Paul H. Dunn's war and baseball stories were invented

Admitted

Their own church publications admit these facts. You can make this point from LDS sources alone.

Who he was

Paul H. Dunn, a General Authority and a Seventy from 1964 to 1989.

He was one of the church's most loved speakers, with bestselling books.

What was not true

The war stories and the baseball stories. His best friend did not die in his arms in the Second World War.

He never played for the St Louis Cardinals.

How it came out

Lynn Packer investigated. The Arizona Republic published it in February 1991.

Dunn at first defended the stories. They were needed, he said, "to illustrate his theological and moral points." Leaders had known earlier.

Packer's reporting was held back. Meanwhile Dunn was quietly made emeritus in 1989, "for reasons of age and health."

What he then said

In October 1991 he published a confession in the Church News. "I have not always been accurate in my public talks and writings." He acknowledged that the First Presidency and the Twelve had censured him.

How strong is this argument?

They admit this themselves, and the church's own paper reported both halves. FAIR is right that one leader's sins do not falsify a religion.

A dishonest pastor does not disprove Protestantism either. So use it small.

What it does show is how faith-promoting stories work. Strong feelings get taken as confirmation.

And it shows a taste for quiet management, until a journalist forced the issue.

What to say

"How would you know if a story that moved you wasn't true?"

A Marine patrol on Okinawa in 1945; a representative wartime image, unconnected to Dunn's invented stories

Church headquarters in Salt Lake City, which granted Dunn emeritus status in 1989

How they answer this — at its strongest

That was one man's failure, not policy. He was censured and made to apologise.

FAIR replies that Dunn's lying was his own failure, not church policy.

The church looked into it. He was censured. He was moved to emeritus status. And he was made to say sorry in public. That is being held to account, not a cover-up.

Latter-day Saints do not claim their leaders never sin. One man's dressed-up sermons say nothing about whether the Restoration is true. A pastor who lies does not disprove Protestantism either.

His apology, and the church taking it, model what repentance looks like.

The verdict

They admit this, and it proves little: use it small, about how testimony works.

Dunn's own printed confession of October 1991 settles the facts. So does the censure he owned up to. The church's own Deseret News reported both.

FAIR is right that one leader's sins do not falsify a faith. That is why the severity is low.

The value here is as a pattern, not as proof. It shows how a faith-promoting story works. A strong tale stirs a strong feeling, and the hearer takes that feeling as proof. And it shows a taste for quiet handling, 'for reasons of age and health', until a reporter forced it out.

Use it to open the question of how we know things.

Open this case in the full study tool →