Customer Reviews

The Millenarian World of Early Mormonism

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I recommend Underwood's revised dissertation as a model for other writers of monographs. The Millenarian World of Early Mormonism is not only good scholarship, it's clearly and carefully written and with an minimum of the pseudo-profundity that fledgling scholars often feel obligated to display. Underwood's thesis is that belief in the imminent Second Coming of Christ permeated the early nineteenth-century culture from which Mormonism sprang and that the doctrine exerted a significant influence on early Mormonism, including aiding its missionary effort in England. Even scholarly Mormons tend to finesse the historical problems with their religion, but LDS bias is rarely detectable here. The Millenarian World of Early Mormonism is a monograph, "a learned treatise on a small area of learning," but within its sphere of competence, it's first-rate.

Grant Underwood had done an outstanding job of depicting 19th century LDS thought and world views. This scholarly work is a must for anyone trying to get an accurate picture of the early Saints beliefs, attitudes, and motivation.

The study of the history of the Mormon religion has exploded in recent years, but not always to the enlightenment of the reader. The "new Mormon history," as this field was labeled in the 1970s, was at first envisioned as an historiographical trend aimed at freeing the study of the faith from the apologetics of previous eras. For many reasons this approach to Mormon history has failed in recent years and this book exemplifies both the heady freshness of the "new Mormon history" during its first years and its more recent, disappointing reality.

"The Millenarian World of Early Mormonism," written by Brigham Young University professor Grant Underwood, is an able explanation of the place of the early Mormon religion of the 1830s and 1840s within the larger Christian apocalyptic movement. Exhaustively researched and tenaciously argued, Underwood's book presents early Mormonism as being more closely related to a larger millenarian perspective than most Latter-day Saints have thought, then or now. By illuminating the parallels between Mormon millennial thought and apocalyptic ideas present in other denominations Underwood demonstrates that Joseph Smith Jr. reflected the society in which he lived and perhaps borrowed from it in creating his unique religious tradition. It was a relatively short step, Underwood confirms, from broader millenarianism to that expressed by the Mormons. Such a conclusion says much about the genius of Joseph Smith as a consolidator and explicator of ideas floating in the religious ether of the early republic, if not as a prophet receiving God's will from on high.

A subtle but vital aspect of Underwood's book is his downplaying of the revolutionary tendencies of Mormonism in general and its millennialism in particular. He suggests that Mormon converts of the 1830s had much in common with other members of American society, and were not insurrectionists seeking to remake it. He asserts that they were "moderate millenarians whose critique of society focused primarily on its spiritual rather than structural deficiencies" (108). This flies in the face of what most other historians have said about the early Latter-day Saints. It also belies what the early Mormons believed about themselves, and cannot be sustained when confronted with the radical nature of early Mormonism.

One example among many makes this point. In 1832 Joseph Smith gave his famous prophecy on the American Civil War. Canonized by the Mormon church, it has been long used as a missionary tool to show that Smith was a "true prophet," since he predicted that a rebellion would begin in South Carolina, southern states would fight northern ones, slaves would rise up against masters, and a great war would take place. What Mormons do not emphasize about this prediction, and which contradict Underwood's moderate millennial argument, is Smith's belief that this would be the beginning of a general Armageddon in which God would make "a full end of all nations" and from which would emerge "the day of the Lord," the millennial reign of God's small group of righteous Saints (Doctrine and Covenants, section 87). By seeking to submerge the militant nature of early Mormonism Underwood might be helping to make respectable the image of present-day Mormonism, but he does not enhance historical understanding.

Underwood's work is firmly in the tradition of the "new Mormon history," relying on detailed research in documents and a presentation that never questions the underlying assumptions of the Mormon faith. It does so admirably, and in so doing presents challenges to students seeking to understand the development of early Mormonism.

Attempts to write off Mormonism as just another of the frontier millennialists that arose in the early 1800s is too tempting for some people to pass up, but in the end there are too many issues that remain and too many ideas that simply don't fit. Millerism was not unknown to early LDS leaders, including Joseph Smith, who addressed many of the errors of Millerism. What Underwood fails to adequately deal with in Mormonism are: 1) the Book of Mormon; 2) the extended prophecy of Mormonism; 3) fulfillment of ancient prophecy; and 4) the seemingly self-fulfilling nature of LDS prophecy.

The Book of Mormon leaves discernible historic and linguistic footprints in both ancient Arabia and Mesoamerica. It has a rich heritage that puts it far beyond the frontier literature of its day. This is the source of numerous books and papers and cannot be addressed here, but Underwood too casually dismisses the Book of Mormon to keep it in the shadow of Miller. He's also correct regarding many of the millennialist views of the saints, but he also ignores the extended prophecies: the fulfillment of the prophecies relating to the restoration of Israel, the gathering of the Jews and the future establishment of Zion. In short, although many of the rank and file saints may have been expecting the imminent return of Christ, the leaders of the church knew that the gospel must first be preached to the world, the Jews return to their homeland and temples dot the Earth in fulfillment of prophecy. It's clear that the LDS leaders themselves didn't believe it was right around the corner.

Underwood also discounts the ancient prophecies which directly relate to Mormonism. It cannot be denied that Miller found fulfillment of prophecies as they related to other events, but Mormonism found prophetic fulfillment in its own creation and mission. Isaiah 29 relates to the "sealed book" that became the Book of Mormon; Gen. 49 relates to the promised land as they related to Joseph, who received the birthright. It's one thing to interpret prophecy, quite another to bring about fulfillment. Mormonism's building of temples and filling the Earth is coming about today just as described. Its prophecy on war correctly saw the coming of the Great Civil War and the subsequent world wars.

Another point. What did Joseph Smith and the Restoration have in common with Judaism and ancient Christianity? The role of witnesses. Moses had the children of Israel as witnesses to his great work, not to mention the 70 Elders of Israel who "saw God." Christianity at the time of Christ also had the apostles as witnesses to not only the resurrection, but the transfiguration on the mount and numerous healings. Lastly, Mormonism had many witnesses, again of healings, of restoring of keys of authority, of the Book of Mormon, of the acceptance of temples and so forth. Not even Islam had this. Neither did Joan of Arc, Ann Lee, Ellen G. White or any other latter-day prophets.

Underwood's treatment is superficial at best, and he misses the most dramatic moments and dismisses too easily that which is of the most significance.