Sunday, October 24, 2021

Let's Talk About Conspiracies!

Previously: What In The World Is Going On With The Church Leaders Lately?

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed the Church hasn't been teaching about secret combinations for quite a while now?

I'll admit I don't watch all sessions of conference these days, but I can recall a time when men like David O. McKay, J. Reuben Clark, and Ezra Taft Benson were constantly reminding us that secret combinations were among us in our day just as they were present among the Nephites and the Jaredites. 

I could be wrong, but in all the years I attended Sunday School classes as an adult, the lesson plans seem to have skipped over those sections in the Book of Mormon that contained those salient warnings.  Was that deliberate?  Were those warnings in the Book of Mormon left out of the lesson manuals on purpose?

I first heard about secret combinations when I attended seminary in the late 1960s, and I'll admit I was confused by what the teacher was saying.  What the heck was he trying to get at?  The only secret combination I knew of was the combination to my locker at school, which, of course, I kept secret from everyone else. So when I heard the teacher say "secret combinations," all I could picture was my combination lock.  Of course, I could have read those assigned chapters in the Book of Mormon and maybe figured it out. But hey, I was fourteen and groggy from the early morning hours -the last thing I wanted to do was pick up the scriptures. 

So for you young people today who may not have any idea what "secret combinations" are: in a word, they are conspiracies.  More accurately, the term "secret combinations" refers to conspirators; i.e. persons who combine together in secret to plot and implement nefarious plans. Back in Joseph Smith's day use of the term "combination" to describe an intimate group was so common that the pre-eminent dictionary defined essentially two kinds of combinations; one good, the other bad:
Combination: Intimate union, or association of two or more persons or things, by set purpose or agreement, for effecting some object, by joint operation; in a good sense, when the object is laudable; in an ill sense, when it is illegal or iniquitous. It is sometimes equivalent to league, or to conspiracy. We say, a combination of men to overthrow government, or a combination to resist oppression.  (Noah Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language, Pub 1828)
What the Book of Mormon tells us is that these iniquitous groups working behind the scenes eventually took control of their entire respective governments. By the end of the Jaredite run, mass murder had become rampant not only within the political realm but among the populace as well.  Mix that brand of  mayhem with the social and economic collapse that had become endemic, and it spelled a one-two punch the Jaredite civilization could not withstand. The Nephites called the conspiracy at work among them "Gadianton's Robbers and Murderers" (Hel 6-18) after the guy who initially founded the cabal. The surprising thing is that over time, a majority of the people simply found it easier to go along to get along with these insiders since the dominant party clearly held all the cards. Easier to cooperate with the ruling class than to continue as a member of the shrinking resistance when hope already seems lost, right?  Still, you might wonder: how could such a thing happen to an entire nation? 

Well, some were inclined to just put up with it, or they decided to join in because they were attracted to the ideology.  At any rate, allowing those secret combinations to get above them is the reason we don't see any Nephites or Jaredites living among us today.  Eventually the influence of the conspirators had so overwhelmed the political and cultural landscapes of those societies that both civilizations were entirely destroyed from within.  And here's why it's important for us to read up on these incidents: because God tells us the same fate awaits us unless we awaken to our awful situation (Ether 8:22-24)

So here's the good news: we have a road map from American history to show us precisely how and when certain secret combinations became entrenched in the United States just as they had on this continent all those centuries before. I'm going to direct you to that before I'm done here, but first I want to make a couple of more points about conspiracies.

Is It A Conspiracy 'Theory' Or Is It An Actual Conspiracy?

The first rule of a conspiracy is to convince everyone that there is no conspiracy.  Many people haven't figured that out, which is why, when you find yourself getting close to the truth about a thing, there always seems to be some knucklehead standing by ready to shout you down by saying "that's just a conspiracy theory."

If you encounter one of these dolts, take the advice of Thomas Sowell and just walk away. Anyone who goes around spouting "it's a conspiracy theory" as if they had just put you in your place is simply too stupid to bother with. Such people cannot be reasoned with. They are mere parrots, still stuck in junior high.

Responding with ridicule was the methodology the ruling class promoted immediately after the assassination of President Kennedy, and once Lee Harvey Oswald had been shot dead it was immediately agreed upon that "the public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial."

