R. Lanier Britsch: For those of us sitting here before you, this is a privilege and, I might even say, a great thrill. I’ve been interested in the missions of Asia for a number of years, and, of course, the brethren to my right and left share my interest. All of them have had a far more active interest in Asia in direct terms than I’ve been able to enjoy. As former mission presidents, these men have had some of the greatest experiences in terms of Church missionary history that we could have possibly brought together.

Dealing with a problem as expansive as the missions in Asia is something difficult to do in the short time allotted. Today we hope to gain greater insight into the diversity that exists in Asia and into some of the accomplishments that have been made in the Asian missions since their inception. Most of them are relatively new. Japan was organized in 1948. It was technically organized in 1901, then lasted until 1924; but they only had about 166 baptisms then, and they get about that in a month now; so things have changed greatly there. What we want to do is try to discuss some of the accomplishments and then, hopefully, tune ourselves to some of the problems that we feel need attention. First we will ask President Rose to introduce the general topic of the current situation. He will statistically introduce the Asian missions, then spend a few minutes discussing the Philippines Mission. He will be followed by Brother Heaton, Brother Komatsu, and Brother Palmer.

Paul S. Rose: I am happy to be here. I had the privilege of being on campus back in 1942 and ’43 as a member of the staff. It is like coming home. I perhaps ought to preface my remarks by reading what Elder Ezra Taft Benson said at general conference in 1970. “In the timetable of the Lord, I think the door is now open and this is the time for the work in Asia. Each visit there has been productive and inspirational. In each of the countries the tremendous expansion and growth is an inspiration.”

The work is indeed going forward in Asia. I have available in my assignment at Church headquarters the mission statistics of both the stakes and the full-time missions. I’ve prepared for the missionary committee a paper showing the rankings of all the missions of the Church according to baptisms per missionary. And it might be interesting that the four top ones are Mexico North, Mexico Northeast, North Central, Mexico Southwest, and Mexico. And some of you who have been on missions would be astounded to know that in the Mexico North Mission last year there were 67.4 baptisms per missionary. Of the twenty-eight top missions of the Church, as far as baptisms are concerned, fifteen of them came in countries strongly Catholic. There’s a change throughout the world in this regard.

In Asia we have eight missions: Japan, Japan Central, Japan West, Japan East, Hong Kong, Korea, the Philippines, and Southeast Asia. Last year [1970] 1,031 missionaries in Asia had 5,808 baptisms, or an average of 5.6 baptisms per missionary. In all of Europe, twenty-three missions, including England, had 3,312 missionaries and 7,667 baptisms, or 2.3 baptisms per missionary. This compares with 4.6 in Asia, and some countries in Asia are much higher than 4.6. I am happy to tell the Philippines missionaries that they had 10.4 there last year. You might be interested to know that in the Scandinavian and Germanic countries not counting England, there is 1.5 baptisms per missionary per year. The Scandinavian and Germanic countries, starting with Sweden, 1.2, and Switzerland, 1.0, Finland, 1.0, Austria, 0.9, Denmark, 0.9, Central Germany, 0.9, Central Germany North, 0.8, Norway, 0.7, baptisms per year.

The timetable of the Lord in Asia is certainly in evidence, as President Benson indicated. Keep in mind that 1,031 missionaries have had 5,808 baptisms. In the twenty-three missions of Europe, including England, all of continental Europe had only about 7,667 or about 1,800 more baptisms than did eight countries in Asia. This is a time of conversion, a time of reckoning in Asia.

I was very happy to have the opportunity of laboring in the Philippines Mission. The Philippines are listed as the only Christian nation, perhaps with a big question mark, in all of Asia. Exposed to Catholicism since the time of Magellan in about 1521, the Philippines are typical of all South American, Spanish American, Central American Catholic cultures where 10–15 percent of the people hold practically all the wealth, and 85 percent or 90 percent hold very little. A country of 37 million people, largely Malaysian in background, they got nothing from Spain in four hundred years except Catholicism and mixed-up languages, not even the Spanish language. We have almost no call for a Spanish Book of Mormon in the Philippines today, only two or three in three years. It is a polyglot country comprising about 80 different dialects.

In 1898 the Philippines became a protectorate of the U.S., which gave them a national language, English. America gave them schools, government, and most of all the Church. And certainly they are ready for the gospel. They are a people with large families, very family oriented, and very receptive to the gospel as families.

