I was listening to a podcast in which the person being interviewed said that while the right talk a lot about “TDS” or Trump Derangement Syndrome, the thing they cautioned against even more was “Trump Depression Syndrome,” or a feeling of hopelessness in the face of Trump’s lawless actions, the murder of American citizens by masked ICE agents, pardoning insurrectionists, still refusing to work toward any sort of justice for Epstein’s victims, and an economy that has people feeling like they don’t have a lot of options. I’m probably feeling more hopeless than anything else, particularly in the wake of Renee Good’s murder. An administration that lies constantly to defend what should be obvious overreach and needless brutality should concern everyone, but it doesn’t.
I read a substack article in which William Kristol made a prediction for 2026 that could go one of five ways. Here are his predictions and probabilities:
- 1 We turn the corner. He characterizes this as Trump’s administration becoming more chaotic (taking Greenland? cancelling midterm elections?), and Congress and SCOTUS finally step up to reign things in and act as the check on his administration that they are supposed to be. Europe steps in to help Ukraine, exposing Putin’s weaknesses. November mid-terms result in a blue wave that further checks Trump’s power, making him a true lame duck. The author pegs this at a 20% possibility. I would say less than 10%. Trump is nothing if not adaptive. He can slither out of checks and balances like nobody’s business.
- 2 Light at the end of the tunnel. This is more of a “time marches on, but things remain about the same” scenario. Trump’s term ends in 2028, so we get closer to that date, and even if he does try for a third term, he cannot live forever. Kristol says 20% for this one as well. I would go higher, like 30%. Basically, like the Mormon church if/when there’s a bad leader, we all wait for the grim reaper to bail us out, just more or less ignoring the worst things because when the person is no longer the leader, we go back to normal.
- 3 The status quo holds. In this scenario, 2026 goes about how 2025 did. Democracy holds, but just barely. Democrats narrowly win the house, but not the Senate, and SCOTUS continues to enable presidential overreach and immunity. Because Kristol sees this scenario as untenable with an increasing precarity to the balance of power, he thinks it’s more likely that things will break rather than remain as they are. Still, he gives it a 15% chance of going this way. I agree that this is likely how the mid-terms turn out (provided Trump doesn’t cancel them as he’s now saying he wants to do). I’ll say I’m at 10%.
- 4 The slide continues. Public support for Trump actually ticks up. ICE continues to grow (due to budget increases and very lucrative pay to the worst humans on the planet–they are literally targeting avowed incels and arming them to the teeth, telling them they have full immunity to kill anyone who gets in their way). Hegseth continues to reshape the military. People don’t care enough, and gobble up whatever crumbs Trump throws them, believing that they are getting something worth having and not just empty promises and gutted healthcare. Kristol places this at 25% likelihood. I would go higher, like 40%.
- 5 The lights begin to go out. The authoritarian momentum of Trump’s first year builds. All power ministries are completely taken over and compromised in terms of their mission. Trump invokes the insurrection act and uses it to terrorize voters, kill protestors, etc. Trump’s ambitions make it clear that there will be no peaceful or democratic transfer of power in 2028. Ukraine is forced into a bad deal or annexed into Russia, emboldening Putin against other Eastern European nations. Congress does nothing while SCOTUS continues to enable and protect their president. Kristol calls this a 20% likely scenario. I’m probably at 10%.
Now that’s just one author’s opinion, his predictions for 2026. He wrote that OP before Trump took over Venezuela, which probably shifts these percentages a little bit. And of course, unlike a handful of our readers and quite a few church members, Kristol is not a fan of Trump or the things he’s doing.
Conversely, I listened to an Ezra Klein podcast in which the Yuval Levin, a conservative thinker, talked about how nearly everything Trump has done comes with an expiration date. We think he’s done a lot, but he has not done it through legislation, so while it might be difficult to undo it (to change staff, reallocate funding, open new departments, etc.), it’s certainly not prevented by anything in law. As a demagogue, Trump’s ideosyncratic ideas and actions will mostly end with him. A JD Vance or Marco Rubio isn’t going to go around putting Trump’s name on buildings when he’s no longer in power, for example. They will follow their own agendas. That’s Levin’s perspective anyway, although the caveat is that norms have shifted. It’s acceptable to use the R slur again, for example. Congrats, conservatives. Your legacy is secure.
This conversation is interesting to me on many levels, but it also goes to the heart of something else we’ve discussed in other posts: the concept of organization change, leadership, and legacy. Legacy isn’t always what we hoped it would be. Sometimes we want to be remembered for one thing, but we are really remembered for something else. For example, I would say Nelson’s presidency will be remembered for two main things: 1) the two hour block, and 2) the temporary avoidance of the name “Mormon,” which will probably over time become a relic of the past. Yes, it impacts the church’s official materials, but literally no one cares like he did about this. Not even Oaks. It was pedantic and dumb. People aren’t likely to say that out loud, at least not yet, but casual use of the term Mormon will probably creep back in until it is in common parlance. We live in polite society, and eventually people will grow up and quit being offended by something so petty.
What I think Nelson would like to have been known for is all the temple announcements (which is giving Trump renaming the Kennedy Center vibes, IMO). Why do I think that will not be his legacy? Because the absolute majority of those temples will never be built. You can announce stuff all you want, but without a building permit and patrons to attend, the actual plans are up to your successors who might just decide that those announcements were impractical and premature.
As I think about other church leaders in my lifetime, I can do a similar exercise of what they wanted their legacy to be vs. what their legacy was. Here’s my take on a few:
- Monson: 1) Dementia, 2) Prop 8, 3) Widows, 4) Ear-wiggling, 5) Picking Uchtdorf. What he probably wanted it to be was the widows.
- Benson: 1) Book of Mormon focus, 2) “To the mothers in Zion” talk, 3) also dementia. What he probably wanted it to be was a hard turn to the right politically.
- Hinckley: 1) “I’m a Mormon” campaign, 2) Larry King interview, and 3) smaller temples. What he wanted it to be? Probably something along the lines of more mainstream acceptance, but with a universalist bent. Those were the days.
