At the end of the book Planted, Patrick Mason makes the analogy of church being like living in a gated community, but one with open gates that welcomes others to come in.
In the meantime, we live in houses in a gated community that paradoxically swings open its gate for all to enter. Yet like many intentional communities, ours has a set of neighborhood covenants that delineate the terms of life within and that shape the quality of the shared experience to make it meaningful for those who enter.
It’s an analogy I’ve been thinking about a lot since reading it. When seen in this light, the existence of the bloggernacle is a lot like a group of people who dislike certain aspects of living in a gated community, wish for a new Home Owner Association board, or whose local board members keep adding community rules that make life unpleasant. Gated communities seem to have a few common characteristics:
- Uniformity of appearance.
- Security theater.
- More expensive.
- Communal areas and activities.
- Lots of rules.
Let’s take a closer look. I was reading an article from Wall Street Journal about whether gated communities are a good investment or not.
Uniformity of Appearance
We recently hosted a French foreign exchange student for a few weeks. One thing he remarked about was that all the houses here look the same. Truth be told, that’s kind of the case no matter where you live. Homes in India look a certain way. Homes in the Canary Islands look another way. Row houses in Philadelphia look another way. Every neighborhood or city or state has a type of home that seems suited to the climate and has over time become the most common. Most homes here are neutral colored stucco with terra cotta tile roofs. There are lots of big windows and mostly desertscape lawns with palms and cacti. So, homes in general here look similar. Within a gated community, the rules of the community prohibit deviation from the norm by not allowing unapproved (e.g. clashing) colors or styles and a host of other types of rules to enforce uniform appearance. The focus is on not lowering property values by keeping everyone to a minimum standard.
This is very similar to the unstated dress code at church. I was speaking with a member of our stake presidency about my concern that women visitors will feel out of place because most other churches accept women in pants. He confidently stated that after they attend, “They’ll get the message.” The norms speak volumes. Men and boys doing ordinances wear white shirts. Most men wear conservative business suits. Blue or striped shirts are allowed begrudgingly. Leaders don’t wear facial hair. Most people dress conservatively. While we allow people to dress differently, if they do, they may be seen to be lowering property values–these people are not candidates for the HOA board.
While HOAs can’t mandate what the homes look like inside, they can prevent broken down cars, pink flamingos and bright blue soffits. Likewise, all the church can do is regulate a normative appearance at church, but we can’t dictate what’s inside the whited sepulchres.
Security Theater
Gated communities are bastions of something called “security theater” or activities designed to give the illusion of increased security while not necessarily lowering the odds of security breaches. Other types of security theater that are familiar to us as Americans would be signing for credit card purchases and going through TSA security at the airport.
A customer of our business was telling me just last week that there was a murder in their upscale gated community. A workman who had been fired by the community board re-entered and killed an 82-year old resident and her guest in a burglary. As this woman noted, the gates are not really secure at all because all the workers have access, and it’s a large community.
Numerous studies over the years have shown that security in gated communities is more a matter of perception than reality. For instance, in 2005, the Orlando Sentinel looked at sheriff’s reports over a four-year period on 1.400 Florida homes in both gated and ungated communities that were similar in price and location. The newspaper found nearly identical rates of burglaries and stolen cars in each. Only minor crimes, such as smash-and-grab thefts and vandalism, were lower in gated communities. Speeding was less of a problem, too, since cars had to slow at the entrances.
The gates weren’t much of a deterrent because they were often easy to get around or were left unlocked; and burglaries and thefts occurred even in communities were gates were manned. In some cases, access codes were widely known because residents regularly gave them to guests and workers who cut lawns, killed pests, walked dogs, cleaned houses and delivered pizza. Similarly, an analysis of national crime statistics done last year by University of Florida criminology student Nicholas Branic found that living in a gated community does not significantly influence a person’s likelihood of victimization.
Types of security theater we have in the church include temple recommend interviews and tithing settlement. In both cases, access is granted based on self-reported worthiness. These are activities that function more like speed bumps than barriers to entry, giving individuals pause, but not stopping anyone–which is how they should work! Mason says that our gated community needs to be open access, but still attractive to non-residents to get people to want to join it.
But like any place with security theater, the theatrics give us a false sense of security and can at times make us less vigilant. We assume that we are safe from danger, but we simply be vulnerable to those who prey on the guileless.
