Dream of Equity and Freedom: Martin Luther King Jr.

“I Have a Dream.” This powerful declaration by Martin Luther King Jr. more than 60 years ago continues to move, inspire, and motivate those who believe in and love equity in the world today. Monday is Martin Luther King Jr. Day. This is a solemn time to remember and renew his hope and our hope that this dream of equity can become reality for a better America for all people.

Recognizing the Dream

On August 28, 1963, King delivered his famous “I have a Dream” speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. He quoted the bold words of the Declaration of Independence and reminded listeners that some of those promises had yet to be fulfilled, especially to people of color. Still, he held tightly to the promise of those words:

Even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.

He applied this personally:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.

King’s dream of equity still resonates in our today, but it needs nurturing to keep it alive. I want to share some powerful resources to help individuals in our nation overcome attitudes and actions of prejudice.

Learning about Racism

In Washington, DC, Kyle R. Williams founded an antiracism activation experience called A Long Talk About The Uncomfortable Truth. It gathers peoples from all over the United States to study our nation’s troubled history with racism. I learned about this program after members of Brigham Young University Athletics participated. I joined in, and I heartily recommend it.

Here’s how it works. Folks who are interested in the program commit to watch a “a multimedia collection of content reflecting the truth about the history of racism in the United States and the impact it continues to have on our society today.” Then the “long talk” portion begins with two two-hour sessions hosted by a moderator. During the sessions, participants learn a CPR protocol: clarifying, probing, and recognizing. This protocol empowers folks to calmly use active listening to restate a troubling racist statement, ask how that statement might make a person of color feel, and then seek a better path forward if the person is open to learning and extending their dream of equity.

Healing the Wounds of Racism

Darius Gray, a founding member and former president of an organization called Genesis, which promotes and supports members' dream of equity, wrote a helpful article called “Healing the Wounds of Racism.” His approach consists of four steps: (1) acknowledge the problem, (2) recognize it ourselves, (3) learn a new approach, and (4) listen. He advised,

The first step toward healing is the realization that the problem exists. We cannot fix that which we overlook or deny. Our attitudes toward others of a different race or of a different culture should not be considered a minor matter. Viewing them as such only affirms a willingness to stay unchanged.

Inviting all people to listen and learn from each other, he continued,

If we endeavored to truly hear from those we consider as “the other,” and if our honest focus was to let them share of their lives, their histories, their families, their hopes, and their pains, not only would we gain a greater understanding, but this practice would go a long way toward healing the wounds of racism.

King’s dream is just as relevant today. By acknowledging, learning, and listening, we can help keep King’s dream of equity alive, overcome attitudes and actions of prejudice, and help heal the wounds of racism.

The Precious Present

Elderly man in Florence, Italy. Photograph by Matteo Vistocco, Unsplash.

An old man in the neighborhood was peaceful. Neighbors wondered what his secret was. He was not healthy or wealthy. Having no family nearby, he spent much of his day alone. But he expressed genuine interest in all around him, and he seemed to relish each new day. When a young boy asked him why he was so happy, the man replied that it was because he had the precious present.

The boy wondered what the present could be. Could it be a bicycle? Some other great toy? He wished he could have the same gift.

Over years, the old man offered clues to help the boy discover the secret to what the “precious present” meant:

“The present has nothing to do with wishing.”

“When you have the present, you will be perfectly content to be where you are.”

“The present is not something that someone gives you. It is something that you give to yourself.”

Then one day it dawned on the boy what the old man meant. The precious present was just that—the present, the here and now. It was not worrying about the past or fretting about the future but living with gratitude in the present.

How can we be more “present,” more mindful, more grateful this time of year? In addition to sharing presents, we can offer our full time and emotional energy, our “presence” (with a c). Here are some ideas to do so.

Sharing the Gift of Christ

This Christmas let’s focus on Christ as the reason for the season. A choir of angels who announced the birth of Jesus sang “glad tidings of great joy.” And Jesus taught his disciples repeatedly to “be of good cheer.” Jesus experienced all our afflictions, yet he knew that we could be of good cheer. Being of good cheer means accepting the gift of Jesus Christ and sharing that gift with others.

Helping Those in Need

This Christmas let’s remember those in need, at home and abroad. Could we donate life-giving money and supplies to those who are struggling to survive in Palestine and Israel? As we help those in need, let’s do what Jesus would do. A group of people in Orem, Utah, called their “Sub for Santa” activity “His Hands,” meaning the Savior’s hands. They found joy as they collected donations to help others. One young man who had felt “persecuted” by his parents because they chose not to buy him the latest electronic gadget instead found much greater joy in forgetting about himself and donating to others less fortunate.

Recording Daily Blessings

This Christmas let’s pause to record daily blessings in a journal. Counting our blessings in a journal will lift and strengthen us and help us see the hand of the Lord in our lives. Martin Seligman, the father of positive psychology, ran clinical tests on depression and found one of the best remedies is to have a person write down each day three things that went well. Simple? Yes. Effective? Absolutely. As educator Brent Top said, “It’s pretty hard to say “Woe is me” at the same time you are saying “How blessed I am.”