Because of the way Mormon succession works, though, the real check on power for LDS leaders is memento mori. Whatever their pet peeves are get a brief day in the sun, but then are often quickly discarded, downplayed or undone by their successors. The King is dead. Long live the King.
- How would you place the odds on Kristol’s five 2026 predictions for the US? Do you envision other scenarios that he did not cover?
- Which Mormon leaders do you think had a different legacy than they wanted?
- Which “legacies” have you seen discarded by successors in LDS leadership?
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
I
Personally, I find it laughable that anyone (Right or Left) would quote William Kristol; and give any kind of credence to his views. For decades now, he’s been nothing but a political gadfly – flitting here, flitting there – with opinions everywhere. And, of course, he’s suffered from TDS from the very beginning. As for President Trump, I (and millions like me) are extremely pleased with what he is doing and the leadership he’s providing. Yes, the time will come when he will be gone – but the actions he is taking now will have effect for decades to come. (I suppose coming to grips with this reality will cause “liberal heads to explode”)
A personal paradox for me is that – while I know that the LDS Church is not true and that it certainly has some historical,doctrinal, organizational and cultural problems – I will step back and stand by them; particularly as the Uber Left becomes ever more unhinged and continues acting without boundaries of any kind. To suggest, that “the Left” has any more moral highground that any of Trump’s cabinet is simply insanity personified. Talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome (Ha)
I agree with you on what Hinkley and Monson wanted their legacies to be. Benson wanted his apostolic legacy to be a hard turn to the political right, but as president, he did nothing to promote that. I think he would be pleased if his presidential legacy turns out to be the Book of Mormon emphasis. (The “Beware of Pride” talk deserves some mention as a legacy too, whether he wrote it himself or not.)
I issue my strongest possible condemnation to the above attack on Ms. Hawk. She has raised valid points that deserve consideration.
“Every nation has the government it deserves,” the French writer and diplomat Joseph de Maistre declared in 1811. Since the primary function of government is to make laws, it follows that every nation has the laws it deserves.
The words of de Maistre are no less true today than they were in 1811. The reason we have a federal government that is running amok is because the great mass of the public has become lazy and indolent. Indeed, the masses have rejected self-sufficiency and self-reliance and instead, have devoted their lives to seeking immediate gratification.
We have a plethora of leaders in all facets of society who care for nothing but their own power. The public at large says nothing, as they spend their days mesmerized by the latest Dua Lipa video. The only effort they spend learning about the situation in Europe is the time it takes to microwave a batch of Irish nachos. These people have earned terrible leaders.
The problem of course is that those of us who do take the time to study the issues are saddled with terrible leaders as well. And that is the answer: we must have better voters.
If people will not take the time to study the issues, they should not vote. Do not make the rest of us pay the price for your laziness and sloth. Go back to your hot dog eating contests and leave voting to those who care enough about it to do it well.
Oaks’ Legacy
To riff on a famous LDS quote: “As Oaks now is regarding LGBTQ issues, Brigham Young once was regarding race; as Brigham Young now is regarding race, Oaks may become regarding LGBTQ issues.”
He’s not gone yet, but he’s mathematically very close, so I’ll make a bold prediction. I believe Oaks wants part of his legacy to be his stances to “save the family”: shunning LGBTQ people, encouraging young marriages that produce many children, etc. I predict he will get the legacy he wants, but it won’t be viewed the way he hopes.
Oaks will be remembered for his stances against LGBTQ people and “saving the family.” At first, many members will view this positively. However, as time passes, older generations die off, and the Church finally becomes more compassionate toward LGBTQ people—and accepts that telling young people when to marry and how many children to have is as effective as tilting at windmills—Oaks will be remembered as the man who defended these positions, but not in the way he hoped. Instead, members will speak of Oaks and his LGBTQ stance much as we now speak of Brigham Young and his awful views on race.
The other thing that I think Oaks wants to be remembered for his defense of religious freedom. His efforts in this area will likely be largely forgotten by most members, quickly overshadowed by his stance on LGBTQ people.
Nelson’s Temple Legacy
It seems like Oaks immediately discarded Nelson’s temple-building legacy. I strongly suspect Nelson had a list of 15 or so temples lined up to announce at the last General Conference. Oaks and the rest of the Q15 almost certainly had that list but decided to throw it away within days of Nelson’s death.
I disagree with the OP because I think most of the announced temples will eventually be built (the ones that *can* be built—Russia and China obviously can’t under current conditions) as the Church slowly works through Nelson’s massive backlog. However, I don’t think new temples will be announced at anywhere near the rate Nelson would have maintained.
2026 Predictions
As for 2026, I’m cautiously optimistic—I think it will play out somewhere between scenarios #1 and #3. Trump is a vile human being, and I strongly disagree with almost everything he does. However, I’m hopeful the Democrats will take at least the House in 2026, which should significantly slow him down. I also think the Supreme Court will check his power to some degree (for example, looking at today’s news, they don’t appear to be looking favorably on his removal of Lisa Cook from the Fed).
After 2028, Trump will be out of office, and I’m hopeful there will be a “never again” movement to reform the U.S. government so that future presidents can’t do what Trump has done. I agree with the point that many of Trump’s changes are relatively easy to reverse, so I hope his successors move quickly to do so. They can start by removing his name from everything—buildings, warships, legislation. No sitting president should be able to put his own name on *anything*.
I really do not see any of the above as most likely. He left out the possibility that people start standing up the the deranged bully in chief. As I see it, TACO. Trump Always Chickens Out. He just chickened out again because Europe stood up to him on Greenland. He says he will not use force. All it takes to cure a bully is for people to start standing up to him instead of cowering in fear. Our Congress certainly is not standing up for themselves and neither is the Subpar Court. But we do have a couple of governors, both in California and Michigan who are starting to stand up to him. Of course if Trump had any guts, the situation in Michigan, where the gov has called out the National guard and the president is sending troops could lead to civil war. Or chicken could chicken out. Or American troops could obey the law and refuse illegal orders to fire on other Americans and we will have a standoff with the National guard and ICE continuing to give each other dirty looks.
