Writing to President Nelson - Correlation Department response

A lot of Church members write letters to President Nelson. He receives probably thousands of letters every day. As in any large organization, staffers open his mail and distribute it to appropriate departments for responses.

If you write to him about Book of Mormon geography issues, your letter is routed to the Correlation Department. I discussed this last year in a blog post, here.

I'm sure the anonymous employees at the Correlation Department want to do the right thing. Their form letter includes a personal section that acknowledges any specific circumstances people include in their letter. It's impressive how the Church works so diligently to serve the needs of the members throughout the world, even to the point of answering thousands of letters.

However, an attachment to the form letter lists statements by Church leaders about Book of Mormon geography. It appears that the Correlation Department employees got their information from the M2C citation cartel, mostly likely from FairlyMormon which uses the same quotations on its web page, also out of context and incomplete.

Consequently, the form letter is yet another exercise in censorship and misdirection, thanks to the M2C citation cartel.

If your only source of information is material approved by the Correlation Department, you will never learn what the prophets have taught about the Hill Cumorah. 

President Nelson has declared that "Good inspiration comes from good information." 

When the Correlation Department is not sending out good information, what results can we expect?

As always, I urge the well-meaning but apparently uninformed employees in the Church Office Building (COB), at CES, and at BYU to reject the censorship and misdirection foisted on them by the M2C citation cartel. 
_____

It is far better to give members of the Church all the relevant information so they can make informed decisions on their own. That's the only way to implement the official Church policy of neutrality.

Here is a table that compares what the Correlation Department sends out with what they should send out if they want to exemplify the neutrality position of the Church.

