Back in the 80s and 90s, when VCRs were in vogue, many of us joked that there were videotapes of our lives that would be replayed after we died to determine if we were good enough or not at the Final Judgment. This notion was even part of the premise of the 1991 Albert Brooks / Meryl Streep movie Defending Your Life in which Brooks has to go in front of a tribunal, watching events from his life to defend his actions. In a similar vein, every Primary child has sung these words: “If the Savior stood beside me / would I do the things I do?” As a counterfactual this is not as sinister as the idea that Big Brother is always watching, but it’s a surveillance-based thought experiment.
The Panopticon effect is the self-disciplining behavior people adopt when they believe they are constantly being watched, even if surveillance isn’t continuous, stemming from Jeremy Bentham‘s prison design where a central guard tower could see all inmates, but inmates couldn’t see the guard. Coined by philosopher Michel Foucault, this concept explains how the possibility of observation induces individuals to internalize authority and regulate their own actions, leading to automatic conformity in prisons, schools, workplaces, and modern digital surveillance.
I was recently in a ward in another state, visiting family, and the speaker was a young man home from college. He said something that made the congregation laugh: “God is always watching you. Like a hawk. And Jesus is like a bald eagle or something.” He continued, adding that the Holy Ghost was always whispering things to you like “Don’t get the Cheetos,” and that if that happens you should. Not. Get. The. Cheetos. It was a talk that was both entertaining and also troubling. It’s the kind of thing that keeps therapists in business. When you imagine that you are under constant surveillance, you are prone to becoming scrupulous or developing OCD. At minimum, it’s pretty hard to relax and just live a normal life when you think every action, word and thought is under scrutiny. As we used to joke in the days of VCRs, was God watching you in the bathroom?
In a religious environment, surveillance operates like this:
- Omniscient watcher: God “sees your heart,” thoughts, intentions
- Moral reporting systems: confession, worthiness interviews, accountability partners
- Community enforcement: gossip, shaming, ostracism, “prayer concerns”
- Doctrinal absolutism: rules framed as eternal, unquestionable
- Fear of spiritual consequences: sin, damnation, loss of salvation, separation from God
Surveillance becomes metaphysical: Even your thoughts are not private.
In the modern world, we do encounter actual surveillance all the time: at the airport, CCTV cameras at the ATM, security cameras in businesses, Airbnbs with exterior cameras, our phones overhearing us chatting about a band we like then getting bombarded with ads for that band’s upcoming concert, etc. These aspects of surveillance may curb our behavior if there are potential consequences for the things we do. It’s why some people refuse to have a social media account or like to use incognito mode on their computer. It’s why criminals who are smart avoid being caught on camera or wear a cap pulled low over their face. Stressing out criminals or making it harder to commit crimes isn’t the worst thing to happen.
But feeling like you are in a surveillance state for non-crimes (such as thoughts) can be particularly damaging. This is even more true when the surveillance is internalized. It can manifest as:
- Harsh inner critic
- Chronic shame
- Self-punishment
- Perfectionism
- Moral anxiety
You don’t need cameras anymore—the mind does the policing. This college kid who thinks that God is watching him like a hawk (and probably also judging his thoughts) lives under the constant threat of detection, that he will not be good enough, that normal feelings like sexual attraction or anger must be suppressed lest God see him falling short of the LDS ideal he’s been taught. This can lead to increased anxiety, depression, and trauma symptoms. In high-surveillance environments like high-control religions or families, people often develop PTSD-like symptoms.
- Emotional numbness
- Fear of making mistakes
- Difficulty trusting others
- Hyper-responsibility
- Indecision
In high-vigilance groups and families, the focus shifts from healthy ways of relating to unhealthy ones:
- Mutual care → mutual monitoring
- Belonging → compliance
- Solidarity → suspicion
This leads to people feeling isolated, even when surrounded by others. This type of approach also stunts moral development. When I was growing up, we always used to say that the bishop’s kids were the worst, meaning the most rebellious, the hellions, especially when they got away from their family. I don’t necessarily think that is true given the majority of bishops’ families I’ve known, but it is somewhat true that families in which the parents exert a lot of control over their children and demand conformity often turn out kids who run the other way when they reach adulthood. In Jennette McCurdy’s autobiography I’m Glad My Mom Died she talks about being raised by a very controlling mother in the Mormon church, and once she became independent (while she was also grieving her complicated loss after her mother’s death) she really went off the deep end. As Andrew S pointed out, the Church does a good job teaching abstinence and a terrible job teaching moderation. If you’ve been completely locked down in relation to sex and alcohol and now suddenly you can do whatever, you might be prone to more extreme behavior.
Surveillance encourages rule-following over moral reasoning, obedience over conscience, and avoidance of punishment over ethical reflection. Instead of asking oneself “What’s the right thing to do?” a person will ask “What will happen if someone sees me doing this?”
This is particularly damaging because it changes caregivers and supporters to monitors we must fool and please through our actions, hiding any unacceptable (as defined by the surveillance system) parts of ourselves. This is particularly damaging to LGBTQ and other marginalized people whose very existence requires masking to “pass” in a hyper-surveillance community or family. Being loved requires being approved by the people watching us in such a system. Everything you do can and will be measured by these observations.
There can be long-term effects of living in this kind of environment. People often:
- Choose “safe” careers over meaningful ones
- Avoid leadership or visibility
- Struggle with boundaries
- Over-function to avoid criticism
- Experience delayed identity development
- Need later life “deprogramming” to rediscover agency
In order to heal from the mindset that develops through this kind of upbringing, people need to recognize it, name it, focus on practices that restore embodiment and reduce fear and shame. Essentially, the individual needs to learn that they are allowed to exist without being watched, and that they are a trustworthy person who merits love and acceptance without being compelled to comply with someone else’s wishes.
- Do you recognize any of these traits in yourself?
- Do you think the church is hyper-vigilant of member behavior? How does it compare with other churches?
- Did you experience the compounding effect of family culture, or did your family culture help mitigate the surveillance you experienced at Church?
