“To Meet the Lord and Enoch’s Band”: Latter-day Saint Perspectives on Zion

Maclane E. Heward

The quest for Zion is central to the purpose of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Latter-day Saint scholar Terryl Givens has recently summarized this purpose: “The church exists to create the kind of persons, in the kinds of relationships, that constitute the divine nature.”[1] In this way, the church is not only seeking a future reunification with God but also a present union with God. This captures the essence of Zion.[2] “Zion-building is not preparation for heaven. It is heaven, in embryo.”[3] Through covenants currently formalized in Latter-day Saint temples, individuals bind themselves directly to God in a “vertical dimension” of heaven. Similarly, individuals also covenant with God in temples to look horizontally to their fellowmen. This horizontal element of relatedness is Zion, a “divine society, centered on family relations but radiating far beyond.”[4] The potential of Zion is the presence of God, for “Christ will reign [in Zion] personally . . .”[5] This view of Zion became clear only after Joseph Smith’s reception of the “prophecy of Enoch.”[6]

Joseph Smith’s Views of Zion

Joseph Smith’s early use of the term Zion seems to parallel general Christian thought of his day. In essence, Zion was used by most American Christians as a metaphor for a gathering of heavenly people, or the work or kingdom of God.[7] Immediately after Smith received the “prophecy of Enoch” his usage of the word Zion was “energized . . . in a powerful and unmistakable manner.”[8] Smith and the church learned about a literal, not figurative, Zion. An actual society that became prepared to receive the Lord, for “Enoch and all his people walked with God, and he dwelt in the midst of Zion” (Moses 7:69). Significantly, Smith also learned about a latter-day Zion that would be established anticipatory to Christ’s millennial reign.[9] This revelation seemed to drive Smith’s “true prophetic task,” which was to “replicate the city Enoch perfected.”[10] Smith began immediately forging a society meant to welcome God—called Zion.

At the end of December 1830 and the beginning of January 1831, Smith received two revelations contextualized in Zion references and directing the Saints toward a purposeful gathering.[11] Within a few months, Smith had received additional information, directing the Saints to collect money and purchase land for their relocation, teach others, and gather to “the New Jerusalem, a land of peace, a city of refuge, a place of safety for the saints of the Most High God; and the glory of the Lord shall be there, . . . and it shall be called Zion” (LDS Doctrine and Covenants 45:66–67; CofChrist Doctrine and Covenants 45:12c–d). By the summer of 1831, the land of Zion was identified and dedicated, and individuals were instructed to “plant” themselves there (LDS Doctrine and Covenants 57:8, 11, 14; CofChrist Doctrine and Covenants 57:4a, 5a, 5c). In addition, this prophecy and the subsequent revelations also showed the foundational principles of a Zion society—namely, deep, transformative, sacrificial love for God and others.[12]

Smith’s pursuit was thus to create a society which would partake of the divine nature. First, those inhabiting Zion must love God in word and deed, which, as happened with Enoch, may incur the displeasure of society.[13] Second, Zion demanded sacrificial love for others that both built community and oneness and prepared all for the presence of the divine.[14] These commitments are currently well represented in church sacraments, particularly those performed in temples. Individuals covenant to live the laws of obedience, sacrifice, the gospel, chastity, and consecration. In essence, promises are made to obey God and sacrifice everything to support his work. Individuals are to dedicate their time, talents, and resources to bringing others to know God and build Zion.[15] Thus, the temple was located in the center of Zion geographically and in spiritual significance.[16]

The Two Phases of Zion: Gathering and Creating Local Units

There are two main phases in the history of the church as it relates to building Zion: gathering and creating local units worldwide. In the first twenty years of the church, the membership had gathered to several different locations—namely, Ohio, Missouri, Illinois, and then Utah Territory. Once in Utah, Brigham Young directed the building of hundreds of communities throughout the West. Throughout the nineteenth century, the call remained the same: “Come to Zion, come to Zion, and within her walls rejoice.”[17] For the membership of the church, the call was consistent with the earlier revelations by Smith. Despite persecutions and through sacrifice, they were to obey God and his prophet by gathering to Zion, and they were to help others along that same trajectory.

Perhaps nothing illustrates the lived reality of the call to Zion like the organization of the Perpetual Emigrating Fund Company (PEF) in 1849, just two years after the church entered the valleys of the Rocky Mountains. The purpose of the PEF was to facilitate the gathering of poor and impoverished coverts to Utah Territory. During its almost forty years of operation, possibly as many as thirty thousand Saints used the fund to facilitate their transoceanic and transcontinental immigration to the Intermountain West. By 1880, those that had used the PEF for their immigration had amassed an unpaid debt of over $1.5 million and as part of the church’s celebration of its fiftieth anniversary, the Twelve Apostles and the PEF Trustee in Trust proposed that half of the indebtedness be forgiven in order to free “the worthy poor” from “a burden which they have been unable, to honorably cast off.”[18] Just seven years later the United States government put an end to the PEF with the passing of the Edmunds-Tucker Act in 1887.[19] The donation of the Saints’ money, goods, and time to the fund exemplifies the principles of Zion as individuals showed a deep love for those they, in many situations, had not met but desired to gather in Zion.

