Introducing a New Series: “Responses”

In today’s age, when the internet fosters a close-knit community with immediate access to news and information, reactions to new scholarship come at a blistering speed. Most academic journals are now available in digital form, scholarly organizations maintain frequently updated websites, and the blogging world makes it possible to discuss new ideas and research within minutes after they appear. In past decades, if one were to read an article in, say, Journal of Mormon History and wanted to write a response or rebuttal, the only option would be to write and mail a letter-to-the-editor and, if it’s accepted, wait several months before it appears. While these letters will still play an important role for many journals, their snail-like pace can often be too slow for today’s twitterworld.

Continue Reading

From the Archives: Proselyting the Mormon Empire in 1866

[In which I just share some cool findings from today’s research.]

In a religious movement that is rife with enigmatic characters, Edward Tullidge still stands out among his fellow Mormons. Converted to the LDS gospel in his native England in 1848, at the youthful age of nineteen, his contested baptism was only the first of many changes throughout his life, a voyage that included stops in deism, Godbeitism, Josephitism, and, intermittently, renewed commitment to the Utah version of Mormonism. Importantly, he narrated his many faith transitions through essays, newspapers, books, and plays, leaving a fascinating and eclectic corpus of writing–think of him as the Mormon Orestes Brownson. As I am currently working my way through his work as part of a broader project, I thought I would share some excerpts from one stop of his journey: his proselyting mission to New York City in 1866, with the purpose of defending Mormonism in print to the many “gentiles” on the east coast.

Continue Reading

Southwestern States Mission: Washing Clothes

For 1900 Jul 16, Elder Jones reports that ?After dinner I went out to the branch where I washed my garments and had a bath.? [1] How often and in what circumstances did the missionaries wash clothes?

Continue Reading

Women, the Priesthood, and Augusta Adams Cobb: Connell O’Donovan’s response to Jonathan Stapley

In the spirit of intellectual debate and friendship, we offered Connell the opportunity to read and respond to Jonathan’s letter before we published it at Juvenile Instructor.  Connell happily accepted the invitation.  What follows his response:

I deeply appreciate this opportunity to reflect further on Augusta Adams Cobb Young?s beliefs as stated in the two documents referred to, and their historical impact and importance. I highly value academic debate and am neither afraid to admit when I have erred in judgment, nor to agree to disagree with a colleague, as the case may be.

I want to begin with some background.  Some five years ago, I first became acquainted with Augusta through my lengthy research project on early Boston Mormons, now nearly 700 pages long (see connellodonovan.com/boston_mormons.html). She was among the first 10 converts to Mormonism in the Boston area in 1832 made by Orson Hyde and Joseph Smith?s younger brother, Samuel H. Smith.

Continue Reading

Responding to O’Donovan on Augusta Adams Cobb Young and priesthood

This post is in response to Connell O’Donovan’s letter to the editor (available here) in the most recent Journal of Mormon History [1] in response to the article “Female Ritual Healing in Mormonism” co-authored by Kris Wright and myself [2]. Instead of waiting six months or so to possibly respond in print, I appreciate being able to respond here. Please note that my comments reflect my opinions only, and are not intended as statement from my co-author.

Continue Reading

Teaching Mormonism at Georgetown-Unit 2: Unique LDS Scripture

For this section of the class we mostly focused on the Book of Mormon. We did spend one day going through the D&C, but in retrospect I think that was a bit of a mistake. I think it would have been better to do the D&C concurrently with Joseph Smith, at least partially, instead of treating it as its own topic. Part of that is because we did that with the next portion of the class, but now I?m getting ahead of myself.

Our guide to the text of the Book of Mormon itself was . . . the Book of Mormon itself. I had dithered about whether or not to use Grant Hardy?s amazing Understanding the Book of Mormon, but in the end decided to let the book of scripture speak for itself. Instead, we used Teryl Givens? By the Hand of Mormon as our more academic book. It was nice to just delve into the text itself and use Givens as kind of a meta-discussion about what the book itself means, and how it?s been used.

Continue Reading

Southwestern States Mission: Easter

How did the Elders and the people they met keep Easter?

Continue Reading

Revisiting the Impossible Question – Part II

And…the objections :

Firstly, her claim that gender is nothing but a construct based on a discourse of power, and sex is but a mysterious part of our eternal identity, leaves nothing clearly meaningful in the concepts of maleness and femaleness. This approach seems to elide differences, as others from the Mexican nun Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz, to Mary Wollstonecraft, have attempted to do. To me, it is clear that Mormon doctrine is fully committed to the concept of differentiation, and the idea that being male or female is an eternal part of our identity (or in other words, that sex and gender are inextricably linked, if not the same thing). Our doctrine of Heavenly Mother and Heavenly Father, the temple narrative that is so grounded in the crowning union of male and female and the creation-wide participation in procreation and regeneration*, the creation narrative steeped in organizing matter and creating order by separation, differentiation, opposition, and the underlying narrative of the plan of salvation that begins and ends with a family of male and female parents?not to mention the explicit Proclamation on the Family?confirm this binary. But if, as Flake and others say, gender is constructed, and sexual differentiation is evolutionary, what is the binary on which creation, exaltation, and eternal marriage are constructed, and which persists through the eternities as an element in our identity? With such a paradigm, are we left with anything at all?

Continue Reading

Revisiting the Impossible Question- Part I

Last post, I offered some musings about the supposedly ?impossible question? I posed to Kathleen Flake at the Methodist-Mormon conference back in February, regarding the definition of femininity and masculinity. At the time, neither the question nor the answer seemed to satisfy either of us, so Dr. Flake kindly offered to follow up with me later to continue the conversation. It was a thought-provoking conversation, and after giving it more thought, I?ve come back to the drawing board with more questions and ideas.

By way of quick summary, I had asked Kathleen Flake to define masculinity and femininity in a way that

a) did not reduce them to mere sexual characteristics or biological difference (which, on its own, seems void of real significance, and furthermore, seems difficult to untangle from temporal causes like evolutionary strategies, which don?t seem to be necessary in a pre or post mortal existence)

b) did not reduce them to character attributes (which seem to boil down to characteristics that should ultimately be universally shunned [coarseness, aggression, emotional neediness, etc.], or universally cultivated [compassion, gentleness, creativity, reason])

c) explains the necessary synthesis of a male and female counterpart for the state of exaltation (as prescribed by doctrines regarding the necessity of temple marriage sealings as we now understand them: monogamous, male-female spousal units)

Continue Reading

Announcing a new column: Peculiar People: Mormonism through the World and the World through Mormonism

Some of you may have already seen the new column at Patheos.com’s Mormon Portal launched last week. The brainchild of two JI bloggers, Peculiar People aims to provide “commentary on culture, politics, the humanities, sports, the arts, and so on through the lens of Mormonism.” Featuring a talented team of contributors—including our own Ben P, Matt B, Ryan T, Max M, and myself, along with present and prior JI (guest) bloggers Rachel Cope, Heidi Harris, Rachael Givens, and David Howlett and a whole slew of other brilliant scholars of Mormon history and culture (Patrick Mason, Susanna Morrill, Taylor Petrey, Richard Livingston, Kate Holbrook, Seth Perry, Xarissa Holdaway, Emily Belanger, and Alan Hurst)—the column will appear twice weekly (Monday and Wednesday). We hope to attract both Mormon and non-Mormon readers, and invite those of you who follow JI regularly to check in over there occasionally, too.

Continue Reading