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
Great post. One of the points that Foucault made about Panopticism was that it was very “light”; that is, it was both efficient and unobtrusive because the prisoners essentially became their own police. This is why stores can put up fake surveillance cameras and still cut down on crime. Whether the camera works is irrelevant; people see the camera, feel like they’re being watched, and refrain from stealing a candy bar or whatever.
To your larger points, this does lead to a fear-based view of right and wrong. It’s a cosmic irony that the LDS Church, an institution that constantly rails against “the world” and its evils, appropriates a short-sighted, fear-based view of morality (in other words, a worldly one). I always thought that the goal of religion was to shepherd us through this life as we learned the difficult lesson of how to give love and get love despite the fact that the world does everything it can to break our hearts. In my sad experience, the LDS Church, at least during the forty years I’ve been a member of it, has been more concerned with using fear (a panoptic view of God) to keep people obedient and conforming than with teaching people how to love each other through difficulties. I suppose that’s my way of answering your question about the church’s hyper-vigilance of member behavior. That’s absolutely what they’re doing. That’s what worthiness interviews are for, that’s what the temple is for, that’s what “ministering” assignments are for, that’s what church courts are for. All exist to ensure that members behave a certain way. Foucault refers to this as “the swarming of the disciplinary mechanisms”.
One of the few advantages of being an outsider in a culture is that these things are more easily observed. Since I don’t give a rat’s ass about temple worthiness or conformity to LDS norms/culture (and because I once read Foucault), I utterly reject this view of morality and don’t have any qualms about saying so. Such a stance alienates me further from mainstream LDS culture, but it also makes me feel like I’m embracing what is, for me (I can’t speak for anyone else), a way to live a life rooted more in kindness and love rather than fear and conformity. In the movie A Bronx Tale, Chazz Palminteri’s character, a gangster named Sonny, says that “fear lasts longer than love”. I think he’s right and I think the LDS Church knows this. I think our chief moral obligation in this life is to do all we can to tip the balance away from fear and more towards love. It pains me to say that I no longer believe that the LDS Church thinks so.
Good topic, but it is so much broader than just the church. I was raised LDS in Ohio, but moved to Utah in 1982. I was a teacher, and it soon became apparent I was being watched not only in church but in society as well. My wife is also a teacher and had an experience this past fall that illustrates what I mean. She teaches drama, and the school play was the “25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee.” She got a high school version and got it cleared by the principal and the school board. The kids did a great job doing the play, but after the first night’s performance, a parent complained about how an actor acted “gay.” She didn’t come to the performance. She relied on her child’s explanation of the play, a freshman doing tech work behind the stage, who didn’t want to do it and was mad. The mom got the original play online somehow and read it, and then wrote a letter to the school board and principal about how she was going to take this up with the governor of the state about how bad it was.
This really upset my wife. I pointed out that the governor would not do anything but would refer her back to the school board, and they had approved it. She was then worried she might take it to the Professional Practices committee at the State Office of Education, and I said they would again refer it back to the district to do an investigation, and wouldn’t do anything, and even if they did come out to do an investigation, they would see that it was approved by the principal and the school board. I also said that virtually everyone in the town loved the play. The school board president, who is also the bishop, said there was one kid who acted a bit gay, but he didn’t even mention that one of the characters portrayed in the play had two dads.
This has all blown over, but not without hurt to my wife. Teachers worry about what they can or cannot say based on laws passed in the legislature concerning DEI or sexual orientation, and also the power of the Professional Practices committee to discipline teachers. Some parents have their own narrow moral outlooks and are constantly on guard for how state schools are teaching our children to be socialists or some other terrible thing.
So we know, as it was mentioned, there are ideas in the church that someone is always watching. We also know that while it may not be the lord, it certainly is the ward. But there is also a “1984” overlook in our society. Whether it’s the government, the community, the Internet, or Social Media, some of us have had to look over our shoulders to see who is watching constantly. Compound that with demands made by the legislature on our public servants, and it’s easy to see how some of us can get a bit paranoid that “someone is watching.”
LDS missions are Mormon culture on steroids. A few examples from my mission:
1. A member organized a hike on P-Day for the missionaries and youth/young adults in the area. It was well attended, with maybe 40-50 people. The hike included a long, extremely steep descent to a river. I have always been an avid hiker, so it wasn’t really very dangerous for me personally or for the more physically active people. However, I remember being extremely nervous about the safety of a number of the hikers (mostly members who really didn’t hike at all) as I saw them slip and slide down that cliff (I climbed back up to help any way that I could). Having reached the river, the rest of the hike was very beautiful and uneventful until we hit one spot where a river crossing was unavoidable. It wasn’t a long crossing (maybe 30 feet), and the water was very calm there, but you absolutely had to swim. Well, swimming was prohibited by the missionary “white bible” we literally had to carry with us everywhere we went. As a result, the missionaries on the hike considered hiking back up the river and up that cliff again, but I convinced them (wisely, I think) that even though cliff hiking wasn’t explicitly prohibited by the white bible, climbing back up that cliff was far more dangerous than the short swim across the river. Some of the members, aware that swimming was prohibited, intentionally took photos of each missionary swimming across the river. All the missionaries on the hike sternly told the members never to share those photos with anyone (luckily this was pre-internet, pre-digital photos). We were all very worried about the repercussions if it was discovered we’d gone swimming, even though it was truly the smartest thing to do in that situation.
