Let’s face it, most people don’t know much about Mormons or Mormon beliefs. 
They probably know about polygamy and that fact we don’t drink, smoke or consume coffee or tea, but beyond that, very little. They might have heard of Joseph Smith or Brigham Young. But they would be hard pressed to name the current President of The Church or any other leader. And most could not equate the name Mormon with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The current ad campaign, “I am a Mormon” has probably helped somewhat to cast us as regular people, but the smash Broadway Musical, “The Book of Mormon” might have pushed us a bit back into the weird category. With the presidential campaign getting underway and two Mormon candidates in the running, the light of scrutiny is once again being shined on us.
And the weirdness factor is raising its head.
CNN posted a very good video explaining the Church to people and of course, the Church has tons of videos on Mormon.org, YouTube and other places trying to explain our beliefs.
But, some folks like a local TV reporter in Memphis like to focus on more obscure ideas in our doctrinal history that make us sound like a weird religion.
We do need to face the fact there has been a lot of speculative doctrine taught over the pulpits of our Church throughout its history and that certain practices are seen in a very bad light against today’s norms. Much of that has changed and the Church has gone to great lengths to try to promote our mainstream doctrines and insure that that is what is taught to members and discussed with others. Like many others, I would never discount or dismiss what has gone before but it must be handled in the proper perspective.
Many folks, not of our faith (or even some associated with it) like to point out the weirdness and the strange ideas and practices in an effort to discredit the Church and to criticize the current Presidential candidates.
I can find such weirdness, if you want to call it that, in some of the ideas of other faiths. But, it does not seem necessary to point those out and dwell on them as a cornerstone of their religious faith.
The bottom line is the purpose of religion is to, by and large make people better people, more loving toward others and build a better world. To call out certain ideas as weird, without really understanding what is behind them is mean-spirited and unfair.
God’s people have always been enjoined to set themselves apart from the world and to be “a peculiar (special) people.”
But just not weird.
Wheat & Tares 
i guess the issue is that if you strip away the “weird” stuff, then you just have generic christianity. and if you want generic christianity, you can get that without the mormon baggage. The uniqueness of mormonism is basically that we have joseph smith, brigham young, and current prophets that speak to god. but if you are going to “not dwell” on the “speculative” things that those prophets say, what is the point of having them?
but yes, i think objectively, we are weird. and not just in a “but all religions require belief in the supernatural, so we’re all weird” kind of way. our underwear is weird. believing that our original prophets were inspired to secretly take other men’s wives is weird. believing that blacks are second class citizens until 1978 is weird. and not weird in a harmless sense.
and now we are in the uncomfortable position of trying to be normal, skateboarding “i’m a mormon” kind of people, while at the same time holding on to the weird baggage.
The fact is, most mormons do not subscribe to the weird doctrines. They probably dont even believe them. They basically believe in generic christianity, but they hold onto the mormon identity because it is the only way they know how to express their appreciation for a christian life, and their love for the family, culture, and identity.
Historical Mormonism when the theology was pretty free wheeling was a few bricks shy of a full load but the modern church is pretty straight up, IMHO. I doubt the old doctrines would make it out of correlation and they’re certainly not part of the curricula. So to answer your question, some members are but the Church? Not really.
Jeff,
We are (at least those that live the religion) are a weird or peculiar people – yea are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people (1 Peter 2:9). Are beliefs are not normal and they shouldn’t be, if they were we would be average and average is as close to the bottom as it is the top.
Look at it objectively – we shouldn’t go to R rated movies; we shouldn’t drink coffee, tea or beer; we should shop, work or play on Sunday; we should wear underwear that goes to the knees; we baptize people that have died; we shouldn’t have tattoos or excessive ear piercing; we believe mothers should stay at home with the kids while the dad works; we pay 10 percent of our income to the church; we store a two years supply of food and water; and, where necessary money. If follow all of these rules you would be considered weird by the world. Look at how much I get trashed defending some of the above items by those close to the church.
Our beliefs are weird and we shouldn’t be offended when others point that out.
A few comments:
1) When I was growing up, we prided ourselves on being a “peculiar people”. We were different. The Church tried to eradicate the name “Mormon” and make everyone use the full-name. We were weird.
