are we there yet

Why Aren’t We There Yet as a Society? A Latter-day Saint Case for Hope

In response to those sensitive souls asking, “Why am I not there yet as a person?” or “Why are we not there yet as a society?” Latter-day Saint theology offers a patient optimism for steady growth in us and around us—along with the anticipation of collective light to become “brighter and brighter until the perfect day.”

There is a question that has been asked of parents from the backseats of cars for decades: “Are we there yet?”

Though most of us eventually outgrow the impatient tone of that query, many sensitive souls today look at their lives and at the world and ask similar questions. Geography is of little import. “Why am I not there yet as a person?” you may ask. “Why are we not there yet as a society?” many wonder.

Life as a journey—long journey—and not a destination

There can mean many things and places. The skeletons of unfulfilled personal dreams scatter the unseen landscapes of our souls. We long for marriage or children or jobs or nicer things. We yearn to be better in our relationships. We hope for societies brimming with justice, equity, and mutual altruism. We cannot seem to escape racism, tribalism, injustice, and misunderstanding—as well as the consequences of making these our bedfellows.

Though we may not have arrived there, where we would hope to be, those sincerely asking these questions of themselves and of our world are very often the wisest men and women among us. They perhaps sense the incompleteness of things. They recognize life as a journey—a long journey—and not a destination. And they do not mistake rest stops for the final frontier.

I sometimes imagine my religious people, the Latter-day Saints, asking “Are we there yet?” throughout the 1830s and 1840sa time when they were driven from homes, persecuted violently, and afflicted with sickness and poverty. During this same period, Joseph Smith sought to promote the cause of Zion, a city in ancient times whose citizens were “of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them.” Joseph was out to build a New Jerusalem, “a land of peace, a city of refuge, a place of safety for the saints of the Most High God.” This would seem to be the ultimate there of “Are we there yet?”

We know, of course, that Joseph’s effort failed in the short term. The early Latter-day Saints were ultimately driven by enemies from New York to Ohio to Missouri to Illinois. They finally found a somewhat permanent home 1,250 miles west in what we now call Utah. With each move, Joseph Smith, and later Brigham Young, sought heavenly help to guide their next steps.

Interestingly, some of these early Saints thought the next place was their ultimate destination. They had good reason. One 1831 revelation given to Joseph commanded the people to go to Ohio and spoke of a “land of promise” in their (seemingly) immediate future. The former Reformed Baptist Sidney Rigdon, an eloquent early Latter-day Saint leader, was one of those who was, at first, certain that the call to gather in Ohio was a final stop for this 10-month-old religious movement. Rigdon wrote from New York to the Saints already gathered in Ohio, “The Lord has made known unto us, some of his great things which he has laid up for them that love him, among which the fact (a glory of wonders it is) that you are living on the land of promise, and that there is the place of gathering … and [God] has given it to us and our children, not only while time lasts, but we shall have it again in eternity.” Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph’s mother, was equally exultant at the opportunity awaiting them in Ohio. She wrote that God would “come and reign on ea[r]th with them a thousand years” after they gathered there.

But not everyone rushed so quickly to conclusions. Thomas B. Marsh, for example, understood Ohio to be a temporary stop on the way to the promised New Jerusalem.

“The Lord calleth for all to repent & take upon them the name of Ch[rist] & assemble at Ohio speedily & thare our Heavenly Father will tell us what we shall next do,” Marsh wrote to his sister and her husband. “Perhaps it will be to take our march to the grand prairies in the Missouri territory or to the shining mountains which are 1,500 or 2,000 miles west from us. How soon this will be we do not know. In fact, we know nothing of what we are to do save it be revealed to us. But this we know—a City will be built in the promised land” (spelling and grammar modernized).

Marsh’s response is a timeless gem of wisdom, both for Latter-day Saints and anyone else who will listen. To borrow from John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, we could say that Marsh understood that proximate circumstances can and will change as we make the sometimes circuitous journey to the ultimate Celestial City.

Of course, we know Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois were not final destinations for the Church. But was Utah? Had someone asked the question, “Are we there yet?” of Brigham Young in his covered wagon in July 1847, his oft-quoted comment (one challenged by some historians) that “this is the right place” would have been a fitting and refreshing answer for the beleaguered Saints at that time.