Becoming as Little Children

This Christmas let’s remember the joy of childhood and become as little children. In “The Song of Gratitude,” Lisa Ray Turner described learning gratitude from her three-year-old son’s prayers. One night, by his bedside, he said a simple prayer: “I’m thankful for Mommy and Daddy, snow and clouds. I’m thankful for Santa Claus. I’m thankful for pizza and my big brother. Thank you for food. Thank you for everything.” Then he finished emphatically with “Oh, and please bless our dumb old cat."

This mom said, “How much he had packed into his prayer! If only my prayers were so sincere. If only my heart were filled with such gratitude for simple aspects of everyday life. I liked to think I omitted such items because they were too insignificant to include among important adult acknowledgments and appeals."

She then reflected: I began to see sunsets. Had they always been there? I started to haul my family outside to watch the sky’s extraordinary hues of purple and pink. . . . I’d always thought gratitude was a feeling like love or anger—something that came naturally. But gratitude is more a virtue, like hope or faith—something that may not come naturally but can be learned (or relearned) by becoming as little children. My Christmas wish for all is that we will find joy in the present, sharing the gift of Christ, helping those in need, recording daily blessings, and becoming as little children.

Adapted from R. Devan Jensen, God’s Greatest Gifts: 10 Reasons to Rejoice

The Pacific War and Rise of the Church in Guam and Micronesia

R. Devan Jensen and Paul A. Hoffman

From a presentation at the Mormon History Association conference at Rochester, New York, on June 10, 2023.

Today let’s talk about war—and peace, the transition from Pacific battlefields to sacred temple grounds.

The Great Depression triggered terrible hardships in Japan that led the Japanese to seek military solutions, aggressively colonizing northern China and Micronesia. “In the 1930s, the Japanese military capitalized on the [Micronesian] islands’ strategic location, with plans to make them a springboard for expansion into the Central and Southwest Pacific.” Indeed, “the Japanese launched the early air and sea attacks of their Pacific campaign from Micronesia.”

The morning of December 7, 1941, Japanese forces bombed the US military in Hawai‘i and Guam (in Guam it was December 8 because of the international date line). Shown here is the USS Arizona ablaze with 1,000 crewmen trapped below deck, including my second cousin Ensign Howard Merrill. Hours after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Japanese bombed the Gilbert Islands, Wake Island, the Philippines, and many more locations. It was a devastating, coordinated attack.

“As the Allies resisted the Japanese expansion and then turned to the defeat of Japan, Micronesia emerged as a key battleground.” The Gilbert Islands represented the eastern limits of the territorial control of the Imperial Japanese Navy. Their bases were established at the Makin and Tarawa Atolls. The US and Japanese forces fought terribly destructive battles in the Gilbert and Marshall Islands from 1942 to early 1944. The Marines learned much from their mistakes at Tarawa and the Marshall Islands, choosing to bypass islands in their next campaigns. “Americans invaded only a few islands to be used as bases from which to launch the next stage of attacks, with the goal of reaching the Japanese home islands as soon as possible. Bypassed islands—the largest number of Micronesian islands—were isolated by Allied control of sea lanes, rendered ineffective by continual bombing, and left to endure and starve until surrender.” Like a typhoon, the Pacific War devastated all in its path. Micronesians were mostly neutral bystanders living in strategic battlefields. Islanders were thus in the cross fire of Japanese and American military contests while providing conscripted labor and suffering from hunger as food shortages arose from blockades and trade disruptions.

The Imperial Japanese Navy had established a formidable naval and air base at the Truk Lagoon (now known as Chuuk). It was informally known as the Gibraltar of the Pacific because of its large lagoon, protected by outer barrier islands, five airfields, and extensive anti-aircraft and naval armaments and fortifications. In Truk, Japanese “military rule became harsher as the war continued and food shortages became dangerous. Micronesian affection and admiration to the Japanese turned to distress, doubt, apathy, resentment, and resistance.” The Americans chose to bomb Truk rather than invade. On February 17–18, 1944, hundreds of carrier-based American fighters and bombers conducted a surprise raid there. Together they sank at least six Japanese warships, nine auxiliary ships, and thirty cargo ships and destroyed about 275 (of 365) Japanese aircraft. The damage was so extensive that the air raid has sometimes been referred to as Japan’s Pearl Harbor. Ongoing US raids wreaked havoc for years.

In the spring of 1944, the Northern Mariana Islands housed Japanese military installations of great strategic significance because they were within fuel range of US long-range land-based bombers to reach Japan. Accordingly, the Japanese reinforced the garrison there and were fiercely determined to defend the Northern Marianas from the westward advance of Admiral Chester Nimitz’s naval and land forces.