As far as the legacy of different church leaders, I would say the POX is a much more likely legacy for Monson than wiggling his ears or widows, which are both largely forgotten already. Benson will continue to be known more for being senile than anything else he did as church president. I see his legacy as his conservative politics from before he became church president. And I think Hinckley will be remembered for his mainstreaming of the church. When he became prophet Mormons were still that weird religion in Utah that practiced polygamy. He interacted with the press much more than any other church president, he changed the image of Mormons to be more of a family oriented church and moved us away from the only thing most people know is polygamy and gave people a picture of modern members as …well, as Donny and Marie. They played right into what Hinckley was trying to project to the press. In fact, they may owe some of their success to his clearing the church reputation ahead of their popularity. So, really I think Hinckley earned the legacy you say he wanted.
And JCS and my ignorant SIL have convinced me that people who do not pay attention should not be allowed to vote. We need a fake News verses real current events test to qualify voters.
lastlemming: I used to think you were right about Benson not being a hard-right ideologue once he got in office, instead just focusing on the BOM and the pride talk (which was cribbed from C.S. Lewis, nearly verbatim), but the more I talk to women, I think his real legacy is the “To the Mothers in Zion” talk. There are many, many women who took that talk and threw away their dreams of education and careers, only to feel that they had nothing for themselves later in life. It really did affect 51% of the church in a way that was largely invisible to the men because part of giving up your dreams is convincing yourself and others that it’s not what you are doing. Benson made women feel they were guilty monsters if they didn’t embrace the SAHM lifestyle whole-heartedly, rendering themselves totally financially vulnerable to the whims and fortunes of their husbands.
grizzerbear: I’m not sure that I’m giving any credence to Kristol’s views by reposting the 5 scenarios he envisions. If you think there are other likely scenarios, feel free to add them. I am totally agnostic on Kristol. He just happened to write the OP with the 5 scenarios. I suspect that it will be more dire than he envisions, in large part due to folks like you who think that everything Trump says and does is dandy. Shrieking “TDS” everytime somebody doesn’t agree that Trump’s farts smell like Chanel No. 5 may work for you, but it doesn’t mean we all think he’s just the bestest most big boy important special guy that you do. To me, he presides like I would expect any rapist to preside. He believes in his own entitlement and he uses his power to dominate, in his case for his personal and family’s enrichment. That 74 million people let him do it, handing over the keys to the kingdom to him, is in fact evidence of the moral turpitude and torpor of the American voter. But you 74 million get a vote just like the rest of us do. That’s democracy.
mountainclimber: Regarding Oaks’ legacy about religious freedom, that’s definitely what he hopes it will be, and among conservative church members, it seems they believe it. My own definition of religious freedom (what I thought was THE definition of religious freedom) is not what he’s peddling. Religious freedom to the Puritans was that they could set up their own non-Anglican religious community that would enforce their rules. The emphasis was on their community’s rights to make their own alternate universe where they ruled the roost. But as non-Puritans came to the colonies, some of them seeking religious freedom, they didn’t want to leave Anglican rules to be stuck under a Puritan regime. To me, it’s this later thing (pluralism, respect for individual religious freedom) that is meant by religious freedom. It’s something akin to freedom of conscience. Oaks seems to want the LDS church to be unfettered and have maximum power to create its own version community, which curtails the freedoms of some individuals born into that community. That’s a religious supremacy version of religious freedom. The religion is free to set rules and have power, not the people in that religion or society.
He seems to agree (at least on some level) with the expansion of religious freedom beyond what I believe is correct, although he did not side with Kim Davis who refused to sign marriage certificates for gay couples. He rightly said she could not be in that job and refuse to do what her job required. Growing up, my understanding of religious freedom was that everyone is free to believe and practice what they choose, but that the limit was what was permitted in the public sphere. You couldn’t mix religion into politics or into government, for example. When I was in 3rd grade, we moved from PA to TX, and for the first time in my life I was exposed to mandatory public prayers (and classroom-level racism, too–the black students had to enter the room last and leave the room last and sit in the back). I was absolutely shocked that students were giving a class prayer before lunch. It wasn’t an LDS prayer or a Catholic prayer. It was definitely something like a Baptist prayer. As a 3rd grader, I was pretty sure they were breaking the law, and whether they were or not, I was really uncomfortable with the things they were doing. They defended a lot of things as if it was merely cultural “This is just how we do things in Texas.”
When I see that the church is filing amicus briefs to fight against gay rights (while tossing a bone to LGBTQ people in blue downtown SLC regarding housing policy), that doesn’t sit right. When I hear church members saying that the cake baker was right to refuse to serve gay people, that doesn’t sit right. The more churches try to create religious supremacy (vs. freedom), the more I think they should lose their tax exempt status. It’s certainly true that the Church as a private institution (including its universities) can behave in bigoted ways (and frequently does, particularly regarding discrimination against women and LGBTQ people, as well as expelling those who change religions as students or don’t attend the LDS church). BYU also has a poor track record of respecting non-LDS people practicing according to their own beliefs and conscience. https://bycommonconsent.com/2014/11/19/byu-religious-freedom-or-its-lack-and-beards/
Fun fact, BYU changed its policy after the Trib pointed out that forcing a Sikh student to shave was not respecting his religious practices, but LOL, Mormon Caroline Leavitt just had to claim that the change was *not* in response to the criticisms they received. Sure, Jan.
Legacies are difficult to assess until some time has passed, but I think there is a real possibility that the legacy of Nelson ends up being that the president of the church can do whatever he wants. In a bit less than 8 years Nelson implemented 2 hour church, dropped scouting and the personal progress program, ended YM presidencies, ended high priest groups (and most HP ordinations), ended most church pageants, tried half a dozen new church slogans, ended the POX, and revised the temple endowment like a half dozen times. (Did I miss any?) Some of these have theological implications, but many of his changes are just changes. He was an executive that wasn’t afraid to remake a 200 year old organization into what he thought it should be, and to my eye it didn’t feel that he waited for consensus. He expected buy in and proclaimed that his way was The Way.