I might tell all of you also that I just got the January 1971 figures for Asia. There were 463 baptisms in Asia in January, and if you take twelve times that, it would be a little over 5,500. But I am sure it will increase. They had 19 in Hong Kong, 71 in Japan, 104 in Central Japan, 24 in East Japan, 37 in West Japan, 46 in Korea, 20 in Southeast Asia, and 142 in the Philippines. So the work goes on. There is no change, no letup. And I hope that all of you who are studying Asian culture will know that you are on the threshold of great things in the Asian areas of the Church.

H. Grant Heaton: I’m delighted to have the opportunity to represent the China area today. I was just thinking of what transpires in a twenty-two year period of time, Spence. Spencer Palmer and I were recruits at Fort Ord together trying to make it in the army twenty-two years ago, and a great deal has happened since then. I might mention, President Rose, that you’ve made a serious omission. There is also a Taiwan Mission, which was just organized in January. The Southern Far East Mission, over which I presided between 1955 and 1959, had a population of 1.3 billion people. Missionary work to the Chinese first opened in 1854. Hosea Stout and two companions were stoned out of Bangkok, couldn’t find any place to live in either Singapore or Hong Kong, went to Japan, and were so discouraged that they came back and reported to Brigham Young that there was no future for the Church in Asia. The next effort to open the missions in Asia was a trip made by President McKay and Brother Cannon in 1921 as part of a worldwide trip. President McKay dedicated China for the preaching of the gospel and returned and reported to the First Presidency that the conditions of that country were so chaotic that he didn’t recommend that any work be done until they had handled their own internal civil struggles.

In 1949 Matthew Cowley, Hilton Robertson, and Henry Aki were sent there to open the first mission. I was called as a young missionary at that time, and our destination was Canton, which is in the southern province of China. Before we could make it there, the Communists had bombed the bridge, and we weren’t permitted to land until we returned to Hong Kong. The mission headquarters was established in Hong Kong, and we were there for about fourteen months, during which time the refugees were pouring out of China into Hong Kong. When the Korean War broke out and it was thought that Hong Kong was threatened by the Communists, the mission, known as the Chinese Mission, was disbanded.

In July of 1955, President Joseph Fielding Smith was assigned to restructure the missions in Asia. The missions were divided into the Northern Far East and the Southern Far East missions. The Southern Far East Mission at that time included Guam, all of China, Formosa, the Philippine Islands, Singapore, India, and everything in between. In the process of the next five years, as I mentioned, we were effectively in control of communications with people in all these areas. I had a map on my wall in the office in Hong Kong onto which I would put a pin whenever we got a new baptismal record in, and on that baptismal record it would list the place of birth. We had members of the Church from every major city in China, from Tibet, from up in the Russian Steppes, and from Mongolia. We had them from northern parts of India, from Burma, and from Indonesia. We had people joining the Church in Hong Kong and Formosa, covering the entire area of Asia.

A unique feature of the Southern Far East Mission is that the success of the mission had practically nothing to do with the people involved, that is, the missionaries going there. There is a scripture in the Book of Isaiah that says in the last days Israel will be gathered. One of a city and two of a family will be brought to Zion. We saw that scripture literally fulfilled. Our missionaries went over there in 1965. We didn’t have anything printed in Chinese, no Articles of Faith, no song books, no Book of Mormon, no Bible, no tracts, nothing. I listened to elders try to give the lessons; I wrote the lessons in Chinese, and I still couldn’t understand them; and yet people started coming into the Church. By 1967 the Southern Far East Mission led all missions in the Church in convert baptisms per missionary. People literally came into the Church, having already been selected for that role. A refiner’s fire had already taken place. These people had been in turmoil for the last twenty years. They had lived in chaos; they had lived under threats of their lives; they had a chance to live under communism and refused that chance. These were people who first of all refused to abide a Communist existence. In my mind that choice can be considered a partial explanation for their coming into the Church. They moved into Hong Kong when the conditions were favorable for teaching the gospel to them. We didn’t have to worry about people being away from home at work so they couldn’t listen to the missionaries. They didn’t have any jobs. They had nothing to do. The missionaries would often spend all day with them. We established a missionary program that required that they complete twenty-three weeks of missionary studies. We had set programs and our people were very energetic in listening to the gospel and learning it. Most of those who continued more than four or five weeks of study joined the Church.

I had the chance to teach one class, and I didn’t intend to baptize any of them. It was a mistake, I thought, getting into that class. Among that group were eleven former generals of the Chinese army, two governors of provinces, and four university presidents. As far as I was concerned, they were not receptive to the gospel, but I had an obligation to complete the twenty-three-week program. When the twenty-three weeks were up, I gave my little farewell speech, and I could immediately tell that there was some hostility in the group. I couldn’t imagine what that hostility was. I’d been polite. I couldn’t remember saying anything wrong in Chinese, but you never can tell. And I worried about this, so afterward I said, “There appears to be some kind of problem here. Could you explain to me what the problem is?” A spokesman stood up and said, “You haven’t asked us to be baptized.”