Japan sought to make Saipan an “impregnable fortress” and was prepared to sacrifice many lives to protect the homeland. By June 1944, Saipan was defended by 26,000 troops and sailors under the overall command of IJN Admiral Chūichi Nagumo, who a few years earlier had led the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. On June 11–12, Vice Admiral Mark Mitscher’s Task Force 58 softened up Saipan’s defenses by conducting fighter and bombing sweeps that destroyed about 200 Japanese combat planes and a dozen or so cargo ships. On June 15, Marines invaded Saipan on eight beaches, supported by the Army’s 27th Infantry Division. The Japanese resisted energetically, and the battle lasted almost a month, ending with a suicidal charge of 3,000 Japanese survivors. Several hundred Japanese civilians jumped to their deaths from Saipan’s cliffs, despite American attempts to convince them otherwise. About 2,000 Japanese eventually surrendered, with Admiral Nagumo taking his own life.

US and Japanese forces fought on Guam and Tinian from July to August. After an eleven-day bombing and siege campaign, the US conducted a multipronged invasion of Guam on July 21. They were opposed by about 18,000 Japanese troops. After three weeks of heavy fighting, about 450 Japanese surrendered, while the remainder had died or gone into hiding in the jungle. More than 1,400 Americans had been killed and 5,600 wounded. Guam was declared secure on August 10, and thousands of CHamoru people, who had been left to starve in concentration camps on the island, were finally freed.

If there was a silver lining to the dark clouds of war, it was that Latter-day Saints began to share the story of the restored gospel in Guam, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, and later many other Micronesian islands. Scattered Latter-day Saints arrived and sought each other for worship services. For example, members sought to gather for worship on aircraft carriers and other vessels. While serving aboard the aircraft carrier Intrepid with Torpedo Squadron Number 10, sailor Ralph Albiston wanted to find fellow Saints, so he researched the records of more than 4,000 crewmen and found twenty-three other members of the Church. He located all of them and asked if they would join in church services. They gathered to sing, study scriptures, and partake of the sacrament. At first they took the bread and water using plates and paper cups, but then Albiston made cups for the water from empty 20 mm gun casings that were cleaned and polished and eventually silver plated. Another Latter-day Saint sailor made a beautiful wooden tray.

Soon after American forces took Saipan, Latter-day Saint Marines built their first meetinghouse in Micronesia. Marine (and future Apostle) L. Tom Perry was stationed for a year on Saipan. He said they wanted to replace their leaky tent with a building:

From the different branches of service, we set about to gather materials. We were surprised at the response we received. The Seabees supplied us with all the tools we needed. The Marines and the Air Force contributed most of the building materials. Now the problem was, who will design the chapel? We checked all of the servicemen. None of them had built anything, except we found a farmer from the state of Idaho that had helped his father build a barn. We made him the design and construction supervisor, and we started about the process of building our chapel. Each evening after our day’s duty was over, we would go to the construction site and begin our work. . . .

We were only able to hold one church service in our building. The next morning, Monday morning, we loaded our sea bags, boarded ship, and headed to Japan.

On the nearby island of Tinian, an airbase was established for American B-29 bombers to conduct long-range bombing of mainland Japan. Seabee Alma Lawrence told the story of the Enola Gay leaving with an atomic bomb:

[In August 1945] about a week or ten days after our battalion had received notice to prepare for the invasion of the Japanese mainland, I was at the north airfield when a new squadron of B-29s came in.

It was a very small squadron of only seven B-29s or so, and only five men to each crew, plus ground support people. I talked for several minutes with one of the pilots from this squadron, and he showed me how their B-29s had been modified. He drew my attention to the fact that these special bombers had only one large bomb bay rather than the conventional two. He explained that each of the planes carried only a five-man crew instead of the standard eleven-man crew. There was no tail-gun on the planes, he said, and many of the other standard positions were also unmanned. Then he said something that made no sense to me at the time. It did cause me to wonder, but I truly figured that he couldn’t know what he was talking about. I had casually mentioned that our battalion had received orders to prepare to invade Japan, and that deployment was now less than two weeks away. The pilot looked me in the face and said we wouldn’t need to worry about the invasion, declaring, “The war’s going to be over before that.”

I didn’t quiz the pilot. I thought he might be bragging, but (if I remember things honestly) I had a feeling he knew something I didn’t. I don’t think he would have told me, had I asked him. I remember that I was at the north airfield again, a few days later, when one of the planes from this squadron took off, towards evening. (We were about 1500 miles from Japan, so it was a long flight. Still, the B-29s were fully capable of making a round trip there from Tinian, though they were usually pretty low on fuel when they returned.)

I don’t think that I ever saw this pilot again, but the following day, the radio was loaded with the news of an atomic bomb explosion over Hiroshima. We heard the news first over the radio, and then over the loudspeaker near the battalion headquarters. The first news was simply that an atomic bomb had been dropped. The explosive power was noted, plus the damage done. I remember being amazed by the power the bomb had. Later, we learned that the world at large was abuzz with the news that much of the great city had been destroyed. A few days later came the reports that Nagasaki had been destroyed by a second atomic bomb. And then in short order came the wonderful news that Japan had surrendered to the United States, and that the second World War was officially over.

