Transcription
[Music]
Hi, hi. I'm Rebecca Griffin. The topic of this video is something that's been on my mind for a while. Like many of you, I'm a parent. And if you're the kind of person that watches my videos, chances are you're more involved in your kids' education than most parents choose to be, and also more concerned about the way the world is going. People figured out a long time ago that the way to shape the future of a society is to influence the rising generation. The UN promotes lots of policy along these lines and has meetings where they discuss ways to minimize the influence that parents have on their children. They want to have every kid start preschool at age three and have social, emotional, and sexual education at school. They even want to pay parents if their kids finish a government school program. Public Schools were started in the 1800s to control and influence the working class. At this point, it is normal for kids to be shaped and influenced by outside sources while their parents celebrate sending them off to school at younger and younger ages and stage silly photos to celebrate. We didn't participate in this system, and probably lots of you don't either, but I think sometimes we don't recognize some of these same problems in an organization that we trust because it is supposed to be the Church of Christ. I've noticed some things that concern me, so I made this video. Thanks for watching.
I think it's common to assume that we don't need to be overly concerned or cautious about what our youth are being taught at church-sponsored activities or classes. But as I see the church aligning more and more with globalist agendas, I have wondered how true that is. Over the last few years, I have grown increasingly concerned over changing policies in the church that seem to be targeting the youth. In this video, I would like to discuss some of the problems I am seeing, why these things might be happening, and what I think a better approach would be. Some of these things might not bother you, and that's okay. Personally, I like to be aware of the way my kids and myself are being influenced and to figure out the motivations behind it. I want to know the effects and decide for myself whether I am okay with it or not. In the past, I'm sure I have done plenty of my own influencing and controlling of my kids, but increasingly I want to teach them to recognize manipulation and to learn to think for themselves. I want them to truly have agency, to see things how they are, and to decide for themselves if they want to follow the Lord or not. So I hope you will watch this with an open mind and try to get past feelings of dissonance and defensiveness. My hope is that people are armed with information and that they will then counsel with the Lord on how to best help their children be converted to Him.
The first concern I have is the separation of children from parents. I think most people don't even give this a second thought, but I didn't even like the idea of my oldest going to Nursery without me, so I volunteered to be the nursery leader and was glad that she wasn't one of the traumatized toddlers left crying while parents went to Sunday school. By the time Primary came around, I had convinced myself that my kids were going to be in good hands being taught the gospel by other members of the church who believe like I did, and most of the time I was serving in Primary anyway. My first real concern happened when when my oldest daughter turned 12. The executive secretary called to set up an appointment for her with the bishop. It's kind of funny—all through Primary and even in Boy Scouts they make this big deal about two-deep leadership, but somehow it's okay for an 11- or 12-year-old girl to meet alone with a man. Now we were very active, believing members, but this just wasn't okay with me or my husband. I told them that I would be coming with her. They reluctantly agreed. So I'm just quietly sitting in the back of the Bishop's office while he talks to my little girl, and then I hear him say that while her mother came with her for this first interview, that that won't be happening again. And I thought in my head, "Wab bet." Six months later, she had her second interview, this time with the second counselor. Now this guy had a background in the sexual crimes division of law enforcement. He did his interviews in a classroom with the door wide open and invited parents to come in. It was great. I appreciated that guy a lot, but I was still a little worried about how I was going to deal with her next interview with the bishop. But something happened right before she turned 13: the church changed the policy to allowing parents to come to interviews. I know why they did it, and I'm grateful to those both in and out of the church who were fighting for that. However, even with the policy change, parental attendance isn't exactly encouraged, and I don't know very many who are going with their kids. Parents just don't seem to be worried, and honestly, I hope nothing happens that makes them regret that. Why do we need these interviews at all? To me, it feels similar to the school system or government establishing a hierarchy of authorized leaders that children are expected to follow.
In addition to personal interviews, these same leaders are now in charge of the Young Men's program, further immeshing them into the lives of the youth. There is also a growing trend in the church to have youth meetings where parents and even local leaders are uninvited: firesides, Temple sessions, and especially FSY, the church-run youth camp where parents are not even allowed to drop off essential medication or call except during a short window each evening. A friend in another country shared with me that the youth in her stake were sent on a plane across the country with one local leader who could only bring them as far as the airport where they were bused to the FSY location while the leader flew back home. Unfortunately, someone forgot about this group, and no one was there to meet them at the airport. Obviously, that was a mistake, but I wonder how often things like that happen. Maybe I am an overprotective parent, but I would not feel comfortable sending my 14- to 17-year-olds to a camp like this, especially when I hear or see evidence of the woke agenda being pushed on our youth and young adults.
