Burned-over district

[arieh0310]

Was Joseph Smith just caught up in the “create-your-own-religion” fervor that swept over NY state in the early 1800s? Upstate NY saw the birth of:

The Millerites, who later became Seventh Day Adventist
The Fox Sisters, which led to Spiritualism and the communication with the dead in seances
The Shakers
Oneida Society, known for group marriage
Pentacostalism
Fourierist utopian socialists, radical feminists
And, of course, Mormonism

This all happened at roughly the same time.

Wikipedia

 

[LittleDeb]

From my studies, I always thought he did. I took a class from our priest offered to the whole diocese on this subject. Father talked about each of the groups you mention except “The Oneida Society” Sorry, I did a double-take on that one because my mind went first to the silverware company! Same place in New York obviously.

I had thought Joseph Smith started the LDS religion specifically because of these other groups. The priest who gave the class also talked about an Evangelical group that taught that you could atain a perfect life by eating a “perfect food.” I have no idea who that group was but the perfect food was the graham cracker!

In all seriousness though he talked about the “Second Great Awakening” being one of the influences in Joseph Smith’s life. (Or was it the First Great Awakening?) Can’t remember, too long ago. I am not sure of the term "burned -over district but it sounds vagely familiar. It might have been during that class. I would be interested in hearing more…

 

[majick275]

don’t underestimate the influence of sidney rigdon. He was a cambelite restorationist preacher. They (cambelites) gave us the disciples of christ and the church of christ.

 

[ben_dy]

LittleDeb:

From my studies, I always thought he did. I took a class from our priest offered to the whole diocese on this subject. Father talked about each of the groups you mention except “The Oneida Society” Sorry, I did a double-take on that one because my mind went first to the silverware company! Same place in New York obviously.

Deb,

The silverware company was built upon the utopian community… for a sort of odd perspective, here is some interesting reading from the first Google ‘hit’ that popped up…

scripophily.net/onsilstoccer.html

…and if you’ve ever been at auction when genuine Shaker boxes, chairs, quilts, etc., were up for bid, you’ll realize how well made the day-to-day items produced by that utopian community were (and how valuable now).

Had the Mormons not had to flee west, perhaps they would have found a craft ‘niche’ as well!

 

[ben_dy]

LittleDeb:

The priest who gave the class also talked about an Evangelical group that taught that you could atain a perfect life by eating a “perfect food.” I have no idea who that group was but the perfect food was the graham cracker!

Again, for a very, very brief history…

suffield-library.org/localhistory/graham.htm

…but there are whole books on the man and the movement. I believe that one of the beliefs held was also that graham flour kept the libido in check.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

LittleDeb:

I had thought Joseph Smith started the LDS religion specifically because of these other groups. The priest who gave the class also talked about an Evangelical group that taught that you could atain a perfect life by eating a “perfect food.” I have no idea who that group was but the perfect food was the graham cracker!

Would that be the Keeblerites?

 

[Zooey]

LittleDeb:

The priest who gave the class also talked about an Evangelical group that taught that you could atain a perfect life by eating a “perfect food.” I have no idea who that group was but the perfect food was the graham cracker!

The Millerites. To this day, there are 7th Day Adventists that follow at least parts of Graham’s dietary ideas…

 

[Zooey]

By the by…Life-long resident of the “burned over district” here. Around here, it is pretty well accepted that Smith was indeed caught up in the religious fervor of the time/place…
We still have places named for the various movements that began here. There is a fairly recent book–can’t tell you the author–called The Psychic Corridor, or New York’s Psychic Corridor…something like that…It tells the history of the various & sundry groups that had their start here.
One of the subjects is, naturally, the start of the Mormon religion.

 

[LittleDeb]

ben_dy:

Deb,

The silverware company was built upon the utopian community… for a sort of odd perspective, here is some interesting reading from the first Google ‘hit’ that popped up…

scripophily.net/onsilstoccer.html

…and if you’ve ever been at auction when genuine Shaker boxes, chairs, quilts, etc., were up for bid, you’ll realize how well made the day-to-day items produced by that utopian community were (and how valuable now).

Had the Mormons not had to flee west, perhaps they would have found a craft ‘niche’ as well!

I never knew this part. It made for interesting reading! Also thanks for the Graham reference although I guess he was a little further east (New Jersey) than I thought.

I keep thinking, was there something in the water in upstate New York? It is interesting that the groups were formed in such close physical proximity and the same time period. Joseph Smith was young when he started the LDS church so it seems strange that he could be so strongly influenced during that time. I do find it interesting and odd that he introduced plural marriage later in his teachings instead of when these other groups were trying it. Perhaps to distance himself from them?