In a speech given in 1878, George Q. Cannon began to lay the foundations of the next phase in Zion building: creating local units worldwide. After years of an isolationist stance which had arisen from persecution and marginalization, Cannon questioned a basic assumption when he indicated that “it is not the gathering of the people alone” for which the church must be engaged. The church must be about “teaching the world” and being the leaven for uplift. Cannon went on to indicate that the church is a light to the rest of the nation in many ways, specifically mentioning the economic and political strength of the territory as examples.[20] Cannon stopped short of calling for church converts to remain in their native lands.

Beginning in the early years of the twentieth century, church leaders began to adjust their call for Saints and converts to gather to a Zion located in the Rocky Mountains. Leaders such as James Talmage in 1900 and the First Presidency in 1907 stated that Zion needed to be created in the stakes and branches located around the world. “The policy of the Church is not to entice or encourage people to leave their native lands,” the First Presidency explained in 1907, “but to remain faithful and true in their allegiance to their governments, and to be good citizens.”[21] This significant adjustment challenged Saints to adjust their view of Zion; instead of a call to gather to Utah, members ought to create Zion in their native lands.

The work of Zion continued as is exemplified with the development of the welfare program. This program was developed during the leadership of church president Heber J. Grant (1919 to 1945). During its inaugural year in 1936, Grant explained, “Our primary purpose [in establishing the church’s welfare program] was to set up, in so far as it might be possible, a system . . . to help the people to help themselves.”[22] Through time it became clear that the reach of the welfare program was much larger than just a myopic focus on church membership. In October 1945, US president Harry S. Truman called upon the church to determine how quickly supplies of food and clothing from the church’s welfare program could be sent to those suffering the devastating effects of war in Europe. To Truman’s surprise, church president George Albert Smith responded that supplies were already collected and ready for shipment.[23] In 1986, presiding bishop Robert D. Hales expressed the connection between Zion and the welfare system, saying, “When we think of welfare, let us think of the plan revealed by our Lord for the eternal welfare of our souls. It is a plan to build faith, love, compassion, self-reliance, and unity. When adopted to local needs throughout the world by vigorous priesthood leaders, the plan sanctifies both givers and receivers and prepares a Zion people.”[24]

In the late 1970s, President Spencer W. Kimball asked that a talk by Elder Bruce R. McConkie of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles be published in the Church’s Ensign magazine. The talk, “Come: Let Israel Build Zion,” indicated that Zion is to be built in three different phases: first, setting up the kingdom, which McConkie indicated had already happened; second, the emphasis of creating and building up stakes in overseas areas, which is understood to be the current phase of the church; and finally, the return of the Lord, his reception by his earthly kingdom, Zion, and Zion’s perfecting—a phase yet to begin.[25] Thus, anticipation of the divine presence remained central to the concept of Zion; the temple is still in the center of Zion. As President Gordon B. Hinckley announced and implemented in 1997, the church has been seeking “to take the temples to the people.”[26] During President Russell M. Nelson’s first four years of leadership (2018–21), the church announced the construction of an astounding eighty-three new temples.[27] Currently the church is calling upon its members to create Zion where they are and is attempting to put temples in their midst so that, through the vertical covenants of the temple, and the horizontal elements of Zion building, members are becoming one with the “divine nature.”

“A Nucleus of Heaven”

Joseph Smith taught that the “great mission” of the Saints was to “organize a nucleus of Heaven.”[28] The call to the church is essentially the same as it was in Smith’s day. Instead of waiting for the Divine to place heaven upon us, we are seeking to create it. We have miles to go before we rest, but the pursuit enlivens those who are filled with the vision. President Nelson recently invited all young people to be a part of the gathering of souls to Zion. It is at the heart of the “greatest challenge, the greatest cause, and the greatest work on the earth today.”[29]

The Abundant Song of Zion in Community of Christ

David J. Howlett

As a six-year-old, I would listen to a cassette tape of a baritone singing traditional RLDS hymns. As my older sister smirked, I would muster my deepest child voice and sing, “Onward to Zion, Faithful and Strong! Zion the Beautiful beckons us on!” At age six, I did not know what Zion meant for the RLDS tradition, but I knew we sang of it—a lot.

Singing about Zion offers a resonant metaphor for understanding the presence of Zion theology in Community of Christ. In fact, Inez Smith Davis, the midcentury chronicler of RLDS history, observed that “the Zionic ideal . . . comes singing up in every generation, over and over again, perhaps only to fade away in discordant notes. Our critics have missed more than all else this Zion-melody in their telling, perhaps because its notes have not been clear enough, but the fact remains that without it, the story [of the church] would scarcely be worth telling.”[30] Smith Davis’s apologetic history has limited utility in the contemporary Community of Christ, but her observation about the “Zion melody” provides an especially useful analogy for how doctrines can move across generations.