Only time will tell if Nelson ends up as an anomaly or a turning point. Oaks may not have the same charismatic leader style as Nelson, but he might have just as many ideas about how the church should change. Already temple announcements are dramatically lower and the evening session of conference is gone. (But for real this time?)
It’s also possible that Oaks doesn’t have a long enough presidency to have a legacy. I notice that no one has yet mentioned Hunter.
Hawkgrrrl,
President Benson properly attributes his quotation from Mere Christianity to C. S. Lewis.
Re: Mothers come home: most women who work outside of the home are not living the dream. As is the case with most men–their jobs are mundane and boring. It is only a small percentage of women that work in situations that offer some fulfillment. I wonder sometimes if it is our own failure to follow Presidents Benson’s and Kimball’s counsel that has brought the West to the point where it is virtually impossible to live on a single income. Such a situation makes it very difficult for those women who would rather stay home–and they are not a few.
A lot to think about here. Legacies are complicated, because people are complicated.
One of the telltale signs of a narcissist is that they invest a great deal of effort and expense into cementing their own lasting legacy while they are still alive. They are desperate to be remembered for accomplishing great things long after they are gone, usually to the point that they no longer find it necessary to be decent human beings while they are still living. Whatever their motivation, the objective lens of history ultimately tends to reveal their selfishness and condemn such figures, if it remembers them at all.
RMN is definitely one such person. His temple announcement spree was certainly aimed at that goal, though future cancellations could impact his legacy in ways he did not foresee. The forthcoming BYU medical school is another example, and when that announcement was made the faithful LDS world was abuzz with rumors about the proposed school bearing Nelson’s name (which the Church PR officials did nothing to quell). But on a much more granular level, RMN forced his wife to endure pregnancy after pregnancy until she finally bore a son (after 9 daughters) which RMN named after himself. That alone tells you everything you need to know about the kind of person he was, and how his view of personal legacy was influenced by LDS teachings on priesthood and patriarchy.
DHO seems to be headed down this path. Though his presidency will likely be a short one, he still hangs his hat on the Family Proclamation, as if it were something to be proud of. Going on 30+ years now, the document has not aged well, and will continue to get more rotten with time, and DHO’s legacy will fester with it. That, and we will see an increase in awareness of the 1970s BYU electroshock experiments that happened on DHO’s watch, the evidence of which will outlive DHO’s most well-regarded GC talks.
One complicated non-LDS legacy example that comes to mind is that of longtime Alaska senator Ted Stevens. The airport in Anchorage was renamed in honor of Stevens in 2000, while he was alive and still in office, and generally well-liked by his constituency. Several years later, Stevens was indicted on felony corruption charges (though later overturned), and sufficiently disgraced among his home state voters to lose his once-safe reelection, and forced him to leave office ignominiously. Not long after, he died in a small plane crash on the way to a backcountry fishing trip. Ironically, the airport still bears Stevens’ name, perhaps owing to administrative/political inertia, or perhaps that Alaskans still wish to honor the positive aspects of Stevens’ decades-long political career (he was, after all, one of the principal architects of Title IX, and that’s not nothing) though time will tell. Still, it’s probably not a good idea to name a major airport or important landmark after a living person, when they still have plenty of time to soil their own reputation–let alone someone who’s reputation was already bad to begin with.
After you die, let the survivors objectively weigh the sum total of your lifetime achievements and decide accordingly whether you deserve to have a building, institution or public monument named after you.
Jack: “most women who work outside of the home are not living the dream. As is the case with most men–their jobs are mundane and boring. It is only a small percentage of women that work in situations that offer some fulfillment.” I think this is largely accurate, but understates two things: 1) we work to get money and have financial independence, something women without marketable skills are barred from, 2) stepping out of the workplace is a very steep penalty for women, often for life, even if circumstances change and they need that income, meaning the only job they CAN get at that point is the suckiest thing possible, and 3) staying at home is no picnic either. Like any job, it’s got ups and downs. Most jobs do not involve as much cleanup of bodily waste, for example, and involve more adult interactions and stimulating conversation. But being a SAHM has the added disadvantage of being unpaid and considered to be “not working” if you do need a paying job. But I certainly can’t disagree that work is often mundane and boring, particularly compared to the “dreams” we might have in our 20s, just finishing college. There’s a reason they pay you to do it. Unlike being a full time caregiver which is so little valued in our society (aside from Mitt Romney’s attempt to provide a true compensatory value to it) that it is untenable for most.
“I wonder sometimes if it is our own failure to follow Presidents Benson’s and Kimball’s counsel that has brought the West to the point where it is virtually impossible to live on a single income. Such a situation makes it very difficult for those women who would rather stay home–and they are not a few.” I think you’re getting the timeline mixed up here. Benson and Kimball’s advice was at least a decade too late. The ship had sailed. Once the economy moved from a single breadwinner economy, in which women were at the whims of their husbands and couldn’t have a credit card or bank account and were just a financial dependent, it was always going to become a dual-earner economy. Otherwise, you have to unfairly overcompensate a man based on the number of dependents he has (including a wife), which is how it had been done for a hundred years or so. That also means that women are essentially children with no economic safety net. Of course it helped that marital rape was legal and so was beating your wife.
@Jack,
*So many* women in the wards we’ve lived in frequently approach my wife because of her career path. She chose to study an in-demand field, worked several years before having children, stayed home while they were young, then returned to the workforce—enabled by the experience she’d gained earlier. She now earns a good salary, and I’m relieved not to carry the full financial burden alone.
These women now wish they had done the same. They wish they had attended or completed college. If they have a degree, they wish they had majored in something more employable, fulfulling, and/or lucrative. Whether they’re divorced, empty-nesters wanting careers, or stay-at-home moms who found staying at home too mundane for them, all they can access now are low-paying, unfulfilling jobs. Why? Because they followed Benson and Kimball’s counsel—either not finishing college or not taking it seriously since they didn’t expect to need a career. They’re now at a point where returning to college is difficult because of the time and financial commitment involved.
