Now, for context: A prior-Mormon, now-Catholic woman has been asking questions of the resident apologists as to why Mormonism decided to go a certain way as opposed to another. Mostly in a speculative manner. . . you know, the "what if" syndrome.
Anyways, the apologists in the thread have been jumping all over her about "taking things out of context" and "straining to find a criticism". In fact, one went so far as to say that
True anti-Mormon style is to remove all context and create arguments that aren't designed to be true, but arguments that are designed to appear true enough to convince any average unsuspecting Mormon.
Finally, enough is enough for our intrepid Catholic woman.
Answer me this, if the church is so danged innocent of this [removing context and creating false arguments], then why don't they reveal their full and actual beliefs to prospective members? Why, instead do they do everything they can to make it seem like just another average christain faith? If it were true, they would not be afraid to be honest and open, they would not lie by ommision, they would certainly not lie by commision. Yet they do it all the time.
Rather observant, coming from one who's parents left the church while she was a young child.
Regardless, our intrepid Apologist has a snarky reply.
There are numerous theories and speculations of doctrine that are not necessarily canonized. What responsibility do missionaries have to teach all the theories of doctrine as well as the anti-Mormon version of our doctrine?
I don't see missionaries trying to make us seem like any average Christian faith. I see them claiming us to be the one true church of Christ, one that stands out from other Christian churches.
Now, I might be reading into this. . . but it really seems as though this apologist just admitted that the truth was "anti-mormon".
Edited for emphasis