Going beyond an analogy about how a narrative moves and has influence, scholar Robert Orsi has theorized about how what he calls “abundant events” gain meaning beyond their initial conception. Orsi argues that “presence radiates out from the [abundant] event along a network of routes, a kind of capillary of presence, filling water, relics, images, things, and memories.”[31] Orsi applies this term to a study of Marian apparitions, but other scholars have used his framework to understand other religious “events” and “narratives,” such as Joseph Smith’s gold plates.[32]

Through a synthesis of Orsi’s theory and Smith Davis’s analogy, I suggest that Community of Christ’s Zion theology can be thought of as an abundant song. As such, Zion is a resonant, performed narrative not “exhausted by its source material” in Orsi’s terms.[33] Instead, the abundant song of Zion resounds in places, media, objects, and memories far beyond its original performance. And, as people share it, they create new variations on the abundant song, which, in turn, shape people, their aspirations, their relationships, and their church’s official beliefs. But what exactly are these variations and themes within the abundant song of Zion in Community of Christ, past and present?

Zion among the Earliest Restoration Saints

In the era of the early American republic, many Protestants used “Zion” as a gloss to imbue something with holiness. This is the earliest sense that the original Latter Day Saints had when Joseph Smith first referred to the “cause of Zion,” or God’s holy cause.[34] Yet, by December 1830, Smith had greatly enlarged the meanings of the phrase when he revised a section of Genesis with Sidney Rigdon, his compatriot and scribe. In an act not unlike midrash (a filling in of the gaps of a biblical story), Smith expanded the story of Enoch in Genesis 5 from a few brief lines to a several chapter saga in which the ancient prophet built a holy city in which “the Lord called his people Zion, for they were of one heart and one mind and dwelt in righteousness, and there were no poor among them” (CofC Doctrine and Covenants 36: 2h–i; Moses 7:18). Zion, Enoch’s holy city, was received by God into the heavens, where it was to await the last days when another holy city, the New Jerusalem, would be established on the earth. Enoch’s city and the earthly New Jerusalem would then be united as one, marking the beginning of the millennium, a thousand years of peace.

Smith, believing himself to be a prophet charged with restoring the ancient faith, felt that he had restored a lost part of the biblical text with his Zion story. While this might be historically untrue in the light of later historical-critical biblical scholarship, Smith’s Zion narrative was part of a much larger Christian, Jewish, and Islamic speculative tradition on the prediluvian Enoch.[35] Smith’s Zion narrative, too, had a life of its own and, in this manner, it became historically real. That is, Smith’s Zion story entered people’s lives, and they subsequently acted on this narrative. Beyond his Genesis midrash, Smith added further details on the New Jerusalem in revelations included in the Book of Commandments and later Doctrine and Covenants. In 1831, he revealed that the city of Zion would be located in Independence, Jackson County, Missouri, and would include a temple complex (see CofC Doctrine and Covenants 57:1a–1d; LDS Doctrine and Covenants 57:1–3).

Smith’s revelations, poured onto an antebellum America awash in communal experiments, inspired ordinary Saints to move to Independence to build the holy city. Their subsequent attempts to organize a community were frustrated by Euro-American settlers who already lived in Jackson County. After an escalating religious and political conflict in 1833, the “old settlers” of Jackson County forced the Saints from the county by gunpoint. In the following years, the early Restoration Saints moved their communal centers to places such as Far West, Missouri, and Nauvoo, Illinois.[36] After Smith’s 1844 assassination and a subsequent leadership succession crisis, groups of Saints of the Nauvoo diaspora, like the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, kept singing the song of Zion, and, in doing so, explored some of the most significant theological tensions and bold community building attempts in the larger Restoration movement.

Zion in the Reorganization

In the late nineteenth century, RLDS members sang from a hymnal titled Zion’s Praises, but they debated how exactly those praises would be realized in the world. For example, one of the founders of the Reorganization, Jason Briggs, emphatically argued against gathering to a central community, while others started an Order of Enoch in Lamoni, Iowa, that made small steps toward a cooperative community. RLDS Prophet Joseph Smith III, aware of the drawbacks of a mass movement back into Missouri and all-too-human imperfections of church members living in community, advocated for a policy of gradualism in creating a Zion community.[37] He canonized this decades-long approach when, in 1909, he counseled the church in a revelation not to withdraw from the world into their own communities. Instead, they were to live and act “honestly and honorably before God and in the sight of all men, using the things of this world in the manner designed of God, that the places where they occupy may shine as Zion, the redeemed of the Lord” (CofC Doctrine and Covenants 128:8c). Even with this nongeographical emphasis on personal holiness and living among other people rather than gathering to a central community, Smith moved the church headquarters from Illinois (1860) to Lamoni, Iowa (1880), and finally moved himself to Independence, Missouri (1910).