At the inauguration of the new president of BYU, Elder Rasband reminds us that BYU is an institute founded, supported, and guided by the LDS church, with a board led by the First Presidency. He says that this prophetic charge and governance structure creates a tremendous advantage for BYU and the spiritual development of the students and compels them to do things at this University that could be done nowhere else in the world. Does this include things like classes on Taylor Swift, handing out pride stickers, and pushing the DEI agenda? If you weren't aware, the diversity, equity, and inclusion agenda has been expanded to include belonging, and we can now see this term commonly used in the church. But we shouldn't be surprised, because apparently belonging is a new doctrine taught in conference by the Quorum of the Twelve, although I haven't been able to find it in the scriptures personally. It is a little concerning to me that political buzzwords are being repurposed as doctrines. The FSY website also lists belonging as one of their goals. Even the jewelry given out to Primary Children and Youth is now called "Emblems of Belonging." This same agenda was advanced at a devotional for YSA held at the U of U Institute of Religion. The speaker was Abu Patel, founder and president of Interfaith America, who tells the young adults to honor the holiness of diversity. Patel's bio describes him as believing that religious diversity is an essential and inspiring dimension of American democracy. He was introduced by the church Commissioner of Education, Clark Gilbert, of the Seventy, who describes him as a leader and good friend. He also calls his organization a gift to the country. I'm not sure why this man was asked to speak to the Institute, but perhaps it tells us something about the views of the man who is in charge of all the seminaries and institutes of the church. Interestingly, Gilbert is also the CEO of Deseret Digital Media, part of the church's for-profit corporations and holder of assets like ksl.com and utah.com. Sounds like a busy guy. I bet he is good friends with Aaron Sherinian, who has been working as the senior vice president of the Deseret Management Corp for the last two years and was just named as the new head of public relations for the church. Sherinian also has ties to the World Economic Forum and used to work for the UN.
Sometimes when I consider the church and the growing connection to globalist agendas, I am unsure if this is the goal or a solution to a growing problem. Maybe it is both the chicken and the egg. Let me explain what I mean. In the past, the majority of children born into LDS families would remain LDS throughout their life. However, things are changing. In her book, *The New Mormons: How Millennials Are Changing the LDS Church*, church researcher Janna Rae estimates that only 45% of young people are staying in the church today, as opposed to 80% in the past. Church membership growth overall has been falling for years, dipping down almost to zero—the lowest rates have been since the fallout over the announcement of the polygamy doctrine in the 1850s. The church publishes data on current membership numbers each year and also the new members, but interestingly not the losses. About one-third of the growth is due to new members of record being born, with the other two-thirds due to convert baptisms. But as anyone who has been on a mission to Latin America is aware, the retention rates of new converts is low. It is estimated that less than 30% of members worldwide are active. For example, census reports in Mexico in 2010 show that around 315,000 people declared themselves to be LDS, while the church had almost four times that number on their records. That means that in 2010, 6% of worldwide church membership were Mexicans who didn't even consider themselves members. This trend is similar throughout the world. So while membership records show certain levels of growth, is it really accurate if most members are not actively participating or attending? The truth is the core of church growth has come primarily from the children being born into strong, active families, and that growth is being threatened.
Why is this such a concern? Recently, the LDS church made a large purchase, including the Kirtland Temple, from the Community of Christ. This happened mainly because the Community of Christ was not financially solvent due to tithing contributions diminishing. More than half of contributions in 2023 were made by members over 75 years old. Active contributing members are dying off and are not being replaced by the young generation. This affects finances certainly, but also the ability to staff wards and stakes. I can see why LDS church leaders would see the need for changes to try to reverse the same trend. Now I'm not saying that the intentions for wanting to keep young people in the church is entirely based on finances and callings, but the church is a corporation. It is dependent on ongoing attendance and donations to keep it afloat, even if it does have a hefty reserve built up. I think it would be naive to think that those who run the church don't consider these concerns and make decisions based on them. The church corporation is very good at collecting data. They have reports, records, and charts for everything. They send out surveys and hire public relations firms. They are very aware of the trends and the reasons behind them. These particular charts come from a leaked report entitled "LDS Personal Faith Crisis," compiled in 2011 and presented to various church leaders in 2012 and finally to President Uchtdorf in 2013. This is how the report defines a faith crisis: "A state of intense emotional and spiritual distress resulting from the discovery of church history facts that do not align with the traditional LDS narrative. This results in members losing faith in some or all foundational truth claims of the LDS church and in the church itself." The biggest problem I see with this is that they are defining faith as belief in the church, not in Jesus Christ. They further define a "True Believer" as one who believes the General Authorities speak for God and that the LDS church is the one and only true church. The report blames the epidemic of faith crisis on an abundance of uncorrelated information available to members online. Interestingly, the report also breaks down the survey results into highest calling ever held and found that 21% of those in faith crisis had been in a bishopric or higher and warns that if bold measures aren't taken, the future success of the church is at risk. Two of the main problems members in faith crisis had were the dishonesty of the church and also the dissonance caused by dichotomous statements like "It is either all true or all false." When members were seen problems, the report recommended teaching church history openly in a faith-based context and publishing papers on difficult issues. A few months later, President Uchtdorf gave his talk, "Come, Join with Us," where he acknowledged that past leaders had made mistakes and said that it was inappropriate to assume that those with doubts had been offended or were lazy or sinful. The first Gospel Topics Essays were also published at this time.
