In 2013, the Church published a series of essays on controversial topics, such as polygamy and the race ban on black church members. What was Elder Steven Snow’s role in that roll-out?
Elder Snow: Well, it was something that when I was in the Presidency of the Seventy. I was aware for many years that this was something that the brethren felt like needed to be done. There had been some attempts in the past that had not worked out. They just hadn’t worked.
The renewed emphasis had been building under Elder Marlin Jensen’s tenure. He really wanted to do this, to really get it. So [it began] under his leadership, and I was apprenticing still. There were six months when I got to work with Elder Jensen, after I was first called. So, I was called in December as Church Historian in 2011. Then I finally took over officially, August 1st of 2012. But during that six months I was with Marlin, we were stirring about that. I think really, under his leadership, it was presented to the Quorum of the Twelve and to the First Presidency. Twelve specific questions were identified. In May of 2012, the leading quorums gave the approval to move ahead. We had a committee of general authority Seventies and also scholars and historians from our department that reviewed all of the drafts that came in on all of these questions. Generally, the way it was done is we retained an outside historian to write the first draft–someone outside of church employment.
GT: Now, why did you pick somebody outside church employment? That’s interesting.
Elder Snow: Well, we just felt it would [be best to] go to an expert, like Paul Reeve, for example, for Race and the Priesthood. You can’t find anyone better than Dr. Reeve to do it. So, he was very helpful in getting us the first draft and the information we needed to go ahead. That’s just an example. So, that was the pattern for most of them and then they were reviewed by our department, the historians and scholars, as well as the general authority Seventies on the committee. And then they were gone through many, many times. Then, eventually were given to the Twelve and First Presidency for approval.
Was there a debate among the brethren about the essays?
Elder Snow: Well, that’s very interesting, the debate. Just so I can give you a little context on what was happening was, “Do you advertise and make a big deal about a website that you can go to learn everything weird you wanted to know about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? You can go here. Or should we just kind of quietly release them?” The decision was made, kind of quietly to put them out there so that they’re accessible. Then at a later date, we could publicize them more if we wanted. As it turned out, that wasn’t necessary. Once Race and the Priesthood, and Nauvoo polygamycame out, it wasn’t necessary to publicize the Gospel Topics database. People began very quickly to learn about it.
GT: Yes, yes. Well, and it doesn’t seem like, and I’ve heard anecdotally, and I don’t know how big of a deal this is. But it was kind of like what you said, “Do we tell the weird things about the church, or do we just let people find them on their own?” Have you heard that some people have lost testimonies?
Elder Snow: That was that was the concern. We wanted to help a lot of people that were struggling on some of these questions. But you’ve got to understand that a large majority, a large percentage of the church could care less. That really hasn’t been anything they’ve worried about. We have anecdotally understood that there have been a few that their world has been rocked by having learned in more detail some of these questions. Now, for the most part, I think they’ve been very, very positive.
I also asked Elder Snow about current history. Church members have been counseled to keep journals. Does that apply to general authorities as well?
Elder Snow: We haven’t spoken a lot about journals since President Kimball’s time. But it’s important to leave a record for your family to let them know about your faith and your challenges, your trials, your difficulties, what you did, what your faith meant to you.
GT: Now, we’ve heard that some of the general authorities have been told not to write journals, because of…
Elder Snow: President Packer was. We try to encourage the new brethren to keep a record. Now, as a general authority, your journal belongs to the church. So you sign an agreement, when you’re called that that’s the case, all your personal papers.
GT: Oh, really?
Elder Snow: All your personal papers that relate to your time as a general authority are technically Church property. That’s a legal agreement that you sign. Now, if you’re good enough to keep a journal and not make reference to any of your church service, you could do that. But that’s pretty hard to do.
I will also ask him about questions of church and state. Is it ok to be a democrat?
Elder Snow: I’ve been an active as a Democrat before my call as a General Authority.
GT: Wow, I think that’s a secret. I don’t think very many people know that.
Elder Snow: Well, I don’t think politics enters into too much in our calling as a General Authority.
GT: I believe Elder Jensen before you was a Democrat as well.
Elder Snow: Yeah, we used to talk to each other about the results of the elections. He’s always been a good Democrat.
GT: Do you have any sense and I don’t want you to name names, especially if you don’t want to, but do you have any sense for how many of the Quorum of Seventy or apostles lean towards the Democratic positions?