Out of the forty-three people in that class, forty-two joined the Church. Five of them later filled full-time missions and three of them are now serving in branch and district presidencies over there.

These people had already made up their minds to do something different from what they were doing. They didn’t know anything about Mormonism to begin with, but Mormonism answered many of their problems. As a basic example: One time, we held a testimony meeting and took our little hike up into the mountains as is customary over there, and everyone all got up and expressed his delight in the gospel and that he liked this way of life. But one man in that group exemplified, I think, what they all felt and what I heard a hundred or more times. He said, “Years ago I was impressed that Christianity was the answer to my particular needs and the needs of China; so I joined a Christian church. And I made the sincere effort in my youth to learn about that church and to adhere to its doctrine. I would attend church and try to assimilate and put into practice everything they told me. Suddenly it dawned on me that the first time I went into that church they told me, ‘You’re a sinner. You must repent.’ And after I had gone to that church for eighteen months, the message continued the same—I was still a sinner. They hadn’t accomplished a thing in my life. I went to another church and to another and to another, and I found the same thing happening. No matter how much effort I put forth I was always declared a sinner. The Mormon Church is the first one that’s been able to convince me that I’m a sinner and then tell me how to overcome it.”

We had hundreds of people who came into the Church because they found in the gospel, not an intellectual answer to a question, but an answer to a deep-seated question that they had been bothered with for many years. Because of the lack of language, the lack of translated materials, and our inadequacy in teaching, we couldn’t implant a sophisticated knowledge of the gospel in those people. But they didn’t stop with what we had to teach them. I listened to sermons in testimony meetings and conversations by members of the Church that far exceeded our teaching of them. They taught back to us principles of the gospel that were instilled in them spiritually. I would like to conclude basically by saying that we have a unique situation, maybe not unique in Hong Kong, or in Taiwan—it might occur in all of Asia—but we do have a situation where the Lord has carried the burden. Young missionaries who neither knew the gospel nor could explain it in Chinese would go into houses and homes to teach the gospel, and the product was a deep-seated conversion on the part of educated, sophisticated people. That program is still going on. Because of it and because the Lord is actually engaged in the lives of individual people there as well as here, the future of missionary work in Asia is unlimited.

Adney Y. Komatsu: I am very grateful for the opportunity that has been given me to participate on this panel. I would like to recognize Duane Anderson, who offered the invocation today. I think I’m here because of him. That statement comes from the fact that I followed in his footsteps in Japan, where he created a great program of the Church. We now have some four or five chapels to be dedicated in that country, but he had started some of this work. I can’t say enough of him and the groundwork he laid.

The mission in Japan started in 1901. On February 14 the First Presidency, in announcing the creation of a Japanese Mission, appointed Elder Heber J. Grant, who was then an apostle, to be the mission president. President Grant and four companions landed in Yokohama in August of 1901; then, later, in September, on a little hill overlooking Yokohama City, they dedicated the land. And, as was stated by the moderator, the work of the mission because of native customs, language, ideology, because of persecutions, hostilities, and other things, met with little success. In 1923, when President Grant was then the Church President, he decided to close the mission. There were only about 150 converts during this twenty-three-year period. In 1936, however, the First Presidency again announced that the Japanese Mission would be reopened, but this time in Hawaii, where at that time over half of the population was Japanese. So they established the work among the Japanese in Hawaii, and, in the spring of 1937, President Hilton A. Robertson, who was the last mission president in Japan in 1924 when the mission was closed, was called again to become mission president. He opened the mission in Hawaii in 1937. The work progressed until 1947 when the Japanese Mission was closed in Hawaii, and the First Presidency announced again that they would reopen the mission in Japan. President Edward L. Clissold, who then was in the stake presidency, the mission presidency, and also the temple presidency, was called to preside over the Japanese Mission. He landed in Japan on March 6, 1948, to prepare the way for the missionaries. The first group of five missionaries included the two Price brothers, Harrison T. Price, who’s now in the American Consulate in Hong Kong, and Raymond Price, who’s with Pan American Air Lines in Honolulu; Wayne P. McDaniel of Alpine, Utah; Kooji Okauchi; and Paul C. Andrus, who later became mission president in Japan. In 1962 the first ground breaking for a chapel in Asia was conducted. This was the second ward in Tokyo, the former North Branch. In 1968 the Northern Far East Mission was replaced by the Japan Mission with headquarters in Tokyo, running from Tokyo north, and the Japan-Okinawa Mission to the south.

