How the study of Mormon history has changed: ‘We have learned to face up to our facts and to be very candid’

By all accounts, Richard Bushman could be viewed as the dean of Mormon history.

For more than nine decades, he has lived it, studied it, analyzed it, shared it with fellow believers and explained it to nonbelievers.

The soft-spoken scholar — with three degrees from Harvard and a drive toward understanding truth — has been writing about Mormonism for much of his academic career. He is a giant in his field and a mentor to many young historians.

He penned a seminal biography of Joseph Smith, founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and later published an examination of the importance of Smith’s gold plates, from which sprang the Book of Mormon. To many, Bushman is a dream representative of the Utah-based faith — quiet, reasoned, faithful, open and willing to tackle hard questions.

So what has he seen of the church in his 94 years? What eras were most difficult, most satisfying? What struggles has he faced as a member, and where does he see the church in the 21st century as compared to when he was born?

Here are lightly edited excerpts from a recent episode of The Salt Lake Tribune’s “Mormon Land” podcast in which Bushman took time away from writing his memoirs in his New York City home to reflect on the past and imagine the future.

Who was the first church president you knew?

I was born in 1931, and the first president I knew was Heber J. Grant [president from 1918 to 1945]. I have followed the presidents right down to the current President [Dallin H.] Oaks. So I’ve seen them all. They all have their winning characteristics. Every one of them is distinctive. They have temperaments, they have preferences, they have styles. I’ve enjoyed every last one of them.

Did you ever meet President David McKay?

Yes, during my young adulthood. I met him in the mission home in Cambridge [Massachusetts] when I was a missionary. He was very tall, so he sort of loomed over me, shaking hands with him. He had a way of looking at you that was like piercing through you. It was a little intimidating, but he was a very generous person, a little bit aristocratic. There was something quite marvelous about him.

Did you know President Gordon Hinckley?

I didn’t know him well personally, but I did meet him once. I came back from the New England Mission, unhappy with the coverage of the Holy Ghost in a series of tracts, little pamphlets, we would distribute. I went to him, and said, “We need a tract on the Holy Ghost.” He was in church public affairs or something. The first thing he said was, “Well, what is there to say?” The next thing was, “Why don’t you write it?” That sort of shut me up.

What about President Spencer Kimball?

I met him once as a stake president. Incredible experience. The whole First Presidency was coming in those days [to hold] regional meetings. When I came up to him (he was short), he put his arm around me and pulled my whole body against his. I remembered it as if some force had gone through me. Others said how they felt his love. It just radiated from him. It was one of those things you just don’t forget.

What was the church like in your youth, and how is it different today?

There have been two major adjustments over my lifetime. The major one was diaspora. Until 1900, we had always been gathering [to Utah].Then, around the turn of the century, the church began to say, “No, stay in your home.” So we began to spread. [Bushman’s wife] Claudia’s father grew up on a poor farm in eastern Utah and saw it was going nowhere, and moved to California. His family thought, “You’ve abandoned us.” They were angry with him, but they all ended up in California. My father was a fashion artist, who did freelance work for Auerbach’s and ZCMI [department stores], but, during the Depression, there just wasn’t enough work. So he moved to Portland, Oregon. The church was aware of this [migration] and that it could lead to problems. What they tried to do was to turn every ward [congregation] into a village. Zion became not one city, but this network of villages all up and down the Great Basin. They tried to do that by creating a church that was loaded with activities, we went to church almost every day. It was also financial, because we not only paid tithing and fast offering, we also paid a budget to cover the ward costs and then raised funds for the buildings. Everyone had two or three church assignments. The church just filled your life. It was just immense.

Do you think something’s been lost, though, because a lot of that no longer exists?

We used to have dance festivals, and we had athletic leagues and church championships — all sorts of things for bringing us together. The second adjustment was globalization of the church. We couldn’t have the United States with one kind of church, and then little villages in Congo or wherever in the world that could not do the whole thing. The church had to cut back and simplify and make it possible for every church anywhere in the world to have the full program.

Was there a time in your life when talk of the Second Coming really grew more pronounced?