When you understand how the church collects data and uses it, some recent policy changes make sense in the context of the losing of the millennial generation. For example, look at the change to 2-hour church and the combining of priesthood quorums. More people are likely to attend church if it is shorter. In addition, fewer resources are needed; more words can fit in a building, and fewer callings are needed to staff one priesthood quorum instead of two. This also groups the younger men in with the more experienced and loyal members. Eliminating the Young Men's presidency has a similar effect. Changes in the temple endowment diminish the glaring discrepancies between men and women in the church and also reduce the time commitment. Maybe I am just an overprotective parent, and no one should be worried about how our kids are being influenced at church. I mean, surely most LDS parents want their kids to stay in the church. Wouldn't they support the church in any measures they take to achieve that goal? I guess maybe it depends on what sort of tactics they use. I am concerned when I see kids being manipulated, shamed, or coerced. I worry when they are told to do things out of fear or that they don't have a choice in the church. The influence of manipulation starts pretty young, beginning in Nursery. Our kids are taught songs that emphasize the focus of the church: "I am a child of God," "I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ," "I love to see the temple," and of course, "Follow the prophet." Our kids are taught exactly what their testimony is before they are old enough to have one, with testimony gloves. Again, their core beliefs include the one true church and following the prophet. This panel with President Nelson, General Primary President Jones, and a group of children shows pretty clearly what our children are being taught and what they believe.
"Thought why is it important? It's important that we have a prophet because if we didn't have a prophet then we wouldn't know what to do, what not to do, and what we could do to do honor. That is true. That is so true. So are you telling us that it's important to follow the prophet? Yes. Why? Um, it's important to follow the prophet because if we didn't follow the prophet we could start to like stray away from the church and not do as many things to like read the scriptures every night. If we stopped reading the scriptures we would stop really thinking about the church and any other time left the church and it would just become kind of like annoying to go to the church and you and you might eventually even stop that. Wouldn't be good, would it? Any other thoughts? Why do you follow the prophet? Why is that important? Yes, Nathan. Um, so it's important because you can follow his him and if you follow him you can like live in the celestial kingdom and you'll be happy with your families and you'll be super happy and you can live forever. President Nelson, would you ever lead anyone astray? Oh no, that's not what prophets do, is it? Some of them have said if the president of the church should ever lead people astray, God would take him away. So I like to stay here and I won't lead you astray. Do you know what the word prophet means? He speaks for God and so God won't lead you astray and the prophet will not lead you astray." This made me feel really uncomfortable, and I'm sad how the focus of the children was on following the prophet and staying in the church with absolutely no mention of following Jesus or becoming like Him.
Probably we all remember this coloring page from the *Friend* magazine, pushing certain globalist agendas on impressionable children. And is it just me, or do the new Children and Youth guidebooks seem to have the same color and style as the Sustainable Development Goals propaganda? Now I'm going to show you some clips that were more disturbing to me. This one is David Bednar talking to some youth. When one boy asks a question, he brings him up for an uncomfortable demonstration. "All right, now, and so you have another day where you don't read, you don't pray, and you're rotten to your brothers and sisters. Now we're going this way. Okay, okay, okay. And now all of a sudden you haven't done those things for a week. Are you liking this? Do you like going in this direction? Is it going to help you to remember to do these things? Um, no. Yeah, think. Now think about the question. Are you liking going in this direction? No. So what is it that keeps you going in the other direction? Um, when you read, when you pray. See, because you're going this direction now because you're not doing that stuff. You haven't done anything horrible, terrible, really wrong. You just haven't done the right things that keep you way back over there. Do you like being this close to the line? Do you know what happens when you get this close to the line? No. A sin. That's right here. Doesn't look that bad, does it? Right where my shoe is. A, that's not that big of a deal. Okay, take just a little step over here. One more step. Just a little more. Okay, now you try to get back over on the other side. Can you get over there? No. For an old man, I'm pretty strong, huh?" I felt horrible for that boy as he fights back tears and clearly felt humiliated and trapped. I wonder if his mother was okay with this or if she just didn't think she could do anything.