But where is there for today’s church? Ask any serious Latter-day Saint the question, “Are we there yet?” as a faith. Assuming there is Joseph Smith’s envisioned place of peace, equity, and perfect understanding, one can only hope the answer will be a resounding “No!” Our aspirations as a faith are too high and our vision too longitudinal to ever, in this world, say otherwise.

“Historians, philosophers, and scientists all agree that life on this earth has been and is one continuous, never-ceasing process of readjustment,” Hugh B. Brown, a member of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, told students at Brigham Young University in 1969. “Your generation is maturing in body and mind at an earlier age than did preceding generations, and as you become aware of that fact, you are inclined to become critical of the older generation—sometimes with justification. We are not here to defend ourselves against you; we are here to let you know some things we have learned the hard way—sometimes by sad experience.”

In case we, 51 years removed from President Brown’s remarks, think our generation has finally figured it all out, we ought to allow scripture to prick our over-inflated egos. “Wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion! Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!” one Book of Mormon prophet warns. Another important component of the Latter-day Saint creed, if there is one, is that “We believe … that [God] will yet reveal many great and important things.”

Nobody, Latter-day Saint or otherwise, should ever swerve from the path of creating a better world.

This year Latter-day Saints are celebrating the 200th anniversary of Joseph Smith’s first encounter with Deity. That First Vision, as we call it, is rooted in the eternal human quest for knowledge. Joseph asked questions. God gave him answers. What has happened in the 200 years since then—including the creation of a global family of 16.5 million believers who can be found in nearly every nation—is a remarkable thing. But, as President Russell M. Nelson told church media during a visit to Hanoi, Vietnam, in November 2019, proper historical perspective is in order. “We think of 200 years as being kind of a long time,” he said. “But [to] the Asians and the Europeans, 200 years is the snap of a finger compared with their rich history. I remember going to Budapest [when it was] celebrating its 1,000th-year anniversary on one of my visits there.”

In a recent commentary on the Second Coming of Christ and the future of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (and, by default, on the future of the world), President Nelson again took the long view. When Christ returns, he said. “He will govern from two world capitals: one in old Jerusalem (see Zechariah 14) and the other in the New Jerusalem ‘built upon the American continent’ (Articles of Faith 1:10). From these centers, He will direct the affairs of His Church and kingdom. Another temple will yet be built in Jerusalem. From that temple, He shall reign forever as Lord of Lords.”

Note that the New Jerusalem, that “land of peace” and “city of refuge” first envisioned by Joseph Smith but not achieved due to unforeseen adversity, is still something Latter-day Saints look forward to, even two centuries later. In the meantime, we seek to create communities of peace and refuge wherever we live. Nobody, Latter-day Saint or otherwise, should ever swerve from the path of creating a better world. Our efforts, however small, “are laying the foundation of a great work.”

So, when we are tempted to wring our hands and retreat to our comfortable places in disgust at the state of our own souls, or of some parts of our faith community, or of our society at large, we should reconsider. Latter-day Saint theology is imbued with patient optimism. It reminds us to recognize Who is at the wheel. And if we are sitting in the backseat of the ride of life and impatiently asking God, “Why aren’t we there yet?” we should not be surprised to hear Him invite us up to the front to be co-pilot in His salvation project. We “should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of [our] own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness,” He told Joseph Smith in 1831. It is only in doing this that we invite more light into our world. And more light equals more of God, something that can grow in us and our communities “brighter and brighter until the perfect day.”

These are good reminders for people of goodwill everywhere. There is always more light to discover, more progress to be made. 

So let’s get to work.  

About the author

Samuel B. Hislop

Samuel B. Hislop is a writer in Utah.
On Key

You Might Also Like

The Ordinary Saint’s Guide to Under the Banner of Heaven: Episode 4, “Church and State”

