By June 4, 2009
Steve R. Sorensen, former director of the LDS Church Archives and co-editor of the 5th volume in the Joseph Smith Papers’ document series passed away on May 29, 2009. In 1980 he started work as an archivist for the Church and went on to serve 16 years as director of the Archives.[1] In 2006, Steve received the Leonard Arrington Award from the Mormon History Association for his lifetime contributions to Mormon history.[2]
By June 3, 2009
The Sacred Space Symposium at BYU concluded with a panel discussion guided by Richard Bushman and included each of today’s presenters. Dr. Bushman had opening remarks and launched discussion with a few questions of the panel before turning it over for questions from the audience. I did not take down the questions from the audience, sorry. We hope that providing these notes has been fruitful for many of you. Those of us who attended really enjoyed it and felt that the presenters were well prepared and engaging in their presentations. Jim Faulconer deserves hearty praise for his work putting it together and we hope to see many more conferences like this one that bring the work of national scholars from within and without the Mormon tradition to bear on issues of Mormon studies.
Richard Bushman
Before the Manhattan temple dedication a group of us was shown through the building.
By June 3, 2009
Laurie Maffly-Kipp, Associate Professor of Religious Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
In mid September 1983, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints dedicated a temple in Santiago Chile. It was the first built in a Spanish speaking country, just a few months prior to the Mexico City Temple. Pres. Hinckley stood in for Pres. Kimball, Elders McConkie and Packer with wives and other leaders attended. This occasion was the most visible sign of the Church’s recent growth in South America. Work had been going on for years to prepare for it. The first stake organized in Chile occurred 11 yrs earlier. The members, he said, were not ready for a temple then.
By June 3, 2009
Michael Fishbane, Nathan Cummings Professor of Jewish Studies, Divinity School, University of Chicago presented on the Divine Presence in the Hebrew Bible. He hilighted that sacred places are not natural, but are made in the Hebrew Bible. My notes:
My contribution to this conference will be to focus on the theme of sacred space in the Hebrew Bible. The Hebrew Bible is the foundational document of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. My orientation has to benefit from the limitations of one slice of historic theology, but we’ll see that it has many dimensions. To help narrow the focus, I want to talk about the interplay of sacred space in the bible and the sacred presence.
By June 3, 2009
Hamid Mavani, Assistant Professor of Islamic Studies, Claremont Graduate University spoke on the sacred in Islam. In essence, he argued that sacred space is defined by intent in Islam. My reformulated notes:
I should let you know that I am the only Muslim speaker; you can be assured that what I say is the absolute truth [laughter].
By June 3, 2009
Richard A. Cohen, Professor of Philosophy, and Director of the Institute of Jewish Thought and Heritage, University of Buffalo (SUNY) presented a paper a the Sacred Space Symposium on “Place, Sacred Space, and Utopia”. The session was chaired by Ralph Hancock, Associate Professor of Political Science, BYU. Dr. Cohen argued, in essence, that there is no sacred space in Judaism and even the most publicly sacred place in Judaism, the temple, is a testament to the placelessness of holiness in Judaism. My notes are not to be seen as a word for word transcript. I have made additions and rewordings for clarity and I missed plenty. Here it is:
By June 3, 2009
Elder Cecil O. Samuelson, President of Brigham Young University kicked off the Sacred Space Symposium with very brief remarks welcoming both presenters and guests. He remarked, in essence, that one of the roles of a university is to understand our own tradition better and also the understandings and perspectives of others. With presentations across a wide theological range, this is shaping up to be a great symposium.
The JI is out in force here this morning and we will be providing notes for each presentation. Stay tuned!!
By June 1, 2009
Yes, I’m “revisiting” the subject of a less than 24-hour-old post! In some ways I restate what Ben said, and the issues I deal with are discussed in both Ben’s post and the following comments, but I also ask some different, though similar, questions.
By June 1, 2009
A couple of nights ago I stumbled across the antidote for all of you out there disillusioned with the attempts of LDS art to meaningfully engage with Mormon history: I saw Mahonri Stewart’s The Fading Flower, presented by New Play Project at Provo Theatre Company. I took along a date, so I was legitimately worried that the whole thing might flop. But I was pleasantly surprised: the play deals with the atmosphere surrounding Joseph III’s coming of age, his assumption of the leadership of the RLDS faith, and the heightening conflict between Nauvoo and Salt Lake – with the Smith family caught in between. It gives special attention to Emma Smith and her youngest son, David Hyrum, in a way serving as a stage adaptation of Valeen Tippetts Avery’s From Mission to Madness: Last Son of The Mormon Prophet.
Although aesthetics and empathy, not faithfulness to history, are the driving forces behind this production, it is compelling, even to the historical mind. And it’s especially significant for its intended lay LDS audience.
In any case, if you’re in Provo in the next week, it’s worthwhile. More information available at http://newplayproject.org/season/2009/fading-flower/.
By May 29, 2009
So I was thinking about Edje’s comment on Russell’s “Why I am a Tory” post:
If the British had stuck to the Proclamation of 1763 indefinitely (forbidding English subjects from settling west of the Appalachians) I think it would have made it rather difficult to implement any sort of centralized gathering scheme. The reaction would have been similar to what actually happened in the US, but with centralized law enforcement and nowhere to go, the Mormons would have been eradicated.
If I recall the diggers attempted a commune in 17th century England and were eradicated. Yet, if I recall, a major reason for the Proclamation of 1763 was to keep the colonists from encroaching on native lands. Since Russell had us on the topic of 1 Nephi 13, I’ll quote verse 14: “And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it as upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.”
If the Mormons needed to have a frontier to flee to, were they a part of the manifest destiny movement, or were they fleeing from it?
© 2026 – Juvenile Instructor
Recent Comments
Glen Larson on CFP: Book of Mormon: “Please add me to your mailing list. Thanks”
Mark Staker on Legacies in Mormon Studies: “Jenny was always generous in sharing her knowledge. She was not only an exceptional educator (who also taught her colleagues along the way), but she…”
Gary Bergera on Legacies in Mormon Studies: “Jenny's great. Thanks for posting this.”
Kathy Cardon on Legacies in Mormon Studies: “I worked in the Church's Historical department when Jenny was in the Museum. I always enjoyed our interactions. Reading this article has been a real…”
Don Tate on Legacies in Mormon Studies: “Very well done and richly deserved! I am most proud of Jenny and how far she has come with her life, her scholarship, and her…”
Ben P on Legacies in Mormon Studies: “My favorite former boss and respected current historian!”