Sunstone's Relationship with Church Leadership

John Dehlin [00:00:15] So some of our viewers will know that 1993 was sort of a crucial and defining moment for Sunstone and not potentially all positive ways. So can you discuss the events and the environment that led up to August and September of 1993, and your involvement in it, how you were trying to manage it, what you experienced about it, the events themselves and the aftermath? It's a big question, but we've got at least 30 minutes.

Elbert Peck [00:00:59] Well, we'll see. Okay. I don't know how far back you want me to go.

John Dehlin [00:01:05] Give whatever context you think would be informative for future generations.

Elbert Peck [00:01:08] Well, I think there's an inherent institutional conflict between the church and any independent organization. That's the first context that needs to be put in. I mean, the church was nervous with this People magazine, which was a very faithful Mormony magazine. They were nervous with farms, which was kind of doing their bidding, or at least some of their bidding.

Elbert Peck [00:01:31] They just don't like. They're nervous with Bookcraft, the Mormon publisher, which they bought Deseret book, bought out, which was out. Deseret booking, Deseret Book. They just don't like that. And so that's the first context. They're nervous with any independent thing that they don't have control over. And that's probably just inherent in organizations and. And for whatever reasons is aggravated in the church.

Elbert Peck [00:01:59] And then the tension with intellectuals goes way back, goes back to the Godbeites, goes back to Scott's grandfather, Scott Kenney's grandfather, E.E. erickson in the 1930s, when J. Reuben Clark slammed down his social works, and goes back to Fawn Brody and Juanita Brooks and the tension that the church had with dialogue in the 1960s in a priesthood meeting. Even President Harold B. Lee counseled people not to read it. And that nervousness was always with Sunstone, too.

Elbert Peck [00:02:36] It was kind of low level, on the radar, but it was always there from when Scott went and talked to his old mission president, Boyd K. Packer. And Peggy would have her tensions when she was there. And in the early 80s, Gordon Hinckley, as counselor, the only active counselor in the First Presidency, would make comments about the critics inside and outside the church. They're nervous of them. They don't appreciate any main contribution they can have.

John Dehlin [00:03:07] Did you say there were actual direct conversations between Scott or Peggy and general authorities during the time Sunstone was alive about Sunstone's role or its approach? Do we know if there were any direct conversations?

Elbert Peck [00:03:19] Did Scott tell you when he went to Boyd K. Packer?

John Dehlin [00:03:21] No.

Elbert Peck [00:03:22] Boyd K. Packer was Scott's Mission president.

John Dehlin [00:03:24] Right. He told me that.

Elbert Peck [00:03:25] And when he was organizing Sunstone, he went and had a meeting with Boyd K. Packer. What's the best you can get Scott to tell you about that? Or he actually is written about in the Sunstone history on his section, on his time.

Elbert Peck [00:03:39] So, yes, and Peggy had talked to some general authorities. Peggy's related to general authorities. Her great grandfather was Heber J. Grant. And so when Daniel and I came to Sunstone, we wanted to be more faithful. We wanted to have everyone in the tent speaking. We got all these BYU professors coming, and we were getting more subscriptions from mainstream Mormons.

Elbert Peck [00:04:06] And Gordon Hinckley was even increasing his comments about his passing, comments about critics inside and outside the church. He would say, we don't need them. We don't listen to them. Elder McConkie had given his talk about the caravan mouse on and the yapping dogs who get left behind.

Elbert Peck [00:04:26] So Daniel and I decided to go have a meeting with President Hinckley, who was a counselor at the time, and invite him to speak at a symposium. I think primarily because of Daniel's dad being a general authority. We got this interview, this must have been in 1987 or 86, one of the two. And President Hinckley took us in his office and sat down, was warm and friendly and congenial. And I proposed the question to him, the invitation to him. He goes, no, no, I don't need to speak there. Thank you, but no to the invitation.

Elbert Peck [00:05:16] So I came back again and said, well, you know, you don't really speak in a lot of detail about your reservations about the critics inside and out outside the church. Could you come and speak a little more in detail to these people so they could understand your reservations and everything? He says, no, I have all the forms to speak. And I say just what I want to say, you know. And then he turned on us and says, I've got some questions for you.

Elbert Peck [00:05:42] And he says, who called you to this? Who called you to this? Yes, a man must be called by authority in order to preach the Gospel. Who called you to Red Sunstone? And we responded, man must not be called in all things. You can do a lot of things on your own, independent, free will and sort of stuff. And he kind of nodded, like, that's a good response. And I can't remember the other questions, but there was, like, on the spot, he would come up with these three or four rhetorical questions he'd put to us. And he put them in a genial way, like, these are just things I think you need to consider.