Summary — The episode begins with the detectives checking in on Bishop Low’s home, which they find ransacked and deserted. Pyre finds a letter written by Ron’s wife to the Prophet expressing concern about her husband’s refusal to pay taxes. The detective contacts the Church about the letter and is told the letter was handed down to one of the bishop’s counselors, LeConte Bascom, who works at the bank. Brother Bascom says he had to turn Ron down for a loan because his brother’s refusal to pay taxes made him a liability, though it’s heavily implied that the real reason is that his wife’s letter was seen as an embarrassment to the Church. In flashbacks, we see Dan marching in a Pioneer Day parade, shouting about the government’s illegal taxes, as well as smoking and kissing a woman who isn’t his wife. Dan’s father says he’s ashamed of his immoral behavior and anti-tax nonsense and advises him to study the scriptures to set himself back on the right path. This unfortunately drives Dan into researching more obscure history of the Church, including information on polygamy.  He makes a business trip down to Colorado City to visit the breakaway polygamist sect there and manages to get the name of a pro-polygamy pamphlet called “The Peace Maker.” He reads this pamphlet and brings up the idea to his wife Matilda, telling her she’s limiting his spiritual power if she doesn’t let him marry a second wife.  During this conversation, Dan is pulled over for speeding and refuses to cooperate with the officer, leading them on a police chase that ends with his arrest. At the jail, Dan’s brothers try to convince him to stop his resistance to the government. Ron feels it’s his responsibility to show Dan the error of his ways, but instead, Dan runs circles around him, leaving him speechless and admitting that he’s going to lose his business and home. Dan somehow turns this fact into evidence that his views are correct and ends up winning over Ron to his side. In the present, Detective Pyre is being leaned on by the Laffertys’ stake president to release them into his custody but refuses. The detectives have identified the car the killers were probably using and plan to hold a press conference to ask for tips when the police chief returns from vacation and demands that all mentions of fundamentalism Mormonism be scrubbed from the press briefing. (It’s implied he’s being leaned on by the Church.) Pyre tries to toe the line at the conference but eventually caves to a persistent reporter and admits that he thinks that the murders may have something to do with fundamentalist beliefs. The next day at church, the ward is shunning the Pyres, and a specific couple is assigned to keep an eye on their faith. Meanwhile, a police officer has located Bishop Low fly fishing in the mountains and safe. Church History — During Dan’s explanation of polygamy, we get flashbacks to the infamous scene where Emma finds out about the doctrine of polygamy for the first time and throws the revelation in the fire. Though church members will be familiar with this story, the tone is portrayed very differently than we are used to. Emma is shown as being absolutely skeptical of Joseph’s translation of the Book of Mormon and other prophetic acts, even though she firmly testified of the truth of these things even after her break with the Church after Joseph was murdered. Joseph is portrayed as proclaiming the doctrine of polygamy only for his own physical gratification, which is a common anti-Mormon trope with little evidence behind it. While it is true that one of Joseph’s wives was only 14, the facts behind the situation are more complex than portrayed in the show. The pamphlet “The Peace Maker” is portrayed by Dan Lafferty as an “essential LDS tract” written by Joseph Smith, and no one in the show ever corrects this perception. In fact, the tract was not written by Joseph Smith, and he repudiated it during his lifetime. This episode presents a slanted view of church history, giving only one side of the conversation and showing the modern church as trying to hush it up rather than having its own interpretation of events. Shibboleths — Pyre claims that writing a letter to the prophet is like writing to “Heavenly Father himself,” which is absolutely wrong. While members of the Church do revere the prophet and listen to his teachings, he is not God, and this equivalency is not one Saints would make (though outsiders think we do). The idea that doing business with fundamentalists is like “doing business with the mafia” is totally alien to me. They are regarded as somewhat of an oddity in Utah, but not dangerous like organized crime. One unusual phrase occurs when the stake president claims that the Laffertys need to be released into his custody for “healing prayer.” I honestly have no idea what this phrase refers to and have never heard it in an LDS context. And the formal type of shunning portrayed happening to the Pyres is not something we do. Though obviously, wards vary in their culture, there is no formal instruction not to talk to those who have questions. Rather, we are encouraged to keep being friends with those who are struggling with faith and support them however we can. Changing History — It is interesting to note that in the actual chain of events, it was Sister Low, not Bishop Low, who was on the Lafferty hit list. Sister Low was a Relief Society President who supported Dan’s wife as she sought a divorce. Why does the show change this? Perhaps the idea that the Church has female leaders doesn’t fit well with the show’s depiction of the oppression of women in the LDS church. Brenda Lafferty’s sister has also expressed her disappointment with the way the show is misconstruing her sister’s murder in pursuit of an

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This