The current leadership is instead trying to make us seem “not-weird”. We have “I’m A Mormon” ads showing girls in spaghetti strap shirts, women fully engaged in careers, skateboarding fashion photographers whose work wouldn’t be exhibited at BYU, etc. We have President Hinckley backing away from fundamental teachings such as “God was once like us, we can be like Him” in interviews by saying he didn’t really know what that meant or that we taught that.
The problem with trying to be “less weird” is that, like Mitt Romney, the weird things DO exist in our history. In trying to distance ourselves from them, it looks like a “flip-flop”, a PR campaign as opposed to a true change, etc.
2) In general: The good things about Mormonism are not unique; the unique things about Mormonism are not good.
The fundamental “good” things in Mormonism are a loving God, faith in Christ, charity, honesty, chastity, helping others, etc. None of these are unique to Mormonism. But the things that set us apart are things that seem weird. Like it or not, the Church was founded on polygamy. That is weird. Like it or not, our current fixation on not a drop of wine has caused us to change the fundamental ordinance we use to remember Christ each week. That is weird. Like it or not, our prophets and apostles taught very racist teachings and established very racist policies. That is weird. We baptize dead people. That is weird to the outside world. We dress weird as leaders, missionaries, etc. Our underwear is weird. It is weird that we won’t drink coffee but can drink a Red Bull.
So, the good things about Mormonism are found in all faiths. The unique things are weird.
We are weird, or as used to be taught before the current mainstreaming of the Church, we are a peculiar people.
Meh, I consider myself to be a weird guy anyway. I obsess over flying things perhaps to an unhealthy level, I like computers, star wars, star trek, science, philosophy, motorcycles, sports, etc. I’m okay with being weird, doesn’t bother me at all.
hmmm, I enjoy a good R rated movie.
I love a going out to eat on Sunday after church, riding my motorcycle, going swimming with the kids, etc.
we should? I don’t. I must have missed that section in the D&C.
that’s crazy man, and a bit disgusting. In my church we baptize (living) people on behalf of someone who has died (I believe the term is “proxy”).
I think a couple earrings in one ear, a belly button ring, or a well placed meaningful tatoo is pretty sexy personally (well on a woman anyway).
I wish my wife would get a job so I could stay home with the kids. Seriously, after I finish my PhD I will have attained all my career goals for this life. I’d be happy with a sugar-mama.
I pay 10% of my increase (not income).
I figure I’ll survive by a drop of dew and the energy of the universe 😉 (bonus points if you know the movie reference)!!
Two years supply?
Now, that is weird. My Church teaches us to have a year’s supply, but recently has been satisfied with any supply.
Personally, I like being a little “weird.” An adjective for weird is uncanny, and isn’t that the adjective used to describe the X-Men?
Really though, I like things that make us unique. I like things that make other faiths an cultures unique or “weird” as well. What really scares me is everyone trying NOT to be weird, and then we end up with something like Brave New World. 🙂
Well said, JMB.
I think we’re weird because we’re inconsistent (at least historically speaking). The Church today preaches a substantially different message than the Church of the early 1800s, or late 1800s, or early 1900s, or mid 1900s, or late 1900s. Emphasis changes things. What was important in the mid-1800s (the doctrine of gathering, the gifts of the Spirit, seeing Christ personally) have slowly gone the way of all the earth (dead ideas) and given way to newly important things. It’s both good and bad.
And yet, though Will and others would have us believe that Mormons are defined by one set of characteristics, they are nevertheless a diverse group (everyone that is but the FP and Qof12 who somehow remain an entirely white, septuagenarian/octogenarian group).
As one article stated it:
But, even with statements like that, when we have Deseret Book (promoted by Elder Oaks’ wife no less) selling “testimony gloves” that are used to “cement” ideas into young minds “for life,” I wonder whether the Church wants us to maintain diversity, or to push sameness… that might be a little weird.
The secret is finally out! JMB is the Dragon Warrior!! I just knew that stinkin’ panda was a phony.
A couple of comments assert that the good things about Mormonism are found in all faiths, and that anything unique to Mormonism is weird (i.e. undesirable). I think this idea is false.
