Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: INONOT ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 01:19AM

First of all, I really - and I mean REALLY like and very much appreciate Michael Quinn. I've listened to his latest MormonStories.org podcasts twice now. I've read all of his books too, and I can hardly wait for the next one which is in the works.

That being said, I have a hard time understanding how he reconciles his belief that Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God - teaching correct doctrines -- and homosexuality. How does he view Eternal Marriage, Temple Sealings, and "Families Are Forever"???

If anyone knows, please do tell!

Thank You!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 01:32AM

Note: What follows is an overall wrap-up of my understanding of Mike's situation--although there is, of course, more that can be had, as more becomes known. Much of what I relate below is based on what Mike has personally shared with me; other information is gleaned from my own research.
_____


--How I Became Personally Acquainted with Mike Quinn--

I have known Mike as a personal friend for several years and admire him greatly, both as an individual and as a scholar, although we disagree on some fundamental matters.

I first came into contact with him in 1993, after he had published an incredibly insightful article on my grandfather Ezra Taft Benson’s political conflicts with other members of the Quorum of the Twelve (see D. Michael Quinn, "Ezra Taft Benson and Mormon Political Conflicts,” in “Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought,” 26(2), Summer 1993: pp. 1-87).

I was so impressed with Mike’s “Dialogue” essay that I called him, identified myself and congratulated him on a very well researched and responsible piece of historical analysis. Except for one minor error (in which my father, Mark A. Benson, had been incorrectly said to have been an official member of the John Birch Society when, in fact, he was not, although he was a fervent supporter of Bircher anti-Communist teachings and goals), I had absolutely no beef with Mike’s analysis, only admiration.

The phone call apparently surprised Mike, given that it came out of the blue and we had never before had contact with one another. Mike confessed to me that when he realized that the grandson of Ezra Taft Benson was calling about his authored “Dialogue” piece, he assumed I was planning to gripe about it. He was pleasantly surprised to hear that, in fact, I was phoning to praise him for the extraordinarily good job he had done.

After I left the LDS Cult later that same year, I had ample occasions to talk directly with Mike about his own perspectives and beliefs pertaining to his personal Mormon beliefs.
_____


--Quinn’s Abiding Testimony in the Truthfulness of the Mormon Faith As God’s Restored Church On Earth--

In personal discussions, Mike shared with me his testimonial belief that the “Book of Mormon” was a literal historical record of ancient and accurate vintage; that Joseph Smith was a prophet called of God to reveal His divine truth to the world; that through Joseph Smith the golden plates were translated and that following the death of Joseph Smith the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints fell into apostasy through the corruption and sin of its leadership--and that this "falling away," if you will, of the Mormon Church from the purposes and designs of God's original 1830 restorative act, has continued up to the present time.

Mike told me that it was his belief that a second Restoration (i.e., one occurring after the initial return of God's true Church to the earth in 1830 through the hands of Joseph Smith) was necessary in order to rehabilitate the Mormon Church and again make it the organization through which God would lead and guide His children to eventual salvation.
_____


--Quinn’s Book, "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View": His Own Research vs. His Own Views on the Case for Mormonism--

I asked Mike how he could profess a testimony in Mormonism’s historical and doctrinal foundations, especially given what many consider to be his devastatingly critical and historical dissection of Mormon origins and extensions of power.

From my own personal standpoint, Mike's compellingly documented book, “Early Mormonism and the Magic World View” (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1987, 313 pp.) had not only knocked out, but blown out, the struts out from under any serious claim that Mormons might attempt as to the alleged divinity of the LDS Church.

So impressed was I, in fact, with his book (which had a profound role in undermining my own belief in Mormonism), that I asked Mike to personally inscribe my copy, which he graciously agreed to do. On the title page, he wrote:

”Dear Steve,

“Great to meet you this morning just before the film crew arrived to interview you here! [At that time, I was in Salt Lake City to be interviewed by the press about the declining health of my grandfather and his mental and physical inability to effectively lead the Mormon Church]. Look forward to more talks and association with you. Best wishes, Mike (alias D. Michael) 7-14-93”

During our personal discussions, Mike acknowledged to me that he knew that his belief in Mormonism did not sound logical but that he nonetheless possessed an inward testimony of the “Book of Mormon,” of the prophetic calling by God of Joseph Smith and of the truthfulness of the Mormon Gospel as God's One and Only True Church.

I found Mike's testimony startling, incongruous and at significant odds with his unparalleled research that, in my opinion, clearly exposed the fraud, frailties and fictions of Mormonism.

But Mike's ultimate testimony in the Mormon faith seemed to rest on his firm belief that it was initially restored by God's hand in pure and true form, then became corrupted through the human-caused downfall of its leaders who subsequently followed Joseph Smith into power in the post-Smith era.

Simply and fundamentally put, Mike holds on to the belief that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints remains God's true Church on the earth--but that it is in dire need of a complete restorative overhaul in order to bring it back to its original integrity, purpose, luster and exaltation-providing power.
_____


--Spencer W. Kimball’s Blessing to Quinn That Someday He Would Become an Apostle--

Mike also spoke to me during our talks together about a blessing he had received from then-Apostle Spencer W. Kimball. In it, Kimball promised Mike that if he remained faithful and obedient, he would someday become an Apostle in the Mormon Church. At the time of the Kimball blessing, Mike was still an active, temple-endowed, well-respected member of the Church.

