Braided Dispositions
Thoughts on The Disposition of Mormonism
Nate Oman is a legal scholar by day, but is one of Mormonism’s most interesting theologians by night (and probably by day too). In his latest essay, “The Disposition of Mormonism,” Oman seeks to generate discussion on what, precisely, is the posture of Mormonism to the wider world, a posture he calls “a disposition.” He taxonomizes dispositional options generally as three: conservative, which “sees the world through the lens of gratitude”; liberal, which “sees the world through the lens of choice”; and progressive, which “sees the world through the lens of liberation.”
Philosophers, theologians, and perhaps especially lawyers love organizing a messy world into usable taxonomies, so it is no surprise that a philosopher, theologian, and lawyer of Oman’s talents wants to create analytical order out of the theological underpinnings of Mormonism. These taxonomies are obviously (and for Oman, admittedly) oversimplifications meant to create an interface of understanding. For the audiences of Oman’s taxonomy, that understanding is introspection: he mostly wants to invite his fellow Latter-day Saints to think through how our theological commitments present for us a way to bring our own brand of order to the disorderly conduct of the external world.
Oman’s taxonomy is both rich and incomplete. It is rich because I think the idea of gratitude, choice, and liberation are powerful concepts that help me make sense of the Latter-day Saints relative to other communities. It is incomplete in the priority it grants to the conservative-grateful disposition that Oman presents as the central commitment of Mormonism. I do not see it. I see in Mormonism profound commitments between and among conservatism, liberalism, and progressivism, and thus between and among gratitude, choice, and liberation. I call this descriptive fact about Mormonism “braided dispositions.” It is the main topic of my essay response to Oman.1
The Limits of the Conservative Disposition
Oman’s account rests on the predominance of conservatism-gratitude in the disposition of Mormonism. I am, like Agrippa, almost persuaded. There are, however, compelling claims for the liberal-choice and progressive-liberation dispositions of Mormonism too, at least as compelling as the conservative-gratitude tradition. Indeed, in the devotional practice of twenty-first-century Mormonism, I see liberal-choice and progressive-liberation as much more dominant than conservative-gratitude.
The Liberal-Choice Disposition, from the Great Council to Neal Maxwell
The liberal-choice disposition is the one of the Great Council in Heaven. This Council is among the most extraordinary extrapolations from the least detailed passages of scripture we have. It is a dominant theme in Latter-day Saint devotion in the twenty-first century, something I do not think I can say for most of the conservative-gratitude theology articulated so ably by Oman (which rests on the Lectures on Faith explicitly and the effervescence of 1840s Smithian theology more generally).
The Great Council discourse tells us that the fate of humanity was almost rendered a fait accompli by Lucifer’s fundamental misunderstanding about God’s great plan of salvation for his children. Instead of compulsion toward obedience, we would experience “choice,” or “agency.” Latter-day Saints use agentic models of discipleship in ways that our fellow Christians simply do not recognize. And I don’t mean only the Calvinists among them: we are obsessed by the idea that we must choose for ourselves, without compulsion, for such is the order of God. In twentieth-century church leader Neal Maxwell’s famous articulation, the “submission of one's will is really the only uniquely personal thing we have to place on God’s altar. The many other things we ‘give’ are actually the things He has already given or loaned to us.”
A disposition toward choice is fundamental to Mormonism, for ourselves and for others, “let them worship how, where, or what they may.” It permeates our practices from youth-led programming for children and youth, invitation-led missionary work, relative anonymity in temple attendance, and even our historic skepticism of the federal government, from Missouri mobs to the cowboy libertarians of rural Utah.
The Progressive-Liberation Disposition of Mormonism
So what of the disposition of progressive-liberation? One of the great benefits of Oman’s taxonomy is to reconsider familiar terms in deeper intellectual traditions. No one within the church or outside of it would mistake most Latter-day Saints as politically progressive. There are organizations at that narrow overlap, but politically speaking, Latter-day Saints tend to be far more conservative than the median American. But as a pre-ideological disposition in Oman’s sense, I would argue that the progressive-liberation disposition is not only widely practiced within our devotional communities and deeply rooted in our theology. I would argue it is the dominant disposition of twenty-first-century Mormonism.
Consider, for example, what we used to call the three-fold mission of the church, later the four-fold mission of the church, and today simply “works of salvation.” Those missions are, broadly, all progressive-liberational. We must: “redeem” the dead (we might as well say “liberate”), “proclaim the Gospel” (liberating from the wrongs wrought by ignorance and apostasy), “perfect the Saints” (liberating ourselves from imperfections that so easily beset us), and care for the poor (liberating ourselves from poverty so that we can focus on higher laws).
I will confess that the progressive-liberation disposition of Mormonism appeals to me the least as a matter of personal devotion. I am much more interested in ecumenicism and discourse, the quest for truth wherever it may be, Brigham Young’s great doctrine that “we believe in all good. If you can find a truth in heaven, earth or hell, it belongs to our doctrine.” I don’t know that my fellow humans, alive or dead, require liberation, at least from me.
I also recognize that this is a minority view. The ward and stake council meetings in which I participate as a volunteer church leader are dominated by discussions of precisely this kind of discourse.
The Power of Braided Dispositions
My conclusion from this analysis is that we claim all three dispositions. We are conservative, liberal, and progressive. Individually, this is a thing of beauty in our tradition. The power of Mormonism against the ecological fallacies of both our friends and critics is that ours is an extraordinarily heterogeneous community. Much of that heterogeneity is a function of the fact that individual Latter-day Saints—including individual General Authorities—will privilege one disposition over the others, each braided together.
This is our triumph: a braided rope is much stronger, after all, than a single thread.
This essay, part of the forum How Mormonism Sees the World, was written in response to Nate Oman’s The Disposition of Mormonism, published May 1, 2025.
Peter Conti-Brown is Class of 1965 Associate Professor of Financial Regulation, Associate Professor of Legal Studies & Business Ethics at the University of Pennsylvania whose thoughts on Substack can be found here.
Art by Helen Frankenthaler (1928-2011).
There is a second problem with Oman’s taxonomy that will await exposition another day. Call it a friendly amendment. If I am right that the disposition of Mormonism is braided between and among conservative-grateful, liberal-choice, and progressive-liberation, it suggests that we stand for everything and thus for nothing. I don’t see it that way. The Latter-day Saint braided disposition still stands stalwartly in opposition to other traditions we should include in Oman’s taxonomy: the related dispositions of power and chaos. These missing dispositions present for Latter-day Saints the most important call to action. We stand for something in our braided dispositions, but we also stand against the accumulation of power for its sake and the unleashing of chaos to disrupt the projects of gratitude, choice, and liberation to which we have, by practice and by covenant, committed ourselves. These disruptions are the most dominant in the current political moment. I will merely posit here for future discussion this oppositional posture of braided disposition, a project that may be the most important intellectual, theological, and even spiritual task of the twenty-first century.
 | A guest post by
|