Anonymous Form Letter from the Correlation Department (original in blue)	Suggested additions/revisions (comments in black, suggestions in red)
Dear [Brother/Sister X]	Keep unchanged.
We have been asked to respond to your letter to [President Nelson, the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve, individual members of that quorum, etc.]	Keep unchanged.
As you are aware, much has been said and written about Book of Mormon geography over the past 180 plus years. Many have invested much time in trying to determine the precise location of sites noted throughout the Book of Mormon.	Keep unchanged.
As part of their research efforts, some have proposed their understanding of specific geography which they feel best matches the Book of Mormon record. However, to date, there is no official Church position as to the precise locations of the noted geography.	Here’s where the problem starts. The letter is confusing two separate, clear teachings of Church leaders. To be accurate, the letter should be revised along these line: As part of their research efforts, some have proposed their understanding of specific geography which they feel best matches the Book of Mormon record. However, to date, there is no official Church position beyond the clear, consistent teachings of the prophets and apostles that: 1. The Hill Cumorah is in New York. 2. We don’t know for sure where the rest of the events took place.
During your research you may have also discovered that while several have made suggestions as to geographic specificity, neither the First Presidency, nor the Lord, Himself, have definitively revealed the precise locations of the geography and events under consideration.	During your research you may have also discovered that while several have made suggestions as to geographic specificity, neither the First Presidency, nor the Lord, Himself, have definitively revealed the precise locations of the geography and events under consideration, apart from the Hill Cumorah in New York. In 1980, the entire First Presidency individually and personally endorsed a letter sent from their office which read, “The Church has long maintained, as attested to by references in the writings of General Authorities, that the Hill Cumorah in western New York State is the same as referenced in the Book of Mormon.” The location of Cumorah was established by Moroni even before Joseph obtained the plates. It was formally published in Letter VII, written by President Oliver Cowdery in 1835 and republished in every official Church newspaper, often at Joseph Smith’s direction, through the Improvement Era. The New York Cumorah is also consistent with D&C 128:20.
The following statement from President George Q. Cannon seems representative. He said: “The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so” (Gospel Truth, 476-477).	The following statement from President George Q. Cannon seems representative regarding locations other than Cumorah. He said: “The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so” (Gospel Truth, 476-477).
Additionally, President Russell M. Nelson spoke about the Book of Mormon saying: “Since President Monson’s challenge six months ago, I have tried to follow his counsel. Among other things, I’ve made lists of what the Book of Mormon is, what it affirms, what it refutes, what it fulfills, what it clarifies, and what it reveals. Looking at the Book of Mormon through these lenses has been an insightful and inspiring exercise! I recommend it to each of you” (Ensign, November 2017).	Keep unchanged.
President Nelson has also said, “I would like to add my testimony of the divinity of this book. I have read it many times. I have also read much that has been written about it. Some authors have focused upon its stories, its people, or its vignettes of history. Others have been intrigued by its language structure or its records of weapons, geography, animal life, techniques of building, or systems of weights and measures. Interesting as these matters may be, study of the Book of Mormon is most rewarding when one focuses on its primary purpose—to testify of Jesus Christ. By comparison, all other issues are incidental” (Ensign, November 1999, 69).	Keep unchanged.
We hope that this emphasis, noted by the prophet, will be a blessing to you as you continue your study of the Book of Mormon. We also hope that the attached document will prove to be helpful as you continue that study.	Keep unchanged.
[inserted note addressing specific personal concerns]	Keep unchanged.
We have copied your stake president on this response and invite you to visit with him further if you have additional questions regarding this or any other matter.	Keep unchanged.
May the Lord bless you in your lives. [unsigned]	Keep unchanged.
Attached document	Attached document
Prophetic Statements on BOM Geography President Russell M. Nelson "I would like to add my testimony of the divinity of this book. I have read it many times. I have also read much that has been written about it. Some authors have focused upon its stories, its people, or its vignettes of history. Others have been intrigued by its language structure or its records of weapons, geography, animal life, techniques of building, or systems of weights and measures. Interesting as these matters may be, study of the Book of Mormon is most rewarding when one focuses on its primary purpose—to testify of Jesus Christ. By comparison, all other issues are incidental."  [Ensign, November 1999, 69.]	Keep unchanged.
President Gordon B. Hinckley The evidence for its [Book of Mormon] truth, for its validity in a world that is prone to demand evidence, lies not in archaeology or anthropology, though these may be helpful to some. It lies not in word research or historical analysis, though these may be confirmatory. The evidence for its truth and validity lies within the covers of the book itself. The test of its truth lies in reading it. It is a book of God. Reasonable men may sincerely question its origin; but those who have read it prayerfully have come to know by a power beyond their natural senses that it is true, that it contains the word of God, that it outlines saving truths of the everlasting gospel, that it came forth by the gift and power of God “to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ.” (Book of Mormon title page.) (Ensign, November 1984, 52)	Keep unchanged.
