The Journal of Mormon History 35:3 (Summer 2009), Part 2
By September 5, 2009
Continued from Part 1.
By September 5, 2009
Continued from Part 1.
By September 4, 2009
The need of specialization has the drawback of limiting the scope of one’s work. As I’ve stumbled through the study of history, this has often been a frustration; the academic study of history is quite focussed. This is needed to gain the expertise one needs in historical writing, but as Richard Fletcher says in preface to his The Barbarian Conversion “Professional historians today are expected to know more and more about less and less.”
By September 4, 2009
Terryl L. Givens, The Book of Mormon: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford?s Very Short Introduction Series (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 125 pp + appendixes and index.
If you are looking for a book that focuses on the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, what it tells us about antebellum religious culture, or even how it shaped (or was shaped by) Joseph Smith?s mind, then this is not the book for you.
By September 3, 2009
David C. Knowlton is an Associate Professor of Anthropology at Utah Valley University and author of a number of important studies of Mormonism in Latin America. We’re pleased he has agreed to provide some thoughts on Parley P. Pratt’s mission to Chile and the Latin/Anglo American divide which will be more fully articulated in a pair of forthcoming articles.
The division of America into two, Latin and Anglo is a strange and deceptive cut, particularly when used for academic analysis. If used to refer simply to matters of nation states the contrast has some utility, but it founders if taken as a statement of cultural separation. The boundaries are simply far too fuzzy, and probably always have been, simply because of the ways in which colonial, and later national, powers competed in the New World, and because of the ways in which people migrated and engaged one another.
This issue is particularly germane for understanding Mormonism. Despite its growth outside the New World, Mormonism is almost entirely a religion of the New World. We can argue, however, that its growth both depended and depends on the separation of Anglo America from Latin America as a political reality at the same time it has depended on blurring the lines. To understand this, it is useful to look, briefly, at Parley P. Pratt.
Pratt is generally argued to have been the first missionary to Latin America, when he performed his short, and troubled mission to Chile. But, in Chile Pratt moved in a world dominated by English mercantilism and a local English speaking population, when in Valparaíso. (In Quillota, though, he was more involved with a monolingual Spanish-speaking world.) Nevertheless Pratt’s missionary work was made possible and ultimately frustrated by the realities of how the Anglophone world engaged the Hispanophone world at a time of English mercantilism and Chilean involvement in trade with English speaking populations. But understanding this requires a more careful look than is generally performed.
Pratt was hampered in his efforts by his lack of Spanish, to be sure, though he had more than many give him credit for. He was well on his way to a usable communicative competence. This is so, despite the frustration with his linguistic inabilities that fills his autobiography.
Pratt was also hampered by severe differences between his religious culture and that of the Spanish-speaking Catholics he hoped to proselyte. Pratt’s detailed and extensive dismay at formal Catholic worship illustrates the gap between his expectations and the nature of Latin Catholic practice. They were deliberately separated worlds, following the council of Trent’s reaction against the Protestant reformation and the periodic reformations of Latin American Catholicism to make it less like the Protestantism that was the base of Mormonism. They also were separations that fit into the political calculus of national elites.
Forming the issue this way, however, over states the difference, just as the ideologues–or should I better say “theologues”–would have it. Catholicism was more diverse in practice than the theologues liked. As Sociologist Jean Pierre Bastien observed, this diversity provided the most important possibilities for Protestant growth in Latin America. Many Anglo Protestant missionaries found niches for implanting and cultivating their faith in this Catholic world; Mormons did not. This is the fact that requires historiographic thought and historical explanation.