Show Me the Money
The one thing most homeowners have to consider before they choose a home in a gated community is whether or not they want to pay the association fees for the ostensible benefits.
Although gated communities are often associated with celebrities and the wealthy, many spectacular homes in iconic upscale places such as Beverly Hills, Calif., Palm Beach, Fla., and Newport, R.I., are in ungated subdivisions. Conversely, developers often gate developments in sketchy neighborhoods to improve sales or rentals; homes there may well be worth less than similar ones in better surroundings. So it’s not necessarily true that residences in gated communities are more valuable than ones that are not.
However, it’s certainly true that owners in gated communities will pay higher homeowner’s association fees to keep up the entrance, maintain outdoor cameras and gates and possibly pay guards’ salaries. Over the years, these fees will add up to hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars, so think carefully before you commit.
Clearly, church members pay a lot in tithing, usually 10% of their income (self-reported) for the upkeep of our buildings and toward the corporate church’s expenses and endeavors. It’s not as direct as the HOA fees in terms of what you are paying to receive, but it is “required” for those who want to be full participants (temple recommend holders in good standing) in Mormonism. Clearly over time this is a large investment, and it does benefit the community as a whole by building up the church.
Paying for a gate may be worth it if you have small children and want to minimize their exposure to traffic.
For many, the benefits of the church as they raise children have a hold on them. They may see the benefit of surrounding their kids with other “good kids” with similar values, as well as supportive leaders and wholesome activities.
Communal Areas & Activities
One of the main allures to live in a gated community is access to a clubhouse, outdoor recreational areas and pools, and sometimes a gym. This gives homeowners a more social environment than they may achieve as an individual household, and without the expense or difficulty of maintaining a pool or recreational area individually.
it’s easier to meet your neighbors on a daily basis than you would in a standard subdivision.
For many, this is the best reason to participate in church, the access to a ward family. Anyone can live a Christian life independently, but having friends who are also working on the same goals is better than going it alone. There are not only ward events like holiday parties, linger longers, social activities for families, children, youth, and women, but there is a neighborliness to Mormon wards that is envied by others. An Indian colleague of mine who was living in New York City mentioned to me that he admired how close-knit Mormon communities are. He said that even if you didn’t know one another, Mormons could move anywhere in the world and instantly have people available to help them move, find a reliable and trustworthy babysitter, or give recommendations on a wide variety of things. It’s like the Next Door App, but more personable.
One of the frequent laments I hear is the loss of some of our previous social activities, things like Road Shows, Music Festivals and Gold & Green Balls, things that have been lost over time. Clearly our social programs are one of the things that gives Mormonism “stickiness.”
Rules, Rules, Rules
One of the main reasons people leave gated communities is disagreement over the rules and how they are enforced. When the rules become irritating to the point that it’s not enjoyable to live in that community, or when the HOA board is particularly heavy-handed in enforcing the rules, people may choose to move out. We attended a family reunion several years ago in a gated community clubhouse. There were papers tacked to nearly every surface with rules on them, ranging from common sense to ridiculous. I’ve never seen so many rules on so many surfaces before. There were even rules tacked to the inside of each bathroom stall door. Clearly this was a HOA board that wanted a lot of control. We accidentally violated a few of the dozens of rules while we were there, resulting in swift correction from the ever-vigilant board members. It’s hard to relax and enjoy a party when you are worried about the joy police swooping in with the sword of justice. Many others in the community seemed unfriendly, more concerned with the disruptiveness of outsiders (particularly children) than with making their community feel welcoming.
As the WSJ article concludes:
If you don’t want to be isolated from the larger community, hate fiddling with gate swipe cards and don’t want to be told what color to paint your mailbox or whether you can park a recreational vehicle in your driveway, then gated communities are probably not for you.
There are plenty of people who choose a gated community to keep out undesirable individuals, to create an oasis away from the larger community where the things they don’t want to see are hidden from view. Some prefer to shield their children from non-LDS influences. If your local ward is adding too many burdens or being judgmental or unwelcoming, you may long for the diversity of the larger community outside the borders of your gated community.