President Harold B. Lee Some say the Hill Cumorah was in southern Mexico (and someone pushed it down still farther) and not in western New York. Well, if the Lord wanted us to know where it was or where Zarahemla was, He’d have given us latitude and longitude, don’t you think? And why bother our heads trying to discover with archaeological certainty the geographical locations of the cities of the Book of Mormon like Zarahemla? The witness of the Book of Mormon is not found in the ruins of Central and South America. They may be outward evidences of a people long since disappeared. The real witness is that which is found in the Book of Mormon itself. [The Teachings of Harold B. Lee, 155- 156.]	This is a favorite quotation from the M2C citation cartel, so it’s not surprising the Correlation Department includes it here. I'm told that this statement is the guiding principle for screening material before it gets to the First Presidency; i.e., anything that involves Book of Mormon geography is diverted before it reaches the First Presidency.  But as written, the quotation is misleading because it is taken out of context. This was an informal comment to Church educators, warning them against teaching false doctrine. I’ve discussed that here. Providing the entire context may not be feasible in a short summary; if that's the case, the passage should be deleted. But if the Department wants to include this obscure passage anyway, and continue to omit the context, they should at least supplement it with another statement by President Lee that summaries the rest of the context of his informal statement to Church educators: “Hugh Nibley apparently has no patience with the doubters as to the N.Y. Cumorah.”
President Howard W. Hunter Faith is required for a divine reason. Faith is the assurance of the existence of a truth even though it is not evident or cannot be proved by positive evidence. Suppose that all things could be proven by demonstrative evidence. What then would become of the element of faith? There would be no need for faith and it would be eliminated, giving rise then to this query: If faith is the first step or principle of the gospel and is eliminated, what happens to the gospel plan? The very foundation will crumble. I submit that there is a divine reason why all things cannot be proven by concrete evidence. [Ensign, May 1975, 38.]	Keep unchanged.
President George Q. Cannon  There is a tendency, strongly manifested . . . among some of the brethren, to study the geography of the Book of Mormon. . . . We are greatly pleased to notice the . . . interest taken by the Saints in this holy book. . . . But valuable as is the Book of Mormon both in doctrine and history, yet it is possible to put this sacred volume to uses for which it was never intended, uses which are detrimental rather than advantageous to the cause of truth, and consequently to the work of the Lord. . . .    The brethren who lecture on the lands of the Nephites or the geography of the Book of Mormon are not united in their conclusions. No two of them, so far as we have learned, are agreed on all points, and in many cases the variations amount to tens of thousands of miles. These differences of views lead to discussion, contention and perplexity; and we believe more confusion is caused by these divergences than good is done by the truths elicited.      How is it that there is such a variety of ideas of this subject? Simply because the Book of Mormon is not a geographical primer. It was not written to teach geographical truths. What is told us of the situation of the various lands or cities of the ancient Jaredites, Nephites and Lamanites is usually simply an incidental remark connected with the doctrinal or historical portions of the work and almost invariably only extends to a statement of the relative position of some land or city to contiguous or surrounding places and nowhere gives us the exact situation or boundaries so that it can be definitely located without fear of error.      It must be remembered that geography as a science, like chronology and other branches of education, was not understood or taught after the manner or by the methods of the moderns. It could not be amongst those peoples who were not acquainted with the size and form of the earth, as was the case with most of the nations of antiquity, though not with the Nephites. Their Seers and Prophets appear to have received divine light on this subject.      The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so. Nor are we acquainted with any of the Twelve Apostles who would undertake such a task. The reason is that without further information they are not prepared even to suggest. The word of the Lord or the translation of other ancient records is required to clear up many points now so obscure that, as we have said, no two original investigators agree with regard to them. . . .     For these reasons we have strong objections to the introduction of maps and their circulation among our people which profess to give the location of the Nephite cities and settlements. As we have said, they have a tendency to mislead instead of enlighten, and they give rise to discussions which will lead to division of sentiment and be very unprofitable. We see no necessity for maps of this character, because, at least, much would be left to the imagination of those who prepare them; and we hope that there will be no attempt made to introduce them or give them general circulation.    Of course, there can be no harm result from the study of the geography of this continent at the time it was settled by the Nephites, drawing all the information possible from the record which has been translated for our benefit. But beyond this we do not think it necessary, at the present time, to go, because it is plain to be seen, we think, that evils may result therefrom. (Jan. 1, 1890, JI 18-19) (Gospel Truth, 476-477)	Keep unchanged, except include the full quotation, which I posted here. In the portions omitted by the Correlation Department, President Cannon gave specific examples of the problems. None of them involved Cumorah. Informed readers can tell that President Cannon was clearly referring to speculation about geography beyond the New York Cumorah. This is evident from his statement that ”The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so. Nor are we acquainted with any of the Twelve Apostles who would undertake such a task.” Of course, Letter VII originated with the First Presidency in 1835 and ever since, members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve have affirmed the New York Cumorah in writing and in General Conference addresses. President Cannon notes accurately that none of the Brethren who have reaffirmed the New York Cumorah have undertaken the task of preparing a map of Nephite geography. That’s because they are two separate issues. The passage should be introduced with an explanation. President Cannon was aware that members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve had consistently taught that the Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is the hill in New York from which Joseph obtained the plates. No members of those quorums has ever questioned or repudiated that teaching. However, members of those quorums, as well as other members of the Church, have entertained different ideas about other aspects of Book of Mormon geography. President Cannon addressed this separate issue with these comments. There is a tendency, strongly manifested... [etc.]
