Historical Fundamentalism and Mormon History

Historical fundamentalism has been a hot topic as of late. Partly as a reaction to movements like the Tea Party, partly as a continuation of the frustrating distance between mainstream and academic history, and partly in response to the growth of constitutional originalism in public discourse as an opposition to societal and political changes?all three parts, it should be noted, are unmistakably interconnected?there has been an increase of ruminations concerning the relationship between the past and the present. (See here, here, here, and here, for example. Also, and especially, here, and here) A recent and significant contribution to these debates comes from Harvard historian Jill Lepore, whose The Whites of their Eyes: The Tea Party?s Revolution and the Battle over American History is a captivating account of how people use (and abuse) the past for modern causes, collapsing the distance between then and now in an effort to gain political and intellectual validation. (A great overview of the book, as well as an insightful interview with Lepore, can be found here. For an enlightening previous interview with Lepore on the importance of being a ?public historian,? sees here.)[1] Personally, I?ve been looking forward to the book for months.

Continue Reading

Johann Gottlieb Fichte and Interpreting Early Mormon Thought

[What follows is the gist of the introduction from my paper “Celestial Family Organization: The Developing Nature of Mormon Conceptions of Heaven, circa 1840s,” presented at the 2010 MHA Conference.]

This post begins with a seemingly unrelated starting point: the debate over the legacy of Kantian philosophy in 1790s Germany. Philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, in defense of his interpretation of Kantian idealism, argued for a distinction between ?the inventor? of an ideological system, and ?his commentators and disciples.? Fichte explained,

The inventor of a system is one thing, and his commentators and disciples are another?The reason is this: The followers do not yet have the idea of the whole; for if they had it, they would not require to study the new system; they are obliged first to piece together this idea out of the parts that the inventor provides for them; [but] all these parts are in fact not wholly determined, rounded and polished in their minds?

Fichte continued by explaining ?the inventor proceeds from the idea of the whole, in which all the parts are united, and sets for these parts individually?The business of the followers,? on the other hand, ?is to synthesize what they still by no means possess, but are only to obtain by the synthesis.?[1]

The specifics of Kantian philosophy that Fichte was debating hold little importance to us, but the tension he outlines between an ?inventor? and ?disciple? plays an important correlating role in the development of early Mormon thought, just as it does with any movement that boasts an innovative founder.

Continue Reading

“A Uniformity So Complete”: Early Mormon Angelology

[To continue my attempt to post something without much work on my part, what follows is the introduction to my recent article, just put online by the Intermountain West Journal of Religious Studies. I post this also to encourage other graduate students to consider submitting to IMW Journal in the future; while it is a student-run production, it boasts an impressive academic review board with professional and respected scholars to help improve your submission; I received great feedback on my earlier drafts that significantly improved the article. To view the articles from the most recent issue, as well as to see submission guidelines,  click here.]

?An angel of God never has wings,? proclaimed Joseph Smith in 1839, just as the LDS Church was establishing itself in what would come to be known as Nauvoo, Illinois.

Continue Reading

New Article: “Salvation Through a Tabernacle: Joseph Smith, Parley P. Pratt, and Early Mormon Theologies of Embodiment”

[The following is the introduction to my recently published article in Dialogue. I post it here with three goals in mind: 1) To get any feedback/corrections/accusations on the article, as well as to provide discussion for anyone else who finds the topic as fascinating as I do. 2) To fulfill my guilt and anxiety to post something of substance here, but doing so without much work on my part. 3) To remind everyone what a great resource Dialogue is, and how awesome they are for strengthening their online presence. For those who haven’t done so yet, go to their website right now and subscribe and/or donate!]

A Kingdom of Priests: Progress and Patronage in Early Mormonism’s Heaven

[In the spirit of transparency, I admit that what follows is an attempt to use the JI as a sounding board for ideas from my upcoming MHA presentation. Critiques are greatly appreciated.]

