Improving the way LDS people are perceived

[I.J. Reilly]

The image problem is multi-facted:

1. People do not believe the PR line that we have nothing to do with the polygamists. I think they are correct not to believe it. They hear FLDS quoting the Book of Mormon, they see our defensiveness, and they know something is there.

2. While some image management is useful, our obsession with our image is unhealthy. To argue by analogy, when a woman dresses up to go out on the town she can sucessfully convey a positive image. However, when a woman has dozens of plastic surgeries, cakes on the make up, colors her hair, and gets Botox, reasonable people will question her character. In this analogy, the Church is the latter.

Moreover, our obsession with our image contributes to the longstanding suspicion that we Mormons talk out of both sides of our mouths, that we say whatever we have to to get the mainstream to like us, that we have skeletons in the closet. Our obsession with our image conjures suspicion, which fuels Mormon insecurity and additional obsession with image. It's a nasty circle.

3. The image of the Church can become what is defacto sacred, just as Feurbach asserted (I quoted this a few weeks ago). Fact, history, doctrine, you name it--everything gets thrown on the pire for the sake of image. Interfering with the image of the Church, however unrealistic it may be, becomes, in the mind of the orthodox, interfering with the Church itself. I believe this situation to be counter to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I could argue that it is a form of idolatry, one that makes Mormons more "Churchians" than Christians. However, I'll leave that claim as food for thought and forego the formal argument for another day.

Oh yes, and I do know the difference between an LCMS and an ELC.

I like what SIEQ has to say here.

A few random thoughts:

I think that the institutional preoccupation with image was born out of necessity, having its birth way back with the Manifesto but really seriously undertaken beginning at the seating of Reed Smoot. The authoritarian way in which it was undertaken was useful up to a point, but that approach has outgrown its usefulness.

Public perception matters if for nothing more than the fact that so many of our members live and work in places where their religion places them in a small minority and a positive image would make life easier for the majority of the church's members. That being said, I generally am very personally adverse to how the church tries to deal with public perception.

From a branding standpoint, the church doesn't do enough to leverage its own unique properties and tries to do too much battle on enemy territory while surrendering its own space (think fighting over what it means to be "Christian" while letting others define what "Mormon" is). We have a unique story to tell but we "bury the lead" so to speak. Much of our PR is reactive instead of proactive.

The largest tool that the church has for shaping public perception is our missionary force. Elders are by far the most visible/public members of the church and there is a lot of work/improvement that could be made in this area.

Finally, I think that it might be time to sever ecclesiastical duties from administrative duties for the 12 and First Presidency. I think if the this group acted more like a board of trustees as far as the administrative works of the church goes and puts more energy into the ministry aspect of the callings, then we would have a much better system.

Just a few uninspired thoughts.

[Non Sequitur]

Your continued defense of her article is getting ridiculous.

You're arguing that Mormons encourage diversity and you're calling ER ridiculous?

Using your logic I could point to J. Golden Kimball and Porter Rockwell and assume that Mormons embrace cursing over the pulpit and killing people.

[byu71]

Just a quick thought on the subject. My belief as to how I want to be protrayed as a mormon may differ from leadership. Leadership of course will and should win out as long as I sustain them and I do.

That being said, the mormons I know look like the clean shaven, white shirt, all the kids follwing behind in an orderly fashion. No tatoo's.

On the other hand, I know other mormons who wear levi's, have long hair, have facial hair and their kids are running all over the place.

This is why I at times argue the point that BYU does not "represent" the mormon church, if the church is it's people. It is a representitive of the church, if the church is the image the organization wants to portray.

When I think of a Catholic, I think of a normal human being, not a priest. When I think of a Baptist, I think of a normal human being, I don't think of the preachers I see on TV. When I think of an Amish, well I think of a horse and buggy.

[happyone]

You're arguing that Mormons encourage diversity and you're calling ER ridiculous?

Using your logic I could point to J. Golden Kimball and Porter Rockwell and assume that Mormons embrace cursing over the pulpit and killing people.

I heard Pres Hinkley curse over the pulpit once

It is imprinted in my memory for all time!

[tooblue]

You're arguing that Mormons encourage diversity and you're calling ER ridiculous?

Using your logic I could point to J. Golden Kimball and Porter Rockwell and assume that Mormons embrace cursing over the pulpit and killing people.

...

[LA Ute]

Were there any Weber State graduates among the offenders?

My money is on Westminster College.

[Sullyute]

I like what SIEQ has to say here.

A few random thoughts:

I think that the institutional preoccupation with image was born out of necessity, having its birth way back with the Manifesto but really seriously undertaken beginning at the seating of Reed Smoot. The authoritarian way in which it was undertaken was useful up to a point, but that approach has outgrown its usefulness.

Public perception matters if for nothing more than the fact that so many of our members live and work in places where their religion places them in a small minority and a positive image would make life easier for the majority of the church's members. That being said, I generally am very personally adverse to how the church tries to deal with public perception.

From a branding standpoint, the church doesn't do enough to leverage its own unique properties and tries to do too much battle on enemy territory while surrendering its own space (think fighting over what it means to be "Christian" while letting others define what "Mormon" is). We have a unique story to tell but we "bury the lead" so to speak. Much of our PR is reactive instead of proactive.

The largest tool that the church has for shaping public perception is our missionary force. Elders are by far the most visible/public members of the church and there is a lot of work/improvement that could be made in this area.

