What do you think?
Rate this book
Religion, Feminism, and Freedom of Conscience: A Mormon/Humanist Dialogue
Essays discuss academic freedom and Mormon ideals
192 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 1994
About the author
George D. Smith
11 booksLibrarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
September 17, 2026
ESSAYS FROM A GATHERING OF HUMANISTS AND MORMONS, DISCUSSING ACADEMIC FREEDOM, AND MORE
Editor George D. Smith wrote in his Introduction to this 1994 book (published jointly by Signature Books and Prometheus Books), “On September 24, 1993, a gathering of secular humanists and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) met for three days in Salt Lake City, Utah, to discuss freedom of conscience as it applies to academic freedom and to expressions of feminism. For years both secular humanists and Mormons have endorsed freedom of conscience. What is open to debate is whether principles of what Mormons refer to as free agency apply to feminists and to teachers at Brigham Young University, which is owned by the Mormon church.” (Pg. vii)
He continues, “At a time when academic freedom is circumscribed by loyalty oaths and doctrinal hegemony at Brigham Young University, when Mormon scholars are excommunicated for discussing contradictions in historical documents, it is easy to forget that Mormon leaders have consistently embraced ‘free agency’ as an essential principle of Mormon doctrine… The importance of freedom is evidenced by Mormon scripture, which declares that Freedom emanated from the mouth of God… The mutual heritage of freedom of conscience among Mormons and humanists provides common ground for dialogue. Although each group might not agree entirely on the meaning of religious and intellectual expression, they both understand and recognize the importance of freedom.” (Pg. xiii-xv)
“The present conflict in the Mormon community regarding academics and feminists is addressed in the essays contained in this volume. BYU faculty have been forbidden from participating in unapproved symposia and conferences… We hope that the Mormon community will recall its heritage as religious humanists, a heritage of freedom of conscience and expression that requires the community to find a way to listen to thoughtful dissenters and discuss differences with mutual respect. At the same time, secular humanists, with their tradition of tolerance and open-mindedness, will find that they have much in common and much to admire in the passion, honesty, and intellectual integrity of Mormons, as well as people of other faiths who earnestly try to harmonize their religious and intellectual traditions.” (Pg. xv)
L. Jackson Newell wrote in his essay, “having spent a good portion of my life as a Mormon outside of Utah, I have seen the positive effect on people who embrace the faith and the doctrine of the LDS church. I believe there is ample evidence that interest and pursuit of education increases dramatically with membership in the Mormon church, and I would wager that participation in the political process, and even economic independence (and the capacity to contribute more than one gives to the economy) also increase. However, one must get outside Utah to see this clearly. On the other hand, I can’t give the LDS church high marks in other areas. It can cause people to be dangerously dependent on leaders rather than think for themselves.” (Pg. 37-38)
Allen Dale Roberts (the editor of 'Dialogue: a Journal of Mormon Thought') states, “Anyone visiting the [BYU] campus cannot help but be impressed with the freshly washed appearance of the ground… and students. But close observers also find that something is wrong with the picture. It is incomplete and more than a little out of focus. One would expect, with all of its assets, that BYU would be one of the leading institutions of higher education in the country, if not the world. But despite its many advantages, BYU is not renowned for its academic excellence… and it is by no means an unrelated development that the campus is beset by serious difficulties connected to its restrictive policies and limitation of freedom… BYU is, by its own design and admission, first and foremost a church institution and secondarily a school.” (Pg. 44)
Later, he adds, “The religious beliefs, pronouncements, and practices of Mormon leaders imperil academic excellence at BYU… Moreover, the truthfulness of all propositions is based on who said them and when. Recall that Ezra Taft Benson said that the statement of a living prophet supersedes the earlier statements of a dead prophet, including, presumably, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Joseph Smith. Those of you familiar with Benson’s extremely conservative writings and teachings, especially those delivered in the 1950s and 1960s, will understand what a frightening prospect this is.” (Pg. 51)
He continues, “BYU professor of American history Thomas G. Alexander put to rest the myth that Mormon theology is constant and unchanging by showing the evolution of basic doctrines of God and humankind… The godhead Mormons think of now is entirely different than the divinity worshipped by early Mormons. Moreover, Mormonism’s unchangeable doctrines are changing as we speak. The infusion of ideas from protestant neo-orthodoxy is a recent example.” (Pg. 53)
Vern J. Bullough (a humanist) acknowledges, “I do not… assert that humanists are free from problems. In part, we have avoided it because we do not control any institution of higher education and our national bodies are competitive with each other. Sometimes I almost wish we could excommunicate some who call themselves humanists. This only emphasizes why academic free is so important, to protect us from ourselves. In some parts of the world, where humanism is institutionalized, the same kind of issues present themselves… In sum, perhaps we secular humanists avoid the problems of academic freedom faced by Mormon academics at BYU by not having our own institutions in the United States.” (Pg. 71)