Intelligence agencies at the time didn't want anyone snooping around and possibly discovering that government contractors may have had something to do with the murder of the president. And they sure didn't want anyone discovering that Oswald may himself have been a deep-cover asset. So they had to keep secret what has since been revealed among the documents in the 20 gigabyte JFK document dump released when Donald Trump was president: that U.S. Intelligence agencies had Lee Oswald on their radar for at least two years before the assassination, because he appears to have been recruited by Naval Intelligence while in the Marine corps. Unredacted sources indicate that just prior to the assassination, Lee was being unwittingly groomed by his agency handler, one George de Mohrenschildt, to be set up as the lone-nut "patsy" who would take the fall for a shooting he had nothing to do with. 

So America was told that Oswald was a nobody.  It was this weirdo Oswald, and Oswald alone, who shot the president. Period. End of story, fade to black.  Members of the press dutifully fell in line, deriding anyone who suggested otherwise as kooky "conspiracy theorists"-which itself was a term virtually no one in America ever uttered until the national security apparatus coined it to be used as a term of derision.   

The Conspiracy You Didn't Learn About In School

I realize I'm wandering all over the place here, but there is one thing I want to present before we get to what I promised, and that's a discussion of the conspiracy everyone has heard about but few people know much about, namely (drum roll) The Illuminati! When the Bavarian Illuminati was exposed in 1797 it was huge news. Virtually everyone alive at the time was talking about it, both in America and across Europe.  The fact that today this famous conspiracy is unknown to all but a few is a testament to what happens when the ruling class decides something should be swept under the rug: it stops being reported, never gets repeated, ceases being written about, and is no longer published in the conventional histories.  Within two centuries the once-notorious incident of the Bavarian Illuminati had been flushed down the memory hole. Too bad, because this is one of those "lessons of history" we all ought to know about.

That's why I'm presenting below an excerpt about the Bavarian Illuminati written by one of the most reliable conspiracy researchers I know of, Donald Jeffries. The following is from his bestselling book, Crimes and Coverups In American Politics, and I present it because it's a very even-handed account, devoid of unnecessary alarmism despite the disturbing insouciance Weishaupt exhibits, given his stated intention to deceive virtually the entire world. Here it is:


Of all the means I know to lead men, the most effectual is a concealed mystery  -Adam Weishaupt

The earliest genuine "conspiracy" book that I know of carried the lengthy title Proofs of a Conspiracy Against All Religions and Governments of Europe Carried on in the Secret Meetings of Free Masons, Illuminati and Reading Societies.  Written by Edinburgh Professor John Robison, it was published in 1797.  The book was the first to focus on the Bavarian Illuminati, founded allegedly on May 1, 1776 by University of Ingoldstadt professor Adam Weishaupt, and its supposed infiltration of Freemasonic lodges.  

While the establishment views the Illuminati as a seldom noted, innocuous organization designed to enlighten the masses, conspiracy theorists consider it as one of the leading candidates for the unseen power behind everything.  Proofs was widely read, and a copy was even sent to George Washington. Washington commented on the book in a letter to Rev. George Washington Snyder, dated October 24, 1798.  A well-known Freemason himself, Washington attempted to refute the contention that Masonic lodges in America had been widely infiltrated by the Illuminati, although he admitted that "It was not my intention to doubt that the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am." 

Thomas Jefferson, however, seemed naively supportive of Weishaupt (whose name he misspelled as Wishaupt) in a January 31, 1800 letter, labeling him "an enthusiastic philanthropist."  Jefferson dismissed the fears of those like Robison towards "the spreading of information, reason, & natural morality among men."  In addition to George Washington, many other founding fathers were masons, such as Joseph Warren, James Otis, John Paul Jones, Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and Benjamin Franklin.  So was the Marquis de Lafayette, the French nobleman who fought with the American colonists. 

Even at that early date, the inclination was strong among establishment voices to discredit any "conspiracy theories."  Robison had been a "respected" figure in intellectual circles prior  to writing Proofs, and had contributed many valuable scientific articles to the Encyclopedia Britannica.  After his controversial book was published, however, the Encyclopedia Britannica critiqued it with the following comment, "it betrays a degree of credulity extremely remarkable in a person used to calm reasoning and philosophical demonstration."  That sentence could easily have fit into any New York Times review of an anti-Warren Commission JFK assassination book. 