Securely headquartered in site for the future New Jerusalem, the next generation of RLDS members sang an efflorescent song of Zion that illuminated all areas of church life. Led by a prophet, F. M. Smith, who earned a MA in sociology and PhD in social psychology, RLDS members attempted to take an eclectic mix of Protestant Social Gospel thought and social scientific insights and meld them with the nineteenth-century Zion narrative.[38] An official RLDS evangelistic flyer from the 1920s is illustrative of this synthesis, stating that the “[Reorganized] Latter Day Saint Program” proclaimed “Social reform by individual regeneration / Every man having opportunity to be his best; to do his best for the good of all / Love the dynamic / Righteousness the principle / Justice the basis of social relationship / To organize such men and women into the kingdom of God. / To provide all with suitable means which, with their talents, become their stewardships / Each one being brought to the task he is able best to perform, the product to be distributed so that none has less than is needed, and no one has more than he can use.”[39] These points, the flyer proclaimed, constituted the “restored gospel.” It is no wonder, then, that RLDS members in this era experimented with cooperative farms, cooperative grocery stores, wrote novels on Zion, preached tens of thousands of sermons on Zion, and wrote hymns of Zion. For example, F. M. Smith wrote the hymn “Onward to Zion!” in 1922 to the tune of Stephen Foster’s “Beautiful Dreamer.” It was an apt tune for a hymn from an era in which larger collectivist dreams felt like they could be real.

By the 1960s, the early twentieth-century song of Zion began to be revised as RLDS members sorted themselves into liberal and conservative camps, influenced by ecumenical Protestant theology or fundamentalist Protestant theology. Consequently, two distinct Zion theologies emerged. In the conservative version, Zion was decidedly centered on Independence and became a reality through personal holiness. Zion would happen when church members kept “all my commandments,” a phrase from Smith’s revised Enoch narrative. This Zion burned bright with last-days apocalyptic urgency, too.[40] In the progressive version, Zion became a process rather than simply a goal. Zion also became a “leavening influence” in the world rather than a “lighthouse,” to use a popular analogy propounded by 1970s RLDS theologians. Zion as a leaven meant working with people of all goodwill for the kingdom of God, going hand in hand with progressive desires for ecumenicism. Additionally, Zion as a leaven decentered Independence as the site of a holy city; the world became a place where Zion was manifest, regardless of geography.[41]

Nevertheless, in 1984, RLDS prophet Wallace B. Smith announced that the time had come to begin construction on the long-awaited temple in Independence. This Temple, finished in 1994, was dedicated for “the pursuit of peace . . . [and] for reconciliation and for healing of the spirit” (CofC Doctrine and Covenants 156:5a). The progressive Zion, then, enacted a transformed millennialism in which the kingdom was “already and not yet,” one that emphasized the justice theology of earlier generations, along with a new emphasis on peace. In a hymn from this era, one progressive RLDS apostle summed up this new emphasis on Zion:

The cause of Zion celebrates the victory over fear,

the witness of the kingdom’s power, new life already here.

Although fulfilment seems remote, the journey just begun,

the kingdom has already come; the victory is won.

The cause of Zion prophecies the future yet to be,

when men and women everywhere shall walk in dignity.

We now anticipate the day when pain and tears shall cease,

when humankind shall live as one in righteousness and peace.[42]

Conservatives balked at this theology and largely left the RLDS Church in the late 1980s, leading to the normalization of the progressive, ecumenical song of Zion among church members by the 1990s.

Zion in the Contemporary Community of Christ

Zion has proved to be surprisingly resonant within the contemporary Community of Christ. Four key contemporary documents, developed by global working groups of Community of Christ leaders and approved by the First Presidency, have creatively revivified the song of Zion. First, in the Basic Beliefs statement, Community of Christ states, “‘Zion’ expresses our commitment to herald God’s peaceable kingdom on Earth by forming Christ-centered communities in families, congregations, neighborhoods, cities, and throughout the world.”[43] Similarly, the church’s Enduring Principles document states that “the vision of Zion is to promote God’s reign on earth, as proclaimed by Jesus Christ, through the leavening influence of just and peaceful communities.”[44] The “leaven” model for Zion, advocated in various forms since the nineteenth century, is further instantiated as a normative model for Zion.

In the church’s Mission Initiatives document, Zion is seen as an eschatological symbol of hope, and its realization is equated with a coming restoration of “Christ’s covenant of peace.” This “hope of Zion will become reality when we live Christ’s peace and generously share his peace with others.” Furthermore, “God’s ultimate vision” for Community of Christ will be fulfilled as it establishes “the Temple as a Center to Promote Peacemaking throughout the World,” seeks “Justice, Create[s] Peacemakers around the World,” and “Unite[s] with Others to Make Peace Around the World.”[45] Here, Zion is tied to the Temple in Independence and its ministries of peacemaking and justice, along with a solidarity with all who work for peace.

