nelson

A Prophet in TIME: Healing the Heart of a Nation

What does a prophet say at 101? He affirms divine worth, urges peacemaking, and calls families the heart of healing.

Download Print-Friendly Version

Today, TIME published an essay by President Russell M. Nelson, the leader of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who is considered by followers of the faith as a prophet. This is a rare instance of a Latter‑day Saint prophet addressing a general audience in his own voice. It is a pastoral invitation to the blessings of following Jesus Christ.

Scripture sets a clear pattern: prophets speak where the most can hear, and they send the message beyond earshot—Noah before the flood, Moses before Pharaoh, Samuel the Lamanite on the wall, King Benjamin from the tower. President Nelson’s TIME essay belongs to this lineage: a modern tower enabling written sending beyond earshot. 

TIME is a uniquely effective platform for such a message, and the invitations are concrete: see the divinity in each human being, and love the people around you, especially those in your family. 

Contemporary Context

Across the last century, presidents of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter‑day Saints have typically taught through Church‑owned channels (general conference, official magazines, broadcasts) and pastoral administration (ministering visits, councils). Signed, first‑person pieces in major U.S. general‑audience outlets have been exceptional, and generally aligned with moments calling for moral clarification or consolation in the broader public square. President Nelson’s TIME essay belongs to that limited set and therefore carries heightened signaling value.

The invitations are concrete: see the divinity in each human being, love …

Unlike institutional statements, this piece presents a concise first‑person witness. It declines an adversarial posture in favor of invitation and blessing. In a media environment that often rewards performative conflict, the rhetoric here is deliberately unbarbed—clear, pastoral, and accessible.

Publishing in TIME positions the message before a general public rather than a pre‑selected ecclesial audience. Many who would not watch a conference address may still encounter a well‑crafted essay in a magazine they already read. Analogous to Paul at Athens, the venue signals a willingness to speak in the marketplace of ideas without diluting core claims (Acts 17:22–23).

What the TIME Essay Says

At 101, President Nelson frames his message around two enduring truths he has tested across a century—as a heart surgeon and as an apostle.

Speak to the world in a love-letter key: witness before argument, blessing before debate, invitation before indictment.

First, each of us has inherent worth and dignity. He grounds this in divine identity (“we are all children of a loving Heavenly Father”) and argues that recognizing that worth steadies anxious hearts and lowers fear about the future.

Second, he encourages us to love our neighbor. Peacemaking is not optional civic etiquette but moral law: “anger never persuades, hostility never heals, and contention never leads to lasting solutions.” He commends bridge‑building across differences and the simple dignity we owe every person.

He extends the ethic to the most immediate community: the family. In a lonely age, “fidelity, forgiveness, and faithfulness within families yield deep, enduring peace”—and strong families radiate kindness outward.

He opens with an analogy from his career as a surgeon. He learned that when natural laws are honored—the right balance of sodium and potassium—the heart can safely be stopped, repaired, and revived: “It always works.” He draws a parallel to spiritual law: when we align with eternal truths, life revives. The essay ends with a birthday wish—that these truths make our lives, and our world, steadier and more joyful.

Context in a Prophetic Ministry

On his 101st birthday, this essay does not launch something new; it compresses the through-lines of President Nelson’s ministry since 2018. From the invitation to “Hear Him,” to “Let God Prevail,” to the charge that gathering Israel is the great work of our time, to appeals for peacemakers and the plea to “Think Celestial,” his teaching has been remarkably consistent. The article’s two themes—divine worth and neighbor-love—sit squarely inside that arc: identity in God, and charity toward God’s children.

Read in that light, familiar notes surface. Come unto Christ personally and daily (Matthew 11:28). Hear Him in scripture and by the Spirit (Matthew 17:5; Joseph Smith—History 1:17). Let God prevail through covenant belonging that is renewed and clarified in the temple (Genesis 32:28; Jeremiah 31:33; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18). Gather Israel one by one on both sides of the veil (3 Nephi 20–21; D&C 128:18). Be peacemakers—reject contention and choose charity (Matthew 5:9, 44). Think celestial—set your affection on things above so priorities re-order (Colossians 3:2). And bear and honor the name of Jesus Christ openly and reverently (3 Nephi 27:7–8; 1 Peter 3:15).

The world we address is not an opponent to defeat but a neighbor to bless.