Few conspirators have left the kind of transparent confessions on the record that Adam Weishaupt did. Consider this quote from Weishaupt:

The great strength of our Order lies in its concealment; let it never appear in any place in its own name, but always covered by another name, and another occupation. None is better than the three lower degrees of Free Masonry; the public is accustomed to it, expects little from it, and therefore takes little notice of it.  Next to this, the form of a learned or literary society is best suited to our purpose, and had Free Masonry not existed, this cover would have been employed; and it may be much more than a cover, it may be a powerful engine in our hands.  By establishing reading societies, and subscription libraries, and taking these under our direction, and supplying them through our labours, we may turn the public mind which way we will.

Does this sound like the philosophy of an innocent free-thinker?  Weishaupt, in another statement, appeared to openly advocate assassination, as he reminded his followers, "No man is fit for our Order who is not a Brutus or a Catiline, and is not ready to go to every length."  Scoffing at the religious leaders who thought his movement innocuous, Weishaupt remarked, "The most wonderful thing of all is that the distinguished Lutheran and Calvinist theologians who belong to our order really believe that they see in it (Illuminati) the true and genuine sense of Christian Religion.  Oh Mortal man, is there anything you cannot be made to believe?"

Weishaupt's Illuminati drew the attention of many prominent Americans.  On the significant date of July 4, 1812, Joseph Willard, then president of Harvard University, delivered a speech in which he declared:

There is sufficient evidence that a number of societies, of the Illuminati, have been established in this land of Gospel light and civil liberty, which were first organized from the grand society, in France.  They are doubtless secretly striving to undermine all our ancient institutions, civil and sacred.  These societies are closely leagued with those of the same Order, in Europe; they have all the same object in view.  The enemies of all order are seeking our ruin.  Should the infidelity generally prevail, our independence would fall of course.  Our republican government would be annihilated.

Although the mention of his name is scoffed at in polite society, Adam Weishaupt was a very real person; as noted, a professor of canon law at the University of Ingolstadt.  Robison's interpretation of Weishaupt's plans as "scheming the establishment of an Association or Order, which, in time, should govern the world" was well reasoned.  His theory would lead inevitably to the concerns present-day conspiracy researchers have regarding the "New World Order," which always seems to be on the minds of those who lead us.  Robert Shea and Anton Wilson used Weishaupt with great dramatic license as a character in their wonderful Illuminatus science-fiction trilogy in the 1970s.  They even claimed that Weishaupt had killed George Washington and assumed his identity.  

As was mentioned earlier, Weishaupt founded the Illuminati officially on May 1, 1776, which is of great interest considering that "May Day" also came to be celebrated as International Workers' Day, and is dear to the hearts of socialists and communists everywhere.  It was an official holiday in the Soviet Union, with elaborate parades held in Red Square in Moscow and other major cities.  

The establishment's view on Weishaupt was expressed by Dr. Tony Page, who explained, in his translation of Supplement of the Justification of My Intentions by Adam Weishaupt, "His project was utopian and naively optimistic...but neither he nor his plan was evil or violent in and of themselves.  It is one of the deplorable and tragic ironies of history that a man who tried to inculcate virtue, philanthropy, social justice, and morality has become one of the great hate-figures of 21st century "conspiracy" thinking." -Excerpted from Crimes and Coverups in American Politics, 1776-1963 by Donald Jeffries (2019) *


*Jeffries has written a companion volume to Crimes & Coverups, titled Hidden History. Whereas Crimes and Coverups is a history of conspiracies in American politics from its founding up to 1963, Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Coverups in American Politics picks up from there, covering the Kennedy Assassination onward.   

Yeah, Well, That's Kinda The Problem, Isn't It, Tony? 
I think most of us would differ with Tony Page's assertion that Weishaupt's actions were virtuous, just, and moral. Weishaupt was undertaking to deceive on a massive scale, with the ultimate goal being world conquest.  Deception on that scale never results in the kind of "justice" most people envision when they hear the word. As much as Dr. Page would have hoped Weishaupt's utopian dream could have been allowed to come to pass, every single civilization founded on the ancient religion of illuminism inevitably degenerates into a dystopia, not a utopia. The precepts of illuminism dictate that the God of the bible was a jealous usurper, and that the true "Bearer of the Light" was Lucifer, The Illuminated One, The Son of the Morning.  It is he, according to the the creeds of the Illuminati, who is the rightful god, unjustly kicked out of heaven just for believing the best way to ensure everybody gets saved is to force them into it. Satan would have coerced all mankind into behaving exactly as he commands them, and when they can't be perfect (as individuals seldom can), they would be forced to conform against their will, even if it means their enslavement, torture, or death for disobeying.

