Fundamentalist Mormon Theology has some interesting differences with the LDS Church. Dr Cristina Rosetti says Heavenly Mothers are named, as is the Holy Ghost. We’ll also talk about a specialized form of reincarnation and the economic order of heaven. Check out our conversation…
Don’t miss our other conversations with Cristina: https://gospeltangents.com/people/cristina-rosetti/
Copyright © 2024
Gospel Tangents
All Rights Reserved
Except for book reviews, no content may be reproduced without written permission
Economic Order of Heaven
GT 01:25 Well, very good. I do want to jump into these later groups. But let’s stick with Musser for a minute. Because I remember in your book, you did his life story first. Then you went into some of his theological writings and things like that. We’ve talked already about how he was the author of, hey, priesthood is different from church. What are some of the other innovations?
Cristina 01:56 Yeah, the three that I focus on are priesthood, polygamy, and United Order. Because while he never lived in Short Creek, while he never was the boots on the ground, he did have the vision for it. He wrote a pamphlet called The Economic Order of Heaven, where he really expanded the vision of the United Order. A lot of people are interested in is this just socialism? Is this communism? What is Mormon United Order? You’ve heard these modern debates. He talks about it.
GT 02:27 I was talking to my son about consecration, and how some people call it communism. It didn’t even faze him. I was really surprised. (Chuckling)
Cristina 02:37 Well, you can give him The Economic Order of Heaven. Maybe he can join up with the AUB.
GT 02:41 I don’t think his mom would be too happy about that.
Cristina 02:44 That’s fair. Yeah, he does a lot of early work. One of the interesting things or what I think is interesting, is he writes The Economic Order of Heaven during the Great Depression, when people are poor. The Economic Order of Heaven, with Musser’s writing, I think it’s really significant. Because at the time he writes it, Mormon fundamentalists are poor in this time. Everyone’s poor. But they’re poor in a different way, because they’re felons. They can’t go to the government for aid the same way other people can. They’re losing their jobs more rapidly. The [LDS] Church is creating the welfare system. But they can’t go to that either. So, they’re in a really unique place.
GT 03:24 Is it because of the depression that they became the United Order?
Cristina 03:29 He starts writing about it during the Great Depression. He starts realizing we don’t have the church welfare system that is being developed. We can’t go to the government. What are we going to do? And so he starts imagining the United Order. He starts really thinking about the United Order and reviving the United Order as a solution to this very real problem. He’s losing his job. Everyone’s losing their job. They have big families to support. He starts to look back. I mean, he does what he always does. He looks back on Mormon history and realizes Joseph Smith had an answer. God has an answer to this. He starts really imagining what this could look like. And so that’s a significant contribution. Then he ties it to the current moment. He’s thinking through a lot of these issues. He really creates the strands. He takes all the strands of 19th century Mormonism and imagines a theology of how to live their life.
GT 04:17 Now, I know Leonard Arrington made a distinction between United Order and consecration. Is Joseph Musser making that same distinction?
Cristina 04:18 Yeah, he makes a distinction between tithing, consecration and United Order. These are stepping stones toward full consecration, eventually. Now, Joseph Musser makes the argument that there’s a twin system of the Law of Enoch and the Law of Abraham, one being polygamy, one being the United Order. He argues that you need both. You need one to live the other well, and you need both to live each other well. He argues that it is a process to be able to do this, because it’s a great sacrifice. Over time, if you live the law of tithing correctly, you can eventually live the law of consecration correctly, you can eventually live full United Order. Once you live full United Order, you will be fully prepared and sanctified to live the law of Abraham correctly, which is polygamy.
GT 05:14 See, I always thought it was the other way. Arrington was saying [that the] United Order was a steppingstone to consecration, but it sounds like he’s backwards.