There’s always a fine line between creating a great cohesive community that people would aspire to join and being able to keep the gates open to welcome new individuals who may not fit the mold–yet. Perhaps all churches are gated communities in a sense, just with different design plans and different rules.
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
A coworker of mine told me about how she was a member of the HOA board in a community she lived in years ago. A homeowner in the community was in an accident and was permanently wheelchair bound. He had a ramp built to his front door. This was against the rules and the HOA told him he had to remove it. He appealed the decision. The HOA board debated and by a narrow margin (one vote) agreed to let him keep the ramp. Many of his neighbors in the community were very angry about the decision and resented him for decreasing their property value.
Lately the church feels like this kind of gated community.
I love the security theatre term. It is so apt. Certainly, in the LDS Church you could hold a TR and be a full member without subscribing to any of the tenets of the faith. Just say the right words, wear the right clothes, and don’t let anybody catch you drinking coffee. I would *love* to know how many LDS fall in this category.
The flip side is you can’t fake paying your tithing. That’s the price you pay to belong to the gated community and, more importantly, the community social and business network. I suppose in this sense, it feels more like a country club to me.
I am not so sure people leave the LDS church because they don’t want to follow the rules. As mentioned, you only need to appear to follow the rules. I expect, as with many gated communities, people leave when the dues outweigh the benefits.
We moved to a border town when I retired. It’s like freakin’ Cancun down here. 🙂
But one of the things I love is that the houses do *not* look the same. They are made of all kinds of materials, have all kinds of shapes, and are different colors. I love the mixed culture, too. I have been forced to learn Spanish. 🙂
One of my favorite pastimes is to drag my wife around in the rich neighborhoods looking at the giant palaces. These aren’t gated communities–gated compounds. Go ahead. I’ve already heard all the drug lord jokes from my family. And, no, there’s no cholos on the street corners, people are wonderful, and the crime rate is very low. It’s almost like belonging to the LDS church with no tithing or callings. 🙂
“I am not so sure people leave the LDS church because they don’t want to follow the rules.” I don’t think the rules of the HOA = the commandments–not by a long stretch. The rules = community norms. The rules = whatever you have to do to avoid being judged or confronted by the HOA board. The Lord looketh on the heart. The HOA board can only see your front yard unless you invite them in.
“rules of the HOA don’t = the commandments”
I agree 100%. I was taking a more cynical view. The HOA can see your front yard and whether your roof needs replacing. But you could be a psychopathic drug lord putting out hits and making crack in your living room–as long as you keep the grass mowed.
I was making the point that it’s possible to appear to be a full TR member of the LDS church, and in good standing within the LDS community while breaking commandments left and right–as long as you don’t get caught.
Given that nobody can really know one way or the other, there’s no incentive for anyone to follow the commandments. So my point was, given nobody can tell whether one is obeying the rules–except superficially–it’s possible people have incentive to belong to the LDS church only for the social and business benefits. They may leave when the cost of tithes and time commitments is higher than the benefits they get from belonging. I’m suggesting that seems a more likely reason. I could be wrong, and I have no evidence either way.
What do I think of those rules? They’re mostly incomprehensible. “No pets more than 25 (or other) pounds.” Huh? I can only imagine that it means “25 pounds, or any other number of pounds.” If your pet has any mass at all, it is not allowed.
“You may not work out of your home.” What? I have to either be unemployed or have a job I can do from home? Or are they saying I’m not allowed to be seen doing any yard work?
“You may not work out of your home.” This probably refers to telecommuting. Not sure why such a thing would be prohibited, but apparently in some communities it is.
I suspect they don’t want people to have home-based businesses. I’m sure some wouldn’t like Avon, or Girl Scout cookies, or something along those lines.
I think the “not working out of your home” is more along the lines of doing something like cutting hair or being a insurance salesman. Both generate a lot of traffic from “outsiders”.
“Clearly, church members pay a lot in tithing, usually 10% of their income (self-reported) for the upkeep of our buildings and toward the corporate church’s expenses and endeavors.”
Some HOAs are required to report what is done with moneys collected. Church tithing funds? No.
When we built our house, one of my criteria was that we wouldn’t live in a place with neighborhood covenants and an association. I’d see my neighbors in hell before I’ll let them tell me what color I can paint my garage door.
I would question whether a clause like “no home businesses” is even legally enforceable, assuming the business conforms to local zoning and licensing laws.
