[3] Unlike most earlier Mormon histories, this book focused on casting the church in a broader context, addressed controversial historical issues, and covered the events of the twentieth century.

With the First Presidency's approval, the department assigned the project to Allen, an Assistant Church Historian, and Leonard, a Senior Historical Associate.

[8] It was also one of the first institutionally-sponsored publications to deal frankly with many controversial issues such as the complexities of Nauvoo, and the church's political, economic, social and doctrinal developments.

[6] One review noted the authors' "remarkable blend of the scholarly approach and the religious story… They do not feel constrained to bear testimony, and yet they demonstrate empathy toward Mormonism that could only emanate from devoted members.

He condemned the portrayal of the Word of Wisdom health code and Joseph Smith's visions as being influenced by parallel movements in American history.

Benson warned that the terms "experimental systems," "communal life," "primitivists," and "prophet alleged," were offensive and did not promote faith in the church.

"[15] In a meeting with the First Presidency and Church Historian Leonard J. Arrington, Benson and Apostle Mark E. Petersen argued the book was faith-damaging and should have presented more prophetic evidence.

Arrington defended it but agreed to allow future department manuscripts to be reviewed by an Apostle before publication,[16] even though they already passed through a reading committee of accomplished historians.

[17] Kimball felt it was a great work and was unhappy with "unchristian" treatment of Allen by some religion faculty at Brigham Young University (BYU) who were upset by it.

Kimball thought Allen had performed honorably in this approved assignment, and "that Benson and Petersen did not have the authority or the right to interfere with the sale of the book.