Finally, Community of Christ Sings, the 2013 hymnal used in the English-speaking part of the church, added a core 150 songs used by the church around the world. One of these hymns, “Tiona Nehenehe,” has been sung by French Polynesian Community of Christ members for generations. Roughly translated into English, the hymn reads, “Zion the beautiful, beloved homeland, saints in these days. Jesus will return, we will all go to Zion and we will all meet him there in Zion, the pure in heart.”[46] The inclusion of this hymn in a contemporary Community of Christ hymnal does not represent a repristination of an earlier Zion theology. Rather, it represents how Zion has become indigenous and can mean multiple things in multiple places. Singing a hymn in a worshipping community, after all, is a cooperative endeavor, and the shared meaning of the words does not matter as much as the shared performance. Singing a hymn about Zion, then, seems like an apt image for how a diverse, global Community of Christ pragmatically strives for the peaceable kingdom of God.

Conclusion: Singing a New Song of Zion

In the words of one Community of Christ theologian, Joseph Smith’s experience is “illustrative, but not necessarily normative.”[47] I would add that Joseph Smith’s experience, at least around “Zion,” is also generative. As such, Community of Christ theologians, leaders, and ordinary members have created new dimensions for talking about, expressing, and living Zion. They are all variations on themes first composed by Smith in the early Restoration church but have also taken on a life of their own, going beyond their author’s original intent, as do all texts that achieve true influence in a larger culture.

As variations on a theme, Smith’s pithy summation of the characteristics of Zion’s people, along with his added revelations about a temple complex in Zion, helped Community of Christ generate an emphasis on peace and justice, ecumenism, and an expectation that such ministries will emanate from a temple in Independence, Missouri. Finally, Smith’s story of “Enoch’s people” who dwelt in the city of Zion continues to shape Community of Christ’s conceptualization of itself as a people in covenant with God. True enough, Community of Christ folks are not the only covenant people or not even the most favored, but they are a people of God, nonetheless.

In these variations on themes, the Palmyra prophet’s midrash-like narrative of Zion has gone beyond the bounds of antebellum American religious culture and been transformed into the abundant song sung by Community of Christ members, generation after generation. Smith’s extrabiblical story could have constrained Community of Christ to a certain sectarian aloofness. Instead, Zion’s abundant song, creatively rewritten by each generation, has gifted Community of Christ with a certain expansive theological imagination. This imagination sees salvation as social, seeks solidarity with those who work for justice and peace, and hopes for God’s peaceable reign. And the song of Zion has verses yet to be written.

Response to David J. Howlett

David Howlett does a masterful job in describing the Community of Christ’s historical and theological relationship with Zion. The concept of Zion, its creation and implementation, has shaped both our pasts and our present lived religious experiences in profound and different ways. These differences present an opportunity for us to admire each other’s views for their unique contributions to Joseph Smith’s quest to create a divine society.

Zion, perhaps more than most other ecclesiastical or theological elements of our faiths, link us together more than divide us. Patrick Mason has recently indicated that assertions of religious truth often fall into two distinct stances: exclusivism or relativism. Early revelations of Joseph Smith, suggests Mason, promote a third category: particularism.[48] Each faith has a particular melodic line to sing, to use David’s musical analogy, to create the complete Zion song. This, I believe, is a helpful lens through which to view our different Zionic endeavors.

Some may argue that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is spending too much of its energy looking back in our past and holding up Nauvoo theological developments. Some would say the church is stuck in a time when Joseph extended too far into theological wonderings. From a particularistic paradigm, there is another way of viewing the Church. The temple ordinances, organized in Nauvoo, but energized beginning at least by early 1831, can be seen as beautiful expressions of a selfless desire to grant all mankind the opportunity to dwell with God and family eternally. Seen in this light, one can embrace the concept of “holy envy” and simply appreciate the unique Latter-day Saint contribution to the collective body of Christ.

Some may think that Community of Christ has lost its historical and theological roots. Since the “past is all that makes the present coherent,” Community of Christ has struggled, some may say, with coherency. [49] David has shown their relationship with history and theology as generated out of earlier expressions, making earlier concepts beautifully new. Community of Christ’s emphasis on peace and justice and ecumenism, which emanates from their Temple in Independence, is a beautiful particular expression of a deep commitment to bring about God’s peaceable reign. David has shown how the songs generated in Community of Christ can be sung with new meaning in a new context. Each religious expression stemming from Joseph Smith Jr. conveys different aspects of Zion and contributes uniquely to the overall work of God.

Edward Partridge, the first bishop of the church, arrived in Zion only to find that his imagined Zion was far different than the actual identified location. All the residents of Zion were informed that “it is not meet that I should command in all things. . . . Men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause and do many things of their own free will.”[50] Our different contributions to Zion can be seen as our attempt to be anxiously engaged in God’s work to bring about Zion. Partridge eventually caught the Zionic vision. He wrote, “Let Zion in her beauty rise; Her light begins to shine, Ere long her King will rend the skies, Majestic and divine. . . . Dear Lord prepare my heart, To stand with thee, on Zion’s mount, And never more to part.”[51] From these two essays on Zion, a few things seem clear. First, the songs of Zion have long captured our shared quest to create a heavenly society. Second, God will build Zion through our efforts. Third, those who catch the vision of Zion, as Partridge did, will focus on preparing their hearts to stand with God on Zion’s mount, never more to part. Finally, though our Zionic expressions are divergent and our future expressions unknown, our particular contributions and our shared beginnings leave much for us to celebrate and encourage in each other.

