Talk of the Nation interviews: Richard Bushman and Mario Depillis discusses the religious environment during Smith’s lifetime.

Certainly. Of course, I’d make sure that they understood that Bushman was a believer.

Hi Jim,

I just finished reading “Joseph Smith Rough Stone Rolling” by Richard Lyman Bushman and your name came to mind. You are a student and writer of history, but also a first hand witness of one coming fresh from experiences beyond the understanding of natural man. Your name tells it all Jimmy Olson friend of Superman!

Within the shadows, types, patterns, symbols and mysteries of the gospel and within the scriptures lie greater truths than the natural eyes can see. Jimmy Olson stood next to Clark Kent and never saw the Superman within. Many stood by Joseph Smith and never knew his history. To talk or write the words are one thing, but to truly see as Joseph did is another.

Now I’m no great writer, but what I wrote is the truth of things that I truly saw before I found my life written in the …

Before I really freak you out and ask the question which begs an answer let me bring you up to date in my life. I’m still on Long Island living in the City of Long Beach on the far south shore in Nassau County two miles from the Queens / NYC line. I’m the Branch President of the very small Long Beach Branch. My house is one block from the ocean and one block from our little church building. I’m two miles from the A subway train which takes me once a week to our tiny Manhattan Temple (Bishop Frost is 1st cou. in the Temple Presidency). I’m happily married to my second wife Beth for 23 years in Dec. I have two adult children living home. Matt is a senior in HS and Emily who heading to Utah Valley State as a junior in Jan. I have two sons in the US Army Dave who is in Iraq guarding convoys as a gunner in a HumVee. Guy who is being deployed to Afghanistan in Jan. as a foot soldier. I have two other sons living in Colorado near their mother Darlene and grandmother Arlene. Rob is continuing his college life in hopes of being a doctor. He did a bit in the Marines a few years before 911. Mike is working construction still trying to find himself a little like all of us.

I’m happy and still keep in touch with Glenn Hughes, Bobby Worthington and Dirk Hooiman. I’m closer to Dirk and plan on retiring in June and move to SLC near where he has been living for the past 10 years. The Valley calls to me and I must go. Beyond the vail of those mountains there is a place for me that God has prepared.

Now back to the future. Riddles are the puzzles of the gods which his children must learn to answer. The key to this mystery is in reveasing your mind set. Seeing the future before it is history would make you a true seer which is what God would have all his children be!

Can you finish what I wrote back 4 paragraphs ago? To answer you must first read my book “Into the Greater Light” at my web site:

http://www.homestead.com/oceanportal

Then if you dare contact Clayton Christensen and let him know that you were there in those days when the Lord brought Bobby, Glenn, Dirk and I together into his Church, the Kingdom of God here on this earth. He will give you the next key so you will know exactly what the Lord would have you do.

Remember the stones keep rocking and rolling down that hill that Joseph laid the foundation for. In following President Hinckley by rereading the Book of Mormon before the end of this year you will be ready for that future which shall surely come to try the faith of the saints.

I say nomore, but to you I said more than enough because when I first came you were my friend!

Peace, love & blessing,
your most unworthy servant,

Old Charley

Now I ask “What Hath God Wrought?”

I, like most of you, have known the non-standard facts contained in RSR for sometime. I have rarely shared these historical events with anyone, because I feel that it is not my place to expose people to facts that might be trials of their faith before they are ready. And I feel that the mark of readiness is when they seek out knowledge for themselves. It has been a general rule that the Lord predicates revelation upon the recipient’s request. Likewise, I think most of us learned these facts about Joseph by seeking them out. We had to wrestle with how to adjust our paradigm to incorporate our new knowledge. I found FARMS quite helpful with that. Eventually, we threw off our old notions, and our testimonies became firmer. I think this is the process that most members should take.

I feel that it has been wisdom that the leadership of the church has made it a practice not to include some of these events in “official histories”, Sunday School and institute manuals. I think the weakest of the Saints and investigators in general have a hard enough time adjusting their paradigms to include what they do know about the doctrines and practices of the church. “Milk before meat”. Their tender roots are not ready to stand the heat of the day. I think the problem with anti-Mormon literature is that it exposes people to things before they are ready.

Faithful members would often not read Brodie’s book because it was considered “anti-” or Quinn’s books because he is no longer a member for refusing to have the church approve his writings before publishing them. I am glad that the church has now softened its stance and has permitted Bushman to publish RSR. RSR provides easy access for the general membership to these facts without having to sift through FARMS articles. Perhaps the timing is right for the release of RSR as it has become easier due to the internet for people to become exposed to these non-standard facts, and we would rather that they learn them from a Mormon source first. And has been stated before, some members might feel betrayed if they think the church is trying to hide these things from them. The members are going to have to rise to the occasion and stretch to accomodate new ideas, but I think it is good for them as long as it is not faster than they have the capacity to receive.