Mike has written publicly about this blessing he received under Kimball’s hands.

In an autobiographical essay entitled, “The Rest Is History" (“Sunstone,” December 1995, p. 54), Mike addressed his personal consuming desire to someday become a member of the Quorum of the Twelve and how Kimball helped him deal with this distraction through the laying on of hands:

"President Kimball asked if I would like to have a blessing. As he laid his hands upon my head, I expected him to give me the comfort and strength to overcome my aspirations for Church office. Instead, Spencer W. Kimball promised me that one day God would call me to be an apostle. After the blessing, President Kimball told me not to work for the office or try to ‘curry favor’ with Church leaders, but just to live as I felt the Lord desired for me. There was no way I could logically explain that experience, then or now."

When we talked, it was clear to me, however, that Mike’s belief in Mormonism seemed to be much more personal and deeper than any anticipation he might have had of advancing into the upper echelons of LDS Church leadership. Mike’s testimony of the Mormon Gospel was a quiet, soft-spoken type of conviction about which he did not make a big deal---but to which he appeared genuinely committed.
_____


--Quinn’s Academic Credentials, Personal Travails and Ecclesiastical Persecution, Starting with His Excommunication for Telling the Truth About Post-Manifesto Polygamy--

What is all the more amazing about Mike's deep-rooted faith in the LDS Church is that his devotion to the basic claims of Mormonism has remained strong through the years, despite all that he has been through--often at the hands of the Mormon Church itself.

At the peak of his professional career, Mike was a highly-regarded expert in his chosen field of history, both in out and of the Church.

Sandra and Jerald Tanner have reviewed his stellar academic career as follows:

”Dr. D. Michael Quinn, who was excommunicated from the Mormon Church in 1993, was at one time considered to be one of the Church's top scholars. He published articles for the Church's official publication, the ‘Ensign’ and also wrote for ‘Brigham Young University Studies.’

“Quinn obtained a Ph.D. in history at Yale University and was formerly Professor of American Social History at the Church's Brigham Young University. Unfortunately for Quinn, he dug too deeply into the secret documents in the Church Historical Department. Quinn was able to see these documents because he had an inside track at the Historical Department under Dr. Leonard Arrington, who was formerly Church Historian.

“In a speech Quinn gave in 1981, he noted that he had ‘spent a decade probing thousands of manuscript diaries and records of Church history’ that he ‘never dreamed’ he would view. (“On Being a Mormon Historian,” a lecture given by D. Michael Quinn, Brigham Young University, Fall 1981)

“When Dr. Quinn began publishing some of his more critical research--especially that regarding how the Church secretly sanctioned the practice of polygamy after the Manifesto--some Church leaders were incensed. In the book, "Faithful History,” edited by George D. Smith, p. 109, Quinn wrote the following:

“’In June 1986 the staff of the Church Historical Department announced it was necessary to sign a form which Elder Packer declared gave the right of pre-publication censorship for any archival research completed before signing the form. I and several others refused to sign the form and have not returned to do research at LDS Church archives since 1986.’

“In 1994, Quinn published his book, ‘The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power.’ This, of course, was very distressing to the leaders of the Church and to many of those associated with Brigham Young University and the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS). Quinn's second volume was published in 1997. It is entitled, “The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power" . . .

“Dean C. Jessee is a scholar who is well known to students of Mormon history. He is currently serving as a research historian in the Joseph Fielding Smith Institute for Church History at Brigham Young University. For many years, however, Jessee worked at the Church Historical Department and had access to a vast number of sensitive documents.

“When Michael Quinn's first volume was published, Jessee expressed concern that Quinn had given too much attention to the 'messy' matters researchers encounter when studying early Mormon history. He also wrote 'that the story he tells is not as free from speculation and faulty interpretation as his bold writing style and abundant source notes would imply.' (‘Journal of Mormon History,’ Fall 1996, pp. 164-165)

“Nevertheless, Dean Jessee acknowledged that Quinn did, in fact, have access to important Church documents and that he did ‘painstaking research.’ Jessee wrote the following in his review:

‘Few historians have been in a better position to study the Mormon past than D. Michael Quinn. With degrees in English and history, including a doctorate at Yale, employment in the LDS Church Historical Department and wide-ranging access to its holdings, a dozen years of teaching history at BYU and painstaking research in seventy-five repositories . . ., Quinn has spent a substantial part of his life studying Mormon history. This book and a second volume to follow are the outgrowth of research that led to a master's thesis, continued through a doctoral program and is the crowning accomplishment of thirty years work. . . .

“’The Mormon Hierarchy’ is a valuable contribution in terms of identifying sources and understanding the groundwork of the organizational structure. . . . While ‘Hierarchy’ has laid important groundwork, the definitive study remains to be written.'

“Over the years Dr. Quinn has often found himself faced with serious problems with Church leaders and officials at Brigham Young University.”


Indeed, it was Mike's daring and ground-breaking research regarding the Mormon Church's deceptive practice of post-Manifesto polygamy (which the Church had strenuously tried to keep hidden from the public) that eventually led to his excommunication.

Mike has written in detail about his fall from Mormon grace, culminating in his exile from the LDS ranks in 1993 on the grounds of apostasy.