President Joseph F. Smith A Book of Mormon geography conference was held at Brigham Young Academy on May 23-24, 1903 President Joseph F. Smith gave the following counsel regarding the discussion on the location of Zarahemla: "President Smith spoke briefly, and expressed the idea that the situation [location] of the city [of Zarahemla] was one of interest certainly, but if it could not be located the matter was not of vital importance, and if there were differences of opinion on the question it would not affect the salvation of the people; and he advised against students considering it of such vital importance as the principles of the Gospel." (Deseret Evening News, May 25, 1903, 7) Note: The present associate editor of The Instructor was one day in the office of the late President Joseph F. Smith when some brethren were asking him to approve a map showing the exact landing place of Lehi and his company. President Smith declined to officially approve the map, saying that the Lord had not yet revealed it, and that if it were officially approved and afterwards found to be in error, it would affect the faith of the people. (George D. Pyper, Associate Editor) [The Instructor, Vol. 73, April, 1938, #4, 160.]	This is another example of the difference between the New York Cumorah and the rest of the geography. In 1899, nine years after President Cannon published his comment about Book of Mormon geography, President Joseph F. Smith published Letter VII in the Improvement Era. This demonstrates that, from the perspective of the First Presidency, teaching that Cumorah is in New York is consistent with neutrality on the rest of Book of Mormon geography. That position has also been explained by other prophets. This dichotomy between the New York Cumorah and the rest of Book of Mormon geography has been so well established by so many of the prophets that it is inexcusable to continue to conflate the two separate issues. While serving as editor of the Improvement Era in 1899, President Joseph F. Smith republished Letter VII in the newspaper, reaffirming that it is a fact that the Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in western New York. He later reiterated the distinction between Cumorah and other Book of Mormon sites. A Book of Mormon geography conference was held at Brigham Young Academy on May 23-24, 1903 President Joseph F. Smith gave the following counsel regarding the discussion on the location of Zarahemla: "President Smith spoke briefly, and expressed the idea that the situation [location] of the city [of Zarahemla] was one of interest certainly, but if it could not be located the matter was not of vital importance, and if there were differences of opinion on the question it would not affect the salvation of the people; and he advised against students considering it of such vital importance as the principles of the Gospel." (Deseret Evening News, May 25, 1903, 7) Note: The present associate editor of The Instructor was one day in the office of the late President Joseph F. Smith when some brethren were asking him to approve a map showing the exact landing place of Lehi and his company. President Smith declined to officially approve the map, saying that the Lord had not yet revealed it, and that if it were officially approved and afterwards found to be in error, it would affect the faith of the people. (George D. Pyper, Associate Editor) [The Instructor, Vol. 73, April, 1938, #4, 160.]
President Anthony W. Ivins There is a great deal of talk about the geography of the Book of Mormon. Where was the land of Zarahemla? Where was the City of Zarahemla? and other geographic matters. It does not make any difference to us. There has never been anything yet set forth that definitely settles that question. So, the Church says we are just waiting until we discover the truth. All kinds of theories have been advanced. I have talked with at least half a dozen men that have found the very place where the City of Zarahemla stood, and notwithstanding the fact that they profess to be Book of Mormon students, they vary a thousand miles apart in the places they have located. We do not offer any definite solution. As you study the Book of Mormon keep these things in mind and do not make definite statements concerning things that have not been proven in advance to be true. [Conference Report, April 1929, 15-16.]	This is yet another example of a member of the First Presidency who made a clear delineation between the New York Cumorah and the rest of the geography. To provide this quotation without also providing President Ivins’ conference address about the New York Cumorah is misleading at best. President Anthony W. Ivins Reference has been made by the president to the acquisition by the Church of the spot of ground in the state of New York known as the Hill Cumorah…. The passages which I have quoted from the Book of Mormon and the more extended discussion of this subject by Elder B. H. Roberts which was published in The Deseret News of March 3 definitely established the following facts: That the hill Cumorah, and the hill Ramah are identical. That it was around this hill that the armies of both the Jaredites and Nephites fought their great last battles. That it was in this hill that Mormon deposited all of the sacred records which had been entrusted to his care by Ammaron, except the abridgment which he had made from the plates of Nephi, which were delivered into the hands of his son, Moroni. We know positively that it was in this hill that Moroni deposited the abridgment made by his father, and his own abridgment of the record of the Jaredites, and that it was from this hill that Joseph Smith obtained possession of them. This sealed portion of the record which came into the hands of Joseph Smith but was not translated by him so far as we are aware, with the abridgment made by Mormon, the record of Ether, and the other sacred records which were deposited in the hill Cumorah still lie in their repository, awaiting the time when the Lord shall see fit to bring them forth, that they may be published to the world. Whether they have been removed from the spot where Mormon deposited them we cannot tell, but this we know, that they are safe under the guardianship of the Lord, and that they will be brought forth at the proper time, as the Lord has declared they should be, for the benefit and blessing of the people of the world, for his word never fails. All of these incidents to which I have referred, my brethren and sisters, are very closely associated with this particular spot in the state of New York. Therefore I feel, as I said in the beginning of my remarks, that the acquisition of that spot of ground is more than an incident in the history of the Church; it is an epoch—an epoch which in my opinion is fraught with that which may become of greater interest to the Latter-day Saints than that which has already occurred. We know that all of these records, all the sacred records of the Nephite people, were deposited by Mormon in