This legacy continues today. I’m relieved that my daughter, a BYU student, is pursuing a degree that interests her, that she’s good at, that is in high demand, and that commands a comfortable salary. However, she has one roommate who was once excited about becoming a doctor but is now dropping her dreams of medical school because it “seems like a lot of work”—she has a serious boyfriend and is adjusting her priorities toward being a stay-at-home mother, even though her financial situation (given the less optimistic earning prospects of her boyfriend’s current educational pursuits) may require her to work. My daughter has another roommate who was preparing to take the LSAT this summer—until she got engaged a couple of weeks ago and is now saying she’s not going to law school after all. These young women are setting themselves up to be just like the women in our local wards who wish they had chosen a path similar to my wife’s. This is Benson and Kimball’s legacy. While their influence is lessening over time, there are still young women today who will end up very unhappy because they chose to “follow the prophet.”
My own mother is highly educated in an employable field. She is now unhappy with her decision to be a stay-at-home mom because that’s what Kimball and Benson taught her she should do. She wishes she had pursued a career—especially now that she sees Mormon women aren’t being criticized for making this choice as much as they were in the past.
“I wonder sometimes if it is our own failure to follow Presidents Benson’s and Kimball’s counsel that has brought the West to the point where it is virtually impossible to live on a single income.” Virtually no one on earth is or was listening to Benson and Kimball because they are the leaders of a very small and insignificant religion. Even if 100% of Mormon women had complied and continued to comply with their counsel, it would not have made even a ripple in today’s modern economies. Also, if what Benson and Kimball taught was and still is truly inspired of God, shouldn’t today’s Church leaders be obligated to continue teaching this, no matter the consequences? The reality is that Church leaders haven’t counseled women to stay home in decades, and they’re now calling mothers with full-time careers to high Church positions. The doctrine has quietly shifted—but the damage to multiple .generations of women remains.
I’m not sure Gordon B Hinckley’s tenure was the “good old days.” He was a counselor in the first presidency when the Strengthening Church Members Committee was formed; he was basically running things when the September 6 (and others) were excommunicated; he was prophet when the Family Proclamation was created—with zero input from women; he was the prophet when Ensign Peak was created, and approved the creation of shell companies to hide the wealth of the church; and he lied about the teachings of the church in his interview with Larry King. I think his legacy is that anything the church does to protect its interests is OK. And his successors have eagerly followed suit.
mountainclimber479 is correct that church leaders are “now calling mothers with full-time careers to high Church positions,” but here’s the irony for me: these women who are now being called to high church office are those who ignored, disregarded, or disobeyed the counsel to stay at home. And then some of those leaders, men and women, get in the pulpit and preach “exact obedience” to me (and us). Seems ironic (is that the word?) for women who were not obedient in one instance to now preach obedience to others, and for men to reward disobedient women while demanding strict obedience to the current leadership. I participate, hold callings, and live faithfully, but I see a disconnect here. Am I allowed to be selectively obedient? Can we take the teachings of our leaders as counsel to apply if it makes sense to us, and to ignore if it does not? Maybe what is important is that we follow Christ, and just about every teaching is someone’s idea of how to do that. What is the commandment? There is a commandment to try to teach our children right from wrong, but is there a commandment for the mother to stay at home? or is that someone’s suggestion to help live the larger commandment? Maybe there are many legitimate and Christian ways for parents to raise their children, instead of one path only. Maybe much (most) of what we get at general conference is suggestion and advice from people who mean well, but it is not commandment, and maybe it is not the word and will of the Lord for the next six months. Maybe we need to teach good principles (e.g., raise your families in righteousness) and let members figure out for themselves how to do it, without judging those who are sincere but different. Maybe we don’t need to tell people exactly how to live. When I was in the Army in Germany, we had a regional representative who came and told us that the person who didn’t get on his knees and pray first thing in the morning was ungrateful, and maybe that sounded good to me when I was young, but now when I wake up sometimes I have only one priority, and that is to get to the bathroom. Let’s teach people to follow Christ and to love their neighbor, and to have faith in Christ, and let’s move away from telling people how to do everything.
I remember an LDS book years ago called “Added Upon.” I’m not sure what it was about, but when it comes to a Prophet’s Legacy, it seems to be what happens when a Prophet says or does something. It just gets added to all the rest. The church takes years to turn or take something back. Take any issues from the Word of Wisdom, the Priesthood, beards, or right-wing agenda, and when a Prophet says something, it adds to the Doctrine supposedly to clear it up or emphasize it. It then becomes an issue that it might not have been before their statements.
I haven’t posted in a while as I haven’t had anything to add that wasn’t said by another commenter recently. I do have a few thoughts here:
Firstly, whether it’s the church or a political party, this idea of getting back to core family values rings false to everyone under age 40. Wanna make families popular again? Make family life affordable. Make the world a place worth raising kids. Neither the church nor any political party with power is doing either of these things right now. Oaks’ guilt trip in this regard will sway no young Mormon I’ve met. It’s theater.
I personally think the following on the USA: Trump always pushes for extremism but he does end up getting some watered down version of what he wants. But non-MAGA republicans and independents are not happy. Whether it’s the shift in affordability from lowering prices on Day 1 to calling it a hoax and telling us to starve on chicken, corn tortilla, broccoli and one other thing, or whether it’s being too cruel in execution of his policies, most people aren’t buying it. My MAGA family members no longer support Trump but they do like Vance. Baby steps.
Last point. I was full blown overwhelmed by simply trying to keep up with current events. I no longer follow CNN but I now read ground news headlines to see the spin and follow under the desk news and amanda’s mild takes and Sharon McMahon on Instagram. Instead of getting mad, now I get to laugh and I get to take action. In particular, Amanda takes a page from AOC and Newsom by doing a twice a week video calling out all the ways Trump loses every week, whether it’s in polling, or his failed court cases, or people refusing to perform at the Kennedy Center rebrand. She does it brilliantly and with snark. You take away a narcissist fascist’s power away by simply laughing at them. To wit, grizzbear used to trigger me; today, I chuckled at his comment and moved on. With Sharon, when SNAP was not being paid, she raised $600K in an hour from people donating the $50 we all had just sitting in our Venmo. Instead of getting mad that Trump won’t feed kids, WE fed them ourselves. Suck he can suck it.