A year later, on March 15, 1970, the Tokyo Stake was organized, the first in Asia. On March 18, the Japan-Okinawa Mission was replaced by two more missions: The Japan Central Mission in the former Osaka area and the Japan West Mission was split again, and now we have what is called the Japan East Mission running north from Sendai to Hokkaido. At present there are four missions, one stake, and about fourteen thousand members in Japan. When I left there in July of 1968, there were about ten thousand members. Thus, in three years we have already had an increase of four thousand members. According to Brother Rose we have about 545 missionaries laboring in these four missions as of December 30, 1970. I’m sure that number has increased since then. In our time, it was one mission, and the most we had was 257 missionaries. That’s when we had to take in ten missionaries from Hong Kong. We usually averaged about 225 missionaries and 500 baptisms a year. Presently, with the four missions, as Brother Rose just announced, there were 1,944 convert baptisms in 1970. So you can see the increase, not only in missionary strength but also in the baptisms that are taking place now in the Orient.

Among the interesting highlights of those missions is the 1965 excursion to the Hawaiian Temple organized under the leadership of President Anderson for the Japanese saints. This has had a great impetus for the members to dedicate their lives to the goal of entering the House of the Lord. Since 1965 we’ve had excursions in 1967, 1969, and 1970, including one group which came to the Salt Lake Temple. We’re also planning one in the summer of 1971. At present over 800 people have entered the House of the Lord, and these are the 800 members that had taken out their endowments. We’ve actually had a total of 966 members go through the House of the Lord by way of the number of seats that were occupied on the plane that we chartered.

We also created in Japan the translation distribution center during the time I was there. I know that Bishop Victor Brown and Brother Thomas Fyans came over one time and discussed the possibility of creating a translation department right there in Tokyo, spearheading all of the work throughout the Orient. President Kan Watanabe, of the Japan West Mission, was appointed manager of this particular distribution center. Later, other centers were established in Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.

Then, of course, the all-important Expo ’70 was created. For six months we had a tremendous number of Japanese people visiting the Expo grounds, including the Mormon Pavilion. I understand from President Okazaki that over six million people went through the Church exhibit. From this Expo so many referrals have come that it’s hard to believe that missionaries don’t have to knock on doors anymore; they just get a slip of paper and keep on going. There are so many people on the list waiting to be taught the gospel that there is no time to go from house to house.

I have been through Japan since last July in my new assignment as Regional Representative of the Twelve for the Tokyo Stake, and I can testify to you that this stake is also growing. It’s hard to believe that the Yokohama Ward is talking about splitting. They have over two hundred members coming out to Church every Sunday and they’re worrying that the building is not able to hold all these members.

I’m sure that we have in Japan many things that are very harmonious to the gospel. The Japanese are very hard-working people, and they always work for what they get. I would say they compare to a swarm of ants crawling around that never stop. They’re always moving. They’re very industrious in all that they do. Also they are people who keep good genealogical records. This again is something that goes hand in hand with the gospel. In a Japanese family we have the patriarchal order of the father and the son carried on. I’m sure that the gospel has a great future in Japan and that the work being done now is not just because of what we have done, but the Lord had intended that His children in that area should receive the fulness and the blessings of the gospel that he has in store for those who will be faithful.

Spencer J. Palmer: At the outset I’d like to recognize at least one special guest in attendance here this afternoon. Brother Orton, would you please stand? Kenneth Orton of the Church College of Hawaii flew in this morning from Honolulu in order to participate in our East-West Week activities. He is president of the Language Training Mission of the Church for the Asian missions. We are honored to have him here.

As I have listened to these excellent reports by Presidents Rose, Heaton, and Komatsu, three vibrant pervasive themes are evident. First, in recent years the Church has begun to break from its Western orientation and is fulfilling its destiny as a truly worldwide Church. Second, war and revolution have somehow presented new opportunities for the Church in Asia and throughout the world. Third, sometimes despite the missionaries and their less than perfect preparation to cope with language, culture, and people, the work of the Lord has gone forth admirably. And that’s certainly the case also in Korea.

When Grant Heaton and I were there together as GIs in the early 1950s, Korea was dejected, in a terribly dislocated state socially, economically, politically, and spiritually as were Japan, the Philippines, and other countries of Asia. It may yet one day be said that Zion’s midwives in Asia were tribulation and pain. The first Mormon missionaries were combat GIs, who baptized the first Mormon converts, Korean friends with whom they associated or worked in the various military camps. Without any Korean Church scriptures or literature of any kind, only with love in their hearts and a sincere desire to help the people, they touched the hearts of many Koreans and caused them to respond to the messages of the gospel.