In the 1998 edition of his “Early Mormonism and the Magic World View” (p. xiii), Mike summarized what ended up happening to him kneeling before the ecclesiastical executioner's chopping block:

"At the publication of ‘Early Mormonism and the Magic World View,' I was full professor and director of the graduate history program at BYU. I resigned within several months because of administrative pressures against my continuing to work on controversial topics. In 1993 LDS officials formally charged me with 'apostasy' (heresy) for my historical writings, and I was excommunicated from the LDS Church.”


Mike had earlier, and more extensively, detailed the increasing pattern of mistreatment, disrespect, lack of cooperation and growing pressures on him to remain quiet on certain controversial topics of Mormon history--all of which were coming at him from the highest ranks of the Church.

After tape recordings and transcriptions of Mike's talk, "On Being a Mormon Historian," began to be published and circulated without his permission, national attention to Quinn's views was heightened by a February 1982 issue of “Newsweek,” headlined "Apostles vs. Historians."

From that point forward, the Mormon squeeze play on Mike began in earnest.

Of that, Mike wrote:

"A few days [after publication of the 'Newsweek' article], a General Authority invited me to his office. He warned me that he found Elder Packer to be easily offended and vindictive years afterward.

"In May [1982], my stake presidency informed me that five former bishops had recommended me to be the ward's new bishop but that Apostle Mark E. Petersen had blocked the appointment. He asked the stake presidency, 'Why is Michael Quinn in league with anti-Mormonism,' apparently referring to the unauthorized publication of my essay by the Tanners.

"Elder Petersen arranged for the Stake Presidency to bring me to the Church Administration Building at 47 East South Temple to meet with Apostles Petersen, Benson and Packer. The Second Counselor in the Stake Presidency accompanied me. The Apostles were careful not to ask me a single direct question. In order of seniority (Apostle Benson first, me last), each of us expressed his own views of the 'Newsweek' article, the 'problems' of writing Mormon history and the effects of all this on the faith of LDS members. The meeting was congenial and supportive."

That seeming support was to eventually evaporate, as those same three Apostles began a deliberate and on-going campaign to have Mike discredited, isolated and deposed, despite the fact that Mike had proven himself to be a highly regarded researcher and acclaimed educator.

As Mike noted:

"In the spring of 1986, graduating history majors at BYU voted me 'outstanding professor.' That fall BYU's administration had my name dropped from a list of participants in an upcoming celebration of Mormonism in Britain. Then, for the second year in a row, BYU's administration denied my application for 'Professional Development Leave.' This time the college dean invited me to his office to explain why. He said the Apostles on the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees had prepared a list of faculty members and research topics which BYU administrators were forbidden to support. 'I have always hoped that one day BYU will become a real university,' the dean said, 'but this makes me feel that that day will never arrive.'

"By January 1987 pressures on me increased. BYU's administration required the History Department and Charles Redd Center for the American West to withdraw funds they had promised me to give a paper on general American religion at the University of Paris. It did not matter that the advanced text of the paper, entitled 'Religion, Rationalism and Folk Practices in America to the mid-19th Century,' made no reference to Mormonism. I paid my own way to France to represent BYU.

"Despite all that that had happened, until January 1987 I could not yet believe that my life's hopes were at an end. A new department chair let me know that my situation would improve only if I stopped doing research which implied Mormon studies. . . . Abandoning Mormon history may have been safe in the climate of repression but it as unacceptable to me, especially as an option of duress. 'Publish or perish' is the experience of scholars at most universities, but for this Mormon historian it was 'publish and perish' at BYU.

"After publication of my ‘Early Mormonism and the Magic World View’ in mid-1987, two members of BYU's History Department circulated the rumor that my stake High Council was excommunicating me for apostasy. The rumor was completely false but, more important, I had thought these rumor-mongers were my colleagues and friends. When a student asked the Dean of Religious Education if BYU was going to fire me, he replied that the Board of Trustees had decided against it. 'Like stirring up a turd on the ground,' he told the student, “firing Mike Quinn would only make a greater stink.” At this point, I began applying for research fellowships that would allow me to leave BYU. . . .

"On 20 January 1988, I wrote a letter of resignation . . . At the time of my resignation, I had tenure ('continuing status'), was Full-Professor of History and was Director of the History Department's graduate program. My letter of resignation represented my formal acknowledgment of failure--personal and institutional. . . .

"I again addressed [the issue of academic freedom] in 1991 after a rarely-used joint declaration by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles condemned the annual Sunstone Symposium . . . . Those who questioned this statement were being summarily dropped from Church positions and both Church and BYU administrative pressure was directed against a junior professor of anthropology at BYU who had given a symposium paper. I observed in a newspaper story; 'Consistently, from the beginning, the [LDS] Church leadership has always been uncomfortable with open forums that have been organized by the rank and file.' However, I added, 'in the 19th-century, the leadership recognized the existence of a loyal opposition and the 20th does not.'. . .

"Since leaving BYU and Utah, I have been an independent free-lance writer. I still do Mormon history. People of various persuasions still seem eager for it."