As we learn in the Book of Mormon, secret combinations could be found in every age and on every continent literally since Cain plotted to kill his own brother. The Mystery Babylon School has always been the model for oppression, not liberation. Illuminati creeds were developed many centuries ago by power-hungry men motivated by one over-arching philosophy: certain men were destined to rule over lesser men. That belief did not change with Adam Weishaupt's attempt at reviving the ancient ways, and that belief remains in force on every continent of the world today.

From the Hittites, to the Assyrians, to the Egyptians and others, the leadership of the Mystery Schools learned how to control the weak. The enslavement and oppression of lesser beings was the defining feature of those civilizations; without it they would have no power. Illuminists "have a very ego-centric, prideful theology that dehumanizes its believer. The ancient secret societies of the Illuminati practiced occult theocracies that are totally removed from the teachings and examples of Jesus Christ." (Fritz Springmeier, Bloodlines of the Illuminati).

One common thread weaves itself through the training of those attracted to the mystery religions: it is the desire for power. Compare that with the desire of the godly hero Captain Moroni, who said, "I seek not for power, but to pull it down. I seek not for honor of the world, but for the glory of my God, and the freedom and welfare of my country.”  

And That Brings Me To My Actual Point
As I was mulling this topic around in my head I was made aware of a recent blog post by Kendal Anderson. Kendal is the author of War: A Book of Mormon Perspective, which I gave a brief mention to awhile back in these pages.  As concerns secret combinations, Kendal has brilliantly explained how these combinations got a foothold here in America at virtually the same time the nascent United States was founded.  I have read entire books on this topic, but I have never seen this fascinating information explained as succinctly as Kendal has done here. What will really surprise you is that two of our founding fathers were instrumental in launching the very conspiracy that now threatens to hold every one of us in its totalitarian clutches. I hope you'll click on the link below to learn what they haven't been teaching you in school or in church:

Click This Link to be taken to "Gadiantons And The State"


Saturday, October 9, 2021

What In The World Is Going On With The Church Leaders Lately?


Previously: Religious Exemptions: You Don't Need Your Bishop's Permission

Many thousands of devout members of the church are understandably confused by recent statements of the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve. Setting aside some of the more bizarre presentations heard at general conference last week, what most disturbs these faithful members is how blatantly the leaders have been lying to them.

The most notable falsehood was the official statement by the First Presidency encouraging members to submit to the Covid "vaccine," wherein they made the outrageous claim that the shot has been "proven safe and effective." 

The reason these members find that statement troubling is because those who have been following the actual science know it is an outright lie. The data simply doesn't exist to support such an outrageous claim.  The very reason the FDA has not approved those medicines manufactured by Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson is specifically because there has not been adequate time to test them to find out if they are safe and effective.  All the data so far shows the opposite to be true. A report released just yesterday shows that the covid shot kills five times more people than it saves.

Just as this controversy was really heating up, I was shown this report about an admission made by Elder Ronald Rasband of the Quorum of the Twelve:

"Elder Rasband was speaking at a meeting in Boise last week.  Our nephew was in attendance. Someone asked about the vaccine and Elder Rasband responded that each person should understand that the Church is being threatened and sued on a continual basis.  The CDC has the Church in their crosshairs.  This request for the members to participate in the vaccine was simply to reduce liability for the Church from the government.  He said that members are to go to the Lord with this...and do what feels right for them.  This has never been, nor ever will be a commandment."

Whew! Well, that's a relief, ain't it? So members of the Church aren't really being told to take the vaccine after all! It's just a ploy to keep the government at bay. 

But hold on a second... doesn't that raise at least two very troubling questions?

1. Given that members of the Church are raised to believe that when the president of the Church speaks he is relating instructions directly from God, is it then moral for President Nelson to put the lives of the saints at risk just to keep a government agency off his back?

2.  Since our constitution prohibits the government from dictating policy to any religious entity, what possible jurisdiction can the government claim that would give one of its agencies authority to make demands on a church? 

Allow me to take a stab at answering those questions:

1. No, it is not moral. 
2. The reason the federal government has jurisdiction over the LDS Church is because the LDS /Church is not really a church.