The first Korean convert to the LDS Church was a Ph.D. candidate at Cornell University, who shortly after his baptism gained his doctorate. This was Dr. Hojik Kim, who later returned to Korea where he occupied important political and social positions. He was the first anchor of the Mormon faith in Korea. Much of the early growth can be explained in terms of his influence. He gathered many young university students around him. Church membership in Korea has remained, by and large, an educationally-oriented community. I think it could be verified that of all the missions in Asia we have more college graduates who are active in the Mormon faith in Korea than in any other. This has been one of the distinguishing features of the Korean Mission from the beginning.

The first baptisms in Korea were in August of 1952 at Songdo near Pusan. The next major event was in 1954, when President Harold B. Lee under assignment from the First Presidency toured Korea and recommended that it be opened officially for missionary work. The next year President Joseph Fielding Smith dedicated Korea for the teaching of the gospel. He blessed that land that the power of evil might be dispelled and that the people might be able to rehabilitate themselves and their country.

The first Mormon missionaries came to Korea in April of 1956. These included Elders Richard Detton and Don G. Powell, among others. Gail E. Carr, who was one of the early missionaries, later became the first mission president. He was an indefatigable pioneer who laid a wonderful groundwork. He presided between 1962 and 1965. I succeeded him and worked between 1965 and 1968. Robert H. Slover is now the president and has been there since August 1968. Under President Slover’s able leadership the mission has gone forward with extraordinary success in baptisms, in branches, in buildings, and in many other ways.

Now let me say something about the distinctive features of the Korean Mission. We now have about a hundred missionaries there, triple the number when I started out as president. As I’ve said, it’s a young mission. It’s relatively small. They’re reaching 5,000 members in the mission comprised of four districts, two in the capital city and two elsewhere in the south. The mission is one of the more successful Church missions in many ways, and one of the more unusual. President Rose has already mentioned that Korea, next to the Philippines, has the largest convert per missionary rate in Asia, eight baptisms per missionary per year. I understand it is the only mission in the whole Church which still baptizes more men than women, and this has tremendous implications and prospects for the future. Male priesthood leadership is essential to the establishment of a stable Mormon society. Education and priesthood leadership are the fundamental pillars upon which we can expect to build a wonderful future for the Church in Korea. Many prophecies, many inspirational promises have been made with respect to the future of the Korean Mission.

An additional reason heretofore for the remarkable success of the mission has been the fact that the Koreans are generally very pro-American. Although this Church is trying anxiously to reach universal, worldwide fulfillment, still we are an American-based institution. Most of our missionaries in Korea are American citizens. Generally this has been a great advantage because of all the friends of the United States, the Koreans are the greatest friends the Americans have anywhere overseas. This helps the Church greatly. It has been prophesied that tens of thousands of Koreans will join The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints within our time. I’m sure we’ll have a stake in Seoul in the near future if the people continue to work for it.

I feel confident that the Mormon people are only now beginning to understand the opportunities and problems that this multicultural, multinational, multiracial kingdom of God can expect to meet in the years just ahead. By reaching out so far, we are bringing into the Church many new influences and insights which should help us to see more clearly the mind and will of the Lord in these latter days.

Britsch: We would like now to turn our attention in a slightly different direction. This is to have some interchange between the mission presidents concerning some of the problems and prospects they see in the Asian missions. One question I would like to ask Adney Komatsu just to get the discussion moving: why are we succeeding in Asia now when we didn’t years ago?

Komatsu: I think primarily, as Brother Palmer has said, World War II has had a lot to do with it, especially the occupation of Japan. In Japan where the American troops were stationed, they actually Americanized Japanese thinking to a great extent. Many individual servicemen brought new liberal thinking to the Japanese people. The people of Japan, as part of a defeated country, recognized the fact that they were facing a new way of life, especially in the democratic expression of things. This made current missionary work much easier than that of the missionaries of the early 1900s, who encountered a Japanese people who had their own way of life, their own customs, and who just wouldn’t listen to foreigners.

Britsch: Does anyone want to comment on that?

Rose: I think the same thing happened in the Philippines. The occupation there by foreign powers brought the people to their knees in humility. They were prepared by other nations, through their suffering and by the Church now being able to supply the things of the spirit and the soul to them. As bad as war is, they were prepared by it for the gospel.

Britsch: Do you have questions you would like to direct towards each other?

