All God’s Children: Racial and Ethnic Voices in the LDS Church
Jacobson, Cardell. 2003. All God’s Children: Racial and Ethnic Voices in the LDS Church- insightful collection of accounts from members. Cedar Fort Inc.
Rating:
6
Summary:
The book falls somewhere between faith-promoting testimonies and in-depth interviews.
The bulk of the book is made up of 15 chapters that were either written by the editor of the book based on interviews with the people listed as the authors or by the authors themselves. Two-thirds of the chapters are by ethnic minorities, primarily blacks. The other third are by people that are in close contact with ethnic minorities (primarily leadership positions in multi-racial wards). There are also two essays that focus less on personal experiences and read more like sociological analyses. One of these essays is informative, the other less so.
The 15 primarily biographical sketches are book-ended by an introduction and conclusion from the editor. The introduction includes a very brief historical treatment of racism in the U.S. along with a short synopsis of racial issues in the history of the LDS Church. It also includes some statistics on race in the U.S. as well as some statistics on race in the LDS Church. The conclusion groups the experiences related in the 15 biographical chapters into topic areas that focus on what problems remain and what ‘successful’ wards/branches in the LDS Church have done to resolve some of these problems. The editor is very clear where he stands on this issue: he is for full racial integration and would like to see the LDS Church’s spotty past be blotted out by a positive future.
Review:
Despite some attempts by the LDS Church to do some blotting, it seems as though racial parity is a long way from being realized among all Mormons. The book does a good job of highlighting some of the successful wards and branches, but one of the clearest conclusions one can derive from this book is that equal treatment of races has very little to do with Church policy or other Church-based initiatives, but instead seems to be either an individual thing or the result of living in a multi-racial environment. Many of the authors highlight wards or branches outside Utah as the most successful ones in their experience. Two successful wards mentioned specifically (p. 29) were one in Stanford, CA, and one in Alexandria, VA, both of which are multi-racial college communities that are known for being liberal and open-minded. Authors with similar experiences described successful wards as receptive to ethnic/racial minorities. This receptivity was accomplished primarily by treating the authors like any other member (meaning, any other ‘white’ member).
Though Utah certainly wasn’t the only place where there were problems (the experience related in Washington D.C. – chapter 5 – was equally disturbing, if not more so), it seemed to be painted as a bastion of ignorance and prejudice. Most of the authors are very forgiving of the naïveté that accompanies most Utah Mormons when they encounter black Mormons, but it doesn’t really ease the pain and discomfort that the authors feel. The awkwardness of these situations are amplified when they are asked questions like: Do black people…? (see chapter 7 for numerous examples of this). Certainly Utah isn’t all bad, but it seemed to be the focus of much of the angst expressed by the contributors to this book.
The two sociologically oriented pieces are chapters 8 and 10. Chapter 8 is by a sociology graduate student and reads like a mini-ethnography/participant observation. It is very well-written and informative, but lacked one thing: the author’s role and participation in the events recounted. Even so, it is one of the better chapters. Chapter 10, on the other hand, was disappointing. It was written by a Brazilian professor at BYU-Hawaii who is trained in sociology. Instead of relating his personal experiences as an ethnic minority, which would have been interesting, he assumes the role of sociological expert and attempts to explore far too many ideas than can adequately be addressed in a 20 page chapter (see the quotes below from pp. 119-120). Additionally, his discussion is laden with religious overtones, like claiming the LDS Church gaining approval to proselytize in certain countries was miraculous. This is unfortunate, coming from a sociologist who should be focused on the sociology surrounding such events and not on alleged ‘supernatural’ causes.
Even though my overall opinion of this book is favorable, there are several other problems with this book. First, the editor doesn’t explain his methodology in choosing the contributors (see quote from p. vii for the limited explanation of the methodology). This led me to ask several questions. First, what does it say about the status of blacks in the LDS Church when the editor has to solicit contributions from 5 white authors? If the book is about being an ethnic/racial minority in the LDS Church, why is a white professor the editor and 1/3 of the contributors white? To the outsider, this might indicate that either there are few or no racial/ethnic minority members of the LDS Church that are in a position to write a book like this. It also might be interpreted as an indication that despite a growing population of ethnic minorities in the LDS Church, these minorities remain subordinate to whites, even in telling their own stories. A second question revolves around issues of representativeness. With the exception of one chapter that interviewed a few inactive black members (chapter 11), all of the contributors are active members of the LDS Church. Where’s the voice of the inactive, disenfranchised black Mormon or former Mormon? By including only the voices of active Mormons, an inadvertent bias creeps in that paints blacks in the LDS Church as strong-willed achievers who won’t let a little discrimination stand in their way. Of course, in light of the first question, one could also interpret this as an indication that there aren’t very many of these individuals, but a discussion of the methodology of selection should have addressed these questions.
I have two final criticisms. First, several of the chapters were very poorly written (chapters 3, 5, and 12, specifically). This is a combination of poor grammar (primarily chapter 3), inability to remain on topic (primarily chapter 5), and the inability to construct coherent thoughts (primarily chapter 12). Two of these chapters ramble so much that they are hard to follow. These chapters would have been much improved had the editor re-written the essays from scratch.
My last criticism returns to the methodology. Because there is very little discussion of methodology and the contributors were able to comment on their experiences in addition to relating them, the book reads less like ethnography or qualitative sociological research and more like a faith-promoting book for Mormons. While I was reading the book I came up with an illustration for this criticism. Letting the contributors do the writing themselves rather than interviewing them and then analyzing the content for a book is like an artist given the paintbrush to the subject and allowing the subject to paint him or her self. Ethnography involves interpretation; this book has some, but only a limited amount. By simply presenting the contributors stories, the book allows the participants to do much of the sociology, and in some cases the results are disappointing. Of course, this criticism is coming from a sociologist, and sociologists may not be the intended audience…
Despite this last criticism, which I believe to be the biggest criticism of the book, I have to admit this is a useful book. In essence, it is a matter of perspective. I approached the book as a sociologist and was expecting an ethnography. What I got instead was a book filled with primarily faith-promoting stories illustrating how racial/ethnic minorities in the LDS Church deal with the continuing prejudice and survive. If I had approached the book from the perspective of a faithful Mormon who wanted to become more informed about some of the race issues in the LDS Church, I think I would have had no criticisms of the book (other than the poor writing in some of the chapters).
Thus, while the book is sociologically insightful at times (as noted by the distinction between Utah and non-Utah wards), it is really better considered a contribution to the faith-promoting literature for Mormons. I should, however, make one stipulation here – it is pretty honest about the problems that face the LDS Church, which means some Mormons are going to find this book an eye-opener rather than just an affirmation of how wonderful the LDS Church is. In this regard, the book excels. I highly recommend the book for faithful Mormons looking for new insights or personal improvement. Sociologists and psychologists of religion will also likely find the book engaging.