My personal experience as an aging female boomer…
I didn’t follow the counsel of church leaders in my young adult years. I have been greatly blessed by letting God prevail in my life in ways that were right for me.
I married in my late 20’s and had children in my mid 30’s.
I stayed in school to get a masters degree, then worked professionally for several years. My husband had an extremely demanding job, so I worked part-time during the years our children were at home. We had only 2 children, so those part-time years were limited. They were also still in a professional position, so I kept up my resume’ and was paid enough to afford good childcare. (Infertility issues, so no guilt over small family.) My husband was RIF’ed while our younger child was in high school, so I started immediately looking for full-time work. I was very quickly employed full time, which was a tremendous blessing as my husband continued his job search. As empty nesters, we both had fulfilling careers. We were also able to help our children graduate from college without student debt.
I cannot speak for anyone else. In my case, I definitely feel that I was blessed by God in the way my life worked out. My education and career have been blessings in our family life in many ways.
In that light, I personally struggle with the dishonesty of the current approach to women who work outside the home. They are lauded for not following church guidance. That was NOT my experience.
We’re just an economic recession and big natural disaster away from Trumpism being extinguished. It is unsustainable. Just like an overbought stock, Trump and Trumpism are on the verge of rapid and swift decline. Trump and the evil Republicans who lick his boots will be brought to their knees. Bothsidesers will no longer be able to bothsides. Libertarians will be exposed as the cowardly Republican lapdogs that they are. Trump clearly has major physical and psychological problems that are getting harder and harder to hide. The pendulum will swing back blue and it will swing back hard.
I think Nelson’s legacy will be 1) no more saying Mormon, 2) 100 years old, 3) 2-hour church, 4) $100 billion, and 5) temples to nowhere (Shanghai, Dubai, and several others). I think he wanted his legacy to be a normalization of Mormonism as good old-fashioned Christianity.
I think that Nelson wanted to discard the Hinckley and Monson embrace of Mormons and Mormonism as a quirky but lovable group of people who embrace the nickname.
Unfortunately, Monson gets blamed for the POX. By late 2015, he had full on dementia according to Greg Prince, who ought to know.
The way RMN described it in his Jan 2016 BYU-Hawaii address, it was a “revelation received during a prophetic moment.”
But it was not with consensus of the Q12 because they were surprised by its announcement, and by the announcement that it was a revelation! RMN went rogue here and was able to escape the blame! It fits with Wendy saying he was finally “unleashed” -once he became the “prophet who speaks for God”. I’ve never seen anyone enjoy adulation so much, except Trump that is.
DaveW’s observation about Nelson’s legacy is spot on. Surely he didn’t intend to leave the legacy that the Church President can govern on a whim, and make it really clear that he’s erasing or challenging a prior prophet’s legacy, but that’s what he did. Nelson was so obvious about his attack (is that too strong a word?) on Hinckley’s actions. Banning the word Mormon after Hinckley’s “I’m a Mormon” campaign. Hinckley “raised the bar” and Nelson went back to “every young man should go on a mission”. Hinckley announced and built small temples. Nelson went on a spree of announcing full-size temples. It was weird. It was so clear that Nelson had bottled up a bunch of pet peeves and sprang them on the Church as fast as he could.
Oaks’s legacy will be the Proc on the Family and his cruel actions and words towards the LGBTQ population. I agree with above commenters who likened it to Young’s racism. It isn’t going to age well.
Trump’s legacy is going to be ‘alternative facts’ (lies). I don’t see Trumpism loosening its grip on America until the conservative news outlets stop spewing their lying propaganda. Electing Democrats who are willing to stop Trump from attacking NATO and Americans who live in liberal states (among other idiocy) is step one. But the political lies have got to stop. We need to share the same reality again.
What I think needs to be Trump’s legacy is the USA realizing it’s necessary to change up the Bill of Rights a bit. Free speech needs some sort of safety valve — you can’t call it “news” if it wouldn’t survive a fact check. Bring back journalistic integrity. Fox News has to change its name to Fox Lies. Like, say whatever you want still, but make sure lies are labeled lies. Or extend the limits on commercial speech to political speech. There’s a Truth in Advertising Act that requires advertisements to be truthful about their products. Put a Truth in Politics Act in a constitutional amendment.
Also, a constitutional amendment that grants bodily autonomy so the Republicans will leave transgender people alone, and amend the 2d amendment to limit an individual’s right to own military grade weapons.
Let Trump’s legacy be a change to the US Constitution to reign in the rightwing insanity that is destabilizing the world order and making everything in the USA run on fear and cruelty.
For me personally the legacy of the last few Church leaders was to convince me that they had no communication with God, and that they were conservative old men clinging to power with no moral message. That the majority of Mormons voted for Trump confirmed the moral vacume in the church leadership.
As for trump and America. From the outside. Much of the rest of the world is organising to have free trade without America. America will go broke this year when they can not raise money from overseas any more. Not sure what the consequences are for the individual.
You may not see it from inside America but most countries had negotiated free trade agreements with America; to have them unilaterally torn up, and replaced with tarrifs, is not what a friend and ally does.
America was respected as the leader of the free world. It is no longer the leader of the free world, and is no longer respected, or liked.
I have been to America a number of times. I will not be visiting while Republicans are in power. I am boycotting America. I would not do anything to contribute to helping trumps America. Likewise I would not visit Israel or Russia, that’s the company I see you in.
Trump has destroyed America’s standing in the world, and there are consequences that will cost you dearly, and should have been obvious to any moral voter.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-01-22/trump-us-debt-carney-davos-fractured-world-order/106254272
Reference for America going broke.
Yes, Geoff, right on!
Since the national debt is a bonafide Ponzi scheme, the result of continually increasing it, will be another stock market crash, probably worse? or hyperinflation?