When this was an Apostle on a live broadcast in 2016, David Bednar gave another talk where he tells members that they no longer have agency after they are baptized. Take a look at these clips. This talk was given in Argentina, so the translation has been redacted. "Have you heard someone say, 'A member of the church who has entered into the baptismal covenant, I have my agency, I can do what I want'? You ever heard that? Yeah. You know what the answer is? No. You can't. You don't understand agency. You don't have agency to do whatever you want. So, for example, if you and I don't pay our tithing, do we have the option not to pay our tithing? Nope. No. It's breaking a covenant. It is not the exercise of agency anymore. Wasn't a war fought so that we could have agency? Do we really lose that when we get baptized at age 8?" Here is the last clip. "Some night you don't want to go to sleep, read the scriptures and learn about what happens to covenant breakers. I guarantee you you will not go to sleep. Now I don't want to scare you." It sure sounded to me like he wanted to scare them. Is this really how we should be getting our youth to pay tithing or to keep the commandments?
In a similar vein, Dale Renlund gave a talk at BYU this year where he actually had his wife put restraints on three students to demonstrate how covenants are binding. This talk talks about three levels of covenants and how you are more tightly bound to God with each level: first baptism, then the endowment, then temple marriage. Do we really want to teach our youth that they are in bondage to God? Isn't that what Satan does? Last week I was attending my daughter's graduation from Snow College. This was my view from the bleachers. A lot of people are asking why they would build a temple in Ephraim when there is a temple 7 miles away in Manti that isn't busy and needs to bring workers in from the outside community to keep it staffed. BYU Provo and BYU Hawaii have long had adjacent temples, and in 2008 the Rexburg Temple was built adjoining the BYU campus. Now UVU in Orem has a temple within.
Walking distance. This makes me wonder if this is a concerted effort to involve the younger generation in temple worship and increase their feeling of bondage as they enter more covenants. Even the requirements for having a temple recommend could be seen as coercive, tying exaltation and eternal families to pain, tithing, and following leaders.
Kevin Pearson of the 70 gave a talk where he tells young men that they should not pray about whether or not to serve a mission. “Do not pray about whether or not you should go on a mission,” he said. “Dumb question when it's a commandment from a living prophet and it's your priest of Duty. That's a given. Now you can pray to have the courage; you can pray to have a confirmation of that in your life. But asking Heavenly Father, who’s commanded his Prophet to command you to go, whether or not you should go seems like not a very good thing to be asking God, right.” He isn’t alone in this instruction. On the Church website, under questions about serving a mission, they have a similar quote from Richard Scott: “Is it really true that every single young man should go on a mission? Is this a commandment from God? Personally, I would never want a young man to go on a mission without having an experience where he was directed by God to go.” It’s no surprise that so many missionaries come home early or leave the Church after they get home.
In 2022, Brad Wilcox gave a talk which gained some notoriety for some insensitive, racist remarks. When he apologized, he mentioned that he had given the same talk many times. Of course, that part of the talk was awful, but I am just as concerned about this part: “See, you want to walk away from the Church, say goodbye to your whole concept of God. You walk away from the Church, say goodbye to the whole piano; have fun playing Chopsticks the rest of your life. Oh, you want to leave the Church? Well, say goodbye to the knot in the end of your balloon; say goodbye to the gift of the Holy Ghost. Oh, you’ll feel the Spirit now and then. You want to walk away from the Church? Walk away from anything that lets anything in your life count or matter beyond this life. You want to walk away from the Church? Well, say goodbye to living prophets; say goodbye—just you have to see Christ through a pretty small window when you’re stuck with just the Bible—so say goodbye to the larger window that we have because of living prophets; say goodbye to President Nelson—I don’t want—I—I want him to live to be 120; I don’t want to say goodbye to him; say goodbye to Elder Udorf; no, yes, you must say goodbye. Walk away from the Church, say goodbye to Elder Holland; say goodbye to Elder Christofferson; say goodbye to Elder Anderson; say goodbye to all of these leaders that I just don’t want to live my life without. I just don’t know what my life would be without their examples, without their teachings, without their testimonies, especially when times get hard. I hope you realize that if you walk away from this religion, you lose everything. You lose everything—everything that truly matters most.”
I just don’t like the way these leaders are talking to the youth of the Church. It doesn’t feel like persuasion, gentleness, meekness, or love unfeigned. It doesn’t feel like they are using kindness or pure knowledge which enlarges the soul without hypocrisy or guile. It feels more like unrighteous dominion.
These public and recorded talks bother me so much that it made me wonder about what is being taught less publicly at FSY and Seminary, for example. As I talked to people, read websites, and went through curriculum, I started to see some patterns which made a lot of sense in view of the problems the Church is facing. FSY is a 5-day youth camp run by the Church and staffed mainly by paid young single adults. As I said, no parents or local leaders are allowed to attend. On their website, it poses the question: “Why should I send my youth to FSY?” The answer comes in the form of a promotional video. Here is a clip from it: [Music] [Music]. That sure looks like they are having a lot of fun. Although one youth that attended reported to me that it mostly consisted of sitting through hours of lectures each day, some that were better than others. The FSY website acknowledges that one of the main purposes is to have the youth spend time with other Church members to feel that sense of belonging. It also claims to create an environment that helps them feel the joy of the Gospel. I’m not sure what they mean by that exactly, but based on the video, it might mean having lots of fun. They are also meant to learn to hear Him. Now I consider learning to receive revelation and connecting to the Spirit one of the most important things we can do in life, but I wonder how they are teaching this during a 5-day youth camp.