What were his feelings about the policy excluding baptism for children of gay parents? He has some candid responses that you won’t want to miss.
The Church has long been accused of hiding unflattering documents. On the other hand, many documents are now available online at the Joseph Smith Papers website, and some other documents like the Council of Fifty minutes, which were previously restricted, have recently been published. Is it true that the Church has hidden documents with unflattering history? Has he seen documents in the First Presidency’s vault? Elder Snow will answer that question.
What are your thoughts about this interview with Elder Snow?
Wheat & Tares 
It was refreshing to hear Elder Snow openly express his opinions without evading your questions. More transparency like this from our leaders would help dispell the notion they are hiding things from us. I wonder if he will get in trouble or experience pushback.
I think it’s great Elder Snow was willing to do an interview and give additional details on a lot of the topics you have covered. Too often Church materials and pronouncements come out of a black box — we have no idea how long it was discussed or what the issues were or how the final product was arrived at. I think if there was *more* talk about the process behind policies and curriculum the membership would have an easier time accepting and understanding and supporting changes that are announced.
This is wonderful. I am so glad E.Snow was willing to be interviewed and speak openly. I really got the feeling that he and those around him are good people, doing their best. There were a couple things I wish I could ask him (so I’ll ask here).
He wondered why someone would worry about seer-stones when they are fine believing in angels and golden plates. Do church leaders really not understand that it isn’t about the seer-stones? Instead, it’s about trusting that the person telling the story is telling you the truth. And how disruptive it is when you discover they are not. Is that idea not understood then?
If they realized that ‘In her 15th year’ came off as disingenuous, why not change it now to ’14 years old’? Webpages are changeable… I’m genuinely curious why that change isn’t doable?
I get the sense that Snow would have preferred to put 14 years old on the website, but got overruled. That’s why the website hasn’t been changed. (I’m speculating, but it makes sense to me why the website hasn’t been changed.)
While I don’t know the reason for choosing the wording “in her 15th year,” one possibility is merely the avoidance of confusion in international world communications. It clearly means having reached or past the 14th anniversary of her birth and not having reache the 15th. On the other hand “14 years old” means one thing in European age reckoning and means something else in traditional East Asian age reckoning. In traditional East Asian age reckoning (still in use in a number of places), age 14 would mean (with some variations that result in even greater difference from European age reckoning) that she had reached or passed the 13th anniversary of her birthdate and not having reached the 14th. There is no such confusion arising from “in her 15th year” except perhaps for those who don’t think about what those words mean. Thinking it disingenuous may not be accurate, though there are reasons to be suspicious that it might be.
JR, when I asked Snow about that, his response was “I think being called out on that was entirely appropriate. We should have said she was 14.”
He was surprisingly candid.
Rick B, Yes, He was right if they were writing only to those who are accustomed to European age reckoning.
I think you’re reaching with this idea of a European age reckoning.
Rick, It isn’t my idea. It’s a common contrast to the traditional east Asian age reckoning. Check Wikipedia. I mentioned it only as a merely possible thought (completely speculative) behind the use of the accurate “in her fifteenth year” language. As I also mentioned, there are reasons to suppose that language might have been disingenuous. So how is noting a possibility “reaching”?
JR,
Please refer to the First Vision Accounts essay where they refer to Joseph’s age as “he was about 14 years old. ” Not ‘several months before his 15th birthday.’
In the Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo essay, they identify Fanny Young as the oldest plural wife at 56 years old. Not ‘several months before her 57th birthday.’
This was a deliberate attempt to obfuscate the fact that Helen Kimball was a child. As others have pointed out, there is nothing standing in the way of revising the essay to correct/clarify the information.
Yes, It may have been; I think it probably was and have never argued to the contrary. You have correctly pointed out, in the description of Fanny Young, what I see as the strongest evidence of it being an attempt to obfuscate. On the other hand, for many (most, I think) contemporary Americans there is no significant difference between ages 14 and 15, so if we are right in thinking it was a deliberate attempt to obfuscate and make JS’ actions more acceptable to such readers, it was doomed from the start to fail in that purpose .. It seems that some here don’t like to even entertain the thought of other possibilities, however remote, or of the difference between those two age references as being a matter of sloppy editing (quite common in church publications as in others, though, it seems to me, highly unlikely here)..