Response to Maclane E. Heward

Maclane Heward provides an excellent historical overview of Zion theology in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As I reflect upon his work, I see a crucial historical disjuncture between Community of Christ and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in terms of what Zion became, as well as a common interpretative strategy used by both traditions as they adapted the Enoch narrative in the wake of this disjuncture.

While it may be obvious to readers of this volume, the Nauvoo experience sent the Community of Christ and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on two different trajectories. Historian Roger Launius has shown how Joseph Smith III saw Nauvoo as a cautionary tale about trying to do too much too fast, as well as what happens when saints try to remove themselves from the evils of society. “In contrast to the Nauvoo approach to Zion, which sought to remove the saints from secular society,” writes Launius, Joseph Smith III’s “emphasis called for the church to be involved in the affairs of the world, in the hope that it would assist in changing it.”[52]

As Maclane shows, Nauvoo’s community-building endeavor became the model for nineteenth-century colonization of the Intermountain West. The doctrines developed in Nauvoo also became the theological foundation for the evolving church in which members made covenants at temples, uniting them to humans and divine figures in this world and the world to come. As temples began to dot the earth in the twentieth century, the concept of Zion also became decentered from Utah or a distant future Zion in Independence. Localized temples became the new gathering points to enact salvifically essential rituals. In contrast, a single temple in Community of Christ, the Independence Temple, served a symbolic function for church unity but had no salvifically essential role.

Both traditions have read back into Enoch’s story the theology of their present. Smith’s Enoch narrative was not intended to be a story about contemporary peace and justice theology and ecumenicism, but Community of Christ has made it so. Similarly, the Enoch narrative does not directly address the creation of a “heaven family” through temple rituals, a later Nauvoo-era theological concept that evolved in the Latter-day Saint tradition. Nonetheless, reading back into a story later realizations is exactly how narratives become living texts. At one level, I appreciate the sheer theological creativity of both traditions in doing so. At another level, I have to acknowledge that the text itself has gifted both traditions with affordances that channel this creativity along certain lines. To use an analogy from Hans-Georg Gadamer, in the interpretation of texts, our horizon meets the horizon of the text, and there is a fusion of horizons when this happens.[53] By allowing the Zion narrative to have its own voice, both traditions have been shaped by it in particular ways as their horizon has joined its horizon. In other words, there is not a simple reading into a text of whatever one wants; the text itself donates meaning too. Beyond this, a fusion of horizons seems to be an apt analogy for what the Enoch narrative itself implants as a hope within its readers—a fusion of heaven and earth within a concrete covenant community.

As I read Maclane’s essay, I am left with admiration for some of the ways in which The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has concretely revivified Zion in the present. Maclane mentions the justice orientation of the Perpetual Emigrating Fund in the nineteenth century, and I see a similar gesture in the present by the church’s Perpetual Education Fund. The former was centered on transporting people to a centralized geography to build Zion. The latter helps people be a leaven in the world wherever they live. In this way, while having very different histories, sacraments, and even ideas about the nature of God, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Community of Christ are not far away in terms of metaphor—taken from Jesus’s parables—about what Zion is in the present; Zion for both can be seen as a God-sent leaven that grows within the elemental ingredients of our world.

Conclusion

We conclude our dialogue with four takeaways. First, what our two traditions have done with the Nauvoo-era church has greatly shaped what Zion theology became in our traditions. Here, we see our greatest divergences as traditions, in the forms of the rituals we practice, our theologies of God, and where we have lived as a people. Second, our relationship to the past also shapes Zion theology in very direct ways—Community of Christ seeing the past as generative, or a starting point, for being a living tradition, and the LDS seeing the past as holding more of a normative status, part of what it means to be a church that preserves a restoration. Third, the narrative of Zion that Joseph Smith launched into the world in 1830 has been the most theologically significant text in our two churches over time. The Zion narrative shaped where people lived, their economic relationships, their theologies, their involvement in the wider world, and their aspirations as no other text did. As a shared text, the Zion narrative has been a song we sing together in the present and a common prayer for the future. Finally, if, as Terryl Givens suggests, Joseph Smith’s mission was to establish a Zion community in the world, then although the LDS Church and Community of Christ represent different particular expressions of Zion, their unique contributions evidence the continued flourishing of Joseph Smith’s prophetic vision.

Notes

[1] Terryl L. Givens, Feeding the Flock: The Foundations of Mormon Thought: Church and Praxis (New York: Oxford, 2017), 34.

