The Problem with Mormon Celebrities

Steve Young. Donny Osmond. Gladys Knight. Mitt Romney. David Archuleta. Brooke White.

What do they all have in common? If you're a Mormon and don't live in a cave, you probably know the answer: They are all members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We know it, and are proud of our own. I'm reminded of the once popular Adam Sandler song, "Chanukah", which proudly and humorously lists famous people who are Jewish. We even have a web site devoted to famous Mormons.

Admit it. You get a sense of satisfaction when you hear about someone who is famous and Mormon, or when you hear about someone you know is Mormon becoming successful and well known. This is perfectly natural. The smaller the group you belong to, the more likely you are to have the "one-of-our-own" mentality. But why do we care so much?

Is it because if there's a Mormon who is liked by a lot people, that makes us more normal? Does it somehow validate the Mormon position? Does it show that our lifestyle is superior since we produce such great people? Of course consciously we would reject these justifications. Surely the success or failure of a few Mormons should not reflect on the entire population in general, should it? Yet, subconsciously, somehow it does.

But what's the harm? Mormons have historically been a small group, and as any small group it is understandable that we should be proud of our own who have become successful. However, the membership of the LDS church has now grown to over 13 million. Our membership is large and diverse. As the membership grows, it becomes more dangerous to allow a few members to be put up on a pedestal. To illustrate this, let's look at a few examples:

I think it's safe to say that Mormons in general were rooting for Mitt Romney. I was myself, but I tried very hard to make sure my support was because I thought he was the best candidate, not because he was Mormon. Although I think I was pretty successful at it, I can't deny that it does appear that many Mormons supported him who perhaps would not if he was not a Mormon. The fact that Utah supported him so strongly proves this, I believe. It's pretty hard to argue with the fact that he would not have gotten such a landslide victory there if he had not been Mormon. We are proud of him.

But what would happen if it came out that he had been involved in some illegal business transaction, or marital infidelity. Don't get me wrong, from what I know of him I wouldn't expect it, but really I know very little about his personal life. I'm not trying to judge. In fact, that's exactly the point: We shouldn't judge too harshly, but we also should be too quick to judge favorably about someone we don't know much about. So if it came out that he had done something unflattering, how would Mormons look, considering we supported him in such numbers?

Another example is Gladys Knight. Some Mormons love to bring her up, especially when talking about race issues within the church. Does her membership somehow prove that race is not an issue in Mormon culture and that we have put our past behind us? Of course it doesn't prove that, but sometimes we act as if it does. So what would happen if Sister Knight decided she didn't want to be a Mormon anymore? Since some have used her name as an argument that the Mormon culture accepts all races equally, would her rejecting Mormonism mean that we have a race problem? We have given her way too much power in the realm of public opinion on Mormonism.

Today, the big names are David Archuleta and Brooke White, who have made the top seven on American Idol. From what I can tell, they are good people. But I know very little about them other than that they are Mormon, sing well, and their families clap for them vigorously. Do I secretly root for them? At some level, yes. I'm not immune. But what happens if it comes out that one of them has done something that most Mormons would consider out-of-line with what we believe, or if they do something like that in the future? Do I want my church represented to the world by two people who I know very little about? Of course I'm not suggesting they should quit, but the question is how we include their Mormonism in their frame of success.

The answer goes back to what our leaders have been telling us for years: Let's be good neighbors. Let's take care of our families, be good employees, and be honest and caring of others. Of course we should do this regardless of whether others recognize it, but it also happens to be the best way to improve the image of Mormonism. Pinning our hopes on celebrities is a short cut, and as my wife will tell you, short cuts sometimes don't get us to where we intend.

Complainer Culture

During my lunch break today I went to get my hair cut. I go to the place because they are quick and cheap, and don't usually try to make small talk, which I hate. This time, though, the lady felt the need to engage.

"I can't believe it snowed last night. This week has been all rain and snow. Can you believe it?" She said. I realized that she was just trying to be friendly, but she actually seemed upset about it. For the record, it didn't snow where I was, but apparently a few flakes fell somewhere nearby].

What I thought: "Yeah, that's called weather."

I returned to work and a co-workers walks into my cube: "Man, I'm so busy. My boss asked me to look into these two issues and now I'm stuck on them, and I'm going on some business trips over the next few weekends." Note: both the trips and the issues were voluntary.

What I thought: "Have you considered saying No?"

And then it hit me: complaining is part of our culture. We complain about everything. When it's winter it's too cold. When it's summer it's hot. When it's spring it's too rainy. You can always complain about work, whether you are too busy or don't have enough to do. It seems that complaining has become the way that we communicate.