Elbert Peck [00:06:22] And then I said, you know, I really do think Sunstone can help the church. And I hit a button with that one. He goes, oh, I've heard that argument before. Peggy Fletcher used to tell me that Sunstone could really help the church. He says.

Elbert Peck [00:06:38] And then he says, at the time she was friends with Ken Woodward, that religion editor at Newsweek. And she showed him all around when he was doing his article on the MTC and missionaries. We don't need help like that.

Elbert Peck [00:06:53] And then he says, I know Petra's family. And he recited his genealogy. And her grandfather's a senator, her uncle's a senator, her mother is a Bennet. No, her mother's not Bennett. Yeah, and her mother's a Bennett, her father's a Fletcher, and they're related to all these people. And grandfather's Hebrew. And her uncle, her great uncle, was his missionary companion. Gordon Hinckley's missionary companion. And then after reciting her genealogy, which he knew intimately, what you get from all these old time families here in Utah, everyone knows everyone who's connected in their lines. He says, considering who her family is, she should know better.

Elbert Peck [00:07:39] You know, she was. And so the thing ended and Daniel, he was really kind of overcome with love for Gordon Hinckley, who I don't think President Hinckley comes across genially in his speeches and stuff. I think he's a very demonstrative person in terms of his affections. Daniel went up to him and embraced him, and I watched as Pinkley kind of hesitantly embraced him back. And so I hugged him too.

Elbert Peck [00:08:05] And then as we left, I remember saying to Daniel, as we're leaving the church administration building, you know, well, at a minimum, he has to say, I don't agree with those guys, and I think they're wrong headed in their approach, but their motives are good and they're trying to do good.

Elbert Peck [00:08:21] And Daniel said, yeah, that's probably what his final conclusion would be. Boy, were we wrong. John Ashton, whose father was Marvin J. Ashton and John was a liberal on our Sunstone board, came back to us a couple weeks later and furious.

Elbert Peck [00:08:44] And Marvin Ashton, John Ashton said to me, said to us, quit trying to talk to those guys. Just leave them alone. They're never going to get it. And the more you talk to them, the madder you make them.

Elbert Peck [00:08:56] And I was of a different mindset at the time, I said, because we were sending them all complimentary issues. And John said, stop sending them the magazine. And I said, well, you know, if they can't be part of the conversation. At least it's healthy for them to overhear it and to know what people are saying. He says, it doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way. They don't overhear the conversation. They just find things to get mad at. He says they'll look through an issue and maybe there are four or five greatish articles that could appear in the Ensign, and you don't get any credit for this.

Elbert Peck [00:09:25] You just get pinged for the one mad. And the more mad ones they get, I'd say, but isn't it better for them to read the whole article than just to read highlighted parts that someone sends them and where they just read those highlighted quotes? He says, no. He said, no, it's not. They don't think like that. All they do is they're trying to defend the church and they just get mad that they see things that they think are wrong. In particular, if they can't, you won't stop when they tell them to. And so Daniel and I thought, well, John probably knows more than we know.

Elbert Peck [00:09:55] After all, his father's an apostle. But we didn't want to just stop sending them the magazines because then they would say, why aren't we getting these anymore? Now they don't want us to know what they're saying. So we found a way that we thought we were very clever. We would send out a form letter saying to everyone.

Elbert Peck [00:10:19] We got all these complimentary issues sent to people, and we're very happy to send them, but we don't want to send magazines to people who don't want them. So here's a return card. Could you just check? Please continue sending me this or not, and send it back.

Elbert Peck [00:10:35] It's their choice, sort of. And I remember the day we got back en masse, all of the cards from the apostles, they'd all been checked by the same blue pen. It's like they talked about us in a quorum, and they said, okay, John, you collect the cards and send them all back. Or the executive secretary. They were all just perfectly checked by the same hand, same pen, same kind of check. Whereas it was a mixed bag from the 70s.

Elbert Peck [00:11:03] Some 70s would say, yes, I appreciate you sending this to me. And others would say, no, no, no. They didn't all get the memo that the 12 did. And then did you have the signature

John Dehlin [00:11:12] of the members of the 12?

Elbert Peck [00:11:13] No, no, they had their name on it. I guess maybe we put. I can't remember. We probably put their mailing label on it or something.

John Dehlin [00:11:20] So they were Paying attention. They wanted to keep getting it.

Elbert Peck [00:11:22] Now the 12 did. The 12 all said no. A few 70s said yes.

John Dehlin [00:11:26] The 12 all said no.

