Paul H Dunn - Lynn Packer

[DBMormon]

The unusual twist in the Paul Dunn saga is that the person who was most punished for Dunn's falsehoods was not Dunn but Lynn Packer, the Mormon professor at Brigham Young University who did the research and uncovered the problems with Dunn's tales.

When rumors of Packer's findings first surfaced, the LDS Church began its own investigation and immediately placed Dunn -- a general authority since 1964 and one of the top 100 leaders of the Church -- on emeritus status for "health reasons." However, Dunn was never publicly reprimanded neither has the Church admitted that his stories were not true.

Researcher Lynn Parker did not get off so easily. "At the same time [that they placed Dunn on emeritus status], however, the university [bYU] terminated Packer's teaching contract, in part because he wanted to publish a story about his findings. Gordon Whiting, then chairman of the BYU communications department, had warned Packer in a memo that `publication of the Paul Dunn article will damage the church, will damage the university, will damage the department and will damage you'" (ibid).

When Parker, himself a Mormon, decided to release his four years of research to The Arizona Republic in spite of the threats, his contract was terminated and he lost his job. Whiting explained that Parker violated, "church and university policies that prohibit public criticism if church leaders, even if the criticism is true. (ibid, emphasis mine). Mormon leader Dunn was not reprimanded for altering the facts, but Parker was fired simply for showing that these stories were not true

quote is from a critical source though the essential facts seem correct.

I am familiar with Elder Dunn and his "stories" but was unaware of the termination of Lynn Packer, the person responsible for discovering Elder Dunn's Fabrications.

I am curious how others here view the termination of Lynn Packer and how Lynn Packer might have handled the situation better and yet still stood for truth and honesty without being terminated?

Edited August 15, 2012 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

no takers thus far... I never know what to make of a post I create that I feel includes a good question and the first 30 viewers don't want to or don't care to share their insight.... I always resort to thinking the post shows my ignorance or no one wants to touch it with a 10' pole.

[ERayR]

Gordon Whiting, then chairman of the BYU communications department, had warned Packer in a memo that `publication of the Paul Dunn article will damage the church, will damage the university, will damage the department and will damage you'" (ibid).

Not an unusual approach. Any organization I know, public, private, businesses or religious organizations, likes to handle such thing privately. So it was not an unusual request. When someone is working for an organization it is a common expectation that as long as they are on the payroll there is an expectation of loyalty. What possible motive could Packer have for doing so. All the ones I can imagine do not speak well for Packer, either he wanted to intentionally harm the church or he was looking for self aggrandizement. If he wanted to publish the very least he could have done is to have enough integrity to quit first. Even then he would be taking research paid for by BYU to use for his own purposes. Packer did his part it was beyond the scope of his authority to reprimand Dunn and he knew it.

That is my take on it.

[ERayR]

no takers thus far... I never know what to make of a post I create that I feel includes a good question and the first 30 viewers don't want to or don't care to share their insight.... I always resort to thinking the post shows my ignorance or no one wants to touch it with a 10' pole.

What is your motive for bringing it up here? Are you thinking it is a good way to give the church a black eye?

[DBMormon]

ERAYR - That was my feelings.... that his job was to tell the church and then let them handle it their way assuming their way meant his discontinuing the dishonesty and some repentance. What if Elder Dunn was permitted to continue the story telling, then does Lynn Packer have a moral responsibility to take it further?

Edited August 16, 2012 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

no, not at all ERAYR - that seems presumptious. Not the case.... this site is about discussing tough issues and this board is apoligetic by nature, thought this question would provoke discussion and help others see the church's response was the appropriate one.

Though not a critic (at least not at the moment) it seems any time a tough question is brought up, someone jumps to the front of the line to degrade and mock the poster.... this thread it was you.

[Scott Lloyd]

quote is from a critical source though the essential facts seem correct.

I am familiar with Elder Dunn and his "stories" but was unaware of the termination of Lynn Packer, the person responsible for discovering Elder Dunn's Fabrications.

I am curious how others here view the termination of Lynn Packer and how Lynn Packer might have handled the situation better and yet still stood for truth and honesty without being terminated?

At the very least, your source is extremely outdated. Elder Dunn was indeed eventually disciplined and, as part of the repentance process, made a public acknowledgment of wrongdoing. That admission was published in the Church News.

Moreover, your source (assuming you have copied it correctly) is inaccurate, in that it repeatedly gives Lynn Packer's last name as "Parker."

And why are you dredging this thing up now? It is several decades old.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[DBMormon]

^{I joined the church in 97' only knew the basic facts of Elder Dunn's issue, never took time to read the in and out of the events! Is it bad to learn new things about stuff that happened long ago? Is it bad to bring up past events? Am I permitted to ask questions or did new rules come out banning it.}

^{I took no position with the question and even affirmed the faithful answer in my followup..... This is why I see no possibility of apoligist and critics of ever having a meaningful discussion... No one can say two words here without someone jumping on their back and down their throat}

Edited August 16, 2012 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

_{by the way. me and another guy were at church and Paul H Dunn was mentioned, we googled it. It was on the first page of results and it was clicked.... you guys have to cut me a little slack and not always be looking for a fight... when was the last time I was confrontational before me getting that way on this thread?}

Edited August 16, 2012 by DBMormon

[Scott Lloyd]

_{by the way. me and another guy were at church and Paul H Dunn was mentioned, we googled it. It was on the first page of results and it was clicked.... you guys have to cut me a little slack and not always be looking for a fight... when was the last time I was confrontational before me getting that way on this thread?}

My action here was not in criticism of you but of your source of information. As you presented it here, it seemed not to take cognizance of the the punishment meted out to Elder Dunn, very heavy, as it amounted to his further public humiliation by entailing his censure and his confession in a large, general circulation newspaper.