Martha Sonntag Bradley (a former professor of history at BYU and co-editor of Dialogue: a Journal of Mormon Thought) reports, “in 1949 the domestication of Mormon women was idealized even as their spiritual power eroded… By 1949, Mormon women, with their American female counterparts, joined the post-war celebration of domesticity, and increasingly the rhetoric of motherhood replaced the emphasis on social activism. The ‘Relief Society Magazine’ became obsessed with the home and included an increased number of articles by men. Male voices acquired more authority and helped to define and articulate the Mormon female ideal. This ideological process continued to develop throughout the most passionate events of the 1960s women’s movement and was by the early 1970s rigidified within church literature and practice. During the LDS ‘correlation’ movement of the 1970s the church pulled the auxiliaries of the church, including their publications and lesson materials, under one umbrella. The women of the Relief Society lost in 1971 their control over money and direct access to the LDS First Presidency… The LDS church made considerable efforts to draw boundaries between traditional women and feminists. Increasingly the feminist was portrayed as the enemy of home, family, and traditional religious values.” (Pg. 129)
‘Traditional’ orthodox Mormons will not likely care for this book, but more ‘progressive’ persons may find it interesting and even enlightening.
Editor George D. Smith wrote in his Introduction to this 1994 book (published jointly by Signature Books and Prometheus Books), “On September 24, 1993, a gathering of secular humanists and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) met for three days in Salt Lake City, Utah, to discuss freedom of conscience as it applies to academic freedom and to expressions of feminism. For years both secular humanists and Mormons have endorsed freedom of conscience. What is open to debate is whether principles of what Mormons refer to as free agency apply to feminists and to teachers at Brigham Young University, which is owned by the Mormon church.” (Pg. vii)
He continues, “At a time when academic freedom is circumscribed by loyalty oaths and doctrinal hegemony at Brigham Young University, when Mormon scholars are excommunicated for discussing contradictions in historical documents, it is easy to forget that Mormon leaders have consistently embraced ‘free agency’ as an essential principle of Mormon doctrine… The importance of freedom is evidenced by Mormon scripture, which declares that Freedom emanated from the mouth of God… The mutual heritage of freedom of conscience among Mormons and humanists provides common ground for dialogue. Although each group might not agree entirely on the meaning of religious and intellectual expression, they both understand and recognize the importance of freedom.” (Pg. xiii-xv)
“The present conflict in the Mormon community regarding academics and feminists is addressed in the essays contained in this volume. BYU faculty have been forbidden from participating in unapproved symposia and conferences… We hope that the Mormon community will recall its heritage as religious humanists, a heritage of freedom of conscience and expression that requires the community to find a way to listen to thoughtful dissenters and discuss differences with mutual respect. At the same time, secular humanists, with their tradition of tolerance and open-mindedness, will find that they have much in common and much to admire in the passion, honesty, and intellectual integrity of Mormons, as well as people of other faiths who earnestly try to harmonize their religious and intellectual traditions.” (Pg. xv)
L. Jackson Newell wrote in his essay, “having spent a good portion of my life as a Mormon outside of Utah, I have seen the positive effect on people who embrace the faith and the doctrine of the LDS church. I believe there is ample evidence that interest and pursuit of education increases dramatically with membership in the Mormon church, and I would wager that participation in the political process, and even economic independence (and the capacity to contribute more than one gives to the economy) also increase. However, one must get outside Utah to see this clearly. On the other hand, I can’t give the LDS church high marks in other areas. It can cause people to be dangerously dependent on leaders rather than think for themselves.” (Pg. 37-38)
Allen Dale Roberts (the editor of 'Dialogue: a Journal of Mormon Thought') states, “Anyone visiting the [BYU] campus cannot help but be impressed with the freshly washed appearance of the ground… and students. But close observers also find that something is wrong with the picture. It is incomplete and more than a little out of focus. One would expect, with all of its assets, that BYU would be one of the leading institutions of higher education in the country, if not the world. But despite its many advantages, BYU is not renowned for its academic excellence… and it is by no means an unrelated development that the campus is beset by serious difficulties connected to its restrictive policies and limitation of freedom… BYU is, by its own design and admission, first and foremost a church institution and secondarily a school.” (Pg. 44)
