As a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, Jon Huntsman has been called a slightly unorthodox Mormon. Commentators debate whether religion is an insurmountable barrier to the office of president. I am surprised that religion is still a relevant part of the political discussion and that commentators seek to classify Mormons as orthodox or unorthodox. The diversity of the Mormon population suggests that there is no such thing as an orthodox Mormon. The terms "orthodox" and "Mormon" simply do not work together. Instead, the label is an example of a twenty-first-century stereotype.
For starters, the definition of Mormon is not clear. It may refer to anyone who believes that The Book of Mormon is scripture. That group of people is very diverse and covers multiple religions (i.e., The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the LDS Church), the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the Community of Christ). A person would be hard pressed to formulate an orthodox definition of Mormon based upon that group of people.
Because Jon Huntsman is a member of the LDS Church, perhaps unorthodox Mormon has reference to a member of the LDS Church who does not comply with certain practices or cultural aspects generally attributed to members of that church. If that's the case, unorthodox Mormon appears to refer to someone who does not fit an unfortunate stereotype.
The stereotype is unfortunate, but not unexpected. We often focus on the sensational and unusual stories about Mormons. For example, a recent Business Week article profiled several members of the LDS Church who served church missions and became successful business executives. The article listed 20 "prominent Mormon businessmen." Those 20 people are a small percentage of the world's business executives, and perhaps a smaller percentage of the 14 million members of the LDS Church.
Considering that almost all former Mormon missionaries are not successful business executives and almost all business executives are not former Mormon missionaries, there appears to be no relationship between being a Mormon missionary and being a successful business executive. The story inaccurately stereotypes Mormons and misses the relevance of a Mormon mission.
Although education and other principles of self-reliance are part of the LDS Church's teachings, as a religion that accepts Jesus Christ as the Savior, the church's first and great commandment is to "love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind," and the second is to "love thy neighbour as thyself." With those two commandments as guideposts, a Mormon can be just about anyone, and the mission experience becomes something much more substantial than mere preparation for life as a business executive.
The LDS Church has 14 million members, mostly outside the United States. The membership of the LDS Church most likely reflects a general cross section of society. Almost all Mormons undoubtedly struggle from day to day to keep food on the table, pay for shelter, clothe themselves and their children, and obtain health care and education--just like everyone else.
Each member of the LDS Church undoubtedly interprets and applies the church's doctrine in a unique manner. The LDS Church provides both spiritual and social settings for its members. The reasons for being a Mormon are probably as unique and diverse as the members themselves. For example, a person may be a Mormon because of the church's social offerings, but that person may not accept aspects of the church's doctrine. A second person may participate in the church's worship services because of an abiding belief in the church's doctrine, but that person may be uncomfortable with social and cultural aspects of the church. Both of those people are Mormons. Labeling one (or both) as orthodox or unorthodox would be inappropriate.
Finally, the LDS Church population is culturally, socially, politically, intellectually, economically, and racially diverse. To illustrate, the church makes its materials available in 166 languages. It has entire non-English-speaking congregations within and outside the United States. The LDS Church touts its diversity at mormon.org. The diversity reflects a fundamental tenant of The Book of Mormon: Christ invites "all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile." There is no single Mormon profile.
The rich diversity of Mormons illustrates that there is no such thing as an orthodox (or unorthodox) Mormon. Such labels merely serve to perpetuate a stereotype. In fact, the distinction between Mormon and non-Mormon is not as bright as many believe. The distinction should become irrelevant in our discussions.
Abraham H. Foxman: Keep Religion Out of Politics
Robert P. Jones, Ph.D.: Romney's Mormonism a Tough Sell for Millennials
Katie Hawkes: LDS Church Ad Campaign: Why Mormons Are on Your Billboards
Emma Lou Thayne: Prayers of Longing and Thanks
What you may be referring to is the likelihood that a 'Mormon' President would share with the president of the LDS church at least some of the same attitudes and opinions, such as: a belief in honesty, charity, morality, family, self-reliance, loyalty to the Constitution, etc. Not a bad thing, most would suppose, I hope.
It seems that your version of equality is exactly what you accuse (without foundation) the Mormon church of having. It's not the LDS church that is attacking you or anyone for their beliefs, but the exact opposite: you attacking them. Surely you can see that? Surely every citizen in a democracy has a right to state and stand for their beliefs - without fear of this kind of vilification.
The Mormon church is not in the least trying to elect a Mormon to the Presidency. Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are promoting themselves to that position, as they have the right, along with every other American in good standing, to do.
I say: NO to narrow-minded religious persecution, and so ought every justice-loving and democracy-supporting American citizen.
I agree with SandeeM - just say NO to narrow-minded religious persecution.
So, let us be clear, the LDS church has several official positions on things that have a direct effect on political policy. It is quite fair to question candidates who profess to be Mormons on whether they accept the churches doctrine. Same goes for any other religious candidate who claims to be a member of a religious institution that has well known tenets that its followers are supposed to mostly adhere to.....that isn't stereotyping.
Unless, of course, the non-Mormon in question happens to be a fundamentalist Mormon polygamist. Then the LDS church is suddenly falling all over itself trying to parse who is and isn't allowed to use the term "Mormon," belief in Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon notwithstanding.
And why is it that people vilify the Mormons? It seems a lot like how the early Christians were vilified 2000 years ago.
If you are referring to the blacks not holding the Priesthood before 1978, you should know that it was a doctrinal and not a social issue; that many good black people were faithful and fully accepted and loved members of the church before that time; that when a revelation, in answer to many fervent prayers over many years was received, making the change, that church leaders and members were overjoyed.
If you are referring to the church stance against homosexuality (I'm speaking for myself here and not as an official spokesperson for my church) - this is a moral and doctrinal view that we, as well as any other, has a right, (and some would say, a responsibility), to state and stand for. But you will never find a malicious, hateful, or even ignorant view expressed by the church toward those who practice homosexuality. Nothing but acceptance of and love and kindness toward every individual has, or will ever be expressed by the Mormon church towards others, because that is our religion.
Readers might find: http://mormon.org/ - helpful, if you would like to understand Mormonism more accurately. The FAQ page is useful.
Yeah, of course BYU is most white because Utah is mostly white. Big deal. However, one of not-so-nice nicknames for BYU is BY-Zoo. It's students are often called Zoobies. Why? Because of the diversity. Meaning, there is more diversity on campus than in Utah generally.
But will you also complain of the lack of diversity in Africa and South America--where the Mormon Church is growing the fastest??
We would be racists if we didn't...
Huntsman's personal beliefs are private, but I strongly suspect that he is a Jack Mormon himself. He keeps this low key to avoid offending active Mormon voters, but by his own admission he drinks wine at diplomatic events.