Here are a couple of things that are unique as well as definitively Mormon:
-Continuing revelation
-The Book of Mormon
-Pre and Post mortal existence with persistent notion of self
-Apotheosis (Pres Hinckley is right that this idea is not as explicitly talked about in recent years. It is, however, discussed constantly by referencing the even more nebulous idea of “eternal families,” and I haven’t encountered explanations of that idea that don’t include some notion of apotheosis)
-Vicarious ordinance work for the dead
-Physical embodiment of God
-Divisions of Heaven
I’m sure there are others I could list as well. Maybe there is something I’m missing, but it sure seems that the things I’ve mentioned are both unique and central to Mormonism, as well as being “good.”
Most of the restoration “splinter” groups had a belief in the Book of Mormon; fewer with continuing revelation, and fewer still with ordinance work for the dead. Yet they would probably not identify themselves as “mormon”.
I would disagree with irony in that I think all those things are still taught in the Church, though not in the same way as before. The Gathering is still alive and well, first in local areas and then, as a group for the second coming. Gifts of the Spirit, still taught in great abundance but not for hugely divine manifestation that have occurred from time to time, but through the Holy Ghost. And seeing Christ personally is also still taught. In fact, I taught in Sunday School just this past Sunday.
There is more refinement to the doctrine and the GAs spend less time on speculative theory then on more practical application for the here and now and eternity.
There is no charge for awesomeness…or attractiveness!!
Jeff:
If something has been modified/refined/changed, then that something is no longer taught. Something else, in it’s place, is taught.
The doctrine of gathering was officially axed during the great depression. Seeing Christ face-to-face might be taught here and there, but the emphasis has been removed from officialdom since at least Reed Smoot (early 1900s). The spiritual gifts have been replaced with following the prophet – just read one of the hymns (The Spirit of God) and see how different it is.
Visions? Angels? Visions and revelations have been redefined as “hunches” per Hinckley, angels have been redefined as mortals per Holland. Really, can you point to some visions or angels coming down to visit the earth (implying something of an angelic being)?
Now contrast that with our own Book of Mormon, it sounds fairly similar to this:
Omni 1:11: “And behold, the record of this people is engraven upon plates which is had by the kings, according to the generations; and I know of no revelation save that which has been written, neither prophecy; wherefore, that which is sufficient is written. And I make an end.”
Whether we want to admit it or not, things have been redefined and de-weirded.
“The doctrine of gathering was officially axed during the great depression.”
Again, I disagree. While the doctrine of a universal gathering in Utah was modified, there were specific reasons. The Gathering left the Church weak in the outlining areas and missionary work was suffering. With a command to teach all people, the Church organizations outside of Utah needed to be strong. The David O McKay explains this pretty well.
“The spiritual gifts have been replaced with following the prophet”
Wow, where does that come from?
I’m a Catholic who loves the Bloggernacle (I’ve also taken the missionary discussions and visited an LDS church). I think lots of things about Mormonism are weird–that’s probably what makes Mormonism interesting to me. I also think the weird things can be good or bad. Off the top of my head:
Weird but kind of appealing (to me):
-Heavenly Mother
-Apotheosis
-Different levels of heaven instead of heaven vs. hell
-Unusual level of dedication/obedience among members (e.g., most Mormons I know, unlike the members of most other faiths I know, actually *follow* their leaders’ guidance regarding premarital sex, early marriage, tithing, etc., even when it’s hard)
Weird and unappealing (to me):
-Polygamy
-Ban on priesthood for blacks until 1978
-The focus on gender
-No R-Rated movies
-The fact that non-members/non-temple-worthy members cannot attend temple weddings of loved ones.
Just weird:
-God having a physical body
-Garden of Eden in Jackson County, MO
-The story of the Book of Mormon
-Garments
-No coffee or tea but caffeine is ok
Personally, I don’t think modern LDS are “weird” enough, and the current leadership’s urgent campaign to look “not weird” contributed in a very large way to my leaving the LDS church.
During the 26 years I was an active LDS member, I saw time and time again that the more unique doctrines of Mormonism were being gradually downplayed, even jettisoned altogether, by the LDS church. I also saw that college-aged LDS and relatively new converts were increasingly taught that well-established Mormon doctrines were “never taught” or “just speculation.” I’ve even seen college-aged LDS in the bloggernacle suggest that the King Follett Discourse (an important resource on some of the most beautiful of Mormonism’s unusual teachings) was “unreliable” for doctrine, or as one active young LDS man put it, that Joseph Smith “didn’t know what he was talking about” during that sermon.