Cristina 05:22 The United Order is the established system of consecration. He would then, ultimately, eventually say as well, that this would also lead to eventually living the full kingdom of God, which is a system of government and a system of society that is never fully–I mean, Southern, Short Creek is referred to as the kingdom of God, eventually. It wasn’t Musser’s vision for it, but he would ultimately argue that an economic arm of the gospel, is one of many arms of the gospel. Eventually there has to be a full societal way of living, that is going to be different. Politically, there’s going to be a way of doing this. He looks at the Council of Fifty for that, and how Joseph tried to establish a government and a theo-democratic reign. He’s interested in that. He wants to do that. But because of his time, the economic thing was crucially important to him. Of course, then he also really cares about polygamy. Polygamy is his easiest one. Because Brigham Young just said it a lot.
GT 06:28 Just repeat what Brigham Young said.
Heavenly Mothers Are Pro-Women!
Cristina 06:29 Right. What is interesting about Musser though, with polygamy is he talks a lot about Heavenly Mother, specifically, the many heavenly mothers. They get names under Woo;ley and Musser, so we get to know who they are. You get to hear all about…
GT 06:44 Asherah, is that one of them.
Cristina 06:46 No. It’s Eve and Sarah. Josephine is one. You get to hear all about them. A lot of them, in his Mother’s Day issue, he ties them to particular virtues like industry. He names the heavenly mothers, and one of the things about him…
GT 07:04 There are seven?
Cristina 07:05 There’s, I mean, what’s hard is, there’s a lot of different names at different points in the writing. It’s very hard to tell how many Heavenly Father has. But Jesus has three. There’s that. What is interesting with him, and people are not going to like this, is a really central part of Joseph Musser’s theology on polygamy is that he thinks it’s good for women. People are going to hate it.
Cristina 07:36 But he does. I mean, he thinks it’s good for women. He talks about how [it’s good for women] in a pedestalizing way to be clear. Women are delicate wallflowers. We have to take care of them. Men are these depraved sex fiends. How are we going to care for the women? Polygamy is a good way to do that. There are many women for these sex fiend men. And so the women get to…
GT 08:06 He’s just going right into the stereotype.
Cristina 08:09 But it’s like a way that he’s like, “and that’s why we need to do this for the ladies.” He talks about how this is important. This is good for women. It preserves women’s dignity, again, pedestalizing. Most people aren’t going to like polygamy for that reason. But what is interesting, I think, is Musser is the first person to highlight women in this, to not kind of make this a priesthood thing. But to make this is something for women. To that end, one of the things that is really interesting about Musser that I wrote about, it’s the first article I ever wrote in grad school. He developed something called the Law of Purity, which is the sexual regimented way that sexuality has to function within the fundamentalist community. Woolley talks about this, but Musser really talks about it. Birth control is obviously off limits. But the thing that he really does is he specifies that no sex while breastfeeding, or pregnant. In some ways, he imagines this as caring for the women in the community. There’s a lot of reasons why he’s talking about this. He believes in this view of science that is not today recognized, that you can hurt a baby. You can hurt things. If you breastfeed at this time, that’s a lot of energy necessary. His scientific ideas aren’t fully formed at this time. But he believes that this is good for women. He believes that he’s protecting the women of his community in doing this. And so, I think that’s really unique.
Holy Ghost’s Name is….?
Cristina 09:36 But the big unique thing with polygamy is if we know the names of Heavenly Mother, do you know who else’s name we know?
GT 09:45 Heavenly Father?
Cristina 09:46 Heavenly Father. We know he’s Adam. Brigham told us that. But there’s this weird person who is God. We don’t know his name. Who’s that, Rick? What’s the part of the Godhead whose name we don’t know?
GT 10:03 The Holy Ghost.
Cristina 10:05 Yeah, but we do know his name. Because it’s Brother Joseph.
GT 10:11 Okay, so he’s he’s the author of that theology, too.
Cristina 10:16 Woolley believed it. Woolley believed it, certainly. But Musser I mean–
GT 10:20 He’s the documenter.
Cristina 10:21 He’s the documenter of it and Musser also bears his testimony of it in church meetings and writes about in his diaries. I wrote an article on Joseph as the Holy Ghost. It’s called Praise to the Man….
Cristina 10:33 …on the development of this.
