Articles/Essays – Volume 33, No. 4

An Excellent Survey of the Headlines, But Not of the Heart | Richard N. Ostling and Joan K. Ostling, Mormon America: The Power and the Promise

Mormon America is a comprehensive and instructive overview of Mor monism “for non-Mormons and Mor mons alike” (xi). Its scope, tone and readability reveal the best of Richard and Joan Ostling’s background in journalism. They cover most major topics in Mormon history, teachings, and culture, drawing from a large, well-selected array of scholarly studies and interviews with a variety of church members. They have an objective and fair-minded stance and often provide contextual understanding for issues they discuss. And each chapter is like a separate article, with an engaging beginning, readable middle, and summary statement at the end, usually positive but sometimes cautionary. For these and other reasons, this book de serves reading by all Mormon watchers in and out of the church. 

However, it also has some key weaknesses. Principally, the book fails to cover topics that would help readers understand what has motivated the saints. The major methodological weaknesses tend to be the flip side of the strengths. The emphasis on controversy—the downside of a journalistic approach—tends to crowd out other important issues. The acknowledged reliance on secondary material (xiii) leads to omissions and debatable claims that could have been avoided with more interaction with practicing Mormons. And the deliberate focus on “what is distinctive” in the Mormon world (xi) downplays important similarities to other religious groups. 

The book’s strengths and weak nesses play out differently in its different parts. The chapters on church history are informative and interesting and include numerous details most members won’t know. However, they do not offer a balanced diet: there is too much of controversy and not enough of Mormonism as a faith. For example, the discussion of polygamy (56-80, 84-90) focuses on its practice in secret (1840s Nauvoo and post-Manifesto), the government anti-polygamy crusade, and issues with modern fundamentalists—while only a couple of paragraphs discuss how polygamy was lived from the 1850s through the 1880s, or what it meant to its practitioners (69-70, 86). The most crucial absence is in the coverage of Joseph Smith: one gets little feeling for why the saints followed him then or honor him today. It’s as if one were to teach American history by exploring the founding fathers’ public and private lives without explaining the political ideas they espoused or the Constitution they wrote.[1]

The chapters on LDS scripture and doctrine are well organized and cover several important topics. Though not bad, these are the weakest chapters, due to numerous small errors and a few major ones that could have been corrected with more feedback from knowledgeable members. The biggest misperception concerns the LDS view of the atonement: the Ostlings perpetuate the error of Newsweek’s Kenneth Woodward, describing it as an act of “empathy” and “example” (328), but not a literal expiation for sins.[2] The biggest omission is all that Mor monism shares with mainstream Christianity: the reader is not told where the similarities lie, much less their relation to the differences or their relative importance. When even mentioned, similarities are described as boring.[3]

There are other problems, such as a tendency to detail criticisms of doc trine and scripture while at best summarizing defenses. The Book of Mormon’s teachings are never explained: quoted passages are nearly all about controversial topics, not passages the members cherish; the chapter on the Book of Mormon focuses entirely on its historicity. This is no more helpful than explaining the Bible to non-Christians by discussing only higher criticism and Biblical archeology. Also, some crucial definitions are omitted. The chapter on the LDS beliefs about God uses the terms “finite,” “limited,” and “contingent,” which have precise theological definitions that many readers will not know. The discussion of whether Mormons are Christian is flawed from the lack of a definition of “Christian.”[4]

The chapters on Mormon culture are the strongest part of the book. All major aspects of the culture are covered, from church governance to personal lifestyle, missions and temples to celebrities and dissidents. These descriptions are the most accurate, perhaps because the journalist’s tools are better suited to current events than to history or doctrine. The balance here is the best, too, covering strengths as well as concerns. (For ex ample: ‘Anyone who notices the regimentation at the MTC and omits the palpable excitement of the students misses the story” [214].) While some members may feel uncomfortable with discussions of church finances or the temple endowment,[5] my own concern is that there is little mention of spiritual life: experiences of comfort, healing, guidance, and witness. A few short testimonies are quoted, but the role of testimony is not understood.[6] The Ostlings refer to the belief in modern prophecy and quote President Hinckley about receiving revelation at the highest levels (149); unfortunately they miss the equally important belief in personal revelation at the lowest levels and the part it plays in members’ commitment, optimism, and support of church leaders. 