Ultimately, I find it sad that the faith tradition initiated through Joseph Smith–a tradition filled with beautiful, inspiring, mind-expanding principles–has essentially been lost. In its place, there’s just a collection of churches which loudly claim to teach the religion of Joseph Smith, all the while increasingly dismissing any of his teachings that might sound “weird” to evangelicals, Olympic games organizers, presidential election voters, etc.
Honestly, I gave up on the LDS church when it seemed like 99% of what I heard in meetings was no different than any protestant church down the road. The only “unique” teaching that LDS leaders seem determined to remain firm on is their claim of exclusive priesthood authority, i.e., the rationale for their exercise of power over others.
To follow up on what Nick said–I was WAY more interested in Mormonism when I heard about the King Follett Discourse and Heavenly Mother (weird but fascinating and beautiful) than I was when I actually met with the missionaries and went to an LDS church (nothing weird at all, and almost nothing I hadn’t heard before at Protestant and Catholic churches).
Jeff:
The original teachings of the church stressed a personal relationship with God above all else. The original teachings of the church stressed that you shouldn’t put your trust in the leaders of the church, and stressed that you should only trust God and the gifts of the Spirit. The original gathering of the church was predicated on the gifts of the spirit both being present and in use and visible by all.
Today, if you’re impressed by the Spirit to leave the church for a better, more enlightened path for you you’re told you need to follow the Brethren, that they cannot lead you astray. Today, if you’re impressed to follow the Spirit and recognize that the Church might teach for doctrines the commandments of men, you’re told to follow the brethren, that they simply cannot lead you astray. Today, if you felt impressed to gather with like-hearted individuals in a cooperative living arrangement you’d be told to stay where you are, that the brethren cannot lead you astray. Today, if you felt the Spirit tell you to go on a mission, you’d be told that you can only be a missionary until your mid-20s for men, then have to wait until your married and of a retired age to actually serve.
You see, there are plenty of Church doctrines that suppress personal revelation and set up stakes around what we can/cannot do… all because the Brethren tell us so. Try exerting a modicum of individuality at church and someone will say that the “Brethren” have told us not to do that… from everything such as a white shirt (been told to me) to living in a cooperative arrangement (been told to my brother) to walking to/for Zion and rejecting Babylonian society (been told to a good friend of mine). If you live your life and feel impressed to do things that are simply outside of both the norms of society AND the church, church members (and official leaders) far and wide will remind you that the “Brethren” are really the ones making the call on what we can/cannot do. It’s not as outlandish as you’re making it sound… unless you’re merely trying to be obstinate.
So yes, the gifts of the Spirit have been replaced by a “follow the Prophet” meme in many subtle and not-so ways.
Jeff:
I have to call you out on this:
There might have been additional reasons for the modification of the doctrine, but the reasons you listed were not the ones leading the charge. We have no further than to look at financial reasons for the chief cause of the modification.
Irony, that can’t be right! Surely you’ve seen all the primary children singing, “Follow the Spirit! Follow the Spirit!”
If the gifts of the Spirit had truly been replaced by “follow the prophet” sentiment in the LDS church, then primary children would be singing “Follow the Prophet! Follow the Prophet! week after week, instead.
Oh…wait a minute….
One item that has been left out is our tendency to only primarily interact with each other.
Many of my non-Mormon friends think Mormons only do things with Mormons.
And, I think, they are generally right.
I agree with Anna (although I am a member). In fact I have an upcoming post on my favorite Mormon things, and those on her positive list are pretty much on mine. I don’t like some of the unique things she also doesn’t like. However, I do like the idea of God having a body. To me the idea of God that’s pretty much an enlightened Man is relatable and great.
Are we weird? Most of the things people are listing aren’t weird but are square, naive or gullible. Yes, Mormons are those things. I don’t think most Mormons are weird. Just a little quick to believe in the supernatural, a little wide-eyed in our simplicity, and perhaps too sheltered from things that are in fact rather ordinary and human.