I know a CES teacher who is required to teach at FSY as part of his job. He told me that he was required to teach two repeating classes. The first had to be on the topic of following the prophet, and then he could choose his other topic. When we also have President Nelson saying, “We hear Him as we heed the words of prophets, seers, and revelators,” I guess maybe we can guess how they are teaching our youth to hear Him at FSY.
I found a post on LDS Reddit that highlights some of my concerns about youth programs like FSY, TRE camps, etc. This girl reports that FSY was the most spiritual experience she had ever had, on par with the scriptures and her patriarchal blessing. She claims the most rebellious kids that I know were crying out of pure testimony by Friday night. One of the comments matched my own thoughts: “These aren’t spiritual experiences as much as emotional experiences that don’t affect any lasting spiritual change.” However, as this comment pointed out, perhaps it does have other types of results. The Church is putting money into FSY because, when compared internationally to all the programs the Church runs, it was most correlated with higher Seminary attendance, higher missionary service, and temple marriage.
Next, let’s talk about Seminary. That is a lot of hours the youth are being influenced without parents there personally. I had a pretty good experience with Seminary, even though it was hard to get up at 5:00 a.m. for 4 years. I really learned a lot about the scriptures, read all of the required reading, and memorized all of the Scripture Mastery verses. Honestly, I can’t believe any of my fellow ward members were willing to prepare a lesson every day and come teach a classroom full of teenagers at 6:00 a.m. My mom was my teacher one year; she had eight kids, including a baby, at home. All of my teachers and lessons really focused on the scriptures and personal application. I don’t remember having a lot of spiritual experiences, but I appreciate the knowledge base I gained.
In January 2023, the Church announced changes to the Seminary credit requirements and changed the official objective statement. Chad Webb, administrator of Seminaries and Institutes, discussed a survey they had done which resulted in them focusing on three areas: conversion, relevance, and, yep, belonging. He discussed how learning assessments would now be done as a group and also how reading requirements would be dramatically reduced. He promised that things would stay Christ-centered, learner-focused, and scripture-based. However, this just seems to be the first step in some dramatic changes.
In 2024, the Church announced a new focus on life lessons to the Seminary program. This year, take a look at this clip by Chad Webb: “Our hope is to help prepare a generation of youth to know how to study the scriptures and to be riveted to the teachings of living prophets; a generation of emotionally resilient youth who have the skills and capacity to succeed in school, become righteous fathers and mothers, and who will lead in the Church and in their communities. Our hope is to help a generation be prepared—prepped—to understand the covenants of the temple, who are deeply committed to keep them, and a generation of missionaries who are worthy, qualified, spiritually energized, and prepared to represent the Savior and inviting the world to come to Him.” And this clip from Clark Gilbert: “I see young men and young women better prepared for missions, striving for their Temple covenants, more emotionally resilient, more self-reliant, and better prepared for college.” So these are the goals for the new Seminary program: how to study scriptures, be riveted to the words of living prophets, emotionally resilient, succeed in school, be good parents, church leaders, understand and keep Temple covenants, and be prepared to serve missions. Remember how just last year they promised that things would stay Christ-centered, learner-focused, and scripture-based? The only time they even mentioned Jesus was when they talked about the youth serving missions and representing Him. How will they be qualified to represent Him when they have not come to know Him themselves? How is Seminary staying scripture-based when they are spending two to three days a week on life lessons and conference talks?
Remember my friend who teaches classes at FSY? We had a long discussion about the Seminary program and how it has changed over the last couple of decades. He works for CES as a coordinator over multiple stakes and dozens of Seminary classes and is completely frustrated and disillusioned with Church education at this point. He is disappointed that a program started for teaching the youth to study and know the scriptures has steadily moved away from that objective and that the bar has been dropped so low. The reason they were given for this: Seminary graduates are more likely to be active, serve missions, get married in the temple, and pay tithing. So the conclusion is, if they make it easier to graduate, more kids will be. Are they really expecting the same outcomes from youth who graduate from this dumbed-down program? Do they really think it is the certificate that matters and not the effort and knowledge gained? This teacher was instructed that the new life skills lessons are the priority, so if they have a week with fewer classes, they should skip the scripture lessons in favor of life skills.
I was curious what these life skill lessons would include and was able to obtain a copy of the new curriculum. These are the categories for the lessons: For the Strength of Youth, building self-reliance, physical and emotional health, preparing for future education and employment, succeeding in school, mission prep, Temple prep, and teachings of Church leaders. I was a little disappointed in this list personally; a lot of this just seems like practical things that could be taught anywhere. Shouldn’t Seminary be focused on spiritual growth? I mean, if we’re going to teach life preparation lessons, I would love to see a class on how to connect to the Spirit and receive personal revelation.
I looked through some of the lessons, which are heavy on statements from Church leaders or Church publications with a few scriptures thrown in. I am uncomfortable with the shift away from the scriptures and in favor of modern leaders. Shouldn’t the scriptures and our personal revelation be the standard against which we judge the messages of others instead of the other way around? In this lesson on General Conference, the students read this statement from President Nelson: “The purpose of this and every general conference is to help us hear Him.” Then the teacher is supposed to emphasize this point: “Conference talks are how we hear Jesus Christ.” Then it asks the students: “Why is it important to know what Jesus Christ would say to you?” The way this is phrased implies that if only you could actually talk to Jesus, what would He say? You can find out at conference. Why aren’t we teaching the youth how to talk to God and receive answers instead of telling them that answers come through someone else? A new Primary song called “The Liahona” also teaches this. I am sad that this is the message given to the youth of the Church.
Setting aside the life preparation lessons, let’s look at the actual scripture study curriculum. When I was in Seminary, we did Scripture Mastery, where we memorized scriptures, learned the reference and context, and discussed how to apply them in our lives. They have replaced this with Doctrinal Mastery, which repeats every year, and then they have the scripture study lesson of the year which follows the Come, Follow Me cycle. When I started looking through the lessons, I realized that this new Doctrinal Mastery program is a really big focus of the new curriculum—a framework for how they study the scriptures. The first goal is for students to learn and apply Divine principles for acquiring spiritual knowledge. These are the three principles: act in faith, examine concepts and questions with an eternal perspective, and seek further understanding through divinely appointed sources. These sources include the Light of Christ, the Holy Ghost, the scriptures, parents, and Church leaders, the First Presidency, and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. “The Lord’s prophets upon the Earth today are a vital source of Truth. The Lord has chosen and ordained these individuals to speak for Him. Satan is the Father of Lies and seeks to distort truth and persuade us to turn away from the Lord and His appointed servants. Learning to recognize and avoid unreliable sources can protect us from misinformation and from those who seek to destroy faith.” These lessons on acquiring spiritual knowledge through divinely appointed sources are the first lessons taught each year in every course of study. They are reviewed and referred to often throughout the year. They are used to role-play scenarios and applied in every lesson as the scriptures are interpreted through quotes, talks, and videos of modern Church leaders. The same principle was taught in conference and in a new Institute class for young adults. Obviously, that faith crisis report made a big impact when it traced problems back to uncorrelated information.
The second part of the Doctrinal Mastery program is the list of selected scripture passages the students are supposed to memorize. They are basically short phrases pulled out of context that declare a Church doctrine or belief. Some of them even have words added to the scripture excerpt. The Seminary lesson manuals are divided into weekly scripture blocks. If I click on this top one, it opens up into six lessons for that week. Among those is a Doctrinal Mastery lesson, obviously. Because of the new life lessons, all of these lessons will not be covered in Seminary class, and because all of the Doctrinal Mastery scriptures need to be covered, I am betting these lessons are the priority for each weekly unit. In addition, another of the lessons also covers the same chapter and topic of the Doctrinal Mastery scripture. So by looking at those lessons, it is pretty easy to see what teachings the Church considers the most important.
As I look through the list, I notice some common themes, so I put these into a chart to give you an idea of what ideas are most emphasized. The most common doctrine that is taught is that of priesthood authority and the restoration of the one true Church. Thankfully, the Atonement of Jesus Christ is also a common theme. Temple work, obedience, and following the prophet also are popular. Less common are the principles of faith, revelation, and other topics. And of course, they did make sure to include Malachi 3 to remind students to pay their tithing. Sadly, when I looked through the lessons, it was easy to see how scriptural messages are being manipulated into pushing certain ideas or agendas. I will cover one in more—more detail in a bit.
This is an example of the table of contents for the Old Testament manual. I was surprised to see photos of Church leaders and the temple as the thumbnail for most of the lessons because I wasn’t sure what this could have to do with the Old Testament. Apparently, they put a photo of whichever Church leader quote is highlighted in the lesson. For example, on the lesson about Isaac seeking a wife, they read a quote by President Nelson about Celestial marriage and discuss it. Every lesson I looked at had multiple quotes by Church leaders. I guess they weren’t kidding about the goal to have the youth riveted to the teachings of living prophets. Honestly, with how little time they are now spending on the scriptures, I wish that time was actually spent on the scriptures themselves.
Speaking of that, this chart shows the new required reading for Seminary students. This is all four years, about 20 to 30 pages each semester. This is shocking to me. When I was in Seminary, we read the entire book each year except for the Old Testament, which still had a considerable amount of reading. I am thankful for that foundation and the word of God that I developed during my years in Seminary. I sincerely hope that many of the youth are choosing to read more than just these required readings and scripture verses that are removed from important context.
I never attended Seminary in Utah or other areas where it is taught by trained and paid Church employees, so I don’t know if my experience would have been different back when I was in high school, but I do hear some interesting experiences now from other parents with kids in Seminary. This was posted on a local homeschool group I am in: “Hello everyone, I am just mentioning this out of concern, and if anyone else has heard about this, my son is in Seminary, and he recently told me that his instructor had told his class that all Seminary instructors were instructed by the First Presidency to tell the children that all kids need to correct their parents because their parents are not following the prophet as they should be. I was very surprised to hear this as this is not doctrinally correct. In my area, there were definitely a lot of people who did not follow the prophet on certain issues in the last couple of years, and so this caused a small uproar. When contacted, the teacher admitted that the letter from the Church was more about teaching the correct way to pray, but that he had added to his own thoughts about parents being remiss in teaching their children about that topic and also being poor examples in following the prophet. I don’t know about you, but I really don’t like the idea of kids being told that their parents are doing something wrong and that they should be calling them to repentance. This kind of gives me Hitler Youth vibes, so maybe this teacher isn’t just coming up with these ideas on his own.”
Just a month ago in St. Anthony, Idaho, a Seventy, Elder Rosa, also chastised parents for not following the prophet in the great health debacle of 2020 and for not teaching their children to do so. I can’t believe that in 2024 they are still pushing this nonsense.
President Nelson offers the voice of warning. Do we look at that voice of warning as just a suggestion, or do we take it for what it is? “I, President [name omitted], talked about—um—a little bit about this when he talked about guiding, following the prophet. And as I thought here, I thought to myself, how many times do we listen to the counsel of the prophet and don’t follow that counsel of the Prophet? Now I hope I’m not going to be controversial right now, but when COVID came, there were lots of problems with following the prophet. I—I’m not being judgmental; I’m not asking for repentance; I’m just giving an observation. And—and my wife and I chose to follow the prophet, and you might say, ‘Oh, you didn’t have a brain for yourself,’ or, ‘Oh, don’t you know what was out there?’ And I—I—I said, ‘Well, simply, I’m just going to decide to follow the prophet because I know that there’s safety in doing so.’ And—and you may have your own philosophical opinion; you may have your own medical opinion. I—I—I don’t really care what your opinion is; I just want you to know that—that I’m just making an observation. And so—and—and those of you who didn’t follow the prophet, you’re still here; you’re in the Church; you’re faithful Temple goers; you’re fine; you’re great; and I’m not judging you. But the question I have then is: the next time the prophet says something that we don’t agree with, what will we do? What will we say? What will we teach our children? What will we teach those around us?”
Another friend of mine said that his 17-year-old son came home talking about a lesson on racism in Seminary. The teacher had said, “You could be racist without realizing it.” I thought this must be another example of a teacher going off script and inserting his own political views into the lesson, but I was wrong. This is the lesson: 2 Nephi ch. 26. For context, here is the chapter heading from the LDS scriptures: There is a lot there: Christ coming, destruction of the Nephites and Latter-Day Gentiles, building up false churches and secret combinations, but none of this is going to be covered because this chapter has a Doctrinal Mastery scripture. This one, on line: “All are alike unto God,” is what they memorize and what two of the weekly lessons are based on. The theme of the lesson is racism. Students are asked to consider what might be shaping their perspective and how they treat others. I think this is where the idea that the students might be racist without knowing it came from. The lesson discusses the priesthood ban, asks students to ponder examples of racism they have observed, and quotes a speech.
To the NAACP, by President. It also gives additional resources about racism from the church website. I have only looked at a small fraction of these new Seminary lessons, but I have seen a lot that concerns me. They are available online, and I hope parents will go through them and be aware of what is being taught to their kids.
Now I want to show you a couple of video clips that I recently watched in the Celestial Kingdom. It's important to remember that we do have a special birthright. It's important to remember what that means and the responsibility that goes along with that. I know that this is the work of the Lord, and Brother Paul is the man on the Watchtower, and I'm so lucky to be here. I know that Brother Paul is the man on the Watchtower, and the Order is the right place to be, and it's the only place on Earth we can get to the Celestial Kingdom. I appreciate that I'm able to be in the Order. If the Order doesn't have it, we don't need it. Brother PA is on the tower, chosen by Heavenly Father to lead us. I know that Brother is on the tower.
These clips came from a video taken at a church meeting of the polygamist Kingston group, also called the Order. If you are like me, you felt some serious dissonance watching these videos. I think it's easy to recognize brainwashing in groups like this one. Brainwashing is defined as a systematic effort to persuade non-believers to accept a certain Allegiance, command, or doctrine, and any technique designed to manipulate human thought or action against the desire, will, or knowledge of the individual, and to develop loyalty and unquestioning obedience to the ruling party. While we don't like to admit it, in reality, we all do this to our kids in varying degrees, and it is definitely happening in the LDS Church.
Consider how these brainwashing techniques are being used: isolation from former associates and sources of information; an exacting regimen requiring absolute obedience and humility; strong social pressures and rewards for cooperation; physical and psychological punishments for non-cooperation, ranging from social ostracism and criticism; and continual reinforcement. One thing Communist governments do to control their people is to hang pictures of the dear leader everywhere. I noticed they do this in the Kingston church building too. This is a photo taken of the primary bulletin board in Utah. Yep, we're also guilty of this. I definitely got brainwashing vibes from this video we watched earlier. The kids here don't really seem that different from those testifying of Brother Paul, the Watchman on the tower. They just use different terms. Even the youth themes our kids recite each week are examples of this. Maybe brainwashing even works in some aspects, but is it the Lord's way to conversion? I think these things are done very intentionally, based on studies, data, and outcomes more than on revelation. I think they are done with the goal of keeping members in the church. Even if you find that a worthy goal, I hope you are uncomfortable with these techniques being used. Even more, I hope that you don't see this as the ultimate goal.
We should have one thing that this report noted is that most members in faith crisis don't leave the church. Some just go inactive, but many others fake it. They stay active so they don't have to suffer the social consequences of not believing. I have met some of these people, active members with callings who have admitted to me that they don't believe any of it, not even in God, honestly. I think most members still think this is better than leaving the church, which is very sad to me. On the other hand, this Bible verse tells us to train up our children in the way they should go, and when they are old, they will not depart from it. So how do we know the proper way to do this?
One thing I really like about this design is the arrow under the words, "the way." Jesus is the way; He is the mark we are shooting for. In the New Testament, His followers were not called Christians, but followers of the way. His way is the straight and narrow path, the doctrine of Christ in the Book of Mormon. We read about lots of times when people join the church only to have a massive apostasy within a year or two. But there were also people who were truly converted and never fell away from the True Church of Christ. These are a few examples: Alma and the people who were baptized at the Waters of Mormon; the Anti-Nephites, or the people of Ammon; the 300 Lamanites who were converted in the prison; and all of the people still alive when Jesus came to the people at Bountiful. All of these people followed the doctrine of Christ. They repented of sin and false tradition and cried out to God. They had a powerful redemptive experience where they were baptized with fire and the Holy Ghost. They witnessed miracles and the gifts of the Spirit; someone with power and authority from God speaking with revelation and prophecy. They took care of the poor and often lived with all in common. They gathered often with meetings run according to the Spirit. Through their personal experience, they received a knowledge of God, and none of them fell away from the gospel of Christ.
Jesus told his people his simple and straightforward doctrine. He told them not to add to it or take away from it. He said that his church is those that repent and come unto him. LDS members tend to equate the Church of God and His kingdom. Maybe that would be okay if we used the Lord's definition of church instead of the corporation. In the Old Testament, the Israelites are given a chance to become Zion. Instead, they refuse to seek the face of God, so they are given a law with many complicated rules and guidelines. When Jesus comes, He says this law is finished and that the only sacrifice He wants is a broken heart and contrite spirit. Ask yourself which law are we following today? Jesus also told them that there will be many who say they did lots of works in His name, but He will tell them that they never knew Him. For sure, the LDS are claiming to do many works in the Name of Christ, but do they actually know Him? Moroni sees our day and warns us about corruption and unbelief. Are we seeing the power and gifts of God like they did in the scriptures or in the early days of the Restoration? A war was fought over our ability to choose life and liberty by coming unto Christ or to choose death and captivity by refusing His gift of redemption. We have to understand the choice, and we can't be compelled to make it. Using coercion or fear to keep people in the church is not the plan of happiness. It does not result in conversion or salvation.
Joseph Smith started his journey by going to the Lord with questions and was criticized for rejecting the religious establishments. He taught that Mormonism is the search for truth and that truth will prevail over priestcraft. He condemned force and dominion. There is a problem when information is controlled and members aren't trusted to discern truth. Perhaps with all the correlation and control we have lost the personal connection to God. Maybe instead of seeking loyalty to an organization, we should be focusing on true conversion to Jesus Christ. What would it be like if all the members of the church were seeking the will and face of God instead of relying on others to tell them what to do? Is it any wonder that our youth are leaving, not only the church but often the gospel too? If you are worried about your own children and their future, ask yourself this question: Can your children say, like the stripling warriors, that their parents have taught them that if they do not doubt, God will deliver them? Will they say that they do not doubt that you know it because they have heard you share your own experiences in knowing the Lord? Maybe it starts with us. [Music] [Applause] [Music] oh [Music] [Music]