Notwithstanding my reservations, I greatly enjoyed Mormon America and cared deeply about it, writing many re flections in the margins (as well as corrections). There is much to think about here, and even the mistakes reveal opportunities for better communication. I especially liked the occasional comparisons to other churches and wished for more detail. The Ostlings are candid in their praise of the church’s strengths: committed living of beliefs, virtuous individuals, strong communities and families, a unique welfare program, high standards for youth and opportunities for their service.[7] They are also candid in their assessment of its weak nesses: struggles to adapt church programs in foreign cultures, lack of a contemplative side or intellectual tradition, absence of training for clergy, a defensive posture towards criticism and dissidents. The final chapter looks to the next century, with such notable comments as: “Mormon administrative style is inspired by corporate America, not democratic America” (374); “Mormonism may appeal precisely because of its authoritarianism” (383). 

Because of the book’s weaknesses, I worry about its reception among the stated target audiences. On one hand, many non-Mormons may be content, thinking they understand more than they actually do. This can be helped by further reading, as the authors hope (xi) -Jan Shipps’ recent Sojourner in the Promised Land: Forty Years Among the Mormons (University of Illinois Press, 2000) would make a good companion. On the other hand, many Mormons may be overly upset or dismissive. This can be helped by a realization that as the church grows, it will get more attention, so we should welcome all fair-minded approaches. The book ends with this gracious tribute: “The Mormon people encircle each other in a loving community, seeking to make sure that everyone has a divinely appointed task and that no one’s needs are overlooked. In modern, fractionated American society, those are accomplishments as impressive as building a city-state on the Mississippi, hauling handcarts across the prairies, or making the arid Salt Lake Basin bloom” (385). Only an atmosphere of mutual respect will enable the dialogue that furthers understanding, which in turn helps the church fulfill its mission to serve the world. 

Mormon America: The Power and the Promise. By Richard N. Ostling and Joan K. Ostling (New York, Harper Collins, 1999), 454 pp., $17.00. 


[1] [Editor’s Note: The footnotes for this article start with footnote 2 in the PDF] By comparison, Leonard Arrington and Davis Bitton’s The Mormon Experience has two chapters on Smith and two thematic chapters discussing both early persecutions and the appeal of early Mormonism. In Mormon America, the two chapters on Smith discuss persecutions (33-36) but not why people were attracted to the movement.

[2] [Editor’s Note: This is footnote 3 in the PDF] The authors cite several mainstream Mormon works that embrace a literal view of the atonement, so this claim is baffling. 

[3] [Editor’s Note: This is footnote 4 in the PDF] For example, much of the Book of Mormon “seems tedious” (27); the early missionary discussions (which discuss God and Christ) are “bland” (213); General Conference talks are “routine, even banal” (202). 

[4] [Editor’s Note: This is footnote 5 in the PDF] Mormons tend to use the term more broadly than do Evangelical Protestants, to mean a belief in Jesus Christ as the savior rather than an embrace of a traditional creed. The charge that they are not Christian, thus, sounds to Mormons like a denial of their belief in Christ though Mormons claim to have the only true church, the authors, thus, err in saying they claim to be the only true Christians (316). 

[5] [Editor’s Note: This is footnote 6 in the PDF] While detailing an extensive estimate of church holdings (by methods explained in an appendix), the authors note that the LDS church runs its finances with “scrupulous integrity as well as business acumen” (120). The description of the endowment is drawn partly from church sources (though which sources is not clear since the book has topical reference notes rather than detailed citations). The rest comes from comparison with the Masonic ceremony, an issue they acknowledge to be sensitive. (193-195). 

[6] [Editor’s Note: This is footnote 7 in the PDF] Descriptions of the missionary discussions and temple recommend interviews fail to mention the emphasis on having a testimony (213,187-8). The authors apparently equate “testimony” to the verbal expression rather than the spiritual experience: “like the Mormons, Evangelicals uphold traditional morals and encourage personalized testimonials” (384). 

[7] [Editor’s Note: This is footnote 8 in the PDF] The high praise of the character of the LDS people, though gratifying, is rather two dimensional. Some discussion of the struggles of individuals and congregations would give a fuller picture and added credibility to the obviously sincere praise. See “Those Amazing Mormons: The Media’s Construction of Latter-day Saints as a Model Minority” (Dialogue 32, no. 2 [Summer 1999]: 107-128) about the problems with the “model minority” label, which Mormon America uses (xxiv).