2. The local ward organized a big ward caroling activity where missionaries and ward members would ride, mostly on bikes (the missionaries) and moto scooters (the members), around the city and carol at various members’ homes. It was a large group, maybe 100+ people, including 16+ missionaries. My bike had been having troubles, and right as the group, including my companion, was pulling away from one of the houses, my bike chain came off. No one in the group noticed my mechanical problem, so the group rode off without me. I had been on my mission a long time, but I had just barely moved to the area, and I didn’t have the map of the caroling route, so I had no idea where the group was headed. Of course, we didn’t have cell phones, and as I’d only been in the area for a couple of days and we were in a part of the city I’d never been to, I had no idea how to return to the chapel or my apartment. After repairing my bike and trying to figure out what to do next, a young woman from the ward rode up on her scooter. To be more specific, a very attractive young woman, the same age as the missionaries, rode up on her scooter. She had been late to the caroling activity. She knew the city and the caroling route and was trying to catch up with everyone. She recognized that I was a missionary, and I explained what had happened. She offered me a ride on the back of her scooter to quickly catch up with the group. That was a very appealing offer, and honestly probably the smartest thing to do, since she could catch up with the group much faster on her scooter than if she had to wait for me on my bike. My companion and I could return and retrieve my bike after the caroling was over. It was even more appealing since it would probably mean I’d need to wrap my arms around this girl’s waist to secure myself on the back of the scooter. So…after a little thought, I told her I wasn’t allowed to ride on scooters (which was true—missionaries were banned from scooters), but that I was completely lost and I really needed her to ride slowly so that I could follow her on my bike. In reality, if it had been a male on a scooter that had come along, I almost certainly would have accepted the ride–the “no scooter rule” could have been explained away pretty easily in this case. I was really concerned about the repercussions if all the missionaries in the area saw me riding on the back of the scooter with this attractive young woman.
Here’s a more recent example from my daughter’s mission:
When my daughter arrived in her mission, for some reason the mission president assigned her to someone who shouldn’t have been training any new missionary. This missionary had only been on her mission for 2 transfers, had non-existent local language skills, and I’m convinced that she suffers from religious scrupulosity (I think that was why she was made a trainer so early–he scrupulosity made her seem super righteous and obedient to the mission president), which she tried to impose on my daughter as well. It was hard, and from our weekly calls, I could tell that my daughter’s mental health was deteriorating for the first time in her life. I tried to help her as much as I could. However, the mission rules are strict, and her companion was extremely obedient, so when she discovered that my daughter was emailing more frequently than on P-Days, she chewed her out and reported her to the mission president. Missionaries have to use Samsung phones because the Church requires them to install special Samsung software that allows them to lock down the phone to a very extreme degree. However, we came up with a number of workarounds to avoid detection from the companion. One of the most fun workarounds involved a Google Doc (missionaries can use Google Docs). The top of the Google Doc was one of Dallin Oaks’ General Conference talks that would appeal to a super conservative member like my daughter’s companion. However, my daughter and I would write messages to each other at the bottom of the document and then change the font color of our messages to white. That made our messages invisible. Each week, my daughter’s companion dutifully performed the required 30+ minute “device audit” on my daughter’s phone—this is where missionaries turn over their phones to their companions, and their companions are supposed to open all the apps, all the messages, photos, etc. in an attempt to find any violation of the rules. Sometimes she even conducted “surprise audits” during the week. Talk about surveillance! In any case, my daughter said that her companion had opened this doc during device audits (because you can see recently accessed docs), but she just assumed my daughter liked Oaks’ talk because she never discovered the “invisible ink” at the bottom.
As I said, some of the missionary examples of Church surveillance, while very real, are kind of over-the-top for most regular members. That said, I’m convinced that missionary life is simply Mormonism on steroids. Church surveillance is very much a part of every member’s lived experience.
Mountainclimber479- I am shocked that the church as a missionaries companion doing a “device audit.” How intrusive! Does anyone know if this is standard practice for all companionships or something your daughter’s mission president put into place?
Parsimmon – this is a worldwide practice.
I grew up in the 80s and 90s, and the whole God is always watching was accompanied by Satan is always watching too. I remember being taught not say your weaknesses/fears/temptations out loud because Satan was listening and would use it against you. (Except for prayer. You could say your weaknesses to God out loud, but somehow Satan was blocked from hearing it).
In my sad experience, the constant idea of God watching leads to fear. And too much concern about outward appearances. Then extreme behaviors like hours of scripture study a day to show God your commitment. I have a family member who took the idea of giving God your best time and not just your leftover time to an extreme. Very very long group prayers that made people late-no short prayers allowed, as it meant you didn’t put God first. And yes, hours of scripture study a day. Among so many others. And always driven by the fear of not being worthy. Don’t get me started on the whole empty chair/sad heaven thing. The control and fear of that idea has been frankly devastating. There’s so much fear of eternal loss that not only does each and every choice they make have unbearable spiritual consequences, but so does every choice and action of their family. Devastating is not an exaggeration.
It is possible to have standards and not fear?
As someone with natural tendencies toward OCD/scrupulosity, I can attest that growing up LDS can bring this fear-based mentality out in the worst possible way. It took years of deconstruction, learning nuanced thinking, and selective discarding of certain Church teachings to get to a much healthier state of mind. But I’m still bitter of having had to unnecessarily live with so much negative self-talk during my youth/young adult years, which I should have been enjoying without giving a thought to possible Celestial surveillance.
I suppose some people find comfort in the idea of “God is always watching”, but that makes the possibility even more insidious to me. If God really watches over all, then He must be fully aware of all the horrible things His earthly children do to one another every day, yet He does absolutely nothing to stop it, or even abate it. Which brings up more questions about whether or not God is truly omnipotent, then how can He see everything but do nothing? A neglectful/indifferent parent is just as abusive as a purposefully violent one. Of course, there is a much more logical explanation that answers these questions, but it is one that would probably get me hauled into the bishop’s office if I said it out loud at church.
@Parsimmon, as “it’s a series of tubes” says, device audits are a worldwide practice for LDS missionaries. They’re defined in a booklet titled “Using Technology Wisely and Righteously” given to all missionaries. Here’s the pertinent section: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/safeguards-for-using-technology/using-technology-wisely-device-accountability?lang=eng
Some quotes:
“When do I perform a device accountability review? Companionships should regularly review each other’s devices. These reviews could be included in your weekly planning.”
“Preach My Gospel invites you to ‘help your mission develop a culture of unity, trust, accountability, and compassion so you can all strengthen and support one another.'”
“What should I review on another missionary’s device? As you review another missionary’s device, respect each other’s personal information by not looking at private emails, journals, and notes. Consider the following as you perform the review:”
“What evidence do I see of positive and effective technology use?”