In fact, President Nelson has previously formulated these thoughts in similar ways in remarks made to BYU, “The Love and Laws of God” in 2019. There, his audience was not as worldwide, and he developed some of the threads more deeply. In remarks at the faith’s semi-annual General Conference in 2023, titled “Peacemakers Needed,” Nelson also discussed the need for kindness, focusing on the importance of loving others and understanding identity. Both remarks are worthwhile contexts for those interested in the development of these ideas.

Together, these themes describe a public posture as much as a private practice. They urge Latter-day Saints to speak to the world in a love-letter key: witness before argument, blessing before debate, invitation before indictment. The center of that witness is not a policy or a brand, but a Person. In that sense, the TIME essay is a synthesis—a clear, external expression of what President Nelson has been asking the Church to be and to say from the beginning of his tenure.

Why Publish in TIME?

King Benjamin wrote so the absent could still receive the word (Mosiah 2:8). TIME operates as a modern tower that reaches readers far beyond Church‑owned microphones. The decision also signals trust—that core Christian claims (mercy through Christ, hope by His Atonement, the dignity of every soul, the sanctifying power of covenants) remain intelligible and appealing within pluralist discourse. Members, in turn, are invited to carry the message further “with quiet confidence and charity,” functioning as digital runners who help others hear (Mosiah 2:8).

Founded in 1923 by Henry R. Luce and Briton Hadden, TIME effectively invented the American newsmagazine: a concise, organized digest for busy readers, written in a recognizable “Timestyle,” and later amplified by cultural touchstones like Person of the Year and the TIME 100. Across a century, its covers and language have helped shape the way Americans—and an international audience—talk about leaders, crises, and ideas. Today, beyond its print cadence, TIME’s multi‑platform reach gives a single essay outsized distribution, and its Ideas pages explicitly welcome outside contributors while distinguishing contributor views from the magazine’s own editorial positions. In other words, the tower is both tall and capacious: a broad audience, a clear invitation for first‑person witness, and a familiar format for civic address.

For a century, TIME has stood at the junction of civic attention and general‑interest reading: a weekly cadence that privileges synthesis over outrage, a magazine architecture that frames essays as addresses to the public rather than duels, and a global subscriber base that encounters it in airports, classrooms, offices, and living rooms. Its Ideas pages invite first‑person contributions from public figures while clearly labeling them as such, preserving both accessibility and a distinction from reported news. The brand’s recognizable cover language and franchises—Person of the Year, the TIME 100—signal to casual and serious readers alike that what appears there participates in a broader civic conversation. A message placed on this tower arrives with prestige without being trapped in a single partisan lane; it is discoverable, shareable, and quotable across communities. That combination—prestige, breadth, and a format hospitable to direct moral speech—makes TIME an unusually effective carrier for a prophet’s love‑letter intended to bless first and persuade by the quiet force of lived invitation.

Amplifying Light

Our public posture should match the essay’s: a love letter, not a lecture. The world we address is not an opponent to defeat but a neighbor to bless. In print, online, and across a pulpit, let our first sentence be witness, not winning; benediction before debate.

Such love binds families and mends neighborhoods.

The Church’s public voice should be recognizably Christian: meek, clear, and anchored in the Atonement. Call people to Christ, not to a side. Refuse contempt. Tell the truth in charity. Let our words suggest a way back—a door open to any honest heart. When correction is needed, couch it in mercy; when sorrow is heavy, offer consolation; when confusion rises, point to the covenant path without swagger.

Let our outreach be one by one and to all at once: a personal invitation joined to a public witness. See them for their divine identity, and love them. In neighborhoods and in the national square, let the Name be present, the welcome explicit, the door held open. We are not curators of a brand; we are messengers of a Person.

When prophets stand and speak, the faithful “pitch their tents” toward the word and toward the temple (Mosiah 2:6). We do not wait for the world to change before we change. We let God prevail now; we hear Him now; we follow Jesus Christ now. Properly received, such love binds families, mends neighborhoods, and promotes unity—until the day a tower is no longer needed because “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ” (Philippians 2:10–11).

May the Lord inscribe His law on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33) and make our public words a real invitation—to the person beside us at church, the neighbor across the street, and the reader who stumbles on a magazine essay and hears, perhaps for the first time, that a prophet has written to them.