But, let interested members seek it out. Perhaps we could recommend RSR to interested parties. I don’t think we should make these facts part of our Sunday School classes. As more and more members become acquainted with these ideas, it will slowly enter the mainstream awareness. These things will probably only be talked about in church as often as Heavenly Mother or polygamy are after the majority of members are acquainted with the facts.

**First let me begin with the fact that I’m much interested by what happens in this book. It has moved me to tears, frustration, anger, meditation on my life, my belief, my history.

**I’m not all the way through Bushman’s book yet. Moving through the details and movements here takes time and thought. But I’m not always sure that lack of records that Bushman underscores means lack of Joseph’s involvement. I find Bushman distancing Joseph from events that really are mysterious. I’m fine when Bushman leaves this mysterious, leaves the lack of connection, the lack of evidence (that’s useful and helpful). I’m confused when he jumps to a comfortable interpretation of the lack of information. Generally a lack should be allowed to remain mysterious, discomfiting, not gathered into something comforting. I tend to think that “making things strangeâ€? is useful, Bush tends toward “making things familiar.â€?

**I think that Bushman too often interprets the lack of Joseph as subject matter or topic in the holy records (revelations, Book of Mormon, New Translation) as the lack of the personal in these records and in the Mormon story. With Joseph you need to push a lot at the notion of what is “personal.” And with this term “personal” I think of something situated in a time and place, invested in a certain complex of issues, concerns, anxieties. There is much in Joseph’s story that seems strikingly situated in a time and place (and by Joseph’s story I mean also the stories he dictated in the revelations, the Book of Mormon story, the New Translation of the Bible, the Abraham story from the papyrus. . . .). And a place where I stand, where I speak, where I live–that seems dipped in the personal.

**I totally agree with Nate that synthesis, elaboration is what makes this book interesting. A focus on “expose” gets us nowhere.

**If we allow the mystery of believing in the story we tell about Mormon history, we must allow a respect for the mystery of not believing.

**Mormon history is so invested in the notion of “enemy.” That comes from the revelations. And it comes from the way Mormons early told our own story (with Joseph lead and some good reason beginning in Kirtland, and Missouri, and Illinois). For me the much more troubling story is that of the “double.” What I am doing is very like what you are doing. The “enemy” story forgives so much on our side.

The acceptability of this approach was illustrated for me by my experience with Reverend Thomas Ryan of the Paulist Fathers in connection with his wonderful book “The Sacred Art of Fasting.”

http://www.skylightpaths.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SP&Product_Code=1-59473-078-4

In this examination of fasting as a spiritual practice Father Ryan included an entire chapter on the Latter-day Saint practice of fasting, giving us equal standing with Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism. Father Ryan chose to give us equal attention with these much older and larger religious traditions not because he thought our fasting practices were revealed by the only true prophets on earth, but rather because he was fascinated by discovering a religious community where millions of people regularly fast. And I must say it is a two-way street. Father Ryan’s description of fasting among Latter-day Saints is better than anything I have ever seen from any Mormon, and he brings to bear fascinating insights from other spiritual traditions on our fasting practices. I would love to make this book better known among Mormons, but back to RSR.

As to the converse question of how insights from RSR might enter into mainstream LDS discourse, I think that depends on whether they can be given a causuistic spin. As long as they are presented in a faithful rather than a debunking spirit I think the Mormon mainstream can absorb and benefit from many of the more non-standard facts in RSR. For example, Joseph’s temper and adherence to the concerns of the culture of honor, when coupled with the amazing speed with which he forgave people who genuinely wronged him (e.g. Orson Hyde), make Joseph both more of a ‘regular guy’ and more admirable. The fact that Joseph was allowed to be subject to the consequences of his mistakes in political and economic matters teach us that we should not assume that the Lord will make us rich just becasue we intend to pay a lot of tithing, it teaches us that spiritual growth is more important than power and riches. Joseph’s sometimes overbearing forcefulness becomes fascinating rather than galling when contrasted with the eagerness with which he sought to endow others with charismatic and priestly power.

One can argue that putting such a faithful ‘spin’ on everything is just sugarcoating truly sour stuff, but I believe that that is as appropriate in talking to a community of faith as bracketing the credibillity of miracles in talking about religious matters to a community of scholarship based on objectivist principles.

Vogel is, I think, caught up in the same tired issues of truth claims, which limits the interest of his argument to historians outside Mormonism who are interested in what the tradition means rather than arguing if it’s true. For them, quite frankly, that is beside the point. Vogel posits things like Joseph forging plates and practicing stories; he is more detailed than Brodie, but really says nothing new.

The most interesting part of the book is his close reading of the Book of Mormon, which Brodie, mistakenly, I think, dismissed. Vogel provides a reading which is sometimes insightful, sometimes Nibley-esque in its parallelism and other times lapses into strained superficiality. It might, though, appeal a great deal to naturalists seeking to evaluate the BoM. On the other hand, the BoM is rather surprisingly ignored by most academics who look at Mormonism. It’s probably too long, like Harold Bloom said.

I also think Nate is right about Signature. It’s far too niche to attract much notice.