In 1787, after spending the last two decades of his life working toward American independence and a new form of democratic government, Benjamin Franklin noted that ?there is a natural inclination in mankind for a kingly government.?[1] He was speaking in Philadelphia to the framers of the Constitution, many of whom had grown disillusioned with the potential for radical social movement the early American republic had experienced, and envisioned their own natural aristocracy as the pinnacle of society.[2] Less than a half-decade later, Philadelphia became the location of the most recent of at least a dozen publications of the satirical novel The History and Adventures of Joseph Andrews. Written by British author Henry Fielding, Joseph Andrews mocked the aristocratic foundations of the eighteenth century, especially its ?whole ladder of dependence,? and the novel?s printing success in post-Revolutionary America demonstrates the culture?s acceptance of radical Whig philosophy that revolted against a fixed social status.[3]

Reasonable Faith

My grandmother is on my mind.

Continue Reading

Glenn Beck, Jim Wallis, Sally Quinn?s On Faith and social justice: a collective failure of imagination

Look, in lots of ways, Glenn Beck is a loon. A loon poorly informed by history, at that. But plowing through the veritable scads of secondary material on my dissertation topic (Protestant fundamentalism) has driven one particular truth pretty well home to me: there’s nothing so destructive to a piece of academic writing as a slightly concealed sneer on an author’s face. Concluding that any particular individual or group is so hopelessly drenched in wingnuttery or disappointing political positions or slavish and bewildering adherence to the blindingly goofy that they are no longer worthy of intelligent analysis is to abdicate the responsibility to understand ourselves that the humanities as a discipline lays upon us. Heck, even for activists (as opposed to scholars), to malign and snarl and taunt the representatives of a cause one finds objectionable is to make the classic mistake of treating the symptom as the disease. Which is why I was not terribly impressed with Jim Wallis’s response to Glenn Beck’s by now blaringly well covered advice to Christians: that they should investigate their faith for the dread and dire words “social justice,” (aka, “Progressivism” (Beck’s definition); aka collectiivsm; aka fascism; aka hurting puppies) and if that mark of the beast should be located, flee for the hills.

Continue Reading

“Prelude to American Imperialism”: Mormon Polygamy, Natural Law, and Whiteness

I put up a link earlier this week on the sideblog to an article by Nate Oman* entitled “Natural Law and the Rhetoric of Empire: Reynolds v. United States, Polygamy, and Imperialism” (available at SSRN here). Because Nate is shopping the article around to law journals and it thus might not catch the attention of historians (attention it definitely deserves), I thought I’d post the abstract here for anyone who missed the sideblog link and/or the discussion on it over at Times & Seasons).

Continue Reading

What does Thomas Paine have to do with the Book of Moses? A Footnote to Sunday School Lesson 1 (Moses 1)

[While I sit in the Pisa Airport finishing my Sunday School Lesson for tomorrow, I couldn’t help but share a point of convergence between the lesson and my recent scholarly research (I am currently working on the Christian response to Thomas Paine in the 1790s). What follows is not a fully drawn-out, or perhaps even thought-out, post, but rather a half-baked idea worthy of nothing more than a footnote for tomorrow’s SS class.]

The 1790s represented drastic change for western civilization. On one side of the Atlantic, the early American republic was beginning to forge into a stable nation; on the other side, an early-embraced revolution was evolving into dangerous anarchy in France.

Continue Reading

From the Archives: “A Sample of Pure Language,” Part II (The Interpretations)

[Continued from Part I]

I sincerely appreciate the three respondents participating in this forum. I’m sure all the readers will agree that all three portions are well-written and enlightening.

Although these  three are well-known around the bloggernacle, here are brief introductions: Robin Jensen is an editor for the Joseph Smith Papers Project, recently received his second master’s degree from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and his name can be found on the cover of the recent Revelations and Translations vol. 1. Samuel Brown is currently an Assistant Professor of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine and Division Associate, Medical Ethics and Humanities, University of Utah. Jordan Watkins, theoretically a contributor here at JI, is a PhD candidate in history at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Continue Reading