GT 10:33 (Chuckling)
GT 10:37 Pray or praise.
Cristina 10:40 Like the song, like the hymn.
GT 10:43 Okay.
Cristina 10:44 Mingling with Gods, because He is One, Rick. But in the beginning, it opens with a quote saying, “I testify that Joseph Smith is the witness and testator, the Holy Ghost.”
GT 10:56 Oh, because I’ve heard this, but I didn’t realize that was Joseph Musser. In the New Testament, where Jesus says that he’s going to send the Holy Ghost to you, he’s sending Joseph Smith to you. Is that a Musser belief?
Cristina 11:13 Musser doesn’t trace it. He never traces it to Jesus saying that. What is interesting is Musser does use the Bible, for sure. But he never does in depth, looks into the Bible. He’s really focused on the teachings of the prophets. A couple of big ones he talks about, I mean, the big one, I guess, is Joseph Smith is the witness and testator of the gospel. That is only ever a name. But an LDS cosmology is given to the Holy Ghost. The other problem in Mormon cosmology is you need a body to attain exaltation. I remember when I was in Institute, I didn’t know anything about fundamentalism. I didn’t know anything about Mormonism when I went to Institute. I asked that. I was like, “When does the Holy Ghost get his body?”
GT 12:05 Okay.
Cristina 12:06 I was told in the millennium. I don’t know if that’s the correct answer.
GT 12:10 That’s what I’ve heard.
Cristina 12:11 Okay, it’s in the millennium. Well, why not just make it the head of this dispensation? And so, and I think it’s neat.
GT 12:19 So, we’ve got Adam as the original head, Adam-God.
Cristina 12:22 Well, not the original, of this eternal realm.
GT 12:25 Then Jesus is from the meridian of time. And now Joseph Smith…
Cristina 12:28 The fullness of time. It’s cool. But my fiancé actually was the one that noted, he was like, “Does that mean that the sacred grove was a Trinitarian moment?”
GT 12:40 How are we getting that?
Cristina 12:41 Because God, the Father and Jesus Christ show up to the Holy Ghost.
GT 12:43 Oh.
Cristina 12:44 What? I’m like, that’s wild. I guess it wouldn’t be Trinitarian. But it would be something.
GT 12:50 They’ve got two bodies there. the Trinity doesn’t have a body.
Cristina 12:51 It would be a Modalism moment. They’re all there. The gang’s all here. Yeah, he’s the one that really runs with Joseph Smith is the Holy Ghost. This is the answer to this long-standing question. He really promulgates this idea. He writes a pamphlet called Michael, our Father and our God, which expands on Brigham Young’s cosmology of Michael-Adam-God. He talks about how Joseph is this. I mean, Musser’s cosmology, Brigham Young’s comments on Adam-God, I mean, he writes about it. He’s talks about it a lot, certainly in the temple, certainly over the pulpit. But Joseph Musser expands on this idea. He talks about how there’s God, but there’s different offices of God. He makes it. Musser really takes the idea that all men have to cycle through the process of being a witness and testator, a savior and eventually attain exaltation. [Those are] things to look forward to. That’s a really a Musser idea of the Godhead.
GT 13:59 Boy that opens up a whole can of worms.
Specialized Reincarnation
Cristina 14:02 Especially because Musser isn’t an early propagator of multiple mortal probations. But there’s an implication that all men will have to be a savior of a world. But Brigham Young also said that. By Brigham Young said that, I want to be clear. Brigham Young has two comments in two Journal of Discourses sections where multiple mortal probations draws from. But, what does that mean? How do you become a savior of a world if you’re not going to—
GT 14:38 So, well, that brings up [another question.] I think you and I understand multiple mortal probations, but some of my listeners might not understand that thing. And so, is that pretty common among fundamentalists, first, before we dive into what is it?
Cristina 14:57 I don’t think so. I mean, I think it is common among a lot of fundamentalists to talk about men being a savior of a world or men having to pass through that office. Actually using that language and talking about in that way, I do actually think it’s interesting that I have seen a renewed interest, especially among millennial fundamentalists. But historically, it was tied to very particular groups, like the TLC, most notably.[1]
GT 15:23 Okay. Let’s dive in there. What does multiple mortal probations mean?
