Jenna Carson and Jason Kerr, English Department

Introduction

I wrote an academic paper arguing that Latter-day Saint doctrine, especially the Law of Consecration, provides the foundation for a specific theology of liberation that can be placed in conversation with traditional liberation theology put forth by Gustavo Gutierrez. I then put the theology to work by presenting the contemporary Mexico-U.S. immigration phenomenon as a case study. I argued that liberation theology helps members of the Church better understand current LDS Church policy regarding the treatment of individuals living without documentation in the United States.

Results

My paper ended up reading as rather politically subversive—more so than I intended. In order to revise the project and make it more palatable for people of all political leanings, I would need to focus not on the connections between the Law of Consecration and traditional liberation theology, but rather, on Church doctrine and policy as presenting its own unique theology. And I would need to take care with the way I interpreted what it means to live the Law of Consecration; for example, one reader of my paper critiqued the fact that I saw the Law of Consecration as applicable to all people (and not just members of the Church).

Discussion

The research I conducted for this project prepared me to apply for Harvard Divinity School, where I was accepted for the Master of Theological Studies program. I came here with the intention to study immigration and theology. I am currently taking a class on Mexico-U.S. immigration and the borderlands, and for my final paper in the class, I’m developing my original paper (which was written for an LDS audience) into a research paper accessible to theologians of all faiths.

Conclusion

Latter-day Saint doctrine and policy does indeed provide—as did traditional liberation theology—a preferential option for the poor; however, Latter-day Saints are highly opinionated and divided on how exactly that preferential option for the poor ought to be manifest in daily life. The Church has clearly outlined how members ought to treat undocumented individuals living in the U.S. and, I believe, will continue to do guide Church members on other matters in the future in order to help them live a preferential option for the poor. While Church members possess agency to choose the ways in which they approach the treatment of the poor, Church policy— such as its recent statements on immigration—carries political implications. Whether or not Church members accept those implications and how they choose to interpret them will continue to be a sensitive issue and must be addressed carefully.