(D. Michael Quinn, "On Being a Mormon Historian (and Its Aftermath)," in George D. Smith, ed., “Faithful History: Essays on Writing Mormon History” [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1992], pp. 89-90, 92-96)
_____


--Years Later Amongst the Quorum of the Twelve: Babbling Baloney About History and Bubbling Bitterness Over Quinn--

Additional sordid details behind the excommunication of Mike Quinn seeped out some eight years after his post-Manifesto essay was first published.

These facts were provided by two of the Mormon Church's highest henchmen--“Apostle-ologists” Neal A. Maxwell and Dallin H. Oaks.

On 9 September 1993, I met with Oaks and Maxwell in Maxwell's Church office, #303, located in the Church Administration Building in downtown Salt Lake City.

I had approached them with a list of detailed and wide-ranging questions about fundamental doctrines, teachings, practices and policies of the Mormon Church that significantly troubled us--and about which we felt we deserved credible and straight-forward answers.

In the broad sense on the polygamy question, I wanted to know from these pre-eminent damage controllers why the Mormon Church had not been more forthcoming and honest with its history with regard to the official practice (and later blatant denial of) polygamy.

Then, specifically, I wanted to know about what I have come to refer to as “the mystery of history, and those who tell the truth about polygamy--without permission."

In that meeting, “good cop” Maxwell offered unconvincing rationalizations for the Mormon Church’s failure to be honest and forthcoming about its practice of polygamy.

“Bad cop” Oaks followed up by launching a shockingly shabby attack on Mike's personal integrity.
_____


--Maxwell's Murky Meanderings--

In answer to the larger inquiry, Maxwell cagily replied by noting that the process of writing history is frustrating, complex and incomplete.

He handed me a photocopy of a sermon. (The copy turned out, I discovered later, to be a talk Maxwell himself had delivered during the 1984 October General Conference entitled, “Out of Obscurity.” However, the single sheet excerpts that he handed to us contained no title or author, although it had been marked up in red ink for our benefit. Maxwell’s address ultimately appeared in the General Conference issue of the "Ensign," 10, November 1984, p. 11).

Quoting from a "Tribute to Neville Chamberlain," delivered in the British House of Commons, 12 November 1940, Maxwell’s sermon declared:

"History with its flickering lamp stumbles along the trail of the past, trying to reconstruct its scenes, to revive its echoes, and kindle with pale gleams the passion of former days."

The sermon then addressed what Maxwell verbally described to us as the definition of history: a collection, he said, of "floating mosaic tiles":

"The finished mosaic of the history of the Restoration will be larger and more varied as more pieces of tile emerge, adjusting a sequence here or enlarging there a sector of our understanding.

"The fundamental outline is in place now, however. But history deals with imperfect people in process of time, whose imperfections produce refractions as the pure light of the gospel plays upon them. There may even be a few pieces of tile which, for the moment, do not seem to fit . . .

"So, belatedly, the fullness of the history of the dispensation of the fullness of times will be written.

"The final mosaic of the Restoration will be resplendent, reflecting divine design and the same centerpiece—the Father's plan of salvation and exaltation and the atonement of His Son, Jesus Christ."


What Maxwell’s excuses lacked in clarity, Oaks’ made up for in character assassination.
_____


--Oaks’ Vindictive Personal Attacks Against Quinn for Writing and Publishing the Truth About Post-Manifesto Polygamy--

In my meeting with Oaks and Maxwell, Oaks was incensed at Mike's decision to air his findings on post-Manifesto polygamy and told me that Mike was an individual without character who could not be trusted. He angrily complained about Mike’s decision to publish the incontrovertible evidence that, despite its claims to the contrary, the LDS Church had secretly and dishonestly sanctioned and solemnized post-Manifesto polygamous marriages.

That publication (in the Spring 1985 issue of "Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought”) led directly to Mike’s excommunication on grounds of supposed “apostasy.”

But it wasn’t as if Mike hadn’t previously been upfront with Mormon Church officials about his post-Manifesto research and his intentions to air it.

Mike explained in his article, "On Being a Mormon Historian (and Its Aftermath)," how his investigations into post-Manifesto polygamy took form, despite a decided lack of cooperation from the highest levels of the Mormon Church:

"President Hinckley telephoned in June 1982 to say that he was sympathetic about a request I had written to obtain access to documents in the First Presidency fault [about post-Manifesto polygamy] but that my request could not be granted. Since I now knew all I ever would about post-Manifesto polygamy, I told him I would go ahead and publish the most detailed and supportive study I could of the topic. President Hinckley said the decision was up to me, that he had done what he could to help."

(Quinn, "On Being A Mormon Historian (and Its Aftermath)," in Smith, “Faithful History: Essays on Writing Mormon History,” p. 90)

Oaks’ fussing and fuming aside, Mike’s published findings stand unparalleled and unquestioned in terms of their depth, scope and accuracy.

Mike himself explained the post-Manifesto reasons for his excommunication in his article, “On Being a Mormon Historian (and its Aftermath)”:

“In 1985, after 'Dialogue' published my article ‘LDS Church Authority and New Plural Marriages, 1890 - 1904’, three apostles [Boyd K. Packer, Mark E. Petersen and Ezra Taft Benson] gave orders for my Stake President to confiscate my temple recommend. Six years earlier, I had formally notified the First Presidency and the Managing Director of the Church Historical Department about my research on post-Manifesto polygamy and my intention to publish it . . . Now I was told that three apostles believed I was guilty of ‘speaking evil of the Lord's anointed.’ The Stake President was also told to ‘take further action’ against me if this did not ‘remedy the situation’ of my writing controversial Mormon history. . . .