Finally, I think that it might be time to sever ecclesiastical duties from administrative duties for the 12 and First Presidency. I think if the this group acted more like a board of trustees as far as the administrative works of the church goes and puts more energy into the ministry aspect of the callings, then we would have a much better system.

Just a few uninspired thoughts.

Great thoughts. I agree whole heartedly on the missionary idea. It is definitely the most visual and recognizable icon the chuch has, with temples being a distant second. A change in preception could be greatly magnified if it involved the missionary program.

On the Q12, I thought that the Presiding Bishopric handled a lot of the administrative side of things and left more of the ecclesiastically work to the Q12? Maybe this is where we need a little more transparency in what goes on at the top. Maybe everyone else knows all this and I just lack the Spirit of differences of adminstration and diversities of operations, but I would really like to know who does what, who sits on what committee, Who makes what decision, etc.

[Maja]

To this day I have to wonder if there is an underlying control issue hiding behind an overwhelmingly Peter Priesthood facade.

My sister was engaged to be married on the 27th of December, but her ex-fiance broke off the engagement on Christmas. His reasoning...she drinks coke (has caffeine in it), wore her bra under her garments instead of over, and enjoys a little vacation from church during conference weekend. He told her that if he was going to follow in his father's footsteps and be a Bishop by the age of 46 then he would need a more religiously conscious wife by his side. My sister is a good Mormon, but her ex...I would say he is exactly the type of Mormon that gives us all a bad rap. He not only tries to portray the Peter Priesthood image, but nitpicks and finds fault in others, condemning those who do not uphold his holier-than-thou ideals.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Lucky girl, although she would likely contest that point.

She dodged a HUGE bullet. Good thing she learned about it 2 days prior to the wedding instead of 2 days after. That guy may very well be successful in life and at church, but he has a severe underlying control issue and would have dominated her to the point of grave unhappiness.

My oldest son has Opositional Defiant Disorder, and has an extreme pathological need to be fully in control of everybody and everything around him. He is slow to criticize himself, but is a self-appointed keeper of the rules, and immediately goes from calm to full-throated screaming at my wife and I when we ask him to obey or change his behavior.

We are working very hard to help him modify his behavior and to temper his belligerence. This is hard enough to do with a 9 year old. I can't imagine trying to deal with this situation in an adult, let alone a spouse, without training.

[smokymountainrain]

wore her bra under her garments instead of over, and enjoys a little vacation from church during conference weekend.

I would like to know how he became aware of this fact...Perhaps Bishop by 46 wasn't going to happen regardless of your sister's outrageously rebellious attitude.

[RC Vikings]

My sister was engaged to be married on the 27th of December, but her ex-fiance broke off the engagement on Christmas. His reasoning... wore her bra under her garments instead of over.

If he knew this he probably wasn't as holy as he claimed to be.

[scottie]

My sister was engaged to be married on the 27th of December, but her ex-fiance broke off the engagement on Christmas. His reasoning...she drinks coke (has caffeine in it), wore her bra under her garments instead of over, and enjoys a little vacation from church during conference weekend. He told her that if he was going to follow in his father's footsteps and be a Bishop by the age of 46 then he would need a more religiously conscious wife by his side. My sister is a good Mormon, but her ex...I would say he is exactly the type of Mormon that gives us all a bad rap. He not only tries to portray the Peter Priesthood image, but nitpicks and finds fault in others, condemning those who do not uphold his holier-than-thou ideals.

Any idea what the significance of age 46 was? If someone applies himself, I don't think age 30 is that much of a stretch.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Any idea what the significance of age 46 was? If someone applies himself, I don't think age 30 is that much of a stretch.

No kidding. My FIL/MIL's stake president is ~34, and has been in the office for a few years now.

His wife has to take care of 5 kids under the age of 7, all by herself, every week at church.

[Portland Ute]

No kidding. My FIL/MIL's stake president is ~34, and has been in the office for a few years now.

His wife has to take care of 5 kids under the age of 7, all by herself, every week at church.

An orthodontist in my community was called to be a stake president in his mid-30's. He's got young kids and is establishing a practice.

He was a bishop prior to this.

Seems like a nightmare.

I'm going to ask my wife to start drinking coke and wearing a bra under her garments just to make sure this never happens to me...

[CardiacCoug]

In my limited experience living amongst heathens and outside of the Zion curtain, I think a lot of the reason that people don't like Mormons are Mormons themselves.

In my dental school, most of the biggest pricks were Mormons. They fit nearly all the "negative" associations mentioned in the article.

Now, that being said, it wasn't all the Mormons. Some of the coolest and most beloved students at the school were also Mormon. (Not me.)

So, what am I saying here? I think we as a group bring a lot of the negative perceptions on ourselves. At my school, there was a very loud minority (comprised of LDS, but NOT all the LDS) that were really assholes to be around. They whined like stuck pigs when alcohol was served at class parties. They wore their religion on their sleeve. They were in your face. They went out of their way to dissociate themselves from other class members and did nothing to get to know or develop relationships with the class. They stuck out like sore thumbs and they were not liked. And they were LDS.

Interesting post. I think it was kind of like this at my medical school too. Mormons tended to be either some of the best liked or the most hated students.

I decided that for Mormons it's a very fine line between being perceived as a really normal, nice, conscientious, all-around awesome person and a holier-than-thou tool. And about half the Mormons end up crossing the line and being hated.

In the medical school setting at least, sometimes the Mormon hard-working, earnest, sober ethos is interpreted as just some older dude that thinks he is better than everybody else and tries to make the other students look bad.