Elbert Peck [00:11:28] All said no. All checked by the same pen, all no. It's like one person filled out all of their cards. They turned in all their cards to one person and they all filled out. I'd like to know that story. But some 70 said yes, although many said no.

Elbert Peck [00:11:43] But it shows you how out of touch some people are. The Relief Society presidency sent the cards back. Checked, yes, with flowing, flattering comments. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate the good work you're doing. So all the 12 and most of the general authorities were no longer getting the magazine, which is probably a good thing, but probably too late.

Elbert Peck [00:12:10] Then a year later or so, 1987, this would have been no. 1987 was the alternate voices talk by Dallin Oaks warning people against critics inside and outside the church. And then there were changes made in the temple endowment.

Elbert Peck [00:12:35] And a lot of the press reported those changes in the temple endowment around 1989. 89. 87 was the alternate voices. 89 was the temple endowments, like these two year increments as you lead up to the crescendo. And lots of newspapers reported the changes in the Temple of Dalmas, the elimination of the blood oaths and the slitting of the throat and stuff, and getting rid of some certain things.

Elbert Peck [00:13:06] We in our little news section often reports how the media are covering the church. And so we did a news story about the news coverage of the changes in the temple. We didn't really report in any detail what was happening, what was actually changed in the temple.

Elbert Peck [00:13:27] But after that, shortly after that issue came out with that news story, I was called in by my stake president who upbraided me very strongly for having run that article. And he thought it was bad judgment and breaking of my temple covenants.

Elbert Peck [00:13:50] I tried to have a discussion with him, like, well, why don't you actually covenant in the temple and what you covenant not to reveal? We didn't reveal any of those things that didn't matter to him. And he really didn't want to discuss it. And he took my temple recommended way.

Elbert Peck [00:14:03] So I went in the next day to the office and told Daniel about that. And Daniel, we talked about what to do about that. And then a couple days later, I also asked my stake president, now, were you told to do this? Have you had any conversations with anyone about this? He says, no, no one has told me to do this. I haven't received any conversations just for some time. I've been concerned about having the stake member of my stake do Sunstone. And this has broken the back.

Elbert Peck [00:14:30] But then a few days later, Daniel's stake president called him in and had a similar conversation, a little more polite, and took Daniel's recommend. So clearly this thing was organized from the top, which later I happened to run into my area president. I was with Gene England at some conference. And our area president was there, and Gene was saying, hey, let me introduce you. Because Gene liked this area president to Elbert Pecker on sunstone.

Elbert Peck [00:14:56] And Gene didn't know about our temple recommends being taken, but the area president clearly knew. And he said to me, as he shook my hand, he says, I know about everything that's been happening to you and Daniel. And he says, let me tell you, it came from far above me.

Elbert Peck [00:15:12] So my stake president lied through his teeth to me, which lost all credibility with me at that moment. Daniel's parents were abhorred that his recommend was taken and really hounded him to get it back. And so because of his dad and mom, Daniel worked very hard in meeting and talking to his stake president. And a year later had his temple recommend restored.

Elbert Peck [00:15:36] And maybe a little after that, Daniel left sunstone. But I didn't want to ever talk to that stake president again. So we just let it go. I didn't have a temple recommend. Daniel and I had decided to keep that secret. We didn't want to become martyrs for the cause, have it be publicized about.

Elbert Peck [00:15:58] But a few of our friends found out about it. And our good friend Pat Bagley, the cartoonist, told the reporter at the Tribune. And so she wrote a story about it, and it appeared in the press, much to our chagrin.

Elbert Peck [00:16:16] So our temple recommends were taken. And the way I sort of see the church doing these things is they. I think the brethren feel like they sent clear messages through Elder Oaks talk through the taking of the temple recommends.

Elbert Peck [00:16:32] And then there became Hinckley talking to you. That was private. But, yeah, I think they feel, and I've heard reports where they say the true saints. Only a whisper and only a hint. And they'll follow it. And the more or less faithful ones, if you even tell them explicitly, they won't follow it anyhow. Clearly we weren't following the whisperings or the gentle counsel of President Hinckley. And so I think they're getting more and more frustrated. At the same time, they're probably hearing more about sunstone. The number of our readers have increased to 10,000 by now. I think we have a lot more visibility. They probably have More people in Salt Lake talking and asking them about Sunstone.

BYU Faculty and the Sunstone Symposium

Elbert Peck [00:17:17] And also the number of BYU faculty involved in the symposium, which I think one symposium was like 60 or 70. In fact, BYU people were in a symposium program. I think that troubled them too. Like, we're paying these people, we're supporting these people. And so there started to be increased pressure not to let BYU people do it.