“Is this device an approved smartphone that is enrolled properly in Church protections? If the smartphone is enrolled properly, it will say ‘This device is managed (or owned) by your organization’ on the lock screen.”
“Review and discuss their recent Digital Well-Being statistics. Discuss what is going well and what challenges they may be facing. Ask how you or your mission leaders can best help and offer support.”
“What if I find something concerning on another missionary’s device or social media? Be sensitive and considerate when you review another missionary’s device. If you see something concerning, you might ask the missionary a few basic questions in a nonthreatening, nonjudgmental way. Give them the opportunity to be accountable and take responsibility by asking their mission president for help. Express love and support. If you still feel concerned after talking with the missionary or they are unwilling to discuss the issue with your mission president, ask your mission president for help.”
That’s the Church’s worldwide guidance. Unfortunately, my daughter certainly did not win at “mission president roulette.” Her mission president published specific rules and guidelines for these *at least* weekly device audits between companions. Some highlights:
1. The audit had to take at least 30 minutes, but longer is fine (I guess if juicy material is found?). Yep, you have to hand your phone over to your companion and let them dig, dig, dig to find any and all “abuse of technology” they can find.
2. A specific list of apps to investigate was given.
3. The missionary was to ensure that the Church’s draconian device restriction software for Samsung phones was still properly installed.
4. A specific list of things to look for was given: any personal emails or messages not sent during P-Day, apps that were used for a suspiciously large amount of time, etc. Yeah, missionaries weren’t technically supposed to dig into private emails or messages, but my daughter had a few very “obedient” companions that absolutely loved doing just that.
My daughter has a good friend who served in a different mission. Apparently, missionaries were aware of device audits in that mission, but they weren’t done regularly by most missionaries. So yes, device audits are a worldwide standard, but the actual practice varies from mission to mission according to good ol’ Mormon leadership roulette.
“Develop a culture of unity, trust, accountability, and compassion,” by having missionaries spy on each other by checking your devices in a spirit of spying and ratting out any infractions. Yup, that will help the companions trust each other, and treating the missionaries like disobedient children who cannot be trusted is a great way to demonstrate that the church leaders trust and respect the missionaries. Such a warm nurturing environment. Exactly how Christ treated people. Yup, and setting up such an example of how adults love and trust each other and such good preparation for marriage. [end sarcasm]
I used to do counseling at a battered women’s shelter and one thing that was a really bad red flag was a spouse checking your phone. It screamed lack of trust and desire to control. Having companions check each other’s phones is such an unhealthy environment. I would not ever allow a child of mine in that kind of environment and am SO glad that I have zero grandchildren at risk of going on a mission. Never once thought I would be grateful for all my grandchildren being safely out of the church. But here we are.
Joseph Smith: “I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves.”
What ever happened to that?
D&C 1:3 And the rebellious shall be pierced with much sorrow; for their iniquities shall be spoken upon the housetops, and their secret acts shall be revealed.
One Church Leader (I think Regional Representative) taught a Stake Fireside of us youth (in my teen days) about this scripture, and, it sounded almost like there would be a Technicolor film of our lives shown to every one of the Earth that has ever lived. Since then, I know some members have said they don’t see any spiritual value to see basically every little detail, flaw, & whim of others, one called like a X rated film of everyone that ever lived. I would like to think it won’t be quite like that.
Now, the device probing of fellow Missionaries could be taken way too far. I served a mission way before PDA, cellphones, internet, etc. I had one Zone Leader, notorious for misconduct, like skinny dipping in the pool behind their apartment, water skiing (!), going to the Peach Bowl (when not authorized), etc. He was quick to get after some of us for anything we did wrong, line that cover his sins. The same kind of shifting of errors could happen with device auditing.
I add my gratitude for having zero grandchildren at risk of going on a mission. And I do not applaud the new 18 year old eligibility for girls- it concerns me! Oakes has recently stated that he wants them all to get married sooner and have children right away, so from an Institutional pov, it makes good sense: The Institution wants the hearts and minds of our children to remain under their watchful eye and remain in fear of some kind of damnation- Hell fire and brimstone, according to Alma 12 & 14.
Missions are certainly Institutional policing on steroids!
And let’s not forget the Strengthening Church Members Committee!
Wow! What I am reading about “device audits” is so disturbing! How anyone could think this is ok is beyond me. What an unhealthy dynamic to introduce into a missionary companionship.
Thank you for sharing the information on this practice. I had no idea this was happening. This is quite disturbing to say the least. Has anyone protested or complained about this practice? I don’t see how this practice leads to building trust or the type of culture which would contribute to a successful missionary companionship.
Yesterday, dismayed by this “device audit” practice I was unaware of, I called my son who returned from his mission a year and a half ago to verify its truth. He told me it was suggested as a weekly intervention and then would also be conducted on splits with District or Zone leaders. I asked him how he or others actually did it. He only said he never took it seriously, not wanting to be part of a culture of ratting out companions. I am most baffled, not by the practice (which I do find abhorrent) but more by calling it trust, love and unity. To scour for evidence of wrongdoing without any reason to do so is not a culture of accountability, it’s screaming from the rooftops, you are guilty till proven innocent, played on an endless loop. This promotes nothing more than a nervous system trained for constant investigation, which only rewards hiding. Trust does not grow under surveillance; it flourishes with safety.
I am amused by this handwringing over device checks. Parents who provide phones to their children should do the same thing. The human brain doesn’t fully develop until about age 25 so these kids need supervision. Mission leaders are just substitute parents of 100+ kids.
As for God is Watching you… it’s a societal thing as much a ‘church’ thing. Remember Bette Medler’s song God is watching you from a distance …. Just my opinion, no research, but I think this God watching thing is a hallmark of Judeo/Christian/Muslim cultures. I don’t see it in Hindu or Buddhist cultures.