Cristina 15:30 Multiple mortal probations is the idea that if you’re not perfectly perfected in this life, you can come back and do it again.
GT 15:35 So, it’s kind of like a reincarnation.
Cristina 15:36 It is except people who espouse MMP would say that you have to come back in the same gender and the same species. So, you’re not coming back in a different realm. You’re coming back human.
GT 15:50 You’re not coming back as a bull or a dog. It’s not like Hinduism.
Cristina 15:54 You would come back a man human and do this again. The idea is that it would be successive so, you’re not going to come back a non-Mormon. You’re not going backwards. It’s not like a karmic accumulation, like in a lot of Eastern traditions. The only people who are, because this comes from a Heber C. Kimball quote, in the Journal of Discourses about people who are not perfectly protected. The assumption is, I’m probably not getting to do this, because I’m not even, I haven’t even…
GT 16:28 You’re not even Mormon.
Cristina 16:30 I haven’t even believed the Joseph Smith story. I’m starting at the ground floor, Rick. You got a head start on me. Maybe this is your second round. I don’t know what your life is. But I’m not even on the track to this. So, people who aren’t perfectly perfected can. That is a very different idea than multiple offices. But there is, I would say, a significant theological question embedded in this of when does Jesus become God? This is a long-standing question I’ve had in Mormon cosmology. Is it always? But how does that work if he doesn’t have a body? Is it when he dies? Is he exalted before? Did he condescend like Adam to get a body, to become the Savior? Like, when is Jesus God? How does this work? Musser would say that Michael, as an exalted being condescends and takes the body of Adam. But he has already cycled through being a savior of a world in the same way that Jesus is not an exalted being. Jesus takes a body, becomes a Savior, and then attains his exaltation. I think that’s a pretty coherent view of how Jesus becomes a God.
GT 17:53 So, the idea is, we’ve got a huge universe. You’re going to just cycle through these different offices, through Joseph Smith and Jesus, and then Adam-God.
Cristina 18:02 Actually, what is interesting is I went to an open house in a temple. I don’t want to specify for this person. I met a senior missionary. I was with my fiancé. I didn’t say anything, but the senior missionary was explaining the nature of God to my fiancé, and talked about how we would have to have a child be a savior of a world if we were celestial beings. I was like, this feels not correct. I was like, this feels like we’re going in. We’re doing a deep dive right now. Because my fiancé is a priest. He was dressed like a priest. And so, people wanted to talk to him, which is our fault.
GT 18:56 He didn’t go incognito.
Cristina 18:58 Well, I mean, he was dressed like he does.
GT 19:01 Because he’s never incognito. Right? He always dresses…
Cristina 19:04 He’s a priest. He dresses like a priest. I mean, there’s instances where he doesn’t, but it is his daywear.
GT 19:15 I should get a video of your priest that went down the slide.
Cristina 19:22 My Roman Catholic priest, Father Dylan came to Short Creek, which was great, and went down the infamous Short Creek slide. He also had Jalapeno Popper pizza. He had the whole Short Creek experience. But as the slide moment was happening, or even standing in the meeting house, I was like, I don’t think there’s ever been a Roman Catholic priest wearing a cassock in this building. Maybe there has. I don’t know, but probably not going down that slide. I don’t know. That was really funny to have happen, because I’ve always felt like the weird Catholic in Short Creek. So, my fiancé, Giuseppe, was wearing a collar. Someone asked him about Jesus, which is, I guess what you do when you see a man and a collar. The senior missionary asked him to explain Jesus. He did. He explained the Anglican view, historic, the traditional view. And then my fiancé asked about Mormon Jesus, and we got some Godmakers answer.
GT 20:36 Really?
Cristina 20:37 Well, he was explaining how, if we’re married, I don’t know. I don’t want to get into it. I don’t want the haters to come after me. But it was a view that, when we got in the car, after the tour, I did tell him, that if you were to meet a very run-of-the-mill, LDS person, that was not representative.