I have mixed feelings today about the atomic bombs dropped on Japan. The bombs were enormously destructive, and thousands of innocent people died. At that time, however, I could see nothing but blessings because of them. Two bombs brought an end to an ugly and terrible war. Had the bombs not been effectively used, the all-out invasion of Japan almost certainly would have resulted in widespread damage to property—and in the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives on each side.

On V-J Day, the island was opened up for celebrating. All military personnel were invited over the loudspeakers to come to headquarters for free beer. That didn’t seem very appropriate to me—to celebrate the ending of the war in that way. I just went into my tent alone and wrote letters and offered my prayers of thanks that the war was over.

Guam soon became an important naval and air base for American forces during the Cold War at the expense of the CHamoru people, many of whom were forced to sell their land at cheap prices to the American military. Notwithstanding these injustices, the CHamoru remain loyal to America and are grateful for their liberation during World War II. After securing the island, US and CHamoru troops spent many months hunting down the hundreds of Japanese troops who had not surrendered. Most of the remaining Japanese were captured or killed within a short time after the battle. However, several of them evaded capture for decades, including Japanese soldier Shoichi Yokoi and several of his companions.

The United States soon established four military bases in Guam, and Church members formed several servicemen’s groups (smaller than branches). The first full-time missionaries arrived in January 1957. That same year, the Church purchased land in Anigua to build another chapel to accommodate the growth in membership. An old navy chapel, again consisting of two Quonset huts, was made available to the Latter-day Saints by a contractor who was removing it from the naval station. The foundation and slab were prepared, and the buildings were moved to Anigua later that year. The first meeting held in the new chapel was on February 9, 1958. Elder Mark E. Petersen of the Quorum of the Twelve dedicated Anigua’s new Guam Branch meetinghouse on June 18, 1959 (shown here).

On March 3, 1970, Church leaders formed the Guam Ward within the Honolulu Stake (3,800 miles away)! Shown here is the chapel in Barrigada, Guam. So the Saints had meetinghouses. But they still lacked access to temples to receive the endowment and sealing ordinances. For decades, access to temples would be a significant problem.

In 1973 students from Kiribati (formerly known as the Gilbert Islands) attended church-owned Liahona High School in Tonga. They converted, and in 1975 they returned and served as missionaries. The church later bought a school in Kiribati.

Missionary work began in Saipan in February 1975. Mustang Gonzalez, a Latter-day Saint construction contractor, was the branch president and told his cigar-smoking foreman, Brad Nago, that he wanted him to be the next branch president. Brad and Jeannie Nago converted and led the branch for many years.

In Honolulu on July 1, 1975, William and Margery Cannon were asked to spend three years supervising missionaries in Hawai‘i. They were responsible for members and missionaries on Saipan, Guam, and Kwajalein. They felt that the restored gospel should be shared in all of Micronesia, but they faced challenges: travel expenses, travel visas, missionary housing, languages, establishing local church buildings, strengthening local leaders, health challenges, etc.

In 1976 Micronesians were actively seeking greater freedom from US supervision, having experienced some success with their Congress of Micronesia. Elder John H. Groberg of the Seventy arrived in Honolulu on July 28 as an “area supervisor” for the Hawaii–Pacific Isles Area. Anticipating that Micronesian nations might end the guarantee of religious freedom in the islands, he requested a meeting with William Cannon. On August 24, Elder Groberg and President Cannon met to decide where to send missionaries first. Three days later, on August 27, the missionaries brought into the mission office Ohren Ohry, a Pingelapese schoolteacher from Pohnpei who was studying at Brigham Young University–Hawaii. Ohry said he would be baptized if a branch could be made on his islands. They agreed, and he was baptized the next day. In quick succession, Elder Groberg and President Cannon sent missionaries to Pohnpei, the Marshall Islands, Chuuk, Yap, and Palau.

In 1977 Don and Maria Calvo were the first CHamoru couple to be baptized in southern Guam. In 1978 Guam was rededicated for the preaching of the gospel by a prayer held atop one of the western mountains. Leaders opened a dependent branch in Merizo in the southern part of the island; the branch eventually moved to Agat. The founding of the Agat Branch resulted in more people joining the Church in that area. A family in Agat, Sal and Purificacion Panes and children, were baptized in 1978. The oldest daughter Memnet said, “I suppose that my family and I were probably the first local Filipino family in Guam to be baptized in 1978. And probably I was also the first Filipina convert who joined the Church in Guam to serve a mission, though I sent in my mission papers from BYU–Hawaii.” Memnet graduated from BYU–Hawaii with a bachelor’s degree in biology. She married Marlo O. Lopez in the Laie Hawaii Temple. They later served as mission leaders of the Philippines Bacolod Mission. The Lopezes then moved to Salt Lake City. She was called to the Relief Society general advisory council. Caring and sharing are vital parts of the Relief Society. She also served as a member of the seminary and institute research committee, nurturing young people.

