Joseph Fielding Smith is the architect of controversial LDS orthodoxy. He has some controversial writings about Blacks and Ezra Taft Benson. We’ll also delve into his role with Lowell Bennion, a BYU professor who was fired. Was JFS responsible or was it someone else? Matthew Bowman answers. We’ll also dive into his role in shaping orthodoxy in the 20th century. Don’t forget to check out Matt’s amazing biography on Joseph Fielding Smith! Check out our conversation…
Joseph Fielding Smith: Architect of Controversial LDS Orthodoxy
Joseph Fielding Smith described as a “lightning rod” due to some views considered politically incorrect today, particularly regarding race. Dr. Matt Bowman, author of “Joseph Fielding Smith, a Mormon Theologian,” sheds light on Smith’s impact on the church.
One of the most uncomfortable aspects of Smith’s legacy is his writings about Black individuals, especially concerning the priesthood. In his work, The Way to Perfection, Smith explicitly stated his subscription to the theory that people of African descent were less righteous in the pre-existence. He used language suggesting they were “not entitled to be born white.” Smith was a staunch “defender of the racial restrictions” in the Church and became a major exponent of the idea, which the source traces back to Orson Hyde, that Black people possessed souls less righteous in the pre-existence. This stance led to prominent public clashes, notably with church educator Lowell Bennion at a symposium in the early 1950s. Their argument over the ban contributed to Bennion’s eventual dismissal by Ernest Wilkinson, who was president of BYU and commissioner of church education. Wilkinson viewed Bennion as too liberal on race and saw Smith as an ally in this regard. While Wilkinson was the person who carried out the dismissal, the collision with Fielding Smith helped instigate the decision.
Disagreement with Benson
Smith also had complex relationships, even with those seen as ideologically sympathetic. Despite being viewed as a fellow conservative, Smith had significant disagreements with Ezra Taft Benson. A letter from Smith exists in which he hoped Benson’s “blood will be purified” upon his return from a mission in Europe in the 1960s. Smith was skeptical of the Church becoming heavily involved in American politics, viewing Benson’s fascination with politics as distasteful and inappropriate for an apostle. He considered it “unseemly” and “disreputable.” Smith also saw Benson as a conspiracy theorist, distinguishing standard conservative politics (like that of Dwight Eisenhower or David McKay) from conspiracy theory. Smith hoped Benson’s time away would rid him of these inclinations, allowing him to return as an apostle rather than an aspiring amateur politician. This highlights that “real deep divides” can exist even within the conservative camp.
Controversial LDS Orthodoxy
Perhaps Smith’s most enduring theological contribution was his role in developing the idea of orthodoxy within the Latter-day Saint tradition. Orthodoxy, an older Protestant concept particularly associated with John Calvin, posits that being a faithful member requires believing certain things and that incorrect beliefs can jeopardize salvation. This was not a central idea in the early Christian Church’s first century. Smith, possibly influenced by Protestant fundamentalism, began insisting in the mid-20th century that belief is actually really important and that believing “the correct ideas” were crucial because incorrect beliefs could “ruin your salvation.” He defended this notion vigorously. Historically, while early Christianity saw debates over ideas like the Trinity, and Roman Catholicism emphasized sacraments and art for teaching, the strong push for average members to understand and adhere to correct doctrine emerged from the Reformed Protestant tradition.
Smith’s emphasis on orthodoxy gained significant traction in the church. When he became President, many members of the Quorum of the Twelve were individuals he had mentored and who shared his views, such as Harold B. Lee, Mark Peterson, and Marion G. Romney. These leaders became “movers and shakers” who believed in Smith’s ideas. There was an explicit push for institutions like BYU to teach Smith’s works, placing his ideas “at the center of what it meant to be a member of the church.” The correlation movement and curriculum standardization were built upon Smith’s ideas and writings, influencing the church through the late 20th century.
Controversial LDS Orthodoxy
However, the source suggests a shift began in the 1990s, moving away from this retrenchment orthodox position towards devotionalism. This newer emphasis highlights that being a good member is about living a good life, being ethical, attending church, and studying scriptures. The focus shifted from basing lessons on doctrinal works like Bruce R. McConkie’s “Mormon Doctrine” to emphasizing ethical behavior and community building. The discontinuation of “Mormon Doctrine” is seen as symbolic of this fading emphasis ozn strict orthodoxy. Bishops today are often more concerned with community involvement and service than with members’ theological positions on topics like evolution.
