Am I a Mormon Boy?

As a young boy growing up in Whitney, Idaho, young Ezra Taft Benson (or “T,” as he was known) learned to love the song I Am a Mormon Boy. Even eight or nine decades later, when “T” served as President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, he “often delighted youngsters of another generation by singing all three verses… in his clear tenor voice” (President Ezra Taft Benson: A Sure Voice of Faith, Ensign 24:7:8ff.).

So why does it rub me the wrong way?

Over the last few months, I’ve noticed what I can only describe as a rash of inappropriate use of the term “Mormon” on the web. The Church’s own media Style Guide is pretty explicit on what they will and won’t accept, but even Church-owned and -operated sites (e.g. the Church News) have started falling victim to the errors. I’ve sent multiple emails to Church News editor Gerry Avant—who incidentally agrees with me—but have been forced to content myself with responses such as the following email, dated 19 November 2009:

I’ve gone to the mat several times on this, but I always lose because the name of the game these days is to “get more eyes on the Web,” and entering “Mormon” on a search pulls up more stories than entering “LDS.” I’m opposed even to the use of “LDS Church,” but I notice that the Church uses that in some instances, such as its Web site: ldschurch.org.
I’ll keep insisting, but I don’t know how successful I’ll be.

So I guess it should come as no surprise to me that in the last few days, there have been several articles—including this one from the front page of the Salt Lake Tribune, and a blog response from the Church’s own Newsroom—discussing the fact that, after years of trying to get away from the term, it is starting to come back into vogue due to one, major issue: search engine hits.

To be honest, it really is a great article, and the blog response is equally well done. However, I’m still not going to start referring to myself as a “Mormon,” and I certainly won’t refer to the Church of Jesus Christ by any name that doesn’t include His. The Savior Himself stated that if a church be called by any name other than His own (e.g. “Mormon,” “LDS,” etc.), it’s not His. I will not be a party to that offense.

Those that know me have probably noticed that if I need a shorter term for the name of the Church, I follow the Church’s recommendation and use “the Church of Jesus Christ.” The Tribune article mentions that this has never really caught on, since reporters feel it might be offensive to some people. And you know what? They’re right. And you know what else? Tough. It’s offensive to me to not call it that. That’s what it is, and I frankly see no reason to mince words about it.

If people look at me quizzically when I say I’m a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I certainly do my part: I mention that some people like to call us “Mormons,” but I also explain (briefly) why that’s not really correct. This not only helps my friends understand our history; it also helps them understand our beliefs. Thanks to that boldness, I have many friends and business associates who didn’t—but now do—know that so-called “Mormons” are indeed Christians. And how is that a bad thing?

Let’s face it, folks: the term “Mormons” was invented by people that couldn’t get together a big enough mob to rape, pillage, and murder the “Saints” or the “Christians.” I don’t worship Mormon any more than my next-door neighbor worships Ezekiel, so in my mind, the term necessarily minimizes my belief in and adoration of my Savior. For this reason alone, it belongs right up there with “Nigger,” “Yid,” and “Spic” on any list of offensive slurs. Do Latter-day Saints sometimes refer to each other as “Mormons”? Sure, but African-Americans sometimes refer to each other as “Niggers,” too. That doesn’t make it right, much less socially acceptable. It’s all a matter of public perception, and we Latter-day Saints have frankly done a lousy job of framing that perception.

Now, all that having been said, the word “Mormon” does have plenty of appropriate uses (e.g. “The Book of Mormon,” “the Prophet Mormon,” “the Waters of Mormon,” etc.). Furthermore, Foster hit the nail on the head when he said that the Church needs to embrace the term and revitalize it, else our self-declared enemies will continue to define it as offensively as they can. For this reason, I applaud what the Church is doing with the term, especially in a search-engine world. It’s all about the aforementioned perception, and I’m ecstatic to see that the Church is taking the bull by the horns. But is it going far enough? Well, not if the Church News continues to use phrases like “the Mormon Church,” it’s not. Using a slur to bring people to your web site is one thing; perpetuating its use, once they’re there, is another.

To conclude, I do want to point out that I am being realistic about this. We’re never going to get everybody to stop using the term “Mormon” inappropriately. If nothing else, there will always be people that use the term specifically because they want to make us look bad. But remember that a century or two ago, the word “Nigger” was still used quite regularly, to describe people of African or other dark-skinned ancestry. What changed? Public perception. And who changed it? Well, I’ll give you a hint: it wasn’t the Caucasians.