <​be​> brought forth; and, that I must be up and doing, and set myself about the things which God had commanded me to do: but, Father,’ continued he, ‘give yourself no uneasiness concerning the reprimand that I have received; for I now know the course that I am to pursue; so all will be well.”

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1845/111

This statement about Cumorah completely supports the teachings of the prophets that Cumorah is in New York. Here Lucy explains that Joseph knew the name Cumorah even before he got the plates. He could only have learned this from Moroni.

_____

Saints should have used Lucy's later version. In fact they cite the later version in note 22!.

Using the later one should be obvious. 

So why did Saints use the old version? 

I think the editors of Saints avoided the corrected version because they realize it refutes M2C.*

The editors will say that they are neutral on the question of Book of Mormon geography, including the New York Cumorah. 

But is that a reason to quote and cite a passage they know Lucy later corrected, especially without telling readers what they're doing?

_____

The M2C intellectuals always have a rationale for disbelieving early Church history accounts that contradict their theory. They have said we should disbelieve Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Lucy Smith, among others.

In this case, they claim we should disbelieve Lucy because she must have added this comment about Cumorah because she was confused; i.e., by the time she dictated this history in 1845, the New York Cumorah was well established by Letter VII, D&C 128, etc. Therefore, according to the M2C intellectuals, we can't believe what Lucy wrote here.

And, apparently, the editors of Saints agreed with their M2C friends.

But consider this.

Just because the original sources are not "neutral" on Book of Mormon geography, does that give the editors of Saints the right to revise Church history?

I think not. 

One of the tragedies of Saints is that it is teaching the world the revisionist Church history, not what the original documents actually say. 

_____

Here is one of the practical consequences of this revisionist history.

Had Saints explained what Lucy said--what she directly quoted Joseph Smith as saying--readers would understand that Joseph knew the name of the hill before he even translated the plates. 

Readers would realize that Joseph could have learned that only from Moroni.

And readers would realizes that all the prophets and apostles who have taught that Cumorah is in New York were correct, while the M2C scholars who have taught that Cumorah cannot be in New York were not correct. 

That would go a long way toward building unity in the Church.

Members everywhere would align themselves to what the prophets have taught instead of being misled by the teachings of the M2C intellectuals.

Now you see why the M2C intellectuals and their citation cartel don't want members of the Church to even know about this. 

_____

This may appear to be nit-picking, but I think this is a serious problem. 

Even people fairly familiar with Church history would have passed this by unawares. 

The millions of Church members around the world, in all languages, plus future generations, have no hope of learning the truth when Saints is deliberately suppressing and changing Church history this way. 
_____

BTW, the same M2C intellectuals who cite Lucy's account for other details--Lucy is the sole source for many important events in early Church history--insist she was wrong about this. She had a poor memory, they say, or she conflated this account with another account.

Those of us who accept Lucy's account point to two important indicia of credibility and reliability.

First, the earlier draft was lined out and replaced with more detail. Lucy directed the revisions, an indication that when she read the first draft, she realized it was not completely accurate. For example, the first account has the angel telling Joseph he was "negligent," but the revised account has the angel telling Joseph he "had not been engaged enough in the work of the Lord." Which sounds more like the words of Moroni? 

Second, Lucy's account of Joseph learning the name Cumorah from Moroni has corroboration in other historical accounts. For example, the Autobiography of Parley P. Pratt, a source cited in Saints (note 4 to Chapter 4), includes this quotation from Oliver Cowdery's teachings to the Lamanites in Kansas: "This Book, which contained these things, was hid in the earth by Moroni, in a hill called by him, Cumorah, which hill is now in the State of New York, near the village of Palmyra, in Ontario county." p. 57.

It's possible Lucy knew what Oliver was teaching, but she didn't get it from Pratt's autobiography because it was not published until many years after this 1845 version of Lucy's account was written. 

_____

To summarize: Saints presented an opportunity to inform Church members about the truth. 

The historians claim they are neutral on the New York Cumorah. That appears to be the reason they chose to mislead readers by not citing and quoting Lucy's corrected account.

What they're really saying is, the original sources are not neutral. They clearly taught that Cumorah is in New York. 

The problem is not limited to Saints. The M2C ideology has been inserted throughout the commentary to the Joseph Smith Papers.

As a result, future generations will have no chance to learn the actual history and what the prophets have taught.

Critics of the Church will continue to point out the disparity between what the prophets have taught and the revisionist Church history as a weapon to undermine faith.

I think it would be far better to report the truth in the first place. 

Of course, I also think it would be better to sustain the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah, but the exact opposite is going on at BYU/CES/CHD.

_____

*M2C is the acronym for the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory. Here is some background on the M2C Academic Cycle.

Church leaders have consistently and persistently taught that the Hill Cumorah (Mormon 6:6) is in New York. However, a few decades ago, certain LDS intellectuals decided the prophets were wrong about the New York Cumorah. According to these intellectuals, the following Church leaders were ignorantly speculating, expressing their personal opinions, and were wrong. This is a partial list:

Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, Heber C. Kimball, Orson Pratt, Joseph F. Smith, Joseph Fielding Smith, George A. Smith, James E. Talmage,

LeGrand Richards, Marion G. Romney, Mark E. Petersen, etc.

The academic cycle:
how students learn to repudiate the prophets

Instead, according to these intellectuals, the "real" Hill Cumorah (Mormon 6:6) is somewhere in southern Mexico. They call this the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory, the idea being that the "hill in New York" is merely the place where Joseph obtained the plates and not the hill referred to in Mormon 6:6. This directly repudiates the teachings of the Church leaders listed above.

These intellectuals have been teaching at BYU and CES for decades now. They have trained thousands of students to accept M2C, including most of the employees in the Church History Department.

As a result, for the last few decades, we have had a steady diet of M2C in art, media, lessons, and even visitors centers.

Mormon abridging a Mayan codex

M2C is explictly on display at the North Visitors Center on Temple Square, as I've pointed out several times, such as here:

http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2016/12/yes-they-do-teach-two-cumorahs-theory.html

The exhibit actually portrays Mormon abridging the Nephite records from a Mayan codex!

Meanwhile, Moroni is off in the distance in upstate New York, burying the plates (along with the sword of Laban and the Liahona, which contradicts all the historical accounts but is shown this way to promote M2C and to repudiate what Oliver Cowdery told Brigham Young and other Church leaders).

Theoretically, all of this could be attributed to a policy of "neutrality" about Book of Mormon geography, but we can all see there is nothing neutral about it. BYU/CES/CHD have been steadfastly promoting M2C for decades, with no thought of even informing Church members what the prophets have actually taught, let alone portraying those teachings in artwork, media, visitors centers, etc.

_____