In March 2020 the Lopezes were called to serve as the first temple president and matron of the Yigo Guam Temple. Memnet recalled, “When we left Guam [years ago], we thought that was it—we would never be coming back to the island. But the Lord sent us back to serve the people. . . . It was very humbling to know that I would be returning back to the island as a temple matron and that my husband and I were called to this sacred assignment.”

Now a temple in Guam has been dedicated. Another in Kiribati has been announced. In percentages of population who are Latter-day Saint, three Micronesian nations are in the top ten in the world. Membership reached about 18 percent of the population in Kiribati. Membership reached just over 9 percent in the Marshall Islands. And membership reached about 6 percent in the Federated States of Micronesia.

Temples in the Pacific will help many members receive the endowment and sealing ordinances. Many lack the resources to travel, so temples are essential!

In closing, I thank my dear friend Rosalind Meno Ram, one of the first CHamoru sister missionaries and now an associate academic vice president at BYU–Hawaii. We joked that we assembled a team like the Avengers to tell stories of war and peace in our book Battlefields to Temple Grounds: Latter-day Saints in Guam and Micronesia. Our team is particularly grateful that war has transformed to peace and that so many Pacific battlefields are becoming peaceful temple grounds. May peace prevail!

Notes

Poyer, Falgout, and Carucci, Typhoon of War, 7.

Poyer, Falgout, and Carucci, Typhoon of War, 7.

Poyer, Falgout, and Carucci, Typhoon of War, 9.

Poyer, Falgout, and Carucci, Typhoon of War, 10.

Hideyoshi Obata, as quoted in Peattie, Nan’yō, 282.

Dupuy and Dupuy, Encyclopedia of Military History, 1285.

Dupuy and Dupuy, Encyclopedia of Military History, 1286.

Freeman, Saints at War, 156–57.

L. Tom Perry (untitled commencement address at Brigham Young University–Hawaii, December 17, 2010), https://speeches.byuh.edu/commencement/commencement-elder-perry.

Alma C. Lawrence, interview by Don Norton, Orem, Utah, June 4, 1999.

Passauer, “Church History on Guam,” 1.

Passauer, “Church History on Guam,” 17.

Nufer, Micronesia under American Rule, 61–85. See also Willens and Siemer, National Security and Self-Determination.

Passauer, “Church History on Guam,” 17–18.

Memnet Lopez, email to Christina Hicks and R. Devan Jensen, August 4, 2021.

Marlo Oliveros Lopez and Memnet Panes Lopez, interview.

Review of Saints, Vol. 2: No Unhallowed Hand, 1846–1893

Review of Saints: The Story of the Church of Jesus Christ in the Latter Days. Volume 2, No Unhallowed Hand, 1846–1893

General editors: Matthew J. Grow, Jed L. Woodworth, Scott A. Hales, and Lisa Olsen Tait. Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2020. Paperback, first printing, 833 pages.

Reviewed by Devan Jensen, executive editor at the BYU Religious Studies Center

No Unhallowed Hand ranges widely, beginning with the Saints’ expulsion from the Nauvoo area, their travels to the Great Salt Lake Valley, the recruitment of the Mormon Battalion, and the challenges of settling Utah’s Wasatch Front, including working through tense relations with indigenous people and the federal government.

Thousands of pioneers crossed the Great Plains, seeking to build dugouts and frontier homes in the Great Basin. Sam Brannan, an emigrant leader, urged all to keep traveling to San Francisco. He was overruled by Brigham Young, president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who soon became territorial governor. 

Settlers quickly displaced and created stressful living conditions for the indigenous Ute, Shoshone, and Paiute tribes in Utah. Tension resulted in the Walker War (192–97), the Bear River Massacre (402), and the Black Hawk War (336–48). Indian missions struggled for decades but eventually resulted in conversions described “like fire in the dry grass” (405). Many of those Shoshone converts helped build the Logan Temple and performed vicarious baptisms for the dead, including those who died in the massacre (509–11). These stories are important to share.

Men and women struggled to forge communities while hundreds of missionaries traveled to distant lands, including Hawaii, Tahiti, Scandinavia, and South Africa. George Q. Cannon, Joseph F. Smith, and his “dear sister” Martha Ann Smith Harris played major roles in many of these stories.

