What Good Have I Done?

Seeing Brigham Young Clearly: Character, Context, and Our Family Heritage

In a recent episode of Cwic Media’s Quick Show, host Greg Matson interviewed Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, a longtime Latter-day Saint scholar and apologist, about the life and character of Brigham Young. The conversation was framed by a growing trend: in recent years, criticism that once centered primarily on Joseph Smith has increasingly shifted toward Brigham Young. Online discussions often portray him as authoritarian, harsh, racially prejudiced, or morally suspect—especially in connection with polygamy, succession after Joseph’s martyrdom, and the priesthood restriction.

Matson and Peterson acknowledge that these issues are frequently discussed in modern spaces, sometimes without historical context. Their discussion attempts to step back from caricature and ask a more basic question: What kind of man was Brigham Young, really? Not simply in isolated quotations, but across the arc of his life, his leadership, and the testimony of those who knew him.

For our family, this conversation carries added meaning. Brigham Young is not just a historical figure; he is part of our heritage. Our Great Aunt Margaret Peirce was one of his wives, and the Gehmlichs are more directly related. When we talk about him with our teenagers and young adults, we are not defending a distant personality—we are reflecting on an ancestor. That makes it important to understand him in full: honestly, carefully, and with both historical awareness and spiritual discernment.

Below are five moments from the interview that illustrate the kind of character Peterson describes—qualities worth considering and, in many ways, worth emulating.

1. A Good and Devoted Man

Early in the interview, Dr. Peterson directly challenges the idea that Brigham Young was an “evil man” whom God simply used for practical purposes. Instead, he states plainly:

“This was a good man… he was a sincere man. A man who was devoted to doing the will of God.” (~3:19–4:05)

This description emphasizes intention and spiritual orientation. Whatever complexities surrounded the frontier era, Brigham’s guiding motive was to do what he believed the Lord required. For young people navigating their own decisions, that devotion to divine will is a defining anchor.

2. Loyalty in Life and in Death

Peterson repeatedly underscores what he sees as Brigham Young’s most defining trait—absolute loyalty to Joseph Smith and to the program Joseph established.

“[He was] absolutely loyal to Joseph in life and in death.” (~4:12–4:19)

This was not casual admiration. It was covenant loyalty. After Joseph’s martyrdom, Brigham’s primary concern was to carry forward what he believed Joseph had restored—temples, gathering, priesthood authority, and westward migration. This models faithfulness that endures beyond convenience or public approval.

3. Kindness and Gentleness Behind the Public Persona

The public sermons preserved in the Journal of Discourses can sometimes sound stern or forceful. But Peterson cites historian LaJean Carruth, who worked directly from original shorthand transcripts, and shares her conclusion:

“What I see is a kind man, a gentle man, a sincere man, not… the kind of monster that some people have conjured up.” (~4:36–4:50)

This reminds us that tone in public discourse does not always reflect private character. Those who knew him closely often described pastoral concern, personal attentiveness, and sincere faith. His friends called him Brother Brigham. For our family, this matters. It invites us to look beyond headlines and ask: What did those nearest to him see?

4. Defending Human Dignity

In discussing race and 19th-century attitudes, Peterson shares a story of Brigham correcting mistreatment of a Black man. Brigham’s rebuke centered on divine identity:

“He is a son of God… he should be treated with dignity.” (~23:41–23:48)

While acknowledging that Brigham shared some racial assumptions common to his era, this moment shows moral conviction in practice. He affirmed inherent worth and corrected dehumanizing behavior. This principle—defending dignity because of divine identity—is timeless.

5. Humility Under Correction

Perhaps the most striking character moment comes from an incident in which Joseph Smith rebuked Brigham Young. Observers wondered how a strong-willed leader would react. Instead of resisting, Brigham responded:

“Joseph, what would you have me do?” (~30:46–30:48)

That question reflects humility, teachability, and trust. It shows strength paired with submission to prophetic direction. This example teaches that confidence and humility are not opposites—they are companions in discipleship.

A Legacy Worth Understanding

Dr. Peterson closes the interview by reiterating that Brigham Young was, in his view, not merely a capable administrator but “a good man” chosen for a specific historical moment. Whether one focuses on his leadership during the westward migration, his organizational ability, or his pastoral side, the portrait that emerges from careful study is far more complex—and far more human—than modern caricatures suggest.

As a family, we do not need to deny history’s complexities. But neither should we accept oversimplified narratives. Brigham Young was part of the unfolding Restoration—and part of our own lineage. Understanding his character with context and balance allows us not only to defend him fairly but also to draw from the virtues that shaped his life: devotion, loyalty, courage, humility, and a belief in the divine worth of others.