Palmer: I would like to direct a question particularly to President Komatsu. Some members of our Church in the United States feel a sense of tension between their loyalty to their own culture and their own history, their own unique Americanism, and their commitment to a universal worldwide Church. The problem is trying to feel as emotionally committed to a universal kingdom as to the Church in the Rocky Mountains or the United States. Now, I’ve often wondered about the extent to which this is a problem in reverse for Asian converts to the Church. What kind of Mormons do we produce in Japan or in Korea or among the Chinese? Do they not also experience a sense of tension between a commitment to their own history, culture, and people, on the one hand, and to the values and teachings of the universal Church? Do they face serious dilemmas in trying to distinguish between what may really be foreign American things and what is perennial and universal truth?

Komatsu: In Japan the majority of converts are younger people. Naturally, the older people have their own customs and habits. There’s a great problem, especially in the Word of Wisdom area. But those who do overcome this problem become strong members. As far as the traditions and customs that the Japanese have, I’m sure this is a problem. Yet I have heard President Hugh B. Brown come into Japan and preach that this is not the Church of the Japanese, the Germans, the Norwegians, or the Hawaiians, but this is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for all men. If we teach the gospel on that basis, despite the tensions which do exist, or however different cultural backgrounds may be, it can be assimilated so that Asians will become good members of the Church.

Palmer: As a Nisei mission president in Japan did you have problems of self-identification? That is, did you feel one day I’m a Japanese, the next day, I’m a citizen of the United States, and, the next day, I’m a Mormon? Did you sometimes feel like an American in disguise in Japan?

Komatsu: If I didn’t open my mouth in Japan, they could have taken me as a Japanese, but the moment I opened my mouth they recognized that the accent is a little different from what they normally speak. In Japanese we say Big Shibai. We put on a big show and try to overcome this, but there is a definite difference there. I did feel like what Brother Palmer is mentioning. Even though I didn’t have the command of the Japanese language, and yet looked Japanese, when I went to a store to get my hair cut or something, I couldn’t fully express myself. I’m sure that the man behind the counter was saying “What kind of a fancy Jack has come out from way down yonder to these Japanese Islands.” As I got better acquainted with the language and gained more confidence in speaking, of course, I used my head more and didn’t open my mouth as much.

Heaton: I think this problem had some particular evidence in Hong Kong, and it depended on how culturally stable the individuals were. You mentioned in Korea that you had largely men joining the Church. At our first district conference in 1956, we had 642 people. Eleven of them were women; all the rest of them were men and these men were adults. They were culturally stable, culturally secure, and they didn’t want to become Americans. They made it very clear that they weren’t buying our Americanism, but somehow or another we had to separate the gospel as a way of life and Americanism as a way of life. It became evident in 1957 when the news that Federal troops went into Arkansas and the first civil rights demonstration reached us. We had to move missionaries out of eight or nine of the villages. They said come back Sunday, but don’t be here during the week. The Chinese empathized with the problem of the black people in Little Rock, and a strong anti-American wave ensued. This is something that happened periodically all the time we were there. There would be a crisis in the United States that hit the headlines and the older people would tend to ally themselves in an anti-American position; and yet it didn’t jeopardize their testimonies or affect their Church participation, except that they really felt uncomfortable having Americans coming into their homes and villages while there was an anti-American sentiment there. But they said, “Don’t leave us alone.” Later on, as younger people came into the Church and as the number of people coming in were relatively unstable culturally, that is, they didn’t identify as much with their own native culture, then there tended to be a kind of attempt to Americanize themselves. I think a lot of the appeal of the gospel to the younger generation is its American flavor, but not so with the older people.

Rose: I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree with what has been said as it relates to the situation in the Philippines because the difficulty we found was with the activists, the young students, not with the older people. The older people had great love and great admiration for that which had been given to them as an American colony, I expect. And the trouble we had was with the young activist students at the University of Manila and other schools. But through it all, I think that the Filipino members have accepted the universality of the Church very well, and only when some missionary got out of order did we have trouble. When missionaries there were humble and carried their testimonies throughout their daily lives, we had no problems. I’m happy that more and more we have local missionaries to help with this situation. Generally, I do not feel this cleavage between “an American Church” and “a Philippine Church” is a serious problem. It is a worldwide Church for most of the people.

Britsch: I have a certain amount of experience with the Asian students as president of the Asian branch here on campus, and I’ve found on several occasions that there have been great cleavages between doing what the Church would suggest and doing what parents would suggest. For instance, I’ve tried to call or initiate calls to mission fields among several of the young men, and the usual answer or frequent answer is, “My parents don’t want me to go now. I think I’d better obey what my parents tell me.” Family trouble of that kind is rather common in interviewing for missions.

