The origins of the Mormon religion are a topic of great interest. On one hand, Mormonism is an outworking of the democratization thesis in its purest form, hence, the designation as the quintessential American Religion. On the other, many Mormon beliefs are completely different from its immediate predecessors. There have been a number of works that have explained the social origin of Mormonism, but not its unique theological development. (xv) Stepping into this void, John L. Brooke’s The Refiner’s Fire: The Making of Mormon Cosmology, 1644-1844 attempts to account for the development of core Mormon beliefs that substantially differentiate it from mainstream Protestantism. Among these beliefs are the celestial marriage, equality of matter and spirit, and the ultimate goal of godhood amongst believers. For Brooke, these beliefs originated from traditions of alchemy and hermeticism. Brooke locates this trajectory as originating in the traditions of the Radical Reformation. Despite the prime facie connections made by Brooke, there remain questions that significantly question his thesis.

|inline

Jon Krakauer’s book on the Ron and Dan Lafferty’s religious slaying of Brenda and Erica Lafferty is gripping and sensational. In Krakauer’s exploration of why Ron and Dad committed these murders, he examines their fundamentalist background. He not only investigates how Dan and Ron were drawn to Mormon fundamentalism, but also illuminates the links Mormon fundamentalism has with mainstream Mormonism’s past. In doing so, Krakauer raises some interesting questions that he teases the reader with though out the book, but never really deals with seriously. The work is an excellent account of the Lafferty murders, recounting vivid details and well-crafted turns of phrase. Krakauer’s skill at writing for effect cannot be discounted. However, after reading the work, one feels as though they are only getting one version of the events, especially as it when the book describes and analyses Mormon history. It as if his interpretation is driving the book rather than the sources.

The only real nuanced discussion of Krakauer’s sources comes in the interesting point-counterpoint appendix to the book. Krakauer reprints the entire review of Under the Banner of Heaven by Richard Turley Jr., the managing director of the Family and Church History Department of the LDS church. In a scathing review, Turley makes many of the same observations as I do here. The best part of his review for the reader of the book is the discussion of sources. Turley claims that Krakauer has cherry-picked his sources and does not critically analyze the entirety of Mormon scholarship. Perhaps the most damaging is Turley’s criticism of the heavy uncritical use of Fawn Brodie’s biography of Joseph Smith, especially in regards to the 1832 castration attempt by an Ohio mob. Turley’s overall point is well founded, since all of Krakauer’s sources tend to agree, there is no mention or use of conflicting reports. It is as if Krakauer only used the sources that agreed with him. There is not any discussion of conflicting sources or scholarly working throughout the book. Krakauer does admit to several errors in the work, which he has corrected in the more recent editions of the book. He also defends his selection of sources in his rebuttal, but this is the only real place any dissenting views are considered instead of just the ones that support his clear and simple narrative. The best counter-point Krakauer offers lies in his point of the selectivity of inside Mormon scholarship noting that all LDS accounts of Mormon history have to be “faith promoting” and therefore exclude any real critical analysis of the history of the LDS church. Within this interesting point lies a rich discussion that is barely broached by Krakauer in his rebuttal. An interesting discussion could be had between the writers of critical Mormon works, like Krakauer; and the sympathetic writers of Mormon history, such as Richard Bushman, author of Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling.

Krakauer tries to situate the Lafferty case in terms of the early history of the Mormons. Among the major themes that he links from the early Mormon Church to the fundamentalist Lafferty brothers were the propensity to hear the voice of God, the idea of blood atonement, and most prominently, the ideal of plural wives. Very carefully, the narrative switches back and forth from accounts of Smith, Young, and other early Mormons to the events leading up to murders. This serves to form in the reader’s mind a close attachment – an almost casual one – between the two eras. The reader cannot but help to think that Krakauer wants his readers to think that the Lafferty’s were being true to the foundations of their religion and that there is something inherently wrong with the LDS Church. While he is not explicit in this connection, he also does not try to avail these concerns. This connection is one in a series of connections that Krakauer flirts with, but does not ever really come out and defend or refutes.

The subtitle to the work is as lengthy as it is controversial, “On July 24, 1984 a woman and her infant daughter were murdered by two brothers who believed they were ordered by to kill by God. The roots of their crime lie deep in the history of an American religion practiced by millions.” Here is an example of Krakauer showing his intent to connect the murders not only to Mormon fundamentalism, but also to mainstream Mormonism. It does not stop here, however. In the first few pages of the introduction, he states that his work will raise questions about the nature of religion itself. In doing so, he must connect the murders not only to fundamentalist and mainstream Mormonism, but also to Christianity and religion in general. Over all, he fails in this respect. While he makes a very damning case in terms of the violence and the damage polygamy does to those involved both in the early Mormon Church and in the fundamentalists that have separated themselves from the LDS Church; he is unable to connect the larger threads. This is because he either does not take into account or fails to discuss the purposeful separation of the current incarnation of LDS Church from these doctrines and events. An analogous situation is linking fundamentalist terrorism with all of Islam, or all Christians in the actions of the Crusades. It is an example of contamination by proximity.