And when a source repeatedly misspells someone's name, it impacts negatively on that source's credibility.

My question to you was in earnest. I really did wonder why you are dredging up this matter now, so long after the fact.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[ERayR]

no, not at all ERAYR - that seems presumptious. Not the case.... this site is about discussing tough issues and this board is apoligetic by nature, thought this question would provoke discussion and help others see the church's response was the appropriate one.

Though not a critic (at least not at the moment) it seems any time a tough question is brought up, someone jumps to the front of the line to degrade and mock the poster.... this thread it was you.

Wasn't degrading you at all. Just wanted to know your motives.

[ERayR]

^{I joined the church in 97' only knew the basic facts of Elder Dunn's issue, never took time to read the in and out of the events! Is it bad to learn new things about stuff that happened long ago? Is it bad to bring up past events? Am I permitted to ask questions or did new rules come out banning it.}

^{I took no position with the question and even affirmed the faithful answer in my followup..... This is why I see no possibility of apoligist and critics of ever having a meaningful discussion... No one can say two words here without someone jumping on their back and down their throat}

This site is a lighting rod for those whose intentions are less than honorable. We just kind of like to know up front where you come from.

[Scott Lloyd]

By the way, DBMormon, is there a reason why you have not identified the source of the quote in your opening post?

[David T]

At the very least, your source is extremely outdated. Elder Packer was indeed eventually disciplined and, as part of the repentance process, made a public acknowledgment of wrongdoing. That admission was published in the Church News.

I assume you mean Elder Dunn, and not Elder Packer...

[DBMormon]

I said it came from a critical source. By the time I had copied and pasted it, I had deleted the page out and did not want to take the time to re-locate it and do that.

[CASteinman]

I would have canned him instantly.

[wenglund]

no takers thus far...

Well...that is quite a shocker given the timeliness and unquestionable significance of the issue.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[DBMormon]

I would have canned him instantly.

Me or elder Dunn or Lynn Packer?

[wayfarer]

DBMormon, I'm glad you brought it up.

I came to know Paul Dunn personally, and by the time I went on my mission, I owned every book he ever wrote. He was a master storyteller -- fables, as it turned out, but still, stories that really motivated me and a host of others of my age group.

If you ever met him in the real person, in the 70s, you would have met one of the most motivating, inspiring people i have ever met personally. He had a way of speaking and writing that spoke truth to the very soul.

I saw him again right about the time he was "outed" by Lynn Packer. He was a broken man. All the good he had done, all the wonderfully motivating stories, all of us who ate up his words -- all destroyed. he was humiliated, and with him, a massive amount of good works.

I know that this is unpopular on an apologetic board, but I see Paul Dunn as a man like Joseph Smith. Joseph had serious issues with honesty, yet to meet the man, according to accounts, was to meet someone who had presence, who could motivate, who could be a prophet of god and help others find the Way. We honor the prophet, and hide his mistakes and his inconvenient foibles. Paul Dunn had no such luck.

To out someone in this way, while being 'honest' in one level, is the magnitude of cruelty to everyone involved. My heart aches for the man Paul Dunn was before he was destroyed. What was the point of destroying him?

Edited August 16, 2012 by wayfarer

[ERayR]

ERAYR - That was my feelings.... that his job was to tell the church and then let them handle it their way assuming their way meant his discontinuing the dishonesty and some repentance. What if Elder Dunn was permitted to continue the story telling, then does Lynn Packer have a moral responsibility to take it further?

That's a what if that never happened and in my estimation would not happen so there is no need for what if speculations.

[Freedom]

BYU is a private university with a very strict code. I would have been more surprised if the instructor was not fired. The lies were uncovered and it should have ended there. Instead, Packer took it further, either for malicious intent or for bragging rights.

[Freedom]

To out someone in this way, while being 'honest' in one level, is the magnitude of cruelty to everyone involved. My heart aches for the man Paul Dunn was before he was destroyed. What was the point of destroying him?

I have 'outed' people in the past and have been 'outed' myself. Done in private, it changes and elevates people.

[wayfarer]

I have 'outed' people in the past and have been 'outed' myself. Done in private, it changes and elevates people.

got you - except that 'outed' kind of means public exposure, and by definition, isn't private.

I think pointing out mistakes and flawed behaviors privately and with compassion, and receiving it as given truly is the way.

[DBMormon]

even when the damage has affected people publicly?

All sins are to be confessed to the Lord, some to a Church official, some to others, and some to all of these. A few may require public confession. Confessing aids forsaking. We cannot expect to sin publicly and extensively and then expect to be rescued privately and quickly, being beaten “with only a few stripes.” (D&C 42:88–93.)

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1991/10/repentance?lang=eng

[Kenngo1969]

... Joseph had serious issues with honesty ...

CFR from a non-agenda-driven source with a reputation for honesty of his/her/its own. Thanks in advance.