References to Sheffield's elite education made me hopeful for an engaging read. I was disappointed that the writing was ultimately prosaic, which might be related to Sheffield's journalism background, since it reflects that style of writing.
The author capitalizes on her so-called "Mormon" background to tell her story. Except, just like in "Educated," by Tara Westover, her home life offers a scarce resemblance to a traditional Mormon family. Her father was clearly mentally ill with delusions of grandeur, and he was itinerant, and abusive. Throughout the book, she acknowledges that her father decided long before he got married that he believed that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints had been led astray and he didn't respect their leadership. She alludes to bizarre, obsessive religious practices perpetuated by her father and what looks like religious abuse which he alone invented and not at all representative of LDS religious practice. Quite the opposite, in fact. His delusions are manifested in his belief that he considers himself to be a sort of present and future prophet, among other things. Since his background was Mormonism, that became the vehicle for his mental illness. If he had been raised Catholic, Jewish, Pentecostal Christian, Muslim, Sikh, atheist, etc., it's highly likely that any of those would have been the expression for his delusions.
In her meaning-making of the intergenerational abuse from her father, I found it strange as a marriage and family therapist that she invoked the theories of Ivan Boszormenyi-Nagy from his contextual family therapy, which is largely theoretical and known for being elitist and less accessible than other models, which is why one of his protégées, Terry Hargrave, created Restoration Therapy to be more clinically useful. I couldn't figure out, given her earlier reference to attachment, why she would bypass that more modern and empirically-validated theory for a clunkier, somewhat outdated one. Her father experienced an absence of secure attachment, which impacts view of self and trust of others, and didn't provide it for his children. Attachment affects everything and is shaped by ongoing experiences recursively.
While the author gives lip service to her "Mormon friends," there were many things in the book that felt designed to undermine the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. For starters, she led out with a faulty assumption that people who joined the church while the LDS church was being organized were enamored of Joseph Smith, the founder, who was led to reorganize Christ's original church, since the churches had strayed from the original doctrine. Not a single written account of my multiple ancestors who joined the LDS church while Joseph Smith was alive mentions joining the church because of Joseph Smith. The "charismatic leader" argument is faulty. ALL of them were searching for a church that had not strayed from Christ's original church and were led to the newly organized LDS church specifically through their seeking to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. The author also has no explanation for why the church didn't die out after the "charismatic leader" was murdered in his early 30s, as with other religions started by charismatic leaders, but instead flourished and continues to grow internationally today.
I'm too tired to recount all of the carefully-worded manipulations, but, for example, she only included song titles she sang in the children's organization of the church that are exclusive to LDS doctrine, while conveniently leaving out titles related to Jesus Christ, even though those songs represent a greater proportion of LDS children's songs that are sung routinely. This seemed designed to make the church seem culty, probably because she has joined one of the Christian sects known for their disdain of Mormons and spreading misinformation about them (If I only had a dollar for all the times I was told I was going to hell by "Christians"). Maybe since her church attendance seemed spotty, she is genuinely ignorant of the emphasis on Jesus Christ CONSTANTLY in the LDS religion, but I doubt it, since her social media presence includes a post in the LDS conference center where the Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square performs routinely in church-sponsored interfaith events (for which the LDS church rarely if ever gets credit, despite being a church that is constantly trying to build bridges with other religions in their communities).
Sheffield seems like a smart, kindish person. I'm sorry that she suffered so much isolation, manipulation and abuse. Based on my experiences growing up in California around mostly non-Mormons, the LDS homes were consistently unique beacons of light in the dark, safer and kinder with engaged parents and no substance abuse. The other "Christian" households seemed hypocritical to me and since they believe they can just accept Christ as their Savior and then do whatever they want, there was no motivation to actually behave in Christlike ways, with few exceptions - they gave lip service to Christlike practices while ignoring them except when convenient or when garnering public attention. In my own home, my LDS father didn't raise his voice, never spanked me, never used a four-letter word and came home every night literally declaring, "Is everybody happy?" while hugging his children and my mom. I had one of the few households without divorce. I was also encouraged to get as much education as I could. That scenario is more congruent with an LDS household. In her home, it seems that the lovely doctrine of Christ was twisted into something dark and controlling, with a strange entitlement linked to a perceived special Mormon pioneer pedigree. This does not make you special and unique among members of the LDS church in Utah or anywhere else - famous Mormon pedigrees are a dime a dozen and meaningless when it comes to practicing church principles or position in the church.
There is no doubt that the author developed a cloak of self-importance. Her hubris is likely what led to her applying presentist arguments to cherry-picked resources to conclude that she knows better than over 12 million people that the LDS church is false. I guarantee that she found nothing in the basement of the Lee Library about the origins of the church that I didn't already know at age 10 in California, because when your "Christian," neighbors are attending Sunday school classes about how your religion is wrong, there is no avoiding these supposed deep dark secrets of LDS origins (because they aren't - the fact that she didn't know about them doesn't mean no one else did either). Evangelicals love to spring cherry-picked fun facts on LDS people hoping for a gotcha moment, a process which is decidedly un-Christian. The author was insulated and didn't know these things and at the time, the church didn't choose to lead out with this part of history - it doesn't mean they were hiding it. I have heard nothing in an anti-Mormon's argument that I haven't known since the 5th grade. However, I'm not surprised by her reactions to previously unknown information, because one gets the sense that she believes she possesses a special intellectualism that the rest of us don't, and seems to potentially struggle with theory of mind. She believes her magical journalism powers give her special access. They don't.