Elbert Peck [00:17:45] BYU was going through its 10 year review process and they wrote into it that we don't want people to speak at Sunstone or write for dialogue. But BYU faculty still would speak in large numbers. I think the brother and I were nervous about exposure. And then we published the George P. Lee letters, which I'm sure they didn't appreciate. And then we published the Paul Dunn issue, which they didn't appreciate. So leading up to 1993, there's probably on the Brethren's part an apprehension that we need to do something about Sunstone. Our more quiet, gentle attempts haven't been responded to. And this cancer is growing.

Elbert Peck [00:18:38] I'm sure that all happens. And then comes the Sunstone Symposium of 1993, which turned out to be, I was going to say a little wild, but turned out to have a lot of sessions in it that the Brethren were very upset with. It also happened to coincide with the Salt Lake Tribune deciding to hire a reporter who would have a beat in religion. They happened to hire Peggy Fletcher, and she filed a lot of stories in the newspaper about speeches at the symposium.

Elbert Peck [00:19:16] And as a good journalist, which she is, you cover the controversial stories, you don't cover the boring stories, you know. And so things that would have been contained within the symposium now had a broader announcement in that context.

Elbert Peck [00:19:32] So Dave Knowlton gets off the plane and comes back and gives his talk, which is about what's happening to the church in South America and the missionary program there. And you can almost take the statement on symposia that comes out a month later and identify which symposium session they're talking about point by point. What's his name? Who? The columnist for the Deseret Noose, who's now Jewish and lives in Texas. What's his name?

John Dehlin [00:20:11] Jolly.

Elbert Peck [00:20:12] Yeah. Clifton Jolly. Clifton Jolly proposes something for the symposium. Up until that point, Clifton Jolly had been a columnist for the Deseret Noose, you know, so we thought, great, we want a Desert News person in the magazine. As an aside, my philosophy in organizing symposiums had been to spend almost all my time recruiting moderates and faithful people, so called faithful, but moderate voices in the church and conservatives. If we could get Them and I didn't spend a lot of time recruiting the liberals because we got plenty of them coming in on their own, so we're happy. Clifton Jolly makes a proposal.

Elbert Peck [00:20:49] Daniel missed the alert signal when Clifton said to him, I don't. Just before his session, I don't want my session to be recorded, which we don't record, and disseminate them without their permission. So we didn't record it. Peggy didn't report it, but it was still reported back to the Brethren. And in that, Clifton, who knew he was going through a midlife crisis and in the process of leaving the church very angrily, and his whole thing is an attack on the Church and on the church culture. And in the talk, he says,

John Dehlin [00:21:22] well,

Elbert Peck [00:21:23] even something like Sunstone is just not good. After saying how the whole church was bad and we'd spend our time better if we just paired everyone up and went off in the cars and fucked each other like bunnies. And then he goes on and on, and then he crescendos to his concluding line, which is about the current president of the Church. He says, well, Ezra, you fucked us again in a sense of persecution, which all hares people about. But there's some, no doubt, someone in the audience who's taking notes because the Church used to send people to regularly go and report on what happens in every symposium, who sends it back to the Brethren. So you know the line in the statement symposium about speaking nil and using bad language about the Brethren and stuff? That's Clifton Jolly. And there were other sessions which, if I looked at, I could remember them all.

John Dehlin [00:22:07] But there was the women, one with Margaret Toscano and Lavina and Michael Quinn about was it if the women have had the priesthood since 1840?

Elbert Peck [00:22:17] That's right. Michael Quinn's statements, yes. In that session, particularly Michael Quinn's statements in that session come up. The Brethren had been sort of moving already in places, which is because Margaret Toscano had been called in earlier that year where they explored the possibility of having a disciplinary court about him, about her. And so that August, a couple of weeks, two weeks after the statement on symposia, the Thursday afternoon or Friday after the Brethren meet, in their meeting in the room, they issue their statement on symposia.

Elbert Peck [00:23:00] And it's curiously issued by the Council of the First Presidency and the quorum of the 12. Most statements come out from the First Presidency. My take on why that was issued by them is that at that time you had a weakened prophet pretty much out of it. And when that happens, the authority of the first presidency and the councilors diminish and you revert back more to collegial. And so they were speaking collectively as 15, because they really couldn't speak on a new topic as three.

Elbert Peck [00:23:36] I happened to be on a family beach trip in North Carolina when that statement is issued, and I get a phone call from Peggy wanting a quote for the newspaper about it. So that's sort of why I think the statement was issued. But all of those reports from the symposium that came at such a time, the Clifton Jolly, the David Knowlton. You're right. The Michael Quinn and the feminist quotes, and there were a couple others. They just said these people now have gone over the top.