GT 20:57 I wonder if you ran into a fundamentalist, but he had a missionary nametag.
Cristina 21:01 Yes, he worked at the Visitor Center, or he volunteered at the Visitor Center. He was on his mission. But I did tell him, that is not real. I think it was specifically because of the kinds of questions Giuseppe was asking, which were very theological questions, but they were very particular, maybe in their wording or particular in the questions a priest would ask. I don’t know. And so, because they were very particular, I think he ended up getting these answers that I don’t think a normal person would have gotten. But we did get to go home with two copies of The Proclamation, one in French.
GT 21:40 Oh, wow.
Cristina 21:41 So we still got the important stuff.
GT 21:43 Are you going to learn French now that you’re moving to Quebec?
Cristina 21:45 Yeah, I’m on Duolingo. But it’s such a nightmare. Yeah. So he got a French Proclamation. They did want us to go home and read it together. And we did not, but I know the gist. My favorite is that when the Lord speaks through his mouthpiece, he says wholesome recreational activities. It’s my favorite line of the Proclamation. But yeah, he got some answer that was very.. He talked about how if we are married eternally, we would have children to populate worlds. One of them would need to be a savior, of those worlds.
GT 22:30 That’s very interesting.
Cristina 22:32 And the assumption was that Giuseppe would probably have to be a savior one day. I was like, this, I know a guy {she holds up Musser book} that also thought this. In my mind, I was like, “Do you want my book? What’s going on?”
GT 22:49 Has he read it?
Cristina 22:50 I’m not going to give it to him. I’m not going back to the visitor’s center of this particular temple.
GT 22:56 I mean, has Giuseppe read your book, your fiancé?
Cristina 22:59 Yes.
GT 22:59 Okay.
Cristina 23:00 He’s acknowledged in it. He read a lot of Truth Magazine when I was reading it.
GT 23:05 Oh, wow.
Cristina 23:07 He was shocked at the level of attention that Joseph Musser gave to General Conference, to just reading the Journal of Discourses. I mean, that is one of the things about the fundamentalist movement that is so interesting. Who has read the Journal if Discourses? The fundamentalists do, but there’s so many [books.] We saw a full set at Bee’s Market.
GT 23:35 But that was the fundamentalists Journal of Discourses, not the Brigham Young.
Cristina 23:42 On the left it’s the original. Then on the right, it’s the new ones.
GT 23:47 Yeah, I thought it was really interesting, because I remember walking in there and being like, this looks like Journal of Discourses. Oh, it is, but it’s the wrong year.
Cristina 23:54 For those who don’t know, Bee’s Market is a Centennial Park grocer. When you go to Guest Services, the priesthood records are there. You can buy them for $55 a book. They’re fine. They do read the Journal of Discourses. They do read Brigham-era, documents. They’re very, ‘Thus saith the Lord.’ I think that’s also compelling to people is that you read, I mean, it’s compelling for the fundamentalists, certainly. You read a hundred something years of LDS leaders saying, ‘Thus saith the Lord.” And then you don’t anymore. Then you find a guy in southern Utah who does. I mean, I don’t know when the last was? Do you know when the last ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ in the LDS Church happened?
GT 24:03 I do not.
Cristina 24:18 It’s probably like Joseph F. Smith. It was probably Heber J. Grant. Am I right?
GT 24:52 (Chuckling) All right. Let’s see if we can summarize. So, we’ve got priesthood and church are separate. Why am I having a hard time?
Cristina 25:06 Polygamy is eternal. It’s good for women, and God did it, too.
GT 25:10 Okay.
Cristina 25:12 United Order.
GT 25:13 And United Order, okay.
{End of Part 4}
[1] TLC refers to True & Living Church, another Fundamentalist Mormon group.
Copyright © 2024
Gospel Tangents
All Rights Reserved
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 26:41 — 24.4MB) | Embed
Subscribe: Email | | More