Oh, it used to be, make no mistake about that. The church that was organized by Joseph Smith and five others on April 6th, 1830 had been properly organized under American common law principles.  And like every other church in its day, the Church of Christ (as it was originally known) stood independent of, and immune from, governmental interference. But in 1851 Brigham Young directed the territorial legislature to convert the church into a  corporation under federal law. That shadow "Church" was now a creature of the federal government, and in 1887 the United States government, as was its right, dissolved that territorial corporation and directed federal marshals to seize its assets. We came within an inch of losing Temple Square.

The lesson that should have been learned by that scary episode (but was not) is this: The State giveth, and the State taketh away.

Because 36 years later Church lawyers convinced President Heber J. Grant to incorporate the church under a model identical to that held by the Catholic Pope.  In addition to several unscriptural "improvements" to its operation, this corporate charter legally changed the name of the Church to reflect the executive office held by a man.[1]  All this was done in secret without informing the members, who up until then had been the rightful Holders of Interest in the church. 
[1] "How be it my church," Jesus asked rhetorically, "save it be called in my name? If it be called in the name of a man then it be the church of a man."  Ever wonder why the Lord saw fit to point that out? Other than the Lutheran church, I can think of no other church at the time that was named after a man, so what do you think compelled the Lord to even bring that topic up? Well, perhaps he was preparing us for a future event. The actual, legally recognized name of the LDS church today is The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or "Corporation of the President" for short.  The fact that the corporate charter is named after the president is a clear indication that for the past 96 years, this "church" has been named after a man. 

If the Church held the same status under the law as when it was organized in 1830, it would be directed by those principles contained in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine & Covenants.  Alas, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was long ago converted from a church into a Corporation Sole, an act that gutted the Church's basic structure and gave the erstwhile "Church" an entirely different status, leaving it vulnerable to the whims of societal change. To read a detailed explanation of how it all went wrong, see "How Corporatism Has Undermined and Subverted The Church of Jesus Christ."

Whereas the church that was founded by Joseph Smith operated under the distinct doctrines revealed by Christ, The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints operates under the doctrine of political expediency. By definition, any church that has been incorporated cannot claim the Lord Jesus Christ as its sovereign head. In an incorporated church, the State is sovereign.

That's not just speculation on my part; it's a legal reality. What it all translates to is this: if the Board of Directors of the Corporation of the President expect to keep the Corporation intact, at times they will be forced by circumstances to set aside the religion. This abandonment of principle has occurred many more times than we would like to believe, as documented here.

But That Was Only The Beginning

Converting what was once a religious society of equals into a corporate entity controlled by a single man at the top was just phase one of the transformation. In the middle part of the last century, leaders of the LDS Church, along with those of many other denominations, were tricked into applying for special 501(c)3 status under Title 26 of the United States Code. This status, government lawyers assured them, would provide their churches special benefits, as well as guarantee their churches remained exempt from taxation.

But Churches were already non-taxable, and guaranteed to remain so under the First Amendment to the Constitution. That exclusion is still plainly codified in the government's own Code of Federal Regulations at 26 IRC 508 (c)(1)(A). But Americans in the 1950s tended to completely trust their government, so when the government began actively promoting a way for churches to better protect their assets, it was an easy sell. Most churches, including our own, willingly signed up.

Well, it was a scam.  Known as The Johnson Amendment after its chief promoter, senator and future president Lyndon B. Johnson (according to this guy, the 'B' stands for "Butthole"), the law had one purpose and one purpose only: to neuter and muzzle America's churches.  According to author David Fiorazo:
"Texas Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson was a powerful politician running for reelection as Senator, but two anti-communist, tax-exempt groups were opposing him and passing out literature during the campaigns. He contacted the IRS and found the group’s activity was legal, so he sought other options to fight them. 
"Johnson shrewdly appeared on the Senate floor on July 2, 1954, and offered his amendment to a pending, massive, tax code overhaul bill. The bill was supposed to modernize the tax code. Records indicate an absence of committee hearings on the amendment. No legislative analysis took place to examine the effect the bill and the amendment would have, particularly on churches and religious organizations. The amendment was simply created to protect Johnson." (The Cost of Our Silence: Consequences of Christians Taking the Path of Least Resistance.)
Under this radical overhaul of the tax code, churches were now restricted as to what could be preached from the pulpit. If they dared talk about the bible as it relates to cultural, political, fiscal, and social issues, they were in danger of losing their tax exempt status. If a pastor preached contrary to what the courts refer to as "fundamental public policy" he was walking a thin line.