While the emphasis on “Smith style orthodoxy” may be waning, “Smith style defensiveness” is taking on new manifestations. Recent events at BYU and disciplinary actions are cited as examples. These issues are often framed not as theological disputes, but as centering around issues of gender, practice, and how people live. While related to moral issues Smith and McConkie addressed, the current focus is more on social organization and conduct. This reflects a renewed sense of being understood siege mentality and a need to “put up a fight” against secularization, reminiscent of Joseph Fielding Smith’s defensiveness, though applied more to issues of practice than abstract belief.
Do you think JFS’s influence is waning 50 years after his death, especially with regards to race ban, defensiveness, and controversial LDS orthodoxy?
Wheat & Tares 
Rick, I would answer yes to your questions, but I caveat that I’ve never lived in the LDS corridor of the western United States. When you live where you’re a small religious minority, you can’t really afford to be too choosy about who’s in and who’s out. If you’re willing to show up regularly and do the work, most of us out here aren’t going to get to too bent of shape if you have some heterodox opinions so long as you keep them reined in to a degree (e.g., fast and testimony meeting is probably not the ideal time to air out your thoughts on why the Church will eventually allow same-sex temple sealings). Maybe the same things happen in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona, but I wouldn’t know.
My brother and I were children of the 60s and obsessed with the US space program. One Saturday while working with our father we were talking about the Apollo moon project and my father told us he believed men would never reach the moon because earth was the sphere given to man to live in. I remember at the time thinking how strange that idea was, years later I learned that it came directly from JFS Jr’s book Man His Origin and Destiny, which was on his bookshelf.
To his credit he never told us we were wrong or made us agree with him, he just gave us his opinion. He spent many years inactive and recommitted to the church when I was young with all of the zeal of a new convert in the best way, using that zeal to change his life and habits and to commit his energy to serving the church and its members while never preaching or forcing others to believe what he did. But he also devoured the books published by the church and accepted them as gospel truth.
Remember that Bruce R. McConkie was Joseph Fielding Smith’s son-in-law, and his father Joseph F. Smith (“remember the F”), an earlier LDS President, was a doctrinal authority in his day. So Joseph Fielding Smith was the middle guy in a three-person sequence of authoritative conservative apostles. We would call them the exponents of Mormon fundamentalism if the term wasn’t so connected to post-Manifesto Mormon polygamists.
Yes, his direct influence is waning in the sense that I don’t think most LDS read his books anymore. But his indirect influence through Bruce R. McConkie and through the fundamentalist approach to LDS doctrine that both JFS and McConkie practiced remains strong. The present-day LDS Church is still hamstrung by the enduring legacy of JFS’s doctrinal fundamentalism and Benson’s political extremism.
On my mission to Brazil 1999-2001, several missionaries had their parents send them Joseph Fielding Smith’s and Bruce R. McConkie’s books. They wanted to have definitive leadership-backed answers on controversial questions. I remember at this time, though, hearing that their books were discouraged. Missionaries were to read the scriptures, the discussions, and the missionary handbook and a few other books such as A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, Jesus the Christ, and The Miracle of Forgiveness (wherein Kimball talks about Cain being Bigfoot and many a missionaries discussed this possible reality). Still, however, many missionaries used and quoted these books. I remember reading these books in some areas where other missionaries had them. They were an influence on me then. Now I look back in revulsion.
I still think that the church membership is more conservative than many of us who write and comment on blogs are willing to admit. A little progress has been made on LGBTQs. There used to be rampant gay-bashing and cheering on of orthodox hard-noses like Boyd K. Packer who talked of beating up gays. Now it’s largely silence. Although I still hear how the parents of LGBTQs are victims of their child coming out. On evolution, no one wants to talk about it. People still like to assume that human history is 6000 years old and that evolution is simply a “theory” (with the sense of it being extremely uncertain and not in the sense that science uses it). On blacks, people pretend like that the priesthood ban didn’t really ever happen or that it wasn’t that bad (Wilcox, “how come we had to wait 1800 years to get the priesthood restored” (what exactly does the priesthood do again?)). Also many members have latched onto this absurd idea that skin in the Book of Mormon means animal skins. On Native American ancestry, members have stopped calling them Lamanites. But they still see the Book of Mormon as all literally true. Definitely no one likes to talk of Native Americans as having come over by land bridge over 10,000 years ago. Bring that up, it is dismissed as a “theory” and, again, by “theory,” they mean untrue.