Heaton: I think the problem you are talking about is not unique to Asian people. We had a young man who wanted to join the Church and couldn’t, and he became the most active member in our Church before he was baptized. I think he’s here on the BYU campus. But you see, he persevered, he kept at it. He was convinced that as long as his desires were right, as long as he was active in the Church, he didn’t need baptism until he could work it out, and he worked it out. The problem isn’t unique to Asia. I worked as a seminary coordinator in the Northwest. We had the same problem—parents not wanting their kids to attend seminary, not wanting them to get up in the mornings, not wanting them to go on missions. And so it’s not an Asian problem. It happens to be a worldwide problem of different degrees of religious enthusiasm. Where you find the child is spiritually devoted and his parents are not, there is a conflict, whether he’s Asian, European, or whatever he is.

Komatsu: I want to say something about the young people in Japan. Because many of them come from a Buddhist background and their parents don’t understand Christian theology, their joining the Church may be compared to the situations in the States where one of our sons might say, “I’m going to be a Moslem,” or “I’m going to join some other foreign religion.” We would be all shook up. I’ve faced this in my own home because my parents are Buddhists. When I told my mother that I wanted to join the Mormon Church and be baptized, she cried out, “Oh, I’ve lost my son!” She was a widow, and she had promised her husband that she would raise their children honorably in the Buddhist religion. But in the Buddhist religion we never went to church. And I didn’t know anything about Buddhism except that my parents were followers of its teachings. This is the same thing in Japan to a great extent. So I’ve counseled the young people to follow the same psychology I used on my mother on their parents by saying, “Mother, would you like to have a bad Buddhist or a good Mormon? As long as I go to the Mormon Church and I become a good person, one that you can be proud of, one without any sins or problems with the world, and avoid being a boy of the streets, wouldn’t you be happy to have me as your son?” I said, “I make you a promise, the moment one of your girl friends in your church comes back and says that your number two son is a terrible son, all you have to say is to quit the Mormon Church and I’ll obey. But as long as you can’t make that comment I will go.” She said, “It’s a deal.” So I joined the Church. And I think many young children back in Japan are finding this because they come from a Buddhist background in which the parents are not acquainted with Christianity.

Britsch: This is interesting and insightful. I would like to ask a question of all four of you, and you can take it in any order starting with Dr. Palmer. Spencer, what in your opinion could we be doing to move the work along a little faster and make it more successful? Then we’ll have Brother Komatsu and the other two brethren respond to the same question.

Palmer: When I went to Korea in 1965, I soon realized that a pressing need of all the Asian missions, in addition to the obvious need of leadership development, was to make the Church better known. I studied and prayed often on what could be done to enable the Church to exercise a significant impact within the native society rather than existing as a separated, sometimes quaint, hothouse entity, a collecting place for social refugees. I wanted to know what could be done to establish an institutional base within the native society. I decided as a beginning that the mission should become concerned with the native flow of life, the beliefs of the people, holidays, customs, and traditions. We all resolved to make Mormons and Mormonism better known in the Korean society at large. We made an energetic effort, and I hope that it was partly successful, to meet some of the leaders of the people, particularly the parents and the fathers of the families, but also the mayors of the cities, and other local officials. I visited with educators and presidents of universities where our Mormon converts were enrolled. We translated the Spoken Word of the Tabernacle Choir broadcast into the Korean language and arranged to have the entire choir program broadcast over nationwide radio, no doubt the only place where this program has been made available in Asia in the language of the people. This is but one example of ways in which the missionaries made a wonderful effort to introduce the gospel to the public at large. We also placed maximum emphasis on using native members in missionary work and in leading the branches and auxiliaries. The foreign elders were there to help and to bless, but we made it clear that it was the Korean Mission of the Lord’s Church.

Komatsu: I think one of the ways that the work can move faster in Japan is through closer communication between the headquarters of the Church in Salt Lake City and the mission field. I’m very happy that I am now the regional representative for the Tokyo Stake so that I can carry back into that stake information, methods of operation, the expertise of the different Church committees, the know how. In the mission field we don’t get this. We’re pretty much on our own. And sometimes I think as the missions spread, as they grow in Japan in the four areas, if a little closer coordination can be given to these men, the kind of help that the stakes receive, I’m sure the work will go that much faster, the members will become stronger, and their faith will increase.

Rose: I think that what Brother Palmer mentioned is extremely important, that we’re at an age now where the work in Asia is not really a pioneering work. If somehow we could create an environment where the people are aware of the fact that they are involved, that the native members are contributing to the development of the Church, it would greatly strengthen the work.