There certainly were times when it was more a focus of attention. I don’t myself connect cataclysmic events in the world — the atomic bomb or the Cold War — like that. But when I was growing up, part of our intense interest in the church was speculation, and the Second Coming was a prime target, because it’s all over the scriptures. And there was a time when we really thought we would be going back to Jackson County, Missouri. That was sort of a live option. Church President [Russell Nelson] revived [talk that] the Second Coming is near. I would, in a way, welcome it. It’s good to be thinking about where we stand in the course of history.

How do you think the study of Mormonism has changed in the past few decades?

We became more candid about errors and troubles. We had to face up to all the facts. As that has happened, secular historians have come to respect Mormon historians better. We no longer have enemies of the church. We have polemicists online, but the professionals around the country who write about Mormonism (the non-Mormon professionals) are very respectful. There is no effort to cut us down or to undermine our faith in any way. It’s really a very amiable era in church history. At the heart of that is that we have learned to face up to our facts and to be very candid.

Do you still get grief from members for your warts-and-all telling of Joseph Smith’s life in your book “Rough Stone Rolling”?

Yeah, I do from time to time. … I used to hear people say after the book came out, “Well, it’s an interesting book for a member, but I wouldn’t want a new member to read it.” I’d say it’s the reverse. People who have trouble with the book are those who have been brought up in a view of Joseph Smith — that’s perfection, that he’s a polished gem, not a rough stone.

Do you think members are better versed now in the church’s real history than they were decades ago? Has that helped or hurt the faith ultimately?

They have learned to accept the fact that there will be ups and downs in the story. So it’s not just what they know, but their attitude that our leaders are going to have flaws from time to time. And that does not in any way weaken the force of what they accomplished.

How has the church’s missionary program changed?

It is a little weak on church history. People can join the church, but they also can leave very easily, because what they’re mainly getting is Christ, which is wonderful. It’s what they should mainly get. But they can get Christ in lots of churches, so people come to our church, and it’s fine for a while, they’re welcome, and then something comes along, and then they drift away, and they can go to another church and get so much Christ. We have something special, unusual and uniquely powerful. I think stories of Joseph Smith seeing the Lord, receiving the plates, translating, those should be burned in the people’s memory so they realize that we have had gifts given to us from heaven that are unlike anything else in the world.

What do you think has been the outcome of Nelson’s edict about not using “Mormon”? Do you think the church would ever go back to that nickname?

It’ll be hard to go back suddenly, but it may happen gradually. It’s hard because you lack a word to use for “Mormon.” [You could use] the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, but that doesn’t fit into the flow. I don’t think that outside writers are ever going to give up on Mormon because they need it. There’s a lot of people in the church who would like to be able to use it at least sometimes. Let’s get Christ into our language, but we don’t need to make Mormon a taboo because it’s so valuable.

What could or should the church do to bridge the country’s polarization?

I don’t think the leaders should take a stand and hammer it. What they’ve done is about as good as you can get — treat each other with respect, civil discourse. Joseph opposed slavery, but he was not an abolitionist. The abolitionists were too violent. He found a way of freeing slaves by giving their revenues from the sale of public lands to slave owners, and that was a way of avoiding clashes. That’s a proper role for the church. It could take a stand on the treatment of immigrants, which I think is inhuman and undermines families. We can follow the Catholic Church. They’re pretty good at this sort of thing.

What are your predictions and hopes for the church?

You have to admit it’s marvelous that this church started in such an unlikely form, and has continually grown, grown, grown. It’s now global. It seems to function. My son just finished a medical mission in Kenya, which is the best of the countries, but still has horrible problems. He thinks that the shaping of character that the church does so well is the ultimate answer to people being able to take responsibility for their families, be kind to one another and honest. One development I truly love is our interfaith interest. We are now collaborating with our fellow Christians and fellow believers around the world. That has to happen. We have to form networks of people of goodwill. We made immense headway there, and that’s one thing that gives me hope for the future.

Note to readers • To hear the podcast, go to sltrib.com/podcasts/mormonland. To receive ad-free “Mormon Land” episodes, along with our complete newsletter and access to all Tribune religion content, support us at Patreon.com/mormonland. This story is available on Patreon and to Tribune subscribers. Thank you for supporting local journalism.