Why do so many people get off on controlling others? I wrote an entire talk on how “the traditions of men” get started in my head this past Sunday; I should try to get it down on paper. I think a good deal of it has to do with “121 Syndrome.”
“many, the benefits of the church as they raise children have a hold on them. They may see the benefit of surrounding their kids with other “good kids” with similar values, as well as supportive leaders and wholesome activities.”
I am grateful to have moved away from UT so that I could shed the indoctrination I received growing up that I shouldn’t associate with non-Mormons because they were more likely to be “bad” influences. Some of the most Christ-like people I’ve known are not LDS. Pride is a problem within church culture–planted and nurtured such that many members believe Mormons are the kindest/most charitable, that leaders are infallible, that “truth” claims are absolute etc etc
I believe we become stunted as we seek to fit others into a “cookie-cutter” mold when in fact, others have unique experiences and levels of understanding/knowledge that we could grow from.
I thought this was well-written and very well-thought-out. I smiled at the reference to “whitened sepulchures”. Staying with the analogy, there are some very good reasons some of us live “in the country”.
Referring to your fellow church members as “whited sepulchers” is just exactly what I’ve come to expect from you. I’m reminded of Mozart’s comment to Salieri, after hearing some of his music: ” One hears such sounds, and what can one say but… Salieri!”
So working *outside* of the home really means working *inside* of the home? How odd. If I’m typing on my computer how do they know I’m not writing a letter to Grandma, instead of writing the Great American Novel that I’m about to send to a publisher? And why would they care?
I don’t know if those are real rules from somewhere, but they don’t appear to have been composed by a lawyer or an English professor. I’m quite sure they meant the exterior of the house, not the exterior of the paint, and they probably didn’t mean to prohibit washing and parking our car when off the premises. But you never know, I guess. At least they’re letting us open the garage door to get in and out. The last place I lived, we had to crash through the door and call someone to replace it every time.
Left Field: It’s not working “outside” the home but “out of” meaning “working FROM the home.”
Mark B: The Lord looketh on the heart.
The problem is not that HOA rules fail to prevent bad behavior. It’s that HOA rules all too often require it for illusory benefit. In drought stricken California, it’s not unusual that lawns are required, even while the water district is trying to reduce consumption. My formal herb garden, roses, and fruit trees would be unwelcome, even though they use less water, feed my family and friends, and are arguably at least as beautiful as a closely trimmed patch of grass.
You’re welcome to supply your own analogs, but I quite like; church, “ponderizing” and its ilk, close reading, studying, feasting.
Daniel,
Just an fyi:
In 2014 CA Governor Jerry Brown signed into law, legislation which prevents HOAs from taking action against homeowners who replace lawns with drought tolerant plants.
In the real world there is great variation in HOA rules. Some are very strict and detailed, others may enact minimal restrictions. Within church culture the same can be found. Some leaders/members get caught up in the detail–(one Stk President in UT declaring women ought to wear pantyhose)–white shirts, no facial hair etc., while others grant wider latitude. Maybe I’m wrong, but the emphasis on outer appearance (and strict obedience for obedience sake) the past several years reminds me of the Pharisees.
I thought that might have been the case, but couldn’t recall. That makes an even better analogy. Not that the state is going to step in to improve exegesis, but maybe something else.
“Blue or striped shirts are allowed begrudgingly.”
How is this begrudgingness communicated?
Men in my congregation wear all kinds of shirts, black and purple and pink and teal. They include folks who have serious callings.
I wonder what I am missing, what I should be looking for in order to understand this phenomenon?
There was a great article “Proclamation on the Pantyhose” which appeared in Meridian magazine 2-3 years ago. The author reported how various church members responded to the Stk President’s pantyhose edict and how it became, for some, a measurement of obedience/worthiness. Curiously she reported some stalwart, devout women who more often than not wore pantyhose rebelled and stopped wearing pantyhose while others had the opposite reponse. One woman I know complied saying, “we are going to be asked to do harder things in the last days.”
Oh my…..
I really like this analogy. One aspect of it that I don’t think has been brought up is the high switching cost. It takes time and money to buy a house and move into the community or to sell a house and move out. Missionary work is often framed in the Church as though it should be trivially easy because it’s like offering someone orange juice or something equally small. Well no, it isn’t. The switching cost involved in buying or selling a house make this a much better analogy. It’s like asking someone if they want to move into your gated community.