John Dehlin [00:24:09] I'm sorry to interrupt, but I haven't known the history. And so I always just assumed you, as the editor, would have been reviewing all these things ahead of time and that you would have even been complicit in some of the anger and rage that was starting to emerge. I've gone back and listened to a lot of these presentations and I heard comments about. I was trying to use this title, but the editors told me I had to use this title. There were three other presentations we wanted to present that were actually more angry, but they were denied. And so this is the only one we got. I mean, so all I'm trying to say is, from what I understand, you were really trying to make sure that the tone was respectful or as respectful as possible. But that's just. I'm not trying to.

Elbert Peck [00:24:51] No, that's right. That's true. I mean, we didn't know what Dave Knowlton was going to say. Because I like Dave Knowlton. His anthropological look on Mormonism from South America, which we published several popular articles of his, which I really liked. And he basically came right off the plane and, oh, they threatened Dave Knowlton for harming. Doing damage to the missionaries, potential damage to the missionaries. That was the line from the statement on his.

Elbert Peck [00:25:16] So we didn't know what he was going to say, and we didn't really know exactly what Clifton Jolly was going to say. Which that's true. That's part of the dynamic of an open forum, is sometimes people say things that are irresponsible.

Elbert Peck [00:25:27] You try your hardest to get responsible speakers, responsible voices, and sometimes that trust is violated. But my personal view was my whole approach to dealing with this tension with the church is I sort of have griefs rather than grievances, and I get sad rather than mad. I want to have. And I like these people and I disagree with them. So I always want us to have to be more respectful. And so we do tone down. Well, the more boring sessions, we try to tone up their abstracts to get people to go to them, but the more inflammatory things, we try to tone down their titles.

Elbert Peck [00:25:59] And I think an open forum doesn't mean anyone can say anything. It means any topic is not off limits. You don't censor because of the topic, and you don't censor because of the person. And like Michael Quinn, because you excommunicated, you can't speak, but you do select based on quality of thought and thoughtfulness and respectful language because that respectful language builds dialogue. Disrespectful language, no matter how right you are, alienates people. And that's always been my inclination to try to get people to do that.

Editorial Decisions and the Right to Speak

Elbert Peck [00:26:39] I often wonder, did I not censor people more? And would that have served the cause in the longer run? And that's a complex process because Sunstone is this organic social organization where people feel a right to be involved and they're part of the community. And it's hard to tell a Lavina or a person, you can't speak at all. Sometimes you can say that topic. Really not that topic is wrong, but you're dealing with it needs to be a little more rigorous and a little more respectful and you can have that kind of conversation with them. But you don't want to be banning everyone just because you're killing the organization that way rather than killing it the other way.

Elbert Peck [00:27:25] But my own personal style would be much more tempered than some of the things that happened. And that's where we're facilitators of a group of people, and we're not the controllers of the group of people. You can only only have such an impact so far. And the Mormon side was getting more and more high pitched and people were complaining. Whereas early on, behavioral scientists like Barna Ritchie, who probably started the whole thing in Sunstone with his institutional individual church, he certainly introduced the phrase the institutional church, where people start talking about the institutional church and you could criticize how we act dysfunctionally as an institution without necessarily criticizing God and the divinity of the church.

Elbert Peck [00:28:13] And that kind of just grew as people were saying, this is it and this doesn't help, this doesn't help. And feminists really picked up on criticism of systematic institutional processes. And gays were starting to do the same thing. And then abuse victims were starting to do the same thing. And so you found an audience, you found more speakers who like to criticize the church organizationally.

Elbert Peck [00:28:38] And some of them were more amateurs than others. And you found an audience who was like, wanting to hear that conversation more. And so that's building up to the time. And because of the things like alternate voices, talk and other talks, you see in the symposium more and more people defending the rights of intellectuals and more and more of them defending the right to speak freely in the church. And that's kind of an outgrowth from the Camelot years, although, ironically, the people who fought the Camelot wars, who were a lot of them in the Smith Institute and other people, had pretty well made their peace with the church by the time the September 6 event came along, and they were not very sympathetic with what was happening there.

Elbert Peck [00:29:25] Many of them thought Sunstone had gone too far. It's hard for people to make judgments because they all make judgments on such limited knowledge. They hear about one session or they hear about two sessions even, and say, oh, they're over the top. If they're doing that sort of stuff, they shouldn't be allowed to do it and they shouldn't be happening. They're judging the whole from a very few.

Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.