The book is most successful when looking it examines the religion, motives, and history of both the Laffertys and the fundamentalist Mormon movement, in its journalism. It is least successful when it tries to link historical themes together in a nuanced manner; in fails as a scholarly work. If Krakauer were to nuance his work and leave out his larger, under discussed implications, a much better book would be had.

Richard Bushman has written an excellent biography of Mormonism’s founder in Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling. Its principle strengths are its narrative style, balanced sympathy for a complex character, meticulous research, and its attention to detail. Conversely, the principle problems with the work are related to its strengths, sometimes the work is too sympathetic to the main character and other times there is too much attention paid to detail. The book is arranged into twenty-nine chapters, each covering a phase or topic in Smith’s life. The thirtieth section, the epilogue, is an extension historically of how the Mormon Church reacted to its leader and founder’s death. From a stylistic sense, Bushman is an excellent story teller. He is able, for the most part, to breathe life into the mundane details of Smith’s life. While the book is incredibly well researched, footnoted, and well written, sometimes the level of detail is distracting from the progression of Smith’s life.

Reconstructing a controversial religious figure like Joseph Smith is a daunting task. Anytime a religious figure claims to have received a divine revelation, translated a revealed work that depicts an entire lost civilization, and is involved in several scandals, skepticism is bound to ensue in large quantities. Writers within the community most certainly will be biased towards an inspired view of the accounts whereas writers from outside the community are likely to undercut the significance of these accounts under the banner of reductionist fraud. Because of these concerns, it was refreshing to see the more balanced approach that Bushman takes. Bushman is a Mormon believer himself, so this allows him and “insider’s perspective” of the Mormon tradition and it is assured that Bushman will not attempt to reduce the religious aspects of Joseph Smith’s life to mere culture forces or a desire to defraud or exploit his followers. He states that on the problem of Smith’s inspiration, he will present Smith in good faith that his accounts were genuine. An excellent example of this is Bushman’s treatment of Smith’s First Vision. Bushman does a good job explaining how and why the focus shifts in later accounts of the vision from Smith’s conversion or forgiveness of his sins, to the statement of apostasy of the current church. Other accounts of this that I have read have sought to explain this shift in terms of Smith trying to give credence to his current movement building.

On the other side of the fence, Bushman is no Mormon apologist in this work. He endeavors to show Smith for how he was; Bushman does not shy away from the controversies in Smith’s life. Bushman states early on in his prologue, “For a character as controversial as Smith, pure objectivity is impossible. What I can do is to look frankly at all sides of Joseph Smith, not ducking any of the problems. Covering up flaws makes no sense in any case. Most readers do not believe in, nor are they interested in, perfection. Flawless characters are neither attractive nor useful.” An excellent example of this is on 371 and spilling onto 372, where Bushman places the blame for what happened to the Davies County opponents, saying,

“Joseph must take responsibility for the Mormon raids on their Daviess County enemies. His angry rhetoric stirred the blood of more militant men. After the Daviess raids, Rockwell wrote his father that “the prophet has unsheathed his sword and in the name of Jesus declares that it shall not be sheathed again until he can go into any county or state in safety and in peace.” Words like that licensed Lyman Wight’s desperate plans. Joseph’s approval of Rigdon’s salt sermon with its strong threats against dissenters had justified the Danites’ expulsion of the Whitmers, Cowdery, and Phelps.”

Here Bushman establishes that he is indeed no Mormon apologist, even though he gives Smith the benefit of the doubt in the book.

Perhaps the greatest weakness of the book, besides the fundamental assumption, is the reliance on Smith’s mother’s journals for Smith’s early life. It is easy to imagine the forced relationship between Smith and his father that Smith’s mother could have created between them in retrospect. However, I don’t know of what source Bushman should have used in its stead.

Bushman situates Smith within a larger period of tremendous religious creativity. Going along with Hatch’s thesis, Bushman sees Smith developing Mormonism through the lenses of anti-clerical and anti-authoritarian sentiment, the empowerment of each person to interpret the Scriptures, and a since of divine purpose and mission drove Smith to be industrious. Hatch himself had used the Mormons as an example that demonstrated his thesis. Whereas Hatch looked at the early Mormon Church’s leaders as a whole, Bushman only examines Smith and his contributions to the movement. While the scope is slightly different, the two works reinforce each other. For example, Hatch speaks in depth about the popular appeal of Smith’s message and how Smith’s roots aided in the construction of that message. Bushman gives, not only an in depth exploration of Smith’s early life, but also a step by step account of how his message attracted laity from other denominations.

The resulting effect of Bushman’s work is a careful and respectful representation of the life and times of Joseph Smith and as an extension, the beginnings of the Mormon Church. While a bit tedious to digest at 666 pages, including notes, the work is effective at stringing along the reader, maintaining interest while developing a coherent narrative. Because of the highly controversial nature of Bushman’s subject, this is quite an accomplishment. Because of the highly suggestive nature of Smith’s life, one has to take him as a real prophet, a delusional soul, or the dastardliest of conmen. Bushman says, “Let see what he looks like if we take him at his word.” Because one cannot prove without a doubt that Smith was lying and conning the whole time, I can accept this hypothetical for the basis of the book. Granting the hypothetical, it makes for an excellent biography.