by

Amber Taylor recently received her PhD from Brandeis University. She was a Schusterman Fellow, and her dissertation dealt with American Christian relations with the State of Israel, particularly relating to Christian pilgrimage in the Jewish State. We’re grateful to her for this post!

The recent controversy over Ilhan Omar’s comments on American support of Israel brings up an interesting question for Latter-day Saints. What is the Latter-day Saint stance on Israel and the conflict over the Holy Land? The answer is, of course, it’s complicated.

In the early years of the Church, Latter-day Saints shared, and even expanded upon, early American excitement over the idea of an imminent Jewish restoration to their ancient homeland. The idea occupied much of Joseph Smith’s writing, and in 1841 the apostle Orson Hyde made a now almost mythical journey to Palestine to dedicate the land for Jewish return. This historical and theological foundation has long loomed large in Latter-day Saint memory.

When the State of Israel was born, amidst much conflict and painful population displacement (of both Jews and Palestinians), a few outspoken Church leaders acclaimed the Jewish victory as self-evident fulfillment of prophecy.[1] The June 1967 (Six Day) war, in which Israel seized control of both the West Bank and Gaza, as well as (significantly) East Jerusalem generally seemed to affirm the conviction that Israel was enjoying God’s favor. Like most conservative Christians, they perceived the victory as further evidence of God’s divine approval of Israel’s cause, further stimulated by influential Mormon authors, particularly Cleon Skousen, who spoke in glowing terms of the “miraculous victory.”[2]

Still, a few things complicate the picture. The first is that, from the late 1960s, a few Latter-day Saints questioned this default pro-Israel stance. Among these are James Mayfield and Orin Parker, both of whom spent extensive time the Middle East for professional or educational purposes.[3] As professors at both the University of Utah and BYU, and influential Latter-day Saint voices on the Middle East, their influence is certainly the beginning of a more nuanced view of Israel and the conflict.

Likewise, the development and growth of the BYU travel study program in Jerusalem, now epitomized in the BYU Jerusalem Center, has had a significant impact on Latter-day Saint perceptions of the conflict. From its earliest days, the directors of the program followed the injunction of President David O. McKay to spend equal time in both Jewish and Arab parts of the region. The history of the land and conflict is taught simultaneously by both a Palestinian and a Jewish instructor, and the directors of the program strive to remain neutral. Whether that goal is achieved, certainly observers note that students often come away from the program with a pro-Palestinian bias, even if others complain of a pro-Israel bias.[4]

The Jerusalem Center also likely has an indirect impact on Latter-day Saint perspectives. As part of their effort to maintain good relations with local Palestinians, in whose neighborhood they reside, on land that was owned by Palestinians before 1967 (before being expropriated by the Israeli government), BYU officials instituted a program of scholarships for local Palestinian students to attend BYU. Each year four Palestinian students join the ranks of BYU coeds, giving even members of BYU campus who never make it to Jerusalem a chance to engage a Palestinian perspective on the conflict.

The third element is the Church leadership itself. Chief among the influencers was President Howard W. Hunter, who in 1979 chided Church membership for its “personal prejudices,” insisting that “both the Jews and the Arabs are children of our Father. They are both children of promise, and as a church we do not take sides.”[5] Two years later, Kelly Ogden and David Galbraith, both with strong ties to Jerusalem and the BYU program there, insisted that “to the extent that we look with sympathy and understanding at both sides, we can be an influence to help bring about a just and lasting peace.”[6]

Neutrality and peace have been the official stance of the Church since the 1970s. Aside from that, little else has been publicly stated on the question of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict since the 1960s. Although the Church has made few, if any, specific moves to assist in reaching a peaceful end to the conflict, certainly the BYU Jerusalem program and curriculum contribute to a more balanced view. Likewise, some leaders feel that the mere existence of the Jerusalem Center, including the integrated and collaborative dynamic of the local directorship of the Center (the executive director is Jewish Israeli, whereas the assistant director, and head of security for the Center, is Palestinian), offer a kind of “bridge between what we’ve had and where we’re going.”[7]

Of course, none of this addresses actual perceptions of Church members, in the United States or globally, on Israel and the Middle East. My anecdotal experience indicates that, inside the United States, a pro-Israel stance still reigns supreme among the largely conservative membership, although that has been shifting in recent years and decades. Noted Mormon sociologist Armand Mauss attributes at least part of that to the intense controversy in Jewish Israeli society over the construction of the Jerusalem Center and to a lack of significant evangelization success among Jews in Israel.[8] Likewise, Latter-day Saints outside of the United States, less influenced by a culture of fervent conservative Christian love for Israel, have been much more likely to question Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and its treatment of Palestinians more generally. My guess is that, as the Church continues to expand globally and be influenced by non-American voices, and as the impact of the BYU Jerusalem program spreads, with its nuanced approach and location in the heart of (Palestinian) East Jerusalem, we will see an increase in the percentage of Latter-day Saints with ambivalent views on the question of American support for Israel.

[1] See, for example, LeGrand Richards’ Israel! Do You Know? (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1954) and “The Word of God Will Stand.” Conference Report (April 1954), as well as Ezra Taft Benson’s “A Message to Judah from Joseph,” Ensign, December 1976. Both Richards and Benson emphasize the miraculous victory of Israel over her Arab adversaries, but also that the time has arrived for Jews to accept Jesus as the Messiah and join His Church.

[2] See W. Cleon Skousen, Fantastic Victory (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1967).

[3] See James Mayfield’s critical review of Skousen’s book in “Whose Victory?” Dialogue 3 (Autumn 1968), 135-37. Parker’s refers to Mayfield and offers his view in his letter to the editors of Dialogue, in volume 4, no. 4 (Winter 1969), 4-5.

[4] See Eran Hayet, Richard Neitzel Holzapfel, and Ray L. Huntington, “Jerusalem Program Reborn: An Interview with the Executive Director,” Religious Educator: Perspectives on the Restored Gospel 10:1, 137-148.

[5] “All Are Alike unto God,” Ensign (June 1979).

[6] D. Kelly Ogden and David B. Galbraith, “I Have a Question,” Ensign (September 1993).

[7] Hayet, Holzapfel, and Huntington, 146.

[8] See All Abraham’s Children: Changing Mormon Conceptions of Race and Lineage (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2003), 183.