Later, he adds, “The religious beliefs, pronouncements, and practices of Mormon leaders imperil academic excellence at BYU… Moreover, the truthfulness of all propositions is based on who said them and when. Recall that Ezra Taft Benson said that the statement of a living prophet supersedes the earlier statements of a dead prophet, including, presumably, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Joseph Smith. Those of you familiar with Benson’s extremely conservative writings and teachings, especially those delivered in the 1950s and 1960s, will understand what a frightening prospect this is.” (Pg. 51)
He continues, “BYU professor of American history Thomas G. Alexander put to rest the myth that Mormon theology is constant and unchanging by showing the evolution of basic doctrines of God and humankind… The godhead Mormons think of now is entirely different than the divinity worshipped by early Mormons. Moreover, Mormonism’s unchangeable doctrines are changing as we speak. The infusion of ideas from protestant neo-orthodoxy is a recent example.” (Pg. 53)
Vern J. Bullough (a humanist) acknowledges, “I do not… assert that humanists are free from problems. In part, we have avoided it because we do not control any institution of higher education and our national bodies are competitive with each other. Sometimes I almost wish we could excommunicate some who call themselves humanists. This only emphasizes why academic free is so important, to protect us from ourselves. In some parts of the world, where humanism is institutionalized, the same kind of issues present themselves… In sum, perhaps we secular humanists avoid the problems of academic freedom faced by Mormon academics at BYU by not having our own institutions in the United States.” (Pg. 71)
Martha Sonntag Bradley (a former professor of history at BYU and co-editor of Dialogue: a Journal of Mormon Thought) reports, “in 1949 the domestication of Mormon women was idealized even as their spiritual power eroded… By 1949, Mormon women, with their American female counterparts, joined the post-war celebration of domesticity, and increasingly the rhetoric of motherhood replaced the emphasis on social activism. The ‘Relief Society Magazine’ became obsessed with the home and included an increased number of articles by men. Male voices acquired more authority and helped to define and articulate the Mormon female ideal. This ideological process continued to develop throughout the most passionate events of the 1960s women’s movement and was by the early 1970s rigidified within church literature and practice. During the LDS ‘correlation’ movement of the 1970s the church pulled the auxiliaries of the church, including their publications and lesson materials, under one umbrella. The women of the Relief Society lost in 1971 their control over money and direct access to the LDS First Presidency… The LDS church made considerable efforts to draw boundaries between traditional women and feminists. Increasingly the feminist was portrayed as the enemy of home, family, and traditional religious values.” (Pg. 129)
‘Traditional’ orthodox Mormons will not likely care for this book, but more ‘progressive’ persons may find it interesting and even enlightening.
July 8, 2019
This book was interesting - and a bit outdated. Since it was published 25 years ago, a lot has changed - though a lot has also stayed the same.
The most interesting aspect of this book was the many anecdotes and stories presented - many about BYU rules for faculty, many about current LDS church leadership, and many about individuals who have been excommunicated or who have left the church. This book gave me a deeper understanding of LDS feminism in the 1990's - and some of the unique challenges for liberal Mormons at that time.
This is an interesting read, but I think it would have interested me more if I was better acquainted with different philosophical perspectives and arguments. I found myself having to Google several philosophical perspectives for a more complete understanding of arguments being made and, while interesting, that made this a complicated book to read, especially since I don't believe Mormon liberals my age operate from the same philosophical perspectives as our predecessors did.
Regardless, this was an interesting book that's available to read online at Signature Books.
The most interesting aspect of this book was the many anecdotes and stories presented - many about BYU rules for faculty, many about current LDS church leadership, and many about individuals who have been excommunicated or who have left the church. This book gave me a deeper understanding of LDS feminism in the 1990's - and some of the unique challenges for liberal Mormons at that time.
This is an interesting read, but I think it would have interested me more if I was better acquainted with different philosophical perspectives and arguments. I found myself having to Google several philosophical perspectives for a more complete understanding of arguments being made and, while interesting, that made this a complicated book to read, especially since I don't believe Mormon liberals my age operate from the same philosophical perspectives as our predecessors did.
Regardless, this was an interesting book that's available to read online at Signature Books.
February 7, 2012
I devoured this in two days. The final essay The Indispensable Opposition by Walter Lippman was outstanding. Lippman writes, "For, while the right to talk may be the beginning of freedom, the necessity of listening is what makes the right important......What matters is not the utterance of opinions. What matters is the confrontation of opinions in debate." This collection of essays was a fine example of this kind of substantive exchange of ideas regarding religion, freedom of conscience and feminism.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews