The following was first published in the Mormonism Researched in July-August 2025. This is a free publication produced by Mormonism Research Ministry. To get a free subscription of the bimonthly newsletter, visit the website here.

I first began studying the history and doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints back in the mid-1970s. At that time, Spencer W. Kimball was the “Prophet, Seer, and Revelator” of an organization that had recently surpassed the 3.5 million- member mark.

Kimball was flanked by counselors Marion G. Romney and N. Eldon Tanner. Among the Quorum of the Twelve were men like Ezra Taft Benson, Mark E. Petersen and LeGrand Richards. Relative newcomers to the Twelve included Boyd K. Packer and Bruce R. McConkie, not to mention James E. Faust who was sustained as Assistant to the Twelve in 1972.

According to the church’s official website, it was sixth President Joseph F. Smith who “recognized the need to ‘correlate’ the diverse auxiliary programs into unified curricula.” The correlation department was charged with “ensuring that all work aligns with the doctrine of Jesus Christ and inspired policies, … separating speculations from official teachings” (www.church of jesuschrist.org, “Correlation,” ellipsis mine).

In a correlated manual, members were assured that “the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve oversee correlation in the Church” for the purpose of “maintaining doctrinal purity” (Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Gospel Doctrine Teacher’s Manual, 2003, 244). The establishment of the Correlation Department exhibited the leadership’s concern that members believe only what they deemed to be true and accurate teachings.

When speaking to members of the church in the 1980s and 90s, a high respect for the church’s general authorities was typically evident. On rare occasions I’d come across a member who had disagreements with what had been taught.

When I did experience it, this was more of a case of ignorance than defiance. In many of those situations, if I could demonstrate that a GA (General Authority) disagreed with their personal position, members would often acquiesce. This is because the role of an authoritative hierarchy was well understood. Consider this quote from sixth President Joseph F. Smith:

“The moment a man says he will not submit to the legally constituted authority of the Church, whether it be the teachers, the bishopric, the high council, his quorum, or the First Presidency, and in his heart confirms it and carries it out, that moment he cuts himself off from the privileges and blessings of the Priesthood and Church, and severs himself from the people of God, for he ignores the authority that the Lord has instituted in his Church” (Gospel Doctrine, 45. Reprinted in Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph F. Smith, 365)

In an address given to “religious educators” on September 17, 1997, then-apostle Ezra Taft Benson stated that “doctrinal interpretation is the province of the First Presidency. The Lord has given that stewardship to them by revelation. No teacher has the right to interpret doctrine for members of the church” (“The Gospel Teacher and his Message,” as cited on page 25 of church manual Teachings of the Living Prophets, 1982).

Doctrinal positions of the church were defended and meant to be embraced. As Faust stated in general conference in 1997,

“The saving principles and doctrines of the Church are established, fixed, and unchangeable. Obedience to these absolutes is necessary to enjoy ‘peace in this world, and eternal life in the world to come.’” (“The Weightier Matters of the Law: Judgment, Mercy, and Faith,” Ensign (Conference Edition), November 1997, 53). 

Leaders were not above publicly correctly error. For example, in his famous June 1, 1980 BYU Devotional message titled “The Seven Deadly Heresies,” McConkie explained that he was not going to expound on what he called “the great heresies of a lost and fallen Christendom”; rather, his purpose was to discuss the heresies “that have crept in among us.” In this speech, McConkie warned his listeners against believing such heresies as

· God progressing in knowledge

· Organic evolution

· Temple marriage guarantees exaltation

· Baptism for the dead that offers a second chance for salvation

· The ability to progress from one kingdom to another in the eternal worlds

· Adam is our Father and our God

· That perfectionism is necessary to gain salvation

The irony of McConkie’s list is that both Brigham Young and fourth President Wilford Woodruff taught that God  progresses in knowledge. BYU teaches organic evolution and 12th President Spencer W. Kimball taught that perfection is an achievable goal.

In today’s world of social media, any member with a computer can almost instantly gain a huge following via a website, Facebook page or YouTube channel. Having personally looked into many of these sites, I have been amazed to see how much LDS folklore proliferates online. Apparently, some members are comfortable posting just about anything they feel is true, regardless of what their leaders have said on a given subject.

Granted, trying to pin down the LDS Church on what it considers “official” can be tricky. However, the church has given guidelines that are meant to keep the membership “true to the faith.” The Standard Works, correlated manuals, conference talks and First Presidency Statements contain many of these guidelines. However, I wonder if some of these LDS social media warriors care at all about what their church stands for.

And while I do not expect the top leadership to play the role of the proverbial “vice principal” in policing errant members, I wonder if their local leaders are concerned. Are they ignorant of what is out there? If not, what is the cause of their apathy? 

Could it be that the popularity of these rogue sites makes corralling the offenders unlikely because it could result in their large fanbase leaving the fold? Or could it be that as long as the offender doesn’t cause undue embarrassment to the church, local leadership will turn a blind eye?

The fact remains that LDS social media can muddy the waters when it comes to LDS orthodoxy. That being the case, we must be extra diligent if we are to understand what this organization is really all about.