Naismith- “What should I be looking for to understand this phenomenon? (Begrudging allowance of blue shirts)”
I can’t say overall, but in our stake, it’s plain as day. Our stake president considers shirt color and tie choice indicators of testimony, worthiness and fitness to serve.
It seems to be just a time-saver for a very busy, good man who sees the world differently than I do.
Thanks, Ruth. In my stake, people do wear white shirts after they get called into the bishopric, when they are functioning in that calling. But they don’t wear white shirts in other settings where they are not sitting on the stand. Just going to the temple after work, or to a stake meeting.
But a white shirt is not a prerequisite to GET the calling. And some of the bright-shirted young men passing the sacrament have parents serving as EQ president or RS president or whatever, and the clerks and HPGL are pretty snazzy dressers. So it doesn’t seem obvious to me that there is any grudging going on… (Not claiming that my experience is typical of the situation churchwide–we may be weird or desperate for people to serve.)
I’ve seen some interesting differences across wards. I lived in one Utah ward where possibly a majority of the men had facial hair. Growing up, this was not true in my ward.
I often wear colored shirts. No one has ever told me not to do so directly. But I have had many discussion with people who believe that white shirts are the uniform of the Priesthood and are uncomfortable with wearing any other color.
And that is part of the problem with some of these cultural requirements – some people are extracting doctrine from them, making the HOA rules into federal statutes (does that work for the analogy?)
And even if it is okay to wear colored shirts, say, for the rank and file, the very fact that leadership doesn’t wear them ever is read as meaning they are an inferior choice. Good, better, best, and all.
“And some of the bright-shirted young men passing the sacrament” Whoa. The YM in your ward are allowed to pass the sacrament without wearing a white shirt? They aren’t in my current ward and weren’t in my previous ward. In my current ward, the YM also must wear a suit jacket–even though we live in hot AZ, even though they are growing boys and it’s expensive to buy them new suits all the time. In my Singapore ward, they didn’t have to wear suit jackets, but they weren’t allowed to roll up their sleeves. I haven’t seen a boy passing the sacrament in anything but a white shirt for over ten years, and if they ask an adult man to help, they won’t ask him to assist if he’s not wearing a white shirt.
Every ward I’ve ever been in has had the same rules that hawkgrrrl describes.
Thanks for that insight. I now understand better about why the church is criticized for preaching prosperity. I could never have afforded a suit coat for my son during his fast-sprouting teen years. It isn’t even required in many missions nowadays.
I have seen wards where all the men wore white shirts, particularly in Mexico. I hadn’t realized it was so widespread.
The only ward I’ve lived in that was substantially different from what hawkgrrrl describes was in DC. The deacons passed the sacrament in polo shirts or whatever they could afford. I don’t think it caused any problems at all. But the rest have been much more insistent in varying degrees.
Hawkgrrl and others, your ward leaders are dangerous radicals who disregard the Terms of Handbook 2, section 20.4. Couldn’t figure out how to copy it on my phone, but it clearly rules out mandatory dress codes for those administering the sacrament.
When I was a deacon back during the Nixon administration, I don’t recall white shirts being a Thing at all, except for missionaries. Not for passing the sacrament, not for men going to church. But it was a long time ago. Maybe I’ve forgotten.
When I was a missionary (during the Carter administration), the GA in charge of our mission strongly recommended that we keep wearing white shirts to church even after we’re released as missionaries. I remember being surprised by the advice. I had no particular objection to wearing a white shirt as a civilian, but I thought of white shirts as really a missionary thing, not expected of others. For quite awhile, I continued to wear a white shirt to church as he recommended because I’m kind of a nonconformist that way. When white shirts became the norm for everybody, I became less zealous about it, though I think I tended to wear white quite a bit most of the time.
Several years ago, I went to stake priesthood meeting with my son, a newly-ordained deacon. He had already thrown his white shirt from church in the hamper. He asked if it would be okay to wear a blue shirt to stake priesthood meeting, and I said, sure. A counselor in the stake presidency pulled a stunt where he came out in a blue shirt, and then took it off to reveal a white shirt underneath, while discussing the importance of white shirts. My son was initially pleased to see that even a member of the stake presidency also wore a blue shirt, but then felt embarrassed and singled out.