At risk of taking this topic on a bit of a tangent, as I read this I couldn’t help wonder whether our perceptions of God’s ability to surveil everything about us are a function of the technological environments we live in. Is it possible our great grandparents wouldn’t be able to relate to any of this at all because they didn’t live in a world of screens and video recordings? That fairly common ideas that have been part of Christian teachings for centuries are now messing with our brains more than they used to because we can visualize what such surveillance looks like?
I’m a bit surprised at the number of commenters here who weren’t aware of the device audit system required of missionaries. It sounds like the degree to which these are practiced and enforced varies from mission to mission based on leadership roulette. My daughter’s mission president devoted significant time in multiple zone conferences training his missionaries exactly how he wanted these done. They were conducted weekly and during splits with missionary leaders, and each missionary had to spend *at least* 30 minutes attempting to find evidence of violations on their companion’s phone—scanning through apps, emails, text messages, photos, documents, music, and video files. My daughter told me that a significant minority of missionaries made it their goal to find *something*—anything—to report to the mission president. These missionaries were despised by many others, but they also tended to be promoted quickly to leadership positions.
Anna, Parsimmon, and Todd S are right to scratch their heads wondering how device audits might possibly “develop a culture of unity, trust, accountability, and compassion” (a direct quote from the missionary manual). This is classic doublespeak. Even the name of the standards book (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/missionary-standards-for-disciples-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng) missionaries are supposed to study daily is doublespeak: “Missionary Standards for Disciples of Jesus Christ.” It’s a book of rules—that part is accurate—but these rules have little to do with being a “disciple of Jesus Christ.” In some cases, they seem to be in direct conflict with that aim. Device audits would be one example. By naming it this way, the implication is that missionaries who deviate from those rules are *not* good disciples.
Parsimmon asked if anyone ever protested or complained. With a mission president like my daughter’s, complaining—openly or privately—would be very ill-advised. You’d be viewed as a rebel, someone who isn’t trying to be a “good disciple,” and you’d be assigned undesirable companions, undesirable areas, and never allowed into leadership or special projects. As a parent, I came very close to writing an anonymous letter to him complaining about his practices. I had a whole list of things he was forcing missionaries to do—he had his own supplemental rulebook that “clarified” the general standards book—and I even drafted the letter. But by the time I fully understood the scope of what he was doing, there were only 3–4 months until his replacement arrived, so I never sent it. I was definitely going to send it anonymously, since the repercussions for my daughter were very real if he knew whose father was complaining.
Fortunately, the new mission president didn’t like his predecessor’s ways. He immediately revoked all the extra rules and worked to improve the mission culture. My daughter brought suggestions for improvement to him and was immediately moved into mission leadership (as a Sister Training Leader) for the remaining six months of her mission. Leadership roulette is real!
@superbravely383e64cac7: I just saw your comment. I sympathize with mission presidents who are asked to supervise and limit the damage that young missionaries can do to themselves, to others, and to the Church. It’s a difficult task. However, I don’t think having companions “dig for dirt” on each other’s phones once a week is the answer. It creates conflict between companions where unity is essential. These missionaries are 18–20+ years old. Should the Church provide training on healthy phone use? Sure, that seems reasonable. Should the Church have companions or mission leaders regularly trying to dig up dirt on their phones? Absolutely not. The vast majority of missionaries would otherwise be at college or doing other things where no parent or other adult is monitoring their cell phone this way. Will people this age sometimes use their phones in undesirable ways? Yes, but at this age, young adults should be allowed to make and learn from their mistakes on their own terms. If they feel they need help, they can ask for it.
Superbravely,
You have given the best reason why 18 is too young- these kids should not be on missions at all!
And thankyou for the Strawman of this belief that god is watching is prevalent in western culture. Sure it is! Aren’t Mormons taught they have to do better than “the world”?
Institutional policing does NOT help youth or adults learn to govern themselves!
I’m also horrified by the idea of device audits performed by missionaries on other missionaries. That takes tattle culture to a whole new level. Who came up with this nonsense? Mike Johnson? When I served, I also routinely ignored the ill-advised mission rule that you were supposed to watch for any flirtations and rat out other missionaries who seemed to have a crush on someone. FFS, these were 20 year olds–OF COURSE THEY HAD CRUSHES. Aside from which, once you introduce a police state (deputizing every rando to fancy him or herself the arbiter of “acceptable” behavior) you unleash all sorts of bad behaviors: jealousy and retribution, imagining things that aren’t there then seeing “evidence” based on confirmation bias, tearing down trust and respect by confronting people based on suspicions that might be nothing more than your own petty grievances or wishful thinking. And all this happening in a culture that teaches you that your thoughts and feelings are to be trusted above all else, even when you have no direct knowledge and can’t read minds and have very little life experience.
It’s interesting to see people’s reactions to learning about the missionary device audits. The software that the Church requires missionaries to install on their phones, called MaaS360, is also related to this post regarding Church surveillance of its members/missionaries. My daughter had to purchase a Samsung phone specifically for her mission because the MaaS360 app is only compatible with Samsung phones. At some point during her mission, the Church decided to just start issuing phones to new missionaries (Samsung phones, of course) so that everyone would have the same phone and the same MaaS360 software running on it.
Missionaries (or their parents) aren’t clearly told what MaaS360 does, and I think that ties into the OP very well. Some of the things it does are easy to figure out:
1. It blocks missionaries from installing almost any app. My daughter’s mission required them to order rides from time to time (for moves and occasionally for other purposes). Uber is very active in the country she served in and would have been very convenient for her to use. However, missionaries were not allowed to install Uber. They had to call or flag down taxis instead, which was often more expensive and certainly less convenient. There are some very high quality and well-known language learning/dictionary/translation apps for her mission language. However, missionaries were only permitted to install exactly one of these apps, and it was one of the crappiest and least functional of the bunch.
2. It blocks all search engine searches. Missionaries literally cannot do a Google search—for anything. I imagine the rationale here is that Google search results can show some undesirable things, but trying to come up with a list of allowed/disallowed searches is very hard, so the solution is just to disallow all search engine searches.
3. It tracks minutes spent using each app—something that is used by aggressive device auditors as a starting point for where to dig for dirt.