Pratt was also hampered by his misreading of the civil war then in course in Chile. Generally, this is written as some variant of “Pratt arrived in Chile to find a civil war making his mission impossible.” However, I would argue that idea is a misreading. Prior to departure Pratt was located in San Francisco, the sister port of Valparaíso, where Chileans were a numerous and much commented part of the city. News from Chile arrived faster than news from Boston and was very current. Instead of focusing on whether Pratt did or did not know about Chile´s politics, the more important issue is the way Mormonism moved in the world. In Pratt´s rendering, Mormon success required a relationship with the state and formal liberalism that was not available under the ruling conservatives who won the war, although most people in the worlds in which Pratt moved–those of liberal commerce in the California gold rush–seemed to expect the liberal reformers to win. Many Protestant groups, in contrast, did not depend on formal acceptance and state sponsored liberalism to the degree Mormonism did. They found a place in Chilean society, Pratt returned to the US.
In other words, the issue behind Pratt´s short mission to Chile was less one of language and the conservative win, than it was one of how Mormonism fit, i.e. the kinds of social situations it required in Chile in order to establish itself. Latin America and Anglo America were not cleanly separated.
However, it is one of how cultural projects, including ideas of ethnicity and language fit into political economic space, and the nature of religion in relationship to all of these, were formed and competed in the length and breadth of America. I mean America from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego and not the Anglo America less Canada, the Caribbean, and Guyana that became the US.
My point is further illustrated by Pratt´s prior, and generally unrecognized, mission to Latin America. By this I mean specifically his work in California–at the time predominantly Spanish-speaking. I also mean, with a bit of irony, the settlement of Mormons on a frontier with Mexico-Missouri and later Illinois, and the later migration deeply into Mexican territory, what became Utah and the Mexican west.
This Spanish-speaking world is a shadow, whose lack of historical exploration haunts any attempt to make sense of the hesitant Mormon growth in Mexico, and South America. The ways in which Mormons interacted with or built barriers against the Spanish population and the Spanish institutions of the frontier of Anglo-American expansion are critical, if we wish to understand the whys and wherefores of Mormon growth, both in what is now the US west and in Mexico. Arguably it is necessary if we wish to understand Mormon growth in the twentieth century in South America and Central America.
To this end, I have two articles in press that attempt to move into this gap, but I urge other scholars of Mormonism to not be befuddled by the Latin America Anglo America conceptual separation and to tackle head on the detailed ways in which Mormonism and Mormons interacted with the institutions and peoples of this frontier, where Spanish and English were used on both sides of national borders.
By August 31, 2009
This is continued from the previous PPP post. As with the other, this is a only a preliminary set of observations and explorations. With that disclaimer, we join Parley P. Pratt in Los Angeles, California in June, 1851.
By August 31, 2009
A few minutes ago I was reading a Talking Points Memo article on the guy who took an AR-15 rifle to an Obama event earlier this month. Apparently Chris Broughton attends a fundamentalist Baptist church whose pastor Steven Anderson has prayed that Obama die and go to hell, sentiments that Broughton shares.
By August 29, 2009
As we continue to get settled into our new apartment, and as I continue to unpack books (where on earth did I get so many books?), I came across a box that contained primarily devotional writings by Latter-day Saint leaders, including two or three compilations of Eza Taft Benson’s religio-political writings and speeches.
By August 28, 2009
BHodges tipped me off recently to a notice on the University of Utah Religious Studies site about an informal conversation on Religious and Mormon Studies. Intrigued, I emailed around and was able to find out some more information.
By August 27, 2009
Well, here is my modest and somewhat impromptu contribution to this most excellent series. Pratt’s Autobiography offers the reader some interesting perspectives about his views on race and native populations. This great series inspired me to dust off my copy of the Autobiography and give a brief look at how Pratt deals with these issues on his Chilean Mission. For time and other constraints, I have not done the extensive reading or thought that this topic merits, but I offer the following, very preliminary, observations as food for thought.
By August 25, 2009
If you read the current heading to Section 39 of the Doctrine & Covenants, you will learn of one James Covill, a prospective convert to Joseph Smith’s nascent Church of Christ “who had been a Baptist minister for about forty years” at the time the revelation was given in 1831.
© 2026 – Juvenile Instructor
Recent Comments
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!”
Hannah J on Legacies in Mormon Studies: “I really enjoyed this! Going to be thinking about playing the long game for a while. Thanks Amy and Jenny.”