Ever since that day, my son has always worn a white shirt to church, and I have rarely worn one. Because I’m kind of a rebel and nonconformist that way. And because I was kind of upset that he embarrassed my son. On a given Sunday, probably 97% of males in our stake wear white shirts. And he thought the other 3% needed to be publicly called out on it? I wonder what our home teaching percentage was at the time?
I like to think my colored shirt makes our ward a little more welcoming and less weird-looking to investigators. (What if you visited another church, and were the only one not wearing a red shirt?) And I will say that a colored shirt in my ward has not always prevented me or others from being asked to bless or pass the sacrament, although I think they do usually look for someone in a white shirt.
I believe the current white shirt dress code emanated from a General Conference talk by Elder Holland October 1995 and Elder Oaks General Conference talk in October 2008 referencing Holland’s talk.
Elder Holland:
“May I suggest that wherever possible a white shirt be worn by the deacons, teachers, and priests who handle the sacrament. For sacred ordinances in the Church we often use ceremonial clothing, and a white shirt could be seen as a gentle reminder of the white clothing you wore in the baptismal font and an anticipation of the white shirt you will soon wear into the temple and onto your missions.
That simple suggestion is not intended to be pharisaic or formalistic. We do not want deacons or priests in uniforms or unduly concerned about anything but the purity of their lives. But how our young people dress can teach a holy principle to us all, and it certainly can convey sanctity. As President David O. McKay taught, a white shirt contributes to the sacredness of the holy sacrament (see Conference Report, Oct. 1956, p. 89).”
lois, this is as far as I have been able to determine, as well.
That, and that white shirts were fairly popular back in the Utah days as un-dyed cloth was easier to produce.
In London in the sixties we had a Stake President who never wore white shirts, always with stripes or dots. He was very popular with the young people.
I have not worn a white shirt since prop8, as i dont want anyone thinking i’m a conservative mormon, everyone else in my stake in a conservative(it was 30 years ago but we now have a labor gov and woman premier) part of the church.
I brought my children up in a much more progressiv area.
Young men regularly pass the sacrament in my ward without white shirts. I do too. Most weeks I wear a blue or patterned shirt. White maybe once a month or so. I’ve never been called out or asked to wear white. Maybe my ward is unusual.
I realize that there are more issues addressed in the original blog than white shirts, but this one has touched one of my raw nerves. My biggest objection to the all-but-official white shirt rule is the symbolism it represents. I hold the priesthood for three hours a week plus any leadership meetings, but once I put aside the white shirt I can also put aside the priesthood. What a terrible lesson we’re teaching our youth. The other reason I never wear white to church, by the way, is on the off chance that a visiting non-member might feel just a bit less off-put by seeing a tiny bit of diversity in men’s costumes at church.
I grew up in the jello belt. I can think of two homes in my ward boundaries that housed non-mormons. We always had about 3 times as many Aaronic priesthood holders than we needed to efficiently administer the sacrament. This may be why the white shirt rule came into effect. In wards where it is harder to find people to pass the sacrament, worrying about shirt color is just not practical. When there are too many priesthood holders and not enough assignments, arbitrary rules are much more likely.
@lois
I always wear a brightly colored Hawaiian shirt to church. I call these my “happy shirts”. They symbolize how happy I am to be worshipping the Lord on Sunday morning.
I passed the sacrament to Elder Clayton in a blue shirt and nothing was ever sa8d. I wasn’t planning to help with the sacrament but a member of the bishoporic asked.
Elder Anderson, G, if only were you in my ward!
Leaders ought to refrain from emphasing things of little importance. Though Elder Holland mentioned it ought not be formulaic or pharisaic, that is precisely what happens in some key areas of the church. The same thing happened when President Hinckley mentioned the avoidance of caffeine in a TV interview. I know of some potential converts who hesitated joining the church because it meant not only giving up tea and coffee, but also any caffienated drink. (Btw what is wrong with tea and coffee?)
In my ward rarely will men–and never young men–wear shirt other than white.
White shirts–just one more tool for authoritarians and their followers–to separate the “chaff from the wheat.”