[2] Prominent Christian theologian N. T. Wright said, “Heaven, in the Bible, is not a future destiny but the other, hidden, dimension of our ordinary life—God’s dimension.” N. T. Wright, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church (New York: HarperCollins, 2008), 19. This description, according to Latter-day Saint scholar Robert L. Millet, resonates with Latter-day Saints as they see Zion and the gathering of Israel as a present endeavor. Robert L. Millet, “For Heaven’s Sake: A Review of N. T. Wright’s Surprised by Hope,” Religious Educator 10, no. 3 (2009): 219–36.

[3] Givens, Feeding the Flock, 34–35.

[4] Givens, Feeding the Flock, 35.

[5] "History, 1838–1856, volume C-1 [2 November 1838–31 July 1842]," p. 1285, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed March 3, 2022, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-c-1-2-november-1838-31-july-1842/459 For Joseph Smith, being in the presence of God was not just a future blessing but one available now in mortality. Smith promised those who were worthy and prepared that they could have this blessing in this life. Minutes, circa 3–4 June 1831, p. 3, The Joseph Smith Papers. See the historical introduction, in particular note 20. See also Anthony Sweat, The Holy Invitation: Understanding Your Sacred Temple Endowment (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2017), 11–29.

[6] "History, 1838–1856, volume A-1 [23 December 1805–30 August 1834]," p. 80-81, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed March 3, 2022, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-a-1-23-december-1805-30-august-1834/86

[7] Givens, Feeding the Flock, 34–35. See also Terryl L. Givens, The Prophecy of Enoch as Restoration Blueprint (Logan: Utah State University Press, 2012), 11–12. Smith’s early use of Zion can be seen in the following references: LDS Doctrine and Covenants 6:6; 11:6; 12:6; 14:6; 21:7; CofChrist Doctrine and Covenants 6:3a; 12:3a, 19:2d.

[8] See Steven L. Olsen, “The Mormon Ideology of Place: Cosmic Symbolism of the City of Zion, 1830–1846” (PhD diss., University of Chicago, 1985), 26, cited in Reed M. Holmes, Dreamers of Zion: Joseph Smith and George J. Adams Conviction, Leadership and Israel’s Renewal” (Portland, OR: Sussex Academic Press, 2012), 45.

[9] This vision was received “to the joy of the little flock, which . . . numbered about seventy members.” “History, 1838–1856, volume A-1 [23 December 1805–30 August 1834],” p. 81, The Joseph Smith Papers. The pattern of the development of Zion in the prophecy of Enoch is attempted by Joseph. The developed community progressed to the point that “Enoch and all his people walked with God” (Moses 7:69). The end of this revelation foretells a latter-day Zion receiving the Lord (Moses 7:60–67).

[10] Givens, Feeding the Flock, 35.

[11] One of these revelations began with God stating the following: “I am the same which have taken the Zion of Enoch into my own bosom” (LDS Doctrine and Covenants 38:4; CofChrist Doctrine and Covenants 38:1b).

[12] Enoch’s vision of mankind’s sin and pain: “his heart swelled wide as eternity; and his bowels yearned” (Moses 7:41). This vision also illustrates the need for love between others as those in Zion “were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them” (Moses 7:18). This seems to be suggested in a parable taught by Smith in a January 1831 revelation (LDS Doctrine and Covenants 38:24–27; CofChrist Doctrine and Covenants 38:5d–6a).

[13] “Old Testament Revision, John Whitmer First Copy,” p. [10], The Joseph Smith Papers. The prophecy of Enoch reveals that, because of his teachings, “all men were offended because of him.” It is clear from this passage that Enoch’s first priority was not the acceptance of peers of society but of God. This allowed Enoch to walk with God.

[14] “The Lord called his people Zion because they were of one heart and of one mind and dwelt in righteousness and there was no poor among them.” This outcome grows out of a love and commitment for God and others. Old Testament Revision 1, p. 16, The Joseph Smith Papers.

[15] General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 27.2, ChurchofJesusChrist.org.

[16] Aaron L. West, “Questions and Answers about the Temple Lot in Independence, Missouri,” ChurchofJesusChrist.org.Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.

[17] Richard Smyth, “Come to Zion,” Millennial Star, no. 6 (February 9, 1861), 96. Richard Smyth penned the words of “Israel, Israel, God is Calling,” which first appeared in the Millennial Star in 1861.

[18] Circular from the Twelve Apostles, April 16, 1880, Church History Library, Salt Lake City, 1, as cited in Emily Crumpton, “Perpetual Emigrating Fund Company,” ChurchofJesusChrist.org, September 1, 2020.

[19] Crumpton, “Perpetual Emigrating Fund Company.”