"I told my Stake President that this was an obvious effort to intimidate me from doing history that might ‘offend the Brethren’ (to use Ezra Taft Benson’s phrase). . . . The Stake President also saw this as a back-door effort to have me fired from BYU. . . .

“At various stake and regional meetings, Apostle Packer began publicly referring to ‘a BYU historian who is writing about polygamy to embarrass the Church.’ At firesides in Utah and California, a member of BYU’s Religious Education Department referred to me as ‘the anti-Christ of BYU.’ . . . Church leaders today seem to regard my post-Manifesto polygamy article . . . as ‘speaking evil of the Lord’s anointed’ because they themselves regard certain acts and words of those earlier Church leaders as embarrassing, if not actually wrong. I do not regard it as disloyal to conscientiously recreate the words, acts and circumstances of earlier prophets and apostles. . . . .

“No one ever gave me an ultimatum or threatened to fire me from Brigham Young University. However, University administrators and I were both on the losing side of a war of attrition mandated by the General Authorities. . . .

“On 20 January 1988, I wrote a letter of resignation, effective at the end of the current school semester. . . . I explained [that] ‘the situation seems to be that academic freedom merely survives at BYU without fundamental support by the institution, exists against tremendous pressure and is nurtured only through the dedication of individual administrators and faculty members.’ . . .

“Three months after my departure, it angered me to learn to learn that BYU had fired a Hebrew professor for his private views on the historicity of the Book of Mormon. Although I personally regard the Book of Mormon as ancient history and sacred text, I told an inquiring newspaper reporter: ‘BYU officials have said that Harvard should aspire to become the BYU of the East. That’s like saying the Mayo Clinic should aspire to be Auschwitz. BYU is an Auschwitz of the mind.’ . . .

“When BYU’s Associate Academic Vice-President asked me if that was an accurate quote, I confirmed that it was. ‘Academic freedom exists at BYU only for what is considered non-controversial by the University’s Board of Trustees [meaning the Quorum of the Twelve] and administrators,’ I wrote. ‘By those definitions, academic freedom has always existed at Soviet universities (even during the Stalin era). . . .

“It is . . . my conviction that God desires everyone to enjoy freedom of inquiry and expression without fear, obstruction or intimidation. I find it one of the fundamental ironies of modern Mormonism that the General Authorities, who praise free agency, also do their best to limit free agency's prerequisites--access to information, uninhibited inquiry and freedom of expression.”

(Quinn, D. Michael. “On Being a Mormon Historian (And Its Aftermath).” In Smith, George D., ed., "Faithful History: Essays on Writing Mormon History" [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1992], pp. 91-95).


Oaks acknowledged that he had read Mike's article on post-Manifesto polygamy, covering the period from 1890 into the early 20th century.

Oaks also confessed that the Mormon Church had not, in fact, been honest about its practice of polygamy during that time. He admitted that the case, as laid out by Quinn, was, in fact, true. Oaks admitted that, in his opinion, lies had indeed been told by Mormon Church leaders about the continuing practice of polygamy after it supposedly was ended by the Manifesto of 1890.

But enough of admitting "divinely-inspired" Church wrongdoing.

Oaks then proceeded to attack Mike personally by accusing him of breaking his word.

Oaks said that Mike had been given access to all of J. Reuben Clark's papers for the purpose of writing a book on Clark's years of Church service. Oaks said he had assured the Church that Quinn was credible, in order that Quinn could be given access to those records. Oaks noted that shortly after Quinn's research was published on Clark, out came Quinn's article on post-Manifesto polygamy.

Mike, Oaks told me angrily, had violated Oaks' confidence. He accused Quinn of having taken more information out of Church archives than he had been given permission to examine and research, going in.

Oaks said that Mike was not an innocent victim in this affair. Oaks informed me that he subsequently wrote Mike a letter, in which he expressed his "deep disappointment" with him, telling Mike he had exceeded the limits of their original understanding.

In that letter, Oaks further said, he told Mike that he now regarded him as someone who could not be trusted. Oaks added that Mike would not tell us about these things, if asked, because of Mike's involvement.

On that last point, I wanted to see for myself.

In August 2001, in a personal visit with Mike at a gathering in Fort Worden, Washington, hosted by a group of gay Mormon fathers (where I and my former spouse had been invited to speak about both her and my personal experiences attendant to voluntarily resigning our Mormon Church membership), I recounted to Mike Oaks' version of events and asked him for his own recollections.

When I informed Mike that Oaks had accused him of breaking an agreement regarding the parameters of subject searching through Mormon Church archives for research purposes, Mike was Visibly agitated. However, in a controlled and quiet voice, he emphatically denied that he had violated any research agreement with the Church Historical Department.

He told me that it was clearly understood going in that he had open access to archival materials. (He also had told me that he taken thousands of pages of handwritten notes while in the Church Archives doing his research).

That made no difference, of course, to the Mormon Church henchmen in its hierarchy who were bound and determined to banish Mike for speaking the embarrassing truth about its lies and deceptions.

Mike was thus branded as an apostate and given the boot.