4. It blocks access to almost all websites. Church websites are accessible, and that’s pretty much it. Missionaries can’t access news websites, weather websites, government websites (to look up information on what they need to do to renew their visa, for example), etc.
That’s what my daughter knew the Church’s MaaS360 software was doing on her phone. But here’s where this connects directly to the Panopticon effect described in the post—what my daughter and her fellow missionaries *didn’t* know is what made it truly effective as a control mechanism:
1. Could MaaS360 allow the Church/mission president to read missionaries’ emails, docs, etc.? (Or did the Church/mission president have access through Google since each missionary has a Church-provided Google account?)
2. Were calls home recorded by the MaaS360 software?
3. Could MaaS360 allow a mission president to track a missionary’s location? Without getting into details, my daughter’s mission had ridiculously strict rules about “leaving one’s area,” even if it was something like going to eat at a good restaurant not in her area but that was directly across the street from a park where they tried to contact people on a regular basis.
4. Was MaaS360 sending everything that happened on each missionary’s phone to backend servers with sophisticated AI functionality capable of flagging “undesirable” communication or content for the mission president to examine?
We never got answers to these questions. And that uncertainty is exactly the point. My daughter and I were very careful about what we said to each other about her companions, the mission president, etc. in emails and other messages. We were, at least initially, genuinely afraid that the Church was recording and transcribing our phone conversations and providing them to her mission president. We eventually decided to speak more openly, but for much of her mission we self-censored out of fear of detection.
That’s the Panopticon working exactly as designed. The Church didn’t need to actually monitor every call or read every email. The *possibility* that they might was enough to change our behavior. We internalized the surveillance and policed ourselves.
Children need constant supervision. So do we–and it’s not such a terrible thing when we understand that God’s love and empathy for each one of us is deeper than we can comprehend.
Speaking of my own case: I’m my own worst enemy–and the church has been a bastion of sanity for me as I work at getting above the horrid OCD that never sleeps.
“Parsimmon asked if anyone ever protested or complained. With a mission president like my daughter’s, complaining—openly or privately—would be very ill-advised. You’d be viewed as a rebel, someone who isn’t trying to be a “good disciple,” and you’d be assigned undesirable companions, undesirable areas, and never allowed into leadership or special projects.”
Yes, this is true. Some Mission Presidents are narcissistic, and any questioning would lead to being labeled disobedient, or, not being faithful.
With so many web sites being blocked by MaaS360, how many bad things can can really be viewed on phones? Is it more of a worry about a waste of time? Back on my mission, we didn’t have companions review letters home, which would have been the closest thing to that.
This subject also reminds me of the too graphic worthiness Interviews of members, especially teens. It sounds at first take like a good idea to catch sins, but, there’s issues with doing that. There can also be the “mote and the beam” problem, where one missionary can be very picky about his companion’s phone usage & topics viewed, but, ignore their own flaws.
@Mike H, good question. Despite MaaS360’s restrictions, several approved apps create workarounds, especially if a missionary has a willing accomplice:
1. Facebook – Many missions use it heavily for proselyting, contacting, and remote lessons. But it’s all-or-nothing filtering, so missionaries also have access to news, provocative content, anti-Mormon groups, all kinds of videos, etc. This was a major focus of device audits in my daughter’s mission.
2. Facebook Messenger – Approved for weekly video calls home and often the local messaging standard. Missionaries sometimes use it to message family, friends, or romantic interests outside authorized times.
3. Gmail – Missionaries can receive email anytime (sending is P-Day only). A willing partner can forward news digests, e-books, music files, or other content as attachments. Messaging with a partner can also be done stealthily in an email draft if the missionary is willing to share the username/password of their missionary Google account.
4. Google Docs – My daughter and I communicated using “invisible ink”—white text at the bottom of a document titled as a General Conference talk. Her companion opened the doc during audits but never scrolled down.
5. Google Photos – Allowed for storing mission photos, but a partner can share anything. The comment feature also works for covert messaging.
The blocking is limiting, but Facebook is a gaping hole, and with a cooperative partner, getting any desired unauthorized content is inconvenient rather than impossible.
@Mike H, I submitted my comment too quickly. Yes, wasting time does seem to be one of the main concerns here. While my daughter does view her mission experience as largely positive, she also feels like doing missionary work the way it’s done in that country (which is similar to many other countries) in this day and age is a big waste of time because it’s so incredibly inefficient. When missionary work is such a fruitless grind most of the time, it should be no surprise that many missionaries resort to scrolling Facebook to pass the time whenever they have the chance.
On one hand I am surprised that this is in place. On the other hand, this is the church that makes the ward clerk approve the user uploaded photo which appears by your name in the member directory within the LDS Tools app. As a former (and overworked) ward clerk, I once asked if we could remove this and allows users to upload their photo without needing approval. This would save the ward clerk some time (albeit a small amount of time).
The response was, “and what would you do if someone uploaded an inappropriate photo.” My response was that we have 500 members in our ward and, despite being ward clerk for years, I’ve never seen an inappropriate photo uploaded. Furthermore, if someone did upload an inappropriate photo, I’d ask them to take it down. If they didn’t, then I’d use my admin privileges to remove it.
The look on the person’s face was as if I was speaking Klingon.
Jack,
We aren’t children any more. Maybe if the church would start treating everyone like adults, everyone would finally grow up.
So, to recap, we *are* comfortable with taking 18-year-olds that graduated from high school a few months ago and
– sending them to the other side of the world
– giving them extremely minimal language training
– exposing them to living conditions they’ve never experienced (parasites, bad drinking water, etc.)
– making them cook for themselves for the first time in their lives, in a foreign place with foreign foods
– sending them into all sorts of neighborhoods to knock on doors and talk to strangers
But we are absolutely *not* comfortable with them
– using Google
– reading the news
– going to the corner store by themselves
– sleeping in a private bedroom
– listening to music of their own choosing
Am I the only one who looks around sometimes and feels like the church is trying to implement Satan’s plan?