Heaton: Can we criticize the BYU here? Is that permissible? Well, maybe the establishment of a school, a university, in Asia, where we could send students from the United States to get an education in Asia would be the most important thing that could be done. Asia has a great deal to contribute to the world, not just in religious thought, but in culture, particularly the Chinese. They have passed through five hundred years of what we’re just beginning to face in population, ecology, and many of these things. They have succeeded in many regards in solving some of these problems. Now the image, especially among LDS parents, is that if you’re converted to the Church you’ve got to go to BYU in order to become educated, and that’s not the case. I think the Church could be well served with an educational institution in Asia which would contribute to the understanding and the knowledge and the development of a worldwide Mormon culture.

Rose: I think, like you, that if we had Church schools in Asia it would greatly help the work. If schools are good in Mexico, they’re good in other areas. I feel very strongly about this. I’ve talked to Brother Neal Maxwell and others about this, and I think they’re aware of the problem.

Britsch: There were people waving their hands a few minutes ago who had questions from the floor.

Question from the Audience: In Singapore it’s my understanding that last year the LDS missionaries were not able to renew their visas. Is this true?

Rose: I guess I have talked with President Carlos Smith the most recently. We had about twelve of those missionaries come into our mission field because of not being able to renew visas. But they’re doing fine. They had 50 baptisms in Singapore in January; and, while they’re having difficulty, President Smith is the most patient man in the world, and the most devoted. I’m sure it’s going to be worked out. The government there has been adverse. President Smith has made the comment that we made a fine conversion of a very outstanding figure in Singapore. There’s a lot of jealousy over this, and I think this is one of the things that prompted them to put the lid on. We have had some religious riots between groups over there. But I think the great blessing that President Benson gave when he dedicated that land is being realized. They’re more stable now than they have been for some time. It’s going to improve.

Heaton: There’s a very fruitful field in Communist China. It depends on whether the Communists will allow freedom of expression and freedom of travel. It would be a waste of time to send missionaries under the present restrictions. They just opened travel into China as of this last week, and that’s very restrictive. I was invited to go to Peking in 1957 as a representative of the world council of churches representing Mormonism, and the Communists invited me there, but when the American State Department found out about it, I was on the hot seat for two weeks just because I’d entertained an invitation. I didn’t attempt to go.

Question and Comment from the Audience: There are serious problems involving the Asian converts who come to the U.S. I don’t know about the other missions, but of fourteen local, native missionaries that served full-time missions in Hong Kong from 1956–60, eleven of them now reside in the United States or Canada. So they’re no longer much help over there. It tends to be a sort of graduating process. They serve as a full-time missionary, get a scholarship to the Church College of Hawaii or to BYU and come to the United States and live. There needs to be some way of keeping that talent in Asia to act as a leaven. I know in the branch here on campus, I would dare say 50 percent at least intend to stay here in the United States, yet some of them didn’t intend to stay when they first came.

Is there something returned missionaries and others can do to help the work in Asia?

Palmer: Two things occur to me. One is to show greater brotherhood and fraternity toward these people you talked about who came here initially with the idea that they were going to return. In most cases they really had some aspiration that they were going to gain wonderful spiritual experiences and ecclesiastical training that they would take back home, but for one reason or another many of them become alienated from the Church here. We could probably reverse this tendency and get some of our people back if they could remain stable spiritually and feel as much a sense of belonging here as they felt among the relatively small, intimate groups of first-generation fellow members in their homelands. We simply fail to do as much here in the way of fellowship and brotherhood as we should. Also, we need to do more to help the programs of the Church financially. Many student groups raise money for various humanitarian projects, many of them of very short-lived satisfaction or benefit, but I feel we don’t begin to do enough in the way of sharing our resources to further the work of the Church among the less affluent membership in some of the foreign missions, including those in Asia. I can testify from experience that relatively small amounts of money given by individuals in support of local missionaries or for other equally worthy projects often have incalculable and, I am sure, everlasting returns.

Komatsu: I would say this to the returned missionaries. Continue the study you’re involved in here at school but on a broader scope. Ten years ago, as a member of the Church, I was like a fish out of water whenever I went to the mainland of the United States, like what is this man from Japan doing in this part of the country? How come you can speak English so well and you look Japanese? Study the cultures of the Asian area, instead of just studying Japan—study China, Korea, India, and all the different nations. And as Brother Palmer has mentioned, you can more readily fellowship these Asian students as well as people in those Asian countries. It’s easier to love people when you get to understand them. It’s harder when you don’t know who they are and why they react the way they do. The most effective members and missionaries are those who understand Asian culture.

Britsch: I guess that was a paid commercial for the Asian Studies Program. I think this discussion has been most enlightening. This has been one of the most outstanding panels of this kind ever held and with you I would like to express our deep appreciation.

Paul S. Rose

BYU Studies Publications