She also conveniently leaves out the church's efforts to rigorously train scholars in secular topics as part of an ongoing effort to expand historical and archaeological knowledge. She referenced the Smithsonian as one of the experts challenging any historical evidence for the Book of Mormon. We now know the Smithsonian has been withholding information incompatible with a narrative they want to promote for North American history. Items previously considered "anachronistic," in the Book of Mormon are increasingly being validated through ongoing archaeological discoveries. Science and evidence are only as good as the measurements, and it's mind-boggling how frequently people make definitive statements without acknowledging that there may be more we don't know, since science is always changing and new discoveries challenging flawed theories is omnipresent.
Her continual recitations about her academic accomplishments at her present age reveal that she must cling to this to prove her worth, even as she might want us to believe otherwise. The LDS church values secular education (as Amy Chua conveys in the book referenced by the author), and is full of people who could have gone to Harvard or any Ivy League school on scholarship. Prominent leaders in the Harvard business school were LDS, possibly concurrently with the author's attendance. Her prattling on about her awards seemed juvenile and tiresome. I laughed out loud when she used the word "histrionic," and then proceeded to explain to the reader that it means "dramatic." Uh, thanks for the definition, since no one apparently knows what that means. Firstly, if you have to define it, why use the word, and secondly, did you forget there's this thing called a dictionary that a surprisingly large number of your fellow citizens know how to use? Or Google?
It is true that LDS people have a strong emphasis on family. It's also true that there are likely more divorced LDS people worldwide than not divorced. Many LDS families don't fit the traditional model. I have divorced family members, including temple divorces going back to some of my original pioneer ancestors - this does not preclude people from progressing after they die or from experiencing family happiness - her explanation of this was limited, since we believe in an afterlife where we keep progressing. We also have one of the most compassionate views of the afterlife of any religion. We don't have large families to "try to get as many LDS spirits here as possible" or however she phrased it - that's a ridiculous thing to say when China doesn't even openly allow the LDS religion right now and has what, 1/5 of the world's population? We have large families because we believe that meaning and purpose come full-circle by teaching and applying Christ's principles in our families, and it's a vehicle for happiness, and provides stability. I have a PhD and a career, and it's meaningless compared to the growth and development achieved by being a mom.
She correctly identifies a cult as something that "you can't leave with your dignity intact." Anyone who says this about the LDS church is lying or has an excessively controlling family like Sheffield who are themselves a type of cult. Despite the fact that Christians have for years been diminishing the LDS church with that term, people in the LDS church are not coerced into staying, isolated, followed shunned, or anything of the like that happens in true cults. The church is too international to be isolationist. The cult argument is absurd for many other reasons, but has become a cheap, inaccurate mockery meant to diminish the true purpose of the LDS church, which is to lead people to Jesus Christ and teach members to follow Jesus' example, and ultimately reduce suffering in the world. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is one of the leaders for providing money, material resources and volunteer service in humanitarian efforts globally. Look it up. If I were going to count on FEMA or our church, it for sure would not be FEMA.
Sheffield includes outright falsehoods, including a statement about bishops being "matchmakers," (100% not true, and I've both been married to a Mormon bishop and the daughter of a twice Mormon bishop and Patriarch), and a blasphemous statement that LDS people don't believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. It is true that they don't agree with the decision made by a bunch of self-appointed dudes at the Nicaean Council who arbitrarily decided that Jesus, God the Father and the Holy Ghost are a "trinity," but protestants get this absolutely wrong about the LDS church by constantly taking our view of Jesus as our divine older brother out of context. I get it - she doesn't believe that Joseph Smith had the experiences that he said he had - that's her prerogative, which actually makes little sense, since early on, he could have retracted his story and saved himself a lot of persecution, false imprisonment and ultimate martyrdom - which is what any charlatan would have done. Charlatans don't have the character to stand by their convictions and continue to testify, despite being hunted down and ultimately put on a government extermination list (which most people don't even know about LDS history in Missouri). Charlatans don't direct their flock to worship Jesus Christ - instead, Joseph Smith would have directed people to worship him, and despite what our Christian enemies constantly assert, he never directed people to worship him - it was always and will always be about Jesus Christ.
I'm glad she found a theology mixed with philosophy that works for her, but it's alarming what she doesn't seem to know about the church in which she was baptized. I'm 60 years old and so weary of the constant half truths and omissions perpetuated about our church, especially when people with spurious and limited engagement with our religion are viewed as the experts. By their fruits ye shall know them. Full stop. Also, the sheep will hear His voice. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints will continue to grow despite the efforts of its enemies, as it always has.
The reason the LDS church has continued to grow isn't because they are organizationally or culturally savvy - it's because people who are seeking truth recognize it. This why one of our formerly Hindu friends explained that in India, when he decided to study Christianity and went to every church he could find, he ended up with the foundling, sparsely populated congregation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in New Delhi. It definitely wasn't one of the sparkly, materialistically progressive options.
Sheffield made an interesting comment that her grandfather served an LDS mission in the Southern States Mission, in which she essentially couldn't imagine success because of the area's strong Baptist roots. Well, my great-grandmother was a Baptist in the "Southern States Mission," in the late 1800s, and while praying for guidance to "live her life for Jesus," she was specifically divinely guided along with her husband, who was a minister, to the LDS missionaries. Even though her neighbors were calling Mormons "evil," and spreading lies and telling people to not listen to them, my great-grandparents recognized that the teachings more closely resembled Christ's original teachings. She also recognized specifically how temple covenants and rituals are part of the divine plan, with origins from the Old Testament, not something randomly made up as a faux Christian add-on, like the author suggests. Joining the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints changed their lives and I'm grateful for their choice, because it has provided more goodness in my life than anything else and has positively affected generations.
Maybe don't capitalize on the word "Mormon," when your life resembles almost nothing of the kind except in name only. It's gross.