130 DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT mean that society is encouraging the expres- enting has much less to do with education sion and the use of narcissistic traits as a than with unconscious processes, particu- means of success (in business, politics and larly the identification with one's own par- the media, as Lasch has claimed), thereby ents. It may be true that corporate mono- making these traits more apparent. liths increase dependency in the population Lasch's villains are bureaucracy, the at large, but even if this is so, it is a long media and advertising, and therapeutic way from saying that they are at the root ideaologies which rob the individual of ini- of an upwelling of narcissistic personality dis- tiative and competence, stimulate an insa- orders. The point is that it is very difficult to tiable craving for goods and thrills to fulfill assess and validate causality for something so an inner emptiness and invade our personal complex as changing patterns of society. life as the media bombards us with anxiety- If one bypasses the question of child- provoking news and as authority figures tell hood etiology — the origin of narcissism — us how to regulate our most intimate rela- and accepts the finding that there is in- tionships. True, the narcissistic personality creased expression and acceptance of nar- is formed in the earliest years by one's par- cissistic behavior in our society, then one ents, but it is a simplified view of humanity can value this work as an excellent attempt to think that a parent's capacity for empa- to help us see ourseleves and our culture. thy, acceptance, and spontaneous emotional It reminds the reader to safeguard proper warmth toward one's child could be com- values, to analyze and change those forces pletely shaped by such outside forces as in our society which contribute to the prob- child guidance books. The process of par- lem of narcissism. Investigating the Investigation Investigating the Book of Mormon Wit- ment is essentially this: the Three Witnesses nesses, by Richard Lloyd Anderson. Salt and some of the Eight Witnesses became Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1981, disaffected in the late 1830s and spent most xv+206 pp. illus. or all of the remainder of their lives out- Reviewed by William D. Russell, chair- side the Church, yet they reaffirmed their person, Division of Social Sciences at testimony regarding the Book of Mormon Graceland College, Lamoni, Iowa. as long as they lived. Their credibility as witnesses is affirmed by evidence showing WITH OVER-GENEROUS PORTIONS of direct that they were well respected in their com- quotations, Richard Lloyd Anderson presents munities, even though those communities the reader with statements made by the wit- were anti-Mormon and their former Mor- nesses to the Book of Mormon, and state- mon connections were known. Anderson ments made by others affirming their good suggests it would have been in their self- character and the sincerity of their testi- interest to renounce their original testimony. mony regarding the gold plates. It is thus Since they did not, he concludes that the encyclopedic in its documentation but there miraculous events they attested to literally is so much repetition in the book that the happened. public might have been better served by a However, all he really demonstrates is journal article. that the witnesses were known by their non- Despite his doctorates in history and Mormon neighbors as honest men and that law, Anderson writes not as a detached his- they reaffirmed their original position to the torian but as a man of faith, with deep end. But it requires a "leap of faith" to reverence for the eleven witnesses. His argu- reach the conclusion Anderson seems to Reviews 131 desire: that the plates actually existed and ney and public servant" (p. 53). But many were the ancient record which the Book of men of honest reputation have committed Mormon claims to be. Alternative explana- fraud. The witnesses' reputation for honesty tions — such as various psychological possi- is supposed to convince us of the truth of bilities — are occasionally mentioned briefly their testimony, but a local lawyer who was but never seriously examined. For example, a politician involved in a scandal is a source he fails to probe possible psychological im- Anderson uses to support Cowdery's trust- plications of the fact that Cowdery, Whit- worthiness (p. 42). Another evidence of mer, and Harris had an "overwhelming Cowdery's public good reputation is his nar- desire" (p. 52) to be among the three wit- row loss in a political campaign in which nesses anticipated to meet the requirements he was attacked for his Mormon back- of Deuteronomy 19:15. The hypnosis hy- ground (p. 44). The conclusion is that he pothesis is brushed aside because persons must have been well respected to have run hypnotized "are normally aware of entering so close to the winner. But we are not given such a process" (p. 188). But he does not the information we need to know whether deal with the possibility that they were not Cowdery really ran well. What was his aware they were hypnotized. party's strength in the district? Was it an All of the departing witnesses had office a Democrat should be expected to nearly a decade of active membership be- win? Did Oliver run ahead of or behind fore leaving the Church. This gave them his colleagues on the Democratic ticket? plenty of time to retell their story on so And how did Cowdery respond to those many occasions to so many people that the who criticized his Mormon past? Ander- testimony would have been embedded in son says Cowdery maintained his testimony their minds and they would not likely throughout his life, but he gives us no evi- change their story later. Anderson makes dence that he affirmed his testimony dur- much of their reputation for honesty, but ing the years he spent as a lawyer-politician the witnesses could hardly fail to realize outside the fellowship of the Church. that to renounce their testimony would As is characteristic of the "faithful his- damage their credibility. Hiram Page recog- torian," sources that support Anderson's nized it would be foolish not to stick by his thesis are given great weight while those story: "As to the Book of Mormon, it would that don't are explained away. For in- be doing injustice to myself, and to the stance, he too easily brushes aside three work of God of the last days, to say that troublesome sources without footnoting I could know a thing to be true in 1830, them or giving the reader sufficient infor- and know the same thing to be false in mation on the circumstances of each to 1847" (p. 129). Thus I cannot agree with make a judgment (pp. 57-61). Without Anderson that it was contrary to their self- footnotes the curious reader will find it interest — once outside the Church — for difficult to pursue the matter. them to stick by their story (p. 83). From The sources Anderson gives greatest the evidence Anderson gives us it appears credence to are the sources that support the they acted in their best interests when out- faith. Regrettably, he does not analyze pos- side the Church: they were not inclined to sible bias in these sources. Statements by create opportunities to affirm their testi- family members are relied upon a great mony, but when asked by others they re- deal and are deemed excellent sources be- affirmed the position they had been pub- cause family members knew the partici- lically committed to for many years. pants well. But is there no problem of bias? With regard to Cowdery, Anderson dis- Anderson relies on George Q. Cannon, who misses the possibility of fraud because such "had a remarkable intellect and a great an explanation is supposedly inconsistent capacity for accurate detail in his personal with his reputation as a "responsible attor- writing" (p. 60). This is the author who, 132 DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT in his biography of Joseph Smith in 1888, a concrete statement of supernatural real- admitted the "paltry things" were left out ity" (p. 53) and "no testimony of direct of his account of "men of God . pure and revelation in the world's history is better holy." (See Marvin S. Hill, "The His- documented than the testimony of the Book toriography of Mormonism," Church His- of Mormon witnesses" (p. 79). tory, Dec. 1959, p. 420). Some statements are simply irrelevant In his zeal for what he regards as the pieties: "The Bible defender can be the truth, Anderson makes such questionable offender, for in jealously guarding his lim- statements as: "All scriptures promise the ited collection of prophets, he often op- Spirit's seal to those who sincerely hear, poses more revelation with a few stock reflect, and pray" (p. 186). "Prophets in- quotes" (p. 187). Regarding the witnesses dependently substantiate other prophets" who left the Church: "This is not to justify (pp. 2-3). "The blunt condemnation of their very real rebellion against priesthood current religions reported by Joseph Smith authority" (p. 128). Cowdery, absent from is a profound mark of credibility when read the church for a decade, would probably by the light of past prophets" (p. 2). "The not have known some "important things average Latter-day Saint who asked Martin revealed in his absence" (p. 185). Simi- Harris about his testimony was not a naive larly, David Whitmer's rejection of later believer who openly or subtly asked for Mormon doctrinal developments is de- mere confirmation" (p.