What Kind of Mormon Are You?

The most frequently encountered terms used in internal discourse to categorize Mormons are "active" and "less active" (the updated form of "inactive"). However, these terms aren't generally recognized or understood by non-LDS and so aren't very useful for journalists. So what terms do journalists use to convey to readers the level of participation of a Mormon subject? And are there other or better terms we might use inside the Church?

Get Religion regularly posts criticisms of how Christians are categorized in media stories, the latest decrying the misuse of the term "devout" to describe (or fail to properly describe) certain Catholics. Similar posts criticize the use of the term "fundamentalist," a somewhat demeaning term often used by journalists to describe any conservative Protestant. Both terms seem out of place for Mormons, with "fundamentalist Mormon" being particularly misleading given the general practice of referring to practicing Mormon polygamists as "Mormon fundamentalists." Perhaps in general media stories it is simply understood that the term "Mormon" implies the person is conservative in doctrine and practice without need of further qualification.

Within the Church, I think we need some additional terms to distinguish between those who are truly less active (they attend church a few times each year, for example) and those who never attend or don't even self-identify as LDS. How about "ROM" (for record-only Mormon). Someone who yells at you if you show up on their doorstep would, by extension, be an UNROM (Unfriendly ROM).

Other terms or category markers do appear in LDS conversation. For example, I have run across the term "temple Mormon" more frequently the last few years, which seems to refer to the person having an active temple recommend and therefore able to gain admission to LDS temples. Other markers sometimes relied on but without handy adjectives in common use include having served an LDS mission, having been married in an LDS temple, and serving or having served in certain positions within local leadership. Then there are undefined terms floating around online discussion groups, such as New Order Mormon or Liberal Mormon (different from a Mormon liberal).

Any other terms you can think of that we use or new ones that we need? Or is it simply wrong and counterproductive to use such qualifiers?

Comments

[Ann]

Just like we have DINOs (Democrats In Name Only) and RINOs (Republicans etc.) I like the term MINOs for people who are still on the records but don't follow the behavioral commandments and don't go to church.

[Eric Nielson]

Priesthood holder is one.

Tithe payer is another.

[Dan]

I believe in Christ. That's what kind of Mormon I am. :)

[James Goldberg]

Jewish Mormons are orthodox. Catholic Mormons are devout. Protestant Mormons are committed. It all depends where you're coming from.

What did the papers call Mitt Romney? My bet is devout b/c his family were colonistas, which put them geographically close to a lot of Catholics AND he served his mission in France, which is also close to a lot of Catholics.

[The Only True and Living Nathan]

I've also seen the term "practicing Mormon" in newspaper accounts; it correlates well to what we mean by "active."

[Paul M]

I'd describe myself as a "social Mormon". I attend Sunday services and most other services, serve in callings when asked, pay my tithing but choose not to hold a temple recommend.

[Zach]

Dave,

You raise a good question, thanks for bringing this up. I have often struggled with how (practicing) Mormons categorize other Mormons based on their various levels of participation in the church (though I guess I do see why it happens). Quite often people who don't practice Mormonism any longer, such as LDS intellectuals for example, still identify themselves as Mormons. However, as already noted, someone from their ward would label them as less-active, an ex-Mormon, etc. This is a classification system that seems to be part of human nature, that people need to know how to act and react to certain people, so I guess I understand that component.

However, I always see this as troubling, or at least I think it’s hard from this ‘less-active’ person’s perspective. I often see the Jewish example in history. Jews still refer to each other as Jews, identify themselves as being Jewish, regardless of their level of commitment to the faith. (this is generally speaking). It would be great if Mormonism could adopt an aspect of this. That said, I do think many LDS intellectuals who don’t practice have already done this (provided they want to still identify as LDS), but practicing Mormons as a whole have still not reached this point. I would be great if Mormons could realize that being Mormon is more than just going through the motions of attending church, reading the BOM, etc., but that being a Mormon also has a mental or emotional component. But then again, that seems to be part of the Mormon worldview.

In closing, I think more could be said on this, but I think this statement briefly encapsulates my idea. I would welcome other thoughts on this also, perhaps others than can add to or improve this idea. And thanks again Dave for an insightful and discussion provoking topic and view into the Mormon world.

[Ziff]

Interestingly enough, the first place I ran into the term "temple Mormon" was in an anti-Mormon publication I saw as a missionary. (I think it was the book The Godmakers, but I could be misremembering.) As I recall, it was used to suggest that an ex-member had been high up in the Church, so it wasn't really a correct usage.

Zach, I think you make a really good point about keeping the name while losing the practice. I wonder if Mormonism is still new enough (versus Judaism and Catholicism, for example) that lots of Mormons in name only don't even self-identify as Mormons (as was suggested above). Given this, for most people outside the Church, the only needed label is "Mormon" since most non-practicing members don't call themselves Mormons. I guess what I'm saying is that we might need a larger community of people who still use the label but don't associate with the Church as an institution before labels like "practicing" or "devout" Mormon will be all that needed.

[Chris]

"In good standing" might be a useful descriptor in some cases.

[The Only True and Living Nathan]

However, I always see this as troubling, or at least I think it’s hard from this ‘less-active’ person’s perspective. I often see the Jewish example in history. Jews still refer to each other as Jews, identify themselves as being Jewish, regardless of their level of commitment to the faith. (this is generally speaking). It would be great if Mormonism could adopt an aspect of this.

And if Mormonism ever becomes more of a hereditary cultural signifier than a deliberate choice of faith and devotion, I'm sure you'll see it. And something of infinitely higher value will have been lost.

[SabioLantz]

For you theological astute Mormons, I have a research question. The NT states:

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
- 1 Corinthians 1:18

Are there any similar passages in Mormon texts