It’s mostly the doctrine and beliefs that people call weird and in guilt by association that makes us, collectedly weird too.
And they call it weird because they hear about bits and pieces and do not know the whole story.
Irony,
“Today, if you’re impressed by the Spirit to leave the church for a better, more enlightened path for you you’re told you need to follow the Brethren, that they cannot lead you astray.”
Who tells you that? In fact, the Brethren cannot lead anyone astray unless they choose to follow them astray. We have our agency to believe or not believe anything any leader says. We should be discerning by the Spirit what is correct and come from God and what is merely opinion and/or advice.
That’s what Gifts of the Spirit are for.
“The bottom line is the purpose of religion is to, by and large make people better people, more loving toward others and build a better world.”
If only the church had stuck to that philosophy instead of inserting itself into Proposition 8 (not to mention all the efforts in other states) I think it would be easier to make the case that the church is not a threat to the values of other Americans.
I’m not defending Prop 8, but on the whole the church is less intrusive in politics than many other churches are. I don’t see politics figuring into our “weird” status either direction.
Yes, we’re weird (and I don’t want to be normal, in many ways) – but, ironically, our underwear isn’t all that weird anymore. LOTS of people wear nearly knee-length boxers and t-shirts under their outerwear now.
Just sayin’.
Amen, Hawk.
Anyone who has lived in the Deep South, as I have, almost has to laugh when people complain about the LDS Church being involved in lots of political issues. We have absolutely nothing on many denominations when it comes to political involvement – as painful as Prop 8 was for many members (and others, of course).
One more thing:
“Follow the Prophet” is NOT unique to Mormonism. That is a silly red herring.
Catholics have the early Church Fathers; Protestants have Paul and the early Protestant founders (and Billy Graham and Jim Bakker and Jerry Falwell and James Hobson and Joel Osteen ad infinitum); and the list goes on and on and on.
Many Protestants, especially, prioritize the Pauline epistles and the writings of modern preachers over the Gospels when it comes down the actual teachings – and I say that looking back on decades of constructive, civil discourse with thousands of people.
Sure, we pound that drum a bit too much, but we certainly aren’t weird in our drumming of it.
#27
I’d be comforted that Prop 8 was an exception except of the church’s carving out and promoting similarly restrictive positions regarding civil rights for Black and women Americans as well.
I believe one aspect of our cultural religious practice that offends many is our attitude that we are somehow chosen, better, and/or more spiritual and those of other religions. Too many of our members tend to look down on those who dress, believe, or live differently than they do.
When I was growing up, I was taught that blacks were the seed of Cain and because of that, they were unworthy to hold the priesthood. Now we accept them wholeheartedly in our Church, and I have learned that many of my non-white brothers and sisters live on a much higher spiritual plane than many of my white ones because of their humility and pure faith.
I see the same situation occuring in the Church regarding those who have same-sex attraction. Because of my past experiences in the Church regarding non-whites (whom, by the way, I have always included in my circle of friends and from whom I have learned so much), I love and respect my gay friends as well and believe that some day Church leaders will realize that these precious souls are worthy to receive full fellowship in the Church just as our black friends are.
Perhaps the Church is weird because it has held so strongly to social and cultural traditions regarding race, gender, and sexual orientation that it has unknowingly encouraged members to become judgmental, self-righteous, and proud. I look forward to the day when Church leaders teach members to love others unconditionally and that God loves us unconditionally as well. I cannot reconcile myself with Elder Nelson’s talk that God’s love is not unconditional since the scriptures show me that His love is perfect, never-ending, and infinite.
Alice, “carved out” and “similarly restrictive” ?????
I’m not aware of any political positions the LDS Church “carved out” with regard to the civil rights of Blacks and women – and the LDS Church didn’t “carve out” Prop 8.
I don’t think the Priesthood ban was God’s will, and I would have preferred the Church not back opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment, but the ban wasn’t a political position – and the ERA was opposed by lots and lots of organizations.
The point Hawk and I made is that the LDS Church is MUCH less involved in politics than many Christian denominations and coalitions – not that it never gets involved in politics and not that we agree with every time it does so. I will add, however, given your examples, that the Church appears to “join” political movements more often than it “carves out” political crusades.