[20] George Q. Cannon, in Journal of Discourses (London: Latter-day Saints’ Book Depot, 1854–86), 20:2–3. Speaking of the territorial solvency, Cannon said, “To-day it is conceded upon all sides, and the fact is not disputed by intelligent persons, that the Latter-day Saints, or, to speak more properly, the people of the Utah Territory, occupy a position superior to that of any other territory within the confines of the Union.” Cannon reported that United States president Rutherford B. Hayes exclaimed, “Your position is certainly an enviable and unique one.”

[21] Givens, Feeding the Flock, 39.

[22] Heber J. Grant, in Conference Report, October 1936, 3, as quoted in Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Heber J. Grant (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2011), 115.

[23] Heather Wrigley, “Celebrating 75 Years of Welfare,” Ensign, May 2011, 140.

[24] Robert D. Hales, “Welfare Principles to Guide Our Lives: An Eternal Plan for the Welfare of Men’s Souls,” Ensign, May 1986, 30.

[25] Bruce R. McConkie, “Come: Let Israel Build Zion,” Ensign, May 1977, 115.

[26] Gordon B. Hinckley, “Some Thoughts on Temples, Retention of Converts, and Missionary Service,” Ensign, November 1997, 50. Brigham Young indicated that there would need to be thousands of temples for the purpose of the Restoration to be accomplished, and Elder McConkie indicated that temples would “dot the earth.” See Givens, Feeding the Flock, 43.

[27] “At the October 2021 General Conference, the Prophet Says the Church Will Build 13 More Temples,” October 3, 2021, newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org.

[28] Benjamin Park, “Juvenile Instructor Heads to Calgary,” juvenileinstructor.org, June 25, 2012.

[29] Russell M. Nelson and Wendy W. Nelson, “Hope of Israel,” Liahona, September 2018, 3.

[30] Inez Smith Davis, The Story of the Church: A History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and of Its Legal Successor, the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Independence, MO: Herald Publishing House, 1934), 12.

[31] Robert Orsi, “Abundant History: Marian Apparitions as Alternative Modernity,” Historically Speaking 9, no. 7 (2008): 15. Orsi has extended these arguments in Robert A. Orsi, History and Presence (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016), 48–71.

[32] Stephen Taysom, “Abundant Events or Narrative Abundance? Robert Orsi and the Academic Study of Mormonism,” Dialogue 45, no. 4 (2012): 1–26.

[33] Orsi, “Abundant History,” 15.

[34] Terryl Givens, The Prophecy of Enoch as Restoration Blueprint (Logan: Utah State University Press, 2012), 11.

[35] John Reeves and Annette Yoshiko Reed, Enoch from Antiquity to the Middle Ages, volume 1: Sources from Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018).

[36] Patrick Q, Mason, Mormonism and Violence: The Battles of Zion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019), 21–25.

[37] Roger D. Launius, Joseph Smith III: Pragmatic Prophet (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988), 168–89.

[38] David J. Howlett, “The Death and Resurrection of the RLDS Zion: A Case Study in ‘Failed Prophecy,’ 1930–1970,” Dialogue 40, no. 3 (2007): 115–16.

[39] Photocopy of original in author’s personal archives; original in Community of Christ Archives, file number misplaced.

[40] Richard Price, Saints at the Crossroads (Independence, MO: Price Publishing, 1974), 139–43.

[41] Duane E. Couey, “Zion as Process,” in Readings on Concepts of Zion, ed. Paul A. Wellington (Independence, MO: Herald Publishing House, 1973), 114–23; Maurice L. Draper, “Zion, the Leaven,” in Readings on Concepts of Zion, 204–8.

[42] Geoffrey Spencer, “The Cause of Zion Summons Us,” in Community of Christ Sings (Independence, MO: Herald Publishing House, 2013), 386.

[43] “Basic Beliefs,” Community of Christ, https://www.cofchrist.org/basic-beliefs.

[44] “Enduring Principles,” Community of Christ, https://www.cofchrist.org/enduring-principles.

[45] “Mission Initiatives,” Community of Christ, https://www.cofchrist.org/mission-initiatives.

[46] “Tiona Nehenehe,” in Community of Christ Sings, 382.

[47] Anthony Chvala-Smith, email to David Howlett, February 27, 2021. Chvala-Smith made this statement in many settings, but he and I were unable to find it in print.

[48] Patrick Mason, Restoration: God’s Call to the 21^st-Century World (Meridian, ID: Faith Matters, 2020), 42–48.

[49] James Baldwin, “Collective Essays,” New York Times: On the Web.

[50] “Revelation, 1 August 1831 [Doctrine and Covenants 58],” p. 96, The Joseph Smith Papers. For information regarding the argument between Partridge and Smith, see the historical introduction.

[51] Collection of Sacred Hymns, 1835, Page iii, pp. 86, 88, The Joseph Smith Papers.

[52] Roger D. Launius, “The Awesome Responsibility: Joseph Smith III and the Nauvoo Experience,” in Kingdom of the Mississippi Revisited: Nauvoo in Mormon History, ed. Roger D. Launius and John E. Hallwas (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1996), 234.

[53] Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, 2nd ed. (New York: Continuum, 2004).