About the author

C.D. Cunningham

C.D. Cunningham is a founder and editor-at-large of Public Square magazine.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Mother Figurine Holding a Baby | Public Square Magazine | Meaning of the Lyrics Peace on Earth, Goodwill to Men

Now is the Time for Peace on Earth, Goodwill to Men

You’ve heard it before: “Peace on earth, goodwill to men.” Whether viewed as prophecy for a hopeful future, as rebuke to a fallen world, or as the deep aspiration of many human hearts, these words invoke wonder still today, especially at a time like 2020. I believe these words point towards legitimate reasons for great hope in humanity’s future, even in the midst of our current distress. A closer look at their meaning provides a glimpse into bright possibilities. The modern-day enshrinement of these words was penned by the hand of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow during a time of deep personal sadness and grief in his 1863 poem “Christmas Bells.” Subsequently, these words have been sung by millions as the hymn “I Heard The Bells On Christmas Day.” Sadly, few choirs will sing this popular carol during the Christmas season this year as many of our most cherished traditions are disrupted by the continuing, unprecedented epidemic.  Notwithstanding the familiarity of these words in the modern context, their first recorded rendering came anciently in a most unusual setting. It was one of the few instances in all of secular or religious writings where an entire host of heavenly beings—angels—came to deliver a message to a few lucky ones on earth. Their entire message as recorded in Luke 2:14 of the New Testament was “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” If there was more to the message or not, we don’t know. But this was the message that was recorded and handed down over thousands of years since that momentous event.  It was this short heavenly song of praise that Longfellow was referring to when he lamented that “hate is strong and mocks the song of peace on earth goodwill to men.” Then as now, we join Longfellow in observing a world stricken with contention, tragic death, and human suffering with no clear end in sight. As a bold counterpoint, however, his poem and the hymn conclude with a resounding proclamation of hope that indeed there will be yet “peace on earth and goodwill to men.” Is it possible to find for ourselves this same hope of which Longfellow wrote so long ago?    Some might assume that the author had somehow arrived at more pleasant circumstances and material conditions. Yet in describing his world that Christmas morning in 1863, Longfellow was feeling the weight of personal tragedy in the death of his wife and the strife of a hot civil war spreading devastating carnage across the land. In such a heavy time, he couldn’t help but underscore how much the surrounding hate he saw in the world seemed to mock the idea of peace and goodwill – a word that suggests to “tease or laugh at in a scornful or contemptuous manner.” The hate he was referring to, and which has the power to infect us in our own day, was between groups of people and between individuals who looked at each other with scorn and contempt. In an environment that fosters hate, any suggestion that feelings of scorn and contempt might be replaced with feelings of peace and goodwill can seem to be almost laughable (another reason it’s powerful to have a heavenly host delivering this message to the world).   We sometimes think of peace and goodwill as synonyms. They are not. In fact, they represent very different human conditions – either one by itself being incomplete. But together they weave a social fabric of heavenly dimensions. There are many examples of one without the other, but relatively few of both existing and being sustained for any great length of time.  In its simplest form, peace could be defined as the absence of conflict. When this kind of peace is voluntary, due to an underlying feeling of goodwill toward all, it is a wonderfully satisfying human condition.  However, a “peaceful” absence of conflict can also be achieved through coercion, even in the notable absence of goodwill. In that case, it comes at the obvious, and dear price of freedom and liberty and represents a most cruel form of the human condition. Coerced peace is usually a political construct as it requires overwhelming use of force to constrain human behaviors. There have been modern examples of peace without goodwill in the recent past. One can reflect on Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, and other nations. For example, Yugoslavia was created after World War II as a federation of six different ethnic regions. A strong central governing party ensured that conflicts were resolved emphatically and quickly. There was “peace,” but without the underlying goodwill among the different ethnic groups. Under Josip Broz Tito the country experienced an extended period of prosperity characterized by enforced peaceful interaction among the various ethnic groups. In many ways, it was considered a model of economic success.  But after Tito died in 1980, the ability to continue the peaceful climate through coercive means declined, and the unresolved conflicts among the different ethnic groups emerged with frightening consequences in human suffering for the whole country and region. In a relatively few years, the region completely lost both its peace and prosperity.  Similar events have unfolded in other countries where peace was enforced despite the absence of “goodwill toward men.” As the power to enforce coercive peace diminishes, people are subsequently often subjected to tragic suffering that can take decades and even generations to overcome to a point of regaining a semblance of stability. In short, peace without goodwill has a terrible historical record for producing great human suffering in the end.  Unlike “peaceful” conflict suppression, goodwill to men cannot be coerced. It is almost by definition an innate feeling of each individual human heart. It can be contagious, and it often seems to be either in large supply or in short supply in a particular family, community, or nation. It would seem that goodwill to other human beings is something that would be a universal good. However, once again we find that