DiscussMormonism.com

I picked up my copy of Mormon Enigma the other day and was rereading parts of it. I remembered that the book's authors, Linda Newell and Valeen Avery, had initially received great praise for the book, including receiving an award from BYU presented by Jeffrey Holland. But then, without warning, all stake presidents and bishops in their area were told not to allow either of them to speak in church meetings about anything related to Emma and Joseph Smith.

Eventually, Linda Newell and her husband met with Dallin Oaks and Neal Maxwell to discuss the prohibition. At first, Oaks told them that the ban came because Newell and Avery had been using church meetings to promote the book, which Newell denied vehemently. Finally, he acknowledged the real reason:

"If Mormon Enigma reveals information that is detrimental to the reputation of Joseph Smith, then it is necessary to try to limit its influence and that of its authors." (Dialogue 35:2, p 46).

I've never heard anyone say that Mormon Enigma is anti-Mormon or dishonest or yellow journalism, but yes, there's a lot in the book that could be detrimental to Joseph Smith's reputation. I'm just a little surprised to hear Oaks say it so bluntly.

Been a long time since I read it (on my mission). Something about Joseph Smith being a necromancer though If I recall correctly that was the yellow journalism of the day (Joseph Smith's time) and not necessarily the book itself.

bcspace wrote:Been a long time since I read it (on my mission). Something about Joseph Smith being a necromancer though If I recall correctly that was the yellow journalism of the day (Joseph Smith's time) and not necessarily the book itself.

Cool. You broke mission rules. I don't remember anything about him being a "necromancer" in the book.

Yes, one of the members we lived with had subscriptions to Dialogue and Sunstone and their library contained a host of other nasties as well. It was my first year and my senior comp was lazy, so I read alot. Amazing how I ended up baptizing so many in my second year and still remain a TBM to this day, huh?

Runtu wrote:

bcspace wrote:Been a long time since I read it (on my mission). Something about Joseph Smith being a necromancer though If I recall correctly that was the yellow journalism of the day (Joseph Smith's time) and not necessarily the book itself.

Cool. You broke mission rules. I don't remember anything about him being a "necromancer" in the book.

Page 25. Emma's cousin is concerned that Smith is on the membership rolls of the Methodist Episcopal church: "he 'thought it was a disgrace to the church to have a practicing necromancer' as a member."

Clearly it is not the argument of the authors and has pretty much no bearing on the other 394 pages of the book. In other words, I suspect someone either didn't read beyond page 25 or has got the book mixed up with another one. Either way, what an astonishingly strange and incoherent response to the biography.

Clearly it is not the argument of the authors and has pretty much no bearing on the other 394 pages of the book. In other words, I suspect someone either didn't read beyond page 25 or has got the book mixed up with another one. Either way, what an astonishingly strange and incoherent response to the biography.

How so? I had not seen the book since the mid 1980's and I seem to have remembered the context of the necromancer statement accurately. Being also heavily into AD&D as I was, I can see how "necromancer" might have stood out. Bottom line: It's just one of many many books I have read.

If you'd like me to read it again, if it's online somewhere, I might take a gander one of these days. But I have no interest in buying it.