that hill. That incident alone is sufficient to make it the sacred and hallowed spot that it is to us. I thank God that, in a way which seems to have been providential, it has come into the possession of the Church. I bear witness to you that the words which I have read here, quoted from the Book of Mormon, which refer to the future will be fulfilled. Those additional records will come forth, they will be published to the world, that the children of our Father may be converted to faith in Christ, our Lord and Redeemer, through obedience to the doctrines which he taught. May God our Father hasten that day, is my humble prayer, and I ask it through Jesus Christ. Amen. (Conference Report, April 1928, 10-15) There is a great deal of talk about the geography of the Book of Mormon. Where was the land of Zarahemla? Where was the City of Zarahemla? and other geographic matters. It does not make any difference to us. There has never been anything yet set forth that definitely settles that question. So, the Church says we are just waiting until we discover the truth. All kinds of theories have been advanced. I have talked with at least half a dozen men that have found the very place where the City of Zarahemla stood, and notwithstanding the fact that they profess to be Book of Mormon students, they vary a thousand miles apart in the places they have located. We do not offer any definite solution. As you study the Book of Mormon keep these things in mind and do not make definite statements concerning things that have not been proven in advance to be true. [Conference Report, April 1929, 15-16.]
Matthew Cowley I would like to bear my testimony to you about the book which you are studying in the Relief Society, The Book of Mormon. I know nothing about archaeology. I have not studied the maps which apparently relate to The Book of Mormon, the travels of the Lehites, the Lamanites, and so forth. I know very little about the outside evidences of The Book of Mormon, but I have a testimony of the divinity of this book, and that testimony has come to me from within the two covers of the book itself.       To me, archaeology, and all that archaeologists discover, which may in a way prove the genuineness of the book-these discoveries are lost in the spirit of the book itself, and if you can't find a testimony within the covers of this book, there is no need to look elsewhere. (Matthew Cowley Speaks, 110)	Keep unchanged, although it’s not clear why this quotation was chosen, when other quotations about the New York Cumorah are available in books written by Apostles that, unlike Matthew Cowley’s book, were actually published by the Church. These include Articles of Faith by James E. Talmage and A Marvelous Work and a Wonder by LeGrand Richards.
Mark E. Petersen We have had speculation, for instance, on the part of some with respect to Book of Mormon geography, and it is plain, unadulterated speculation and not doctrine. And if a General Authority has speculated on Book of Mormon geography he did not represent the view of the Church while doing so. [“Revelation,” address to religious educators, 24 August 1954. (in charge to religious educators, 2nd ed. 1982, 137]	Elder Petersen specifically taught the New York Cumorah in General Conference in 1978, but the form letter uses this obscure quotation from 1954 against Elder Petersen himself. Instead of the obscure 1954 quotation, the letter should use this quotation from Elder Petersen made in General Conference: " Mark E. Petersen Moroni's father was commander of the armies of this ancient people, known as Nephites. His name was Mormon. The war of which we speak took place here in America some four hundred years after Christ. As the fighting neared its end, Mormon gathered the remnant of his forces about a hill which they called Cumorah, located in what is now the western part of the state of New York... When finished with his record, Moroni was to hide it up in that same Hill Cumorah which was their battlefield. It would come forth in modern times as the Book of Mormon, named after Moroni's father, the historian who compiled it. (“The Last Words of Moroni,” Conference Reports, October 1978) The quotation from a 1954 private meeting, unless accompanied by Elder Petersen’s General Conference address, leads members of the Church to believe that Elder Petersen himself was engaged in "unadulterated speculation" when he spoke about the New York Cumorah in General Conference in 1978. That is inexcusable. Elder Petersen’s conference address, combined with the 1954 statement, reiterate the persistent, consistent teachings of the prophets that: 1. The Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in New York. 2. We don’t know for sure where the other events in the Book of Mormon took place.
	Any list of prophetic statements on Book of Mormon geography should include President Marion G. Romney’s 1975 General Conference address titled “America’s Destiny.” President Marion G. Romney In the western part of the state of New York near Palmyra is a prominent hill known as the “hill Cumorah.” (Morm. 6:6.) On July twenty-fifth of this year, as I stood on the crest of that hill admiring with awe the breathtaking panorama which stretched out before me on every hand, my mind reverted to the events which occurred in that vicinity some twenty-five centuries ago—events which brought to an end the great Jaredite nation. You who are acquainted with the Book of Mormon will recall that during the final campaign of the fratricidal war between the armies led by Shiz and those led by Coriantumr “nearly two millions” of Coriantumr’s people had been slain by the sword; “two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children.” (Ether 15:2.) As the conflict intensified, all the people who had not been slain—men “with their wives and their children” (Ether 15:15)—gathered about that hill Cumorah (see Ether 15:11).... Thus perished at the foot of Cumorah the remnant of the once mighty Jaredite nation, of whom the Lord had said, “There shall be none greater … upon all the face of the earth.” (Ether 1:43.) As I contemplated this tragic scene from the crest of Cumorah and viewed the beautiful land of the Restoration as it appears today, I cried in my soul, “How could it have happened?”... The tragic fate of the Jaredite and the Nephite civilizations is proof positive that the Lord meant it when he said that this “is a land of promise; and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fulness of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity.” (Ether 2:9.)"… I bear you my personal witness that I know that the things I have presented to you today are true—both those pertaining to past events and those pertaining to events yet to come. (“America’s Destiny,” Conference Reports, October 1975)

I hope this table is useful for the employees at the Correlation Department as well as every member of the Church who wants to make informed decisions about this topic.