For a while it seemed to me that RMN wanted his legacy to be the ushering in of the second coming. Or being the man who predicted it would come. The number of members I’ve heard talking about being prepared for the second coming skyrocketed after his talk. And, well, nothing can be bigger than the second coming. I’ve heard a lot less of that already.
I think Nelson will be remembered for his advanced age and extraordinary health. I actually think he’ll be remembered for the temple construction as well. I think a handful of announced temples may be cancelled but most of them ultimately will get built, but it’s going to take many years to clear the backlog. Temple construction hasn’t meaningfully sped up, so people will have to wait. But, they will remember themas Nelson temples even if Uchdorf or Bednar is president of the church when they get dedicated.
Oaks wants his legacy to be taking a stand against same-sex marriage. He may succeed in that. I think we need to see what else happens under his leadership. Suppose he calls Edward Dube to be an apostle (plausible because he’s in the presidency of the Seventy already and is around the right age), and only lives another year or so. Suddenly calling the first Black and first African apostle could become something he is remembered for long after the church has undone some of his legacy on marriage and LGBTQ inclusion.
In terms of legacies being undone by successors, I’m surprised nobody has yet mentioned Spencer Kimball and the 1978 revelation. He undid the legacy of his two predecessors. In the present day, Lee and Smith look like their only legacy was standing in the way of progress, aside from Smith being remembered for some of his very fundamentalist writings.
Well, some intended legacies don’t stick. I think an intended legacy for Pres. Nelson was his Gandhi-King-Mandela Peace Prize, of which he was the first awardee (and, I think, the church might have paid to create/endow the prize with the express purpose of Pres. Nelson being the first awardee). So he got the award, but somehow, it doesn’t seem like the award is remembered as part of his legacy. Sadly, it reminds me of someone else who likes to procure awards, so maybe it is best if it is forgotten.
Our church leaders are men, and I sustain and appreciate them as men who try to do good. It is good that there is collegiality and discussion so that, hopefully, only the best ideas come to the front. Still, personality plays a part.
On the question of predictions for US politics for the coming year, I expect the following: the Supreme Court is going to start to reign Trump in. They will not let him mess with the Fed and they will restrict all of the capricious tariff nonsense. That will be good for the economy, but possibly bad for everything else. Trump’s cognitive decline will become increasingly apparent. He will rage at the forces restraining him, will unleash more domestic chaos, and because his cabinet is full of loyalists who don’t seem willing to invoke the 25th amendment to remove him, we will be forced to live through it unless he becomes very ill, which is also plausible. The House will flip this fall, but the Senate is uncertain. By this time next year, there will be impeachment hearings over a laundry list of unconstitutional things Trump has done so far, which will further enrage Trump but not result in his removal from office. I honestly can’t figure out which of the first 3 scenarios this fits into, but probably it’s #2.
On a solely political note. When has tRump ever paid off his debts? When have Rethuglicans ever lowered the deficit? And, finally, how would one distinguish MAGA and its enablers from the NSDAP? (I will admit that, thus far, MAGA hasn’t targeted Romani).
Trumps’ legacy of destruction of chaos may take decades to undue after he leaves office. However, IF there are free and fair elections this year, and IF the democrats can present a semi-coherent alternative to trumpism to the voter, then I would expect trump to be a thoroughly lame-duck president by November. (He already is a lame duck in many ways)
In terms of prophetic legacy, I suppose that depends on who you ask. When a pope dies, I’m mostly interested in understanding how that particular pope (or any other religious leader) met the current moment. Did he speak and act prophetically in the face of injustice, crises, ect, or did he appear out of touch or dismissive? I can’t remember an lds prophet in my lifetime who truly rose to the occasion in the way, though RMN had his moments. So far, it’s radio silence from DHO on the constitutional crises Trump has created, something which Oaks is well-equipped to address. I don’t expect him to take a pepper ball to the head from ice agents like a local pastor did, for example, but give us something – some kind of response, some kind of statement.
For most regular Mormons, I think it’s feels from conferences talks that define the legacy of a president of the Church. I can come up with at least something inspirational, powerful, comforting that was said by all of the presidents of the Church since I was old enough to pay attention, but with Oaks – I hate to say it, but I got nothing. Maybe he doesn’t mean to, but he comes off as legalistic, dogmatic, and harsh. (A lot of people would disagree with me, of course) I hope that changes and I hope we see a prophetic response to what’s going on in the world. And hope springs eternal… I guess?
The only logical conclusion regarding church leaders’ radio silence in the face of Trump’s chaos and destruction is that the leaders of the church (or a majority of them) support it.
Dot: I don’t know if they “support” what Trump is doing or has done. I think they have rationalized a separation of church and state in their minds. If they are like Evangelicals (they are), they think Trump is an instrument in God’s hands to “right” the world from abortion to same sex marriage and make sure the Supreme Court is favorable to religion and its beliefs. They ignore and overlook all the other stuff because God will “protect” them. So I guess in a way they do support him because the church certainly hasn’t been involved with the other 20 or so religions/churches in Utah actively fighting against ICE. For the majority of LDS members, those churches are too liberal or woke for God to work through them. LDS Church leaders certainly don’t ask themselves, “What would Jesus do?” I guess since the majority of them agree with each other, it must be God’s will. It’s not.
Dot might be right about leaders of the church (or a majority of them) supporting Trump’s actions. But I can think of other reasons why they would not speak about it. They lead an international church. Their focus is probably guiding the church in rough waters. I don’t know that Peter and Paul spent many hours and many gallons of ink on scrolls complaining about the policies, edicts, and laws of Roman emperors Claudius or Nero. Surely there was a lot to complain about, but their focus was on saving souls, not affecting, changing, or guiding politics. So I can think of logical conclusions regarding church leaders’ radio silence. Even Jesus never spoke against the Roman Empire. He taught individuals to practice individual repentance, to love their neighbor (and their enemies), to do good, and to believe, and rendering to Caesar what what his, and to God what was His.