If you remember LDS Church leaders preaching vigorously against abortion in the nineteen sixties, and you were puzzled when they suddenly seemed to shut up about it following the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade; or if you wondered why Gordon Hinckley, in his wishy-washy conference talk on the Iraq war did not once reference the many places in our scriptures that clearly prohibit God's people from participating in pre-emptive warfare; well now you have your answer. In the LDS Church of today, the revealed word of God is disallowed where it contradicts government practices and policies.

The Church Of Public Policy Of Latter-day Saints
Our leaders have not forgotten the beating the Church took in 1887 when their predecessors were on the losing side of a battle with the feds.  As Denver Snuffer documented at the 2014 Sunstone Conference, every major policy change in the Church since then has been the result of the Church bowing to political and social pressure from outside the Church.  Not one of these changes has come by way of revelation from God.  Don't believe me? Look around. When was the last time you saw any president of the Church issue even one bona fide revelation the way Joseph Smith did on a regular basis?

No one really knows where the courts will draw the line on "fundamental public policy" so preaching the gospel with boldness can be risky. The primary reason why incorporated Churches will do anything to avoid a confrontation with civil authorities, even to the point of giving up religious principles, has been neatly summarized by author Jerry Finney:

"The IRS determines, subject to costly and time-consuming challenge, whether a restriction has been breached by a 501(c)3 organization. These restrictions subject a religious organization to suit in the courts for violating a federal government law. Fundamental public law is above biblical principle if the two conflict."  (Jerald Finney, Separation of Church and State: God's Churches: Spiritual or Legal Entities? pg 37.)  

Because the LDS Church today is a legal entity and no longer a spiritual one, it's safer to avoid making waves.  The bottom line is that our leaders have sold us out. The Lord said we cannot serve both God and mammon. They chose mammon.

"When a church incorporates, it becomes a 'creature' of the state. Having created the incorporated church, the State governs them via corporate law and public policy, grants and revokes privileges, burdens them, restricts them, penalizes them, and can dissolve them." (Peter Kershaw, "Does the Government Control Our Churches?")
Remember how, until very recently, Church leaders vigorously resisted any hint of accommodation toward homosexuality?  And did you notice how quickly the Church began to palliate its position as soon as it became apparent the Supreme Court would be ruling in favor of same-sex marriage?  What you're seeing is the Church that used to be directed by Jesus Christ frantically trying not to displease its new master.

Fellow blogger Anonymous Bishop tells of a priesthood meeting he conducted where he, as the bishop, had made an innocuous statement on the importance of standing up for traditional values.  After they dismissed, a general authority who happened to be a member of his ward asked to see the bishop in his office. He gave the bishop a very stern look.
"He then proceeded to warn me to 'not get ahead of the Brethren on these issues.' He said, 'Things are changing in the church and it’s important we await further direction from the prophets.' ”
One has to ask: further direction from the prophets, or further direction from the State?

The bishop tells how, back in 2008, this same general authority had actively encouraged members in that very ward to do all they could to work for passage of California's Proposition 8, stressing how important it was for the Church and its members to "continue fighting on these eternally important issues."
"But now, only a few years later, the same church leader was warning me, as his bishop, to 'not get ahead of the brethren' as the church 'upgrades' its position."
This is why the Church in recent years has spent so much time and energy instructing local leaders on the importance of following the Church Handbook of Instruction. When government lawyers are investigating an incorporated church for infractions, they aren't interested in that Church's religious beliefs. What they want to see is the Church's policies, practices, and procedures. I've been on the phone with three former bishops who all informed me they had been instructed by their higher-ups that the CHI is the only source they are to consult in the performance of their duties, barring even the scriptures. This would also explain why the Church released a training video back when Monson was President featuring Monson actually testifying of the Church Handbook, and did so in the name of Jesus Christ!

If that doesn't qualify as taking the name of the Lord in vain, I don't know what does.

The thing that made Monson's odd testimony all the more disconcerting to me is that at least one blogger has noted and documented that in the past ten years, Thomas Monson "has not borne testimony of any of his own Church’s unique foundational doctrines, including the truth of the Book of Mormon or the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith in any of the church’s General Conference meetings"

But he enthusiastically bears his testimony of the corporate handbook.

Painting Themselves Into A Corner
As I pointed out in my blog post of August 29th, when the First Presidency issued its egregious policy recommendation, they made no pretense that they were relaying a message from God.  Yet I've heard numerous otherwise good members insist that "the Lord will never let the president of the church lead us astray."  Why do they believe such nonsense?  God never made that promise.