Then I think about the successful people I know: Stephen Covey, President Monson, and others who are successful in various ways. It's interesting that they don't complain much, at least about insignificant things. Perhaps there is a correlation.

Of course some things are worth complaining about, and I don't pretend that I don'tdo my fair share. But today was a time for me to reflect and wonder if my life could be more rewarding with less complaining (from me, that is).

Is this one more way that I should be "in the world, but not of the world?"

Confessions of a Sabbath Breaker

Check out my guest post at The Millenial Star.

Cultural Pseudo-Truth

Last night my wife and I watched a television program on the civil rights movement (No, this is not another MLK/Mormon post, it just starts there). I was not alive during the heart of the movement, so it's very foreign to me. It's hard to imagine that all of this happened not so long ago, and that racism was so recently acceptable in our society. How do we explain this? Were all those racists bad people, and now we are so much more moral? I don't believe so. I believe most of them were generally good people. So how could they be so wrong about race issues? I believe it is because of a phenomenon I'll call cultural pseudo-truth. (If there is already an accepted term for this, please let me know.)

In general there are two sources of truth: science (or, more generally, reason) and religion (or, more generally, faith or revelation). Some questions are best answered by science, and some are best answered by religion. However, I think we overlook the influence of a third, false source of pseudo-truth: culture. I believe that, unfortunately, much of the "truth" that we take for granted comes from this third source. Racists in the past accepted that blacks were inferior. Not many people, even good ones, thought to question this cultural norm. It took a revolutionary leader, Martin Luther King, along with other brave individuals to bring scrutiny to this belief.

When I accept the reality that at least some of the things I believe are a result of my culture, and not based on some more sure source, I think of two important questions related to Mormonism:

First, how does cultural pseudo-truth affect how others view us? I think most of the reasons some people think that Mormons are "weird" is a result of the culture that we are compared against. The Word of Wisdom, temple worship, and the missionary program are a few things that are pointed out as things that make us weird. I could go into why I believe each one seams weird when viewed through a cultural lens, but when viewed from cultural neutrality are not all that weird. Not to dwell on a sensitive topic, but I'll just point out that our culture views clothing as an expression of our light-heartedness (Think Joe Boxer and t-shirts with sarcastic comments on them that are all the rage with the kids these days). In such a culture, it's no wonder why Mormons are considered weird for associating some spiritual significance to an article of clothing. However, such a view is not unique in the world, as demonstrated by orthodox Jews wearing yamacas, and other current and historical examples.

But, before we Mormons start congratulating ourselves that we have risen above cultural pseudo-truth, let me explain my second important question: How does cultural pseudo-truth affect how we view the world? Are there things in our culture that we accept as true which cause us to view those who do things differently as wrong? Not surprisingly, it's harder for me to come up with examples of this. Clearly it's harder to recognize cultural pseudo-truth in myself than it is to recognize it in others. One possible example is family size. Mormons traditionally have large families (although this is less so recently). If we assume, for a moment, that this is a cultural phenomenon, and not doctrinal in some way, should it influence how I view someone who chooses to have a small family, or no family?

Or perhaps there is something even more dire. Perhaps I, like the racists of times past, hold some deep conviction rooted in my cultural that is actually dead wrong and deeply harmful. The problem is: how would I know?

A Peculiar People or a Peculiar Nurse?

At a recent trip to the doctor's office, the nurse tried to convince my wife to get the HPV vaccine. For those that don't know, the vaccine prevents a certain sexually-transmitted virus that can lead to cervical cancer. My wife didn't know much about it and so she resisted the nurse's attempt to push it on her. She isn't anti-vaccination, but she understandably does like to know what she's doing before she agrees to such things.

The nurse could not believe that she would refuse. She explained that if she had multiple partners, this could protect her from getting cancer. My wife explained that she was married.

"Well, I was married once too," the nurse responded. My wife continued to refuse, although I wouldn't have judged her if she decided to comply (I have nothing against the vaccine).

The nurse left and came back a few minutes later. "How was I supposed to know that you were married? You're 25." Probably realizing how rude she had been, the nurse turned defensive.

The conversation turned to other matters, and it came out that she has a son. Fortunately my wife didn't reveal that we also have a daughter, or else the poor lady probably would have had a heart attack.

So in the matter of minutes, my wife was told she was weird in 3 ways:

1) She didn't consider it a realistic possibility that she would have multiple partners in the same time frame.

2) She's married at the young age of 25 (has been for 5 years, but she didn't tell the nurse that).

3) She has at least 1 child, again at the ridiculously young age of 25.

Are we really that strange, or is this nurse just crazy?