Different members see that as either a positive or a negative, depending on their viewpoint, but it’s really hard to look at the scope of American history and claim that the LDS Church has been a proactive, initiating force in politics anywhere close to the level of many Protestant churches.
In that way, we are a bit weird.
I don’t think that we are weird at all. What we believe and do is perfectly normal. It is everyone else who is weird.
It’s more than the ban on the priesthood. Surely you’re familiar with the Stapley letter attempting to intimidate George Romney from supporting basic voting rights for Blacks. That was far outside the ecclesiastical domain of the church and distinctly political.
As for Prop 8 it’s just an example of the church’s overtly political activities in regard to gay people. It’s just plain disingenuous not to recognize that the church and NOM have been major architects and pillars of legislation preventing basic marriage rights for gay people around the country.
#33:
I’m not aware of any political positions the LDS Church “carved out” with regard to the civil rights of Blacks and women – and the LDS Church didn’t “carve out” Prop 8…I will add, however, given your examples, that the Church appears to “join” political movements more often than it “carves out” political crusades.
Ray, the LDS church has indeed “carved out” anti-gay legislation. The earlier “Knight Initiative,” which banned same-sex marriage in California before it was found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of California, was orchestrated by LDS leaders from the start.
Andrew Pugno, the lawyer currently leading the defense of Prop 8 in federal court, was serving on state senator Pete Knight’s staff at the time Proposition 22 was being proposed. Mr. Pugno drafted the language of Proposition 22. Working through BYU law professor Lynn Wardle, Pugno submitted the proposed initiative language to LDS leaders for their approval. Why? Because LDS leaders were bankrolling the effort, for one.
You can read the leaked correspondence, all linked at http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/prop-8-lawyer-vetted-first-gay-marriage-initiative-mormon-leaders-926
Not surprisingly, Pugno was a drafter of Prop 8 as well. I wonder who he vetted that language with?
Alice, I haven’t argued against political involvement by the Church – claiming that it doesn’t get involved. I’ve said it doesn’t do so nearly to the extent that many Protestant churches and coalitions do – and that most of it is “joining” rather than “carving out”.
Seriously, you’ve listed three examples over multiple decades. I know there are plenty more examples, but you’re making my point for me.
Nick, again, political opposition to Prop 8 didn’t start with the LDS Church. Maybe we are using the term “carve out” to mean different things.
“It’s just plain disingenuous not to recognize that the church and NOM have been major architects and pillars of legislation preventing basic marriage rights for gay people around the country.”
Don’t put words in my mouth in order to claim I’m being disingenuous. I never said that, never have and never will. I assume it was an honest mistake caused by not reading what I wrote carefully, not an intentional attempt to be disingenuous. Please, read a little more carefully in the future.
I believe literally that I am a son of God. Everything ‘weird’ flows from that.
to Ray-
I have no intention of either arguing or putting words in your mouth. And no less conviction about how I see things.
If you are encouraged that the church only attempts to limit the civil rights of Black, gay and women Americans only occasionally in contemporary history then you can take heart. The church has willingly and full-heartedly done what it has done and that stands in dramatic contrast with “the bottom line is the purpose of religion is to, by and large make people better people, more loving toward others and build a better world.” For me that’s very disturbing and much more profound than something lighthearted like being “weird”.
Alice:
There is no constitutional right to same sex marriage.
alice – I don’t think Ray would necessarily disagree with you about disliking the politicking in the church, nor would I, but that’s not something that makes Mormons unique. You said “For me that’s very disturbing and much more profound than something lighthearted like being “weird”.” Fair enough, but the post was called “Are we weird?” not “Are we profoundly disturbing?”
I don’t even think we are weird because someone always has to go over the top no matter what the OP is.
Alice, again, please don’t put words in my mouth I didn’t say. Your characterization of me and what I said is wrong – plain and simple. I choose my words carefully in order to avoid that type of misrepresentation. I won’t continue to converse when all I can say is, “I didn’t say that.” It just isn’t worth it.
This line at the end of this BYU Universe piece reminded me of this post:
“We are genuine, authentic and non-robotic,” monotoned the chairman of Mormon Media Task Force, Kevin Kelly.