Nelson began by assuring listeners that they “can overcome this sin-saturated, self-centered and often exhausting world.” Shortly afterward, he provided a lengthy list of worldly “plagues,” including arrogance, anger, immorality and greed. Throughout the address, he continued to contrast the peace and stability of LDS teachings with the “distractions and distortions” of the world and urged us to “trust the doctrines of Christ more than the philosophies of men.”

Although leaders since the church’s inception have contrasted LDS teachings with “the ways of the world,” the narrative especially gained momentum in the decades following World War II with the rise of the sexual revolution, pro-communist ideologies and civil rights struggles. In order to protect discriminatory belief systems and practices that were receiving intense public scrutiny, such as the priesthood and temple ban on people of African descent, church leaders began positioning their institutional norms and policies as antithetical to the “secular” and “sinful” tendencies of the world. They have even described Satan as the author of social justice movements that have fought against racism, patriarchy and heteronormativity.

This ideological framework has undoubtedly influenced the modern church and continues to shape the rhetoric of its leaders. Nelson is among those who frequently elevates church teachings above the “sin-stained world,” a framework that I believe has several unhealthy effects on the church and its members.

Firstly, this kind of rhetoric enables an “us vs. them” mentality, which has the potential to taint and distort the way members interact with their non or former LDS friends and family members. I am aware of several instances in which LDS parents have prohibited their children from visiting their non-LDS friends’ houses. Even worse, I am aware of devoted church members ostracizing and even disowning family members who are “living in sin.” As part of my graduate research in Mormonism and sexuality, I have interviewed dozens of LGBTQ+ current or former members of the church. Tragically, countless individuals have described heinous acts of marginalization and othering from their own orthodox family members. I am certain that the “church vs. world” framework exacerbates this type of abuse, especially when leaders like Dallin H. Oaks frequently position queer identity and activism as oppositional to God’s teachings.

In addition to harming relationships and fueling abuse, decrying worldly ills also impacts the way many church members feel about science and current events. In 1993, Boyd K. Packer warned of three groups which constituted the “greatest threat to the church”: feminists, homosexuals and intellectuals. Although most current leaders no longer express such hard-line positions at the pulpit, this way of thinking still occupies space within the church. The anti-intellectual sentiments of Packer and other leaders can be clearly observed in a general skepticism among members toward science and public health, most recently demonstrated by a widespread reluctance to wear masks and get vaccinated in response to COVID-19. Similarly, framing feminism and homosexuality as insidious threats has caused many members to demonize LGBTQ+ individuals and delegitimize the struggle for gender and sexual equality.

Lastly, rhetoric that denounces the “ways of the world” prevents many members from thinking critically about harmful church teachings and practices. As the “church vs. world” narrative gained strength in the second half of the 19th century, LDS authorities became increasingly invested in the narrative that they are never influenced by sociocultural pressures and forces. This line of defense was especially utilized as the church faced increasing public scrutiny over their priesthood and temple ban on people of African descent, as well as their anti-feminist positions. By creating a construct known as “the world,” LDS leaders have been able to label those who criticize oppressive aspects of the church as being “worldly” — and according to Nelson, worldliness comes with a slew of negative attributes including pride, anger and hatred. This toxic framework is an example of what psychologists refer to as “poisoning the well,” in which members of an ingroup create an adverse narrative about outgroups, such that any criticism made by a member of the outgroup is immediately discounted.

Despite the harm caused by pitting “the world” against the church, more members than ever are beginning to think critically about harmful LDS teachings, especially younger generations. For instance, LDS sociologist Jana Reiss found in her “Next Mormons” survey that younger members are significantly more likely than older members to believe that homosexuality should be accepted by society. Her data revealed other hopeful trends in which millennial and Gen Z members of the church demonstrate greater willingness to examine and scrutinize social injustices and oppressive ideologies, both within and outside of the church.

As the 21st century church continues to grow and evolve amidst contemporary sociocultural norms, framing the world as antithetical to LDS teachings will only become increasingly unacceptable to Latter-day Saints. Worse, it will enable members to other and marginalize people with different beliefs and provide ongoing justification for the abuse of marginalized groups, most notably LGBTQ+ individuals. I challenge LDS leaders and members to think more carefully about the ways they speak of the world, with the hope that the church will move toward a more inclusive and unifying perspective of their relationship with broader culture and society.

Keith Burns is a graduate of Sarah Lawrence College who specializes in Mormonism and sexuality.