All good, Georgis, but what about all the prophets who have said political things. It’s there in every canon of scripture, even modern day prophets; so, care to elaborate, or you’re just cool with cherry picking?
The OT prophets were different, because Israel/Judah were supposed to be God’s kingdoms, and the kings accepted that, so those prophets had grounds to enter the political realm–God’s realm and politics were really inseparable. NT apostles seem quiet on politics, as I mentioned. Some early church fathers encouraged Christians not to go to the arenas for the gladiator fights, but I’m not aware that they actively fought against the emperors to get them abolished. BoM prophets seemed to separate preaching and politics for the most part. So I’m not about the every canon argument. But our nation isn’t set up as God’s nation, and our leaders don’t see themselves as God’s anointed. For the prophets in our dispensation who have entered into politics, well, the people of Utah elected B Young as their governor, and things were all muddled. And other prophets have spoken about politics, probably too much in my opinion. Interesting that Benson didn’t speak on politics once he became president of the church. Maybe he learned something. Maybe the current leadership team has finally realized that they don’t need to be speaking too much on contemporary American domestic politics. What they say from our pulpits in general conference should bear equally on saints in Armenia and in Zambia and everywhere in-between. The gospel message is about individual actions, individuals repenting, individuals forgiving each other, individuals doing good, etc. That message need not change regardless of who is president in the White House, or who is on the throne in England, or who is running the Kremlin. I don’t want our church leaders to be cheerleaders for either political party.
Don’t buy it, Georgis. Your not wanting them to be a cheerleader is still them taking a stand. It’s just a stand that matches your libertarian ‘don’t want them to get into politics’ stance.
The LDS church is complicit in the violence being perpetrated in the USA by the MAGA dictatorship because it did nothing to persuade the majority of its members that voting for thugs and pedophiles might be a bad thing. When has the LDS church ever done a single thing that might risk its money and property? It’s ludicrous to claim that the deafening silence is to protect an international Church. Is the Anglican communion not international? How about Judaism? Let’s not forget the Catholics, who are universal in a sense that the LDS church can only envy and mock, as its pathetic temple outside Rome with its pathetically bad copies of statues, attests. Those churches and others are raising their voices. But the prophet and his cohort voted for the guy and the policies. LDS, Inc, supported the Third Reich and supports the MAGA Reich now. Murdering people in the streets of Minneapolis is a small price to pay when one is a buyer and seller at the temple. Are you a tithe payer? Here’s your ticket.. That’s how LDS, Inc. and the prophet roll.
I think that Pres. Oaks is quite happy to see the feds charge the mob of protestors who disrupted a church service in MN and defend freedom of religion. The church leaders are also likely quite pleased that the current US administration is trying to defend the freedom of religion, worship and expression of Jewish people much more that the previous leaders did. These incidents are familiar to historically versed LDS members and are exactly the types of things that Pres. Oaks has highlighted in previous talks.
Interesting that the many positive results of the change in government in the US in 2025 have been ignored. There is a cease fire in Gaza. The insane, murderous government of Iran is much further from getting nuclear weapons. Violent crime in the US is much lower. I could go on, but many other successes may be seen otherwise by those blinded by TDS.
El oso, how many attacks in Gaza since the ‘ceasefire’, how many deaths? Do you know? To suggest the first Presidency approves of violence for disruption of church service is gross. How convenient and safe for you to have a three letter acronym to wash always all criticisms. Very convincing.
Brian,
There are fewer attacks, fewer deaths and fewer hostages being tortured since the Gaza cease fire. Just like violent crime in the US is down, but there are still horrific murders, etc. all the time.
I would not equate getting a judge to issue arrest warrants for civil disturbances as violence. I doubt Pres. Oaks sees it that way either. Church policy would also indicate that the leaders agree. They ask that non-law enforcement members not bring weapons to church. They would prefer to rely on legal prosecution of agitators as the deterrent.
“There is a cease fire in Gaza”
Just three days ago, an Israeli attack killed 11 in Gaza including children and 3 journalists. Hamas is still armed and Israel has no intention of stopping the Israeli settler movement from stealing Palestinian land and annexing Gaza and the West Bank.
As for hostages, according to B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, “At the end of September 2025, the Israel Prison Service (IPS) was holding 10,914 Palestinians in detention or in prison on what it defined “security” grounds, including 2,931 from the Gaza Strip. At that time, the IPS was also holding 1,983 Palestinians, 18 of them from the Gaza Strip, for being in Israel illegally.” You’re only talking about a select few Israeli hostages being freed.
On Iran being further from building a nuclear weapon, Trump tore up the JCPOA agreement that Iran has been sniffing by. Obama solved many things diplomatically and Trump has done nothing but escalate matters with Iran and given them even more incentive to build a nuclear weapon.
The people with TDS are you folks. You fail to recognize that Trump is a serial liar who is in daily violation of the Constitution by profiting from the presidency. His administration is the most corrupt in US history. They are covering up ICE murders. Trump tried to steal the 2020 election, fomented an insurrection, and then pardoned all the criminals found guilty for January 6 crimes.
I’ve long read your comments el oso. You’re an evil, disgusting, vile human being.
I’ve seen the statistics about violent crime in the USA going down. What I haven’t seen are the statistics about state-perpetrated violence going up. The radical right joined ICE, and now when they kill, kidnap, and beat people, it doesn’t get counted as a crime because it’s legal. Violence is violence, whether it’s crime or state-sponsored. The current state-sponsored violence has more than exceeded the drop in illegal violence.
I agree with Brad D. The people suffering from TDS are the ones who center their morality and reality on Trump. That is the true derangement.
Between October 10, 2025, and January 20, 2026 Israel violated the ceasefire agreement at least 1,300 times.
These violations included 604 instances of bombing and shelling (air and artillery), 430 shooting incidents, and 66 raids into residential areas.The ongoing attacks have resulted in at least 484 Palestinian deaths and 1,321 injuries since the October 2025 ceasefire began.
And, el oso, you do know that the Final Solution was legal, don’t you?
You should meet my LDS family, they’re also PROFA, because their religion supports that view.