I gotta go Google “burned-over district” so I can understand the term.

“Keeblerites”

 

[ben_dy]

LittleDeb:

I never knew this part. It made for interesting reading! Also thanks for the Graham reference although I guess he was a little further east (New Jersey) than I thought.

I keep thinking, was there something in the water in upstate New York? It is interesting that the groups were formed in such close physical proximity and the same time period. Joseph Smith was young when he started the LDS church so it seems strange that he could be so strongly influenced during that time. I do find it interesting and odd that he introduced plural marriage later in his teachings instead of when these other groups were trying it. Perhaps to distance himself from them?

I gotta go Google “burned-over district” so I can understand the term.

“Keeblerites”

Oh, the writings and life of Thomas Keebler, a disciple of Graham, make interesting reading - it wasn’t until he began to insist on ‘elfin magic’ that he began to lose his following…

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Burned-Over District was a name given by evangelist Charles Grandison Finney to an area in western New York State in the United States of America. The name was given because the area was so heavily evangelized during the religious revival movement of the first half of the Nineteenth Century as to have no fuel (unconverted population) left to burn (convert).

Finney is a fascinating subject as well.

And as for diet & marriage ‘regulations’ regarding the Mormon’s…

In Doctrine & Covenants 89 (the “Words of Wisdom”) Smith came close to a call for a sort of ‘vegetarian lite’ diet, restricting the use of meat to “to be used sparingly; and it is pleasing to me (that is ‘God’, who is speaking through JS) that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.” I don’t know many Mormons, though, who forgo a nice eye-of-the-round in the spring months. Hot drinks, too, were condemned. Smith also came down against the use of ‘strong drink’, although he allowed the drinking of Mormon produced wine; but I think one glass of a nice scuppernong wine from the local LDS vintner today might lose you your temple pass! Oddly enough barley and other grains to produce ‘mild drinks’ were allowed and there was something called ‘Mormon beer’ for a bit but, again, I think you’d lose your temple pass today were you spotted drinking a tall cool one no matter how low the alcohol content.

And then there’s the infamous Doctrine & Covenants 132 which had to do with ‘plural marriage’ - interesting history there. Smith had been caught, literally, with his trousers down, and thought it best to write down a revelation - "recorded on July 12, 1843, but supposedly “the doctrines and principles in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831” (one can only speculate as to what might have prompted the revelation of 1831, although we certainly know what prompted it’s 1843 recording) - concerning this new covenant of plural marriage. God reveals, of course, that it’s really nothing new - He had given Moses, Solomon, and David multiple wives and concubines and was just passing along this gift to the men who held the restored priesthood. Smith’s wife, by all accounts, wasn’t quite please but, as she believed her husband to be a true prophet, I suppose, and as the revelation said she would be ‘destroyed’ should she not accept it, she seems to have (grudgingly) accepted it - although she did not first receive it well, from the few accounts given.

I think it’s quite right to lump today’s LDS church in with the various utopian societies that were sprouting - even though the communal society failed, remnants of it are visible in the present organization. I think of Smith as a brilliant young man who desired not only a church after his own beliefs but also a stable communal community yet he died so young that he certainly was never able to establish the latter. Brigham Young tried, too, but it seems that utopian societies are bound to fail for one reason or another… I guess it usually comes down to sex and greed - men seem unable to be content with what they have, what they have is never enough.

I need to root around and find St. Thomas More’s Utopia and read it once again…

 

[silverwings_88]

ben_dy:

And then there’s the infamous Doctrine & Covenants 132 which had to do with ‘plural marriage’ - interesting history there. Smith had been caught, literally, with his trousers down, and thought it best to write down a revelation - "recorded on July 12, 1843, but supposedly “the doctrines and principles in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831” (one can only speculate as to what might have prompted the revelation of 1831, although we certainly know what prompted it’s 1843 recording) - concerning this new covenant of plural marriage. God reveals, of course, that it’s really nothing new - He had given Moses, Solomon, and David multiple wives and concubines and was just passing along this gift to the men who held the restored priesthood. Smith’s wife, by all accounts, wasn’t quite please but, as she believed her husband to be a true prophet, I suppose, and as the revelation said she would be ‘destroyed’ should she not accept it, she seems to have (grudgingly) accepted it - although she did not first receive it well, from the few accounts given.

