Dialogue: Thirty-Six Years in the Kingdom published many groundbreaking essays dealing with Mormon history and theology. Many of its most controversial articles have, in time, proved beneficial to the Church. Why then, is Dialogue often defined in words ranging from “dissident,” to “anti-Mormon”? If these definitions are legitimate, has Dialogue shifted from its original vision? Or is it too often misunderstood? Over the past eight years I have interviewed all former Dialogue editors as part of my research for a four-part history of the journal. Using examples from various articles and the controversies they’ve addressed (and, at times, caused!), I will share my conclusions. Has Dialogue helped or hurt the Kingdom?