Not coincidentally, Mike’s stake president prior to his banishment darkly hinted that he was also being investigated on "moral" charges (relating, no doubt, to Mike's open and honest acknowledgement of being gay).

The suffering that Mike experienced in the face of such personal attacks must have been horrible.

But through it all, Mike remained quietly courageous and true to self. I remember being in his Salt Lake City apartment, where I had gone to visit him. In his bedroom, above his bed and which he allowed me to see, in large letters affixed to the wall was the phrase, “Sin is in the eye of the beholder.”

It was clear that, in that bold statement alone, Mike wasn’t about to let anyone else tell him who he was or what he should do with his life.

Several years later at that conference put on by gay Mormon fathers, I listened as Mike began a stem-to-stern presentation on the world history of homosexuality.

At least he tried to give it.

In an extraordinary presentation that was some two hours in length, Mike took the audience on a review of gay global history--covering the vast territory of its accomplishments and tribulations. A stickler for the minutest of detail, Mike read from his prepared text, page by page. Unfortunately, time constraints only allowed him to give his panoramic presentation up to the early part of the 1800s. The lesson: Mike knows his stuff--and is stuffed with plenty that there is to know. He is a proud gay man who appreciates, honors and defends the historical contributions of gays to the advancement of human civilization.

Try telling that, however, to the Mormon Church.

As far as it was concerned, the fix was in. Ecclesiastically speaking, Mike was a dead man.
_____


--Quinn’s Phone Tapped--

Mike told me that his apartment phone was tapped (most likely, he thought, by Mormon Church security), and that, moreover, he was able to verify the power drain on his telephone line (indicating a deliberate intrusion) through the use of special phone equipment. He said that the likelihood of the drain actually being a tap was supported by employees at the local SLC phone company.
_____


--Quinn Targeted with Death Threats--

Mike has also received death threats from both Mormons and “anti-Mormons,” alike.

On the first, the Tanners explain:

”Around the time of his excommunication he was informed of a threat against his life. While Quinn did not link this threat with the Mormon Church itself, he believed that the rhetoric regarding his work had encouraged someone to threaten his life.”

As to receiving death threats from opponents of Mormonism, Mike himself noted, in his “On Being a Mormon Historian” lecture, the irony of being perceived as an enemy of the Mormon Church by the very Mormon Church leaders he continues to support and sustain as his religious leaders:

”The central argument of the enemies of the LDS Church is historical, and if we seek to build the Kingdom of God by ignoring or denying the problem areas of our past, we are leaving the Saints unprotected. As one who has received death threats from anti-Mormons because they perceive me as an enemy historian, it is discouraging to be regarded as subversive by men I sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators.”
_____


--The Break-up of Quinn’s Marriage and the Shocking Death of His Son--

Mike’s heterosexual marriage of many years eventually ended in divorce.

Piling pain upon pain, his teenage son committed suicide by hanging himself in one of Salt Lake City's surrounding canyons.

I remember when I first heard the shocking news that Mike’s son had died.

The report had been broadcast on local Salt Lake news, with details that were especially tragic: Mike's boy had been found hanging from a tree in one of the canyons surrounding Salt Lake City.

Unbeknownst to me at the time I first heard about the news and mistakenly believing that the media was reporting the young man's death as having just occurred, I immediately phoned Mike, expressing my shock and condolences and asking him if he was aware of what was being reported.

Mike was very measured and soft spoken in his response.

He informed me that his son had, in fact, taken his own life a few days earlier. Mike did not go into any of the details surrounding his child's demise and I did not ask.

Mike reacted as I have always known Mike to respond during times of personal adversity, hardship, trial and disappointment: He manifested a strong sense of inner strength and outer resoluteness, combined with a quiet acceptance of the disappointments and challenges that life had dealt him.

Although it would have been perfectly understandable had he broken down and cried during our conversation, Mike remained steady in his demeanor and spoke in a clear (albeit subdued) voice.

Whatever one may think of his personal religious beliefs, Mike is an individual of deep conviction, with a strong sense of self, and a person of unquestionable honesty, integrity and courage.

During those horribly sad moments in the wake of his son's untimely and tragic death, Mike was a personal portrait of dignity, calmness, steadiness and peace.

Once again, under the weight of enormous personal pain and grief, Mike showed himself to be a very good man.
_____


--Quinn’s Professional Career Spirals Down--

Following his excommunication, Mike's professional career took a nose dive.

Mike told me that he had been attempting to make some money as a portrait photographer. In fact, Mike does beautiful black-and-white photography work. He advertised in the local Salt Lake papers and, as I witnessed myself, the walls of his apartment were adorned with some of his more impressive work.

Still, as the years passed, Mike found himself unemployed and, in most cases, without the necessary grants funding to continue his historical research. He was fortunate, however, to eventually land a temporary job working in his alma mater’s library at Yale and subsequently was told he had received some continuing financial support to do research on gay issues at Huntington Library in California.

At one point, Mike moved to Mexico to live with a friend. He also lived under trying conditions in San Francisco’s Chinatown In some of his most dire circumstances, he was living day-to-day, hand-to-mouth. Eventually, destitute, he moved in with his mother.
_____


--Quinn Is Not a Quitter—and Refuses to Quit His Church--

Through all the pain, tragedies, misfortunes and injustices in his life, Mike has remained steadfast and even-keeled in his personal faith. He has fervently maintained his testimony in what he believes to be the truthfulness of the Mormon Church--a Church which in its depraved and destructive state has persecuted and maligned him--remains firm.