So now the Brethren find themselves in the unenviable position of having to try to justify a teaching that the Lord has not backed them up on, while at the same time trying not to appear to be backbedaling too frantically. Perhaps they weren't expecting such an overshelming amount of disappointment on the part of their most dedicated followers.  So now they've sent out Rasband the new guy to offer an awkward reassurance: Hey really, don't worry about it; this was all just a show we put on for the gentiles.  

If the leaders really want this headache to go away, they could easily solve all their problems by dis-incorporating the Church. That would place them once again under the protection of the first amendment to the constitution, removing the church from any and all interference from government harrasment.

But this they will not do. As Moroni observed when looking into the Church in our day, "ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches..." The risk involved in dis-incorporating the Church is the very real certainty that all those perks the Brethren enjoy would evaporate, and they would be forced to get regular jobs between conference gigs just like the Book of Mormon says they should.

As I related in an earlier post, Congressman George Hansen confided in me some years ago that he personally knew several general authorities who would prefer the Church rescind its corporate status. He did not name those particular apostles, but he did say they differed from the newcomers in that the old school apostles were firmly rooted in the doctrines of the faith. Those general authorities are all dead now, replaced by corporate yes-men who can't imagine the Church operating in any other form than the business model they have become accustomed to.

I grew up in a different era. I can't imagine such theological giants as LeGrand Richards, Mark Petersen, Ezra Taft Benson, Howard Hunter, Harold B. Lee, Joseph Fielding Smith, or even Bruce McConkie sitting still while their lesser informed Brethren gutted the church of its core teachings and turned it into the obvious counterfeit it is today.

The good news is this: leaders can only lead as long as they can hold on to a cadre of followers. So maybe the upside of this is that devout believers will finally stop trusting in the arm of flesh and re-learn the importance of having an eye single to the glory of God.  It is possible -indeed preferable- for members of the Lord's church to affirm the divine role of the prophet Joseph Smith, embrace the Book of Mormon, celebrate the Restored gospel, and love the Savior while still concluding that the current leaders are seriously lacking inspiration. "Hold fast to that which is true," the apostle Paul taught. That also requires letting go of that which is not true. Tens of thousands of devout believers worldwide have been learning to simply let go of the hollow dross for the past several years now. You can, too. 

I highly doubt the Church will ever be reformed from within, because that would require the current administrators to give up all that wealth, prestige, power, and adoration.  I get the sense they don't have the moral capacity for that.


Next Entry: Let's Talk About Conspiracies!

Notes & Asides:
Much of the information in this post was previously covered in a couple of posts I wrote back in 2015. Rather than recreate that information from scratch, I lifted whole sections for inclusion in this one. There was necessarily a lot left behind and not included in here, so if you would like to see the originals, here they are:

The Real Threat to Traditional Marriage Part Three

The Hidden Reason for the Policy Change on Baptisms

From way back in 2010, here's the granddaddy of Momon hidden history, courtesy of information provided mostly by Damon Smith who worked deep in the bowels of the Magisterium.  He's the guy who revealed the actual name of the modern LDS church, and pointed out that one subdivision of the corporation, Intellectual Reserve, Inc, retains ownership of the name "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" as a trademark utilized by the corporation as needed, which is why most Mormons are not aware that isn't the actual name of the entity that runs things:

How Corporatism Has Undermined and Subverted The Church of Jesus Christ

Finally (for now), a reminder that there have been several updates to my last blog post, consisting mostly of important information you'll need to know if you intend to challenge the vaccine mandates (if and when those mandates ever go into effect).  Go to that site and scroll down to the bottom (just before the comments begin):

Religious Exemptions: You Don't Need the Approval of Your Bishop

UPDATE, October 14, 2021:
For those who may have clicked on the second link in the piece above and didn't find the story to that link ("the covid shot kills five times more people than it saves") I have corrected the link. Dr. Mercola only leaves his articles on his website for 48 hours, after which other mirror sites pick it up so it can always be found. I've linked to the piece at, one of my favorite news and commentary sites, where it goes by the title "More Than 200,000 Have Already Died From the Covid Jab in the US." 

The video that leads into the piece is a must-watch, and though it's two hours long, if you can't spare the time you can get the gist of the data by watching just the first few minutes.  Steve Kirby's research is impeccable and no one has challenged or refuted the data.