What was he doing with his pants down…???

My my, what a prophet…

 

[ben_dy]

What was he doing with his pants down…???

My my, what a prophet…

From the 1981 BYU Master’s thesis of Andrew Ehat, entitled, Joseph Smith’s Introduction of Temple Ordinances and the 1844 Mormon Succession Question:

In June 1841, Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith and William Law had assumed the responsibility of the deceased Edward Lawrence’s estate valued at $7,750.06. Joseph was named as guardian of the Lawrence children. Somehow during his period of indecision, William Law found out that Maria Lawrence* was sealed as a wife to Joseph; in fact, Law, he later stated, found Joseph in a compromising situation with Maria on 12 October 1843. Two weeks later, 26 October 1843, Joseph ostensibly sealed Maria for time to John M. Bernhisel… But in January 1844, Joseph apparently felt this would no longer calm the angered William Law. The day after Joseph and William’s final confrontation, Joseph began arrangements to relinquish the estate affairs entirely… Undoubtedly, if William Law, one of the appointed trustees of the estate, ‘claimed’ that Joseph had not only extorted the funds of the estate, but had also committed adultery with the eldest child of whom he was personal guardian, that would make an explosive expose… What was said and done in public was guarded and carefully worded in order to protect both the Church and his faithful colleagues as they entered practices illegal in the sight of man yet covenants they were assured were commanded by God… Law appeared before the first sitting of the Grand Jury of the Hancock County circuit court to swear out charges against Joseph. Law filed charges and presented such evidence that the Grand Jury authorized an indictment against Joseph Smith for 'adultery and fornication.’

*Maria Lawrence was the eldest of two sisters of whom Joseph Smith, Junior, was legal guardian.

Also note that the date given for the finding of Smith “in a compromising situation with Maria” is October 12, 1843, three months after the revelation of plural wives, so it is claimed that Smith had taken Maria as (his first, if I’m not mistaken) plural wife, so he really wasn’t engaged in adultery - just carrying out his marital duties, which he seemed to take very seriously given, I suppose, that he could only reach the exalted state of the celestial kingdom promised by God if he believed and practiced this doctrine and discipline revealed to him.

I don’t think Mormon apologists try to deny these claims any longer - they point out that Smith knew of God’s plan for plural marriage in 1831 (Doctrine & Covenants, in the introductory paragraph to Section 132 says, “Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831”), that it was recorded on July 12, 1843, and thus Smith was not guilty of “adultery and fornication” as indicted by “the Grand Jury of the Hancock County circuit court” no matter what the good people of Carthage, Illinois might have thought at the time. I’m not certain that this revelation had even been made public to the Mormon community at large at the time, for had it the (what I assume to be non-Mormon) Grand Jury may have been instructed not to indict Smith based upon his Constitutional right to practice his religion.

This doesn’t seem to be the first time that Joseph was thought guilty of indiscretion but that’s a topic for another thread…

 

[flameburns623]

You’ve mixed-and-matched a bunch of unrelated groups, and not very accurately I might add.

The Millerites, who later became Seventh Day Adventist

Well, you got this one right. Millerism and Mormonism were taking place at roughly about the same time. Though the ‘great excitement’ to which Joseph Smith referred took place in the early 1820’s, and Millerism became extant in 1830, at about the time the Book of Mormon was published and the LDS Church established.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millerite_Movement

The Fox Sisters, which led to Spiritualism and the communication with the dead in seances.

But you’re about 28 years away from the time of the birth of Mormonism with respect to the Fox Sisters:

fst.org/fxsistrs.htm

Joseph Smith was dead and buried and long since gone from upper New York State when the Fox Sisters began cracking their toe knuckles.

The Shakers

And the Shakers started about 50 years PRIOR to Mormonism, in Manchester, England, not New York.

religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/Shakers.html

Oneida Society, known for group marriage

Also a good deal later than the founding of Mormonism:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneida_Community

Pentacostalism

Pentecostalism was begun in Topeka, Kansas and at the Asuza Street Revival in Los Angeles, in the late 1890’s and early 1900’s.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentecostalism

Some revivals in the 1820’s DID report something like glossolalia, to be fair to you, and so did early Mormonism. But this was NOT how Pentecostalism actually got started.

Fourierist utopian socialists,

Born in England, transplanted to Boston, Massachusetts and sundry other places. The Oneida community was remotely related.

britannica.com/eb/article-9035046

radical feminists

Born in various places in the USA in the early 1970’s and 1980’s.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism

And, of course, Mormonism
This all happened at roughly the same time.