Despite his agonizing personal and professional expeiences, Mike has maintained his committment to what he believes to be the truthfulness of the Mormon Church. This bespeaks a personal devotion greater than any hoped-for call to Mormon apostleship. At this point in his life, Kimball's promise to Mike in that regard seems, shall we say, a tad out of reach.

Nevertheless, Mike's sincere belief in the LDS Church--a Church which in its depraved and destructive state has persecuted and maligned him--remains firm.

I genuinely do not understand that personal arrival point for Mike Quinn, but I say more power to him. Despite our differences, I know him to be a decent, honorable guy.



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2011 04:09PM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: PapaKen ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 02:10AM

Well, maybe....

Naw.

Although....

Who knows?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: The Investigator ( )
Date: March 14, 2015 09:02PM

I can appreciate Dr. Quinn's retention of faith in the original tenets of the founding of the LDS church, but given all that he himself has helped bring into the light, it is a complete enigma why he remains determined to cling to the Mormon fallacy.

President Eldon Tanner once said: "No matter how sincere one’s belief may be in an error, it will not change the error into truth." Given the myriad errors that Dr. Quinn and others have exposed, it would take an eternity to find even a modicum of truth in anything 'revealed' by Joseph Smith and those that followed.

I began life as a Catholic and learned nothing. I converted to the LDS church and discovered the Bible. I walked away in 1986 and found Jesus. Frankly, I don't regret any of these steps, as I believe they were all necessary and essential for me. However, I have never stopped being an 'investigator' of the Mormon faith, and am determined to share with others what that investigation has revealed. A hearty thanks to Dr. Quinn for lending me a significant hand in this ministry.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Phazer ( )
Date: December 23, 2015 10:22AM

New Order Mormon or not, seems delusional to me and the belief and faith is no different than people who have faith that their religious flavor happens to be the better path.

The "God" concept has been the human method to explain what they did not know at any given time. There are yet still many un-explainable things and people default to a God or creator as the answer to the unknown.


When you take God or the creator out of the equation, on those quiet nights of deep though and reflection and how today's human's could evolve into what they are the first quesiton that will remain unsolvable is this:

Every person was a baby once. Helpless and needy. At what point 10s of million of years ago did a mammal be able to survive, thrive and live as a born baby with no parents to care for that baby?

How was the baby birth process and infant survival duplicated 1000s of times in order to create the population of the early world?


There may not be a creator or a God but perhaps we are aliens from some other world OR Earth was seeded by something else.

A baby can't survive today without a guardian or a parent. How did babies from 10s of millions of years ago survive when more modern babies cannot?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: GNPE ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 01:47AM

I hope his next book which u mention brings him some measure of satisfaction and perhaps greater financial & psychological security 'happiness' in the greatest range.

I'm not only afraid & concerned for him, but also for others, Mormons & ex-mormons & others/anyone who tells the truth.

I also hope that he sees the entirety of his life, career & personal... as worthwhile, contributing to those he has reached.

Godspeed, Michael Quinn;
Here's to Better Times...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: americangirl406 ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 04:11AM

I've wondered that too! My grandpa asked me to research his reasons for still believing in the church even with the evidence against it, because then perhaps I could still believe as well! But this goes beyond all rational thought to me. More power to him I guess!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Jeff Walsh ( )
Date: August 20, 2012 04:10AM

Has anyone thought to question D Michael Quinn's motives in his attacks against the Church he says he still believes in?

I read the open letter to Quinn sent by Fred C Collier which paints a very different picture and if true would open up a whole different side to his character.

I do notice that he is a director of Signature Books who turn out to be publishers of many of the anti-mormon books which enemies of the Church very eagerly buy, is this now his main source of income seeing that he is virtually unemployable?
Jeff Walsh

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: topped ( )
Date: September 04, 2013 06:55PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: INONOT ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 04:47AM

Thank you very much for your post, Steve. It's very thorough and I appreciate it! It's so much more information than I hoped I might get to help me understand him.

I can hardly wait for his next book on the finances of the Church. How timely that book will be, and it should be a big seller to Mo's, exMo's and neverMo's. Tell him to watch his back while writing it, and to protect his documentation. Finances are the SECRET priority of the Church. He's treading on sacred ground. They might start watching him closely.

He's a great man in my book ...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Redwing ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 08:45AM

Wow, Steve. Very informative & thorough post - thank you.

Reading Michael's absolute faith in Kimball's blessing, struck home to me. In 1994, we had a 19 yr. old son dying of lymphoma. A GA came & gave him a blessing, in which our son was promised that if he went back to the doctor for more chemo, he would be healed in this life. We put total, blind faith in that blessing, hoping for a miracle. Our son would ask me, when is my blessing going to kick in? When will I get well? Long story short, he continued to decline in health till he passed away in the spring of '95.