(insert meme of Eleanor Shellstrop saying “This is the bad place”)
chrisdrobson:
“We aren’t children any more. Maybe if the church would start treating everyone like adults, everyone would finally grow up.”
The Book of Mormon gives us an interesting picture to look at on that account: When the Lord’s people misbehaved he loved them enough to send them his prophets to warn them. But he wouldn’t force them to repent–he only warned them. And because he would not force them–because he allowed them to make their own decisions–both the Nephite and Jaredite civilizations went extinct.
Sorry: Robison with an “i”.
Jack,
God sending a middleman, who clearly doesn’t get the message from God with much if any clarity, instead of coming himself is just lazy parenting. We’ve got to stop making excuses for God and retweeting the same old tired sayings that stop us from thinking and engaging more deeply.
chrisdrobison,
That’s the situation we were in before coming here. We’re having a different experience in this sphere–one that places at a distance from God. And so he graciously sends his servants to help us along the way; “sent ones” he calls them–and the greatest of these is the Savior himself.
That said, the great irony is that the message of the sent ones is that our one-on-one relationship with God can be restored to what it was before. So here we are working to reestablishing that relationship–with the Lord’s servants helping us along through the long and sometimes arduous process of preparing to meet God.
Even the Holy Ghost is a sent one–one who is sent to testify of the reality of the Father and the Son. And inasmuch as mortality is a new experience for us we need as much guidance as the Lord will graciously provide us–which, according to the canon, is more than we have room to receive at times.
That said, oh, how important it is that we become as little children — as the Savior counseled the Nephites — so that we would feel no shame in looking to him or his sent ones for help and assurance. We simply cannot get there without a little help–and it is by design that much of that help will come from the Lord’s servants and from fellow travelers.
The study of literature learns through compare and contrast.
Torah common law not to be confused with Xtian and Muslim religious theology wherein both religions created their Gods, from the Nicene Creed to Islam’s strict Monotheism Universal God. The Book of Yonah compares to the Book of Job. Both address the destruction of g’lut. The Assyrian empire conquered by the Babylonian empire shortly after Yonah. Torah common law not a religion – bottom line. During the Dark Ages period of the Crusades Jews favored to convert Torah judicial common law courts into a Codified statute law religion strikingly similar to the Catholic church during its scholastic period during this time period.
The kabbalah concept of שכינה makes a סוד opaque – concealment of light – reference to the Sinai revelation of the שם השם wherein Torah permanently revealed as the revelation of this local tribal god in this world. The construction of the Mishkan, likewise another Torah revelation at Sinai to this precise same impact. The 13 tohor middot revealed at Horev following the Golden Calf, rabbi Yochanon taught the סוד opaque kabbalah that all ברכות צריך שם ומלכות; meaning that swearing a Torah oath לשמה requires the sanctification of Oral Torah middot or מלכות. Hence the Shemone Esrei contains 3 + 13 + 3 blessings – תרי”ג; Six Yom Tov + Shabbat – the opening and closing three blessings and the 13 chol and one shabbat blessing(s) refer to the direction of future social behavior through some dedicated tohor middah. Herein defines the K’vanna of all korbanot dedications.
The distinctions in Divine names (e.g., El Shaddai for the patriarchs vs. the Tetragrammaton at Sinai) underscore this shift: the patriarchs experienced God through promises and personal encounters, but Sinai revealed a national, judicial common law legalism. Justice the one word definition of Freedom from Egyptian slavery and invasion of Canaan לשמה.
Law as a “guardian” (παιδαγωγός, often translated as tutor or schoolmaster) until faith in Christ arrives misrepresents Torah as temporary or punitive, rather than an eternal system of pursuing justice. The Sinai revelation no more waits upon JeZeus than do Jews today. Torah functions as the Constitutional mandate of Sanhedrin common law ‘legislative review’ courtroom law. דברים טז:כ – the command to pursue justice actively through courts and ethical behavior. This shares no common ground with: get “Saved & baptized in the name of JeZeus.”
he Torah’s blessings and curses (e.g., ויקרא כו) – tied to ruling the land with justice, uprooting Canaanite avoda zara; meaning to prevent assimilation (ערב רב) and intermarriage. Amalek in all generations the consequences of Jewish assimilation and intermarriage.
The Book of Shemuel addresses the subject of Moshiach for the first time? No. Such a טיפש פשט fails to grasp that the NaCH Prophets and Holy Writings serve as hand maidens to the Kallah Torah bride; Moshe the greatest of the Prophets. Moshe anointed the House of Aaron as Moshiach; Penchas lead the warriors against the king of Moav who hired Bil’aam to curse Israel as משיח מלחמה. The entire purpose of korbanot to dedicate צדק צדק תרדוף as the definition of Torah faith.
Confusing the forms of faith for the substance of faith turned the heart of king Shlomo to worship avoda zara. The “temple” not some grand Catholic Cathedral but Federal Sanhedrin Courtroom common law wherein the Cities of Refuge serve as the spokes of Federal law courts across the land. The Talmud Chagigah 13a warns against excessive speculation concerning the kabbalah of time-oriented commandments expressed through מלאכה wisdom to create from nothing Angels/מלאכים. Even simple mitzvot with kavanah become time-oriented, the “Crown of Torah” (Shabbat 127a).
The Rambam’s critique in Moreh Nevuchim 1:50-54, where he argues that Divine names reflect attributes of action in this world, not metaphysical essences causes my soul to retch; the Book of בראשית – before the revelation of the Torah at Sinai לשמה. The first commandment Name רוח הקודש, whereas all other Divine Names – words. A fundamental רב חסד מאי נפקא מינא fundamental error made by assimilated to Greek logic rather than פרדס logic – Rambam. Assimilation and intermarriage defines the Yonah/Job\Daniel collapse of the Golden Age of Spain. Rambam’s code negated the charem of the Karaim deniers of the Oral Torah on par with the Tzeddukim during the Chanukkah Civil War!
Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica stands as the Catholic equivalent to the Rambam’s horrid Yad Chazaka. Mishna Torah means common law. Rambam’s assimilated Roman law codification – statute law! Another רב חסד מאי נפקא מינא fundamental error. The study of Talmud actively requires the compare and contrast of the different middot (ancient Egyptian bricks) building blocks developed by the Tannaim scholars and employed by all Amoraim scholarship upon the Mishna common law Case/Rule judicial codification made by rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nassi.
The Yalkut Shimoni on Iyov learns that Holy Writing T’NaCH primary source commentary to the Books of the Prophets similar to Gemara’s relationship to the Mishna; it links Iyov’s afflictions to a microcosm of Israel’s exiles, teaching that restoration comes through pursuing justice, not theological resignation.
The Zohar (Shemot 2:216b) describes the שם השם ציוי ראשון as light hidden in vessels, revealed through the Mishkan’s construction. HaShem לא בשמים היא – rather the Spirit Divine Presence Shekinah breathes within the Yatzir Ha-Tov of the heart – תפילה הדבר שבלב and not a Father and Son in Heaven. The prophets sometime inverse the Order of the Oral Torah middot רחום וחנון, based upon the כלל פרט כנגד רבוי מיעט Egyptian bricks made from straw. חנון expansive the next series of middot serve as definitions of חנון. Whereas רחום restricts based upon the commandment concerning treatment of the people of Canaan, the stubborn and rebellious son, Amalek, and Torah blessings & curses. Bottom line: do not confuse mercy with pity.
Korbanot exist only as time oriented commandments which require k’vanna – the opposite of Cains sacrifice! Yeshayahu 1:11-17, HaShem rejects offerings without מלכות Oral Torah middot dedications. Its not the form of living blood that a korban dedicates but rather the substance of the dedication of Horev Oral Torah tohor middot!
Chagigah 13a warns against speculating on ma’aseh bereishit (creation) or merkavah (chariot) mysticism, read through the simplistic טיפש פשט of literal word for word translations. Torah instructs through משל\נמשל rational discipline; Joseph interpreted dreams. Dreams which lack an interpretation compare to a letter never opened and read. Torah common law does not compare to a Harry Potter work of fiction that simple minded children can read and enjoy. Torah common law stands upon the יסוד of בניני אבות-precedents. Talmudic precedents function as logical proofs based upon the understanding that Talmud as 70 faces like the facets of a diamond!
Sefer בראשית together with its Divine Names – pre Sinai. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n. The לשמה Sinai brit, this Divine Spirit lives within the hearts of the chosen Cohen People. Goyim pray to their Gods who dwell in the Heavens. Rambam’s rationalism, influenced by Aristotelian Greek logic, sidelines the פרדס (Pardes) hermeneutic organized into a warp\weft threads of דרוש\פשט – the Aggadah. And רמז/סוד – the Halacha. פרדס inductive logic which conducts a compare and contrast T’NaCH prophetic mussar to halacha which serves as precedents ie a unique perspective by which scholars re-interpret the language intent of the Mishna based upon this בנין אב logical comparison of Case/Rule to similar but different Case\Rule judicial rulings.
A Three-Man Torts Court divides the justices of the Court. One judge assigned as the Prosecuting attorney. The second judge as the Defense attorney. The Difficulty/Answer style of the Gemara edited to communicate this model for a future Sanhedrin Court room once Jews re-conquered the oath brit Home land. T’NaCH\Talmudic inductive logic as far removed from Greek philosophy deductive logic as the lights of Hanukkah despise the T’zeddukim attempts to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah and also turn Jerusalem into a Greek polis!
Yonah Gerondi wrote Shaarei Teshuva after the disaster of 1242 burning of all Talmudic manuscripts across France in Paris bon-fires. Gerondi duplicated the error of the brothers Hashmonaim who requested that Pompey resolve their dynastic dispute during a prior Hanukkah Civil War some 1000 years previous. The Jewish Civil War witness not only the destruction of the common law Rashi/Tosafot school – all Jews expelled from France in 1306.
But it generated chaos and anarchy that disrupted Jewish refugee exposed nakedness before Goyim enemies; the king of England first imposed taxation without representation then expelled all Jews in 1290. The German kingdoms likewise robbed plundered and made forced population transfers. Pauperization of Jews cause the Vatican decree of ghetto gulah imprisonment of all Western European Jewry which in its turn caused another mass population transfer of Jews from Western to Eastern Europe. Then came the 1648 Cossack pogroms!
Rambam’s code, while brilliant for impoverished g’lut refugee populations scattered across Western Europe during the dying days of the Dark Ages, its inherent corruption – flattened T’NaCH Talmudic common Case\Din law into Aristotelian categories, akin to Aquinas’ fusion of faith and reason egg-crate dogmatism, which the Baal HaMaor cricized the Rif common law code and later the Vilna Gaon critiqued the Rambam’s Yechuda jumping into the Sea of Reeds emphasis on religious codification observance of halacha prioritized over Talmudic depth of inductive פרדס logic; the k’vanna of lighting the lights of Hanukkah.
As mentioned above, the Yalkut Shimoni on Iyov (Remez 906) indeed frames Iyov’s sufferings as a microcosm of Israel’s exiles—from Egypt to Babylon to Rome—teaching that geulah demands active pursuit of justice (צדק), not passive theological surrender. This midrashic commentary functions unto Gemara Aggada: a primary lens on NaCH (Prophets and Writings), linking personal affliction to national t’shuva. Restoration not through resignation, but rather courtroom equity – echoing Devarim 16:20’s mandate.
Tefillah is דבר שבלב (matter of the heart, Berachot :כו) rejects Tehillem prayers as comparable to tefillah oaths; Jews do not pray to any Father-Son duality in the Heavens. Yeshayahu 1:11-17 condemns form without substance: HaShem spurns blood offerings absent מלכות (kingdom)—Oral Torah middot from Horev. The dedication isn’t animal life but tohor attributes, elevating the act to the Torah’s crown (Shabbat 127a). This aligns with the Zohar’s vessel metaphor: external form holds inner light of middot.
moskerr,
By virtue of being created in the image of God we are vessels just as the Father and the are Son vessels. Like begets like.