Sort of the way the American Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Vietnam War, and the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq all happened at 'roughly the same time :nope: .]

 

[arieh0310]

flameburns623:

Sort of the way the American Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Vietnam War, and the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq all happened at 'roughly the same time :nope: .]

Let me repost the entire article:
*The Burned-Over District was a name given by evangelist Charles Grandison Finney to an area in western New York State in the United States of America. The name was given because the area was so heavily evangelized during the religious revival movement of the first half of the Nineteenth Century as to have no fuel (unconverted population) left to burn (convert).

The area still had a frontier quality during the early canal boom, making professional and established clergy scarce, lending the piety of the area many of the self-taught qualities that proved susceptible to folk religion. Besides producing many mainline Protestant converts, especially in nonconformist sects, the area spawned a number of innovative religious movements, all founded by lay persons, during the early 19th century. These include:

* **Mormonism** (whose main branch is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). Joseph Smith, Jr. lived in the area and claimed to have been led by the angel Moroni to golden plates from which he translated the Book of Mormon near Palmyra, New York.

* **The Millerites**. William Miller was a farmer born in rural Vermont who moved to the area and found many converts there to his theory of an imminent Second Coming. His successor, Ellen G. White, went on to found the **Seventh-day Adventist Church.**

* **The Fox sisters** of Hydesville, New York conducted the first table-rapping **séances** in the area, leading to the American movement of **Spiritualism** that taught communication with the dead.

* **The Shakers** were very active in the area, with several of their communal farms located there.

* **The Oneida Society** was a large sectarian group that subsequently disbanded. It was known for its unique interpretation of group marriage which had mates chosen by committee and offspring of the community raised in common.

* Finney himself preached at many revivals in the area. His preaching style was an early precursor of **Pentecostalism** which emphasized a living, practical faith marked by emphasis of the Holy Spirit over formal theology.

In addition to religious activity, the Burned-Over District was famous for social radicalism. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the early feminist, came from Seneca Falls, New York, and conducted the Seneca Falls Convention devoted to women’s suffrage there.

It was the main source of converts to the Fourierist utopian socialist movement. The Oneida Society was also considered a utopian group.*

I wasn’t implying that all these movements were all interrelated and simultaneous, but that NY experienced quite a radical spiritual awakening that led to tons of sects being formed in a relatively short period of time.

 

[ben_dy]

flameburns623:

You’ve mixed-and-matched a bunch of unrelated groups, and not very accurately I might add.

flame,

To be fair, the original poster’s comments were general and a link was provided so that the whole of the article could be read. To be a bit realistic about Wikipedia, maybe, I’ve found that while the nature of the project seems noble sometimes what one finds is so subjective that it’s not really a good source at all for objective views and accurate facts: I wouldn’t accept it as a primary source in a high school paper, really, but if you keep in mind that some bias is going to creep in - sometimes a great deal of bias - it’s fast and useful as a quick and dirty reference but whatever you find needs a more object source. Just as an example, notice the definition correctly attributed to Finney and Wikipedia has a convenient link to Finney should you be interested in him and a quick scroll brings up a warning that portion of the article discussing Finney’s Theology which says “The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please view the article’s talk page.”

Reading the article on Joseph Smith, for instance, one sees a seeming polyglot of pro- and anti-Mormon information that has been fused to produce an article that is somewhat accurate yet - for someone more acquainted with Smith - seems a little too cleaned up with some nifty hagiography and apologetics while some information is just factually incorrect (much of which is in Smith’s favor).

So although I don’t think you judged the original poster’s comments harshly at all, and you did do some research to point out the times and places of origin of the various groups mentioned, I’d just like to point out that while Wikipedia can provide some interesting and varied information (and having every other word linked to another article can become a bit like channel surfing for hours on end) I don’t think anyone should use the site as anything but a place with some fun facts but facts that need other sources to verify the accuracy of what is written.

I notice that you’ve linked to Wikipedia for about 1/2 of your sources and I’d say that is a good percentage as it’s likely that about 1/2 of the data from that source is accurate!

Sorry if I’ve rambled a bit - I just wanted to make a point about referring to a single source for information: in this instance, a very specific single source. My take on the phenomena is similar to Deb’s - “I keep thinking, was there something in the water in upstate New York?”