The reason I am writing this story, is because of the blind, stubborn 'faith' we thought we had to have, in order for that blessing to come to pass. Perhaps Michael is doing the same thing - hoping against hope that the blessing Kimball gave him will come to pass. Maybe he is tenaciously clinging to that false hope, wondering when & how the blessing will come to pass. That might explain how he can remain 'faithful' in spite of all his damning research to the contrary.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Skeptical ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 09:24AM

Michael Quinn has been an enigma to me and other ex-Mormons. He is completely aware, perhaps more than any other person, of the historical problems facing the LDS church's foundational claims, he is gay; and he has been mistreated by the LDS church, yet he professes belief.

Listening to the podcast on Mormonstories,org helped me better understand.

First, Quinn does not believe that the LDS church is what is proclaims itself to be: "the one and only true church on the face of the earth."

Also, in my opinion, Quinn identifies strongly with Joseph Smith, who Quinn identifies as his first Mormon hero, although a flawed hero.

Quinn believes that Smith was personally chosen by God to be a prophet, and despite Smith's personal flaws, continued in his prophetic call. Quinn speaks of Smith being a bad husband, yet a prophet.

I wonder if Quinn's adoration of Smith helps him cope with his failed marriage, and his being homosexual, despite having been told by Kimball that he would be an apostle. In Smith, Quinn must find a kindred sole and someone who helps it feel safe.

Just my thoughts.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: introvertedme ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 01:41PM

I saw a book by Mr. Quinn in the library the other day - I picked it up, interested in what he had to say, but put it back when I saw how committed he remained to fundamental beliefs of the church. I was intrigued, maybe dismayed, at finding this out - I hear he's an outstanding researcher and writer, but I don't want to read material that condones the church in any way any more. Thanks, Steve, for that very enlightening post - it gives me much to think about. I appreciate you taking the time to put that together.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: squeebee ( )
Date: September 04, 2013 07:31PM

Oh I would read it anyway. Regardless of his personal beliefs his books are still phenominal.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Charlie ( )
Date: September 22, 2011 02:05PM

Personally I can understand Michael's reluctance to drop belief in what he feels was / is a witness of the holy spirit.

This was / is probably the hardest part of my recovery. The realization of my self-delusion in all matters restoration has shaken and continues to shake my existance just about every day. I keep trying to find something that I can hold as TRUE. It just doesn't exist because everything comes down to a "witness" to bridge the gap between historical fact and belief. For example, the facts behind Jesus are no better than the historical facts underlying Joseph's claims. Having lost the ability to trust the "spirit", I am bereft of a "religious" foundation for my life. This leaves me in an uncomfortable state.

When I first removed myself from the LDS sphere as a result of acknowledging my status as a gay man, I made a foundational resolution for my life. "I will do as much good and as little harm as I can." After a subsequent bout with restorationism, I find myself at this point once again. Perhaps for me, this needs to be enough.

I have deep empathy for Michael in his journey. I've always admired his intellect and courage. My deepest concern is that, as a gay man, his adherence to his "witness" probably speaks to a lack of acceptance of himself and could lead go some degree of self loathing. A conflict over accepting one's self a a gay man can lead to unhappiness, unsafe behaviors and even suicide. My hope is that Michael can complete his recovery and find peace by coming out to himself as well as the world.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: misterzelph ( )
Date: September 04, 2013 08:42PM

Thanks Steve for the insight. I've watched the Dehlin interview, in its entirety twice. I knew I liked Mr. Quinn, but I couldn't quite put my finger on some of the reasons why. Your post helped me understand him a bit better. In the Dehlin interview, Quinn does state that faith is a gift, a gift that he's been granted and has not been granted to all--and that he has no quarrel with people like me who don't have the faith he has. I respect him for that.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 04, 2013 08:44PM

That said, Mike's research is phenomenal and indisputable. It is to his credit that he writes such powerful and credible history, despite his faith. :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2013 08:47PM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: misterzelph ( )
Date: September 04, 2013 08:54PM

Yes.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: March 14, 2015 10:22PM

Incredibly interesting and infinitely fascinating.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: liberal mormon ( )
Date: March 15, 2015 03:53AM

I had lunch with Michael a while ago. We had a wonderful and interesting discussion about his beliefs. He described himself as a New Order Mormon.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Phazer ( )
Date: December 23, 2015 10:23AM

I posted above but the new message should been down here.


New Order Mormon or not, seems delusional to me and the belief and faith is no different than people who have faith that their religious flavor happens to be the better path.

The "God" concept has been the human method to explain what they did not know at any given time. There are yet still many un-explainable things and people default to a God or creator as the answer to the unknown.


When you take God or the creator out of the equation, on those quiet nights of deep though and reflection and how today's human's could evolve into what they are the first quesiton that will remain unsolvable is this:

Every person was a baby once. Helpless and needy. At what point 10s of million of years ago did a mammal be able to survive, thrive and live as a born baby with no parents to care for that baby?

How was the baby birth process and infant survival duplicated 1000s of times in order to create the population of the early world?


There may not be a creator or a God but perhaps we are aliens from some other world OR Earth was seeded by something else.

A baby can't survive today without a guardian or a parent. How did babies from 10s of millions of years ago survive when more modern babies cannot?

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 ********   **     **  ********   **     **  ********  
 **     **  **     **  **     **  **     **  **     ** 
 **     **  **     **  **     **  **     **  **     ** 
 ********   *********  **     **  **     **  ********  
 **         **     **  **     **   **   **   **        
 **         **     **  **     **    ** **    **        
 **         **     **  ********      ***     **