The book takes a refreshingly candid look at complex issues such as adoption sealings (41–42), plural marriage (152–54), the temple and priesthood restriction against blacks (181–82), and the Utah War and related Mountain Meadows Massacre (254–63). Of course, race was a hotly debated issue in the stormy decades before the US Civil War. In the 1852 territorial debate on slavery, Governor Young “declared publicly for the first time that people of black African descent could no longer be ordained to the priesthood. Before this time, a few black men had been ordained.” Elder Orson Pratt strongly objected to slavery in Utah without “any authority from heaven.” Governor Young’s views “echoed a widespread but mistaken idea that God had cursed people of black African descent” (182). “Can a prophet or an apostle be mistaken?” he asked in 1858. “Do not ask me any such question, for I will acknowledge that all the time” (279). (Yes, even prophets are fallible.) Many decades later, black member Jane Manning James sought First Presidency permission to be sealed, with the poignant plea, “Is there no blessing for me?” (590). Her letters went unanswered. (Church leaders eventually returned to the original unrestricted policy toward blacks nearly a hundred years later, in 1978.)

Throughout Utah, the Saints began building temples to perform ordinances for the living and the dead. Many felt complex emotions while enduring federal prosecution to restrict the practice of plural marriage, and many felt equally complicated feelings when the Manifesto overturned that practice (602–7). President Wilford Woodruff reassured them, “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray” (609). Most members adapted. Others struggled to change and continued the practice. (As human beings, we swim in powerful currents of culture. If currents sweep us out to sea, we need to change direction.)

The book concludes with the joyful dedication of the Salt Lake Temple (661–65). Overall, I highly recommend this book. I congratulate the authors, editors, and publisher for demonstrating integrity to the historical sources and nuances of history. 

When Did Latter-day Saints Start Leaning Republican?

In the United States, the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints disbanded its “People's Party” in 1891. Church leaders invited members to join either the Democrats or the Republicans. These leaders wanted to become more mainstream and help the cause of Utah statehood. They also thought that political diversity could help members shape local and national elections.

That contest to win voters to the two major political parties created more heat than light. In the April 1892 general conference, President Wilford Woodruff counseled the Saints to stop fighting. “Every man has as much right—prophets, apostles, saints, and sinners—to his political convictions as he has to his religious opinions,” he said, adding, “Don't throw filth and dirt and nonsense at one another because of any difference on political matters" (“General Conference,” Deseret Evening News, 5 April 1892, 4).

At that time, many felt that believing members could only be Democrats and not Republicans because Republicans were the leaders of the antipolygamy crusade. During a priesthood session in St. George, apostle Francis Lyman said believing members were needed in both political parties. “We don't want anyone who is a Democrat to change,” he told them. “There is much less difference between the two parties than at first thought” (Francis Marion Lyman, Journal, 11 September 1982).

So when did Latter-day Saints start leaning Republican? Here's excellent analysis by my friend Joseph Stuart, a PhD student in history at the University of Utah:

In 1904, the United States Senate convened hearings to ascertain whether Reed Smoot, Utah’s junior senator and an apostle for the LDS Church, could hold his seat in Congress. Senate Republicans, largely self-identified Protestants, questioned whether Smoot could serve the people of Utah in an unbiased matter, given his connection to his church, which they argued, had never followed through on promises to Americanize. These Republicans viewed Smoot as the LDS Church’s puppet, incapable of making moral decisions because of his professed faith, which they viewed as a “false” religion. Kathleen Flake has shown in her book The Politics of American Religious Identity that Smoot and the Republican Party came to a political agreement during the trial’s three-year duration. Smoot would support their policy platforms and work to flip Utah’s residents to the Grand Old Party. In return, they would stop calling LDS leaders to answer questions about their church on the Senate floor. The deal worked for both sides. However, there’s no question as to who wielded the most power in the relationship. Mormons acquiesced to a national political party and won political influence. Republican Party leaders gained a crucial electoral constituency and did not have to recognize Mormonism as a religion on the same level as Protestant Christianity.  

Utah’s white Mormons became more Republican over time. The Beehive State and its Latter-day Saint citizens did not align strictly with Republicans or Democrats through the mid-twentieth century, despite some LDS leaders who identified the New Deal’s social safety net as bad for the nation’s spiritual health. The partisanship expressed by individual leaders did not stop Latter-day Saints from voting for Franklin Roosevelt in each of his four presidential campaigns.

Many Latter-day Saint Democrats, including Senator Elbert D. Thomas of Utah, promoted President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, feeling that his leadership was the best pathway out of the Great Depression.

The Red Scare of 1950 changed the trajectory of the country. “In the early months of 1950,” wrote Richard Swanson, “Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin embarked on what may be recorded as a most energetic attempt to rid the United States of persons linked, even remotely, with Communist sympathies or associations. . . . Capitalizing on the prevalent mood of disgust with foreign policy failures, the junior senator offered the oversimplified explanation that Communists had infiltrated high-level State and Defense Department positions” (Richard Swanson, “McCarthyism in Utah” [master’s thesis, Brigham Young University, 1977], 1). Swanson wrote that “the use of slanderous insinuations to give the impression that a politician was pro-Communist was widespread and effective in Utah,” and “the first victim of this deluge of McCarthyism was the state’s senior senator, Democrat Elbert Thomas” (Swanson, “McCarthyism in Utah,” 99). 