 

[flameburns623]

ben_dy:

flame,

To be fair, the original poster’s comments were general and a link was provided so that the whole of the article could be read. To be a bit realistic about Wikipedia, maybe, I’ve found that while the nature of the project seems noble sometimes what one finds is so subjective that it’s not really a good source at all for objective views and accurate facts: I wouldn’t accept it as a primary source in a high school paper, really, but if you keep in mind that some bias is going to creep in - sometimes a great deal of bias - it’s fast and useful as a quick and dirty reference but whatever you find needs a more object source. Just as an example, notice the definition correctly attributed to Finney and Wikipedia has a convenient link to Finney should you be interested in him and a quick scroll brings up a warning that portion of the article discussing Finney’s Theology which says “The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please view the article’s talk page.”

Reading the article on Joseph Smith, for instance, one sees a seeming polyglot of pro- and anti-Mormon information that has been fused to produce an article that is somewhat accurate yet - for someone more acquainted with Smith - seems a little too cleaned up with some nifty hagiography and apologetics while some information is just factually incorrect (much of which is in Smith’s favor).

So although I don’t think you judged the original poster’s comments harshly at all, and you did do some research to point out the times and places of origin of the various groups mentioned, I’d just like to point out that while Wikipedia can provide some interesting and varied information (and having every other word linked to another article can become a bit like channel surfing for hours on end) I don’t think anyone should use the site as anything but a place with some fun facts but facts that need other sources to verify the accuracy of what is written.

I notice that you’ve linked to Wikipedia for about 1/2 of your sources and I’d say that is a good percentage as it’s likely that about 1/2 of the data from that source is accurate!

Sorry if I’ve rambled a bit - I just wanted to make a point about referring to a single source for information: in this instance, a very specific single source. My take on the phenomena is similar to Deb’s - “I keep thinking, was there something in the water in upstate New York?”

My choice of links wasn’t related to the reliability of Wikipedia. I thought the linkage of upstate New York with oddball religious movements and religious fervor was overdrawn and misrepresented historical truth. I still think so. Your observations about Wiki are very worthwhile.

 

[Zooey]

ben_dy:

. My take on the phenomena is similar to Deb’s - “I keep thinking, was there something in the water in upstate New York?”

I just hope :whacky: it’s:nope: not :bigyikes: still in there!!!http://bestsmileys.com/paranoid/1.gif

 

[allhers]

Zooey:

I just hope it’s not still in there!!!http://bestsmileys.com/paranoid/1.gif

whatever you do Zooey, don’t move to a treehouse and start making elfin magic cookies. (you do have an elf name though, don’t you?

 

[ben_dy]

Zooey:

I just hope :whacky: it’s:nope: not :bigyikes: still in there!!!http://bestsmileys.com/paranoid/1.gif

I have a friend who lives in Syracuse - pretty close to Palmyra (and may even be considered part of the ‘Burned-Over District’ for all I know) - and although he’s only lived there since about 1950, it wasn’t until, oh, around 1960, I suppose, that he began receiving visages of personages in a light whiter than he had ever seen before. Claims to have been translating that portion of the plates which were ‘sealed’ at the time Joseph Smith, Jr., did his translation. Says the manuscript translation of “The Book of Mormon, II” should ready to go to press in February or March of 2006. While I suggested that he contact the LDS church in Salt Lake City to make certain he wasn’t violating any copyright law by using the title “The Book of Mormon” as the title of his publication, he claims to be the new and true Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" and that, once the remainder of the book began by J. Smith is published, “Salt Lake City will accept me for who I am, I assure you. You can bet on it.”

So if there is something in the water in that area of NY, it seems to take at least a decade to ‘kick in’!

(In truth, my friend is a childhood friend who move to Syracuse in 1950 and with whom I’ve kept in touch and, after he graduated from law school, had a nice practice for a number of years and then taught and is just as calm and reasonable and still as Catholic as he was when he moved away at the age of 13!)

Not to say there may not have been some mushrooms dropped down a few wells in the 19th century in the area…

 

[LittleDeb]

ben_dy:

Not to say there may not have been some mushrooms dropped down a few wells in the 19th century in the area…

So that’s it! Case solved!

The “keeblerites” were the first to the area and grew these magic ‘mushrooms’ and dropped them in the wells. Every thing else is history. I think Zooey can safely drink the water now. I really need to stop adding to this humor on this thread. It all started with the ‘pun and run’ poster who started the keeblerites. Then ben picked it up, then zooey (sounds like a good elfin name to me!) and now me.

In all seriousness this was so interesting to learn about the district and really delve deeper into some of the influences on Joseph Smith. We really should start a thread on the influences in his life. Any takers?