During the 1950 senatorial campaign, attack ads “accused [Thomas] of presiding at Communist meetings and of sponsoring leftist organizations. He was cartooned as a puppet of the Communists and the radical unionists,” and “the Republican candidate, Wallace Bennett, did nothing to deter the attacks,” wrote historian Richard D. Poll (Richard D. Poll, David E. Miller, Eugene E. Campbell, and Thomas G. Alexander, eds., Utah’s History [Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1978], 518). Even though Senator Thomas was not a Communist, his critics “publicized enough implicative insinuations and accusations” that Thomas was defeated in the election cycle of 1950.

President David O. McKay and Elder Ezra Taft Benson passionately preached against communism during the 1950s and 1960s, and this sometimes led to tension within church leadership, particularly the First Presidency. Elder Benson was so vocal in his crusade against socialism that the First Presidency censured and then called him to preside in the European Mission to keep him out from US politics. When President McKay died in 1970, Elder Benson subdued his political activity until 1973 when he became President of the Twelve and spoke out against socialism (see Matthew L. Harris, Thunder from the Right: Ezra Taft Benson in Mormonism and Politics [Urbana: University of Illinois, 2019], and http://www.mormonpress.com/ezra-taft-benson-and-politics).

Membership in both parties continued to be divided fairly evenly until the mid-1970s when abortion became, for many members, a big issue leading them to affiliate with Republicans. (It is noteworthy that nearly all believing Democrats likewise oppose abortion.)

For many years Utah, like several other states, allowed abortions only to save a mother’s life. In 1973 the US Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade struck down state abortion laws. Roe v. Wade proved to be a continental divide for American political parties. Before the decision, Democrats were more pro-life because more Catholics were Democrats. More Republicans were pro-choice. After the decision, leaders in Congress helped define each party's stance, with some voters changing parties. From that time onward, as former Deseret News reporter Rod Decker noted, “more religious people tended Republican, and less religious people went with the Democrats. Utah followed that national pattern. . . . As positions clarified, Utah voters became more Republican. After Roe, Utah never voted for another Democrat for president or senator” (Rod Decker, Utah Politics: The Elephant in the Room [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2019], 56).

Rod Decker. Courtesy of KUTV.

America’s bicentennial year of 1976 was the year the vast majority of membership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints went Republican. “1976 was what the Republican ascendancy started, right after Roe v. Wade,” Decker said in a recent KUTV interview. That continental divide continues in Utah—and in our nation.

No One Knows My Editing

Patty and I at the Provo Utah Temple.

“No man knows my history,” Joseph Smith Jr. said, later adding, “I don’t blame any one for not believing my history. If I had not experienced what I have, I would not have believed it myself” (http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-e-1-1-july-1843-30-april-1844/351). With a nod to Joseph Smith, no one knows my editing!

All my jobs have been marvelous adventures. I started my career at Deseret Book, the Church Curriculum Department (now Publishing Services), and the Ensign magazine. Then in 2001 Richard Draper, a professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University, hired me as the executive editor/associate director of publications to help take the Religious Studies Center, in his words, to “a higher level of professionalism, efficiency, and organization.” We have certainly done that, and we continue to grow. Over the years, publications directors such as Richard Draper, Richard Holzapfel, Robert Millet, Richard Bennett, Dana Pike, Thomas Wayment, Scott Esplin, and Jared Ludlow each supervised and handled peer review of manucripts. Whereas the original annual output of the RSC was two books and a two-color newsletter, we now produce about thirteen to fifteen high-quality books (winning many awards), a journal, a magazine, a robust website, and social media output for both our college and the center.

When initially hired, I told Andrew Skinner, dean of Religious Education, that I felt OK committing to five years and then reevaluating. During that five-year period, Covenant Communications copublished many books with the RSC. Richard Holzapfel firmly established the Religious Educator as a viable journal. We began relying even more on BYU editing students to shoulder the increased editing load that Richard Draper, then Richard Holzapfel encouraged through their proactive recruitment of authors. Designer Carmen Cole redesigned the RSC Newsletter. Student Matt Grey started Studia Antiqua to publish student papers on the ancient world. Our students have always shouldered much of the editing load.

At the end of that five years, I told the new dean, Terry Ball, that I felt comfortable staying another five years. It was tricky to keep up with Richard Holzapfel's creative mind, new projects, teaching, and travel schedule. He asked us to push hard to get all past content on the RSC website and translate selected materials into Spanish, Portuguese, and German. He encouraged us to create a magazine, which we designed with the help of Hales Creative and named BYU Religious Education Review. I recommended that we hire a publicity/production superviser to build the RSC brand. That spot was filled by Stephanie Wilson (part-time and then full-time) and then Brent Nordgren. Richard and Brent did an admirable job negotiating a copublication agreement with Deseret Book that dramatically increased our distribution network. That laid the foundation for financial stability.

After Richard Holzapfel's departure, we had another five or so years with quick transitions between publications directors—leading to greater staff autonomy. Publications directors were Robert Millet, Richard Bennett (interim), and Dana Pike. While working under Richard Bennett, Religious Education began to pay for a staff member to take a professional development course each year. After I asked if he would send me to the Mormon History Association conference, he said that he couldn't unless I had a paper accepted. So I began to craft and submit history presentations. That turned into a personal challenge—to document many interesting Church history and family history stories, branching out into related areas. Writing was done nearly always in my personal time but occasionally on RSC time when projects slowed down.

BYU Religious Education began sponsoring its Church History Symposium in 2006, and the Religious Studies Center soon published the proceedings with Deseret Book. Alexander L. Baugh initiated the event by proposing a conference to acknowledge the two hundredth anniversary of Oliver Cowdery’s birth. Since that time, this event has become a premier venue for rigorous and faithful scholarship on Church history. The topics have been Oliver Cowdery, Wilford Woodruff, John Taylor, preserving the history of the Latter-day Saints, church organization and administration, Latter-day Saint missionary work, Joseph F. Smith, Joseph Smith’s study of the ancient world, the international church, Mormon women’s history, the intersection of business and religion, and religious liberty and Latter-day Saints.

The next five-year segment began when Thom Wayment began serving as publications director. His leadership contributions included pushing for greater quality in our books and journal, expanding the author pool, adding strong members to our team, and promoting staff training that resulted in an increase in social media outreach and thus better sales. Challenges during this period were redoing contracts, increasing book production, dropping the review board, wrestling with design issues, and holding fewer RSC team meetings to coordinate efforts. After we resumed RSC team meetings to coordinate efforts, productivity soared. Brent hired Madison Swapp and then Emily Strong, a 3/4-time designer. Both have worked hard. Thom asked me to attend a conference of the Association of American University Presses, and I realized that we could do much more to build the RSC brand and promote our books. As an editor, I was inundated each year with editing sixteen academic books, two journals, and a magazine. When I mentioned that I was struggling to keep up with the workload, Thom invited in two editors from the Maxwell Institute. That has been a boon to our organization because Don Brugger and Shirley Ricks have been marvelous team members. (Shirley has since retired, and talented editors Julie Newman, Alaina Dunn, and Becky Call have worked here.)

And about that time we started social media pages for the BYU Religious Studies Center, Religious Educator, BYU Religious Education, and Y Religion podcast. We began hiring student media specialists and creating a digital format of the RSC Newsletter that now included videos and suggested readings for Come, Follow Me. We began cross-promoting our work with BYU Studies, Book of Mormon Central, Latter-day Saint Insights, and Seminaries and Institutes. Such partnerships feel productive.

Scott C. Esplin became publications director, followed by Jared W. Ludlow. The Religious Studies Center has extended its outreach to a broader audience by copublishing with other partners. In 2016 it teamed up with Abilene Christian University to copublish Alexander Campbell and Joseph Smith: Nineteenth-Century Restorationists. In 2018 it worked with the Maxwell Institute to publish a Maxwell Institute Study Edition of the Book of Mormon. In 2020 it partnered with the Central Conference of American Rabbis on Understanding Covenants and Communities: Jews and Latter-day Saints in Dialogue. In 2022 it partnered with the John Whitmer Historical Association to publish Restorations: Scholars in Dialogue from Community of Christ and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. And it 2023 it partnered with the Jonathan Nāpela Center for Hawaiian and Pacific Islands Studies to publish Battlefields to Temple Grounds: Latter-day Saints in Guam and Micronesia.

During my career, I mentored about sixty interns. Leah Welker, who worked with me at the RSC and LDSPMA, shared a kind email: "I thought I would drop a note and give you a belated thank-you for your mentorship toward me during that time. It came at a very important point in my life, and you helped connect me with some special and formative experiences. I also always appreciated your kindness, empathetic nature, and unassuming leadership. You made the RSC a wonderful, safe place to work and grow. You let us try things and fail, but you tried to set us up to succeed. You treated everyone equally, no matter their gender, age, or ethnicity, and you always valued our well-being above the work. You taught me a lot, and about far more than just editing: about writing, publishing, administration, leadership, and being a good leader and authentic disciple of Christ. I have been so very lucky to have had so many good bosses, but I count you as one of the best."

Beyond Dogmatism

Religion is sometimes attacked as a source of ignorance and conflict. While, as human beings, all of us are subject to confirmation bias, perhaps the real danger is dogmatism, or the tendency to lay down principles as incontrovertibly true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others, especially when it leads to prejudice or violence. That condition may affect both the religious and the nonreligious. Militants in any ideology can become destructive.

Is Snoopy being "dog”matic?

As this article points out, people who dogmatically hold to any topic without being able to consider other perspectives "typically pay a high price for their dogmatism. Not only do they alienate many people, but they actually imprison their own egos inside their figurative fortress of conviction."

The solution is keeping an open mind. Higher thinking allows us to see beyond simple black and white categories and to see the full, multicolored spectrum of human experience.